Opinion: The Françafrique countries should question it’s need for France

The last two weeks or recent days the French President Emmanuel Macron have proven how the elites of Paris is disregarding the former colonies, if it is Mali or Algeria. I am sure behind closed doors and within trusted associates the words could be even striking. Because, these words has been said in public and with no proper excuse.

In that regard, when the Head of State of France is saying that. The previous colonies should question the need to be bound by mechanisms and by agreements tied to Paris. Since Paris clearly don’t respect you or honour you.

Françafrique consist of Algeria, Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad (Tchad), Cameroon, Republic of Congo, Comoros, Central African Republic, Djibouti, Gabon, Guinea, Mali, Madagascar, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Ivory Coast, Senegal, Togo, and Tunisia. That is lot of counties and huge part of continent. The French are involved also in republics and nations, which they were the colonial power over. However, this here piece about them. Since they have still a significant place and plays a role for the power-balance in these countries.

About the “Colonies Francaises d’Afrique”:

The countries still bound by a monetary union and a common currency, which is Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal and Togo, These are all part of West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU). The second monetary union of the CFA Franc are based on these countries: Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, and Gabon. These countries are a part of the Central African Economic and Monetary Union (CAEMC).

The French and some of their allies tried to relaunch it as “Eco” in 2019 and that has gone nowhere. That should say a lot. I doubt that is only happening, because of regime changes. Nevertheless, I don’t expect any serious movement on this matter anytime soon.

We know Benin said it wanted to leave CFA Franc … that hasn’t happened either. Paris and the elites there has a way of keeping everyone under their control.

What would be healthy would be for all heads of state and parliaments, ministries and such evaluate the relations, agreements and ties with it’s former colonial master. Since, as an independent nation it is nothing saying that you should be there forever or have to be mocked on a irregular basis by Heads of State of France. Neither, should the French has trade advantage or mineral extraction agreement, which other nations companies couldn’t have. That could possibly make it more profitable and earn more tax-dollars to the state reserves in any given republic.

It is time for all of them to consider this. Everyone has some sort of ties and this is why they are still indirectly having influence. That is why everytime something happens or in regards to French interests. Things gets tense and you never know when things will pop-off. This is why the Republic’s need to oversee and have a proper oversight of it. It is like this has have never been done.

All mechanism and statutory bodies, which is connected needs also to be looked into. This here will take time and needs to be inquires. There is a need to directly investigate and also see what sort of affects it has had over the years. If there is a beneficial relations or one-sided. Since, there might be some good parts, but a lot of it is a way of the French to never let go.

After everything Macron has done. The Francophone Africa needs to react and not accept this sort of acts. Right now he does this to Algeria and Mali. Who knows when the “wrong” head of state get elected somewhere and he will use his power to stifle them. Even if that was the will of the people and not the will of Paris. That is what is striking here and that is why these republic’s needs to see over everything. We know the French will feel insulted and infuriated. Since they are entitled to it all. However, this wasn’t their to begin with. This isn’t Marseilles or Bordeaux, but it’s Yaounde and Lome. Peace.

Rwanda: The Duclert Report re-affirms what we knew about French involvement ahead of the 1994 Genocide

Yes. This is a long time coming. It had to be several of French Presidents before they took any responsibility and taking to account their role in the Genocide of 1994 in Rwanda. The French had invested and a close relationship with the current leadership at the time in Kigali. That jaded their will and their support for it. These folks did directly trade weapons and profit on the genocide.

The French have tried people who has been involved in the Genocide in Rwanda. France have acted as a big-brother, but not acted righteous towards its own ends. They have been the paternal nation and with the current Duclert Report. The current leadership in Paris should make reconciliation and redeem its stature in Kigali. That is only fair knowing what their actions did and did assist the atrocities in Rwanda.

First dropping one statement from France24 to show what they found and what has been written in 1999 about the same thing.

French Reports states known facts:

“The report tells of French decision-makers trapped in “post-colonial” thinking who supported the “racist, corrupt and violent” regime of Habyarimana as he faced a Tutsi rebellion which many considered was directed from English-speaking Uganda. Mitterrand “maintained a strong, personal and direct relationship with the Rwandan head of state”, it said” (France24 – ‘’Blind’ France bears responsibility on Rwanda genocide, historical commission reports’ 26.03.2021).

French Involvement before the Genocide:

“The leaders of France and Rwanda also had very close family ties Mitterand of France and Habyarimana were friends, but their sons, Jean Christophe Mitterand and Jean Pierre Habyarirnana, were not only closer friends, but that friendship was consolidated further by business dealings. The two camps used political power in their countries in order to boost and protect their respective economic interests. The Rwanda Re-view(2:3,1993) ran a letter from Mitterand to Habyarimana, a letter that was not only both personal and official, but also talked about the interests of France in Rwanda. There is also an indication that Jean C. Mitterand was one of the biggest arms dealer in Rwanda. It was there-fore in the interest of France that there should be use for the arms France was ready to supply to Rwanda, arms that eventually ended in the arms of the hands of the extremist killers” (Joan Kakwenzire and Dixon Kamukama – ‘The Path of a Genocide – The Rwandan Crisis from Uganda to Zaire’, P.83, 1999).

With these two pieces. You see they say the same thing. They are connected. The Kakwenzire and Kamukama is also showing the benefits of the relations between the Heads of State. That the sons also had a favourable relations. They wouldn’t have done what they did. If it wasn’t beneficial and had positive outcome. These folks wouldn’t have worked together like they did.

Both Kigali and Paris had close communication. They were even trading arms ahead of the genocide. Certainly knowing what was brewing and had some foresight into the violence that could erupt. Not like they were dumb or had no knowledge.

Just as they had already done this as well ahead of the genocide:

“1991; March 15: The French ambassador to Rwanda, Georges Martres, informed Juvénal Habyarimana that the French Presidency had decided to put a thirty-man DAMI (detachment of troops for military assistance and training) at the Rwandan authorities’ disposal *(Lanotte, 2007: 144). It was named DAMI-Panda and was originally intended to stay four months on location, but in fact it remained in Rwanda until December 1993 *(Lanotte, 2007: 145). This deployment was not publicized by the French political and military authorities, or by their Rwandan counterparts *(Lanotte, 2007: 148)” (Viret Emmanuel – ‘Rwanda – A Chronology (1867-1994)’ 01.03.2010, SciencePro.fr)

So with this all in mind. The Duclert Report only re-affirm what we already knew. They are only stating facts that been out there and they have finally “found” it out themselves. If they will take more accountability and actually reflect it. That is a whole different ball-game.

For some of us. We knew the French was directly involved and supported the regime who did their part in the genocide in 1994. Clearly, with that knowledge. The French could have acted differently and not participated in the exports of arms. However, they only saw money and friendship with the Heads of State. It was business and pleasure. Which in the end was helping the demise of so many innocent civilians.

Now is not the time for empty statements, but direct action of the French to act upon their own findings, which many of us already knew. Peace.

Benin: CENA – Communique de Presse – Avis d’Appel a Candidatures pour le Recrutement des Agents Electoraux dans le Cadre des Elections Communales du 17 Mai 2020 (03.03.2020)

Opinion: Wouldn’t be shocking if their suddenly came a coup d’etat against Talon…

Not that I wish this on Benin nor anywhere else. But when President Patrice Talon is seeking to end the Central African Franc and let the reserves of Benin out of the Banque de France. Expect that Paris, France gets into a stir and a hiccup will end up happening in Cotonou. They can already play the facade of the acts of one-party local elections and dissidents out of that. That a small infringed and demoralized group of activists, military soldiers and a few high ranking officials, suddenly came into play.

That would fit Paris so wisely, as the French doesn’t want to loose their hold on their former colonies. Fracafrique is too important to loose. The French cannot stomach anyone challenging them or even crossing them. That will not happen in 2019. They rather have more power and more friends on the continent, then lose one of them.

Benin’s “new” President Talon will stop the dependency with the French. Where the Republic of Benin can decide more of their own. If the Republic would leave the CFA it would really show force. Now, they are just preparing to withdraw the foreign reserves. That is a hit on the Banque de France. This must hurt the pride of the French and their glorious colonial history, which the CFA is reminder and a relic of.

Talon is daring the powers to be. His powerful in Cotonou, that’s why he could dismiss and stop the opposition from running in the local elections, but he is now going up against the ones whose running the IMF and has leverage in the United Nations and the World Bank. All of these can hurt the economy of Benin.

And if the French continues their exploits, they would use the previous President Thomas Boni Yayi. Who was the President of Benin between 2006 to 2016. Even with his health defects and struggle. He might muster some courage, if he knew that his previous partners of Paris would reinitiate him in power. As he lost to Talon in 2016. All of that wouldn’t be surprising at all.

If not, the French find a collective of “progressive” and “dissidents” who happens to work some mercenaries and they just suddenly takeover the radio, TV and the Parliament. They put road-blocks into the Capital. Therefore, announcing the resignation of Talon and his regime, as they want a democratic government and they are in transition to another one. So, that they as soldiers will bring a fundamental change. But in reality, the new government will continue the CFA and the French influence. They will secure the French industrial exports and everything else. As long, as the elite can shop and do the kneeling in front of the neo-colonial masters of France.

That would be a real life thing and another story in the tale of French dominance on the continent. Peace.

EFF welcomes Benin’s Decision to Withdraw its Foreign Currency Reserves from France and Calls on all other African Countries to do the same (09.11.2019)

Opinion: Francafrique is alive, as Paris axe Arikana Chihombori Quao!

Arikana Chihombori Quao, the African Union Ambassador to the United States, which was terminated on the 7^th October 2019 after her open criticism of the Western Powers hold of the African Nation.

She’s been vocal and righteously so against the French hold of the former African colonies it has agreements with, military, monetary and direct trade enriching itself on the spoils of the African continent. Which is all true, that is why all the big-men from the previous colonies are favourable and steady visiting Paris and meeting the heads of state there. That is why, the interests of Paris comes before the needs of the citizens of the respective Republics. They are all Francafrique doing.

That is why Emmanuel Macron has no issues boosting dictators, standing by autocrats who secure the monetary gains of the Central African Francs (CFA). This is boosting the Reserves of France, they are earning on the printing and monetizing the currencies of these Republics. They are all in the hands of the French, controlling and monitoring the monetary policies and the economic policies made in the respective republics. This is how to keep the governments, either by the hook or by the crook.

Secondly, they are also kept by a military pact and a resource sharing agreements, which means the extraction industry of the French gets first deals, if it is Total or anything else. Will get a first rights to extract or be able to trade commodities. That is why you see in former North African Republic, which was colonizes you see Renaults, Citroen’s and so-on. You are not seeing so many American or British cars there, but French produced cars in abundant. That is because, the French still has a foothold and advantages, which the Republic have to abide too.

Therefore, what the axed and sacked AU Ambassador to US said about the French is true. It maybe hurt the pride of the French. But you don’t need to say anything substantial to hurt their pride. You can just dismiss their champagne and they will cry havoc. In addition, the French know they need Francafrique and they would miss out important market, funds and resources, which it cannot live without. The banks, the industries and military would suffer a hit. The French will not say this, but the reason for axing shows this.

The French is weak, the French isn’t as great or has the power to flex without its state under passive control through the measures of the CFA and other Post-Colonial agreements made with Big-Men in the Francafrique. That is just the way it is and because someone with a title said it. It had to be silenced.

However, if the French didn’t want it undressed or questioned their role on the continent. They should have maybe answered it with words or numbers. Instead, they are verifying her words by axing her and pushing the Chairman of AU to get rid of her. Peace.

President Macky Sall is a bit to friendly to the Colonial French!

“With the French colonization, we had positive things” – President Macky Sall

The Senegalese President Macky Sall is out again, being super-friendly to the French. Even saying again that the Colonizer did lots of good to Senegal. The Republic and the people should be ashamed by the man. That he is so little sovereign and with pride over his own republic. If he was Paul Biya, I would understand, he should praise Switzerland and the mountain resorts he resides at. But I will not digress more. President Sall has again praised France. It is like you wonder how much money they are doling him and what sort of business-deals he has done with French Companies. Since he is a bit to friendly with them. Especially knowing the history of France in Senegal. You should figure out, that you can be cordial with them, but not so lovable.

First show some older clips, to show that this isn’t new from the President. So the ones that is shocked about recent statements as of this week. This is his M.O. and what he does. He has been like this before and said similar things, even if the French was imperialistic and still is, with their reach and demeaning control of the currency market in West Africa. Which the Republic of Senegal is under and their monetary policies are controlled by, therefore, I would expect more reluctant view of France, but Sall is different. He prefers and just see goodness from the French.

BWOG Staff reported in 2013:

“President Sall painted his vision for African Economic growth, insisting that philosophers like Fukuyama and Hobbes paint a picture of man “as a wolf to other men.” He insisted that predatory economic practices be reined in and saw little merit in criticism of African debt by countries “that are in huge debt themselves!” “We cannot validate the voice of the future with tools from the past,” he went on, claiming that innovative investment, not empty charity, was the real path to growth. He claimed that 4/5ths of African countries were experiencing growth above the world average and insisted that a common currency for eight West African is the right move. The one positive aspect of colonialism is that it united those countries oppressed by the same power” (BWOG Staff – ‘LectureHop: Macky Sall, the President of Senegal’ 28.09.2013 link: http://bwog.com/2013/09/28/lecturehop-macky-sall-the-president-of-senegal/).

An interview with Sall in 2013:

“What role should countries such as Senegal play in regional security compared with outside actors such as the United States and France? We cooperate with France, which is an ally and a friend. It is of course a former colonial power. But France understands the stakes in and the sociology of our countries. The United States also has a security policy in the region, and it is our partner through africom [the U.S. Africa Command] and everything that it does in terms of military cooperation with various countries” (…) “So can Africa take care of its own problems now? No. Africa cannot handle its own problems, because we are not yet at the point where we have the logistical capabilities to deploy troops in case of emergency. It’s simply a matter of means, not a matter of men” (Mercredi – ‘A Conversation With Macky Sall’ 28.08.2013 link: https://www.ndarinfo.com/A-Conversation-With-Macky-Sall_a6291.html)

Northern Senegal farmers:

“Under French rule, the poor farmers of Northern Senegal were forced by oppressive economic policies to resort to the monoculture of peanuts and rice. The legacy of colonialism on traditional farming practices was the desertification of the delicate Sahel soil and a devastating famine in the late twentieth century (Kloby 103). In what was once a civilization of communal living and bartering, the French instituted elements of capitalism that would best serve the European metropole. Instead of nurturing a complete capitalist system and educating the local populous about the newly developed concepts of industrialization and economic theory, the Europeans exploited the rich resources of both land and people to further advance their own development (Rodney 112)” (Emma Anderson – ‘COLONIZATION AND SENEGAL’ 10.07.2013 link: https://www.globalcitizenyear.org/updates/colonization-and-senegal/) .

As you see, President Sall has a favorable view, maybe he is caught up in the view of French Embassy of Senegal in Dakar, which writes on their page about their relationship:

“After more than three centuries of uninterrupted relations, France and Senegal have remained since the independence of very close nations. A shared history, a tradition of cooperation in all fields, a constant flow of human and material exchanges in both directions, confirm this proximity. The strong bond that President Léopold Sédar Senghor had with our country has been perpetuated by his successors, President Abdou Diouf, President Abdoulaye Wade, and President Macky Sall since April 2012. France intends to remain alongside Senegal, which is the largest recipient of French aid in sub-Saharan Africa. It is in all these areas, but also in that of our cultural and human exchanges, woven through three hundred and fifty years of history, that the exceptional relations of friendship between France and Senegal are manifested” (La France au Senegal – ‘Relations politiques’ 21.06.2017).

Therefore, you can see that the exceptional relationship is evident in the way Sall is defending the colonial works that French did in Senegal, as they didn’t do it to control and get their imperial control of Senegal. That should be insulting to Sall, but you can wonder why he see it so favorable. Because he shows such defense and defense of the assimilation and the policies done by French Colonial Administrations, which was done for the betterment of Paris and not for the betterment of Dakar. That was just dumb-luck if the policies created something good for Dakar, because the end-game in the colonial enterprises are for the betterment of the empire, not for the colonies. They are the means to an end.

That is why Sall is so French friendly and defending the demeaning and insulting policies of the Colonial French. Which the Senegal republic has inherited and is still under supervision of the French. As their monetary policies and other government framework are still monitored by the French and the French Treasury in Paris. Therefore, the Senegal Government have less control and have less powers of their own, as long as they are following guidelines from the French on how the Central African Franc (CAF) is.

The Senegalese are the ones that following similar steps as in France, but have politicians that are blindly also following the French. This is all in deliberate way of still having not only influence, but actual control of the territories they used reign supreme over. That is what the French is doing. Therefore, President Sall is a bit to friendly and defending the French. I just don’t get it. I don’t. But that is just me though. Peace.

Muse Report shows how the French Government supported Habyiramana during the 1994 Genocide!

Just two days ago an American Law Firm studied the Rwandan Genocide as they say it themselves: “In light of that inquiry, the Government of Rwanda has retained the Washington, D.C. law firm of Cunningham Levy Muse LLP to review and report on the material available in the public record on the role and knowledge of French officials regarding the Genocide against the Tutsi” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 3, 2017). This here is will be quotes from that report that is on the role of the French Government in the Rwandan Genocide. Clearly, there has been allegations and has been some talk about that, concerning the arms and the knowledge of it. This report are putting light on some of that. I will take the quotes that is substantial for the French intervention in the civil war and genocide in Rwanda.

“The expansion of France’s military support and strategic advice began within days of the war’s commencement. On October 11, 1990, Defense Attaché Colonel René Galinié recommended sending French advisers into the field, northeast of the combat zone, to “educate, organize and motivate troops that had been ossified for thirty years and who had forgotten the basic rules of battle.” (…) “In addition to advice, French officials supplied the FAR with modern mortars, armored vehicles, and other vehicles, along with ammunition and rockets. French officials also provided and helped maintain helicopter-gunships, which fired upon RPF fighters. According to jokes at the time, the only thing Rwandan soldiers did was pull the trigger” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 12-13, 2017).

“Massacres of Tutsi continued throughout 1991, 1992, and up until the Genocide. French officials were aware of massacres at this time, as well as the role of the Habyarimana government and its military in them. Despite this knowledge, French officials maintained their support of the Rwandan military and funneled weapons into Rwanda” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 20, 2017).

“Thus, in February 1993, after the Noroît detachment had just been reinforced . . . , the Army Chief of Staff reminded the defense attaché that he was responsible for “ensuring that the Rwandan army does not find itself in a stock shortage of sensitive ammunition . . . and that deliveries to the FAR of military equipment be made in the utmost discretion.” In fact, in the timeline laid down in his end of mission report, Colonel Philippe Tracqui, commander of the Noroît detachment for the period from February 8, 1993 to March 21, 1993, noted “Friday, February 12, 1993: landing of a DC8 50 with a 12.7mm machine gun plus 100,000 cartridges for the FAR. Wednesday, February 17, 1993: landing of a Boeing 747 with discrete unloading by the FAR of 10 mm shells and 68 mm rockets (Alat).” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 23, 2017).

“The French Parliamentary Commission accordingly found: Faced with procrastination by Rwandan authorities and concerned about the stability of states and regional security, France never made the decision to suspend all cooperation, or even to decrease the level of its civil and military aid. Thus, President Juvénal Habyarimana was able to convince himself that “France . . . would be behind him regardless of the situation, and he could do anything militarily and politically.” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 27, 2017).

“Arms flows to the FAR were not suspended immediately by France after the imposition of the arms embargo on May 17, 1994. Rather, they were diverted to Goma airport in Zaire as an alternative to Rwanda’s capital, Kigali, where fighting between the FAR and the rebel RPF as well as an international presence made continued shipments extremely difficult. Some of the first arms shipments to arrive

in Goma after May 17 were supplied to the FAR by the French government. Human Rights Watch learned from airport personnel and local businessmen that five shipments arrived in May and June containing artillery, machine guns, assault rifles and ammunition provided by the French government. These weapons were taken across the border into Rwanda by members of the Zairian military and delivered to the FAR in Gisenyi. The French consul in Goma at the time, Jean-Claude Urbano, has justified the five shipments as a fulfillment of contracts negotiated with the government of Rwanda prior to the arms embargo” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 39, 2017).

“Information in the public record also shows that in the months that followed the Genocide against the Tutsi French officials continued to support génocidaires. On August 3, 1994, the UN Secretary General suggested that the international community should coordinate with UNAMIR to identify within the camps perpetrators of the Genocide against the Tutsi, with an eye to bringing them to justice. But instead, French soldiers escorted and released suspected génocidaires in Zaire. Between July and September 1994, French military helicopters evacuated Bagosora, along with Interahamwe leader Jean-Baptiste Gatete, and other ex-FAR troops and militia members, out of Goma” (…) “Finally, we urge the Government of Rwanda to seek France’s cooperation in this endeavor. To this end, France should make available its archives, documents, physical evidence and officials (current and former). Any investigation by the Government of Rwanda should evaluate what occurred in the 1990s, as well as what has happened since then, including France’s cooperation with this investigation into French complicity in the Genocide” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 48, 52, 2017).

This one collected lots of public information and put into account. This is damning evidence and not just random quotes from a mad-man, but from lawyers collected information as ordered by the Rwandan Government. The could have been done by the French, they might have given other insights and even transcripts we haven’t seen. Even as the Rwandan has and can get documentation on the actions during the genocide and before. Since the Rwandan Government wants closure and might want the French to answer for their crimes.

French President Francois Mitterrand at the time was loyal to President Juvenal Habyarimana, therefore wanted to stop the Rwandan Patriotic Front from overthrowing their man at any cost apperently. The French really showed it with the ammunition, training and also helping them flee with weapons to Zaire/Democratic Republic of Congo. Clearly, the French knew what they did and did it with a reason, as of they wanted someone loyal to them and also a weapons brother at any cost.

So the continued trouble of the Great Lakes Region has been created by the French as well. Since they let the Interahamwe and Ex-FAR leave with weapons in the refugee camps in the DRC. That has been an initial reason for violence since the 1990s. The French should step up and take responsibility for what they did and who they gave power to. Which also created this genocide. The PRF and President Paul Kagame did his part, the RPF is not a holy and non-violent movement who just brought peace. They also killed and took control. However, the French did aid and abide help to the other partner in the crime. Therefore, they are responsible for their part in this genocide. That shouldn’t be left alone and the stones should be turned, the ones sanction this and ordering this on behalf of Habyarimana and his government.

This report was compelling and it shows how disgraceful the French was and how they really wanted the dictator Habyirmana to continue to rule in Rwanda. Peace.

Reference:

Cunningham Levy Muse LLP – ‘REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA ON THE ROLE OF FRENCH OFFICIALS IN THE GENOCIDE AGAINST THE TUTSI’ (11.12.2017)

President Macron neo-colonial perspective on Africa came to the surface at the G-20!

The supposed centrist and progressive French President Emmanuel Macron, he newly elected President who we’re to be a fresh air. Aren’t apparently so, not if he believes what he said this week during the G-20 Summit in Hamburg. It is a disgrace of a modern European President to reflect this sort of sentiment. Especially, since this wasn’t said by some rascals associated with Marine Le Pen or Geert Wilders, but actually out of Macrons own mouth. It is time to erase the saint-hood and the prestigious placing among the hopeful leaders. Because when he says these words, it hurts, and it proves that the French still feels superior towards the African Nations and their people. Macron clearly feels so when explaining himself and addressing development on the continent. The words in italic are proving his sentiments. Just take a look at a badly translated Press Conference on the 8^th July 2017!

“I do not share that kind of reasoning. There were several envelopes that were given. Either we change the target with the addition of billions. We have been deciding to help Africa for decades and we did. If it were that simple, you would have noticed it. The Marshall Plan is a plan for material reconstruction, in countries that had their equilibrium and stability. The challenge of Africa, it is totally different, much deeper and civilization today. What are the problems in Africa? “He asked” (…) “It is through rigorous governance, fighting corruption, a struggle for good governance, successful demographic transition. In countries that still have 7 childbirths per woman, you can spend billions of euros, you do not stabilize anything. The plan of this transformation that we must conduct together must take into account the African specificities by and with African Heads of State. It is a plan that must take into account our own commitments on all the projects I have just mentioned, better associate public and private; And it must sometimes be more regional and even national. That is the method that has been adopted and that is what we do wherever we are engaged. I will have the opportunity next week to come back in much more detail” (Macron, 08.07.2017).

It seems like he knows and understands the African experience, that he can precisely blame the mothers of Africa for the bad demographics. That he can say the failed planned parenthood is the problem. Because, the French has no interfering in the African affairs with their armies, with their control through their Central Bank and Central African Franc (CFA), and also their ideals of a Francafrique. Dr. Lansine Kaba said these words a few years ago and they still ring in my ear!

“Francafrique involves a complex web of relations that have made France a major player in the affairs of many African countries and even of the African Union. Through the networks of this largely “opaque conglomerate”, France, a founding member of the UN Security Council and the World Bank, can boast a significant global influence that extends far beyond the French-speaking states. The term Francafrique suggests several facts and ideas, ranging from the politics of cordial exchange and cooperation to that of covert actions and violent military intervention that the French have been known for perpetrating in different parts of Africa since the 1960s” (…) “It involves an effective style of diplomacy that is not necessarily staffed with well-seasoned accredited diplomats, but energetic and daring doers. Francafrique builds relations that rely on close personal connections woven between the French leadership (the president and his close aides) and individual African leaders who depended on French assistance and security forces. Francafrique excelled in channelling funds to electoral campaigns of some prominent French politicians too” (Al Jazeera, 2013).

Than you have the WikiLeaks cable leaked from 2009, that even speaks volume of the way Macron views Africa as well: “Gompertz admitted that France’s Africa policy does have problems, most notably, that France continues to focus most of its efforts on its former colonies, even though they are not necessarily the most strategically important. Gompertz hopes to push for a stronger engagement with Anglophone and Lusaphone Africa. (Note: GOF officials frequently cite Nigeria, Angola, and South Africa as three of France’s key emerging partners in Africa. Gompertz was departing the same afternoon for Morocco and South Africa. End note.) Similarly, too much of France’s political and cooperation resources in Africa are designed to reinforce its partnerships within the international “Francophonie” organization. Gompertz cited the example of Burundi, where English is replacing French as the most popular foreign language, but he said this is understandable given Burundi’s important trade links in the East African Community. At the same time, he related that while he was Ambassador to Ethiopia, there was a strong demand for French language teachers, but France was not responsive in helping meet this need” (WikiLeaks, 2009).

So when Macron claims the missing envelopes and development, for various reasons, that he can understand. Even his own former Ambassador to Ethiopia Stephane Gompertz saying the projects was more for political gain and French own interest in Africa. Therefore, that the French President says what he says about the envelopes are bit disgusting. Knowingly the only intent the French has in Africa, isn’t directly developing the continent, but to extend their power there. Than he later claims the demographic and planned parenthood issues is behind it all. When the French interference and misuse of funds to keep their friendly leaders at bay. Clearly, are the program the French run under their Francafrique project.

So, when a French President should know what the French has known. That the French can spend billions and envelopes a not see development. When the interests are more of Paris, than of Dakar or Bamako, even the shores of Tunis. Usually if the Fancafrique are more for the gain of its own than the ones in need. More for the Paris elite or the friendly leaders instead of development. Therefore, it is an own created monster of French influenced based on patronage and clientele served from Paris. Macron must know this as the Ivorian and other leaders have nice houses on the boulevards of Paris. These are made of the patronage created by the French.

It is therefore, disgusting, that he blames the African woman and their parenthood for the lacking development. When lots of French own influence on the continent is for personal gain and for patronage. Not for development itself. To overlook this, is to forget the French acts and also superior belief in themselves. That is why Macron said what he said. The belief and understanding of grand strength. That they are one of the greatest civilizations on planet earth.

President Macron words: “In countries that still have 7 childbirths per woman, you can spend billions of euros, you do not stabilize anything”. Macron need some sense and need to step-up from his Le Pen ways. He need to fix his mind and should rethink French strategy on African soil, before talking about stabilization. Parts of the problems still on the continent is the problems left behind from the French. That they have never left wealth, but left behind petty dictators who spends fortune on Champs Elysee! Peace.

Reference:

Al Jazeera – ‘Q&A: France’s connections in Africa’ (15.08.2013) link: http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/specialseries/2013/08/201381584025929212.html

WikiLeaks – ‘”FRANCAFRIQUE” — MFA DISPUTES REPORTS ON A RETURN TO BUSINESS AS USUAL’ (19.11.2009) link: https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09PARIS1534_a.html

Discussion: Should the French get jurisdiction for trials of Rwandan Genocide? Since they now are breaching international boundaries and judging acts not happening on French soil, but in Rwanda.

It is not that I am for the Rwandan genocide or partial in any sense of the actions done in Paris today. I will just spill the beans and ask for questionable trial and courtship in Paris as that is France, not Kigali that is Rwanda. If it still we’re tribunal in Arusha, Tanzania then this would be understandable for court outside as it was an agreement between United Nation and the Rwandan Government for this Tribunal as Peaceful change after the civil war and the genocide in 1993-1994 in the country. There I will question the action of the French Authorities today.

In Paris today:

“On Tuesday, Octavien Ngenzi, 58, and Tito Barahira, 64, will go on trial for allegedly playing a direct role in the massacre of hundreds of Tutsi refugees in a church in the eastern town of Kabarondo on April 13, 1994” (News Wires, 2016).

Because it is an important question and with the implication of history between Rwanda and the France; France have been the colonial master on the African Continent and still have control over the Central African Franc (CAF) and with that has an economic stake in many African nations. Still, this should not be implicated into why they can take Citizens of another Nation and also order their trial, even if it is breaching with Human Rights and Roman Statute. Most Countries have ratified the Roman Statute and also parts of UN Charter for Human Rights and even the Geneva Convention on justice in War. Still, this does opens the door from who has the right to sanction and the right to create justice.

Some people might say the Rwandan Government is a totalitarian and a Police State under strict control from a central government under the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) under President Paul Kagame who does not have the will to take certain Génocidaires to court as they might implicate certain close allies of the government. Still, that does not open the question that I will talk about. Because even if the courts and judges are premature and built for the Government in Rwanda, does not take away their jurisdiction and their own rights of rule of law in their own country. Even when it is the violations are a crime against humanity as Genocide.

Not that I want the men and woman behind an action of this size to get away is not my intention to discuss it. It is more the example of colonial law and the post-colonial acts that are not just or justified. We as people have to set standards and use our minds. I will not let the French or British control the Central Arguments, as much as I don’t want the Americans or Chinese doing it. What is important is this. We have Nations, which is a set territory, a territory where they keep citizens safe and have the monopoly for violence is for the state; in that sense that the nation have an Army to keep foreign forces away and the town a secure to raise families and work. Second part of that security is the internal security to make peace inside the country with a Police that takes criminals and courts of laws that with justification condemns and detain fellow citizens that have breached the national laws. All of this should be universal and understood, as ordinary understanding of what a state should do. And it with this matter I will take a step further.

Because this is important even when the States and Governments who controls their nations and does the wrong acts against fellow peers. Their citizens should then as long as the nation and state have ratified international laws and statutes get their crimes against humanity in the International Criminal Court of Hauge. Even if the ICC and it’s attack on African Leaders, it still have the authority as given by the United Nation and the other bodies together with the ratified laws that the States and Government have signed at one point in time.

The problem I have and the reason for it is simple and it’s basic for any Republic/Kingdom/State/Nation their sovereign rights and their sovereign rule as a Sovereign Power in their own Territory as it is with the Army and the Police inside that nation. That is the main issue I have. Even when it comes to Crime Against Humanity.

Let’s say that the unlawful and unjust war from the United States of America under President George W. Bush who even address the world on 20^th March 2003, which started a war on false premise and lies to American public and the United Nations, without the international states accept for United Kingdom accepting the attack on the Sovereign Nation of Iraq under President Saddam Hussain. I am not saying President Hussain we’re a saint, as his acts with certain gas and weapons against Iran was not justified, still the matter at hand can question the jurisdiction of the ones implicated and breaches of justice from the American Government at the time and the United Kingdom Government who went in Iraq. They all certainly we’re behind acts against Humanity on some levels as they went to war and even did torture in certain chambers in Iraq. Can the Rwandan Government and their courts if they collect evidence and collect for instance affidavit of victims and of low-level civil servants of the time, could they take President Bush for trial at the High Court of Kigali?

I am just asking the question, because the case today is an act upon the same sovereign question as the former Mayors of two towns or villages are taken to court in Paris. They are in foreign land as they are not in the Jurisdiction and the Territory of where the crimes happen and in the State where the claimed Génocidaires are citizens.

If citizenship and if sovereign nations still means something, then we have to ask the question and ask the matter. Even when it grimes crimes and crimes against humanity as the laws should be the same for Western Nations as for the African Nations. This should open up the questions for French interaction with the Génocidaires of the official government at the time under President Habyarimana with the military training and equipment before Operation Turquoise turned into the UNAMIR mandate under Dallaire. In that sense, the black-box sage that never really been answered as the training and interference of the French, should give the Government under Rwandan Patriotic Front to be allowed to Court the French Men who served the Génocidaires, right? Since the French now is doing the same in Paris, just because they are French and European should not make them able to clean their hands of the blood, just as much as the RPA, now RPF should not be white-washed over time. The law should apply alike to either side. Something that should not be needed to explain or take on; as any crime on humanity and support of the attacks with weapons and structures should be taken to court as violation of these men and woman.

The case is not that the Génocidaires should be dealt with from authorities and the men behind killings should not be punished by the Government or any other piece international legal-body that has the jurisdiction on it. If so then the men and woman should go to international court or a national one that could offer a fair judgement on the causes behind the violations and assess the criminal activity.

But what bugs me is the easy way the French and Government of France overturn the Rwandan Government as a sovereign nation to turn their citizens and their eye-witnesses to Paris for the trial to concede the judgement of these two mayors. Not that I am defending the Mayors for their activity, it’s the actions of French I am still questioning.

That is why, why couldn’t the Rwandese if they could collect information on the French involvement and support of the late-President Habyarimana in the turns up-to the genocide. Since the French can now take Rwandese to court in Paris and collect the witnesses from Rwanda to serve these men and woman in the capital of France. There questions about it and if it is justified as the precedence this kind of cases set. As if the French Authorities still can grant them authority to get these people to be eye-witnesses in a court case of actions against humanity in Rwanda and not on the French shores or near Caen. Therefore since this court is not directly based on the Roman Statute or the other ratified laws where the crimes against humanity are involved and control the verdicts of the judgements. So the matter is that if it was so, since this a case that is about crimes done abroad in alien jurisdiction, it might should have been posted in the ICC and not the High Court or whatever name the Court have in Paris.

It is not that I want the two Mayors to free-men without a court judgement or get the Génocidaires of the Rwandan tragedy to not be tested in Court and get fair trials, so that the men and woman who has actually done their crimes get their punishment. But the way it is done and how it is conducted as long as it talks about Sovereign States and Territory; when coming to court and to be able to conduct justice to its citizens and the condemn the crimes, condone it and make sure that criminals get fair trials before serving time as felons. That shouldn’t be too much to ask. The question is if we twisted the Courts to Kigali instead of Paris, if the French we’re sent to be on trial in Kigali instead of Paris. That should be allowed to ask, as the Rwandan Government and the French Government are both Sovereign States. As Sovereign they have rights, over territory and their citizens and nations are bound to respect these in any sense and be responsible for justice, also over boundaries and borders. And also respecting the international conventions, laws and other ratified accords that set the standards for justice in the State as the Citizens need safety and security; something the state should provide and make sure they have, by the peaceful means and rule of law. Peace.

Reference:

New Wires – ‘Rwandan ex-mayors face trial in France over 1994 genocide’ (10.05.2016) link: http://www.france24.com/en/20160509-rwandan-ex-mayors-face-trial-france-1994-genocide-Ngenzi-Barahira