A TALE OF TWO GENOCIDES: NAMIBIA’S STAND AGAINST ISRAELI AGGRESSION

APRIL 18TH, 2024

Source

Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is ‘Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak Out.’ His other books include ‘My Father Was a Freedom Fighter’ and ‘The Last Earth.’ Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net

Ramzy Baroud

The distance between Gaza and Namibia is measured in the thousands of kilometers. But the historical distance is much closer. This is precisely why Namibia was one of the first countries to take a strong stance against the Israeli genocide in Gaza.

Namibia was colonized by the Germans in 1884, while the British colonized Palestine in the 1920s, handing the territory to the Zionist colonizers in 1948.

Though the ethnic and religious fabric of Palestine and Namibia differ, the historical experiences are similar.

It is easy, however, to assume that the history that unifies many countries in the Global South is only that of Western exploitation and victimization. It is also a history of collective struggle and resistance.

Namibia has been inhabited since prehistoric times. This long-rooted history has allowed Namibians, over thousands of years, to establish a sense of belonging to the land and to one another, something that the Germans did not understand or appreciate.

When the Germans colonized Namibia, giving it the name of ‘German Southwest Africa,’’ they did what all other Western colonialists have done, from Palestine to South Africa to Algeria, to virtually all Global South countries. They attempted to divide the people, exploited their resources and butchered those who resisted.

Although a country with a small population, Namibians resisted their colonizers, resulting in the German decision to simply exterminate the natives, literally killing the majority of the population.

Since the start of the Israeli genocide in Gaza, Namibia answered the call of solidarity with the Palestinians, along with many African and South American countries, including Colombia, Nicaragua, Cuba, South Africa, Brazil, China and many others.

Namibia rejects Germany’s Support of the Genocidal Intent of the Racist Israeli State against Innocent Civilians in Gaza

On Namibian soil, #Germany committed the first genocide of the 20th century in 1904-1908, in which tens of thousands of innocent Namibians died in the most… pic.twitter.com/ZxwWxLv8yt

— Namibian Presidency (@NamPresidency) January 13, 2024

Though intersectionality is a much-celebrated notion in Western academia, no academic theory is needed for oppressed, colonized nations in the Global South to exhibit solidarity with one another.

So when Namibia took a strong stance against Israel’s largest military supporter in Europe – Germany – it did so based on Namibia’s total awareness of its history.

The German genocide of the Nama and Herero people (1904-1907) is known as the “first genocide of the 20th century”. The ongoing Israeli genocide in Gaza is the first genocide of the 21st century. The unity between Palestine and Namibia is now cemented through mutual suffering.

However, Namibia did not launch a legal case against Germany at the International Court of Justice (ICJ); it was Nicaragua, a Central American country thousands of miles away from Palestine and Namibia.

The Nicaraguan case accuses Germany of violating the ‘Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.’ It rightly sees Germany as a partner in the ongoing genocide of the Palestinians.

This accusation alone should terrify the German people, in fact, the whole world, as Germany has been affiliated with genocides from its early days as a colonial power. The horrific crime of the Holocaust and other mass killings carried out by the German government against Jews and other minority groups in Europe during WWII is a continuation of other German crimes committed against Africans decades earlier.

The typical analysis of why Germany continues to support Israel is explained based on German guilt over the Holocaust. This explanation, however, is partly illogical and partly erroneous.

It is illogical because if Germany has, indeed, internalized any guilt from its previous mass killings, it would make no sense for Berlin to add yet more guilt by allowing Palestinians to be butchered en masse. If guilt indeed exists, it is not genuine. It is erroneous because it completely overlooks the German genocide in Namibia. It took the German government until 2021 to acknowledge the horrific butchery in that poor African country, ultimately agreeing to pay merely one billion euros in ‘community aid,’ which will be allocated over three decades.

The German government’s support of the Israeli war on Gaza is not motivated by guilt but by a power paradigm that governs the relations among colonial countries. Many countries in the Global South understand this logic very well, thus the growing solidarity with Palestine.

A photo titled “Captured Hereros,” taken circa 1904 by German colonists in Namibia. Photo | German Historical Museum

The Israeli brutality in Gaza, but also the Palestinian sumud, resilience and resistance, are inspiring the Global South to reclaim its centrality in anti-colonial liberation struggles.

The revolution in the Global South’s outlook—culminating in South Africa’s case at the ICJ and the Nicaraguan lawsuit against Germany—indicates that change is not the outcome of a collective emotional reaction. Instead, it is part and parcel of the shifting relationship between the Global South and the Global North.

Africa has been undergoing a process of geopolitical restructuring for years. The anti-French rebellions in West Africa, demanding true independence from the continent’s former colonial masters, and the intense geopolitical competition involving Russia, China and others are all signs of changing times. And with this rapid rearrangement, a new political discourse and popular rhetoric are emerging, often expressed in the revolutionary language emanating from Niger, Burkina Faso, Mali and others.

But the shift is not happening only on the rhetorical front. The rise of BRICS as a powerful new platform for economic integration between Asia and the rest of the Global South has opened up the possibility of alternatives to Western financial and political institutions.

In 2023, it was revealed that BRICS countries hold 32 percent of the world’s total GDP, compared to 30 percent held by the G7 countries. This has much political value, as four of the five original founders of BRICS are strong and unapologetic supporters of the Palestinians.

While South Africa has been championing the legal front against Israel, Russia and China are battling the US at the UN Security Council to institute a ceasefire. Beijing’s Ambassador to The Hague defended the Palestinian armed struggle as legitimate under international law.

Now that global dynamics are working in favor of Palestinians, it is time for the Palestinian struggle to return to the embrace of the Global South, where shared histories will always serve as a foundation for meaningful solidarity.

Feature photo | Hon. Yvonne Dausab, Minister of Justice of Namibia, joined representatives of over 50 nations in presenting testimony to the International Court of Justice on the legality of the Israeli occupation. Photo | International Court of Justice

From periphery to priority: Africa as a key arena for Russia’s ambitions

AUG 2, 2023

Last week’s Russia-Africa summit highlighted their shared interest to cooperate against western dominance. While Moscow leads the fight, Africans are eager to play a role in shaping the new multipolar order.

Photo Credit: The Cradle

Mohamad Hasan Sweidan

Since the start of this year, Russia has shown a remarkable commitment to engaging with Africa, with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov making three visits to the continent. These diplomatic efforts underscore the increasing importance Moscow places on cooperation with African countries.

This was expressed by Russian President Vladimir Putin in his recent article published on the Kremlin website on 24 July under the title “Russia and Africa: Joining efforts for peace, progress and a successful future” where he stated:
“We highly value the honestly-gained capital of friendship and cooperation, traditions of trust, and mutual support that Russia and African countries share. We are brought together by a common desire to shape a system of relations based on the priority of international law, respect for national interests, indivisibility of security, and recognition of the central coordinating role of the United Nations.”
The response from African countries has been unprecedented, particularly evident at the second Russia-Africa summit held on 27-28 July. An astounding 49 out of 54 African nations actively participated in the summit, indicating a significant development in the relations between the two parties.

Russian interests in Africa

This heightened engagement comes in spite of the war in Ukraine, which reshaped the geopolitical landscape and emphasized the importance of expanding cooperation with Africa amidst the global competition for positions and influence.

The Russian Foreign Policy Concept, issued in late March, recognized the importance of “strengthening and deepening Russian-African cooperation in various spheres on a bilateral and multilateral basis.” 

What makes Moscow’s outreach particularly noteworthy is that it extends beyond countries with immediate strategic interests or abundant resources. Notably, Russia has reached out to smaller African states, such as Eswatini, highlighting its intent to strengthen its influence and build a positive image across the entire continent.

The African response to Russia’s calls for closer ties has grown substantially. The Second International Parliamentary Conference “Russia-Africa” saw an increased participation of 40 delegations from African countries in March 2023, compared to 36 delegations in the previous conference held in 2019.

Similarly, the second Russia-Africa summit witnessed the attendance of 49 African nations in July, compared to 43 countries in the inaugural summit in 2019.

These developments are especially significant as African countries face mounting pressure from western powers to cut ties with Moscow due to the conflict in Ukraine. According to Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, western states, particularly the US and France, were exerting “unprecedented pressure” on African countries ahead of the Russia-Africa summit in St Petersburg.

Aid and Trade

Trade exchange between Russia and Africa increased between 2020 and 2022, after the first Russia-Africa summit, increasing from $14 billion to $18 billion, and is expected to double in 2030.   While Russia’s trade with continental Africa is still relatively modest, four countries stand out as crucial partners: Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, and South Africa, accounting for 70 percent of the total trade.

Africa’s top trade partners

Despite being at the bottom of Africa’s list of trading partners and contributing only 1 percent of foreign direct investment to the continent, Russia’s Africa policy is evolving rapidly. The Kremlin has recognized the increasing importance of Africa and sought new partnerships globally while deepening existing cooperation in the face of massive western sanctions.

One significant effort by Russia to strengthen ties with Africa is its commitment to education. In 2023, Russia offered a record 4,700 scholarships to African students, a considerable increase from the 1,900 scholarships awarded in 2019.

Furthermore, Russia has emerged as the top arms supplier to Africa, accounting for 44 percent of major arms imports to the region between 2017 and 2021. This dominance surpasses other major players like the US (17 percent), China (10 percent), and France (6.1 percent).

Russian presence in Africa

At the recent Russia-Africa summit, President Putin emphasized Russia’s commitment to military-technical cooperation by signing agreements with over 40 African countries and providing them with various weapons and equipment. Some of these deals even involved providing aid free of charge, demonstrating Russia’s commitment to supporting African nations in their fight against terrorism.

 Breaking free from neocolonial exploitation

In today’s rapid geopolitical transformations, Africa has emerged as an arena for competing major powers. Amidst this struggle for influence, Russia and African countries have found common ground in their shared interest to cooperate against western dominance.
Moscow positions itself as a leader of the anti-western resistance, while African states see an opportunity to break free from the shackles of western colonialism and assert their voices in shaping the new multipolar order.

To understand the dynamics of the current Russian-African relationship, historical context is essential. The legacy of western colonial policies remains a pivotal element in the cooperation between Moscow and African states.

Many African countries identify with Russia’s vision of a multipolar world, seeking a more equitable presence in global affairs. Russia deftly capitalizes on this anti-colonial sentiment, presenting itself as an attractive partner aligned with the interests of the Global South, particularly Africa.

Recent Russia-Africa summits have provided a platform for Moscow and its African partners to criticize the west openly. Leaders like Burkina Faso’s Brahim Traoré used strong anti-colonial rhetoric to emphasize the need to break free from neocolonial exploitation and resource extraction.

In addition to rhetoric, Russia backs its words with action. At the summit, President Putin canceled $23 billion of African debt and pledged increased Russian investment in the continent. Moscow also highlighted its commitment to African food security, contrasting western practices that prioritize developed countries over developing ones.

UN data shows that 45 percent of food exports from Ukraine, exported under the Black Sea Grain Initiative signed between Russia, Ukraine, the UN, and Turkiye, went to developed countries, compared to 49 percent to developing countries.

Only 6 percent of these exports went to the least developed countries, including African countries, the equivalent of approximately 1.4 million tons. Last year, Russia exported 11.5 million tons of cereal to Africa, and nearly another 10 million tons were delivered in the first half of 2023.

Seeking collaborative partnerships

The report from the Munich Security Conference in February highlighted a troubling trend for the west: 
“Many countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America have steadily lost faith in the legitimacy and fairness of an international system which has neither granted them an appropriate voice in global affairs, nor sufficiently addressed their core concerns. To many states, these failures are deeply tied to the west. They find that the western-led order has been characterized by post-colonial domination, double standards, and neglect for developing countries’ concerns.”

As a result, countries in the region are seeking new partners who will approach the relationship as a collaboration rather than a zero-sum game. They have found an appealing alternative in Russia’s engagement, particularly in President Putin’s rhetoric advocating for a fair representation of African countries in international forums like the UN Security Council and G20. Furthermore, Moscow’s commitment to reform global financial and trade institutions to better serve African interests has resonated with these nations, setting the stage for deeper cooperation.

The growing discontent with the western-led system and the allure of alternative partnerships have helped to forge closer ties between the Kremlin and many of Africa’s leaders. This may explain recent events in Niger and before that in Mali, where military coups have redirected the country’s foreign policy away from the west and, in particular former colonial ruler France.

Gaining ground in the Global South

The support of some African countries, such as Burkina Faso, Mali, and Guinea, for the coup in Niger, can be seen as a message of support for expelling the long-standing French influence and presence there.

In Russian geopolitical thought, Africa has become a region of increased importance and opportunity, necessitating stronger cooperation and multifaceted relations. Moscow’s approach to the African continent is built on three main pillars: enhancing influence through cooperation, emphasizing its leading position among anti-western countries, and investing in the region’s abundant resources.

Russia recognizes that the prevailing anti-western sentiment in Africa provides a unique opening to build alliances and advance the cause of liberation from colonial legacies. The ongoing conflict between Russia and the west extends beyond the confines of Ukraine and is now unfolding in various regions, including Africa.

President Putin has skillfully positioned himself as a leader of the resistance against western influence, effectively resonating with many countries in the Global South, including Africa. By aligning itself with Africa’s desire to break free from historical western dominance and colonial influences, Russia has gained significant ground.

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.

On Trussification: From Decolonisation to Desperation to Hopelessness to Farce

October 16, 2022

By Batiushka

Source

Decolonisation: The Western Withdrawal from Asia, Africa and Europe

The Western European Empires have gone. The bankrupt Spanish Empire went first, in the century before last, the Germans lost their colonies in 1919 (at the same time as the Austro-Hungarians lost their European colonies), then the Italians lost their fantasies in Africa during the Second World War, the Germans got kicked out of their colonies in Eastern Europe in 1945, but the Portuguese much later, only getting kicked out of Africa in the 1970s. By that time the Dutch, the British, the Belgians and the French had also been kicked out of their colonies. Only the NATO Danes still hold on to Greenland, which is a lot of ice and snow and all of 56,000 people, though both Eisenhower and Trump wanted to buy it. However, since the US has its base at Thule, it effectively controls the country anyhow.

Since 1947 the UK has been kicked out of almost everywhere, infamously from the Indian Subcontinent in 1947, from Palestine in 1948 and humiliatingly, by their Americans ‘allies’, from Suez in 1956. All that remains is, for the moment, a small group of tiny enclaves and islands like Bermuda, the Caymans, Gibraltar, St Helena, the Falklands etc, about 18,000 square kilometres and fewer than 300,000 people in all, plus a lot of ice in the ‘British Antarctic Territory’.

As for France, after its humiliation in South-East Asia in 1954, it has gradually been kicked out of Africa (1946-2022) (Suez in 1956, Algeria in 1962 etc) and soon, even after its decades of assassinating independentist African politicians and military interventions, it will have nothing left there, though it still has a few islands in various oceans here and there.

As for the short-lived US Empire, over the last fifty years it has largely been kicked out of several Asian countries (Vietnam (1975), Iran (1979), Iraq (2011-2021) Afghanistan (2021), now out of Russia (2022), and soon out of China, India and Saudi Arabia. True, it still hangs on in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Israel, but not for much longer. Eurasia is to be US-free.

As regards the Western withdrawal from Europe, the UK left Europe in 2020. It still hangs on to Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and above all to England, but it will not last. Now it is the turn of the US to be kicked out of Europe. It is happening in the Ukraine at this very moment, but this rejection will later spread to Western Europe. Then it will be the turn of the EU to be kicked out of Europe and ultimately the US will be kicked out of the Americas, especially out of the US.

Do not be surprised by the words ‘the Western withdrawal from Europe’ or ‘the UK being kicked out of the UK, the EU out of the EU and the US out of the US’. This is not gibberish. I am talking about the removal of the three parasitic Establishment elites in all those three manmade unions. Once those elites have gone, those purely manmade unions will fall and the newly sovereign peoples of England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, the peoples of Continental Western Europe and all those in Northern America can be liberated from their zombification and so will be able to retrieve their roots, their identity, their sovereignty and their selves again.

Desperation

When the USA gets desperate, it always turns to terrorism, much as gunboat Britain did and still, very weakly, attempts to do. Without mentioning the CIA-created quagmires in Latin America or in Asia or mentioning the details of the Gulf of Tonkin (1), we recall its quagmires just in Europe: the installation of the Greek junta in 1967, the CIA overthrow of De Gaulle in France in 1968, the assassination of Aldo Moro in Italy in 1978, the assassination of Olof Palme in 1986, and much more recently MH17, its terrorist attacks on the Nordstream pipelines and the Crimea Bridge, and now its attempt to force Russia to use nuclear weapons, so that the Zionist neocons in Washington can at last find an excuse to use their nuclear toys.

Those who want modern Russia to behave like Stalin’s Soviet Union and blast their brother-people of the Ukraine off the map, as the USSR did in Berlin in 1945 (though in truth most of the damage had already been done by Anglo-American terrorist bombing) need a gentle reminder. Despite US fantasies and intimidation, I have news – the Soviet Union is dead and President Putin definitely does not want it back. He, after all, lived through its end when he was in East Germany and remembers just how awful it was. Russia’s aim has never been either the occupation of the Ukraine (unlike the Soviet aim in Eastern Europe in 1945, which was to create a buffer zone for self-protection from the aggressive West), or the destruction of the Ukraine, or the massacre of its Ukrainian brothers. Let us remind ourselves yet again of Russia’s three aims in this conflict against the US puppet regime in Kiev, that is, of the aims of the Russian campaign for the liberation of Russia’s brothers and sisters in the Ukraine from the Fascist junta. These three aims were, and are, and will be:

1. The Liberation of the Donbass

This has been 75% achieved, indeed, since the liberation has turned out to be not just that of Lugansk (99% achieved) and Donetsk (75% achieved), but also of 99% of Kherson and 75% of Zaporozhie, we could say that it has been 85% achieved. Why has the liberation turned into Donbass x 2, of four provinces instead of two? Simply because the Kiev junta continually threatened the Crimea and the Donbass and they had to be protected. And if Kiev continues to shell Donbass x 2 and occupy its empty fields, the Russian campaign will have to be the liberation of Donbass x 3 or even Donbass x 4.

2. The Demilitarisation of the Ukraine

This is well on its way, at least 50% completed already. In fact, it was completed as regards the NATO-fortified Kiev military by 25 March. However, since, as Russia expected, NATO decided to resupply Kiev with their own military stocks, now already much depleted, demilitarisation is still under way. But it is only a question of time.

3. Denazification

There is some confusion here. What does this term mean? Does it mean Russia sending out teachers to instruct Ukrainians in the difference between Nazi racism and the normal human acceptance of people from other countries and their cultures? No, it does not. Denazification in today’s Western context is different from that. It is the process by which the infantile Westernised child learns to stop putting its fingers into the flame. In other words, the West has to teach itself and learn from bitter experience. This is how Denazification (and from there regime-change) will be implemented throughout today’s Western world.

For example, over the last three months the yen, the euro and the pound sterling have all been reaching historic lows against the US dollar. This is because US interest rates are higher than elsewhere and so its financial markets are attracting international investment capital. After all, why invest in European countries, which are energy-dependent but forced to boycott their main source of energy? You do not want to invest in self-bankrupting countries, which are set on a suicidal course. The USA is not as yet perceived to be self-bankrupting (though its turn will come). What is the denazifying result of all this? Let us look at the ‘case’ – and it is a ‘case’, in the medical and pathological sense – of the UK.

Hopelessness

Having ditched its drunken loser Johnson, over the summer the UK Establishment wasted two months in the middle of a huge political and economic crisis allowing 80,000 mainly elderly and wealthy people to select an incompetent Prime Minister for 68.7 million people – such is UK democracy, which apparently the rest of the world, especially ‘autocrats’ in Russia and China, urgently need to learn from. Thus, as soon as Truss, the worst possible candidate for Prime Minister, had been carefully selected over the two summer months, many commentators, including myself, doubted that she could last until Christmas. It now seems that that pessimism may have been very optimistic. Some latest estimates reckon that at best she may not last until 1 November.

Truss’ decision to increase government spending – not least to double the UK ‘Defence’ (who is attacking the UK anyway?) budget to £50 billion by 2030 – to send over £3 billion of military supplies to Kiev so far this year, to subsidise 100,000 Ukrainian ‘refugees’, and at the same time to make tax cuts for the rich (what else would you expect the Conservative Party to do?) has not been accepted by Biden, the IMF and, above all, by the markets.

Therefore, on 14 October Truss ditched her own Minister of Finance of 38 days for his decision to carry out her own illiterate economic policy – illiterate, as precisely and prophetically described last July by Truss’ rival as Conservative Prime Minister, the former Finance Minister, Sunak. So, on 14 October, Truss appointed a new British Finance Minister, the fourth in four months, a man notorious for contributing to the destruction the UK’s abysmal Health ‘Service’ (2). He will now do exactly the opposite of everything she had promised just three weeks before and on which impossible promises the intellectually challenged elected her.

Naturally, the hopeless Truss blames all her problems on ‘global factors’ and especially on ‘Putin’s appalling invasion of the Ukraine’. No mention of voluntary and suicidal Western sanctions at all. After all, would she want to admit to her own colossal stupidity? Here we see how Denazification and, as a result regime change, are already happening in the UK, all by themselves, just as they will in the EU and in the USA. All Russia has to do is to sit back and watch Western leaders destroying themselves and dragging down their countries with them, until their peoples rise up in revolt, as is beginning to happen all over Western Europe, and as will happen in the US (we had a presage of this at the Capitol last year) and in its other colonies. This is Denazification, though perhaps more precisely it should be called ‘Auto-Denazification’. Or perhaps it could just be called ‘Hopelessness’? Or maybe just ‘Trussification’?

16 October 2022

Note:

1. A quick read of William Blum’s Killing Hope, US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II or Stephen Kinzler’s Overthrow, America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq should be enlightening here.

2. A young friend in the UK phoned me on 14 October. He told me how after weeks and weeks of chronic pain, he was eventually diagnosed by a UK hospital doctor as having cancer. He was then told that he had six months to live, but that surgeons would not have enough time to operate, as ‘the waiting list is too long’, and was then given ‘pain-killers’ that did not work as consolation for his death-sentence. The next day, through a friend, he booked a flight to Romania. There, arriving from the airport, he was seen in a clinic at once and given an MRI scan. He was immediately informed that he had a hernia. The surgeon apologised to him that he could not operate on him the next day, but that he would have to wait until the day after. Just another example of the UK’s ‘world class’ health system….Trussification indeed.