First Published: The Organizer, Vol. 4, No. 7, July 1978.
Transcription, Editing and Markup: Paul Saba
Copyright: This work is in the Public Domain under the Creative Commons Common Deed. You can freely copy, distribute and display this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit the Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line as your source, include the url to this work, and note any of the transcribers, editors & proofreaders above.
“Massacre in Zaire!”
“100 Whites Slaughtered”
“Black Mercenaries Murder Unarmed
Whites!”
In late May and early June, headlines like these were splashed across the front pages of papers all over the country. By the middle of June they had been replaced by the Cold War cries of National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski; “Soviet-Cuban Threat to International Stability”, “Soviets Behind Zaire Invasion”, “New Cold War?”
These two sets of headlines lay out pretty clearly two messages we are supposed to accept: 1) that Black Africans wantonly murder whites (one white life is worth ten Black ones); 2) Soviets and Cubans are behind the social upheaval in Zaire, which justifies US arms build-up and intervention in Africa.
That white residents were killed in the mining town of Kolwezi is true but it is not the whole truth. It is not clear who killed them. Some accounts attribute the killings to Mobutu’s troops who are known for their lack of discipline. A provocation aimed at discrediting the rebels, the forces of the Congolese National Liberation Front (FNLC), cannot be ruled out. Other accounts say the whites were killed by FNLC troops who broke discipline and went on a looting spree.
Either way, this event needs to be placed in context. Moral outrage from the Western governments is the height of hypocrisy. The European colonialists butchered thousands of Congolese. These “civilized” whites punished stealing by Africans, in the days of colonial rule, by cutting off the hands of the accused. While the press played up the white deaths, the deaths of Black civilians in Zaire inspired no massacre headlines or editorials. This kind of reporting is tailored to play on racial fears and obscure the real issues.
The so-called invaders of Shaba province were of the Lunda tribe which is the major ethnic group in Shaba. Even most western journalists admitted that the local population around Kolwezi appeared to support and aid the rebels. Why did they receive this support?
Shaba province is one of the most mineral rich parts of Zaire, which as a whole is extremely rich. But the people there are malnourished, working long hours and making almost nothing. Zaire’s 40 million people live in a country which produces 90% of the world’s cobalt (no jet has ever flown without cobalt)and where copper and other valuable minerals are abundant.
But the average Zairean eats so poorly that according to the UN, he or she only gets half the protein necessary to maintain decent health. A case of the measles would kill most Zairean children. In Shaba province a child’s diet is mostly manioc – a starchy root with little protein, but it helps to quiet their hunger pangs.
At the same time, President Mobutu is one of the richest men in the world. He owns houses in almost every world resort. He started out as an army officer, but by collaborating with large multi-national corporations to protect their investments with military might, he was able to rise in power. In 1965 he staged a military coup and installed himself in office.
By playing middle-man for the CIA and other western intelligence agencies and companies, he was able to make a big profit on channeling money to FNLA during the war in Angola. An ex-CIA agent who was in charge of Angola operations in 1975 said that Mobutu went so far as to pocket $ 1.5 million he was supposed to pass on to the FNLA.
Mobutu stays in power through corruption and repression pending troops against his opposition wherever it arises. He seems to think there is no limit to how far he can go in selling the people of Zaire down the river. He actually sold the northeastern section of Shaba to the West Germans, who run it as if it were a separate country. They use it for a testing ground for cruise missiles and have installed a surveillance system which can keep tabs on most of Africa.
On top of all this, Zaire is so far in debt to the western powers that one American businessman said, “When you loan money, the other party is in debt. When you loan this much money, you become a partner.”
The French and Belgians, as major copartners in the exploitation of Zaire have the same essential interests. The strategic location of Zaire in the heart of Africa is another consideration. Zaire has been a key base for exporting counter-revolution to Angola. It’s continued subservience to western imperialist interests is critical to thwarting the movements towards a genuinely independent Africa.
Thus the western powers moved quickly to bail out Mobutu. On June 6, top US Belgian, French, British, and West German officials met behind closed doors to decide Zaire’s military and economic fate, and to decide Mobutu’s future. The decided to exchange $100 million in emergency aid, plus $1 billion over the next two years, in return for Mobutu’s last shred of political independence.
According to the Christian Science Monitor, “Key decisions will be made by Western councilors, distributed through such important sectors as the national bank, the mining industry, transport, communications and defense.” A western official in Paris told the New York Times that “all participants agreed that Mobutu had to be given one more chance because there was simply no alternative to him as President, but that he would be made to understand that it was his last chance and that he had no choice but to accept supervision, a shadow government.”
This is consistent with the way in which the western powers have dealt with Zaire all along, although it is more extreme. Until 1960 Zaire was a colony of Belgium. When it won formal independence, Patrice Lumumba, a nationalist democratic leader, became its first prime minister. The CIA became worried right away. Although Lumumba was not a communist, he was open to trade with the socialist countries.
The CIA recommended to Eisenhower that he be assassinated, and evidently Eisenhower approved, because two plans were worked out. When this was revealed in 1976, the CIA made a big deal out of the failure of their attempt. But the CIA coached Mobutu’s troops who captured Lumumba and turned him over to the Katangese secessionists who killed him.
The US also supported, both politically and economically, Mobutu’s coup in 1965.
Through its hardliner Zbigniew Brzezinski, the Carter administration has been beating the drums about a “Soviet-Cuban” threat to Africa, touching off speculation about a renewal of the Cold War. In part this talk represents a cover for US intervention on behalf of corporate interests and puppets like Mobutu. But it also represents real concern about the declining position of the US in relation to the USSR in Africa and elsewhere.
Brzezinski’s talk about Soviet-Cuban aggression in Zaire glosses over several key facts. No evidence of direct Soviet or Cuban involvement in the Shaba events has been produced by anyone. Far from encouraging an “invasion” of Shaba, Cuba’s Fidel Castro and Angolan President Neto have both said publically that they sought to restrain the FNLA and Neto has recently closed the Angola-Zaire border to the rebels.
Mobutu and his US backers are hardly in a position to cry about foreign-backed invasion when they are supporting the subversion of Angola by basing counter-revolutionary guerillas on the Zaire-Angola border.
Finally, while the US government howls about Cuban troops in Africa, it discreetly supports the 14,000 French troops fighting in Mauritania, Chad, and elsewhere in Africa.
With hundreds of millions out in loans and over $2 billion invested in mineral extraction, it’s clear why the Carter administration as the voice of the monopoly corporations is rallying to the support of Mobutu.
US propagandists obscure what is at the heart of the struggle in Zaire, as it does in South Africa, Namibia, and Zimbabwe. On one side are the neo-colonial forces, who act as agents of western capitalism and are backed by the big imperialist powers. On the other side are the forces of national liberation – who want to develop Africa for Africans. Because these forces are aided by the Soviets and Cubans, their cause is no less legitimate. Was the American War for Independence in 1776 less genuine because it received aid from France?
This is the real issue in Africa today. The US government’s racist scare stories and anti-communist propaganda are attempts to obscure their design to keep Africa under the thumb of imperialism.