Black Africans Eye Arab African Muslims Warily

[Title edited]

At the risk of appearing to be insufficiently obsessive about Scott Thomas Beauchamp in the eyes of his defenders, here’s a post on something else in which I’m interested.

Last month, the African Union (AU), which is composed of 53 of the continent’s nation-states, held a summit in Accra, Ghana to discuss the possibility of forming a more permanent union--a United States of Africa. The location of the summit--the Ghanaian capital--was a symbolic nod to post-colonial Ghana’s first president, Kwame Nkrumah whose dream it was that all of Africa would federate under a singular government.

The staunchest proponent of a fully united Africa turned out to be Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi:

At the Accra summit we are going to get straight to the point. Let those who are hesitating, get out of our way! For 40 years all the summits have failed, our micro-states have no future.

However, many black Africans, heads of state and otherwise, viewed Gaddafi’s eagerness with a great deal of suspicion--and not simply because of the Gaddafi persona--and pushed for a more gradual approach to African unity. Some attendees at the summit were rather diplomatic about their reservations.

Nigerian President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua

charged his colleagues "to focus more on the urgent task of strengthening and consolidating internal governance and growth structures at the moment", adding that Nigeria favours a "gradualist approach to the establishment of a Union Government in Africa." [SNIP]

"This brings me to another critical variable in this debate: the degree of our commitment to our continental body and the essence of our Africanness. To the extent that we continue to subscribe and owe more allegiance to extra-continental bodies to the neglect of the AU, our steps towards functional integration will remain faltering."

He further enjoined African leaders to channel their energies towards improving facilities that are fundamental to the integration of Africa such as transportation, communication, power, agricultural and education.

Ugandan President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni:

"In Uganda, we are not in favour of forming a continental government now," he said.
"It will bring together incompatible linkages that may create tension rather than cohesion," the Ugandan leader continued. "This will especially be so if you bring together groups which want to impose their identity on others. I cannot give up my identity for anything.

"While economically I support the integration with everybody, politically we should only integrate with people who are either similar or compatible."

(All emphasis mine.)

Tanzanian Social Scientist Joseph Mihangwa Shinyanga of James Shikwati’s African Executive has little need for such niceties, however, and spells out the reasons which black Africans--even Muslims like Yar'Adua--are suspicious of the aims of Gaddafi and his Northern African allies--members of the extra-continental Arab League.

I am no racist, but it is true that Arabs of North Africa relate with [black] Africans the same way the Boers relate with Africans in South Africa. That is why their allegiance with the AU is suspect. They can’t serve the AU and Arab League at the same time because blood is thicker than water.

The Arabs invaded and captured Northern Africa around 639 BC. To date, they dominate Egypt, Libya, Sudan, Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco. [SNIP]

African Arabs never regard themselves as Africans but rather as Arabs living in Africa. If they don’t change this perspective, Africa will never unite. This stand is evident in the late Gamel Abdel Nasser’s sentiments in Philosophy of the Revolution that “we live in Africa but we are not Africans.”

In the Accra Powers Conference, (1958), out of the eight independent nations that attended; Ethiopia, Ghana, Liberia, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, Sudan and Egypt, only Ethiopia, Ghana and Liberia defended pan africanism. The rest favored the Arab league, a stand they have not changed to date. These are some of the countries that were touting a one-government Africa.

The Arab league is out to front the Arab agenda through the AU over black Africans. The same Gaddafi who fronted for a united Africa in Accra, has been on the front line destabilizing Mali, Chad and Niger with a view of bagging them into the Arab League. Gaddafi armed Dictator Idi Amin of Uganda against Tanzania arguing that he was aiding a Muslim nation against a non Muslim one. In Darfur and Mauritania, African ‘Arab’ rulers are chasing black Africans away from their own land and bringing Arabs to take their place. Secret slavery is happening in Mauritania. Just recently, General Hassan of Sudan [President Omar Hasan Ahmad al-Bashir] told the military: “we neither want to see these slaves (blacks) in Sudan nor need them. What we need is their land.”

Comments

[Wayne]

How nice. It goes right along with something else I have been picking up on.

A year or so back I was listening to some Arab commentator (I don't remember the name but he was highly connected to the UAE heirarchy) talking about the new Dubai with its newly building incredible skyline, monumental man-made resort islands, and new aggressive business acquistition plans.

Whe he was asked about what this was all for he indicated these ideals for their future:

It is a time for a new world financial and societal order especially for the nations and peoples of the Arabic world. It was time for them to take the lead in the world. That Dubai was to be the new New York both of the Arab world and of the whole world - a shining beacon of modern Arabic Islam's new leadership in world affairs.

They would be moving to convince both the wealthy of the Islamic world and those who were willing of the West to consolidate the world's financial markets away from the unstable and capricious Western centers.

They would be using their vast economic resources and the political and market power that comes with them to direct the world to center itself around the new city.

Moves of even Western companies to bring their headquarters to the new city with its capitalist-freindly policy are a testimony of the policies and plans that would bring about the supremecy of the modern Islamic economy over the old dead Western power centers.

He also stated that people would recognize the safety in the new markets as they were not the "target of the anger of disaffected elements resulting from aggresssive and oppressive policies by certain governments" (Al Qaeda) and so provide a much better climate for business.

He then went on to talk glowlingly about how the new resorts being built would be dedicated to the mores of Islamic culture without the decadent influences of Western immorality.

They would be places where Moslem sensibilities would comforted and where those who had previously sent their money to far Western economies and spent their leisure funds in dens of inequity like Las Vegas could instead come and keep those resources in a more proper place without having invest in or to be surrounded by Westerners.

All in all it is a frightening view that seems to me to say they are going pull back away from doing business with the Western world and to use every legal (and as they provided the clearing house for Al Qaeda and other Islamist groups to move their finances) illegal means to move the world's economic base towards one directed and controlled by the Islamic world.

It rather sounded like Dubai is to be the NEW BABYLON to with its 2000+ feet high towers reaching up to praise Allah.

[Moso Ikoro]

Thank you very much for allowing comments from concerned Black Africans. I personally do not/not take religion an issue here because I consider religion a matter between an individual and his/her God or Creator. We (Black Africans) have a history, culture, traditions and other values we would like to preserve and promote without any religious implications.
Our black African leaders can cooperation and mutually work with any nation on earth and not at the expense our values and rich cultures. We do not want to be pulled by the nose or have anyone decide on what or what not is good for us.

I am one of those black Africans who bitterly was opposed to the "AU." I preferred our "OAU" to continue. It was needless to initiate a change of name. It was necessary to make changes in the "Charter" to match or suit the current imperatives.

It has been and is the Arabs' intention to dominate and oppress black Africans and take over our lands south of the Sahara and eventually declare the "African continent" and "Arab and Islamic Continent."

I do not want to quote what has already been quoted here but I will give as evidence a statement made at the Sudan peace talks in Nairobi, Kenya by one of Sudan's national islamic front (NIF) outspoken and arrogant islamists Dr. Ghazi Attabani in October 1994 before IGADD mediators and heads of government. Dr. Ghazi had this to say and I quote: "Giving a written answer to the two points on the agenda, Dr. Ghazi stated that his delegation had not come to discuss either of the issues. They (self-determination for the people of South Sudan and secularism) were both completely unacceptable to Khartoum, and the regime would not consider either compromising on its Islamic agenda or the possibility of self-determination for the south. He said that this position would not be negotiable.

Contempt and insults: Continuing to lecture his audience, he informed the IGADD mediators that islam is the religion of Africa. It is the Khartoum regime's historic duty to assist the spread of the religion throughout the continent. Islam had been on the march across the whole of Africa until European colonialism had temporarily halted its advance and imposed Christianity. Now that colonialism has disappeared, it is the responsibility of the Khartoum regime to resume islam's march across the continent."

Unquote: There is no/no clearer message than this. Black Africans and black African leaders should be very careful when they come to discuss bilateral and cultural integration with the Arabs or those who call themselves Arabs.
Our black African countries are rich but we only need good leaders with vision for the continent.
I am against the "AU." Revert to our "OAU." Why should we have accept Arabs in OAU in the first place? This was a mistake and should be corrected. If they (Arabs) want to be with us in the OAU then they should accord us (black Africans) seats in the Arab League (AL). Black African MUST be courageous to take steps to form a "Black African League of Nations (BALON)" which will exclude Arabs from North Africa. And the basic aim will be to discuss black African issues ONLY.

Thank you very much for reading.

[baldilocks]

Thank *you,* Moso Ikoro, for an interesting and informative comment and for point me to more research on this topic.

[Mavurudu Banambiro]

Having read what is said here I am convinced of the followings:

I have lived in a country which likes to call itself an Afro-Arab country for a very long time since 1976 to 2005. The name Afro-Arab country is mainly for political reasons to woo the black Africans to believe that they are part of this world. In the real sense of the word this is an empty slogan. In practical terms the Afro-Arab characteristics are non-existent but rather Arabism and Islamism is more salient than the Africanism.

In this Afro-Arab country it is maintained that once one speaks Arabic language and is a muslim therefore, he/she is an Arab. This concept is completely wrong. It is a mixture between religion and identity. Many black Africans today will not/not consider themselves europeans because they have embraced Christianity. Again, religion is an individual relation between him/her with his/her God or Creator.

This was and is a wrong teaching of islam in the black African World. They have also resorted to bribing the poor black Africans to embrace the religion for money, women etc... The underlying factors with the teaching to black Africans is in two folds: one is to spread the Arabic language and cultures and two to dominate the world through islam. They (Arabs) see the Western world as a rivalry power which must be destroyed and this is evident when all Arabs called for the destruction of Israel in the 1967 war. They still maintain this idea until today. Therefore, the black Africans present generation should be very careful when they deal with the Arabs.

The Blacks are now suffering in South Sudan and in Western Sudan in the Darfur region under the cruelty of the arabs and their proxy janjaweed militias or those who wish to call themselves arabs. The war in the Darfur region is crystal clear an ethnic and racial war between the blacks there and the Arabs. No/no matter what and how much some Sudanese arab people/politicians may wish to put it in a better language to the world outside, it is nothing less than a RACIAL WAR in the real sense of the word.

Egypt has been a deadly virus in the blood of the blacks in the Sudan since 1820, first with Turks (1820-1885) then with the Mahdiyya 1885-1898 and with the British 1898-1956. Those who have read the history of Sudan will know exactly what happened to the blacks in the present day Sudan during these periods of time. Note: slavery and slave trade runs consistently at the background. The policy in Sudan is influenced by all Arab States of the Middle East and Egypt in particular.

The Arabs (jallabas) of Sudan are nothing less than being cunning, found of blackmailing, tricky, manipulative, crafty, secretive, inhuman, dishonest, ruthless, liars, freaks, merciless, oppressive, suppressive, cruel and etc... This was evident after the signing of the comprehensive peace agreement (CPA) in Nairobi, Kenya on January 9, 2005. The Sudan People Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) released/freed scores of prisoners of war (POWs) of government soldiers while the government of national islamic front (NIF) now known as the national congress party (NCP) released no/no single SPLM/A POWs. This only showed how cruel and ruthless the war was executed in the South of the country. Hence, and in my opinion the Southerners have every right to secede from the north. The world should support this stance. If the World supported Eritrea, Bosnia Herzgovina, East Timor, Estonia, Latvia, Luthuania, Croatia name them why not/not South Sudan???

It is a lie that by dividing Sudan into north and south implies dividing the continent's 56 countries. This will not/not happen. This is what the northern elites has been saying along and have done nothing to resolve the north-south intermittent conflicts.

Let the south secede and live as good neighbors!!