Government+too+willing+to+be+US+proxy,+Karima+Brown,+B+Day

Business Day, Johannesburg, 30 January 2007
=Government too willing to be US proxy on ’terror’=


 * Karima Brown**

UNSURPRISINGLY, the US government went ahead and placed two South African citizens, Junaid and Farhad Dockrat, on their “terror list”, despite our government’s plea for further talks on the matter.

As far as Washington is concerned, the two men are guilty of financing “terror” activities because they are, among other things, providing funds to al-Akhtar Trust, described by the US authorities as a fundraiser for Osama Bin Laden and his al-Qaeda cronies.

Following the listing, their business assets will be frozen as banks in SA await further instructions from our foreign affairs department. Clearly what the US government wants, it gets. The pesky issue of due process does not feature at Guantanamo Bay and it will not feature in Laudium, SA.

Forget for a moment that the US definition of a terrorist until very recently included members of the African National Congress (ANC). Forget also that Hamas — elected by the people of Palestine as their legitimate government — is also regarded as a “terror” organisation. And that Hezbollah, which forms part of the opposition in the Lebanese parliament, is similarly condemned.

But in Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf, a military dictator, is respected as a head of state by the US government for no other reason than his willingness to be a proxy in their war against the Taliban. In the 1980s the US armed and funded the Contras in Nicaragua, who terrorised the citizens of that country.

So the definition of terrorist or terror activity is clearly very fluid in the eyes of the globe’s only superpower. But no matter, it appears that US might means that they are also always right.

I hold no brief for religious fanatics, be they militants or financiers. But while the Dockrats could well be linked to al-Qaeda, their treatment raises serious questions about our sovereignty as a state — especially if it is the case that the US can impose its decisions on us, overriding due process and the rule of law, principles enshrined in our constitution, in the process.

Of course, SA is not the only country facing this dilemma. At a recent social forum summit in Nairobi, lobby groups from around the world set out the dangers of an unchecked US-led war on terror, when they said:

“While governments claim that new security legislation and law enforcement measures have been introduced to ‘protect’ their populations, they have instead led to appalling infringements of human rights. While rights such as freedom of expression, assembly and association must be respected in all circumstances, including when fighting terror; recent reality is an erosion of these hard-won rights and civil liberties across the globe.”

What is most disconcerting is the readiness with which our government and the political elite generally accepts this distorted reality. Granted, the South African government did at least attempt to engage the US on the Dockrats. But I wonder what kind of effort went into making the case. My scepticism about government’s efforts is informed by recent history. Remember the Tanzanian we handed over to the US authorities, despite the fact that if found guilty he could receive the death penalty, which is expressly disallowed in our constitution?

It seems as if the ANC-led government is all too keen to disregard its own history in its desire to play handmaiden to the US in global affairs. The definition of terrorist activity is made patently clear in the Organisation of African Unity’s Algiers Convention of 1999, which states that the struggle waged by peoples in accordance with the principles of international law for their liberation or self-determination — including the armed struggle against colonialism, occupation, aggression and domination by foreign forces — shall not be considered as terrorist acts.

SA’s handling of its relationship with the US points to the fact that government is willing to fall into line with the US and to do its dirty work on the continent. Not only does the ANC betray its own political history by adding its weight to prevent other international liberation movements from charting a similar course to its own, it is allowing itself to become a proxy for the US in its shameful bullying of the world.

Pastor Martin Niemoller wrote: “When the Nazis came first for the communists, I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a communist. When they came for the Jews, I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. When they came for the trade unionists, I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. When they came for the Catholics, I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. When they came for me, there was no one left to speak up.”

These words, written during the heroic struggle against Nazi fascism, remain particularly relevant today because the so-called “war on terror” continues to erode basic human freedoms around the globe.


 * Brown is political editor.


 * From: http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/opinion.aspx?ID=BD4A370962**

824 words