AMY GOODMAN: You’re listening to Pacifica Radio’s Democracy Now! I’m Amy Goodman.

In the African nation of the Congo, a rebel group has lost a northwestern town to President Laurent Kabila’s troops and will now tighten ranks with two other rebel factions to try to prevent further defeats, this according to a rebel leader. Jean-Pierre Bemba said his Ugandan-backed Congolese Liberation Movement lost Nkonya, 465 miles northeast of the capital, Kinshasa, during fighting Sunday that left 119 government soldiers and two rebels dead. Bemba said his movement would join two other rebel groups in talks on Thursday to try to improve military cooperation. The rebel groups are backed by Rwanda and Uganda.

Both the government and the rebels have regularly accused each other of ceasefire violations since they completed a peace accord in August that also calls for the deployment of U.N. peacekeepers, the withdrawal of foreign troops, and a national debate to lay the groundwork for democratic rule in Congo. The peace accord was also signed by Rwanda and Uganda, who backed the rebels and Kabila’s allies from Zimbabwe, Angola and Namibia. Last week, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Richard Holbrooke warned during a tour of African capitals that no U.N. peacekeepers will deploy in Congo until the ceasefire takes hold and that warring parties name a neutral mediator to start talks on Congo’s future. So far, the rebels and Kabila have been unable to agree on a mediator.

We’re joined right now by Horace Campbell. He’s a professor of African studies at Syracuse University in New York.

Welcome to Democracy Now!, Professor Campbell.

HORACE CAMPBELL: Thank you, Amy.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain further for us what is happening right now in the Congo?

HORACE CAMPBELL: Well, the Congo is coming out of 100 years of plunder, genocide, violence, war and the will for peace by the Congolese people. And I think the changes that are going on all over Africa have been very dramatic, and the Congolese people are finding out, painfully, that armed conflict and armed struggles are not the way to solve the political question.

The values in the Congolese society that were corrupted, first by the Belgians, King Leopold, then by Mobutu, and this tradition was carried on within the political culture by Kabila — this corruption of the basic values of life and devaluing the human lives in Africa, which have been set in motion, need correction. And the attempt to correct this by different political forces, armed and unarmed, have reached a point where the Congolese people want to move in a new direction. And the difficulty in moving this direction is that the transition is always very painful and slow.

However, what we should do is to point to the positive aspects of the transition, and that positive aspect is the reality that on July 10th, all of the parties were signatories to a Lusaka peace agreement, and this peace agreement was a major step forward in breaking those values that I spoke about. And I think it’s important that we accentuate the positive aspects of this peace process and why this peace process came into being.

AMY GOODMAN: But, Professor Campbell, what about the precedent of having other countries like Rwanda backing and Uganda backing an invasion of the Congo?

HORACE CAMPBELL: Well, I think that part of the responsibility of the media and persons like yourself is the kind of language that is used to communicate the reality of what’s going on in the Congo. The use of the term “invasion” is the term that has been used by Kabila to determine the fact that citizens of the Congo, and these citizens, although they’re divided into different liberation movements, were moved to take up arms because the government of Kabila had foreclosed all forms of parliamentary, democratic and nonviolent opposition to his government. So, the fact that Kabila uses the term “invasion” does not necessarily mean that it’s an invasion, because an invasion suggests that the Ugandans and Rwandans have formed some organizations to invade the Congo. Kabila never suggested that the support that he had from Uganda and Rwanda was an invasion when there was an attempt to remove Mobutu, and this attempt was successful. At that time, the whole of Africa saluted Rwanda and Uganda for taking the initiative in ridding Africa of the kind of government that supported genocide and tolerated those who harbored those who committed genocide, so that Kabila, who himself unleashed the forces from Rwanda that committed genocide, is using the language of the “invasion,” is not at all helpful in terms of understanding.

And when the media, in some progressive program, such as Democracy Now!, use the term “rebels” for an audience in the United States of America to characterize the ideas of Wamba dia Wamba, who’s speaking of ideas of emancipatory politics, how the Congolese people can move out of this quagmire of kleptocracy, theft, genocide, how can they move to a new direction of tolerance, politics of inclusion, the collective leadership, the security of the people and the reconstruction of the people of the Congo — the fact that the left in this country is not aware of the ideas that are coming forward about the politics of emancipation is a testament of the lack of knowledge of what’s going on in Africa in this country. I think that the questions of genocide, the question of corruption of the political culture — we’re not talking about corruption in terms of money, just the corruption in terms of the values in relation to human life — it is a real deficit in this country when we are not able to point to the sections of society that are moving towards a new direction.

I would want to use a similar parallel just to talk about invasion. When South Africa was fighting a war of liberation, the South African government always pointed to other people to say that they were harboring people invading South Africa. Every liberation movement in Africa needed a rear base from which to operate. And in the case of the Congo, the rear base for the Congolese Liberation Movement are Uganda and Rwanda. It so happens that Uganda and Rwanda also have legitimate security concerns insofar as those who committed the genocide in Rwanda in 1994 escaped through the Congo and are still being supported by the government of the Congo. So, there are legitimate internal and external reasons why there are liberation movements from the Congo operating from Rwanda and Uganda.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to professor Horace Campbell. He teaches African American studies and African politics at Syracuse University, as we look at the Congo and the surrounding area, and also want to talk about Sierra Leone, as well. But before we do that, what about Burundi, Professor Campbell, which looks like it could be on the verge of something along the lines of what we saw in Rwanda in 1994?

HORACE CAMPBELL: Unfortunately, this is the case. And again, we need to see how all of these things are interrelated. The extremist elements, elements who preach the politics of ethnicity, elements who preach the politics of genocide, on both sides of the political spectrum in Burundi, they want to militarize the situation to the point where there is another genocide. In fact, the genocide in Rwanda is directly linked to the extremist elements in Burundi who killed the prime minister in 1993. But I think this is why we need to be more informed about what’s going on.

Since 1996, when there was a coup d’état in Burundi, President Nyerere, former President Nyerere of Tanzania, took on the painstaking task of trying to bring about the kind of negotiations that would bring peaceful resolution to the problem of the Burundi, where the extremists and the militarists on both sides would be isolated. This work of Nyerere has been opposed by France, has been opposed by the Pentagon, the elements of the Pentagon who want to create something called an African Crisis Response Initiative, where they think that there’s a military solution to the political problems of Burundi.

President Nyerere passed away in October. But since he passed away in October, the former president of South Africa, Nelson Mandela, has taken on the task of continuing the role of President Nyerere in being the mediator. And I think this is a major testament to the fact that Africa takes itself very seriously in solving these internal problems. And Africa does not see their problems as unique. They see their problems as part of the international problem, the legacies of colonialism, militarism and the Cold War. And in this particular case, Nelson Mandela is not only interested in working for peace in Burundi. Some of your audience may not know that there is going to be a meeting in Washington this week between Israel and Syria on the peace negotiations on the Golan Heights. The donkey work for these negotiations had been carried out by President Nelson Mandela of South Africa. So, while the world would stand aside and cast aspersions about what’s going on in Africa, Africans are concerned about peace in all parts of the world.

And the kind of magnanimity which was shown by Nelson Mandela in South Africa in saying that we want truth, reconciliation and peaceful resolution in South Africa, they’re doing the same thing in Burundi. And I think what is needed is more resources from the international community to support the peacekeeping efforts of Mandela and the Julius Nyerere Foundation in Tanzania, so that countries such as France does not go in and support the militaries, because the French minister of cooperation went to Burundi to say they will then start supporting the Burundi government, where the Nyerere Foundation was saying that there should be no international support to this government until they came to a peaceful resolution of the situation.

So, I think that the situation is moving rapidly in Africa, where elements such as the former president of Tanzania, Julius Nyerere, and Nelson Mandela, in conjunction with Organization of African Unity, are taking matters into their own hands. So, the kind of gloom-and-doom situation which is presented to the U.S. media to demonize Africans is really falling behind them all. I want to use an example to show how the media treats the situation in Africa, if I can come back to the Congo for a second.

AMY GOODMAN: I’m just going to interrupt you for one minute, because we have to break for stations to identify themselves. We’re talking with professor Horace Campbell from Syracuse University. He’s professor of African American studies and African politics. And we’re talking about the Congo. We’re talking about Burundi. We’re talking about overall African politics. And then we’re going to, for a moment, talk about Sierra Leone and the U.N. peacekeepers that have just been brought in there, Sierra Leone having produced more refugees than perhaps anywhere in the world. You’re listening to Pacific Radio’s Democracy Now! We’ll be back in a minute.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: You’re listening to Pacifica Radio’s Democracy Now!, The Exception to the Rulers. I’m Amy Goodman, as we continue with professor Horace Campbell of Syracuse University, professor of African American studies and African politics. You were just going back, Professor Campbell, to the Congo.

HORACE CAMPBELL: Thank you very much. I wanted to come back to the experience of Nelson Mandela and working for peace in Syria and Israel and the work that he did, and say why this involves some responsibilities to citizens of this country as far as peace is concerned in the Congo and in relationship to genocide in this whole region.

In July, there was a peace agreement that was signed in Lusaka. It called for the United Nations peacekeeping force to go into Congo. It called for the creation of a joint military commission, which would oversee the withdrawal of all forces — that is, not only Rwanda and Uganda, but Zimbabwe, Uganda and Angola. It called for the establishment of mechanisms for the disarming of the Interahamwe, those who are committing genocide. It called for the location, identifying and disarming of all groups that are armed in the Congo. And it called for the establishment of a national dialogue.

Now, since July, the joint military commission has been working diligently to establish the framework for peace. Since July, they have been meeting, attempting to come to an agreement on who the facilitator would be for the national dialogue. I am pleased to say that, today and tomorrow, the Organization of African Unity will have a meeting in Addis Ababa, where they’ll be discussing Quett Masire from Zambia — I’m sorry, the former president of Botswana, to be the facilitator, so that the African peoples take this question of peace in the Congo very seriously.

And I think that Holbrooke and the State Department have to — they have to fall into line with what’s going on. This idea of posing threats to Africa — the U.N. will not do this, the U.N. will not do that, they will not deploy peace — because those kinds of threats are — does not augur well for the promotion of the peace process, because the United States of America cannot go forward without taking some responsibility for the militarization of this region in their support for Mobutu Sese Seko and Jonas Savimbi in Angola. The whole militarization in this region is born in relationship to the Cold War.

And what I would want to say is that it’s only been five months since we’ve had this July accord, and the OAU and the mediators are working very hard to set it in motion. The left in this country, at least, should support the efforts towards peace. I remember when the Irish Good Friday Accord was signed in Ireland in 1998. It was signed in April. Twenty months later, they were able to move to the stage of decommissioning weapons and trying to get the dialogue going on in Ireland. The media never went about in saying, “Well, the Irish peace accord is going down. The IRA is a rebellious group.” The media supported the efforts of Senator Mitchell in the attempts to get peace. What the left and the media needs to do in this country is to support President Nelson Mandela, support Quett Masire, support the OAU, and support those elements that want to arrest Jonas Savimbi as a war criminal, because the role of Jonas Savimbi and those elements from the United States, South Africa and the diamond industry that are still supporting him, those are the elements that are blocking peace. It’s not because of some innate wish towards violence by the African people.

AMY GOODMAN: Professor Campbell, let’s touch on Sierra Leone. We’ll certainly have a fuller discussion later. But before we move on to Panama, in a historic moment today, as the Panama Canal is handed back to the Panamanians from the United States, Sierra Leone, a story, a country that gets almost no coverage. And when you look at the level of coverage the refugees got, for example, out of Kosovo, and yet, you look at the level of the refugee problem in Sierra Leone, it’s very clear what the bias of the media is.

HORACE CAMPBELL: Yeah. Again, we have to support the efforts towards peace in Sierra Leone. What unites Sierra Leone and the Congo? What is it that brings both of them together? What brings both of them together is the role of diamonds and militarism in Africa. Again, in Sierra Leone, there was a peace accord that was signed in July. And this peace accord said that the 45,000 persons who were involved in fighting against the government, they were in an organization called the RUF, the Revolutionary United Front. And that’s why I want to step back from the celebration of armed conflict as a way of solving problems, because these people signed the agreement, but the diamond dealers in Antwerp, Belgium, which is the world’s largest market for rough diamonds, they imported from Liberia 8.3 million karats of diamonds, when Liberia only produces 60,000 karats of diamond. Where does the other 7 million carrots came from? They came from the areas in Sierra Leone where the rebels have control. And the diamond dealers in Israel, Antwerp and New York have a direct link to supporting and finding arms back to these people.

Now, one of the problems with the way in which the State Department views Africa is that it views Africa that they’re basically tribal savages, and therefore they’ll always be fighting. So, in this peace accord that was signed, it did not seek to bring to justice those elements of the RUF that went around cutting off people’s hands, violating women, raping and carrying out acts of violence and violation in the countryside. This kind of thinking is not going to help the peace process. There cannot be peace and reconciliation, reconciling the ordinary citizens of Sierra Leone with those who carried out the most heinous violence. I think this is something we must move from.

The next point that you raised was on the question of refugees. Again, we have the double standard of the U.S. government and the State Department, the United Nations. In Kosovo, they were spending at least a dollar per refugee per day, $1. In Africa, it ranges from 20 to 30 cents. And the idea of refugees is that refugees are refugees when they are in European countries, such as Kosovo and Bosnia, but in Africa, the United Nations do not develop the resources to be able to help those Africans. And what we need is, in January, when the United States of America take over the chairperson — takes over as chairperson of the Security Council for January, Holbrooke said that this would be the month for Africa. It cannot be the month for Africa without some dramatic changes in the United States of America. In the State Department itself, they have four desk offices for Kosovo, but only one for Rwanda and the Congo. I think there must be some internal political changes. And I think this is where the media would have a very important role to play in trying to bring more information to citizens of this country, when the United States has the chairmanship of — is the chairperson of the Security Council in January, because Holbrooke says this will be the U.N. month for Africa. It cannot be the U.N. month for Africa without moving away from the ideas of plunder, genocide and savagery, which is in the public consciousness in the United States of America.

AMY GOODMAN: Horace Campbell, I want to thank you very much for being with us. Professor Horace Campbell teaches African American studies and African politics at Syracuse University in New York.