Subj: Race, Immigration & War on Terror - African Times
Date: 2/24/2003 12:07:03 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(African Times, Monday 17th February 03)
Race, Refugees & War On Terror
So now it is refugees (asylum seekers) who are responsible for terrorism in
the west? What nonsense, what a denial.
I wrote shortly after the terrorist attack on the US (September 11th 2001),
questioning the new concept of 'war against terrorism'. I wondered then, and
do so now, whose terrorists are we referring to? Instead of looking inwards
and attempting to deal with the root causes of this hate crime - or is it
indiscriminate revenge killings, the US and her allies led by Britain have
conveniently opted to duck the issues and now seem bent on a war path with
Iraq.
This war, a separate subject on its own, will, if nothing else, breed more
terrorists for the west. Regardless, it will certainly breed resentment and
hatred.
As for Her Majesty's (British) government, a new excuse for a generation long
question about immigration has arisen. Leading political figures in both
government and the opposition now believe that the best way to tackle
terrorist threat is to attack the weakest and most vulnerable in their
society - refugees, otherwise conveniently referred to as asylum seekers.
Britain, more than any other country in Europe and North America is best
placed to understand these subjects. First, on immigration front, they were
the leading Europeans in mastering the art of slavery. Slavery was a most
devilish and dreadful way of forced migration - an open day massacre in
order to secure forced labour for the construction, establishment and
sustenance of mother empire. To this day, the country continues to benefit
from inward migration.
On the other hand, Britain knows from its Irish experience that in order to
deal with a people with a political cause, you have address its root causes.
In northern Ireland, the answer was eventually not tit for tat, though Gerry
Adams (Sinn Fein leader) was temporarily banished, but the engagement of
political forces from all sides of the political divide (the Republicans,
Unionists & the British government) and their para-military agencies. It
worked.
After September 11, instead of questioning more of what is going on in Saudi
Arabia, Yemen, Algeria, Egypt and those other countries some of whose
nationals have been linked to these events, we are now grossly banding and
accusing immigrant communities of either supporting or apparently being
terrorists themselves. Strangely, these communities do not include those from
the colonies of Australia, New Zealand, white South Africa and Zimbabwe.
Surprise, surprise!
I recall having a client, an Iraqi Kurd in 1990. Until the Iraqi invasion of
Kuwait, he had been refused political asylum in the United Kingdom.
Immediately after the invasion and shortly before the gulf war that followed,
not only did his circumstance change, but he became among the most sort for
Iraqi personalities I knew then. Strange world.
In the early 1990s the worst (African) countries from where to seek asylum
in Britain were the Democratic Republic of Congo (then Zaire) and Nigeria.
In official circles and the media, Congolese had no grounds to seek refuge
in this country because their country was very safe under General Mobutu
Seseko Wazabanga. They were simply economic migrants who enjoyed high life in
London and liked their trousers rather tight and high, so the stereotype
went. What the world was not told was that Mobutu was created and sustained
in power by the very same powers that were now abusing victims of Mobutu's
dictatorship. If only Mobutu's (Zaire) had not been used by these same
forces to fight against progressive Africanist forces in South Africa,
Zimbabwe, Namibia, Angola, Mozambique and the entire east Africa. But as
usual, the ever-forgiving Africans are quickly forgetting about this.
As for Nigerians, they were dubious people who never told the truth. They
were economic migrants who liked high life, big cars and most of them were
sons and daughters of generals and high-ranking officials in government.
Moreover, like the Congolese, they were paraded as benefit (social security)
cheats who were costing the exchequer billions of pounds every year. Sadly,
many including some Africans bought the propaganda.
Until the highly publicised hanging of Ken Saro-Wiwa and a dozen of his
colleagues by the Abacha regime, nobody in the Britain establishment
wanted to hear any Nigerian say they had fled their oil rich country
because of political persecution. This continued even after the electoral
charade on June 12th 1992 in which MK Abiola stood. I strongly suspect that
the subsequent changes in global attitude and political pressure that led to
Nigeria's suspension from the Commonwealth was largely because of the
stature of the leading victim, Saro Wiwa and the involvement of the likes of
Saint Mandela and not necessarily because of the executions! Many more had
died before him.
Now that there is this new game of associating refugees to terrorism, am sure
that a section of the African community will as usual, choose to de-log
itself from the debate. This time round, it might in fact be very tempting.
So far, the likely suspects are people of Arab, middle east origin and
largely Moslems, whatever their nationalities. And that is the problem.
After these communities, the next target could as well be the man next door.
Somalis are very tempting candidates for this game, aren't they? Then
Sudanese perhaps? Well…. We have had terrorist attacks in Kenya and Tanzania.
Already, there is a Ugandan being held in the Cuban based US camp,
Guantanamo bay. Supposedly 'British', the suspect is black and the mother
originally from Uganda. Sadly he happens to be a Moslem. Many of the members
of Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), one of the many forces fighting the
Uganda dictatorship is known to have many Moslems in its ranks. But most of
the recent arrest by the state have been non Moslem and very much indigenous
Ugandans.
When the Asylum and Immigration Act (1996, UK) came into being, I can safely
say that there were no records of Zimbabwean refugees in this country. Since
the escalation of the land question in that country, there are perhaps
thousands of Zimbabweans of African descent now seeking 'refuge'.
If the British government, backed by their media get their way, soon,
thousands of Zimbabweans, Nigerians, Ugandans and Somalis will be flying home
- by force if necessary. Like it is happening to those Arabs, they will be
considered security risk and a threat to national security. What the
government would have forgotten is that they in fact created the influx in
the first place. Let us hope and pray that it does not come to that, but
time is a good healer.
Joseph Pinytek Ochieno campaigns for human rights and multi-party democracy
in Africa & is chairman of the Uganda Peoples External Bureau - UK.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
