Vous voyez cette phrase se trouvant à la fin du résumé : "Rather than end the struggle for control of Congo, Washington inflamed it—“leaving behind instability that continues to this day.”
TRAD "Au lieu de mettre fin à la bataille pour le contrôle du Congo- Washington l'a enflammé- laissant derrière une instabilité qui continue jusqu'à aujourd'hui." C'est exactement le même constat qui peut être fait par rapport à leur politique en Haïti- du coup d'État de 1991 pour se débarrasser d'Aristide à aujourd'hui.
Un article super intéressant très très triste quand on constate les milliers de morts et le chaos provoqués par les USA dans un pays qui avait tous les atouts pour devenir une grande nation. C'est rageant, révoltant.
/image%2F1034110%2F20240630%2Fob_cf700d_mail-1.png)
Even though the threat of communism in Congo was quite weak under Lumumba, who was “far more interested in nonalignment,” the CIA “engaged in pervasive political meddling and paramilitary action between 1960 and 1968 to ensure that the country retained a pro-Western government and to help its pathetic military on the battlefield.” The agency’s efforts were extensive and malignant, Weissman wrote—so much so that the CIA’s station chief had “direct influence” over the events that led to Lumumba’s eventual murder, in January 1961. By then, with help from Washington, he had been supplanted by Joseph Mobutu, the pro-Western head of Congo’s army, who “would go on to become one of Africa’s most enduring and venal leaders.”
“Clinging to a longtime friendly dictator, even as his flaws become more risky for U.S. interests, is a well-known pathology of U.S. foreign policy,” Weissman wrote. In the case of Congo, the CIA’s legacy of intervention stoked “a long-running spiral of decline, which was characterized by corruption, political turmoil, and dependence on Western military intervention.” Rather than end the struggle for control of Congo, Washington inflamed it—“leaving behind instability that continues to this day.”
One of the world’s largest humanitarian crises is currently playing out in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Conflict between armed militias, rebel groups, and government armed forces in the country’s mineral-rich east has displaced up to seven million people. But the country’s instability goes back decades—perhaps to the pivotal moment in January 1961 when the country’s prime minister, Patrice Lumumba, was assassinated. In a 2014 essay, the political scientist Stephen Weissman explored the role that the CIA played in his murder and how American intervention in Congo set the country on a course from which it has not yet recovered.
Washington’s decision to send the CIA into Congo in 1960 was fueled by the anxieties and paranoia of the Cold War. Lumumba, a charismatic nationalist whose government was the first to be democratically elected since the country gained independence from Belgium, had turned to the Soviet Union for help following a Belgian military reoccupation and the secession of Congo’s richest province, Katanga. Fearing the rise of communism and Moscow’s influence on the continent, Washington carried out a covert operation to replace Lumumba—an endeavor that for decades was portrayed as “a surgical, low-cost success.” But by 2014, new evidence had come to light; and, as Weissman wrote, “it paints a far darker picture than even the critics imagined.”
Even though the threat of communism in Congo was quite weak under Lumumba, who was “far more interested in nonalignment,” the CIA “engaged in pervasive political meddling and paramilitary action between 1960 and 1968 to ensure that the country retained a pro-Western government and to help its pathetic military on the battlefield.” The agency’s efforts were extensive and malignant, Weissman wrote—so much so that the CIA’s station chief had “direct influence” over the events that led to Lumumba’s eventual murder, in January 1961. By then, with help from Washington, he had been supplanted by Joseph Mobutu, the pro-Western head of Congo’s army, who “would go on to become one of Africa’s most enduring and venal leaders.”
“Clinging to a longtime friendly dictator, even as his flaws become more risky for U.S. interests, is a well-known pathology of U.S. foreign policy,” Weissman wrote. In the case of Congo, the CIA’s legacy of intervention stoked “a long-running spiral of decline, which was characterized by corruption, political turmoil, and dependence on Western military intervention.” Rather than end the struggle for control of Congo, Washington inflamed it—“leaving behind instability that continues to this day.”
Extrait de l'article que vous pouvez lire dans le lien- malheureusement c'est en anglais.
PLAYING POLITICS
In the beginning, U.S. covert action in Congo was exclusively political in nature. Washington worried that Lumumba was too erratic and too close to the Soviets and that if he stayed in power, Congo could fall into further chaos and turn communist. Allen Dulles, the director of the CIA, cabled the CIA station in Léopoldville, the capital, in August 1960: “We conclude that his removal must be an urgent and prime objective and that under existing conditions this should be a high priority of our covert action.” So the CIA station, in tandem with Belgian intelligence officials, subsidized two opposition senators who attempted to organize a vote of no confidence against Lumumba’s government. The plan was for Joseph Kasavubu, Congo’s president and Lumumba’s rival, to dissolve the government after the vote and nominate one of the senators as the new prime minister. The CIA also funded anti-Lumumba street demonstration labor movements, and propaganda.
/https%3A%2F%2Fcdn-live.foreignaffairs.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fstyles%2Fsocial_share%2Fpublic%2Fpublic-assets%2Flegacy%2Fimages%2FWeissman_WhatReallyHappenedInCongo_2_0.jpg%3Fitok%3DaLFUPeq0)
Newly available evidence shows that the CIA engaged in pervasive political meddling and paramilitary action in Congo during the 1960s-and that the local CIA station chief directly influenced the ...
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/democratic-republic-congo/what-happened-congo-lumumba-mobutu
Commenter cet article