Thinking the Recolonisation of Africa: US, UK Counter-terrorism Forces Storm Nigeria

A Nigerian news portal, 'Abusidiqu' once reported a wikileaks revelation on how an Algerian-based CIA-sponsored agency gave $40 million to members of the Boko Haram sect promising them more if they continue in their acts. This claim cannot be dismissed considering the act of the CIA in Syria too. The French military also was also financing the rebels in Mali before they grew out of hand. French forces also airlifted and dropped sophisticated weapons for rebels in Libya, especially in Misrata, during the no-fly-zone turned regime-change war. These weapons were unaccounted for but today as always and usual, terrorists roving West Africa are said to get their weapons from Gaddafi and as an aftermath of his fall. Boko Haram also began kidnapping after France paid it N500 million to free some French nationals held hostage.

Africa still continues to be their chessboard, a continent they can always penetrate when the need arises. United States has expanded its African-based forces in the name of AFRICOM. The rate at which terrorists are roaming the continent is giving the foreigners the desired outcome. Terrorism and foreign dominance in Africa seem to be working hand in hand. Kenya rushed to beckon on Israeli storm-troopers as well as American and British 'experts'. Terrorism is weakening and showing the weakness of Africa which the leaders have allowed and bolstering and strengthening those who led the continent to the state of torpidity and massive quagmire.

In what looks or appears more like a continuously established situation, the Nigerian Navy Chief of Training and Operations, Rear Admiral Babalola Ogunjimi disclosed that foreign Special Forces have arrived Nigeria for counter-terrorism operations which specifically will be for operations against the deadly and dreaded Boko Haram sect. This is coming after the United States raided Libya and Somalia to prove its reach, capacity and capability. the Nigerian Navy Chief stated that the Nigerian military, in conjunction with Special Forces from the United Kingdom (UK), United States of America (US), Spain and Netherlands have begun a joint training to combat terrorism in the country.

He said 150 of them were drawn from units of the Nigerian Armed Forces-Army, Navy and Air Force- while 739 are from the foreign Special Forces. Ogunjimi said the training called "African Winds", began on October 3, and was expected to last for 14 days and would be followed by four days' exercise. He said the exercise would be conducted by Mobile Training Teams (MTTs) of the Special Forces in Lagos and Calabar, respectively.

"It is expected that the "African Winds" training and exercise will further improve the capacity of the Nigerian Armed Forces to deal with numerous security challenges in the Gulf of Guinea", adding that some of the challenges include crude oil theft and attacks on merchant ships. Ogunjimi said the programme was in furtherance of the Chief of Defence Staff's drive to promote effective joint services operations among Nigerian Armed Forces and friendly military from other countries.

According to him, the exercise in Lagos will take place between October 15 and 18 at Ibeshe Beach and the Navy Ordinance Depot (NOD) Waterfront. The exercise that will be conducted in Lagos include Amphibious Raid, Maritime Counter Terrorism, Vessel Boarding Stop and Search in an opposed environment and Hydrographic survey," he said. He  further said the Calabar exercise would hold between October 21 and 24 at the Tinapa and Muddy Beach in the state and Oron Beach in Akwa Ibom State.

Ogunjimi further revealed that the exercises to be conducted in Calabar include Riverine and Jungle operations which would be carried out by a combined force from US., UK and the Netherlands marines. He said an amphibious raid exercise planned and executed by troops from the Army, Navy Special Boat Service and the NNS Jubilee, would be conducted at Oron Beach to end the exercise. "African Winds" is the nickname for a maritime capacity building training programmes for the Armed Forces of Nigeria in conjunction with the Netherland Maritime Forces under the US sponsored African Partnership Station. Other countries covered by the programme are Morocco, Senegal, Ghana, Benin and Cameroon.

Under the programme, the Netherlands Maritime Forces is providing an amphibious logistic support ship, the HMNLS Rotherdam, to support the training and exercise," he said. He said the ship contained 688 troops, four helicopters and six special boats called Landing Craft Utility (LCU) and Landing Craft Vehicle Personnel (LCVP). He said  other facilities in the ship included Fast Raid Interception Special Forces Craft used in inserting small number of specially trained troops from sea to land, particularly in the creeks. Rather than build their military bodies and forces to a sophisticated level to be able to combat modern demands and challenges, African leaders prefer to be notoriously corrupt; dwindling their nations' wealth while genuflecting for aid from those who destroyed and continue to destroy the continent.

"African Winds" is really a perfect title considering how systemic and systematic the wind of recolonisation is blowing. It is blowing so fast and speedy that African leaders pretentiously act as if they are unaware of the rising trend. Spain is a country notable for its American colonies built by African slaves. The Netherlands too is another notorious country of slave raiders and traders. The United Kingdom did hers too and its even the most versed in the act which she transferred to the 'Almighty' United States of America today. Africa seems to have accepted its destiny to 'forever' be backward and relegated to the background always while feeding the highest percentage of those it kowtows for.

One begins to wonder when ignorant African leaders will begin to see the relationship between Western push into the continent and their financing of terrorism thereof. The situation is extremely appalling. Many Africans rush to accept the incursion on the ground that terrorists are perpetuating heinous crimes yet most of the weapons used are Western-manufactured. A pertinent question was once asked: 'Why has terrorists not attacked Israel on the scale they do elsewhere?' Al Qaeda was created during Soviet incursion into Afghanistan. Today, the US finances Saudi Arabia which automatically finances the radical Sunnis and Salafists. When they attack any country, America and the foreign powers will be the best for such a country.

The United States Boosts its Military Presence in Africa

The US military presence in Africa is on the rise yet still relatively calm and esoteric; striking Islamist militants with drones, supporting African forces in stabilising Somalia and Mali and deploying dozens of training teams. Its presence remains mostly low key, barely mentioned in the context of President Barack Obama's visit this week to Africa.

Nevertheless, with some 4,000-5,000 personnel on the ground at any given time, the United States now has more troops in Africa than at any point since its Somalia intervention two decades ago according to Reuters. That ended in humiliation and withdrawal after the 1993 "Blackhawk Down" debacle in which 18 U.S. soldiers died.

The build-up of US military presence is due to seemingly two main reasons; al Qaeda and China. It wants to stem the tide of the rising influence of Islamic insurgency and other militant groups as well as win influence in a continent that could become an increasingly important destination for American trade and investment as China's presence grows in Africa.

Obama's week-long African tour will focus on military and security issues apart from food security and democracy. He is expected to douse fear that the US is militarising Africa for its own benefits shrouded in the war against terror. In the Horn of Africa, the vast majority of US forces deployed in Africa are at a major French military base in Djibouti, a tiny country sandwiched between northern Somalia, Ethiopia and Eritrea.

Experts reveal the military base has provided a staging post for occasional special forces deployments and drone and air attacks against Islamist militant targets in Somalia. However, US officials have refused to comment. The base was also allegedly instrumental for NATO's operations in Libya.

The US views its military presence in Africa as key in a continent where China is rapidly expanding and has surpassed the United States in terms of trade relations in Africa. China has huge investment in mining, energy and infrastructure and also a key ally of Sudan's President, Omar al Bashar which of course has always bolstered him against the West.

US officers believe its limited military missions have gone a long way in reducing initial African scepticism over Germany-based AFRICOM, set up in 2008 to bring all US military activities in Africa under one unified command, rather than dividing responsibility between commanders in Europe, the Middle East and Asia.

"We are focusing on building human capital," says Major General Charles Hooper, head of strategy and plans at AFRICOM. "The smaller missions can be some of the most effective when it comes to gaining trust."

In Angola, Namibia, Democratic Republic of Congo and elsewhere, US engineers have helped train local counterparts in landmine clearance. In southern Africa, military medics have helped local armies tackle HIV infection while in Mauritania, the focus has been on veterinary aid to local ranchers.

US warships combating piracy off both East and West Africa are increasingly frequent visitors to local ports. One US aim is to convince African militaries their interests are best served by remaining democratically accountable and not interfering in politics.

Some operations, however, have hit just that problem. The hunt in Central African Republic for Ugandan warlord and head of the rebel Lord's Resistance Army Joseph Kony has largely been suspended following a March coup in CAR.

The anti-LRA mission had been the only one in Africa in which combat troops were deployed, involving just over 100 US special forces personnel. US forces continue to train Ugandan and other armies as part of that operation.

Critics in Africa complain Washington's approach to the continent has become increasingly militarised and focused on counterterrorism. Others worry US military clout may ultimately be used to seize resources. Administration officials disagree and point to Obama's visit as evidence of US intentions.

"This trip ultimately disproves the notion that we're somehow securitising the relationship with Africa," Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes told a conference call last week. "This trip is expressly devoted to trade and investment, democratic institution-building, young people and unleashing economic growth through some of our development priority."

In general, US forces have only been able to operate when African governments - or sometimes France, which maintains a network of bases in former colonies - allow them to. Permission can be quickly withdrawn for political reasons. The United States still treads carefully in Somalia, the scene of a serious reverse in 1993 when militia fighters killed 18 Americans on a mission to capture a Somali warlord in support of a UN mission.

US officials say there are often one or two US liaison officers deployed inside Somalia helping African Union forces fight Islamist group al Shabaab - which is linked to al Qaeda - on behalf of Somalia's transitional government. Most of the US support for the African Union mission AMISOM remains outside the country, training forces in Kenya, Uganda and elsewhere.

It is a similar picture on the other side of the continent, where the US military is also acting primarily in support of local nations and France. The aftermath of the 2011 Libya war has seen a flood of weapons and militants across the Sahel, fueling the rise of al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb which briefly captured much of northern Mali before a French offensive there earlier this year.

The US Air Force provided much of the transport for both African and French reinforcements in Mali, while US air tankers from RAF Mildenhall in England have flown long missions over the Sahara refuelling French combat jets. Some 100 US personnel deployed to Niger to set up a drone base. Unlike in East Africa, however, the drones will be unarmed and used only for reconnaissance to track Islamist militants like Boko Haram in Nigeria.

The US and African officials say Washington has long been reluctant to share its most sophisticated intelligence with African partners, in part over worries it might fall into the wrong hands. African officers say that if they are to be truly effective at fighting militants in their own countries and as part of broader Mali-type missions, they need to know as much as possible about rebel movements, locations and plans.

"The Americans are our friends - but often they are friends who are not frank," says former Senegalese army chief Mansour Seck, also an ex-ambassador to Washington. "They have a tendency to ask you what you have but will not tell you what they have."

Al-Qaeda linked terrorists in Mali may possess surface-to-air missiles

Before the state of emergency was declared in Nigeria, the army reported that members of the insurgent group, Boko Haram claimed they possessed surface-to-air-missiles which many dismissed as part of the lies of the military.

This became evident in a BBC report which showed similar weapon was fired at an aircraft of the Nigerian Airforce after the state of emergency was declared in Maiduguri. Recent discovery in Mali corroborated this position.

An Al-Qaeda missile manual found in Mali suggests jihadists in the region may possess the SA-7 surface-to-air missiles, capable of taking down commercial aircraft, AP reports. Suspicion are that the arms were looted from Libya during the war against Gaddafi.

The 26-page document that AP obtained was recovered from the building that was previously occupied by Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) in Timbuktu. It is also evidence of militant groups actively training its fighters to use the so-called man-portable air-defence systems, or MANPADS.

The writing of the manual for the usage of the weapon indicated that the weapon was present because a manual cannot be written for an imaginary object. AQIM not only has the MANPADS, but also fighters who know how to use them effectively," AP cited Atlantic Council analyst Peter Pham, a former adviser to the United States' military command in Africa and an instructor to US Special Forces as saying.

According to residents, prior to fleeing Timbuktu ahead of French troops’ interference in January, the jihadists attempted to get rid of the paper apparently setting it on fire. However they failed to destroy it completely.

Remaining pages 313 through 338 of the manual to MANPADS contain step-by-step instructions and tips on how to use the weapon, aim the target and change the battery.  It is also illustrated with images of soldiers firing the hardware, which takes training and skill to use.

"This is not a 'Fire and forget' weapon," Bruce Hoffman, director of the Center for Security Studies at Georgetown University told AP. "There's a paradox here. One the one hand it's not easy to use, but against any commercial aircraft there would be no defences against them. If terrorists start training and learn how to use them, we'll be in a lot of trouble.”

Another arms expert, N.R. Jenzen-Jones, confirmed that the information on the missile's engagement range, altitude and weight appeared largely correct. It’s not only the manual that suggests that Al-Qaeda fighters have been thoroughly trained to use MANPADS.

Locals have told AP they saw foreign fighters running laps each day, carrying out target practice and inhaling and holding their breath with a pipe-like object on their shoulder.

Those witness accounts could be backed by French forces’ findings during their ground operation in Mali earlier this year, which included elements of SA-7s, such as battery packs, launch tubes, according to unnamed aviation official AP talked to.  

It has been suggested that SA-7 drills have been part of the curriculum at ‘Jihad Academy’ that, according to one of the experts who examined the manual, was located in a former police station, some five kilometers away from the Ministry of Finance’s Budget Division building, where the document was found.

The US has long been concerned about surface-to-air missiles falling in the hands of Al-Qaeda fighters. Worries have been voiced especially loud after many of Gaddafi’s stockpiles in Libya were found looted.

Once launched, an SA-7 directs itself toward the source of the heat, the engine. While many military planes are equipped with anti-missile protection mechanism, civilian aviation and commercial flights are at risk.

“If someone manages to take down a civilian aircraft, it's hundreds of dead instantly. It's a high impact, low-frequency event, and it shows a lot of fear," expert N.R. Jenzen-Jones said.

According to the US Department of State, since 1975, at least 40 civilian aircraft have been hit by different types of MANPADS, causing about 28 crashes and more than 800 deaths around the world.

French forces - which due to the the possibility that SA-7s might have fallen in hands of jihadists, had to change the way they carry their offensive in Mali - continue monitoring the region. According to French aviation officials, who declined to be named, surveillance at Mali’s airport is being conducted constantly.

"There are patrols every day," AP quoted a French officer as saying. "It's one of the things we have not entrusted to the Malians, because the stakes are too high."

French Gift to Mali Islamists

­
The revelation by the former US ambassador shows that most of the wars fought by Western Nations are wars they covertly or overtly financed. The heavy weapons used by Islamists in Mali came from NATO's supply against Gaddafi.

The ambassador reveals:

In recent years France and other European countries have channeled millions of dollars in ransom payments to Al Qaeda-linked militants, according to a former US ambassador to Mali. The militants are thought to be from the same groups now fighting French troops in the troubled North African state.

In an interview aired on a French channel on Friday, Vicki Huddleston, who served as ambassador from 2002-2005, said that France had paid $17 million to free French hostages seized from a uranium mine in its former colony Niger in 2010.

She added that at least $89 million could have been paid out through intermediaries by European countries between 2004 -2011. North Africa's AQIM military organization has been active in northern Mali since 2003. The militants have kidnapped dozens of hostages for ransom over the last 10 years.

The incoming invasion of Africa is really on course.

The Coming Invasion of Africa

The Real Invasion of Africa Is Not News, and a License To Lie Is Hollywood’s Gift

by John Pilger, February 01, 2013

A full-scale invasion of Africa is under way. The United States is deploying troops in 35 African countries, beginning with Libya, Sudan, Algeria and Niger. Reported by Associated Press on Christmas Day, this was missing from most Anglo-American media.

The invasion has almost nothing to do with "Islamism", and almost everything to do with the acquisition of resources, notably minerals, and an accelerating rivalry with China. Unlike China, the

US and its allies are prepared to use a degree of violence demonstrated in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Palestine. As in the cold war, a division of labour requires that western journalism and popular culture provide the cover of a holy war against a "menacing arc" of Islamic extremism, no different from the bogus "red menace" of a worldwide communist conspiracy.

Reminiscent of the Scramble for Africa in the late 19^th century, the US African Command (Africom) has built a network of supplicants among collaborative African regimes eager for American bribes and armaments. Last year, Africom staged Operation African Endeavor, with the armed forces of 34
African nations taking part, commanded by the US military.

Africom’s "soldier to soldier" doctrine embeds US officers at every level of command from general to warrant officer. Only pith helmets are missing.

It is as if Africa’s proud history of liberation, from Patrice Lumumba to Nelson Mandela, is consigned to oblivion by a new master’s black colonial elite whose "historic mission", warned Frantz Fanon half a century ago, is the promotion of "a capitalism rampant though camouflaged".

A striking example is the eastern Congo, a treasure trove of strategic minerals, controlled by an atrocious rebel group known as the M23 , which in turn is run by Uganda and Rwanda, the proxies of Washington.

Long planned as a "mission" for NATO, not to mention the ever-zealous French, whose colonial lost causes remain on permanent standby, the war on Africa became urgent in 2011 when the Arab world appeared to be liberating itself from the Mubaraks and other clients of Washington and Europe. The hysteria this caused in imperial capitals cannot be exaggerated.

NATO bombers were dispatched not to Tunis or Cairo but Libya, where Muammar Gaddafi ruled over Africa’s largest oil reserves. With the Libyan city of Sirte reduced to rubble, the British SAS directed the "rebel" militias in what has since been exposed as a racist bloodbath.

The indigenous people of the Sahara, the Tuareg, whose Berber fighters Gaddafi had protected, fled home across Algeria to Mali, where the Tuareg have been claiming a separate state since the 1960s.

As the ever watchful Patrick Cockburn points out, it is this local dispute, not al-Qaida, that the West fears most in northwest Africa …."poor though the Tuareg may be, they are often living on top of great reserves of oil, gas, uranium and other valuable minerals".

Almost certainly the consequence of a French/US attack on Mali on 13 January, a siege at a gas complex in Algeria ended bloodily, inspiring a 9/11 moment in David Cameron. The former Carlton TV PR man raged about a "global threat" requiring "decades" of western violence. He meant implantation of the west’s business plan for Africa, together with the rape of multi-ethnic Syria and the conquest of independent Iran.

Cameron has now ordered British troops to Mali, and sent an RAF drone, while his verbose military chief, General Sir David Richards, has addressed "a very clear message to jihadists worldwide: don’t dangle and tangle with us. We will deal with it robustly" – exactly what jihadists want to hear. The trail of blood of British army terror victims, all Muslims, their "systemic" torture cases currently heading to court, add necessary irony to the general’s words.

 I once experienced Sir David’s "robust" ways when I asked him if he had read the courageous Afghan feminist Malalai Joya’s description of the barbaric behaviour of westerners and their clients in her country. "You are an apologist for the Taliban" was his reply. (He later apologised).

These bleak comedians are straight out of Evelyn Waugh and allow us to feel the bracing breeze of history and hypocrisy. The "Islamic terrorism" that is their excuse for the enduring theft of Africa’s riches was all but invented by them.

There is no longer any excuse to swallow the BBC/CNN line and not know the truth. Read Mark Curtis’s Secret Affairs: Britain’s Collusion with Radical Islam (Serpent’s Tail) or John Cooley’s Unholy Wars: Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism (Pluto Press) or The Grand Chessboard by Zbigniew Brzezinski (HarperCollins) who was midwife to the birth of modern fundamentalist terror.

 In effect, the mujahedin of al-Qaida and the Taliban were created by the CIA, its Pakistani equivalent, the Inter-Services Intelligence, and Britain’s MI6.

Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser, describes a secret presidential directive in 1979 that began what became the current "war on terror". For 17 years, the US deliberately cultivated, bank-rolled, armed and brainwashed jihadi extremists that "steeped a generation in violence". Code-named Operation Cyclone, this was the "great game" to bring down the Soviet Union but brought down the Twin Towers.

Since then, the news that intelligent, educated people both dispense and ingest has become a kind of Disney journalism, fortified, as ever, by Hollywood’s licence to lie, and lie.

There is the coming Dreamworks movie on WikiLeaks, a fabrication inspired by a book of perfidious title-tattle by two enriched Guardian journalists; and there is Zero Dark Thirty, which promotes torture and murder, directed by the Oscar-winning Kathryn Bigelow, the Leni Riefenstahl of our time, promoting her master’s voice as did the Fuhrer’s pet film-maker. Such is the one-way mirror through which we barely glimpse what power does in our name.

Piracy in Africa: The End of a New Beginning

Maritime insecurity in Africa, particularly in connection with acts of piracy, has constituted an important field of study for security researchers in recent years.

It has also frequently made local and global media headlines. Despite this trend, the focus in recent reports is starting to shift away from alarm towards detailing the diminishing threat of piracy around Somalia. Large-scale pirate activities there appear to be on the wane, but in what ways can we reasonably expect 2013 to be different from the past, in East Africa and elsewhere?

So far in 2013 the most notable event has been the increase in piracy incidents off the West African coast, particularly in the Gulf of Guinea. This continues the trend in 2012 noted by the International Maritime Bureau (IMB) where, despite a sizeable drop in the number of attacks in East Africa from 237 in 2011 to 75 in 2012, a total of 58 incidents were recorded in attacks off the West African coast in 2012, compared to 49 in 2011.

Increased naval patrols and capacity and the adoption of lessons and practices suitable to passage through these sea lanes and areas can account for the drop in attacks and might prompt hopes that piracy will eventually pose an insignificant security threat.

However, the attacks off West Africa differ from East African incidents mainly due to one factor - violent criminal acts are now connected with the movement of oil. The most recent attack took place off Côte d'Ivoire on 21 January 2013 when a large oil tanker named ITRI was hijacked, also demonstrating that the problem is not geographically limited to the Gulf of Guinea.

Crews in such cases are often assaulted while illegal oil bunkering occurs - a practice whereby the ship is drained of oil, which is subsequently spirited back to shore and either sold or refined.

This could result in oil spills, particularly around the already ravaged Niger delta. Offshore oil platforms, often seen as a means of avoiding land-based political instability, are now potential targets and frequently beyond immediate aid. Terrorist attacks on vulnerable installations could also occur, further prompting increases in the number of operations in partnership with the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM).

Many of these acts will be reported as being criminal rather than piratical, as they do not all occur in international waters but rather within the sovereign borders of states, which are set at 12 nautical miles offshore, and are thus subject to countries' own laws and legal systems, rather than being subject to international law as is commonly the case off Somalia.

Meanwhile, that of Nigeria is gradually gathering international attention though it is still largely localised. If the menace is not check appropriately, West Africa might degenerate into another Somalia just as the Islamists are allowed fertile grounds.

U.S Military Trains Coup Plotters

Gen. Carter Ham, the head of the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) has admitted bluntly the failure of U.S. military training to instill respect for human rights in a Malian army now accused of massacring Arabs and Tuaregs as it fights its way north into rebel-held territory. "We didn't spend probably the requisite time focusing on values, ethics, and a military ethos," Ham acknowledged, saying that most U.S. training for the Malians focused on tactics, strategy, and "technical matters."

Since 1985, the United States has sponsored approximately 156 Malian military officers and non-commissioned officers at U.S. professional military schools and given them training focused on professionalizing the military forces. Over the past three years, this funding has reached at least roughly $400,000 annually, and it is possible U.S. intelligence agencies have also funneled in support as well. Sadly, Mali is hardly an isolated case of U.S. military assistance programmes operating with dangerously little oversight and lacking a compelling central rationale.

Though good examples of successful U.S. military training programmes exist but lots of headline cases have gone badly wrong over the years -- from training Indonesian troops that carried out atrocities in East Timor to the billions poured into the Egyptian military to the scores of tainted graduates from the School of the Americas that ran riot in Central America during the 1980s.

In looking at the patterns of U.S. military assistance, the question is not who gets American military aid, but who doesn't. In 2012, the United States delivered bilateral security assistance to 134 countries -- meaning that every country on Earth had about a 75 percent chance of receiving U.S. military aid. Once you weed out places like North Korea and Vatican City, you are pretty much assured of receiving military aid no matter how large or small your country, no matter how democratic or despotic your regime, no matter how lofty or minimal your GDP.

There has been almost zero discussion of how to better focus U.S. military assistance around clear objectives and direct it to countries where it can make a lasting difference. And these aren't insignificant sums when taken together. The administration requested $9.8 billion in security assistance funding for fiscal year 2013.

Much of this military assistance -- through programmes like Foreign Military Financing; International Military Education and Training; Non-proliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining, and Related Programmes; International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement; Peacekeeping Operations; and the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund -- is supposed to be overseen by the State Department with the Defense Department doing the heavy lifting of actually delivering aid and training.

The rationale on paper for such assistance is straightforward and usually receives uncritical congressional support. U.S. military aid helps train security forces, finance the purchase of military equipment, bolster the ability of law enforcement to tackle the illegal narcotics trade, and shape cooperation on non-proliferation issues.

But more than anything, the Pentagon has always insisted that spreading military assistance so broadly is all about building relationships with fellow militaries -- a cost effective way of establishing contacts who will pick up the phone in a ministry of defence when needed. For many, U.S. dollars propped up an autocratic military in Egypt, other argue that it was the senior flag relationships between the Pentagon and Cairo that kept the military from opening fire on democratic protesters during the Arab Spring.

But U.S. military aid looks much better on paper than in practice, in large part because it is often delivered as if on autopilot without a reasoned discussion of its merits. The State Department largely offers rubber-stamp approvals, and the Foreign Service currently lacks personnel with the expertise needed to engage in a rigorous debate with the Pentagon about who deserves aid and why.

As Gordon Adams of the Stimson Center has argued, the State Department's "internal capacity to plan, budget, and manage these programmes needs to be seriously strengthened." This, combined with the general tendency of Congress to treat military spending requests as something just short of a papal writ, has meant that U.S. security assistance programmes receive very little oversight.

Equally troubling, military and economic assistance are treated as quite different creatures. For economic assistance, the United States has increasingly insisted that aid recipients at least demonstrate some marginal commitment to democracy and open markets. Not so on the military side, where concerns about corruption, the rule of law, and human rights are treated as something we are too polite to ask about.

Indeed, we probably would offer military training to everyone if it were not for the minor restrictions imposed by Senate Democrats like the Leahy Law, which prohibits U.S. military assistance to known thugs and war criminals that violate human rights with impunity. Yes, having military-to-military contacts through U.S. military training and aid is often useful and can build important relations and lasting trust.

But it is equally true that the list of U.S.-trained officers that have led coups against their sitting governments is a lengthy one in countries ranging from Honduras to Haiti to the Gambia. Contrary to what Ham's remark suggested, a few months spent studying tactics and logistics in Kansas or Georgia rarely seems to slow down a power-hungry colonel when he is hell bent on toppling the elected government that just threatened to cut his budget.

Underwriting security assistance to countries with autocratic leadership or nations that are of little strategic significance doesn't make much sense. U.S. military aid and training should be concentrated in a far fewer countries rather than being sprinkled all around the globe like fairy dust in hopes that good relations result.

Nations should be chosen to receive such military aid and training based on their commitment to reform -- both within the military and within the broader structures of democratic governance, free markets, and respect for human rights. Such aid should be a reward for high-performing countries, not a party favour dispensed at the door.

General Ham sounded genuinely surprised that American-trained officers were up to nefarious deeds. Apparently Ham is not much of a history buff -- a U.S. trained captain led a coup against the government of Mali just last March.

Courtesy: Foreign Policy Analysis