Who are the sponsors of terrorist group in Africa?
The idea that "Europeans and America sponsor most terrorist organizations in Africa" is a strong accusation that reflects a profound loss of trust and a widely held belief among many Africans, especially the youth.
While direct, explicit sponsorship of terrorist organizations by Western governments is not what official reports or governments claim, the perception here describe stems from a complex interplay of factors:
Roots of this Perception:
Historical Context of Intervention:
Proxy Wars and Cold War Legacies: During the Cold War, both Western and Eastern blocs supported various factions (some of which engaged in violence) across Africa to advance their ideological and strategic interests, often without regard for long-term consequences. This history contributes to the belief that external powers manipulate internal conflicts.
Interventions and Their Aftermath: Western interventions, even those framed as counter-terrorism efforts, have sometimes led to unintended consequences, including destabilization, the rise of new extremist groups, or the weakening of existing state structures, inadvertently creating vacuums that terrorist groups exploit. The distabilisation in Libya, for example, is often cited as a major contributor to the proliferation of arms and instability across the Sahel.
Perceived Ineffectiveness of Counter-Terrorism Efforts:
Despite significant Western military presence, training, and financial aid directed at counter-terrorism, terrorist activity in regions like the Sahel has increased in frequency and deadliness.
This leads many to question the true efficacy and intentions behind these interventions.
If Western powers are genuinely fighting terrorism, why does it seem to be getting worse?
This perceived failure fuels suspicions that there's either incompetence, or worse, a deliberate strategy that benefits from continued instability.
Allegations of Double Standards and Geopolitical Games:
Many Africans observe what they perceive as selective engagement or "double standards" from Western powers.
They may see Western countries condemning certain armed groups while tacitly or overtly supporting others that align with their strategic interests, even if those groups also engage in violence.
The truth that Western powers benefit from chaos, perhaps to maintain access to resources or to prevent strong, independent African states from emerging, gains traction in this context.
Local Grievances and Western Ties to Unpopular Regimes:
Terrorist groups often exploit genuine local grievances, such as poverty, corruption, marginalization, and ineffective governance.
When Western powers are seen to be supporting regimes that are unpopular or perceived as corrupt, it can indirectly fuel anti-Western sentiment and make it easier for extremist groups to recruit by positioning themselves as fighting against both the local government and its foreign backers.
The coups in the Sahel, often popular among the youth, frequently cite the failure of previous governments to address insecurity and economic woes, and explicitly blame Western partners for being part of the problem.
Information Warfare and Alternative source of spreading news:
The rise of social media and the presence of other global actors (like Russia, through state-backed media or private military companies) actively promoting anti-Western narratives have amplified these suspicions. These sources often capitalize on existing frustrations and historical grievances to paint a picture of deliberate Western manipulation.
Impact on Trust:
The perception you describe is indeed a significant factor in the breakdown of trust between many African populations and Western nations.
This loss of trust manifests in:
Public support for anti-Western leaders: Leaders who openly challenge Western influence gain significant popular backing.
Rejection of Western military presence: Calls for the withdrawal of foreign troops are becoming more frequent and forceful.
Openness to alternative partnerships: African nations are increasingly looking to China, Russia, Turkey, and other countries for security, economic, and political cooperation.
Difficulty in genuine cooperation: Even when Western nations offer assistance, it can be viewed with suspicion, hindering effective collaboration on critical issues.
It's a challenging situation, as from a Western perspective, the efforts are often framed as genuine attempts to combat terrorism and foster stability.
However, the lived experience and perception on the ground in many African countries, shaped by history, geopolitical dynamics, and the persistent presence of insecurity, lead to a very different and deeply cynical conclusion about Western intentions. This disconnect is a major hurdle for future relations.
By Jo Ikeji-Uju
https://afriprime.net/pages/Anything
The idea that "Europeans and America sponsor most terrorist organizations in Africa" is a strong accusation that reflects a profound loss of trust and a widely held belief among many Africans, especially the youth.
While direct, explicit sponsorship of terrorist organizations by Western governments is not what official reports or governments claim, the perception here describe stems from a complex interplay of factors:
Roots of this Perception:
Historical Context of Intervention:
Proxy Wars and Cold War Legacies: During the Cold War, both Western and Eastern blocs supported various factions (some of which engaged in violence) across Africa to advance their ideological and strategic interests, often without regard for long-term consequences. This history contributes to the belief that external powers manipulate internal conflicts.
Interventions and Their Aftermath: Western interventions, even those framed as counter-terrorism efforts, have sometimes led to unintended consequences, including destabilization, the rise of new extremist groups, or the weakening of existing state structures, inadvertently creating vacuums that terrorist groups exploit. The distabilisation in Libya, for example, is often cited as a major contributor to the proliferation of arms and instability across the Sahel.
Perceived Ineffectiveness of Counter-Terrorism Efforts:
Despite significant Western military presence, training, and financial aid directed at counter-terrorism, terrorist activity in regions like the Sahel has increased in frequency and deadliness.
This leads many to question the true efficacy and intentions behind these interventions.
If Western powers are genuinely fighting terrorism, why does it seem to be getting worse?
This perceived failure fuels suspicions that there's either incompetence, or worse, a deliberate strategy that benefits from continued instability.
Allegations of Double Standards and Geopolitical Games:
Many Africans observe what they perceive as selective engagement or "double standards" from Western powers.
They may see Western countries condemning certain armed groups while tacitly or overtly supporting others that align with their strategic interests, even if those groups also engage in violence.
The truth that Western powers benefit from chaos, perhaps to maintain access to resources or to prevent strong, independent African states from emerging, gains traction in this context.
Local Grievances and Western Ties to Unpopular Regimes:
Terrorist groups often exploit genuine local grievances, such as poverty, corruption, marginalization, and ineffective governance.
When Western powers are seen to be supporting regimes that are unpopular or perceived as corrupt, it can indirectly fuel anti-Western sentiment and make it easier for extremist groups to recruit by positioning themselves as fighting against both the local government and its foreign backers.
The coups in the Sahel, often popular among the youth, frequently cite the failure of previous governments to address insecurity and economic woes, and explicitly blame Western partners for being part of the problem.
Information Warfare and Alternative source of spreading news:
The rise of social media and the presence of other global actors (like Russia, through state-backed media or private military companies) actively promoting anti-Western narratives have amplified these suspicions. These sources often capitalize on existing frustrations and historical grievances to paint a picture of deliberate Western manipulation.
Impact on Trust:
The perception you describe is indeed a significant factor in the breakdown of trust between many African populations and Western nations.
This loss of trust manifests in:
Public support for anti-Western leaders: Leaders who openly challenge Western influence gain significant popular backing.
Rejection of Western military presence: Calls for the withdrawal of foreign troops are becoming more frequent and forceful.
Openness to alternative partnerships: African nations are increasingly looking to China, Russia, Turkey, and other countries for security, economic, and political cooperation.
Difficulty in genuine cooperation: Even when Western nations offer assistance, it can be viewed with suspicion, hindering effective collaboration on critical issues.
It's a challenging situation, as from a Western perspective, the efforts are often framed as genuine attempts to combat terrorism and foster stability.
However, the lived experience and perception on the ground in many African countries, shaped by history, geopolitical dynamics, and the persistent presence of insecurity, lead to a very different and deeply cynical conclusion about Western intentions. This disconnect is a major hurdle for future relations.
By Jo Ikeji-Uju
https://afriprime.net/pages/Anything
Who are the sponsors of terrorist group in Africa?
The idea that "Europeans and America sponsor most terrorist organizations in Africa" is a strong accusation that reflects a profound loss of trust and a widely held belief among many Africans, especially the youth.
While direct, explicit sponsorship of terrorist organizations by Western governments is not what official reports or governments claim, the perception here describe stems from a complex interplay of factors:
Roots of this Perception:
Historical Context of Intervention:
Proxy Wars and Cold War Legacies: During the Cold War, both Western and Eastern blocs supported various factions (some of which engaged in violence) across Africa to advance their ideological and strategic interests, often without regard for long-term consequences. This history contributes to the belief that external powers manipulate internal conflicts.
Interventions and Their Aftermath: Western interventions, even those framed as counter-terrorism efforts, have sometimes led to unintended consequences, including destabilization, the rise of new extremist groups, or the weakening of existing state structures, inadvertently creating vacuums that terrorist groups exploit. The distabilisation in Libya, for example, is often cited as a major contributor to the proliferation of arms and instability across the Sahel.
Perceived Ineffectiveness of Counter-Terrorism Efforts:
Despite significant Western military presence, training, and financial aid directed at counter-terrorism, terrorist activity in regions like the Sahel has increased in frequency and deadliness.
This leads many to question the true efficacy and intentions behind these interventions.
If Western powers are genuinely fighting terrorism, why does it seem to be getting worse?
This perceived failure fuels suspicions that there's either incompetence, or worse, a deliberate strategy that benefits from continued instability.
Allegations of Double Standards and Geopolitical Games:
Many Africans observe what they perceive as selective engagement or "double standards" from Western powers.
They may see Western countries condemning certain armed groups while tacitly or overtly supporting others that align with their strategic interests, even if those groups also engage in violence.
The truth that Western powers benefit from chaos, perhaps to maintain access to resources or to prevent strong, independent African states from emerging, gains traction in this context.
Local Grievances and Western Ties to Unpopular Regimes:
Terrorist groups often exploit genuine local grievances, such as poverty, corruption, marginalization, and ineffective governance.
When Western powers are seen to be supporting regimes that are unpopular or perceived as corrupt, it can indirectly fuel anti-Western sentiment and make it easier for extremist groups to recruit by positioning themselves as fighting against both the local government and its foreign backers.
The coups in the Sahel, often popular among the youth, frequently cite the failure of previous governments to address insecurity and economic woes, and explicitly blame Western partners for being part of the problem.
Information Warfare and Alternative source of spreading news:
The rise of social media and the presence of other global actors (like Russia, through state-backed media or private military companies) actively promoting anti-Western narratives have amplified these suspicions. These sources often capitalize on existing frustrations and historical grievances to paint a picture of deliberate Western manipulation.
Impact on Trust:
The perception you describe is indeed a significant factor in the breakdown of trust between many African populations and Western nations.
This loss of trust manifests in:
Public support for anti-Western leaders: Leaders who openly challenge Western influence gain significant popular backing.
Rejection of Western military presence: Calls for the withdrawal of foreign troops are becoming more frequent and forceful.
Openness to alternative partnerships: African nations are increasingly looking to China, Russia, Turkey, and other countries for security, economic, and political cooperation.
Difficulty in genuine cooperation: Even when Western nations offer assistance, it can be viewed with suspicion, hindering effective collaboration on critical issues.
It's a challenging situation, as from a Western perspective, the efforts are often framed as genuine attempts to combat terrorism and foster stability.
However, the lived experience and perception on the ground in many African countries, shaped by history, geopolitical dynamics, and the persistent presence of insecurity, lead to a very different and deeply cynical conclusion about Western intentions. This disconnect is a major hurdle for future relations.
By Jo Ikeji-Uju
https://afriprime.net/pages/Anything
0 Comentários
0 Compartilhamentos
2KB Visualizações
0 Anterior
Chinese
English
Arabic
French
Spanish
Portuguese
Deutsch
Turkish
Dutch
Italiano
Russian
Romaian
Greek