@ Ibalitakely 15 juillet à 11:43

« Fa angaha tsy maintsy idiran’ny vahiny foana ny raharaham-pirenen-tsika e ?? Isaky ny misy kotrana kely eto dia maika ery ny sasany @ izao Dakara, Maputo, RSA, USA, UE, SADC, COI, ... sns, nefa voamaika lasa kotrana be hatrany ny fandehany.[...] FA IZAY MBOLA MIANTSOANTSO NY ANY IVELANY HANDAMINA NY ETO MADAGASIKARA NO TENA MPAMADIKA TANINDRAZANA, mila fitsaram-bahoaka [...] »

Misy famelabelarana vao haingana ity mampahatsiahy ny tantara sy ny toe-draharaha eran’i Afrika zanatanin’i Frantsa taloha ka mampibaribary ny antony mahatonga ny « fidiran’ny vahiny foana amin’ny raharaham-pireneny ».

Hisarihana ny saina manokana ao anatin’ilay antsoin’ny mpanoratra hoe “COLONIAL PACT”– izay tsy maintsy neken’ireo zanatany ireo raha te-hahazo ny fahaleovantenany araka ny lalàna iraisam-pirenena izy tamin’ny 1960 – ny momba ny « fiaraha-miasa » eo amin’ny « fanabeazan’i Frantsa sy ny fanofanany ny Tafika sy ny “herim-pamoretana” .

“The first was the agreement on military co-operation or Technical Military Aid (AMT) agreements. These covered EDUCATION, TRAINING OF SOLDIERS AND OFFICERS OF AFRICAN SECURITY FORCES”. Koa tsy mahagaga ilay « fiantsoantsoana » isan’andro vaky ny any ivelany – ny hoe “communauté internationale” longon’i Frantsa – “handamina ny eto Madagasikara”

Toy izao ilay lahatsoratra :

The U.S. and the wars in the Sahel
Gary K. Busch
https://www.pambazuka.org/human-security/us-and-wars-sahel
Jun 29, 2017

Washington has been at war in Africa for years. But in French-speaking parts of the continent it is Paris that is fully in control. WHO BECOMES PRESIDENT AND HOW NATIONAL AFFAIRS ARE CONDUCTED IS A MATTER DETERMINED BY THE FRENCH FOR THEIR OWN INTEREST UNDER THE COLONIAL-ERA DOCTRINE OF FRANÇAFRIQUE. [...]

Before one can explain the role played by the U.S. in the fight against terrorism in the Sahel it is important to understand the continuing role of the French Government and army in the region. [...]

The independence struggle of French Africa resulted, with the exception of Guinea, in the notional independence of the African states, each with a flag, a national anthem, a football team, and a CONTINUING DEPENDENCE ON FRANCE under the terms of a COLONIAL PACT. The terms of this pact were agreed at the time of independence as a CONDITION OF THE DE-COLONIZATION of the African states.

The Colonial Pact Agreement enshrined a number of SPECIAL PREFERENCES FOR FRANCE in the political, commercial and defence processes in the African countries. On defence, it agreed two types of continuing contact. The first was the agreement on military co-operation or Technical Military Aid (AMT) agreements. These covered EDUCATION, TRAINING OF SOLDIERS AND OFFICERS OF AFRICAN SECURITY FORCES . The second type, secret and binding, were DEFENCE AGREEMENTS supervised and implemented by the French Ministry of Defence, which served as a legal basis for French interventions within the African states by French military forces. [...]

The COLONIAL PACT was MUCH MORE than an agreement to station soldiers across Africa. It BOUND THE ECONOMIES OF AFRICA TO THE CONTROL OF FRANCE . [...]

In summary, the colonial pact maintained the French control over the economies of the African states :
• it took possession of their foreign currency reserves ;
• it controlled the strategic raw materials of the country ;
• it stationed troops in the country with the right of free passage ;
• it demanded that ALL MILITARY EQUIPMENT BE ACQUIRED FROM FRANCE ;
• it TOOK OVER THE TRAINING OF POLICE AND ARMY ;
• it required that FRENCH BUSINESSES be allowed to maintain MONOPOLY ENTERPRISES in key areas (water, electricity, ports, transport, energy, etc.).
• it required that in the AWARD OF GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS in the African countries, FRENCH COMPANIES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED FIRST ; only after that could Africans look elsewhere. It didn’t matter if Africans could obtain better value for money elsewhere, French companies came first, and most often got the contracts.[...]

The system is known as Françafrique. These policies of Françafrique were not concocted by the French National Assembly or the result of any democratic process. They were the result of policies conducted by a small group of people in the French President’s office, the ‘AFRICAN CELL, starting with Charles DeGaulle and his African specialist, Jacques Foccart. For the past half-century, the secretive and powerful « African Cell » has overseen France’s strategic interests in Africa, holding sway over a wide swath of former French colonies. Acting as a general command, the Cell uses France’s military as a HAMMER TO INSTALL LEADERS IT DEEMS FRIENDLY TO FRENCH INTERESTS AND TO REMOVE THOSE WHO POSE A DANGER TO THE CONTINUATION OF THE Sidestepping traditional diplomatic channels, the Cell reports only to one person : the president.
[Hotohizana]