Regime Change

I Came to Addis to Defend Ethiopia and Represent the True Interests of the U.S.A.

The short video above is a news story on my lecture at Addis Ababa University. The longer video below is an extensive interview with Prime Media.

Discussion with Lawrence Freeman: Africa, Ethiopia, and Geo-Politics

December 21, 2021

Why I Came to Ethiopia

I was on the ground in Addis Ababa, from November 28 – December 10, to defend Ethiopia and represent the true interests of the United States. During that time in Addis, I conducted sixteen interviews and gave a two hour lecture at Addis Ababa University. I came to Ethiopia as an American, who, knowledgeable of the origins of my country, knows that the current U.S. policy towards Ethiopia is wrong and dangerous.

Understanding the intent of the psychological warfare campaign conducted by Western nations, international media, and most especially, my own United States Department of State, I knew the most important place for me to be, was in Addis Ababa, the capital of Ethiopia.

As I anticipated, all was calm and normal in this bustling city, with unending construction of new buildings. Through multiple media outlets I was able to expose the lies of the false narrative about Ethiopia and counter the psychological warfare campaign being waged against the Ethiopian people.

It was and remains my responsibility to defeat this campaign against Ethiopia and present what America’s true interest are in Africa.

Lawrence Freeman standing in front of the Addis Ababa skyline

Disinformation Campaign

The U.S. embassy sent out daily disinformation that Addis was in danger of attack from the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) located in the town of Dessie, less than two hundred miles north of the city. Even after government forces pushed the TPLF out of Dessie, the U.S. embassy continued to encourage Americans to leave Addis and went as far as offering to buy their tickets to return home. Ned Price, press spokesperson for the U.S. State Department, attempted to create even more fear and hysteria, by officially announcing the U.S. would not be conducting a military airlift for Americans like it did in Afghanistan this past August.

Various news programs accompanied the State Department’s fraudulent comparison of Addis and Kabul with videos of an American plane taking off from the Kabul airport leaving desperate people behind on the runway. This disgusting and outrageous comparison between Addis and Kabul, was deliberately and knowingly untruthful.

Those who believe the U.S. has not taken “sides” do not comprehend political warfare. And do not understand the intent of geo-political forces in the administration of President Biden and other western governments for regime change of the duly elected Prime Minister, Dr. Abiy Ahmed.

Relaxing at a restaurant off Meskel Square, Addis Ababa

More ominously for Ethiopia than Ned Price, the New York Times, the premiere organ of the U.S. Establishment, articulated the geo-political intent for regime change. In a blatant “hit job,” advocating the necessity of removing the “sinister” Prime Minister Abiy at all costs, The Times published on December 15,  The Nobel Peace Prize That Paved the Way for War. This article maliciously portrays Prime Minister Abiy as a maniacal ruthless leader only bent on destroying the TPLF and caring nothing for Ethiopia. Its intent should obliterate any ambiguity regarding U.S. geo-political policy for Ethiopia.

It is vital for the Ethiopian government, its people, Ethiopian diaspora, and friends and allies, to understand the geo-political determination to weaken the authority of Prime Minister Abiy or remove him from office. However, simultaneously it is necessary to think beyond the current military campaign. The government should prepare now for what is required as soon as this conflict is over. It is imperative for the future of the nation that Ethiopia engage in two crucial missions:

  1. Articulate a comprehensive reconstruction plan that includes the economic development of all regions of the nation in building a prosperous Ethiopia. Farms, schools, hospitals, and all kinds of necessary infrastructure will need to be rebuilt and expanded in Tigray and across northern Ethiopia. Let us use this post war mission to unify the nation around a national economic mobilization to improve the conditions of life for all Ethiopians.
  2. Commence a national dialogue to discuss/debate the supremacy ofthe concept of being a citizen of a sovereign nation as opposed to membership in an ethnic group. Ethiopia’s national identity must be strengthened, and the partisan influence of ethnic dominated regionalism reduced.

Normal traffic in Addis Ababa

America’s Real Interests

America was not created to intervene against sovereign nations like Ethiopia. Today, we are still witnessing the death and destruction across the Sahel caused by President Obama’s military intervention ten years ago when the U.S. overthrew and killed Libya’s leader, Muammar Gaddafi.

There is no objective reason for discord between the U.S. and Ethiopia. None! The conflict between the two nations exists entirely because President Biden has allowed his policy towards Ethiopia to be determined by the globalist-humanitarian-democracy cabal. They arrogantly believe they have the right to impose their so-called democratic-humanitarian construct on Ethiopia. Dictating how Ethiopia should be governed, and who should govern it.

The United States, created to be a Democratic-Republic, was founded on the economic theories of Alexander Hamilton, endorsed by President George Washington. These principles, known as the American System of Political Economy, have guided our more thoughtful U.S. presidents in conducting foreign and domestic policy.

The U.S. in its better moments, unlike the last few decades, has supported the right of governments to preserve the sovereignty of their nation. President Abraham Lincoln was prepared to continue the war, which costs the lives of 750,000 Americans, to defeat the efforts by the southern Confederacy to break up the Union. For President Lincoln, there was no greater importance than safeguarding the sovereign Union of the U.S., and no limit to his actions for that purpose.

The author giving a lecture at Addis Ababa University

As a result of Hamilton’s dominant influence, the U.S. was committed to economic development from its very inception and desired the same for all other nations. Sadly, the last U.S. president who understood the critical importance of economic development for African nations was President Kennedy–almost sixty years ago. To the detriment of the U.S. and the world, America has lost its mission and its vision to create a better future for humankind. The shining “city on the hill” has become a quite a bit dimmer.

The true underlying interests of the U.S. and the American people is exactly the same as that of Ethiopia and its people. All nations have the same shared-common goals:

  1. Improving the material standard of living for its citizens and ensuring a better future for their children and  grandchildren.
  2. Nurturing the creative potential of the mind of every child to enhance their ability to contribute to the development of humanity.

The foundation of a real American foreign policy should rest on these two pillars of statecraft. From this higher strategic perspective, Ethiopia, and the U.S., have no fundamental insurmountable disagreements that would prevent the two nations from engaging in policies that will mutually benefit its people now and for the future.

Read my earlier post: Biden’s Economic Warfare Only Hurts Ethiopians–Who Benefits?

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for over 30 years. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com. Mr. Freeman’s stated personal mission is; to eliminate poverty and hunger in Africa by applying the scientific economic principles of Alexander Hamilton.

__________________________________________________________________

U.S. Diplomats Collaborate With TPLF to Plot Removal of PM Abiy From Governing Ethiopia

November 26, 2021

It is instructive to read Jeff Pearce’s article; Ethiopia: Western Diplomats Meet in Secret to Decide How to Help the TPLF , based on the secret zoom meeting with retired Western diplomats, including a former U.S. offical, and Berhane Gebre-Christos, leader of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front-TPLF. Their secret discussion was on how to remove Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed from office . Watch the video of the zoom meeting above.

I have known for a long time that the certain Western forces have wanted to weaken Ethiopia’s duly elected Prime Minister, Abiy Ahmed. Now we have the proof. Open collaboration of Western diplomats with the TPLF, labelled a terrorist group by the Ethiopian government, to bring down Prime Minister Abiy. These used up diplomats want the TPLF to succeed in militarily defeating Ethiopia’s army and overthrowing the government, which was elected by over 40 million Ethiopians. This is regime change! This is a real scandal, given the stated position of neutrality by the U.S government. Shame on the Biden administration.

There are also TPLF sympathizers currently in the U.S. government, who are directing President Joe Biden to weaken the sovereign nation of Ethiopia.

As an American, with exceptional knowledge of Africa and Ethiopia, I will continue to fight to prevent President Biden from destroying the Horn of Africa, like his Democratic predecessor, President Obama, did to Libya and the Sahel, ten years ago.

Below are excerpts from Pearce’s article.

The West’s Horn of Africa experts have been meeting with a TPLF leader and TPLF/OLF supporters in secret, even as its governments claim to be impartial — TPLF’s Berhane Gebre-Christos speaks as TPLF member, proposed head of “transitional government.

Donald Yamamoto, recently the U.S. Ambassador to Somalia who just retired this year, to TPLF official Berhane Gebre-Christos:

“Abiy is not listening… Obasanjo has not been extraordinary helpful or very active, and so are there any other opportunities that you see?”

Vicki Huddleston, former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for African Affairs and US Assistant Secretary of State for Africa, speaking to Berhane Gebre-Christos:

I couldn’t agree more that you know, Abiy should step down, there should be an all-inclusive transition government.”

Former ambassadors and current diplomats for the United States, Britain and EU had a Zoom meeting this past Sunday with an official for the TPLF in what amounts to a green light from the West for the terrorist group’s attempts to overthrow the democratically elected Ethiopian government. And there’s evidence to prove it: a phone-cam video of the two-hour meeting.

“I hope that you’ll have military success fairly soon, because it seems as if the situation is only becoming more drastic,” said Vicki Huddleston, who was Chargé d’Affairs ad interim in Ethiopia during years the TPLF were in power.

France’s retired diplomat and writer Stéphane Gompertz openly speculated on the potential for Abiy to be forced from power. “Even if Abiy sticks to his guns, which unfortunately he seems to be doing, you either hope that people around him either in government or in the military realize that this is going nowhere and might force him to, well, accept the cessation of hostilities or force him to step down?”

The Western powers — Britain, the EU and especially the United States — have been posturing for months that they have not taken sides in the conflict and are pushing negotiations only in the interests of peace. But the Zoom talk rips away the façade, revealing a chummy circle of foreign policy elite, both retired and still active who mostly know each other and are in sympathy with TPLF objectives. They include Donald Yamamoto, one of the U.S. government’s most senior Africa experts who just retired this year as the American ambassador to Somalia, and Spain’s diplomat Carmen de la Peña.

Read the complete article: Ethiopia: Western Diplomats Meet in Secret to Decide How to Help the TPLF

Read my earlier posts:

Will President Biden’s Sanctions vs Ethiopia Cause Suffering for Hundreds of Millions of Africans

Biden’s Sanctions Could Plague Ethiopia and Africa for Generations

 Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for over 30 years. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com. Mr. Freeman’s stated personal mission is; to eliminate poverty and hunger in Africa by applying the scientific economic principles of Alexander Hamilton.

________________________________________________________________________________

Biden Government Must Replace Regime Change for Ethiopia With Policy for Economic Development

November 22, 2021

In an interview with Addis Media Network, on November 18, 2021, I discuss how we must fight against efforts for regime change in Ethiopia, and instead promote a policy for economic development. I identify that the so called mainstream media are not objective truth seekers, but part of the propaganda arm of the political-economic elite–an oligarchy. The West refuses to respect the sovereignty of Ethiopia and the elected government of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed. President Joe Biden is pursuing a dangerous policy of economic and political warfare against Ethiopia and its people. The enemies of Ethiopia will use humanitarian concerns as an excuse to potentially deploy military forces under the pretext of protection the Ethiopian people from their own government. This doctrine, known as R2P-the responsibility to protect- was created by George Soros and Tony Blair. Samantha Power and others in the Obama administration used R2P to justify the overthrow of President Kaddafi and the destruction of Libya.

Ethiopia must be allowed to pursue its commitment to development and the elimination of poverty. We need a united Ethiopia, with a single conception of Ethiopian citizenry, not one based on ethnicity.  Unfortunately, U.S. President, Joe Biden, does not understand the true interests of the continent, and is allowing his administration to be used against the people of Africa and Ethiopia. Ethiopian diaspora should be united in defeating regime and allowing Ethiopia to once again lead Africa along the path of economic growth.   

 Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for over 30 years. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com. Mr. Freeman’s stated personal mission is; to eliminate poverty and hunger in Africa by applying the scientific economic principles of Alexander Hamilton.

__________________________________________________________________

Biden’s Economic Warfare Only Hurts Ethiopians–Who Benefits?

President Biden is losing patience with Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed Ali
Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and U.S. President Joe Biden (courtesy of Afrinotescom)

Lawrence Freeman, November 9, 2021

President Biden and his administration have launched a new round of economic and political warfare against the people of Ethiopia, on the one year anniversary of the conflict initiated by the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF).

Biden Uses Trade as A Weapon Against Ethiopia

On November 2, President Biden threatened, “I intend to  terminate the designation of Ethiopia, Guinea, and Mali as beneficiary sub-Saharan African [SSA]countries under AGOA as of January 1, 2022.” AGOA-the African Growth and Opportunity Act established over twenty years ago, is designed to allow SSA nations easier access to American markets, in an effort to promote economic growth. Conservative estimates are that 200,000 workers in Ethiopia, mostly women, directly benefit from AGOA provisions plus another 800,000 employed indirectly. Thus, Biden would be pushing one million Ethiopians into poverty. In addition to the already existing sanctions, it is despicable that a sitting American President would stoop to the level of using trade agreements to impoverish an African nation. To punish the people (predominantly women) of a developing nation, an ally, by deepening their impoverishment is virtually unheard of in American foreign policy. Yet the “liberal Democratic” Biden administration intends to impose these hardships within two months, if the duly elected Prime Minister of Ethiopia , Abiy Ahmed, does not bow to the demands of the U.S.

Let us be clear. President Biden’s economic/trade warfare will only impact the government and people of Ethiopia, it will have no effect on the warring rebels. In effect, the revoking of AGOA, existing U.S. sanctions, and threatening additional sanctions only encourages the insurrectionists to continue waging war in anticipation that it will weaken the government of Prime Minister Abiy. Cui bono? In other words, who benefits from U.S. anti-Ethiopian measures.

On the same day, November 2, U.S. Special Envoy to the Horn of Africa, Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman, amplified President Biden’s threat in his speech in Washington DC. In his speech, Feltman only refers to “the growing crisis in Ethiopia’s northern state of Tigray,” conspicuously omitting that the conflict erupted after TPLF militarily attacked the Federal government’s army base in Mekele, Tigray. He laments the famine-like conditions in Tigray, and criticizes the use of food as a weapon, but then proceeds to endorse the U.S. use of AGOA as a weapon. He concludes that Ethiopia has only “days, not weeks” to obey the instructions from Washington. Only in parentheses does Feltman meekly comment that the U.S. also “insists TPLF stop its military advance.” However, no punishment or threats have been issued by the U.S. against the insurrectionists commensurate with those leveled against the government of Prime Minister Abiy .

Feltman, like the rest of the Biden administration, exposes his  disingenuousness, when he says, “We do not want Ethiopia to lose its AGOA trade benefits or international economic assistance,” but President Biden announced that is exactly what he intends. If Ethiopia yields to U.S. intimidation, the alleged concerns about Ethiopia violating AGOA “statutory eligibility” will magically disappear, making clear that  the revocation of AGOA is being used as a bludgeon to force Ethiopia to submit.

Regime Change on the Agenda?

Foreign Affairs magazine published on November 5, an article with the inflammatory title: Can Ethiopia Survive? It should be understood that this is the magazine of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the premiere think-tank of the Anglo American Establishment. Every U.S. President has been advised by the CFR, and often accept personnel they recommend for cabinet positions. Only select articles are published by the CFR, and this one has qualified in part because it articulates possible scenarios for Ethiopia’s future that include regime change.

The authors, in typical patronizing language, question Ethiopia’s existence as a sovereign nation, and assert that if Ethiopia is to survive, it will have to produce “a reason for its existence.” They also falsely claim that Ethiopia’s national elections were “neither free nor fair,” contrary to all official observers.

The article continues, proposing four possible outcomes of the current conflict, all of which will weaken the Ethiopian nation-state and endanger the Horn of Africa.

First, a victory over the Ethiopian army, (which they allege is collapsing) by the TPLF and Oromo Liberation Army. Secondly, a negotiated settlement, which would not endure. Thirdly, a prolonged military stalemate between the government of Ethiopia and the two rebel forces.

Fourthly, under the subhead: Abiy could join the growing list of recently deposed African leaders, the authors speculate that “Abiy [would be] removed from his position, likely by his own military officers.”

Suggesting a palace coup of the elected Prime Minister of the second largest nation in Africa, with over 110 million people, the only SSA nation never colonized, is extremely dangerous and should be frightening to all Africans.

The authors propose a transitional government, which again includes the removal of Prime Minister Abiy. It also calls for greater ethnic autonomy, a hardening of ethnic identities, rather than forging a unified Ethiopian identity. They write:

“The only solution is to pursue a negotiated settlement that secures at least some buy-in from the leaders of the TPLF and the OLA…At a minimum, its leaders would hope to press their current military advantage and demand reinstatement as the regional government, greater autonomy for the region…If the TPLF ends up joining forces with the OLF…their demands are also likely to include the removal of Abiy himself and the formation of a transitional government.” (Emphasis added)

I have warned since the outbreak of this conflict about the intent of regime change, which devotees of geo-politically diseased thinking, believe will eliminate the resistance to their designs on the region.

We are now entering the second decade since the same cast of characters currently advising President Biden, previously in the Obama administration, implemented regime change in Libya, assassinating President Kaddafi. Hundreds of thousands of Africans, if not millions, living in the Sahel have suffered as a result of this geo-political adventurism. Obama said he was sorry, and it was a mistake. That is not an acceptable excuse.

We cannot let President Biden follow in the deadly footsteps of his predecessor. Let our voices resonate throughout the U.S., Africa, and around the world: no regime change in Ethiopia!

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for over 30 years. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com. Mr. Freeman’s stated personal mission is; to eliminate poverty and hunger in Africa by applying the scientific economic principles of Alexander Hamilton.

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Why is the Nation State of Ethiopia Under Attack? Is Regime Change on the Agenda?

September 6, 2021

Please watch the above interview from August 24, 2021 with with myself, and Deacon Yoseph Tafari, Chairman of the Ethiopian American Civic Council, on ETV’s weekly show, “Addis Dialogue.” We discuss the the current conflict in Tigray and its impact on the the existence of the nation-state of Ethiopia from a strategic perspective.

Our discussion includes answering the following questions: What are the reasons for the conflict? What has been the role of the United States since the November 4, 2020 attack by the TPLF on the Ethiopian National Defense Force in Mekele? Who are the outside interests that are undermining the government of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and why are they contemplating “regime change?” What is the strategic importance of Ethiopia to the Horn of Africa? Why is Ethiopia’s development model important to Africa? Why is the GERD being attacked when it will generate electricity for economic growth in the Horn of Africa? Why U.S. President Joe Biden, must immediately reverse current US policy and support the government of Ethiopia?

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for over 30 years. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com. Mr. Freeman’s stated personal mission is; to eliminate poverty and hunger in Africa by applying the scientific economic principles of Alexander Hamilton

_____________________________________________________________________

Promoting Economic Growth and Tranquility Should Replace Foreign Interventionism. The Case of Ethiopia 

Last U.S. soldier to leave Afghanistan

Promoting Economic Growth and Tranquility Should Replace Foreign Interventionism. The Case of Ethiopia 

Lawrence Freeman

September 2, 2021

As the United States was in the final days of evacuation from its twenty year old failed invasion of Afghanistan, the Washington Post called on President Joe Biden to impose more harsh penalties on the nation of Ethiopia. There are insights we can glean from the juxtaposition of these two events.

On August 27, the Washington Post editorial board called on President Joe Biden to issue additional sanctions against Ethiopia. The Post asserted that the government of Ethiopia is responsible for atrocities including civilian massacres, using rape as a weapon, and “causing the world’s worst hunger crisis in a decade.” No proof was provided other than reports from Amnesty International and comments by Samantha Power, Chief of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Readers of the Post editorial are expected to have accepted all the allegations by the media against Ethiopia over the last ten months as true and factual. However, a leaked video conversation by United Nations representatives in August, revealed an admission of no real evidence-data-to support the media’s unsubstantiated claim that Ethiopia used rape as a weapon of war.  Also, recent reports from USAID officials, indicate that the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) have been stealing food intended to feed Ethiopians.  

The editorial continued, “If Eritrean officials deserve sanctions, the U.S. government must consider them for Ethiopian government officials, too.Conspicuously, while the Post asserts the alleged crimes of Ethiopia as genuine, they merely allude to “accusations” of atrocities by the TPLF. 

 

President Biden defends ending war in Afghanistan (courtesy of hindustaintimes.com)

Failed Foreign Interventions

Is President Biden foolish enough to allow Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Samantha Power, and others in his administration to lead the U.S. into another foreign disaster, after twenty years of failed interventions? This remains to be seen.

History often provides us with a real time juxtaposition of events that exposes an underlying reality, that might otherwise go unexamined by those who are habituated to regurgitating media induced popular opinion.

A week before the Washington Post publicly joined the liberal establishment’s campaign to weaken the government of Prime Minister, Abiy Ahmed,in favor of separatist forces, Tony Blair defended the British-U.S. disastrous Afghanistan policy. Remember, Blair was British Prime Minister and Labor Party leader from 1997-2007.

In his wordy defense for geo-political motivated interventions, Blair castigated President Biden for pulling U.S. troops out of Afghanistan. Blair arrogantly insisted that it is the responsibility of the West to military intervene around the world in the guise of promoting so called democratic values. He wrote on August 21, “If the West wants to shape the 21st century, it will take commitment…we in the West represent values and interests worth being proud of defending.”

Blair attempts to justify a generation of Western intervention that has produced nothing but death, destruction, and suffering around the world.

Abetted by Blair, President George W Bush launched the invasion into Afghanistan, under the pretext of chasing down the terrorists responsible for the “9/11” bombings in the U.S. Except that the  majority of those responsible were citizens of Saudi Arabia, the geo-political ally of the U.S. in the Gulf region. Less than two years later, the U.S. invaded Iraq, led by Blair’s lies, searching for the non-existent weapons of mass destruction. How many millions of men, women and children have lost their lives or suffered horrible conditions because of the ill-fated Western adventure to destroy Iraq, a then relatively stable nation in the region.

Former President Obama’s overthrow and elimination of President Muammar Gaddafi almost ten years ago, purportedly to protect the Libyan people, has led to untold suffering of millions of Africans across the Sahel. This reckless intervention by liberal Democrat Obama, transformed the nation of Libya into a failed state, and has led to an expansion of violent extremist movements throughout the nations of the Sahel; still ongoing today. Obama’s support for “regime change” against Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, has done nothing but create more devastation in the Middle East. 

Now asked yourself; how many nations dedicated to the principles of American republicanism were nurtured into existence during this generation of U.S. and Western intervention?

Tony Blair and George Soros, leading liberal architects for regime change (courtesy of pagesix.com)

Blair and Soros Promulgate “R2P”

Blair, who chastises President Biden’s withdraw from Afghanistan,  epitomizes the “liberal Imperialist.” Under the guise of promoting democracy and so called western values around the world, Blair advocates “regime change” with complete disregard for national sovereignty.

In a 1999 Chicago presentation, Blair publicly advocated his infamous doctrine “responsibility to protect-R2P,” which became the core of  British and American foreign policy for the next twenty years.

In 2012, I wrote:

“… the ‘responsibility to protect’ doctrine advocates discarding over three centuries of the lawful recognition of the supremacy of the sovereign nation state, established by the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia, which ended over a century and a half of religious warfare in Europe. Blair’s anti-nation state doctrine insists that the so-called international community has the right to use its more powerful militaries to eliminate governments under the amorphous notion of quote ‘humanitarian intervention.’”

Liberal Democrat George Soros creator of the Open Society, and super funder of liberal causes, supported and expanded Blair‘s new “R2P” doctrine. In his 2004 article in Foreign Policy Magazine, Soros wrote: 

“Sovereignty is anachronistic conception originating in bygone times… it became the cornerstone of international relations with the treaty Westphalia in 1648…The rulers of a sovereign state have responsibility to protect the state’s citizens. When they failed to do so the responsibility is transferred to the international community.”(emphasis added)

Who comprises this supercilious “international community” that decides to disregard the sovereignty of nations, and from whence did they acquire this entitlement?

Will Biden End Foreign Interventions?

President Biden’s August 31, address to the people of the United States, could portend the end of U.S. policy of mis-adventurism around the world, when he said: “This decision about Afghanistan is not just about Afghanistan. It’s about ending an era of major military operations to remake other countries.” If so, Biden’s presidency will be a turning point in modern history. This moment provides President Biden with a unique opportunity to define a fresh foreign policy approach.

Second filling of GERD that will generate electricity-economic growth for Africa (courtesy of burkena.com)

Let President Biden demonstrate his commitment to this new outlook by reversing his administration’s involvement in undermining the elected government of Ethiopia. The U.S. should be supporting and strengthening PM Abiy in his efforts to secure the nation-state of Ethiopia against separatist-rebels trying to dismember the nation.  Sanctions will not help Ethiopia. It is not in America’s interest to have a weakened Ethiopia. Sanctions are not an effective method of conducting relations with a sovereign nation that has provided stability in the region and been an ally to the U.S. There is no justification for the U.S. to turn against Ethiopia, its erstwhile partner in the Horn of Africa.

Sanctions should be repealed immediately. This will require President Biden curtailing his Secretary of State, Antony Blinken’s proclivities for interventionism and Samantha Power, a longtime supporter of “R2P” and George Soros.   

 

A new foreign strategy should not be predicated on intruding militarily  or applying political coercion to other nations under the pretext of imposing so called western democracy. Rather we should emulate one of our great U.S. presidents, John Quincy Adams, who said in his 1821 Fourth of July speech, “America goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.”

Instead of weakening nations through sanctions and the withholding funds for development, the U.S. should export republicanism. The U.S. was founded as republic with a government constitutionally mandated to provide for the “general welfare” of its citizens. All great U.S. presidents, regardless of party, understood that fostering economic growth, propelled by advancements in science and technology, was the proper means to ensure prosperity and tranquility.

Ethiopia, although still an emerging nation, has distinguished itself by launching bold initiatives to drive economic development, particularly in the area of infrastructure. Let the basis for a renewed alliance and friendship between Ethiopia and the U.S., be grounded on policies that promote economic progress for Ethiopia’s 110 million citizens.    

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for over 30 years. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com. Mr. Freeman’s stated personal mission is; to eliminate poverty and hunger in Africa by applying the scientific economic principles of Alexander Hamilton

________________________________________________________________

Western Regime Change Against Libya: Massive Suffering Today

PRESS TV interview with Lawrence Freeman

The 2011 Libya regime change against President Gaddafi has created a failed state in Libya today that has lead to the deaths and slavery of thousands of Africans. President Obama, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and Samantha Powers zealously advocated the overthrow of President Gadadfi that created today’s nightmare for Northern Africa. What is needed to reverse this bloody disaster is a whole new approach to Northern Africa, one based on economic development, which must include refurbishing Lake Chad with the Transaqua water project.

 

 

 

 

___________________________________________________________________________

Is There A Plan For A Venezuela Type Regime Change for Nigeria?

April 11, 2019

I cannot verify all the information in the article below, nor do I think President Buhari will be removed from office and replaced by Atiku Abubakar. However, the machinations presented in this article are plausible. Although, President Trump has spoken out against regime change, his administration, led by National Security Adviser, John Bolton, and Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, is in fact attempting to do just that in Venezuela. There, they are endeavoring to replace the current President of Venezuela by installing a member of the National Assembly as head of state, who was never elected as President. Some people in and around the Trump administration are trying to use this precedent in Venezuela to establish a new precedent for regime change.  If the cited article below is true, it appears that there are unscrupulous people,  who are being handsomely paid by the defeated, but wealthy Atiku, to make him President of Nigeria.

Atiku Abubakar-left. President Buhari-right. (courtesy nigerianpilot.com)

The idea of removing President Buhari from office-Venezuelan style, would not only illegally overturn the will of the Nigerian people, but it would be a catastrophe for all of Africa. Africa, especially North Africa, is still suffering horribly from the 2011 regime change and assassination of Libyan President, Muammar Gaddafi. Contrary to the misguided apologists of the Obama administration, there is no escaping the truth; Samantha Powers, Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton, and President Obama are responsible for the death and destruction of North Africa by their reckless action in overthrowing President Gaddafi and then killing him. Following the regime change collapse of Libya, thousands of Tuaregs, along with various extremists, drove out of Libya in their pick-up trucks filled with modern weapons and munitions. As a result, following the collapse of Libya, Mali’s sovereignty was undermined, the nation destabilized, and remains so today!

Nigeria is already familiar with the effects of western inspired regime change. Boko Haram’s growth and sophistication in lethality was also caused by the influx of new terrorist actors streaming across the desert after President Gaddafi was eliminated.  Were those lunatics in the cited article ever to succeed in their fantasy to remove President Buhari, civil war accompanied by an exodus of millions of Nigerians would overwhelm West Africa especially, drawing the continent into new and deadly regional conflicts and massive internal displacement of people.

For the sake of Africa and the world, let’s put end to regime change, now!

Excerpts:

“Enlisting the assistance of two high-powered Washington, D.C. lawyers, a Nigerian presidential candidate is looking for help in his legal challenge after his election loss. Atiku Abubakar, former vice president of Nigeria, lost in the country’s February presidential election to incumbent President Muhammadu Buhari. However, Abubakar swiftly filed a legal suit challenging the election results due to allegations of voting irregularities and violence.

“Abubakar has ties to those in Trump’s orbit, having hired political consultants like Riva Levinson, who worked with Paul Manafort, and Brian Ballard, a major Trump fundraiser. Like many other foreign leaders looking to bolster their standing with Trump, Abubakar stayed at the Trump International Hotel in Washington D.C”

“Abubakar himself has a rocky legal history. A Senate subcommittee report on foreign corruption cited Abubakar as a case study regarding his transfer of millions of dollars into the U.S. through shell companies. He was never prosecuted. In 2009, the FBI alleged that Abubakar demanded bribes from former Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.), who was convicted of corruption charges. At one point, Jefferson stored $90,000 in cash for Abubakar in his freezer.”

READ: Failed Nigerian Presidential Candidate Lobbying US to Recognize Him as Authentic President

______________________________________________________________________

Watch two interviews with Lawrence Freeman on the cause of the crisis in Sudan and the solution. He discusses, poverty, regime change, George Soros, National Endowment of Democracy, President Omar al Bashir, Open Society, the International Criminal Court, the International Monetary Fund, poverty, infrastructure. China, US, and UK.

______________________________________________________________________________

Watch my interview with RT TV: Will Nigeria election be destabilized?

________________________________________________________________________________

February 1, 2019

External & Internal Forces Fear Continuance of Buhari Presidency

President Buhari campaigning  Premium Times

February 1, 2019 President Buhari removed Chief Justice Walter Onnoghen last week, after it was found that Onnoghen had violated the Code of Conduct, failing twice to appear before the Code of Conduct Tribunal.  Buhari’s opponent in the Presidential race has accused him of not following constitutional procedures, by which he should first obtain two-thirds in the Parliament vote or a request by the Supreme Court itself. There is a provision in the Constitution under which the President can suspend or dismiss the Chief Justice. That is, in a situation where the Chief Justice is found to have contravened the Code of Conduct. In this regard, the President does not require any Senate vote or recommendation from the National Judicial Council. The Nigerian Supreme Court has jurisdiction and final say in challenges against election results. Internationally forces based in the City of London- financial capital of the world-do not want to see President Buhari succeed in a second term as Head of State. His commitment to fight against corruption, and develop the Nigerian economy with collaboration from China threatens the internal and external enemies of Nigeria, who oppose the nation’s progress. The announcement this past week that Nigeria has become an official member of China’s Belt and Road portends success for Nigeria, as the country frees itself from domination by the International Monetary Fund. The British government issued a statement of concern on January  26, which says “we are compelled to observe that the timing of this action, so close to national elections, gives cause for concern. It risks affecting both domestic and international perceptions on the credibility of the forthcoming elections.” In the US establishment’s Council of Foreign Relations blog,  Udo Jude Ilo from the Open Society Initiative for West Africa and Yemi Adamolekun of Enough Is Enough Nigeria (EIE) attacked President Buhari. They wrote  among other things: “the timing of [Onnoghen’s] replacement is so troubling. Many analysts, including the authors of this piece, see the move by the President as a calculated attempt to gain some electoral advantage should an election petition between the President and the main opposition party end up in the Supreme Court.” Open Society Initiative was created by billionaire George Soros, who is member of the global financial elite. Open Society is a vehicle for regime change around the world. Enough is Enough is funded by Soros’ Open Society. The authors of this blog are not just concerned Nigerian citizens, but part of a of a nasty operation to aimed at disrupting/tainting the Nigerian Presidential election and potentially destabilizing Nigeria to prevent the re-election of President Buhari. In recent weeks media outlets in the West have been voicing allegations of violence and other actions to be instigated by the government of Nigeria in order to insure a victory for President Buhari. The British are undoubtedly the driving group behind this scenario, but we cannot rule out US involvement. President Trump to his credit has come out against regime change, however US support for the removal of the President Venezuela raises doubts about that commitment. Not accidentally, the terrorist thugs from Boko Haram have resurfaced in force lately, scoring unexpected victories against Africa’s Nigerian led Multinational Force,  and the Nigerian army, spawning a new wave of refugees in the Lake Chad region. Those of us who have studied Nigeria’s political-economy over decades understand that the efforts directed against President Buhari are intended to derail  the momentum for the industrial development of Nigeria. This includes the President’s commitment to Transaqua, a vital water-transfer project to save the shrinking Lake Chad.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Human Rights Philosophy Challenged

By Makki Elmorgabi Why the bill of indictment, and why against Human Rights Philosophy; not just against what the pretenders of the philosophy practice. Pretenders are advocates and activists, some of whom are deceivers, and some are dreamers. The problem is not simply in the practice, but there is something inherently wrong with today’s human rights philosophy itself. It was not a negative philosophy during the period of aristocratic tyranny and feudalism,but in the recent period it has become negative and resistant to reform. While in the time of traditional tyrannical power, human rights had a role, but in the modern era, the dominant form of human rights philosophy has taken on a different and negative quality. In the battle to resist the traditional tyrannical authority inherited from the time of European feudalism, the philosophy was positive. In addition to which, the philosophy of “individual secularism” was a positive force in the battle against the authoritarianism of socialism and communism during the cold war. However, after it had become the dominant school of thought for almost two decades, the evil content of this philosophy appeared. Human Rights gradually became a reactionary philosophy, resulting in it losing its progressive aspects. It is true that in the West, human rights are based on “individual secularism” which drives communities to a state of war (state of nature), by isolating the individual from the community. As is commonly known, the social contract theory of democracy is based on the development of communities from the individual in the “state of nature.” From this social contract is born civil society. Human Rights philosophy today is again isolating the individual, and separating him not just from the community, but from his inheritance and source of ethics. The modern individual motivated by human rights theory, thinks about himself in his moment, and in so doing he is distancing himself from his community, traditions, inherited ethics, and much more. Through individual rights, he returns to the “status quo” of being completely dominated by his wicked, evil, selfish needs and wants. The result is that the community is returning day by day to “the state of nature.” The wicked personality is coated by fake culture, fake arguments, and the media; even the laws and its practice are full of tricks. As a result, justice is denied and abandoned! Five Charges against Human Rights Philosophy and its Pretenders 1)…Human Rights Philosophy is tyrannical, i.e., it is vulnerable to manipulation by tyranny. The reason for its vulnerability to manipulation is that people are divided and scattered on the basis of needs, demands, and wants, that are guided and directed by powerful groups, who are conflicted and competing among themselves. The so-called activists and pretenders of human rights are mostly under the control of these powerful groupings who control the discourse of what are the appropriate human rights issues for agitation. The powerful, rich and strong decide, then the activists and interventionists follow. The pretenders often attempt to portray a false image that they are attacking “the powers that be” but, in truth they are not working for the sake of human rights, but for national and international powers pulling the strings behind the scene. 2)…Human Rights Philosophy is a divisive, discriminatory, and violent philosophy, not integrative nor peaceful. It creates, generates, and invents more differences every day among, and between groups, communities and even nations. In actuality, human rights philosophy does not simply invent differences, but encourages and drives the communities mad to accept and defend any newly-discovered differences among them. Thus, putting any person, group or even a nation overseas,under imminent threat and “justified” intervention, if they refuse the newly discovered differences.Their philosophy uses inflammatory campaigns under the justification of taking rights from the grip of other people peacefully, but the size and the effects of their campaigns leads otherwise. Violence is an absolute result of such inflammatory campaigns in a cracked community. If adopting and practicing inflammatory and provocative campaigns between groups, races, classes, and sects, is not violence, then what is? 3)…Human Rights Philosophy eliminates and denies the people’s right to information, as human rights pretenders are addicted to using silence and distracting facts on other topics to deprive their audience from needed and correct information. Human rights pretenders’ tools are disinformation, misinformation, passive silence and distractive campaigns. A smart mix of these things is always ready to be put in place for immediate operation by well-financed tyrannical powers. Sometimes human rights organizations give themselves the right to prioritize the size and length of campaigns. They claim that they didn’t miss any violations, but they can keep what they want low-profile, and use minute by minute updates to create massive. They design poll questions to bring specific answers, and they produce fake and rigged studies and statistics, instead of being observers and monitors. They themselves are the ones that need to be monitored, observed and investigated for the good of society. If the Human Rights Philosophy is leading people to such a waste of money and time, then their philosophy itself should be reviewed. 4)…Human Rights Philosophy pretenders are dehumanizing their opponents, mainly conservative and religious people, portraying them as monsters and barbarians. They deny their opponents the right of freedom of expression, justifying lies and fake news against them. Their methods include physical violence or when suitable they utilize passive silence and distraction in collusion with the violence. 5)…Human Rights pretenders collude with interventionists and neo-colonialists to create and prolong conflicts in Third World nations through pressure groups, NGOs, and support from elements within international liberal organizations. They drag countries into wars, regime change with chaos, or “Creative Anarchy”. Human rights pretenders follow the angle of the war and the directions of interventionists, then they distance themselves and pretend that it was not their idea even after very strong collusion. However, the fact remains that they get benefits through organizations that live off conflicts, refugees, and disasters. They manipulate innocent human rights believers and dreamers from the Third World. There is a class of people now making business from this collusion. They have not been held accountable for their corruption, and abuses to humanitarian crisis and use of donor’s money, because of the difficulty in investigating and proving their criminal behavior. They live off the collusion with interventionism, but claim they are opposed to it Human Values Not Human Rights I call for Human Values as an alternative to Human Rights today’s philosophy and practice. Another article has explained this thoroughly, but still we need to deal and debate with Human Rights philosophy and its advocate, in spite of the fact that a great number of them are “pretenders and paraders”. Although human rights philosophy is resistant to reform, it is still advisable to try to solve the corruption of this philosophy by contributing to the debate of reform among the pretenders, who claim the title of activists and advocates. Trying to reform will help to create a good climate for change. However, we should redefine human rights philosophy in a broader concept of a “Comprehensive Orientation for Human, Environmental and Peoples’ Rights.” Mekki ELMOGRABI, is a Sudanese press writer and diplomat focuses on East Africa issues, he founded in 2011 Mekki Center and participated in several African initiatives and programs. He is currently in Washington DC and reached through (Mekki Elmograbi: Google, Facebook, twitter) or chairman@mekkicenter.com  Cell Phone +17033426346 (Preferably text or Whatsaap)

___________________________________________________________________________________________

No to British Regime Change in South Africa!

David Cherry and Ramasimong Phillip Tsokolibane January 10, 2015

     South Africa is being rocked by destabilization. The leading edge of the operation is the recent call of the Metalworkers Union (NUMSA)—the largest in the country—for regime change. This comes just as the spirit of the BRICS association of nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) is taking hold worldwide, and as the commitment of South Africa’s ruling African National Congress (ANC) to the BRICS—and to nuclear power—is becoming entrenched. The ANC has chosen the only path that can provide the country with a future. What hostile force, then, is at work?

     The destabilization is no different, in essence, than the one Russia is now experiencing. Both come from the same mother, the British Empire in its neo-colonial phase-based on propaganda, and financial and psychological warfare-and both have the same intent: to immobilize or overthrow lawful governments that threaten to break out of the British system and create the beginnings of an alternative worthy of the human spirit-the BRICS association. The project includes surrounding Russia and China with hostile governments as a step toward the overthrow of the governments of those two nations

Continue reading

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

George Soros & Open Society-British Empire Using ‘R2P’ To Destroy National Sovereignty

Michelle Steinberg April 29, 2011 R2P was explicitly Nerobama’s justification for starting the war in Libya. Don’t believe the press lies that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was the muscle behind the Libya war policy: The R2P doctrine has been the British Empire’s drumbeat since Tony Blair’s 1999 Chicago speech calling for a ground invasion of Kosovo, and it has been the policy of Clinton-haters George Soros and Soros owned Samantha Power since the mid-1990s, when Soros was creating the International Criminal Court, and trying to take over the nearly failed states of the former Soviet Union through his Open Society operation. Soros’s little handmaidens, Power and Rice, have been drooling to implement R2P ever since it was first cooked up in the inner sanctums pf the Empire in 1999. In addition to propagandizing for R2P, Soros has poured billions into creating tandem institutions that will smash the sanctity of sovereignty, especially as it was defined in the UN Charter. In the 1990s, Soros financed the propaganda for the creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC), and in 1999, he jumped immediately into supporting the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS, a.k.a. the Responsibility To Protect Commission), an independent initiative of the British Commonwealth that spewed out of the mouth of then Canadian Prime Minister Chrétien during the UN Millennium summit. Continue reading

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Southern Africans Rally Against British Assault on Zimbabwe

Lawrence Freeman October 12, 2007 There is no better timely example of the British colonial imperialist policy towards Africa then the current self-defeating temper tantrum by Britain’s new leader. The ghost of the infamous conqueror of Southern Africa, Cecil Rhodes, is alive but not well in the body of Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Fortunately, South African President Thabo Mbeki, with overwhelming support from the leaders of the Southern African Development Community, has brought about a compromise between the ZANU-PF ruling party, and its opposition, the British-backed leadership of the Movement for the Democratic Change (MDC). This has thwarted, for the moment, British attempts to instigate a regime change of Zimbabwe’s elected President, Robert Mugabe , before the March 2008 multiple national elections. Continue reading