The United Nations peacekeeping force withdrew from Angola on March 3, apparently at the insistence of the Angolan Government. The United Nations is only inclined to leave countries if their policies have been defeated or successful.
So what is the story in Angola? Peter Stevens investigates.
Socialist Outlook has always campaigned against UN interventions. We do not believe their presence will benefit the workers and peasants of affected countries. Their involvement is only to buttress imperialism’s interests.
So what was the imperial interest which took these troops to Angola and why are they acquiescing in their departure?
A brief history is necessary.
Angola achieved independence from Portugal in 1975. This independence was achieved primarily because of the collapse of the Salazar dictatorship in Portugal in 1974, under pressure of wars of independence in all its colonies. At this point the liberation struggle in Angola was at a stalemate.
The Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA) had been forced to fight not only the Portuguese but also the rival National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA).
The latter had increasingly come under the influence of apartheid-ruled South Africa, keen to protect itself against black liberation struggles. The announcement of the Portuguese withdrawal produced a race for the capital city (Luanda) between these two movements.
The MPLA won due, amongst other things, to the support of Cuba which airlifted thousands of troops into Angola with the help of the USSR.
This great success, and the move of Angola into the ‘Socialist’ camp was too much for South Africa and US imperialism. UNITA became an important part of the efforts of these powers to destabilise Angola.
These efforts became more desperate as the struggle against apartheid intensified in South Africa and Namibia, and Zimbabwe achieved independence in 1980.
By the mid 1980s the South African Defence Force (sic) (SADF) was directly involved in Angola. This led to a decisive but unexpected outcome - SADF was defeated by the Cuban army.
This defeat, particularly when combined with the collapse of the USSR and the ongoing struggle further south, caused imperialism to enforce a new political order on its allies in the region.
Namibian independence, majority rule in South Africa, cease-fire in Mozambique (where the South African backed Renamo has been terrorising and destabilising), and lastly, peace accords in Angola.
It was the need to stabilise this new political order that led to UN troops being sent to Angola to police these accords.
This has been no easy process. There were two peace accords, in 1991 and 1994, and many outbreaks of fighting. The Lusaka protocol in 1994 involved new cease-fires and elections (UNITA won a third of the seats in the new assembly and several government ministries) and the arrival of UN peace keepers.
Imperialism was interested in the exploitation of the rich diamond and oil wealth of Angola. Undermining popular revolutions was no longer top of the agenda (the MPLA had declared itself no longer Marxist in 1990). Stability was a necessity.
Today the situation has shifted; not in terms of imperialism’s goals, but the means by which it thinks they can best be achieved. A new ‘new order’ is emerging in southern Africa resulting from the genocide in Rwanda and the overthrow of Mobutu in Zaire.
The Congo is a vast disjointed country. If it collapses into chaos this will be a major threat to stability across Southern Africa. Mobutu was the US’s principal ally in the region after apartheid South Africa: to lose him was of great significance. The US wishes to see a new government safely controlling the country. The only one on offer at the moment is that of new President Kabila.
The Angolan government is willing militarily to prop up Kabila. This is specifically to prevent UNITA, and a group fighting for independence for the oil rich Angolan region of Cabinda, from using the Congo as a base.
This gives the Angolan government a usefulness to US interests. Firstly as an ally of Kabila, and secondly as the defender of the US oil companies with interests in the Cabinda region.
The UN is willing to withdraw its forces because it wants to redraw the line in Angola. Nobody thinks that the Angolan government will be able to destroy UNITA. But they do believe that the oil wealth of the government is far greater than the diamond wealth of UNITA.
This should result in UNITA’s areas of control being reduced. The removal of the peace keepers enables this fighting to take place.
At the same the UN is maintaining its "humanitarian" operation (good PR), tightening sanctions against UNITA’s arms supplies and diamond smuggling and declaring its willingness to facilitate new negotiations.
This is not some tidy conspiracy run neatly by a suit at the CIA. Its a blood and horror story of the conscription of men and boys, criss-cross alliances between southern African states (Uganda against Kabila, Zimbabwe for him), the slaughter of tourists, Zambian supply roots for UNITA, the De Beers diamond corporation’s involvement with UNITA; an endless list. Tragically there is a distinct lack of good guys.
But to go back to the beginning – why have the UN agreed to go? – because it suits imperialism at this moment in time.
Exploring the concrete issues behind the actions of the UN here and elsewhere can lead to better understanding of the much misunderstood role of the United Nations in the world today.