Good riddance to bad rubbish…
Well, almost. I don’t think we had a good riddance of this character at all. The notorious former Ugandan dictator, Idi Amin, has died in-exile in Saudi Arabia today.
And who saved him from being killed or lapidated (stoning one to death)? For someone who allegedly wiped out 400,000 people like a fascist, the media portrayed him as a buffoon and a cannibal!
Additional news came about how Soviet Union was the sole member in the UN security council to reject a motion to declare Uganda of committing human rights violation. And alongside, news also appeared that the US and Britain went ahead and denounced Amin, and closed their embassies.
Well, between easy and difficult, the West chose the easy and cut-off all relations. As if the people in Uganda were the worse humans to deal with! As if it were all the faults of Ugandanians. So the solution was to oppose UN and impose sanctions and cut off business. So that the people suffer even more.
Suffer for doing what? For resenting Amin of course, went the narrative!
How many countries can claim to have a leadership which is supported by the majority of its people, anyway? Worse, why should Amin have a place in history, if not ably supported by some external forces (since he was a dictator, apparently without domestic support). The blame went to the Reds, without any substantiation, except the UN vote which to me, sounds ridiculous, since any sanction is not good for the people of the country. Since the rulers don’t care, sanctions or no sanctions.
Here are some pointers (click here for an article by Steven Niven):
The United States’ officially hostile stance obscured its ongoing support of Amin’s regime. It continued to provide military helicopters and parts long after the US had claimed to have cut off aid and also provided “special police training” to high ranking officers in Amin’s SRBPSU. In July 1979, the Washington Post quoted a CIA official’s explanation for assisting the Ugandan secret police. His answer suggests that, like the other governments who assisted Amin, the US believed that it could control and manipulate him. “By training Amin’s men,” the CIA official remarked, “we were able to have some influence over Amin. It was also a possibility that we could go back to the trainees later for intelligence operations.”
In December 1986, the New York Times reported that CIA operatives provided bombs, military equipment, and training to Amin in 1975, to assist him in subduing domestic unrest, in spite of congressional legislation forbidding such sales. The Times report, issued during the unfolding Iran-Contra scandal, noted that “there was no indication whether George [H.W] Bush, the director of Central Intelligence at the time, was aware of the operation.” Throughout the 1970s, former CIA operatives funneled sophisticated surveillance equipment made by American companies to the Ugandan secret police. British companies — including the state-owned car manufacturer, British Leyland — likewise provided Amin with state-of-the-art surveillance and military equipment, even though the UK broke diplomatic relations with Uganda in 1976. Ironically, British trade with Uganda continued even though, as the Sunday Herald of Glasgow reported yesterday, Britain’s Labour Government was at the same time considering assassinating Amin.
Saudi Arabia shielded one of the biggest anti-human institutions. How come nothing happened to this host country? Next logical question: Who shields the Saudis? Only answer: Of course we know!