|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Africa
: US Embassy
Bombings
As US media suggest targets for military attack
Death toll mounts in East African bombings
By the Editorial Board
11 August 1998
The death toll in the bombings of US embassies in Kenya and
Tanzania rose to 210 Monday, with as many as 100 others missing
and feared dead in the rubble of the US embassy in the Kenyan
capital city, Nairobi.
More than 5,000 people were injured in the twin blasts, the
vast majority in Nairobi, where the US embassy is located at a
busy intersection in the center of the city. Nairobi's hospitals
were choked with wounded people, with more than 500 requiring
extensive treatment.
The embassy in Dar-es-Salaam, the Tanzanian capital, is in
the diplomatic quarter, a quiet residential neighborhood distant
from the downtown area. Casualties were were accordingly much
lighter. Ten people died and 70 were wounded.
The death toll was the worst in an attack on a US facility
overseas since the October 1983 truck bombing of a US Marine barracks
in Beirut which killed 241 soldiers. The largest number of dead
were in an office building, the Ufundi House, adjacent to the
US embassy, which collapsed under the impact of the blast. The
upper floors of the building pancaked down, leaving a pile of
rubble only two stories high, crushing most of those inside. The
other large concentration of deaths was in several buses passing
by the embassy at the time of the blast.
Thirty six of the dead in Nairobi have been identified as employees
of the embassy, 12 of them Americans and 24 Kenyans. As many as
100 more Kenyan employees of the embassy are missing and feared
dead. Excavation of the embassy site has been delayed by the enormous
scale of the damage and by conflicts between US officials and
Kenyan rescue workers.
There have been numerous press accounts about the indifference
of US military and government officials towards the largely Kenyan
victims of the tragedy. The BBC reported that US investigators
have sealed off the embassy, even refusing entry to Kenyan President
Daniel arap Moi.
The Financial Times, the leading British business daily,
cited complaints that US marines had rejected requests for picks
and shovels when hundreds of rescue workers were frantically digging
into the Ufundi House wreckage with their bare hands. A Kenyan
police captain told the newspaper, "The French are here,
the Israelis are here, the Red Cross are helping and the Hindis
are giving us food. Where are our American brothers?" An
ambulance worker said, "The Americans have behaved like [obscenity]
from day one."
Mike Sheldon, the chief administrator of Nairobi Hospital,
said he found it "very puzzling" that three US doctors
sent on the day of the blast "didn't do anything. Nothing."
Not one of the hundreds of American soldiers, FBI agents and other
personnel who have poured into Nairobi over the weekend has participated
in the rescue efforts at Ufundi House and other heavily damaged
buildings around the embassy.
Vincent Nicod, head of the Red Cross delegation in Nairobi,
said that US officials were concentrating on security matters,
not rescue. "They were checking through rubble to see what
kind of paper flew out of the embassy," he told the Chicago
Tribune reporter on the scene.
The Nairobi embassy is the second largest US facility in sub-Saharan
Africa, exceeded in size only by the embassy in South Africa.
The six-story building was the base for CIA and military intelligence
operations as well as the diplomatic service.
At least two of those killed in the embassy were military intelligence
officers, and another, Tom Shah, was described as a State Department
"political officer," the usual cover posting for CIA
agents. The State Department refused to release any information
on Shah, although it released biographical and family data on
other victims of the bombing.
While Kenyan and Red Cross rescue workers criticized the US
response, American officials criticized the Kenyan rescue effort
on the grounds that it may have destroyed evidence that could
be used to identify those responsible for the bombing. The embassy's
security chief was filmed by a local television station shouting
at Kenyan policemen who were seeking to shift wreckage to find
people buried underneath.
There were conflicting reports about the progress of local
police investigations into the two bombings. In Nairobi, several
eyewitnesses reported seeing a group of men jump out of a yellow
truck and throw grenades or other explosive devices at the embassy
just before the main explosion.
In Dar es-Salaam, police announced Monday that they had arrested
several suspects, but they gave no details of the evidence linking
those arrested to the bombing or of the nationality of the suspects.
The Tanzania bomb was believed to have been on board a water truck
owned by the embassy and driven by two longtime employees. Both
drivers died in the explosion, as did five Tanzanian guards who
had permitted the truck to enter the embassy compound.
There has been no credible statement claiming responsibility
for the bomb atrocity. Phone calls to several Middle East newspapers
claimed the bombing was carried out by a previously unknown Islamic
radical group calling itself "Islamic Army for the Liberation
of the Moslem Holy Sites."
The Moslem Brotherhood, one of the largest Islamic fundamentalist
groups, issued a statement in Cairo condemning the attacks on
the US embassies and warning that these could now become the pretext
for attacks on Islamic and Arab interests in the Middle East and
elsewhere.
The lack of either physical evidence or statements of responsibility
did not stop the American media from publishing lists of likely
suspects for the terrorist attack, names supplied by either US
or Israeli intelligence services. The most frequently mentioned
individual was Osama bin Laden, a Saudi Arabian multi-millionaire
now living in exile in Afghanistan.
Thomas Friedman, the foreign affairs columnist for the New
York Times, suggested that Iran or Iraq was likely responsible,
while the International Herald Tribune, a joint publication
of the Times and the Washington Post, cited British
experts pointing the finger at Iraq, Sudan and Somalia.
The report in the International Herald Tribune, published
less than 24 hours after the explosions, began by declaring that
the embassy bombings were "acts of war and the United States
could take reprisals against the bombers under international law
without approval of the United Nations."
According to a British expert cited by the newspaper, "If
Americans find Iraqi connections that could lift the lid right
off. If this were the case, I would not be surprised if there
were a direct action against Saddam Hussein."
The Wall Street Journal chimed in on Monday with an
editorial blasting the Clinton administration for not having ordered
military retaliation for the earlier bombing of a US military
barracks in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia in 1996--against whom, the newspaper
did not say.
Giving its prescription for action, the Journal declared,
"President Reagan bombed Tripoli, Libya, and within a short
time the terrorist streak wound down." On its news pages
the newspaper published an article listing a dozen potential targets,
from Angola to Pakistan, and including Libya, Iraq, Iran and Palestinian
Arab groups.
US government officials were more cautious in their public
statements, but Defense Secretary William Cohen, interviewed on
the Sunday ABC news program This Week, recalled the 1986
bombing raids on Libya as a precedent for military action.
Israeli officials were more emphatic. Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu blamed "international terrorism centered on Islamic
fundamentalism," and offered the assistance of Israeli intelligence
agencies in tracking down the bombers.
The strident press campaign and the government statements have
ominous and disturbing implications. They suggest that the US
government hopes to use the tragic loss of life in Nairobi and
Dar es-Salaam to accomplish now what it could not do last February--win
public backing to launch a military strike against Iraq or other
targets in the Middle East.
The US media reaction underscores how unreliable and biased
the US agencies investigating the tragedy are. Little, if any,
credence can be given to whatever evidence is produced by the
FBI and CIA agents who have flooded into Nairobi and Dar es-Salaam.
It is worth noting that none of the regimes and organizations
listed as likely suspects would actually benefit from the bombings
in Kenya and Tanzania. On the contrary, the principal beneficiaries
could well be militaristic elements in the United States, as well
as Israel, who were frustrated by the deal brokered between UN
Secretary General Kofi Annan and Saddam Hussein which deprived
the US government of its pretext for bombing Baghdad.
The provocative and reckless character of the US media coverage
makes it difficult to avoid the suspicion that those who stand
to benefit from these atrocities may have had a hand in organizing
them. Even if it turns out that individuals motivated by Arab
nationalism or Islamic fundamentalism actually carried out the
attack, it is quite possible that their actions were manipulated
and directed by intelligence agencies like the CIA and the Israeli
Mossad, which have a long record of such provocations, and possess
the high level of technical skill needed to coordinate two explosions
in cities nearly 500 miles apart.
It is predictable that the American media excludes such a possibility
from its long list of likely perpetrators. But this only illustrates
why such terroristic attacks are always so reactionary: they play
directly into the hands of imperialism, and, on more than one
occasion, have been instigated for precisely that reason.
See Also:
Bomb blasts at US embassies in Africa
kill 80
[8 August 1998]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |