Ba’labakk Voice of the Oppressed (in Arabic) 0630 GMT — [Station commentary: “Aggression and Intervention in Somalia”]
In the name of God, the merciful and compassionate:
Some 30,000 soldiers are intervening to feed the starving and have traveled thousands of miles to reach Mogadishu so that the world might register the Americans’ distinguished and conspicuous humanity. If these 30,000 men are sent to deter the disputing factions and address the starvation, why is no one being sent to Bosnia-Hercegovina. International aid does not reach the starving in Bosnia-Hercegovina and there is no similar intervention there because of the war the Serbs are launching.
Why is this U.S. intervention covered by UN resolutions and camouflaged by token units from certain countries?
Who decided Somalia needs so many soldiers to perform the limited tasks?
Can the Security Council, the big powers, or others guarantee that the presence of these forces in the region will not lead to tension and problems that could spill over Somali borders?
The Americans are interested in more than Somalia: They are eying Sudan, particularly south Sudan, on the pretext of human rights, protecting minorities, stopping massacres, violations, and starvation. Perhaps there is a decision to interfere in Sudan; we think this is likely.
There is an Islamic regime in Sudan working to follow the Islamic shari’ah and laying the foundations of foreign policy based on rejecting subservience to the U.S. policy, backing the nation’s national and legitimate rights, and condemning hostile interference in its affairs. This has been the state of affairs in Sudan.
For some time the Americans and certain Westerners have been playing up the Sudan issue in the media, although events in Sudan, particularly in the south, have no serious dimensions beyond the conflict of interests. Evidence of this is that the opposition forces in south Sudan have split up. Had there been a worthwhile issue to fight for, they would not have split.
FBIS-NES-92-237, 9 Dec. 1992, pp. 43-44
