Discussion Notes
January 18, 2006

Lumumba and the Congo during the Cold War

• What are his obligations?
• Where do these obligations come from?
• What choices are made by Lumumba?
• What choices are made about Lumumba? Why?
• What are the ramifications for these choices?

L feels his obligations are to the country of the Congo as a whole - speech talks about enslavement and white/black economic differences. He supports democracy and socialism to bring equality - patriotic tone to the speech

• "We are going to do away with all discrimination of every variety and assure for each and all the position to which human dignity, work and dedication entitles them."
• In the speech he doesn't want the black people called by the informal designation: shows desire for equality.

L feels and obligation to bring his country to independence - takes it upon himself to bring stability; he says that the Congo needs to show what the nation can do on its own.

• support for this statement: letter to wife "no brutality...has ever forced me to ask for grace...I would prefer to die with my head high and my faith steadfast and my confidence profound in the destiny of my country, rather than to live in submission and scorn of sacred principles."
• parts of this speech sound a lot like the Dec of Ind - lists the wrongs of the Belgians just like Jefferson lists the wrongs of the Brits
• Quotes the Dec of Rts of Man and the Citizen

His main obligation was to get independence and at the same time keep the country together; civil war in Congo - if Katanga splits off with all of the natural resources then the rest of the nation is deprived of the wealth of the resources from Katanga. "Lumumba only Congolese leader who rose above ethnic differences and tribal affiliations that killed other parties."

Ramifications of his choices: once in power he could have done what Tshombe did in Katanga (give the whites/people with money) what they want - then he would have lived comfortably - he and those close to him would have had wealth, money and comfort. Instead he puts himself through struggle and risks his life.

He couldn't give the whites what they wanted - he could only give what Katanga had and they seceded.

He never acknowledged what the whites demanded

He never acknowledged Katanga's secession because he wanted other countries to look to other countries like he held all of the country so that he still controlled the resources.

A choice with consequences: asking US and UN for economic and military aid, they said no so he went to Soviets and they agreed. Now US is afraid of Lumumba nationalizing the resources of the Congo and trade with the Soviets - not only is US cut off, but Soviets gain. So the US wants him dead.

This was a Belgian interest like the US had the sugar interest in Cuba - 1/2 way around the world, US not nearly as invested as it was in Cuba.

Do you think Lumumba would have ended up like Castro if he hadn't been assassinated? There are a lot of factors, but would he have been able to continue working toward the peace he preached about?

• if willing to die for his cause, he would have been willing to keep working for it
• Castro risked and survived coup/assassination attempts
• he speech was impromptu - not pre-drafted so it indicates the depth of his passion and commitment
• Castro suppressed the people of Cuba which is not what Lumumba was after. We killed Lumumba while we recognize the purity (?) or validity of his motivation; we tried to kill Castro but gave up even though we think he is a self-motivated despot
• Eisenhower administration supported military intervention to help Katanga break away because high level US gov't officials had economic ties there; they also had ideological aversion to Lumumba because of his socialist ties
• Long live the Congo (in his letter to his wife)

Our interest in Cuba may have been much for than what it was in the Congo

Why the US did care for selfish reasons about Congo:

• Most of Katanga's mineral reserves are owned and mined by a giant U.S.-British-Belgian controlled corporation, the Union Miniere du Haut Katanga (UMHK)
• annual sales of $200 million
• UMHK produced 60 percent of the uranium in the West
• Belgium invested over $3 billion in the Congo, and the U.S. about half a billion

So the Soviets would want access to the uranium in the Congo for making nukes

The estimated dollars for rebuilding the Congo were a worthwhile investment given the money to be made there

SO...now what do you get about the Congo? About its place in the Cold War? About making and enemy?

Since the Congo let the Soviet Union help them, did that make them our enemy?

We had other economic reasons for not liking Lumumba, his currying favor the of the USSR didn't help him any

Why care about the Congo if seceded Katanga gets us what we want? Because the Soviets are helping them get Katanga back.