Military Watches
Find us on Facebook


Printer Friendly VersionPrinter Friendly VersionSend to a FriendSend to a Friend

AFRICAN MERCENARY leader “Mad” Mike Hoare didn’t just kill African commies by the thousands, but had a plan to bulletproof the rest from Marxist domination: create a black middle class!


He dropped this grenade on a very conservative white audience in Durban South Africa, in 1975—a decade after he defeated a communist assault to seize the Congo. His role in that hyped event was that of a “draw card” to boost attendance. His “mission” was to swagger to the dais, reel off a few battlefield stories from his Congo years, and then politely walk off stage bathed in warm applause.


Instead he told his sea of white faces that blacks were the biggest victims of the Marxist tide that threatened all of Africa. “Fight communists with the weapons of capitalism” (from The Seychelles

Affair), he challenged them.


“Improve the lot of the blacks. Create a solid black middle class that would have something to lose, some reason to fight against communism. I saw these tactics succeed in the Congo.”


Then he pulled the pin on the “grenade” and lobbed it. He recommend that a full ten percent of the taxes his audience paid South Africa each year be channeled into raising the living standards of blacks and “vast sums” of those tax dollars be poured into black education.


The audience was stunned mute and Col. Hoare was not invited back. But the incident reflects Hoare’s social conscience and belief that poverty is the fertilizer that nourishes the roots of communism.



One life-changing day in Aba, a Congo town circa 1964, turned Col. Hoare into the anti-Marxist he remains to this day. While leading his 5 Commando “Wild Geese” mercenaries, he stumbled across a school, but wasn’t greeted by laughing children, rather by silence, bottle flies, and that sweet sick smell of human corpses.


“Simbas,” armed and indoctrinated by the Chinese and Russians, had swept through Alba, and a witness described the scene to Col. Hoare. “The political commissars made them line up here . . . and pointed to a long wall. The professors here and the boys there. They asked everybody who could read and write to step forward. Some of the boys did. The soldiers took these boys and their masters away and killed them.”


At that moment of epiphany, Hoare knew the first move of the communists was to find a fertile field (full of the poor) to till and then destroy the “weeds,” i.e., Western society.



“The intelligentsia must be destroyed,” said Hoare in The Seychelles Affair. “It is part of the basic doctrine of communism.” The communists must destroy all vestiges ofWestern civilization, capitalism, and that quaint superstition called religion.


Only after the old is bulldozed away can the communists build a social matrix where all are beholden to, and controlled by, the state. So, nearly a half century later, did Col. Hoare, and the rest of us (I fought Marxist Robert Mugabe’s “boys in the bush” for 37months in the RhodesianArmy)—in the long run—win or lose our anti-communist African campaigns?


Well, Professor J. Peter Pham of James Madison University, also Senior Fellow for Africa Policy Studies at the Washington, D. C., think tank Foundation for the Defense of Democracies has this sobering assessment:



“History records that the Soviet Union lost the Cold War. However, when one looks across Africa today and examines many of those holding positions of power, it is not altogether clear that communists didn’t win the continent—thanks in large part to the failure of the United States and its allies to fully appreciate what was at stake.”


Russian and China provide a kind of bullet-proof curtain for corrupt African despots and the quid pro quo is blatantly obvious: “You (referring to corrupt African despots) give us access to your strategic minerals and markets and we will always protect you at the United Nations.”


Ever wonder why the United Nations doesn’t act in Darfur? China is sucking oil from Sudanese soil! Each member of the permanent UN Security Council has VETO POWER. As members, both China and Russia would have the right to veto, let’s just say, a plan to invade Zimbabwe.



Hoare’s old Congo is today the biggest slaughterhouse in the world, an endless loop of murder, rape and internal war.


But during that magic time “window,” 1977–1980, when the USA might have made a positive difference in Africa’s future, President Jimmy Carter made a fatal—for Africa—wrong turn. President Carter and his Africa point man, Andrew Young, big champions of Marxist Robert Mugabe, decided to ignore Rhodesia’s first majority election and bullied the United Kingdom to do likewise.


Black moderate and anti-communist Bishop Abel Muzorewa clearly won that election (54 percent of the vote) to become Zimbabwe’s first black prime minister in 1979. So why did President Carter hang with Mugabe, by far the most sinister of all possible choices? Because Mugabe was the candidate recommended by Mugabe’s one-party “thugocracy” despots in neighboring African countries.



“The betrayal of Muzorewa is one of the more craven episodes in American foreign policy,” wrote James Kirchick, assistant editor of The New Republic, in his sensational exposé “How Tyranny Came to Zimbawe:

Jimmy Carter Still Has a Lot to Answer For,” which ran June 18, 2007 in The Weekly Standard.


“History will not look kindly on those in the West who insisted on bringing the avowed Marxist Mugabe

into the government,” wrote Kirchick. “In particular, the Jimmy Carter foreign policy... bears some responsibility for the fate of a small African country (Zimbabwe) with scant connection to American national interests.”


None other than Bayard Rustin, advisor to Martin Luther King, Jr., and chief organizer of the 1963 march on Washington (“I Have A Dream”), declared the first majority-rule election in Rhodesia to be “remarkably free and fair.”


Civil rights icon Rustin, in Rhodesia as a Freedom House observer, added, “With the United States openly deferring to the wishes of ZANU, ZAPU, and their enablers among the African tyrannies, we have found ourselves, until now, tacitly aligned with groups armed by Moscow, hostile to America, antagonistic to democracy, and unpopular within Rhodesia itself.”



“If the presidents of Zambia, Mozambique, Tanzania, and Angola have their way,” Rustin wrote, “majority rule will take a form more or less similar to what exists in their own countries; which is to say that it will be a dictatorship by a small black elite over a destitute black population.”


In response to Carter’s refusal to accept the legitimacy of the April 1979 election, the Washington Post editorialized that the administration was “ignoring fairness and impartiality in order to court those black

African states, mostly petty dictatorships or paper democracies.”


Rustin, were he still alive, would weep to see that his predictions came true. Muzorewa was an anticommunist who believed in representative government. Kirchick believes that had the USA and UK recognized that February 1979 election in Rhodesia, it would have sent a different signal to other African nations, and just maybe Africans could finally begin to be actually “liberated.”


If you were to ask Col. Hoare if he is bitter about the outcome of Africa, I suspect he would say “yes,“ but that he found the challenges and rewards of command completely fulfilling. I doubt he would want to re-write any part of his history except perhaps The Seychelles Affair.