Something just does not sound right about the narrative we are being told about what happened in the Central African Republic. We are told the SA unit faced 3000 attackers and they killed hundreds of attackers. They themselves suffered 13 deaths and 46 injured.
Unfortunately evidence of dead rebels is only coming from the SA government and nowhere else. If hundreds of rebels were killed, common sense dictates that an even higher number would have been injured. Therefore it is simple logic that hospitals in Bangui would have been overwhelmed with casualties. Organisations such as Medicins Sans Frontiers and the Red Cross would have been reporting and issuing statistics on these casualties.
So far all I have heard from these organisations is them complaining that their clinics have been looted just like other businesses around Bangui. Surely they would not have forgotten to mention a high number of casualties, if looting was affecting their ability to treat such casualties.
There has also been claims that a South African soldier was taken aside and shown a warehouse 'stacked to the ceiling' with dead bodies. The insinuation was that they were all victims of South Africa's fighting prowess.
Again the odd thing is that apart from the South African government nobody else is talking about stacks of dead bodies. Certainly not the Red Cross, Medicins Sans Frontiers nor the French who also have boots on the ground.
Maybe I was missing something, I thought, so I went and googled 'Central African Republic casualties'. Both Google Search and Google News came up with long lists of links all of them about the South African casualties, a couple about an Indian who was accidentally shot by the French.
None of them was about casualties on the rebel or even the CAR government side. Could it be that there were no casualties when the rebel and government forces fought each other?
This seems odd. However if you take three other facts into consideration things begin to make sense a little bit.
1. Bozize was helped to escape by South Africa soldiers which suggests that they, not CAR army units, were providing his security.2. Some SA soldiers have claimed that the first shots at them were fired by CAR army units and not rebels. This suggests that the CAR army could have been part of the rebellion.3. CAR army generals and police chiefs have already declared allegiance to the rebel leader. These are not the actions of people who were passionate about defending Bozize or those helping prop up Bozize.
This suggests that the so called CAR army either did not put up a fight or were already on the rebels side, leaving the South Africans with the short end of the very short stick propping up Bozize. There is a distinct possibility that this was a fight of all sides in CAR versus outsiders propping up Bozize. That would also explain the absence of any meaningful independently verified casualties on both sides of the CAR conflict. They did not really fight each other.
This leaves one wondering, was South Africa trying its hand at imperialism? What were they doing, propping up a man whose very own army could not be trusted to be loyal to him. We definitely can't say they were defending democracy because Bozize was not a democrat. He seized power violently.
Disclaimer: All articles and letters published on MyNews24 have been independently written by members of News24's community. The views of users published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24. News24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.