Journalist Aaron Klein has an interesting take on Barack Obama’s surprising decision to send troops into Uganda to battle a rebel army.  The genesis of the idea may have begun at the George Soros-funded International Crisis Group, one of the “think tanks” that Soros uses to promote policies that benefit him.  In this case, the ICG recommended last year that America deploy military forces to Uganda.  This move prompted questions since the rebel group did not pose a threat to American interests. But whose interests might be served by defeating the rebel group? George Soros — a major Obama backer. Klein writes:

Soros himself has been closely tied to oil and other interests in Uganda. In 2008, the Soros-funded Revenue Watch Institute brought together stakeholders from Uganda and other East African countries to discuss critical governance issues, including the formation of what became Uganda’s National Oil and Gas Policy. Also in 2008, the Africa Institute for Energy Governance, a grantee of the Soros-funded Revenue Watch, helped established the Publish What You Pay Coalition of Uganda, or PWYP, which was purportedly launched to coordinate and streamline the efforts of the government in promoting transparency and accountability in the oil sector. Also, a steering committee was formed for PWYP Uganda to develop an agenda for implementing the oil advocacy initiatives and a constitution to guide PWYP’s oil work. PWYP has since 2006 hosted a number of training workshops in Uganda purportedly to promote contract transparency in Uganda’s oil sector. PWYP is directly funded by Soros’ Open Society as well as the Soros-funded Revenue Watch Institute. PWYP international is actually hosted by the Open Society Foundation in London. The billionaire’s Open Society Institute, meanwhile, runs numerous offices in Uganda. It maintains a country manager in Uganda, as well as the Open Society Initiative for East Africa, which supports work in Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda.

Soros seems to have his hand in trying to guide the development of the oil and gas industry in Uganda.  The Ugandan government would naturally be beholden to Soros if he could show he had enough influence with the White House to bring in American troops to take out a rebel group.  Also, the defeat of the rebel group would make development of the energy industry that much more viable since operations would be much more secure. This strategy bears similarity with the story of InterOil, a major holding of George Soros, that has  been granted concessions for reportedly major natural gas reserves in Papua New Guinea.  The government there has recently been arguing with InterOil regarding that company’s ability to develop these reserves and build and operate a Liquefied Natural Gas port to export the gas. What could friends of George Soros in the American government do to help him soothe the deal with the Papua New Guinea government? What the Obama administration did in fact do was send government experts all the way from here to there to help the nation develop its reserves. This was especially surprising since the Department of Interior has blamed its delay in issuing permits to develop our own domestic reserves on lack of manpower and funding — yet the administration found the manpower and money to export our experts do help develop New Guinea’s reserves. Or rather the reserves that InterOil and its major shareholder , George Soros, want developed courtesy of the American taxpayer. Anyone see a pattern here? In one case, Obama sends military forces to Uganda — a nation where Soros has been active in trying to help it formulate a policy to tap its oil wealth.  But before the policies could be put in place, a rebel group needs to be vanquished.  In the other case, Obama sends American government experts to help another nation to develop its natural gas wealth when the one company ideally positioned to benefit from this taxpayer-funded development has as its major shareholder none other than George Soros. Soros declared his own modus operandi when he said in a 2004 New Yorker profile that there are “symbiotic moments between political and business interests.”  He is a master at finding these moments and promoting the political careers of those who will do his bidding.