10 days ago, a Military Junta led by an American trained Captain in the Army ousted the president of Mali, Amadou Toumani Toure, popularly known as AT&T. The justification for the coup d'état was the incapacity of the regime to face the Tuareg rebellion in the north and corruption.
Tuaregs account for 15% of the total Mali population of 15 million. Their rebellion is making military progress day by day, and last Friday they conquered their first city: Kidal. Today, Monday April 2nd they are claiming their occupation of Timbuctu.
Mali's neighbors have a main priority: restore, at least partially, the constitutional democracy in place before the Coup d´Etat. By Monday April 2nd, the Economic Community of West African States ( ECOWAS), will impose financial and diplomatic sanctions and even proceed to the closure of the terrestrial borders.
This strategy is the same followed by the region in 2010 and 2011 to secure the ousting of Ivory Coast President Laurent Gbagbo who had no intention of respecting the results of the Presidential elections.
AT&T of Mali was in no way a model president. In his years in power contraband and drug trafficking grew exponentially, fueling corruption. The northern part of the country became a sanctuary where Al Qaeda terrorists would hold their Western hostages. This has sunk tourism in the African country with the biggest archaeological heritage in Africa after Egypt. The Libyan crisis has assured a steady supply of arms to both Tuaregs and terrorists
Spain, has two social workers kidnapped in Tinduf ( Algeria) over five months ago.
Terrorism and Al Qaeda is no joke in the region. The region is very poor and development issues are extremely important. Robert Fowler, the Canadian diplomat who was UN representative for Niger and the Tuareg negotiations, was himself kidnapped for 130 days and is quoted as saying that his captors were the most focused group of young men that he has ever encountered in his life. They were relatively well educated and the officers were all Algerian. Their objective is the recreation of the grand caliphate; they hate with passion the concepts of liberty and freedom and democracy, and they look forward to expelling all Westerners, Western influence, from their land. They want to turn the Sahel into one vast, seething, chaotic Somalia.
He concludes that the Terrorists are proud of their spreading links to Boko Haram in Nigeria, they are very proud of their strikes deep into Mauritania, proud of their colleagues in al-Shabab reaching into Kenia and Uganda. Furthermore, now that they are well equipped with both sophisticated, and enormous quantities of Libyan weapons, their threat is much more present. Also a factor is the illegal drug traffic, coming from South America and going to Europe and Asia.
You also have the question of the exploitation of natural resources, which is less of a problem in Mauritania because it is in the middle of the desert, but in Mali, and Niger, the resources lie precisely where the Tuareg communities live.
A recent panel discussion at Chatham House identified three problems: one is the influx of black African refugees from Libya. Many places in northern Niger and Northern Mali are full of refugees;
Second is AQIM (Al Qaeda), which has benefited from the fall of the Kaddafi regime in Libya and the steady flow of weapons. AQIM delivers welfare, much in the same way of Hezbollah in Lebanon, or the radical Islamists in Algeria, or the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt. It brings in social welfare in regions where the state doesn't bring in anything;
The final idea refers to the need to act in support of local initiatives; the problem is that ECOWAS is not functional, and Algeria and Mauritania are not members. You also have regional tensions: Libya, Algeria and Morocco have sometimes used the region as a backyard for their own disputes.
Both for African countries and for Western anti-European countries the main problem is the possible destabilization of the Sahara region.
Two initiatives are interesting: The Joint Headquarters in Tamanrasset, established in 2009 by Algeria, Mali, Niger and Mauritania, which, granted, has not been very efficient. And the second is the EU Strategy for Development and Security in the Sahel.
Mali’s neighbors are justifiably worried that prolonged chaos in the country could lead to the consolidation of the political rebellion and threaten the territorial integrity of the country and, also, of other neighboring States with important Tuareg communities, notably Niger.
To reestablish the constitutional order in Mali will imply handing back power to civilians and since AT&T's mandate was due to end in a few weeks, to proceed to organize free elections, and a new Constitutional government that may be in a position to negotiate some solution to the regional problem with the Tuareg community.
Monday, April 2, 2012
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Syria and the Arab Spring
A recent editorial of the New York Times said that President Bashar Al-Assad of Syria is so willing to kill his people that he could hold on to power for years. I agree.
It also said that some elements of the opposition now risk jeopardizing their cause and further stoking dangerous sectarian animosity if they adopt brutal and illegal tactics. A recent report by Human Rights Watch suggests that some opposition foces are doing just that. It asserted that some units, the Free Syrian Army and other smaller entities, have engaged in human rights abuses including kidnapping, detention and executions of security forces and pro-government militia members.
The Syrian opposition is seriously hampered by internal divisions and confusing messages. I also agree.
The sad truth is that what we so pompously called the Arab Spring is a sad case of permanent chaos. The political, demographic, cultural and tribal dynamics of countries like Egypt, Libya and Syria guarantees that the fall of the established regimes translate not into peace but in War, not in stability but in anarchy, not in liberty but in new and even more sinister forms of oppression.
I am in no way condoning or supporting oppressive regimes of the like of Mubarak, Ghadaffi or Assad, all I am demanding is coherence in the press and the analysts concerning the following three points:
1.- there are no good or bad dictators. If we now demand the demise of the Assad regime in Syria, we should have wished the same when it came to Sadam but we did not do so for many years.
2.- if Assad goes, what we can expect in Syria is an atrocious Civil war, a new Lebanon, and the dismemberment of Syria along ethnic and religious lines.
3.- It is a pathetic ingenuity and illusion to presume that the Arab Islamic world is oriented in any form towards a liberal democracy. If we keep on insisting on this idea we are demonstrating a complete ignorance of what is happening in reality, or worse, a deliberate distortion of the truth with propaganda objectives.
The Butcher Assad is fighting against a " coalition" that includes Washington, European Union, but also Al Qaeda, the Saudi monarchy and Hamas among others. What does the future have in store for Syria with these common enemies?
I don't know, but I have the feeling we are in for even worse scenes than what we have seen up to now.
It also said that some elements of the opposition now risk jeopardizing their cause and further stoking dangerous sectarian animosity if they adopt brutal and illegal tactics. A recent report by Human Rights Watch suggests that some opposition foces are doing just that. It asserted that some units, the Free Syrian Army and other smaller entities, have engaged in human rights abuses including kidnapping, detention and executions of security forces and pro-government militia members.
The Syrian opposition is seriously hampered by internal divisions and confusing messages. I also agree.
The sad truth is that what we so pompously called the Arab Spring is a sad case of permanent chaos. The political, demographic, cultural and tribal dynamics of countries like Egypt, Libya and Syria guarantees that the fall of the established regimes translate not into peace but in War, not in stability but in anarchy, not in liberty but in new and even more sinister forms of oppression.
I am in no way condoning or supporting oppressive regimes of the like of Mubarak, Ghadaffi or Assad, all I am demanding is coherence in the press and the analysts concerning the following three points:
1.- there are no good or bad dictators. If we now demand the demise of the Assad regime in Syria, we should have wished the same when it came to Sadam but we did not do so for many years.
2.- if Assad goes, what we can expect in Syria is an atrocious Civil war, a new Lebanon, and the dismemberment of Syria along ethnic and religious lines.
3.- It is a pathetic ingenuity and illusion to presume that the Arab Islamic world is oriented in any form towards a liberal democracy. If we keep on insisting on this idea we are demonstrating a complete ignorance of what is happening in reality, or worse, a deliberate distortion of the truth with propaganda objectives.
The Butcher Assad is fighting against a " coalition" that includes Washington, European Union, but also Al Qaeda, the Saudi monarchy and Hamas among others. What does the future have in store for Syria with these common enemies?
I don't know, but I have the feeling we are in for even worse scenes than what we have seen up to now.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
North Korea and the Nuclear issue
The People's Republic of Korea has just reached an agreement with the United States:
-it will suspend its long-range missile tests
-it will suspend any uranium enrichment activities
-it will allow IAEA inspectors back into the country to monitor these promises.
In return, the United States will supply 240,000 tons of food aid. The new US representative for North Korea, Ambassador Glynn Davies, has negotiated this agreement and was, until recently, the United States Permanent Representative to the Agency in Vienna.
Another condition is that the Six Party talks should reconvene as soon as possible [USA, China, Japan, Russia, South Korea, and North Korea]. These conversations have been suspended since 2009. If successful, North Korea might be allowed to build small light water reactors limited to the production of electricity.
Two factors are very important to consider in this case. On April 15, North Korea will celebrate the Centennial of the birth of Kim il-Sung, the founder of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. The regime desperately needs food supplies for the festivities, in order to make believe the population that all is well in the country.
The US presidential election in the fall is also an important factor. Washington will most certainly do its best to avert any possible source of conflict in the Far East. Pres. Obama has his plate full with Iran, Syria, Afghanistan, etc.
For someone like myself, witnessing nuclear developments from my seat in the Agency in Vienna, this comment is good news. It is hoped that the months to come will see further progress in one of the major issues in the Agency's safeguards program.
-it will suspend its long-range missile tests
-it will suspend any uranium enrichment activities
-it will allow IAEA inspectors back into the country to monitor these promises.
In return, the United States will supply 240,000 tons of food aid. The new US representative for North Korea, Ambassador Glynn Davies, has negotiated this agreement and was, until recently, the United States Permanent Representative to the Agency in Vienna.
Another condition is that the Six Party talks should reconvene as soon as possible [USA, China, Japan, Russia, South Korea, and North Korea]. These conversations have been suspended since 2009. If successful, North Korea might be allowed to build small light water reactors limited to the production of electricity.
Two factors are very important to consider in this case. On April 15, North Korea will celebrate the Centennial of the birth of Kim il-Sung, the founder of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. The regime desperately needs food supplies for the festivities, in order to make believe the population that all is well in the country.
The US presidential election in the fall is also an important factor. Washington will most certainly do its best to avert any possible source of conflict in the Far East. Pres. Obama has his plate full with Iran, Syria, Afghanistan, etc.
For someone like myself, witnessing nuclear developments from my seat in the Agency in Vienna, this comment is good news. It is hoped that the months to come will see further progress in one of the major issues in the Agency's safeguards program.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
The Fall of (ex) Judge Garzon in Spain
The Left, both Spanish and Worldwide, that defends and worships Garzon, should take good note that the Spanish judge was just found guilty of abusing his power as an investigative judge, thus going against the constitutional rights of a number of those people being investigated by him. Prevaricating is a crime in Spain for Judges and Public officials.
The seven Supreme Court Judges who have found him guilty are, many of them, leftist appointees to the Bench, so it is difficult to argue a political campaign against the ex-Judge.
Worse than this is the ruling by another Supreme Court judge that, despite the irregularities by Garzon when he accepted financing for his extracurricular activities in New York some years ago during a sabbatical year from prominent Spanish banks and other business leaders, he cannot be judged as the “ crimes” have prescribed. The facts the judge considers proven are that, after Garzon returned to his position in Spain, he did not only not disassociate himself from passing judgment on the same people and corporations who had given him money, but that he kept the files for himself and proceeded to acquit them of any charges and then suspended the investigations.
It is true that Garzon gained worldwide popularity when he asked for General Pinochet´s arrest and extradition to Spain in 1998 for crimes against humanity. It is also true that he has leaded for a number of years the principle of universalisation of such crimes.
But none of these activities make his wrong doings merit acquitting him, under the Law or in the eyes of public opinion. This makes editorials like the recent one in the New York Times all the more undignified for such a prestigious paper.
The seven Supreme Court Judges who have found him guilty are, many of them, leftist appointees to the Bench, so it is difficult to argue a political campaign against the ex-Judge.
Worse than this is the ruling by another Supreme Court judge that, despite the irregularities by Garzon when he accepted financing for his extracurricular activities in New York some years ago during a sabbatical year from prominent Spanish banks and other business leaders, he cannot be judged as the “ crimes” have prescribed. The facts the judge considers proven are that, after Garzon returned to his position in Spain, he did not only not disassociate himself from passing judgment on the same people and corporations who had given him money, but that he kept the files for himself and proceeded to acquit them of any charges and then suspended the investigations.
It is true that Garzon gained worldwide popularity when he asked for General Pinochet´s arrest and extradition to Spain in 1998 for crimes against humanity. It is also true that he has leaded for a number of years the principle of universalisation of such crimes.
But none of these activities make his wrong doings merit acquitting him, under the Law or in the eyes of public opinion. This makes editorials like the recent one in the New York Times all the more undignified for such a prestigious paper.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Syria’s crisis is more Strategic than a Human Rights issue
As I write these lines, attacks against the city of Homs in Syria are continuing. This attitude has been boosted by the “ carte blanche” the Regime in Damascus has received from Russia and China, when they both vetoed the United Nations Security Council Resolution on Syria.
Russia’s motives are clear. Syria is an ally since the 70s and remains Russia’s only direct access in the Mediterranean, and its last strong friend in the Middle East. The veto, against the wishes and proposals of the Arab League, the US and the European Union, gives Russia a renewed international presence and promotes their image as a world power, which can resist pressure from all sides.
In last Sunday’s NYTimes, Thomas Friedman has defined Russia in just a few lines. “It has become a “sort-of-but-not-really-country.” Russia today is sort of a democracy, but not really. It’s sort of a free market, but not really. It’s sort of got the rule of law to protect businesses, but not really. It’s sort of a European country, but not really. It has sort of a free press, but not really. Its cold war with America is sort of over, but not really. It’s sort of trying to become something more than a petro-state, but not really.”
Friedman concludes: “the more Putin throws his support behind the murderous dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, the more he looks like a person buying a round-trip ticket on the Titanic — after it has already hit the iceberg. Assad is a dead man walking”.
But there is also another dimension to the crisis in Syria: Iran, and its continuous international expansion, as Charles Krauthammer published recently in the Washington Post. Iran has a net of proxies in the region, like Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Hamas in Gaza. Its influence is growing in Afghanistan and in Iraq, and is diversifying towards Latin America, with Ahmadineyad´s recent tour of Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Cuba.
But Syria remains the most important asset for Iran, as it is the only Arab State openly supportive and allied to Iran in the Middle East. Through Hezbollah in Lebanon, Iran has regained an outpost in the Mediterranean for the first time in over 2.000 years.
But, make no mistake; the tensions between the Arabs and Iran are mainly religious. Iran is the major enemy of Arab countries historically, and remains so today. Arab States are, with the exception of Iraq, mainly Sunnis, while Iran is Shiite. The Assad clan, who belong to a small alaui sect, an offspring of Shiism, rules Syria.
The Syrian crisis is, therefore, not only about democracy and liberty. If Assad’s regime falls, the Arabs would welcome Syria back into the Sunni fold. Turkey has once again changed tack and believes a regime change in Damascus would increase its influence in the area of the former Ottoman Empire.
Finally, Iran would be forced, together with the impact of the sanctions on its nuclear program, to retreat from the Middle East for decades to come. Saudi Arabia on the one side and Israel on the other would certainly not miss them in the region.
For the West, for once, the choice is not between Human Rights and Strategic interests. We can afford to bet on both at the same time. So let us openly support the Arab League in the Syrian issue.
And now the West seems united, but we do have to remember that the Spanish Socialist Government of Zapatero, both with Moratinos and Jimenez as Foreign Minister) supported Assad for a long time, both in the European Union and in the UN and with a trip of support by Trinidad Jimenez to Syria after the riots began. The recent change of government in Spain, with the Partido Popular in power, has not entailed a change in the officials responsible for Syria in the Spanish Foreign Service, who have been confirmed in their positions by the new Minister, but we can hope that Spain will no longer adopt different positions from other partners.
There are therefore, more than the obvious issues at stake in Syria today, and Russia and China are clearly positioned in this conflict of “ ideologies and civilizations” once again. Lest we forget old times…
Russia’s motives are clear. Syria is an ally since the 70s and remains Russia’s only direct access in the Mediterranean, and its last strong friend in the Middle East. The veto, against the wishes and proposals of the Arab League, the US and the European Union, gives Russia a renewed international presence and promotes their image as a world power, which can resist pressure from all sides.
In last Sunday’s NYTimes, Thomas Friedman has defined Russia in just a few lines. “It has become a “sort-of-but-not-really-country.” Russia today is sort of a democracy, but not really. It’s sort of a free market, but not really. It’s sort of got the rule of law to protect businesses, but not really. It’s sort of a European country, but not really. It has sort of a free press, but not really. Its cold war with America is sort of over, but not really. It’s sort of trying to become something more than a petro-state, but not really.”
Friedman concludes: “the more Putin throws his support behind the murderous dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, the more he looks like a person buying a round-trip ticket on the Titanic — after it has already hit the iceberg. Assad is a dead man walking”.
But there is also another dimension to the crisis in Syria: Iran, and its continuous international expansion, as Charles Krauthammer published recently in the Washington Post. Iran has a net of proxies in the region, like Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Hamas in Gaza. Its influence is growing in Afghanistan and in Iraq, and is diversifying towards Latin America, with Ahmadineyad´s recent tour of Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Cuba.
But Syria remains the most important asset for Iran, as it is the only Arab State openly supportive and allied to Iran in the Middle East. Through Hezbollah in Lebanon, Iran has regained an outpost in the Mediterranean for the first time in over 2.000 years.
But, make no mistake; the tensions between the Arabs and Iran are mainly religious. Iran is the major enemy of Arab countries historically, and remains so today. Arab States are, with the exception of Iraq, mainly Sunnis, while Iran is Shiite. The Assad clan, who belong to a small alaui sect, an offspring of Shiism, rules Syria.
The Syrian crisis is, therefore, not only about democracy and liberty. If Assad’s regime falls, the Arabs would welcome Syria back into the Sunni fold. Turkey has once again changed tack and believes a regime change in Damascus would increase its influence in the area of the former Ottoman Empire.
Finally, Iran would be forced, together with the impact of the sanctions on its nuclear program, to retreat from the Middle East for decades to come. Saudi Arabia on the one side and Israel on the other would certainly not miss them in the region.
For the West, for once, the choice is not between Human Rights and Strategic interests. We can afford to bet on both at the same time. So let us openly support the Arab League in the Syrian issue.
And now the West seems united, but we do have to remember that the Spanish Socialist Government of Zapatero, both with Moratinos and Jimenez as Foreign Minister) supported Assad for a long time, both in the European Union and in the UN and with a trip of support by Trinidad Jimenez to Syria after the riots began. The recent change of government in Spain, with the Partido Popular in power, has not entailed a change in the officials responsible for Syria in the Spanish Foreign Service, who have been confirmed in their positions by the new Minister, but we can hope that Spain will no longer adopt different positions from other partners.
There are therefore, more than the obvious issues at stake in Syria today, and Russia and China are clearly positioned in this conflict of “ ideologies and civilizations” once again. Lest we forget old times…
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Sorry
For the past few months I have been totally inactive in this blog. I don´t have many followers anyway, so I do not expect many complaints. I do write on things that interest me, and for the most part, I have been thinking only of myself.
I apologize if I have disappointed anyone, and promise to be more active in the near future.
I apologize if I have disappointed anyone, and promise to be more active in the near future.
The new US Defense Strategy and Europe
The United States has announced a new defense strategy, shifting its main attention from Europe to Asia and the Pacific. Some in Europe consider this to be a disaster, and further proof that the United States is abandoning Europe.
A more balanced approach, however, could lead us to a very different conclusion. In the first place, because after this withdrawal there will still be 60,000 American troops on the European continent. Down from 275,000, true, but a substantial presence nevertheless. Furthermore, Washington has decided to extend their presence in Turkey, Romania and Poland, and the Spanish base of Rota will see the arrival of four new battleships.
The European Union, however, could be expected to have a positive reaction, and deepen its cooperation in foreign and security policy. It would be further desirable to seek a common view of global matters on both sides of the Atlantic.
Of course, at this stage of the game, this will simply not happen, and the only world power with a global strategy will continue to be the United States for a long time to come.
A more balanced approach, however, could lead us to a very different conclusion. In the first place, because after this withdrawal there will still be 60,000 American troops on the European continent. Down from 275,000, true, but a substantial presence nevertheless. Furthermore, Washington has decided to extend their presence in Turkey, Romania and Poland, and the Spanish base of Rota will see the arrival of four new battleships.
The European Union, however, could be expected to have a positive reaction, and deepen its cooperation in foreign and security policy. It would be further desirable to seek a common view of global matters on both sides of the Atlantic.
Of course, at this stage of the game, this will simply not happen, and the only world power with a global strategy will continue to be the United States for a long time to come.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
