Mali: This is What We've Done
This is the consequence of our intervention in Libya:
Mali's junta brushed off calls to give up power on Tuesday as world powers sounded the alarm and Islamists tightened their grip on the north, ordering women to wear veils in storied Timbuktu.
Feeling the bite of mounting sanctions and pressure from all sides, the soldiers who seized power on March 22 proposed a national meeting on Thursday and dispatched a team to Nigeria for talks on an exit from the growing crisis.
Since the coup, ostensibly over the government's failure to stamp out a northern rebellion, the junta has lost over half the country's territory – an area the size of France – in a matter of days to the rebel juggernaut.
Islamists seized control of the ancient trading hub Timbuktu over the weekend alongside Tuareg rebels and have since chased out their allies and declared to residents and religious leaders that they were imposing sharia law.
This is the direct consequence of NATO's intervention in Libya. This shouldn't an afterthought. This should be the top of the news.
We did this.
- Comment (30)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Sep '11
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Maybe so. When you get rid of a dictator like Saddam or Gaddafi, you create massive instability. It's the price you pay. Except that the people who actually pay are the ones who were paying while those monsters were in power.
From what I read this morning, the Tuareg rebels (who have been in rebellion for years) are not Islamists, and are putting up a fight against al-Quaeda (for it is they, and they have been in Algeria all this time, regrouping, without us apparently being terribly bothered).
Yes, it is bad that a democratically elected government is ovetthrown by a military coup. But Mali has a long and troubled history, with slavery openly practised. The country hasn't been at peace. If the Tuareg carve out a territory for themselves, that isn't the end of the world. Having fought all these years, I can't see them just handing it over to al-Quaeda. Let's see what happens.
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Qaeda using Mali crisis to expand:
We're seeing what happens already.
Oct '10
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Ah, the Arab Spring. By intervening anywhere in this part of the world, apparently we're either propping up totalitarian secular dictators or aiding totalitarian Islamist insurgents. Either way we lose.
Sep '11
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Claire,
I will confess that Mali isn't among the countries in Africa to which I pay much attention.
I don't see how or why this is directly related to NATO's "kinetic intervention" (or whatever they called it) in Libya. Could you connect the dots?
Oct '10
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Claire Berlinski, Ed.: Qaeda using Mali crisis to expand:
This must not be a terribly high bar. The ousted president Toure was only the second 'democratically' elected head of state since a military coup ousted the one-party leader in 1991 and, after a year or so held elections. The Chairman of the Transitional Committee for the Salvation of the People in '91-'92? Why, Toure, of course.
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
This explains it pretty well. Basically, the Libyan regime's collapse prompted a spike in weapons trafficking, which allowed al-Qaida and the Tuareg rebels to get their hands on sophisticated weapons and ammunition stolen from Libyan army depots. Thanks to Qaddafi the Tuareg had a lot of combat experience. After Qaddafi fell they flooded back to the Sahel and initiated a rebellion in northern Mali, which in turn led to the coup--and this is apt to spread to Mauritania and Niger. It's about the worst imaginable outcome.
Apr '11
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
The birth of a Tuareg (Toureg) homeland?
Since 1916 there have been at least five Tuareg rebellions.
AZAWAD
"The area is notorious for banditry and drug smuggling. The area is believed to contain a great deal of potential mineral wealth, including petroleum and uranium."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azawad
"(Tuareg) Men also begin wearing a veil at age 25 which conceals their entire face excluding their eyes. This veil is never removed, even in front of family members. Women are not veiled. Tuareg belong to the Maliki sect of Islam, resulting from the teachings of the great prophet, El Maghili, who came among them in the early 16th century."
Are the Tuaregs and Al Qaeda in an alliance of convenience? The Tuaregs don't look much like orthodox Sunnis.
Further, this is just another example of N. African and Muslim devolution as the various centers fail and cannot hold. Egypt is edging towards breakup, Syria towards sectarian warfare. The Kurds are working on their own homeland. My bet is there will be continued conflict and devolution unless an historic strongman steps forward.
http://www.mnlamov.net/english/93-the-renewal-of-armed-struggle-in-azawad.html
Edited on April 4, 2012 at 4:28pmNov '10
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
"We did this."
I get the impression "we"--whoever that is (does it include me?)--did not act entirely alone, but that "they"--whoever they are (does it exclude me?)--had something to do with it too.
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Aodhan:"We did this."
I get the impression "we"--whoever that is (does it include me?)--did not act entirely alone, but that "they"--whoever they are (does it exclude me?)--had something to do with it too. · 15 minutes ago
That will be small comfort when a state the size of France controlled by al Qaeda does what a state controlled by al Qaeda may be expected to do.
Sep '11
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Claire,
Qaddafi maintained his rule by using Taureg mercenaries. When he was deposed, the Tauregs went home. Taking their (Qaddafi-supplied) weapons with them.
Let's consider the alternatives:
No intervention:
Intervention:
I will grant that Al Qaeda in the Maghreb may well have provided funds, food, ammo, and more weapons. But I would think that any conceivable outcome in Libya--good or bad--was going to result in substantially improving the weaponry of the Tuareg.
The colonial African pseudo-nations are dissolving--the borders, governments, and institutions of their European colonists are disappearing. That has happened in Somalia; it's happening now in western Africa; it has happened to a lesser degree in central Africa.
This is the devolution of European colonialism. Deeply saddening--but not something for which I feel the need to put on a hair shirt.
Nov '10
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
I am no more thrilled by the prospect of Malian Islamification than you are Claire.
What exactly do you mean by "We did this"? Are you distributing responsibility? If so, across whom exactly, and on what basis?
I personally feel I am entirely independent of this intervention--that I neither did it, nor was it done to me.
Do you take a different view?
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
Aodhan:"We did this."
I get the impression "we"--whoever that is (does it include me?)--did not act entirely alone, but that "they"--whoever they are (does it exclude me?)--had something to do with it too. · 15 minutes ago
That will be small comfort when a state the size of France controlled by al Qaeda does what a state controlled by al Qaeda may be expected to do. · 8 minutes ago
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
John Murdoch: Claire,
Qaddafi maintained his rule by using Taureg mercenaries. When he was deposed, the Tauregs went home. Taking their (Qaddafi-supplied) weapons with them.
Let's consider the alternatives ...
Among the alternatives: Recognize that involvement in this situation or any situation like this demands a massive commitment to post-conflict stabilization, in the absence of which complete regional destabilization is likely--a lesson that has been amply demonstrated in the past decade in Iraq and Afghanistan. At the very least, someone should have anticipated--many did anticipate--the problem of controlling Libya's borders and stanching the flow of weapons.
It's easy to say, "Well, that's not our problem." Except now it is. It's easy to say, "Well, the region would have gone up in flames anyway." Perhaps. But we certainly poured fuel on the fire.
Feb '11
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Yes, let us all become extremely worried and spend countless billions when a landmass the size of France with no water falls into the hands of al Qaeda. In this land, there are several thousand people because the area has no water and can support no people. The people are salt traders, camel and goat herders. By all means, become very, very worried.
You will only be worried if you think the US is and should be policeman of the world.
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Aodhan:
What exactly do you mean by "We did this"? Are you distributing responsibility? If so, across whom exactly, and on what basis?
We all share a responsibility for the things our democratically-elected government does. None of us are individually powerful enough to influence the decision to go to war, but when our country does, and when something like this happens, it should be cause for some serious national introspection. We can't just say "Whoops, seems we may have destabilized half of Africa and brought al Qaeda to power in Mali--and God knows where, next!" and shrug.
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Or if you think Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb has just established a rogue state where Mali used to be, which is about as serious a threat to European security as might be imagined. Libya's on the verge of disintegration, Niger is threatened, Mauritania, Algeria and Cote d'Ivoire might be affected, and it is very easy to see the US getting drawn in out of necessity this time, rather than on R2P grounds. It's really looking like the worst-case scenario.
Jan '11
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Things could always be worse I suppose.
I do not comprehend the full extent of my ignorance regarding foreign policy. Nevertheless I fail to see why a Ron Paul approach to foreign affairs would not be an improvement over existing policies.
Carry a big stick and don't be afraid to use it.
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Yeah...ok.: Things could always be worse I suppose.
I do not comprehend the full extent of my ignorance regarding foreign policy. Nevertheless I fail to see why a Ron Paul approach to foreign affairs would not be an improvement over existing policies.
I'm leaning more and more that way myself. To hell with them all.
Sep '11
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Algeria have dealt ruthlessly with Islamists over the years. The al-Quaeda group who have moved into Mali are small in number. The Tuareg rebellion has been going on for ages. The men cover their faces because they ride camels in the desert. The women don't, but are also veiled. It doesn't make them Islamists. It makes no sense at all for the Tuareg to roll over and let al-Quaeda control the territory they have been fighting for for so long.
Like Saddam, Gaddafi had to go.
And I don't take at face value *anything* that the French do or say in or about Africa. 'Perfide' is the word for them.
May '10
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Would a Republican President have done the same? I wouldn't be surprised.
I was against intervention in Libya. But I don't see how America or NATO can improve the situation now. Even if we bear some responsibility for how this turned out, would it be responsible to intervene now for the goal of stability without reasonable likelihood of success?
Sep '11
Re: Mali: This is What We've Done
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
John Murdoch:
Let's consider the alternatives ...
Among the alternatives: Recognize that involvement in this situation or any situation like this demands a massive commitment to post-conflict stabilization, in the absence of which complete regional destabilization is likely.... At the very least, someone should have anticipated...the problem of controlling Libya's borders and stanching the flow of weapons.
What borders?
Libya, Algeria, Mali, Niger, and Chad all border the desert. The southern border of Libya makes the U.S. -Mexican border look like the Iron Curtain.
That territory is populated by the Tuareg. They have been fighting against (largely French) colonial regimes and colonial borders for over a hundred years.
This is part of the devolution of European colonialism: the arbitrary lines (literally) drawn in the sand by the Europeans are being re-drawn by the people who actually live there. Sending in a "massive commitment to post-conflict stabilization" to re-establish French colonial borders in the name of defeating Al Qaeda seems to be an extremely long stretch.
Might not engagement with the Tuareg, and re-defining some borders to reflect the actual ethnic/tribal areas make more sense?