Great article from Al Jazeera
. It discusses how Al Qaeda are increasing their foothold in Mali with money, and how they have been doing so for over ten years - with the apparent support and encouragement of the Mali government.
Going into more detail about that, it also states how the recently ousted president let AQIM into the country and allowed them to use it as a base for kidnapping people from other countries, in exchange for some of the ransom money and in the hopes that they would damage the MNLA. He also allowed drug runners ply their trade in exchange for kickbacks and even courted them in the presidency.
Everything's alleged but the evidence is pretty strong. You can understand why the military ousted him. It's shocking reading.
EDIT: That said, I'm not finding these allegations anywhere else, though I've only just started searching. Maybe I'm giving Al Jazeera too much credit? What do others think?
edited 31st Dec '12 2:52:59 AM by betaalpha
Al-Jazeera is known to have picked a side and pushed for it before. I don't know if they've been caught lying but if you compare their reports on topics like Israel or the MB in Egypt to that of British, French or American sources you can tell that, while all of these sources do pick sides, some are much more blatant about it than others. (Of course there's also loads of variation between the sources of any country you care to name, but that's not the point.)
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.It seems all of Bamako's playing for time and dithering has finally had a bad effect. AQIM/Ansar Dine have launched an offensive and taken the forward most checkpost of the Malian Army. They've retreated to the garrison town nearest to Mopti, which is right at center of the bow-tie shape that is Mali. If the rebels take the fight to the garrison town, and they win, Mopti's done.
For the Malian Army, this is basically proof positive to the international community that they can't do jack, which is bad because all intervention strategies involved using them as the main force.
Indeed. At least the Mali government sent a letter asking for help, so that indicates less of a "Just give us support, we can handle this" mentality. It sounds like the military were barely making any attempt to defend the village considering its strategic value. (Not to insult those few soldiers that were present and lost their lives to awful leadership).
I'm pretty disgusted that the world is taking so little interest in the fact that Al Qaeda and its allies are creating another Afghanistan. This is an astounding victory for religious, kidnapping-fueled despotism and warlordism. Just 3000 troops?
edited 11th Jan '13 12:39:00 AM by betaalpha
The French are showing interest. The President of France has stated that they are willing to help.
"France, like its African partners, cannot accept this. I have decided that France will respond, alongside our African partners, to the request from the Malian authorities.
"We will do it strictly within the framework of the United Nations Security Council resolution. We will be ready to stop the terrorists' offensive if it continues." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-20986704
And another update: Hollande has confirmed that troops are already in Mali providing support
. Nice one France. At the very least it should give the Mali military a much-needed morale boost which may stop them losing more towns to the militants. I'd like the EU to follow their lead.
edited 11th Jan '13 10:17:12 AM by betaalpha
BBC take on this issue:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-20991723
Seems like the French are really taking this one seriously. They have moved along a lot since this abomination:
Weeeeelll... the Crusades were fought for all sorts of reasons, but I'll not go any further into that. AQIM are reaching with that silly quote anyway. A crusader intervention? What the bloody hell's that? Evil Christians sweeping into the country to... support one group of Muslims in overthrowing an invasion by another group of Muslims?
One would hope that AQIM have lost much of their credibility in any event by being financed by drug runners and kidnapping, but that might be a bit forlorn. Their threat towards France's sons is hollow too - we're pretty sure Al Qaeda would threaten France and every other Western country no matter what it did.
France is really stepping up in general interventions in the West Africa/North Africa region. They were the ones who pushed hardest for the Libyan mission, too, except in Mali ground troops are also involved. Pushing out AQIM is a definite good thing, don't get me wrong, but it's never too early to ask what the French force's long-term goal is. Stable democratic Mali government? Good luck with that; they'll need it. Otherwise: driving AQIM out of Mali? Reduction of separatist threat and reconciliation? Or something more or less than that? Something tells me that unless some kind of long-term settlement is reached with the Tuaregs (and said settlement, to be acceptable by them, would necessarily involve the Mali government swallowing some bitter pills), we'll see the perfect environment for the i word to take place in, and nobody wants to do counterinsurgency.
Charlie Stross's cheerful, optimistic predictions for 2017, part one of three.When the French really get their asses in gear in a military intervention, you really really don't want to be on the opposing side. Ever heard of what they did in Kolwezi?
^^ The long-term French goal? More or less retaining the influence they have in the region, more or less colonialism without explicitly owning the countries there as colonies.
(I will, however, grant that such is still a fairly large step up from AQIM rule.)
[edit]
For the record, I'm not saying that France looking out for its own interests is necessarily wrong. That's part of the idea behind forming a nation in the first place. I'm just saying to keep it in mind.
edited 12th Jan '13 4:46:38 AM by Nohbody
All your safe space are belong to TrumpThe question is, how long will France able to keep fighting in Mali? Hollande faces many domestic problems and such interventions are not very popular at home for various reasons, the most important seems to be the financial crisis. Hollande probably hopes to end this soon but nobody can predict how things will turn out. Many things are still unclear, like for example how good organized the official army of Mali really is. A few weeks ago they were described as relativly competend and now they look even worse than many experts feared. Maybe (hopefully) it is Libya 2.0 but it could also develop into a second Syria.
edited 12th Jan '13 6:35:13 AM by Zarastro
Whoever said the Malian Army was competant, post-coup, was delusional.
EDIT- I don't think Mali will be truely settled til the Tuareg are taken seriously and what is agreed to is actually implemented, as Sabre said. So this will be neither Libya nor Syria, because the problem is simpler politically speaking than Syria but not as straight forward as Libya was.
edited 12th Jan '13 10:38:57 AM by FFShinra
Right. When I asked about their long-term goals, I meant in the context of when to declare victory. Above everything, foreign military interventions must have a clear goal; unless the French government can articulate that goal, they're potentially setting themselves up for a long, nasty, and protracted counterinsurgency campaign. In the words of David Petraeus, "tell me how this ends:" would the French be satisfied with a temporary cease-fire? Would they require that the Tuareg problem be settled for once and all? And would they settle for just pushing AQIM out of Mali, bearing in mind that without controlled borders, fighting transnational movements is like trying to grasp a stream of water? Or do they want to hit AQIM hard in whatever neighboring sanctuaries they might established six months or a year down the line?
All of those have different preconditions. Some are much more difficult to achieve than others, and would require a longer-term investment of blood and treasure. How much do the French want to invest? Unless the French know that, this could be either a short-term, relatively peaceful affair, or else a protracted, bloody campaign.
Charlie Stross's cheerful, optimistic predictions for 2017, part one of three.Well, it's having some knock-on effects: Hollande steps up France security over Mali and Somalia
, and Britain to send two military transport planes to assist Mali operation
.
edited 12th Jan '13 2:36:07 PM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling OnThe article I saw about this on the BBC quoted French officials (or it could've been Hollande) saying that France thinks that letting Mali become a safe haven for terrorists is more dangerous than participating in an intervention; that the advance of Ansar Dine further South must be stopped at once; and that France is in this "as long as necessary."
There's no general concensus on what constitutes "necessary" involvment in something like this so the French could declare the operation a success at the first sign of victory, no matter how temporary or small. With the other quotes, the suggested definition of the minimum goal becomes something like "Ansar Dine's advance has been stopped and the North of Mali has reached a point where it will not become a safe haven for terrorists." To me it seems that the French have set their goal at driving out Ansar Dine from all of Mali at least to an extent where it won't be among the key players there, or where the government is more in control of the whole country than Ansar Dine.
I don't know how strong the military of Mali is compared to Ansar Dine and its affiliates, so I won't comment on which one of them would win in a war where neither was willing to retreat. With backing from the AU (and at least some Western powers,) I would assume that the scale would be tipped in the current, "Southern" government's favour.
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.I see this intervantion as an overall possitive thing.
It would be better if the African Union got involved do...
They shot down a French airplane... or so they claim. They have probably very good equipment, many of which would be sophisticated and quite up to date. The black mnarket for weapons its thriving in North Africa after the implosion of Lybia after all.
edited 12th Jan '13 5:14:18 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.

edited 23rd Dec '12 5:03:35 PM by MalagasyParrot