The War on Terror continues...

The US strategy in Somalia is both painfully obvious and completely baffling. It would seem to be based on thinking still stuck in the cold war era.

The Islamic courts which brought some semblance of order and stability to many parts of Somalia have been forced into a tactical retreat much like the Taliban in 2001 by US backed Ethiopian forces.

The idea that the American "War on Terrorism" is against a monolithic global network of jihadists is pervasive in Washington. This is not dissimilar to the idea that communists had a network of allies over whom they had absolute ideological control. The American view appears to be that if our enemies have certain factors in common, they are essentially the same enemy. No exceptions permitted or nuance considered. My enemy's friend is my enemy.

Before the Islamic courts took control of most Somalia the country was literally in complete chaos. For decades several warlords had carved the territory into fiefdoms and regularly duelled for territory, resources and pride. The fate of ordinary people was not largely catered for and no effective system of justice was in place and murder, robbery, rape and intimidation were rife as well as an burgeoning industry for assassins carrying reprisal beatings and killings.

The courts brought a system for the people not only to deal with criminality but a system to begin to organise a united country. The main port in Mogadishu had been used as a base for pirates who had frequently attacked international shipping off the horn of Africa. The Islamic Courts made it one of their military objectives to put a stop to this. They essentially provided relative sense of order for the first time since in more than 20 years.

The US has decided to disregard all of this as a matter of policy and back forces opposing this movement based on the premise that some elements of the Islamic Courts appear to share the ideology of al-Qaeda. There are elements of the Islamic Courts movement whose rhetoric causes concern but in my observation they seem to be well reigned in and under control. At first the US attempted to back the warlords responsible for most of the chaos with money and equipment but the disparate warring clans could not unite to present a unitary defence against the Courts movement who were able to overcome them all militarily with increased public support largely due to the American intervention.

The choice of Ethiopia, a long standing enemy of Somalia, a country with whom they have fought a war to proxy for the US in battling the Courts movement and propping up the weak Somali government is equally baffling. This is a government so weak that up till very recently it had to sit in Kenya, a foreign country. For this government to be propped up using foreign troops, particularly Ethiopian will in the very least inflame many Somalis and I cannot see how this government can gain any legitimacy as long as Ethiopian troops are present. The problem is that there is no chance this government can survive 10 minutes in Mogadishu without Ethiopia's backing. I continue to watch with interest.

An attack on British troops in Iraq - Nov 2006

Just before the attack, one of the lead vehicles correctly identifies a threat and warns of "Kamikaze" probably saving lives by giving any exposed rooftop gunners a chance to duck into the vehicle.

The genius of Steven Colbert...

"To Leave Iraq, take the next exit ramp..."

The Iraq war is lost. In my view it was lost the day those scandalous pictures from the Abu Ghraib prison were published.

The window of opportunity for a face saving exit is shutting fast! Since the Congressional elections in America, the political debate in America seems to be shifting from whether or not to "stay the course" or "cut and run" as it were. Now the debate is shifting to when and how to withdraw and disengage. Donald Rumsfeld had been fired. Dick Cheney is largely marginalised. The Neo Con cheerleader troupe has made an about face and is now claiming that the war was a good idea but was just managed badly... TYPICAL BUREAUCRATIC HOGWASH!!

Those of us who opposed this illegal invasion before the fact said that it would lead to chaos and civil war. I remember members of the British government crowing about the success of their venture in 2004. Now thier only recourse in a debate is "...so would you prefer it if Saddam Hussein was still in power?" Having lived under the dark clouds of dictatorship of Sani Abacha's Nigeria in the late 1990s i can say with some authority, YES!! Under Saddam, Iraqis may not have been free but the lines they were not to cross were clearly defined. Now, no one knows if he will be the victim of a suicide bomber in a market place.. or if he will be kidnapped by sectarian militia rife in the police force.. or maybe even just caught in the crossfire between skirmishing neighbourhoods. Life was much more certain and stable under the dictator which is saying something! Bush and Blair have taken a bad situation and turned it into a disaster. Tony Blair is latched on so tight that he may just follow the Bush administration as they "stay the course" right off the edge of the cliff...

THE ONLY LEGACY BUSH AND BLAIR WILL HAVE IS IRAQ. AN ERROR OF JUDGEMENT 100 TIMES WORSE THAN SUEZ!

IDF Response to peaceful protest

Quite frankly, I see Israel's attitude towards the Palestinians to be completely shameful and completely counter productive! There are MANY Israelis who will feel the same. This is not how to make peace! How many of the children hit with stun grenades or rubber bullets will go on to be taken advantage of by those who send suicide bombers?

TAKE AWAY A PEOPLE'S HOPE AND ONLY CHAOS WILL FOLLOW!!

Kramer's a RACIST!!

This is not particularly political but must be a total disappointment for fans for "Seinfeld"...

One reason why I believe I understand why the Israelis react like they do when they are attacked is because they like blacks know what it feels like to be persecuted.

This is like saying to a Jewish person "50 years ago you would have been marching towards the gas chambers!!"

Hateful and oh so disappointing.

This is what torture looks like.

The background to this is that a student at UCLA is approached randomly and asked for ID and he doesn't or can't produce any. For what ever reason, campus police were called. He is asked to leave and agrees to do so after apparently initially refusing. He objects very loudly to the officers grabbing his arm and for some unbeknownst reason he is tazer'd. More than once! About 3 minutes into the video, he is completely limp while the officers repeatedly ask him to stand up. Tazers can do that to you and it is possible to be completely incapacitated for us to 15 minutes after a shock. He cannot or does not comply with the officers and is tazer'd AGAIN sending his legs flying through the air apparently in spasm and he can be heard screaming in pain!!

The students name is Mustapha which may or may not be relevant. I'll leave you to judge.

Purity of Arms

Here is an excerpt from the Israeli Defence Forces Website (www.idf.il). It is one of their values.

The IDF servicemen and women will use their weapons and force only for the purpose of their mission, only to the necessary extent and will maintain their humanity even during combat. IDF soldiers will not use their weapons and force to harm human beings who are not combatants or prisoners of war, and will do all in their power to avoid causing harm to their lives, bodies, dignity and property.

I have to say I find it difficult to see how they can argue that this has been adhered to in their recent operations in the Gaza Strip.

Bush Whacked

At last enough there are enough Americans that are not going to let their legitimate fear of terrorism be taken advantage of.

The Republicans tried using statements like "...the terrorists would prefer a Democrat victory!" or "...the Democrats position on the war on terror is that the terrorists win and America loses!" to scare people into voting their way. It didn't work.

Checks and balances have been restored to the United States system of government and in less than 24 hours, the first positive sign: Don Rumsfeld is thrown overboard.

I look forward to the hearings and investigations the Democrat Party surely must now instigate.

THE ERA OF THE NEO-CON IS OVER!!

Back to Gaza

A couple days ago, we saw on TV two Palestinian women on a peaceful demonstration shot in the back while running away from the IDF. This shooting reminds me of video from Apartheid South Africa I used to see when i was growing up. We are hear today of and tank shell hitting a civilian house killing 18 more women and children.

It seems anywhere the IDF go, they leave a multitude of innocent dead in their wake. I DO NOT BELIEVE THE CIVILIAN OR MILITARY LEADERSHIP OF THE IDF ORDERS THE TARGETING OF CIVILIANS. They do however seem to encourage a culture of impunity which could and, probably does, lead to indiscipline among the "frontline" troops.

Civilian deaths like these may serve to vindicate extremist propaganda in the eyes of the Arab world. This cannot be good for Israel or peace in general. Israel must find an alternative to this cycle of attack and retaliation they have been stuck in for almost 50 years!

There will be no decisive military victory, no military glory for either side. Israelis cannot continue to revert to "Jewish Paranoia" over the existence of their state. All rational observers can see that there is very little prospect of the State of Israel not existing into the distant future.
The only real threat to the existence of Israel is the loss of American support for which there is also little prospect.

Israel has the ability to make a bilateral peace from a position of strength rather than making excuses and constantly moving unilaterally. It is clear that Israel is not in a conciliatory mood after their recent strategic defeat in Lebanon. Going forward I hope the people of Israel begin to realise that there is not military solution to their unique problem.

DIALOGUE IS THE ONLY WAY TO PEACE AND ISRAELIS WILL NOT KNOW PEACE UNTIL MOST OF THEM REALISE THIS!

How do you solve a problem like Korea?

The biggest problem with sanctions against a country like North Korea is that any ruling regime has access to resources that insulate them from the effects of economic pressures. In countries where governments where governments need to create wealth for many in order to hold on to power, it may be difficult to understand the extent to which some corrupt dictatorships are willing to leave their people impoverished and in poverty in order to accumulate resources and funds for themselves and their cronies. Case in point: Saddam Hussein and his sons living in lavish palaces while Iraqi children died from lack of medicine at the height of sanctions against Iraq.

The North Korean regime has absolutely no regard for the masses in their territory. They allow people to starve while spending untold millions on choreographed mass parades. The only thing that kleptocratic dictatorships care about is the survival of their regime and they often repress opposition and dissent with ruthless human rights abuses.

I do not know what the appropriate censure would be for a regime like Kim Jong-Il’s. It’ll probably take someone smarter than me to figure out what is.

Islamophobic Crusade

Leader of the House of Commons and former British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw recently asserted that he would prefer if Muslim women who come in to his constituency surgery to see him did not wear a veil over their faces. He also said it was his intention to spark a debate as in his view, the veil represents a physical barrier to communication and a symbol of separate identity. While it may be politically astute for Mr Straw to have made these comments, in the wider context, it is UNBELIEVABLY IRRESPONSIBLE for him to have said what he said.

We live in a society where many people are made to feel uncomfortable by scantily clad women and young girls exposing their cleavage, mid-riff and wearing implausibly short skirts. We are not supposed to complain about this and anyone should suggests that these girls may need to cover up is labelled a prude and considered odd. Yet there seems to be a groundswell of support for this move to demonise the veil which is the opposite of everything in this society which seeks to objectify women.

In Islam the veil is meant to preserve a woman’s modesty. In much the same way that not all women are comfortable in low cut tops and mini skirts, some women prefer to be covered up. Not all women are comfortable with being ogled and wolf whistled at. As long as a woman chooses to wear the veil of her own free will then what is the problem? Women should not be compelled to wear a veil but neither should they be compelled to remove it. I think those who claim to be made uncomfortable by the veil are really saying they are uncomfortable around Muslims.

There is not doubt that there has been a rise in anti Muslim feeling in Western Europe and North America since 9/11 and the subsequent terrorist attacks around the world by evil and twisted pseudo-Islamic radicals – the ‘al-Qaeda types’. The reasons for the attacks and the premise of the War on Terror are complex but suffice to say the killing of non combatants is always wrong whether in New York, Gaza, Jerusalem, Sarajevo or Dresden. Violence always begets more violence.

Osama bin Laden and his ilk have been trying to convince disaffected young Muslims that the so called War on Terror is simply a pseudonym for a War on Islam. The government in London and Washington have been trying very hard to refute this saying often that they realise that not all Muslims share the sentiments of al-Qaeda and even if some think their grievances are legitimate, almost none approve of their methods. There are probably more violence prone white racist thugs in the UK or the USA than potential terrorists. Over and over the actions of the British and American governments seem to reinforce the notion that there is a conflict against Islam. I may explore this in detail at a later date but examples are George Bushes choice of the words ‘crusade’ or ‘Islamo-fascist’ and Tony Blair’s assertion that the Muslim community are the ones that need to ‘sort out’ the terrorist threat.

If we are to win the battle of ideas we cannot alienate people to the extent that they are not interested in listening.

Washington Misguided

"The US has a huge hammer in its' military capacity which creates a strong temptation to see every foriegn policy problem it faces as a nail"

-Martin Walker, Editor of the of United Press International English Edition

Here we go again...

Bill Clinton’s remarkable interview on Fox News is a reminder of why he won 2 elections. The contrast with Bush is stark. Even after having lost his temper, Clinton was coherent stating specifics in his efforts to kill Osama Bin Laden. That was Clinton’s A Game!

Now Condi Rice wants us to believe that the Bush administration was just as aggressive as the Clinton’s in facing the threat of terrorism. She also claims that they were not given a plan on how to deal with the threat. Once again, the Bush administration is not on the same side with the facts.

For all those interested in truth and facts, watch this clip:

http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=6d59cc85-6335-4cd1-b772-eaf924103673&f=&fg=email

Terrorism 101: The Spectacular

Terrorism is a common tactic in, though not exclusive to asymmetric warfare. It is warfare on the cheap. It is a tactic as old as warfare itself. The Ancient Romans had specialised teams of shock troops whose job it was inflict mass casualties on helpless civilians, in effect acts of terrorism. Groups like the Irgun in Palestine and Nelson Mandela’s ANC have used acts which could be described as terrorism against what they would consider an unjust or incorrect political situation. Terrorism is in effect, like warfare, politics by other mostly violent means.

While Al Qaeda’s resources and resourcefulness are considerable, its’ means of delivering its’ warfare is limited by the vastly greater resources of their main enemy, the United States. It therefore has to maximize the effectiveness of whatever resources it brings to play. ”The Spectacular” is a type of terrorist attack devised by al-Qaeda which involves a highly visible mass casualty operation almost always on soft targets which captures the imagination of both its’ followers and its’ victims. For the victims it creates a sense of vulnerability and insecurity. For the followers these attacks are meant to inspire and create a sense of progress in the struggle as well as a sense of staying in the fight. It may also serve toinspiring some to immitate and also seek "martyrdom in jihad".

5 years ago today, on the 11^th of September 2001 the attack on the North East of the United States of America proved to be a near perfect example of the Spectacular, successfully executed to devastating effect. On that morning four planes were hijacked. The world had never experienced a suicidal high jacking of an airliner and so at first reacted in a typically sluggish manner. One plane is flown into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. Only one camera just happens to capture the impact. The stage is set. The impact is significant enough to attract the interest of the news media, more and more of whom had begun running live feeds as the significance of the event becomes clearer. Several video cameras are now trained onto the towers. Suddenly as if from out of nowhere, a second passenger plane descends at full throttle towards Lower Manhattan. The plane crashes, passengers and all, into the South Tower in a huge ball of smoke and fire with the whole world watching live! For anyone who has ever been in plane or in a tall building the prospect was bone chilling. Yet it was achieved by 19 operatives on suicide missions armed with box cutters. They manage to execute the ultimate sucker punch. As a secondary benefit, the attack managed to provoke a massive over reaction by America which has in turn provided a further propaganda coup for al-Qaeda and a vastly more receptive pool of potential recruits.

As a tactic, this particular attack cannot be replicated. Never again will passengers sit idly by during any further hijacking of airliners. If the passengers are not able to subdue the attackers they will probably be sacrificed as a last resort to prevent further casualties on the ground. As a tactic the Spectacular proved its’ worth that day and has been adapted for attacks in Bali, Madrid, London, Beslan, Mumbai and several times in Iraq.

I fear this genie is out of the bottle. My only hope is that the powers that be are up to the strategic challenge of this formidable and dangerous enemy, al-Qaeda.

Resurgent Insurgents

5 years after the Taliban was toppled as the government of Afghanistan the war seems to have restarted. It is now becoming clear that the Taliban was never actually defeated. The Taliban is fighting hard in Afghanistan there have been scores of terrorist attacks since the ill advised declaration of a “War of Terror”. Iran has supplied weapons to Hezbollah in order to attack the main US ally in the region, Israel who incidentally could not dislodge Hezbollah from her northern border despite massive firepower and relentless bombing. Iraq is in flames and fighting a civil war in all but name. Thousands are dead around the world.

At every turn George Walker Bush has proved that he is not a strategic thinker. The reaction to 9/11 has proved almost as dangerous as the terrorists that caused it the only difference being that the terrorists were trying deliberately to cause devastation while the current US administration has just been inept to put it very mildly.

It is hard to see where all of this will end up. I certainly do not want to live in a Taliban style caliphate but I am not confident that the George Bush is going in the right direction to prevent this.

AMERICA IS CREATING MORE TERRORISTS THAN IT CAN EVER KILL OR CAPTURE!!

Sanctions against Iran? Dont make me laugh!!

In most, if not all, countries of the world in order to enforce laws there are systems and process to identify those who may have committed acts deemed illegal and normally what follows is a punishment of some sort which serves to dissuade the perpetrator from repeating his actions, exacts a retribution for those actions and discourages others from following acting in a similar fashion. While many nations are fair in their application of law, often the systems of trial and punishment are hijacked by questionable regimes and used to terrorise a populace into submission and compliance. Whatever the nature of the regime, the punishment aspect is what gives law enforcement its' bite. It is what actually makes it enforcement rather than a statement of what the state wished people would do. If we move from the micro to the macro environment, an effective way to scale these processes up has yet to be devised. Saddam Hussein is a case in point.

Sanctions against Iraq after the Kuwait invasion and the First Gulf War disproportionately affected the people particularly the poor unconnected people. Saddam Hussein was unconcerned as long as he and his sons could frolic in their lavish palaces and live the good life. When he need more funds, he figured a way around the sanctions by getting around the now infamous "Oil for Food Programme" which was devised to assuage the guilt of Western diplomats who felt at least partly responsible for the death of almost a million Iraqi children. Saddam was unconcerned with the fate of the ordinary Iraqi hence rendering economic sanctions totally useless. Travel bans and targeted sanctions are just as useless as Mugabe proved by attending the Pope's funeral.

I do not know what the solution is but if we are to get a solution in North Korea, Burma (or is that Myanmar), Zimbabwe among other hot spots we as a world need to find an effective way to punish despotic leaders in a way which actually amounts to a genuine punishment that they would care about. In honesty I do not know what the solution is but I can see the problem and if some system is not found, state actors will continue to abuse the rights of their populations and thumb their nose at the international community.

Israel and her Neighbors

After centuries of persecution, pogroms and discrimination culminating with the Nazi holocaust, I can completely understand the bunker mentality that still prevails in Israel to this day.

Finally after so many centuries, the Jews can have thier own state... And people can say whatever they want about the Jews and money... the truth is they all seem to know what to do with it when they have it and have built themselves a gem of a homeland. I do not begrudge them this.

My problem is thier attitude towards thier neighbors. Now, I acknowledge that there are many in the region who would like to "wipe Israel off the map" as the saying goes. I do believe however that there are moderates all around, even within the groups dimissed as terrorists who accept the reality that Israel is going nowhere and cannot be forced into any action it does not wish to take. The assertion that Israel will not talk till thier right to exist is recognised to me seems ridiculous. Any challenge to Israels' right to exist in reality can only be rhetorical, a starting point for negotiations from which compromise can be reached and I am certain that the every Palestinian, Syrian and Lebanese thinking person knows this to be true. For Israel to set a precondition for final status negotiations is, in my view, just plain stupid as it leaves the agenda at the mercy of the rejectionists and extremists on both sides.

There is no shooting solution to Israels final status, no great victory to be had. In the end, as history has taught us, the only solution to these issues is dialogue and compromise. If Israel continues to refuse to talk more Israeli's and Palestinians will die.

One more thing why does the settlement building policy of Israel seem so much like the Nazi policy of Lebensraum?

European Imperial History

From the countless African wars to both of the world wars fought in the first half of the last century, the roots of many conflicts in today's world can be traced back to policies of, and decisions taken by the European "Empires".

There is a school of thought in some parts of Africa that the former imperial masters deliberately left behind states that had no hope of success in order to delay the industrial development of what could be rival nations in the future. I am not convinced that was the case but the other alternatives are blind arrogance or complete ignorance. Ethnic groups were often divided up placed on opposite sides of national borders while being trapped inside national borders with ethnic rivals. India and Pakistan I think are the starkest example of the latter. In West Africa, the Yoruba speaking people are spread across Nigeria, Togo, Benin and there are even some in Ghana. The borders drawn in the Middle East after the fall of the Ottoman Empire have been the direct cause of thousands of death from Israel to Iraq.


While the European people cannot be held accountable for what thier ancestors did, most still benefit from the results. If the current prosperity of Europe came off the back of others whose lives were diliberately or inadvertently messed up as a result, it is not unreasonable to expect that at least some lingering injustices are resolved. I hope to go into these into more detail as time goes by...