Mali: six weeks on

Six weeks after the intervention of European troops, Harry Parkhouse dissects the conflict in Mali.

I am writing this exactly six weeks after François Hollande agreed, at the request of the Malian government, to provide military assistance to the struggling Malian forces combatting what can only be described as a horde of serious, fanatical Islamist belligerents. At such a time the inevitable questions regarding the supposed legitimacy of Western involvement tend to rear their quivering heads. Moreover, fears of prolonged occupation, that have been conjured and propagated by the experiences of Iraq and Afghanistan, emerge in tangent. Paranoia aside, it is prudent to be frank when looking at the success and moral justification of French and, recently British, forces fighting amongst the chaos.

French armoured fighting vehicles leave the airbase at Gao in northern Mali last week. Picture credits: jeromestarkey

The adversaries cannot be said to be an organised monolithic group; there are various competing Islamist and nationalist factions all seeking to impose their own, often-brutal ideology onto the Malian people. The National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad, or simply the ‘MNLA’, a nationalist separatist group fighting for the implementation of an independent secular state for the nomadic peoples known as the Taureg, cannot now be said to be the main threat to the region – in the last week they have actually started fighting against other Islamist factions in cooperation with the French. This appellation should be given to Ansar Dine, the predominant Islamist sect that since last June has not only gained more and more territory from the government as well as from the MNLA, but also done it a way that epitomises both wanton cruelty and hysterical absurdity. The smashing of TV sets that were displaying ‘un-Islamic’ images (video games, for example) or the desecration of mausoleums in Timbuktu serve as exemplars of the latter – things that can be begrudgingly put to one side in times of war as ascriptions of a frantic religious neurosis. The former examples, however, demand our international attention and rectification. From the blocking of aid trucks to Timbuktu due to the presence of female aid workers, to the public floggings, amputations, executions and stoning across various towns in Northern Mali. Such wartime atrocities, whilst obviously reprehensible, still for some does not justify intervention as hey, all fair’s in love and war?

There is a banal point here, however. These crimes against humanity are self-evidently not simply wartime tragedies or realpolitik tactics of warfare, but the end in itself for the extremist Islamic movement in northern Mali. In other words, to use such an obvious metaphor, they are just warming up. Aggressive implementation of Sharia law, which can only further worsen the already destitute position of the people of Mali, has long been an open goal for the coalition of the “Defenders of Faith” as they call themselves. This would not only significantly vitiate the lives of many men and many more women in Mali, but it also would demonstrate to extremist Islamic militias across the north of the African continent that successful Islamic revolution is a possibility due to the inefficiency of under-funded and under-trained African militaries and the supposed moral apathy of the West to intervene in such affairs. Hollande grasped this simple point, and as such the will to act on the moral calling that necessitates French intervention. I am glad that now, the UK has also sent servicemen and servicewomen to help combat the threat of state-sponsored theocratic immorality and subjugation in Mali.

The crowd welcomes ‘the saviour’, Francois Hollande. Picture credits: salymfayad

As is stands, with the ever-increasing frequency of Islamist retreat across the north and the genesis of successful discourse and cooperation with the MNLA, progress is being made in Mali. This would have not been made a reality without the French and British intervention that was mandated by both Mali and the international community. Lengthy occupation will not be a risk either – the Malian forces, as well as the infrastructure of the Malian government are being re-strengthened day by day through military and political assistance from the international community. Rash and unsubstantiated claims of Western imperialism or oil hoarding have been clearly shown to have no relevance in Mali. Instead the proprietors of suggested falsities are demonstrating effective military engagement with minimal casualties against adversaries who, if given the key to Bamako, would be in a position to effectively promulgate the caliphate of immorality across northern Africa. These points justify why this conflict is one of central importance, not just for western security, but more importantly for ensuring the freedom of the people of Mali and other North African nations from rampant oppression.

North Africa: a region on the rocks?

Arthur der Weduwen looks at the Algerian Hostage Crisis and the militant situation in North Africa and asks if the Western world needs to change its approach to this long-overlooked region.

The Algerian hostage crisis kept international news occupied for well over a week. Miscommunications, misinformation, and all-round speculation on the nature of the hostages, their captivity, and their lives were broadcast around the world. One thing that was certain was the identity of the hostage-takers, and their leader, Mokhtar Belmokhtar, whose mission is to drive the infidels out of the North African desert.The motive of the attack was made clear by Belmokhtar: it was a just repercussion for the French invasion of Mali that had started only days earlier. This explanation was valid, but not truthful. Intelligence has now shown that the attack was well-planned, organised, and was due to take place regardless of any foreign intervention in Mali.

What does this say about the current situation in the Sahara? It is well-known that Al-Qaeda affiliated groups have been gaining ground in the North African desert. This has been a gradual trend, increasing over time as militants have been recruited and trained in Mauritania, Niger, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Chad, and Mali. Most incidents have thus far stayed limited to the hostage-taking of European or American individuals, especially French. These have been exchanged for sums of money that have enabled the ‘freedom-fighters’ to recruit more men and acquire more weapons.

All photo credits to Calsidyrose.

What has the international response been to this threat? This is where opinions collide. Groups like the Boko Haram, operating in Nigeria, have been fighting against the Nigerian government for many years without foreign intervention. This pattern has been similarly followed in different countries. Up until this year, the Malian government was fighting the insurgents alone, and Algerian and Libyan governments have done the same for many years.

The gaze of the West is ever East, a saying that is as true today as it was a thousand years ago. The USA and its European allies have largely maintained their eyes on Iraq and Afghanistan, giving weary looks to Iran as well. Meanwhile, the insurgency in North Africa has grown, and the West has grown unaccustomed to the warfare waged in the Saharan desert heat.

This is evident in the wide international disarray that occurred during and following the hostage crisis. Algeria took immediate response. They have experienced hostage crises before, and have a strict policy. No negotiations with ‘terrorists’. This caused outrage with the governments of Britain and Japan, who felt that the Algerian approach was irresponsible and the cause of much collateral damage. I, however, am sympathetic to the Algerian approach. The West is not bothered if Algerians are taken hostage and three dozen Algerians die when the Algerian government chooses not to inform them. However, as soon as Westerners are involved, the West dictates its presence and mandatory consultancy. Regardless of whether the Algerian response was right, it seems that the West needs to reconsider its North African position.

As always, some questions need to be asked. What is going to happen to France’s invasion of Mali? At the moment of writing, French troops have taken the city of Goa and will be encroaching Timbuktu soon. It seems that the superior firepower of the European-AU force will succeed in driving out the Islamists insurgents. For now.

France has pledged to leave once they have ‘liberated’ Mali. The current Malian government does not seem strong enough to contain the insurgent threat, and there is a great possibility that there will be another uprising if the French and the AU force leave. Moreover, the displacement of the Islamist insurgency will simply cause a crisis in another unstable Saharan country – Chad, or Libya, for example. The irrelevance of the artificial borders in the desert, combined with weak governments, will only facilitate this process.

What can thus be done to prevent another crisis like the hostage situation in Algeria, or the brutal regime installed by the Islamists in the North of Mali? It is difficult to say. The Islamist challenge is rooted deep within society, and is not eliminated by a foreign invasion, perhaps even strengthened in the long term. If the West seeks to prevent future crises, they must provide a healthy degree of support to the local governments. Poverty and incompetent regimes breed support for alternative methods of government, so to strengthen the authority of the pro-Western regimes in power would be an effective method of containment. However, this has been done in the past, and has led to regimes like that of Mubarak in Egypt, which has now been overthrown in the Arab Spring.

Therefore, the West needs to ask itself whether it wants more Mubaraks to emerge, or whether they want true democracy in the Sahara – even if this leads to states with an anti-West, extreme-Islamist agenda. It is no easy dilemma.

Nigeria take AFCON spoils

Ghana taking on Cameroon. Photo credits to Jake Brown

Nigeria won their third Africa Cup of Nations trophy as they beat Burkina Faso 1-0 on Sunday 10^th February.

Nigeria progressed to the final of the competition after demolishing Mali 4-1 in the semi-final.  This fixture saw the Super Eagles go into the dressing room at half time 3-0 up, with tournament top scorer Emenike notching the third goal of the game, taking his tally for the competition to four (though he would later go on to miss the final through injury).

Diarra scored a consolation goal in the 75^th minute to return the deficit to three but Nigeria comfortably held on, and the ease with which they dispatched their opponents showed the intent and desire of a side that did not want to suffer a similar fate to their Ivory Coast rivals, who had gone into the tournament as favourites but bowed out in the quarter finals.

The Super Eagles’ opposition in the final, Burkina Faso, had never won on foreign soil in the Africa Cup of Nations and had never qualified for a World Cup, but it was unlikely to be a walkover – the two sides met in the group stages, where the game finished 1-1.

The Burkinabe Étalons took on Ghana in a semi-final full of controversial refereeing decisions.  The referee, Slim Jedidi, waved away Burkina Faso’s claims for what looked like a stonewall penalty, before awarding Ghana a very dubious spotkick, with Atsu going down after challenging for an aerial ball.  Later in the game Jedidi sent off Burkina Faso’s Pitroipa (who went on to be named the player of the tournament), though the referee later apologised for making mistakes throughout the game, and the Burkinabe star midfielder was allowed to play in the final after the red card was rescinded.

The match went into a penalty shootout after the two sides were tied at 1-1 after extra time, and the shootout started in the worst possible fashion for the Ghanaian Black Stars, with Vorsah scuffing his kick horribly wide.  Two more Ghanaian misses followed, and Burkina Faso sealed a memorable 4-2 shootout victory.

The final itself was a hard-fought contest in which Nigeria always seemed on track to victory, though it took a moment of brilliance from Sunday Mba to separate the two teams.  A shot rebounded to the Nigerian midfielder in the 40^th minute, and he cleverly flicked the ball up over Mohamed Koffi before poking the ball into the far corner, sending the Super Eagles’ fans into delirium.

It was a game that showcased some of Nigeria’s greatest international performers – Chelsea duo Mikel and Moses both hit excellent form for their country over the course of the competition and were decisive in seeing their nation win their first AFCON since 1994.  Although Burkina Faso threatened on occasions, they never really looked like challenging their opponents, and Burkinabe coach Paul Put admitted that his team ‘showed Nigeria a bit too much respect in the first half’, before adding that ‘the whole of Burkina Faso can be proud of their players’.

Many critics will remember the 2013 edition of the tournament for its poor playing surfaces, unreliable refereeing and unsold tickets, but the tournament offered fans enough excitement to make up for the problems that it experienced.  While Burkina Faso put in a brilliant effort to finish runners-up in their best ever Africa Cup of Nations, the title goes to a strong Nigeria side fittingly managed by the outspoken Stephen Keshi, who captained Nigeria to their previous AFCON title 19 years ago.

Tim Hellyer

Africa Cup of Nations semis take shape

Joint top scorer Emmanuel Emenike, pictured playing for Spartak Moscow. Photo credits to Wikimedia Commons

This year’s Africa Cup of Nations has seen holders Zambia knocked out in the group stages and tournament favourites Ivory Coast beaten by Nigeria in the quarter-finals.

AFCON, which takes place every two years, was previously won by underdogs Zambia in 2012 (before the competition was moved to odd-numbered years starting this year) in an epic penalty shoot-out that finished 8-7 in sudden death.

The losers of that contest were the Ivory Coast, who lost 2-1 to Nigeria in the quarter-finals.  With a talented squad led by recent Galatasaray signing Didier Drogba, Newcastle midfielder Cheick Tiote and Manchester City powerhouse Yaya Toure, The Elephants were not expected to lose to the Nigerian Super Eagles who had only managed to win once in the group stages.

Drogba, who sealed Chelsea’s Champions League victory with his last ever kick for the London club last May, said that his chances of ever lifting the AFCON trophy were now “over”.  The striker, who will have turned 36 by the time the World Cup kicks off in Rio next year, said, “We now look ahead to the World Cup, with or without me”.

The game itself saw tournament joint top scorer Emmanuel Emenike (pictured) rifle in a 30-yard shot just before half time, but it was Drogba who turned provider for The Elephants five minutes into the second half.  His free kick found a completely unmarked Cheick Tiote at the back post to nod in an equaliser, but the aptly named Sunday Mba finished off a marauding run with a shot that deflected and looped over Côte d’Ivoire keeper Boubacar Barry to clinch a 2-1 victory.

That ensured that Nigeria would finish the weekend anticipating a semi-final clash against Mali, who beat hosts South Africa 3-1 on penalties on Saturday. The second semi-final will see Ghana take on Burkina Faso.  On paper, Ghana are the in-form team of the competition, having won their last three games in a row, but a shaky performance against Cape Verde in their quarter-final will give Burkina Faso hope.

Top scorers

Ghanaian striker Wakaso is one of the current tournament joint top scorers, but it should be noted that of his three goals, two have been penalties and one was an open goal scored after the opposition goalkeeper went upfield for a corner in the last minute in a desperate bid to snatch an equaliser.

The Black Stars’ opponents Burkina Faso have a joint top scorer themselves in Alain Traoré, who equalised in the 94^th minute with the last kick of the match against Nigeria in the group stages and scored twice in The Stallions’ emphatic 4-0 victory over Ethiopia.  With Nigerian Emenike also on three goals, progression to the final – and potentially overall victory in the 2013 AFCON – could be decided by one of these three leading strikers.

Political turmoil leads to weak North African showing

There have been a few notable absences in this year’s AFCON, chief among them Egypt, who have won the AFCON more than any other team. But, the seven-time winners, who won the tournament three consecutive times in 2006, 2008 and 2010, have failed to qualify for the last two tournaments in a row.

It is unsurprising that Egypt have struggled over the last few years.  Earlier this month, at least 74 people were killed in riots at the Egyptian city of Port Said after fans took knives into the stadium when rivals al-Masry and al-Ahly met, and while there is some hope after al-Ahly unexpectedly won the African Champions League in November last year, it is clear that these are bleak times for a national side that has not qualified for the AFCON since 2010 and has not qualified for the World Cup since 1990.

It is no coincidence that since the 2011 Egyptian Revolution, Egypt have struggled to retain a footing in international football, and it can be argued that the national side will only progress once the often-violent domestic leagues and tumultuous political scene stabilise.

The North African sides that managed to qualify this year also fared poorly.  Morocco went through the tournament undefeated but their three draws were not enough to seal qualification to the knockout rounds, whilst Algeria, who held England to a 0-0 draw in the 2010 World Cup, took just one point from the competition after losing to Togo and Tunisia.

Nigeria and Ghana have won the AFCON twice and four times respectively, but neither has won in the last 19 years.  While Burkina Faso and Mali will both be looking to get their hands on the trophy for the first time, they know that they will have to get past stern opposition in the semi-finals – teams that have won the cup before, and are looking to win it again after years without a trophy to their names.

The semi-finals of the AFCON – Mali v. Nigeria and Burkina Faso v. Ghana – will be played today (February 6). The final will be played on Sunday (February 10).   

Tim Hellyer

Alethea Osborne: the situation in Mali explained

Our latest columnist, Alethea Osborne, offers a comprehensive breakdown of the situation in Mali.

Soldiers from Mali’s French-trained Rapid Intervention Regiment (RIR). Picture: jeromestarkey

The recent Algerian hostage crisis has swung a country that was previously relatively unknown, Mali, into global view. Many people would have been unaware of its existence, let alone its political situation, before the French intervention in the country in order to tackle the Islamic military presence there. It is vital, therefore, to clear up a few misconceptions about the situation which are often left unclear through press coverage.

The presence of more extreme Islamists in the north is to a certain extent the result of Gaddafi’s demise in Libya. The Tuareg are an ethnic group and historically Mali’s strongest opposition. During the reign of Gaddafi many were recruited to join the Libyan army and so gained military training and arms. Since the Arab Spring and Gaddafi’s downfall they have returned to their homes in northern Mali and quickly joined or created Islamist or Nationalist groups, providing them with key arms and military experience. However, the speed at which rebellions broke out after Gaddafi’s death indicate that there was a strong framework already in place before their return.

It is clearly easier when referring to the rebel groups in the North to simply refer to them as ‘terrorists’ or ‘Islamists’, however it is vital to understand that there is not simply one united group. In fact, there are at least four major groups in the region, ranging from the MNLA, who are more nationalist than Islamist and have offered to work with Western forces, to Mokhtar Belmohktar’s Al-Qaida-influenced The Signatories in Blood, who take credit for the recent Algerian hostage crisis. The very concept of Al-Qaida’s influence is one that needs to be explained, while the AQIM (Al-Qaida in the Maghreb) may have certain tactics similar to those of Bin Laden’s Al-Qaida, they are far more like a franchise which is run separately and with individual, mainly far more regional and economic-based, objectives. Yet, the idea of links to Al-Qaida works more easily within Western media and governments’ rhetoric of the ‘war on terror’. It also justifies the French military presence in the country, despite the clear evidence that Western intervention in the last decade has more often than not helped boost support for jihadist groups and created a clearer Western enemy for often originally more regionally-focused groups.

“No to military intervention in Mali” Picture: the global movement

The French were invited by the Malian government to help stabilise the situation and support the Malian army in trying to suppress the uprising in the North. It is important to point out though that the Malian government itself is very unstable, with two changes of rule in the last nine months, including a military coup. This has resulted in no clear representative leader and large political divisions in the country. So the French, while asked to come, received this invitation from an unelected leaderless government. It also suggests that there was no other plan put in place except the hope of Western intervention; blatantly untrue, as there was one proposed by the West African regional bloc Ecowas and approved by the United Nations Security Council. It included providing 3,000 West African troops to support the Malian army, but placed a large weight on the importance of negotiation and the potential harmful effects of military intervention.

It is completely comprehensible that it is often easier to simplify situations in order to explain them, but it is important to understand the basic facts concerning the key players in a conflict before they get too diluted in political rhetoric.