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.
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.
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.
exeposedev 