Terrorism
The Rome Conference for Libya
As many as twenty-four countries gathered on February 2 last to finally decide how, to what extent and where to start opposing the Daesh/Isis expansion to Syria-Iraq and particularly to Libya.
Those countries included Turkey, accused by various sources of being part of the problem and not of the solution, as well as Saudi Arabia, which has never hidden its support for some Islamist factions in Syria and Iraq having connections with the Caliphate.
They also included Qatar, the Emirate which directly supports – in opposition to Saudi Arabia – the Muslim Brotherhood and some groups of the insurgency against President Assad in Syria.
Also the United States, however, supported and sometimes trained the Syrian group linked to Al Qaeda, the Jabat Al Nusra Front, with a view to combating Isis, as also recommended by General Petraeus, mindful of his surge in Iraq against Al Qaeda, organized with the mobilization of Al Anbar Sunni tribes.
Using the enemy against the enemy is an old formula of the 15th century alchemy and ruses, but I fear that strategic thinking is another thing.
Furthermore, according to some reports obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), Hillary Clinton – when she was Secretary of State – was supposed to have supported and armed Qaedist and Muslim Brotherhood to combat Isis-Daesh both in Libya and in the crisis region stretching from Iraq to the Syrian coast.
Therefore, within the narrow scope of the war waged against the Caliphate, the meeting held on February 2 last at the Italian Ministry for Foreign Affairs – officially called “Ministerial Meeting of the Global Coalition against Daesh/Isis in the Small Group format” – is not a “coalition of the willing”, but rather a coalition of those who do not want to take actions or which take them so late as to jeopardize any action taken to oppose Isis/Daesh both in Libya and Syria.
In fact, the meeting was not attended by the country which has really taken decisions in the region threatened by Al Baghdadi, namely Russia, which has so far launched thousands of air strikes against the Caliphate, thus reducing its territorial size significantly.
The same holds true for Assad’s Syrian Baathist regime, with the Syrian Arab Army strengthened by the Russian contribution, or even for China which, while refusing to participate in any coalition, supports with weapons, equipment and intelligence the Russian effort that has so far avoided Al Baghdadi’ strategic point: reaching the Mediterranean coast and directly threatening the Atlantic Alliance and the “moderate” Arab countries.
Moreover, the US-led operation Inherent Resolve has so far launched over 20,300 attacks on Isis targets.
Hence why is Daesh/Isis still a terrible threat? Obviously because its territory is limited to the minimum required to manage the operations and also because the Caliph Al Baghdadi has been extraordinarily good at handling complex and differentiated relations between his Islamic supporters.
He has played the enemy with the friend and his enemies with each other.
“Allah (himself) does mock at them, and he leaves them alone in their inordinacy, blindly wandering on” (Surah Al-Baqarah, The Cow, verse 15)
Nevertheless the Caliph Al Baghdadi’s Islamic State has already lost about 14% of its original territory, mainly thanks to the Russian-Syrian and Iranian-Iraqi actions, but still rules essential cities for the passage of fighters, means and resources throughout the region: Mosul, Sinjar, Qaim, a large part of Fallujah, the suburbs of Ramadi and the refineries of Baiji.
Turkey has only waged its regional war, especially against the PKK Kurds, sometimes covertly by supporting the Caliphate so as to combat the Kurds and has then managed some Islamist groups with a view to opposing Russia.
In that region, every country has waged the war it liked most.
In fact, the Turkish leaders’ goal is the de facto annexation of the Syrian Sunni area which accounts for 74% of the population and, starting from there, the hegemonic reunification of Central Asia, by using the many Turkmen minorities , up to reaching China’s borders.
A return to the past of the Turkish civilization – turning from a tribe moving from Northeast Asia towards the sea and the region of the old Argonauts’ Golden Fleece into a civilization returning from the Mediterranean to its Asian roots.
Many years ago Carl Schmitt had that insight while thinking of rebuilding the great land empires against the North American and British “thalassocracies”.
Conversely, Saudi Arabia’s goal is to destroy a regime such as the Baathist and Alawite one, linked to Iran. Hence Saudi Arabia wants to regionalize and isolate Iran from the Mediterranean – since Iran has not a necessary buffer like Syria, which is useful to control and manage all oil and non-oil trade originating from Iran towards the Mediterranean and the European Union.
And to think that it was the wisdom of Louis Massignon, a distinguished Arabist and agent of the Deuxiéme Bureau, the Second Bureau of the General Staff (France’s external military intelligence agency) to favor the Alawites (also known, in ancient times, as nusayri, Islamic Gnostics influenced by early Christianity) and to support the quasi-Shi’ite Alawites in managing power in Syria, obviously to prevent the Sunni dominance.
And while Iran and its allies follow, for various reasons, the “party of Ali”, the Shi’a, and Saudi Arabia is closed to the north by a Yemen now run by the Houthi, who are also Shi’ites – while in the Eastern provinces of the Wahhabi Kingdom and in Bahrain the Shi’ite uprising of the workers of the largest Saudi Arabia’s oil fields and gas deposits will break out – on the other side of the Persian Gulf, Iran will manage the uprising thus becoming the absolute master of the Shatt el Arab.
For the Islamic Republic of Iran, managing the maritime, military and economic passageway of the sea crossing where over 70% of world seaborne trade transits is a vital objective. It is the culmination of a no longer regional – and even directly religious – hegemony.
Furthermore, together with the P5+1, the United States have accepted the military Denuclearization Plan of Iran, the Russian pivotal ally in the Middle East.
However, regardless of the actual substance of the JCPOA treaty reached by the P5+1 with Iran, this should make the United States think that the strategic equation of the region must be changed.
This means using Iran to oppose the jihadists and achieve a strategic rebalancing with Saudi Arabia, in exchange for a “new deal” with Israel and the creation of a corridor of alliances between the Iranian Shi’ites, Russia, China and the other nations of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).
Instead of being tied down to “the Saudi lobby”, the United States could start playing at many tables, thus having greater strategic autonomy and putting stronger pressure on the Greater Middle East.
Hence a large containment action, which would ease tensions in that strategic region and put in place – in addition to SCO – a new possible loose alliance linked to the European Union and the United States.
This is the only way to better manage the next land and maritime Silk Way designed by President Xi Jinping.
But our ruling classes are still hostages to what the 17th century libertines called “the old thinking” and swing between a global strategy of generic economic agreements and the return of the old Cold War, while the global jihad is knocking at our doors and, indeed, has already cruelly entered our homes.
Hence is there someone who can really think of using “moderate” Islamists in the new Cold War? And to what end, given the expansion of China and its economic dominance?
Apart from the Russian Federation and the Sunni countries, in addition to Iran, which actively supports, also with ground forces, Assad’s regime and Russia itself, none of the twenty-four countries gathered at the Italian Ministry for Foreign Affairs has clear ideas on what to really do against Daesh/Isis both in Syria and Libya.
Obviously the United States want to avoid the Russian mainmise on the Syrian-Iraqi region, but this logically means that they must somehow support a few Islamist groups that claim they are fighting against the Caliphate. Tertium non datur.
It is worth recalling that some US military trainers were precisely those who set up – with moderate “Islamists” somehow linked to the Muslim Brotherhood – the real “Kominform” of the jihad, a sort of 30th Brigade which, in a first phase, after its passage from Jordan, refused to fight against the Al-Qaeda faction in Syria. Later on some members of the Brigade even defected to Isis, starting from Turkey. Hence the result was exactly the opposite of the one initially planned.
Basically the United States do not want a Syrian-Iraqi area where Russia can “give cards” and master the game in view of a new bilateral confrontation between the United States and Russia. But, apart from the old needs of the “military-industrial complex” that also President Eisenhower feared, what is the strategic logic of a new world bipolar structure, with China which is going to be the first global economy?
In fact the US Forces in Europe are increasing in number (by several thousands) and efficiency, so as to “strengthen” the Eastern European countries’ resistance against Russian influence.
A dangerous bipartition of European security, which is either unitary or does not exist.
But here the strategic equation becomes trivial: either Russia is opposed at global level – and hence the Caliphate’s wound in Syria and Iraq is left open – or a new type of relationship between NATO and the Russian Federation is redefined so as to have a political project and sufficient human and material resources to eradicate the jihad from Syria and Libya.
Once again, tertium non datur.
It is also worth recalling that the magnitude of terrorist attacks will certainly increase, along with their apparent randomness and their distribution throughout the world.
It is a war for infra-Islamic hegemony between the jihad and the Koranic “apostate” areas, but the end point is also domination over Western countries and over their immigrant populations, as well as over the “infidels.”
And we must not forget that this is the real stake.
In the case of Libya, we are faced once again with an almost total lack of strategic and geopolitical vision.
Meanwhile, the various Libyan factions have no interest in coming together to then accept military aid from Italy, Great Britain, Holland, the United States and France.
Indeed, it is now likely for the tripartite territory of post-Gaddafi’s Libya to remain what it is today: Fezzan, Cyrenaica, Tripolitania and the areas of the Toubu and the Tuaregh, with further internal differentiations.
It is true that some Europeans maintain we could intervene also without the official request for a joint Libyan government, but obviously our alliance with one single Libyan force on the field would automatically mean that the others are at war against us.
As is well-known, the Parliament of Tobruk – which is the only internationally recognized one – has not accepted the list of Ministers proposed by Al Serraj, the candidate as Prime Minister of the “national unity government”.
The official excuse regards the excessive length of the list of Ministers – as many as thirty-two – but the essence and the substance of the political conflict is different.
It regards the tough opposition of General Khalifa Haftar, the Head of Operation Dignity and Supreme Commander of the Army of the same Parliament in Tobruk.
Meanwhile Caliph Al Baghdadi’s “sword jihad” is organizing itself along the coast; it targets oil infrastructure and therefore aims at biting the jugular vein of the European system.
It does so through oil and, in particular, the jihad strategic point is the management of the over ten million migrants who will leave Mesopotamia to come to Europe according to the pace and time-schedule set by the jihadists.
And Turkey will demand a high price by using its three million refugees as an indirect strategic weapon against the European Union, the Middle East and Libya.
A demographic bomb intended, at first, to destroy the EU Welfare State and later to destabilize our democracies.
Obviously, behind the superficial idea of a “surgical” action in Libya, there is mainly the EU governments’ desire to reduce the tension and concern of their publics, still worried by the para-terrorist attacks in Paris and in many other nations: just think of the 635 women in Cologne who reported to the police the rape attempts and the other offenses perpetrated by over a thousand Maghreb Arabs.
But “feelings” and psychology do not define a strategy.
And the jihadists in Libya already range between 2,800 and 3,500 – including 1,600 in the Sirte region, in the Libyan “oil crescent”.
The Daesh/Isis members are not so many, but quite enough to trigger off a mesh of power similar to the Syrian-Iraqi one: the management of some cities and points of contact between them, without expanding on a desert territory which is useless to retain.
The Caliph Al Baghdadi is the Islamist and jihadist revival of Lawrence of Arabia: the British lieutenant was not interested in land. For him the desert was to be militarily intended as sea: only the lines and routes, and not the entire and huge expanse of water, are to be controlled.
I would define the Isis/Daesh war as an interdiction war – hence the issue does not lie in “eating” the territory away, but in developing a strategy and a tactic which are equal and opposite.
We must organize the resistance and protection of the cities that Isis needs to conquer, as well as the very tough management of connection and communication lines, and finally make the enemy drown into the void stretching between our nerve centers and their lines.
Furthermore, considering that the Isis/Daesh strategy is asymmetrical and “hybrid”, we, too, should do the same.
We can and we must use against Daesh/Isis what is improperly called “terrorism” (which is, in fact, the jihad) so as to destabilize it, intimidate and frighten its militants and especially eradicate its covers among civilians, as well as finally restrict the terrorists’ scope of action.
Wars en dentelles or the old cry of the French captains during the Thirty Years’ War, Messieurs les Anglais, tirez les premiers!, are no longer possible.
I dare not even imagine what will be written on the Rules of Engagement (ROE) of a possible Euro-American action on the Libyan territory.
I am reminded of the Italian ROE in the first phase of our engagement in Afghanistan, which seemed written by Monsignor della Casa, the author of the famous treatise Il Galateo overo de’ costumi.
As experienced by Russia during its actions in Ukraine, in modern warfare we cannot make too many differences between civilians and the military, between soldiers and uniformed officers and guerrillas, between psywar actions and real war operations.
Moreover, what should Western troops do in Libya?
Should they curb or wipe out the excessive power of Isis, which can rely on de facto alliances which would remain in place, like the one with “Libyan Dawn”, which is also the enemy of General Haftar’s forces?
Should they carry out the usual UN “State-building” activity, although many local people do not want a State but only their political system? Furthermore, who would participate in this State-building activity?
The forces which are now fighting each other bloodily or the usual “moderate jihadists” revived for the occasion?
Should our troops perhaps organize the protection of cities from ISIS (which is not only a military, but also a political problem) or the protection of oil infrastructure, without considering the network of people traffickers?
In short, there is a fact which has become clear: the West can no longer wage war, hence it will never be able to achieve real peace.
And here we are at war on a ground and with actions defined by our enemy – an opponent we have left basically undisturbed for three years.
Therefore the strategic asymmetry plays completely against us.
And I do not even rule out the possibility that some of the governments which want to take action have already thought of negotiating with some Libyan Islamist forces, with a view to avoiding the worst and minimizing the presence of our military in the country
Perhaps after deep thought on my part about the other hidden reasons, in addition to the declared ones, about the reasons for Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad’s visit to China at this precise and sensitive time, I realized that the issue of the “Chinese terrorist Turkistan Islamic Party” and its extensions in Syria and its work with the terrorist organization ISIS The Chinese authorities asked their Syrian counterpart to hand over Uyghur fighters to them and count their numbers. Here it is necessary to draw attention to the fact that the transformation of Syria and Iraq in particular into a destination for jihadists from all corners of the earth was not a coincidental act, but rather an organized act by global and regional intelligence services, with the aim of flooding Syria and Iraq with foreign fighters. While European intelligence services were facilitating the passage of European jihadists to the Middle East and Syria, with the aim of getting rid of them, the finger of blame was directed at the role of Turkish intelligence in bringing in jihadists, led by Chinese Uyghur fighters from the Xinjiang region, and spreading them in Syria and Iraq.
Perhaps this matter, despite its extreme sensitivity to China and its danger, related to the fighters of the Chinese terrorist Turkestan Islamic Party, or what is known as “Uyghur fighters”, may not have been extensively covered in analyzes of the reasons behind Bashar al-Assad’s visit to China, namely China’s attempt and the requests of its officials, at their forefront is the former Chinese Premier (Li Keqiang) in 2021. The Syrian side is requested to assist it in the issue of confronting the Turkestan Party and its expansion in Syria and its relations with the terrorist organization ISIS, which includes Chinese Uyghur fighters and is located in northwestern Syria. The separatist Turkestan Islamic Party, based in the Chinese province of Xinjiang, is considered a terrorist organization by the Chinese authorities, and its work in Syria is a branch of the Uyghur Turkestan Islamic Party, which works with the terrorist organization ISIS in Syria.
The Chinese Ministry of State Security and its counter-terrorism agencies were keen to follow up on the official establishment of a branch of the terrorist Turkestan Islamic Party, which was established in Syria at the beginning of 2014, and which operates in Syria alongside the “Al-Nusra Front” (Al-Qaeda). The leader of the Turkestan Islamic Party in Syria was the terrorist known as “Abu Reda al-Turkestani”, who was killed by Syrian aircraft in a raid on Jisr Al-Shughur Hospital, which was his stronghold. He was followed by the liquidation of the terrorist “Ibrahim Mansour”.
Due to the strong coordination between the Chinese authorities and their Syrian counterparts, the influx of Uyghur terrorists from China to Syria has decreased and may have stopped, specifically starting in 2018, and those who are still fighting with ISIS in Syria are the reason for maintaining the tense situation in the Latakia countryside and launching sporadic attacks on it. With care to settle several thousand Uyghur terrorists and their families there.
What was striking about the Chinese Turkestan Islamic Party in Syria was its participation in the demolition of Syrian churches by its fighters, members of the Uyghur Turkestan Islamic Party, who glorified the acts of destruction. The Turkestan Islamic Party also cooperated in the squares of Homs and Idlib with the Uzbek brigades and the Al-Nusra Front. Here, Jabhat Al-Nusra and ISIS are competing with each other to recruit Uyghur fighters. The flag of the Turkestan Islamic Party was placed in “Jisr Al-Shughur” above the cross of the church after the end of the battle, as evidence of their victory in it. Therefore, China fears that Uyghur fighters will return to it and cause unrest there, especially in China’s Xinjiang region, and for this purpose it is trying to coordinate with the official Syrian authorities to count their numbers and try to arrest them and hand them over to the Chinese authorities.
Western intelligence is trying to obstruct Russia and China by supporting separatist terrorist groups banned there. On the Russian side, Chechen terrorist movements are supported, and on the Chinese side, the East Turkestan Independence Movement is supported, which demands the independence of the Uyghur minority from the Chinese central government in Beijing.
Here, the reports of the Syrian intelligence services loyal to the Bashar al-Assad regime indicate the presence of three thousand Chinese terrorist Uyghur fighters affiliated with the Turkestan Islamic Party, fighting in Syria alongside terrorist organizations, especially the Al-Nusra Front and ISIS. Therefore, the meeting between Chinese President “Xi Jinping” and his counterpart Bashar al-Assad focuses on the issue of military and security cooperation between the Chinese security system and the Syrian security services, with a real intention made clear by China to increase its military support for the Syrian army, with the aim of combating and combating Takfiri groups. Specifically, Uyghur fighters of Chinese origin, whom Beijing considers a future threat to it, especially in the Xinjiang region in the west of the country.
Confirmations by the Syrian intelligence services indicate that Uyghur fighters have two main camps in the Syrian Idlib Governorate, the first in the village of Ehsim in the Jabal al-Zawiya area, and the number of those in this camp is estimated at about 2,500 Uyghur fighters from the Turkestan Party, while the second camp of the Chinese terrorist Turkestan Islamic Party is located in the town of Two marshals in Jabal Al-Zawiya. This camp includes about three thousand Uyghur fighters. The Uighur fighters, who brought their families from the Chinese province of Xinjiang to Syria, are intending to settle some villages in Idlib Governorate, and take them as their main headquarters, especially in the villages of Jabal Al-Summaq, from which they expelled their people or confiscated their property in partnership with Jabhat Al-Nusra terrorists.
Uyghur fighters affiliated with the Chinese terrorist Turkestan Islamic Party and its branch in Syria and its extensions with the terrorist organization ISIS are trying to find a foothold in Syria, specifically trying to create their own organization extending from the west of Idlib Governorate and the countryside of Latakia to the south and east of the Iskenderun district in Syria, with a plan in place to settle 200,000 Turkestan fighters in those areas inside Syria, including the families of Turkestan Uyghur fighters. The process of settling Turkestan families in towns such as Rabia, next to Turkmen and Jabal Al-Bair, up to the Salqin region, also took place on a large scale. The most dangerous is the construction of new homes and residential complexes for Chinese Uyghur fighters in Syria in the “Jabal al-Summaq” area in Harem. Or even in Christian villages whose residents were completely abandoned by terrorists, such as the villages of (Al-Yaqubiyah, Al-Ghassaniyah, Hallouz, and Atira). There is also confirmed information that Turkey has granted its citizenship to more than 300,000 Chinese Uighurs since 2011.
Therefore, the visit of Syrian President “Bashar Al-Assad” to China comes in a serious Chinese attempt to cooperate with the Syrian side and Bashar Al-Assad’s intelligence to hand over Uyghur fighters to it and limit their numbers, especially with the common Chinese-Syrian fear that the Chinese terrorist Turkestan Islamic Party in Syria will begin to establish (The Chinese Islamic Emirate of Turkestan) in northern Syria, provided that this emirate is led by the Turkestan fighter (Jund Allah al-Turkestani), in the Jisr Al-Shughur region in particular and other areas close to it, so that this would be the first recognition of its kind for the establishment of an emirate and settlements for the Turkestans in Syria, from those who are fighting since the beginnings of the Syrian crisis.
There is not much left to debate on the dangerous aspect of al-Shabab’s demonic doctrine that proclaims Islamic values and functions as mindless terrorists or bloodthirsty hoodlums, at best. At its core, al-Shabab is what it is. However, in recent years it has been transforming away from its original monolithic nature. Aside from becoming decentralized franchises with mercenary style function, it has infiltrated the Somali government, intelligence, and the traditional clan structure. That said, it would be naïve to assume that al-Shabab is the only source of violence and insecurity in Somalia.
More than a year ago, President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud declared an ‘all-out war against al-Shabab’ and vowed to take the fight to them in every remote village across Somalia. Therefore, he decided to partner with various clan-based vigilantes and armed them to fight al-Shabab. Some warned against that strategy due to its potential to further divide the country, fuel perpetual clan wars, and inadvertently strengthen al-Shabab. Almost a year and a half later, Somalia is barely surviving a worse scenario. Today, more and more clans are turning their guns on each other.
Worse, the Somali army and the highly trained counter-terrorism divisions Danab and Gorgor continue to get ambushed at night, massacred, their equipment taken, and others destroyed in remote villages and military camps in no man’s land in Galmudug and Hirshabelle federal states. These kinds of attacks that happened more than a dozen times—the worst and most under reported being Cowsweyne—are raising serious concerns. They are causing finger pointing, and profound distrust within the military apparatus.
Is al-Shabab strong enough to deliver these successive defeats against a much larger army that is backed by ATMIS and U.S.? Is al-Shabab logistically capable of executing deadly operations in various locations of a vast geographical area? How many fighters, combat technical and suicide trucks did they bring to execute such ambushes? How come on each occasion the massacred soldiers failed to hear the roaring engines coming at them? We are talking about rural areas where there are only dirt tracks that zigzag through a flat landscape. And at night one could hear the muffled sound of the coming truck from a far distance and could see its headlights from afar.
Answers to these critical questions, and to get to the bottom of these mysterious attacks, would depend on whether you drank the Kool-Aid or not. In other words, if you are persuaded by the government’s version that al-Shabab is the only group behind all terrorist attacks—past, present, and future—you don’t need to read beyond this point. However, if you are pained by the scores of young commandoes being mysteriously terminated, or are simply in pursuit of truth, things are not the way they are officially presented.
Somalia, due to its abundant natural resources, lack of patriotic leadership, prevalence of high-level corruption, and relentless zero-sum political competition, is a lucrative, open-for-all illegal mining cottage industry. And Galgadud region, particularly around the town of El-Bur, remains the center of gravity regarding this latest, multi-actor, deadly competition for control.
War Is a Deception
In late August 2011, at that historic night when al-Shabab abruptly pulled out of Mogadishu, I received a good news call from a senior Somali official who told me something to the effect ‘Our mole was right. They are leaving.’ When I asked ‘Who?’ He enthusiastically replied: ‘Al-Shabab, of course.’ I was Somalia’s Special Envoy to the U.S. at the time. In the morning, local and international headlines were claiming that al-Shabab was defeated by a coalition of the Somali National Army and AMISOM. President Sharif Sheikh Ahmed declared al-Shabab “defeated,” and they declared it “a change of tactics.”
However, there were no face-to-face deadly battles between these entities that ultimately compelled al-Shabab to run for their lives. Al-Shabab was controlling almost all of Mogadishu and executing its terrorist attacks at-will. Likewise, it controlled the narrative as it owned more propaganda outlets than the government. But, behind the scenes, al-Shabab militants were being hunted down every night by killer ghosts- mercenary sharpshooters using military night vision and silencers. Al-Shabab militants were dropping like swatted flies when their leader, Ahmed Godane, realized the existential threat that his militants were facing and ordered immediate evacuation.
The ghost-lords of Halane, predatory capitalists, and their armed enforcers, have always been the x-factor. A few countries already have their own mercenaries to serve their interests. Sure, those interests may at times coincide or confluence with the national interest of their host nation. But let us not forget, mercenaries are neither disciplined and restrained by ethics or moral values nor are they accountable to any authority other than their next lucrative contract.
Change of Scenery
On August 5, President Mohamud put on his military gear and set up a central command in Dhusamareeb of Galmudug region to lead the Somali military and clan militias’ all-out war against al-Shabab from there. He has been there more than 40 days. This raised many questions since the town of Mahas in the Hiiraan region was recognized as the ground-zero where that whole community declared war against al-Shabab.
Dhusamareeb is the headquarter or the bazaar of international illegal mining. A fierce competition is already underway between Ethiopia—the old field guardian—and mercenaries funded by U.S, UAE, and the late comer, uranium-desperate, European Union whose new Ambassador took a private plane to present her diplomatic credentials to President Mohamud in Dhusamareeb. An historic moment, indeed.
Meanwhile, President Mohamud cannot go to Garowe- the capital city of Puntland which is only 270 miles from where he is now stationed. Puntland has officially suspended its relationship with the federal government. It is now where Somaliland was three decades ago.
Meanwhile, the people of Sool, Sanaag and Cayn (SSC-Khatumo) who have been living under brutal repression by Somaliland military have organized themselves in recent months and accomplishing what many thought impossible. They convincingly defeated Somaliland military and exhibited exceptional discipline for not chasing the fleeing army into their clan territory. Immediately after their victory, they officially declared their independence from Somaliland and appealed to the Federal Government to accept them as a federal state. With visionary leadership and the right strategy, this issue could have served as a catalyst to a Somali-owned, country-wide reconciliation process. But, President Mohamud pled deaf, dumb, and blind.
Danger still looms as this issue is likely to morph into a long military struggle. Neither Somaliland, nor UAE which heavily invested in Berbera seaport, nor UK which is Somalia’s penholder, and the trainer of Somaliland’s special forces are willing to accept this latest fateful development.
And as if all these are not enough, the federal government mandated citizens to apply for a digital national identification card. While this may be appreciated from the security perspective, for a nation whose constitution remains ‘provisional’ and what constitutes Somali citizenship is yet to be determined, this will only further divide the country. Because clan identity is strong in Somalia and these clans inhabit various parts of East Africa, the citizenship issue has been the most controversial issue since the trusteeship period (50-60).
The emotionalization of the war on al-Shabab, and the muzzling of media reports has not only ensured President Mohamud jingoistic praises, it also emboldened him to declare victory over al-Shabab despite a large number of Somali soldiers getting killed and others being forced to evacuate almost every town or region they occupied for a short while. Things turned out so bad that President Mohamud had to sideline top military commanders, give the greenlight to reshuffle the government after the UN General Assembly, and request an emergency 90-day delay on ATMIS troops reduction.
Any objective observer would question the logic driving the claim of victory against al-Shabab under the current circumstances. But thinking logically means questioning the government’s narrative, and that ironically is considered a treasonous act.
Sadly, the only thing that stood the test of time in Somalia in the past three decades is lustful greed and the attitude that integrity is not necessary in building trust and unity. The status quo preserves al-Shabab, sustains corruption, and makes failure a lucrative cottage industry. Neither the doner nations, nor the Somali government, nor the international non-governmental organizations want to see that industry under any form of scrutiny.
On September 3, the Russian Federation is marking a memorable date, specifically, the Day of Solidarity in the Fight against Terrorism that became part of Russian legislation in 2005, a year after a horrendous terrorist attack in Beslan that killed over 300 Russian citizens, including children. This appalling terrorist atrocity was something unprecedented in terms of its meanness and brutality, and it highlighted the need to rally the entire international community against terrorism.
“We have to state that, in the current international realities, the issue of combatting terrorism has long since lost its unifying essence. The collective West that considers itself a beacon of democracy and human rights is openly waging a hybrid war against Russia. Not only is the West using Ukraine as a geopolitical battering ram against our country, but it is brazenly turning a blind eye on the terrorist essence of the Kiev regime and is sponsoring it,” official statement, released ahead of September event, said.
At the same time, the Western line to “isolate” Russia has not been crowned with success even in such a sensitive area as the fight against terrorism. The opinion of Russia remains significant and weighty during dialogue with friendly states. The Russian Federation prioritises cooperation with friendly states in the current complicated conditions of foreign policy turbulence. For example, we are collaborating rather fruitfully with our partners at various regional associations, including the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and the Collective Security Treaty Organisation.
Close contacts between the security agencies of these associations’ member states are taking place under the auspices of the CIS Anti-Terrorism Centre and the SCO’s Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure. As for the CSTO, it can deploy its Collective Peacekeeping Forces in the shortest possible time, and this is an extremely important, effective and essential factor in facilitating counter-terrorism security in the zone of its responsibility.
Additionally, the BRICS Counter-Terrorism Working Group now ranks among the most advanced cross-regional formats. The BRICS Counter-Terrorism Strategy and the Action Plan for its implementation, drafted in 2020 and 2021 when Russia and India chaired BRICS, are the gold standard, reflecting an analytical and well-thought-out perception of real, rather than imaginary, terrorist threats.
The Russian Federation also supports constructive dialogue on counter-terrorism operations with the states of the African continent. The Declaration of the Second Russia-Africa Summit on Strengthening Cooperation in the Fight against Terrorism, signed following the Second Russia-Africa Summit in St Petersburg in July 2023, reflects the common approaches of our countries.
“We will continue to coordinate joint efforts in the above-mentioned multilateral formats, including those aimed at streamlining the existing mechanisms for coping with the security risks of the states involved,” the statement finally said.
The Beslan school siege and the Moscow theater siege were the toughest tests that Vladimir Putin went through during his 20 years in power. “Major terrorist attacks were the toughest to deal with. The Beslan school siege was one of them. I will never forget it. Another one was the Moscow theater siege,” Putin noted in the Kremlin.
Back in 2019, officers and rescuers who helped to release hostages from Beslan’s School No.1 in 2004 were awarded by Vyacheslav Bitarov in the Caucasus republic of North Ossetia.
More than 1,200 people were taken hostage during the terrorist attack at a school in the North Ossetian city of Beslan, which occurred on September 1, 2004, the first day of the academic year. The tragedy claimed 334 lives, including 186 children. Some 126 of these hostages became handicapped, of them 70 children.
The school, located next to the district police station, housed approximately 60 teachers and more than 800 students. Its gymnasium, where most of the hostages were held for 52 hours, was a recent addition, measuring 10 metres (33 ft) wide and 25 metres (82 ft) long.
There were reports that men disguised as repairmen had secreted weapons and explosives into the school during July 2004, something that the authorities later denied. However, several witnesses have since testified they were forced to help their captors remove the weapons from caches hidden in the school. There were also claims that a “sniper’s nest” on the sports-hall roof had been set up in advance.
The attack at Beslan was met with international abhorrence and universal condemnation. Countries and charities around the world donated to funds set up to assist the families and children that were involved in the Beslan crisis. This School No. 1 was one of seven schools in Beslan, a town of about 35,000 people in the Republic of North Ossetia–Alania in Russia’s Caucasus.
-
World News4 days agoAssad-Xi Jinping meeting: China-Syria strategic partnership
-
Environment4 days agoGlobal warming did the Unthinkable
-
Economy3 days agoInternational Forum for China’s Belt and Road and the Six Economic Corridors Projects
-
Terrorism3 days agoBad Strategies Boost Al-Shabab
-
East Asia3 days agoAssad’s visit to China: Breaking diplomatic isolation and rebuilding Syria
-
Africa4 days agoDecorating Africa at United Nations
-
Americas3 days agoQuad foreign ministers meet in New York for the third time
-
Southeast Asia4 days agoGolden Visa for Sam Altman: A New Momentum for Indonesia in the Artificial Intelligence Era