The Political Conundrum!

This is another Bouhammer recommended site if you are looking for a good blog on Afghanistan that does not cover as much about the military side of things, but more on the people, culture, etc.

 

This particular posting has some really great pictures too.

http://blog.freerangeinternational.com/?p=1797

In the past few weeks, a communique published by several exiled former leaders of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) based in the United Kingdom has caused a bit of a stir in British media.

Those familiar with the LIFG will recall that in November 2007, Al-Qaida's As-Sahab Media Foundation released an audio recording featuring Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri and Abu al-Laith al-Liby to announce the official merger of the LIFG into the ranks of Al-Qaida. According to Zawahiri in the recording, "Honorable members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group have announced that they are joining the Al-Qaida organization in order to continue the march of their brothers... Your good sons are gathering [in the Maghreb] under the banner of Islam and jihad against America, France, Spain and their people... O' nation of jihad, support your sons so that we defeat our enemies and rid our homeland of their slaves." In the As-Sahab recording, Zawahiri's address was followed by a response from Abu al-Laith al-Liby--in which he confirmed, "We announce we are joining Al-Qaida as loyal soldiers."

Then, on July 3, a faction calling itself "the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group--Britain" distributed its own statement declaring it was cancelling the two-year-old LIFG partnership with Al-Qaida. The authors criticized Al-Qaida for "wrongful practices like random bombings, destroying private and public property, and targeting civilians" and announced its support for "the current dialogue between the group's [LIFG] leadership and the Libyan regime." (An English translation of this communique can be downloaded from the NEFA Foundation website)

How significant a development really is this? It is important to understand that there has been a nearly decade-long schism within the ranks of the LIFG itself, pitting political dissidents in Europe versus Afghan-based military commanders. The split occurred in 1996-1997, after the LIFG lost its safe haven in Sudan and suffered catastrophic losses during an internal crackdown within Libyan borders. At the time, the LIFG leadership decided “to save as many people as possible. Therefore, the order was given to the most important people to leave the country [Libya] immediately.” The cadres of the LIFG were tossed about like spores in the wind, fleeing “to various Asian, Persian Gulf, African, and European countries,” as well as to Afghanistan. Those who returned to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan included many of the LIFG's most hardline voices--those who were already considered persona-non-grata by moderate Arab regimes and Western European security services (such as Abu al-Laith al-Liby). For the same reason there have been understandable complaints about Abu al-Laith al-Liby making the unilateral decision to hand over the reins of the LIFG to Al-Qaida in 2001, one wonders to what degree the exiled LIFG politburo ensconced in the U.K. can now legitimately speak on behalf of distantly-affiliated Libyan mujahideen fighting on the ground in Afghanistan (and elsewhere). For that matter, can the LIFG even still be considered a single, viable organization -- or have the forces of globalization torn it to shreds?

I believe this is also what my colleague Thomas Hegghammer is alluding to when he opines that the media have delivered "a misrepresentation of what’s happening but I can see why people want to spin it that way."

For more background on the LIFG, see my NEFA Foundation report here. The NEFA Foundation has also obtained and translated several communiqués previously issued by the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) which shed light on the group’s historical relationship with Al-Qaida and the Taliban. In the wake of both the 1998 East Africa Embassy Bombings and the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the LIFG leadership issued statements supporting their fellow mujahideen “brothers” and condemning the United States and its allies. Following punitive U.S. missile strikes on Sudan and Afghanistan for the August 1998 Al-Qaida bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, the LIFG issued an official communiqué condemning “these barbaric strikes” and “announcing its support for Muslims in Sudan and Afghanistan… Simultaneously, we would also like to present some facts to the Islamic nation, in order to prove that America is not only the enemy of the Mujahid Shaykh Usama Bin Laden and Islamist movements, but rather the enemy of the entire Islamic nation… The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group calls upon Muslims to confront this American aggression in order to give the proper response to this bellicose attack against the people of this Islamic nation.” Likewise, in reaction to the American invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001, the LIFG released a fatwah from Shaykh Hassan Qaid ruling that, “by declaring war against the Muslims and occupying their countries, the United States of America has made its interests all across the world into legitimate targets for the mujahideen. They should bomb and demolish them with any means available. Those interests include military, economic, social, embassies, cultural centers, tourists, or any individuals in any place upon earth.”

Henry Allingham, who is one of the last surviving veterans of WWI (yes one, not two) and was the world’s oldest man has went on to the Fiddler’s Green. He was 113 years old.

Allingham joined the Royal Naval Air Service – precursor to the Royal Air Force – in 1915, and a year later took part in the Battle of Jutland, the war’s largest naval battle. During World War II he worked on measures to counter magnetic mines.

You can read the whole story at www.military.com/news/article/worlds-oldest-man-wwi-veteran-dies.html

 

Allingham spent the last years of his life reminding others of the 9 million soldiers killed in the conflict, anxious that people should remember their sacrifice.

June 12 was election day in Iran. But in another Muslim country, local elections were also conducted that very day. It was in Morocco and the outcome was very little commented and when it was, the analysis was most of the time flawed.

Indeed the Western media and various experts declared that the Islamists were decimated and that they were now history. Think again! In fact, the main official Islamist party, the PJD (Parti de la Justice et du Développement), a loose offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, is far from dead and one could make the case that it got its best results ever. Abdelillah Benkirane, the PJD’s General Secretary, succinctly summed up the outcome of the elections, “We’ve won” and in a way he is right.

At first sight, it is easy to see why some pundits called the PJD’s defeat: in absolute terms the party garnered only about 6% of the votes. But to put things in perspective it ran only for 8,000 seats out of the about 27,000 in play- i.e. about 29%-. The PJD smartly targeted the cities where it is quite popular and was quite successful because it finished actually first in towns with over 35,000 inhabitants. And more importantly the PJD finished first in Rabat, the kingdom’s capital and Casablanca, the economic capital. With political alliances the PJD is one way or another in the driver’s seat in Rabat, Casablanca and Kenitra. Will it be able to enforce its very strict conservative religious agenda that runs counter to what Morocco stands for? This remains to be seen. In the meantime, the PJD has joined forces with the Socialist Party, the USFP, and has defacto lost its “pariah” label. The PJD has now become a party like all the others and is likely pretty content with this newly acquired status. In fact, two years ago the West was afraid of an Islamist tsunami in Morocco and is now clearly relieved that it did not occur. But with a flawed analysis, the West is missing the big picture that little by little the Islamists are gaining ground, controlling cities and penetrating the core of Moroccan society. Like in most countries, the Islamists are not really in a rush to seize power: the tortoise always beats the hare in the end…

After the much dubious Iranian presidential elections and the popular revolt that ensued, the European Union took the lead in supporting the people of Iran. Most vocal were France and the UK compared to the tepid U.S. reaction. The Iranian regime did not wait long to blame the West and tension has escalated since local personnel from the British embassy in Tehran were detained by Iranian authorities. The EU is envisioning withdrawing all 27 ambassadors to Iran to protest. And it might be onto something…

Former French president Jacques Chirac told The New York Times in Jan. 2007 regarding sanctions, “The question is how can we impose sufficiently strong constraints on Iran. This is a difficult issue. One has to know what Iran can withstand or not. Iran has a regime that is still a bit fragile, a bit fragile. The last elections proved in particular that the President did not have all the authority one could have expected. This somewhat fragile regime is afraid. Afraid of what? Afraid of being contested.
What does it want? It wants to maintain the regime of the mullahs. To maintain the regime of the mullahs, it needs to not be contested or threatened by the international community”.
Iran is now being hit by this double whammy: domestic revolt and international isolation. But in order to increase pressure the EU and other Western nations should break off diplomatic relations with Tehran following the example of what France did in 1987-1988.

The book “Black Hawk Down” and the subsequent movie did a good job describing the U.S. debacle in Somalia in 1993. The quick retreat of U.S. troops after this incident led Osama Bin Laden to describe the U.S. as a paper tiger that could not bear losses. Now sixteen years later, Somalia is in a worse shape than it was then and now about to fall into the hands of Al Qaeda (AQ) allies. Unfortunately at this point the international community is nowhere to be seen.

The latest assault from the main insurgent group, the Islamist al-Shabab (“The Youngsters”), seconded by the Islamic Party, started in full force against the Somali government, known as the Transition Federal Government (TFG) on May 7. The Shababs are leading a cruel guerilla war, inspired by Iraqi methods, against the TFG. Indeed, bombs hidden on the side of the road explode when TFG convoys drive by, grenades are thrown at police patrols. The Shababs are everywhere and nowhere, the attacks occur in every neighborhood of Mogadishu and the northern part of town is almost off-limits to the TFG forces.
The situation has quickly deteriorated in the past weeks: in just the span of three days, al- Shabab succeeded in killing the Mogadishu chief of police, the Security minister in a spectacular and bloody suicide attack and a TFG MP. Since the start of this latest offensive, 300 people have been killed and tens of thousands of people have fled Mogadishu. In light of this, the TFG president, Sheikh Sharif declared a state of emergency and authorities called for neighboring countries (Ethiopia, Kenya, Djibouti and Yemen) to come to the rescue. At this point, the two most likely countries that could intervene are Ethiopia and Kenya but both would not act without a very clear international mandate. And for the time being the U.N. has been totally absent.
But time is of the essence and the TFG is not very much in control, to say the least. The government is holed up in a compound, called “Villa Somalia”, in the hills of Mogadishu, surrounded for protection by 4,300 soldiers from the African Union. Without them the TFG would have likely already fallen.

What are the options at this point to restore security and order in this crucial country of the Horn of Africa?
First and foremost, even though Somalis are not behind the al-Shababs because of their mostly international jihadist agenda, they do not have much respect for the TFG. In fact, the TFG suffers from its own incapacity to restore some kind of security and having made compromises such as introducing Sharia law in the country. On top of the nationalistic and religious aspect, the clannishness makes the situation more complicated even for Somalis themselves; indeed, behind most political rivalry is a clan issue.

Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb did not wait long to react to the controversy of the burqa in France and in a communiqué accused France of “religious terrorism” and threatened her of attacks on its soil or against its interests.
I just wrote an article on this topic for the Weekly Standard.
You can read it here.

Here is an excerpt:
In his speech in Cairo, President Obama mentioned no less than three times the headscarf sometimes worn by Muslim women. Each time, his purpose was to stress "the right of women and girls to wear the hijab"--but never their right not to wear it. It was as if it had never occurred to the president that this sartorial practice could be anything but wholly voluntary.

The French, whose 2004 ban on the hijab and other religious attire in public schools Obama was indirectly criticizing, are more attuned to the use of the headscarf as an instrument of domination by religious extremists. It was Muslim women seeking relief from pressure to cover themselves whose complaints led ultimately to the French ban. Now the issue has cropped up again in the form of a call, endorsed by French president Nicolas Sarkozy, to ban the total veiling of the face.

It all started in mid-June when André Gérin, the Communist mayor of Vénissieux, a suburb of Lyon, who is also a member of the National Assembly, proposed a parliamentary commission to investigate the burqa (an outer garment covering a woman from head to toe) and the niqab (which veils the whole face except the eyes) as oppressive to women. His resolution stated:

A woman wearing a burqa or a niqab is in a state of unbearable isolation, exclusion, and humiliation. Her very existence is denied. The sight of these imprisoned women is intolerable when it comes to us from Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, or other Arab countries. It is totally unacceptable on the soil of the French Republic.

A few days later, in a historic address to parliament, Sarkozy said the burqa is not "welcome in France." This "is not a religious issue," the president said, "but rather a question of freedom and of women's dignity."

A week ago I was so happy to announce the new kick-butt twitter bird T-shirt that honors the #militarymon (Military Monday) trend. The shirt is a joint venture between Bouhammer.com, Vision-strike-wear.com and kissmygumbo.com and all proceeds go 100% to the Project Valour-IT initiative which is part of SoldiersAngels.com.

 

You can check out the Press Release at http://soldiersangels.org/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=370&cntnt01origid=15&cntnt01returnid=15

 

Once again, milblogger “Bouhammer” is paying it forward. This time he has teamed up with Vision Strike Wear and Greta from Kiss My Gumbo to sell a t-shirt that will support the troops. All proceeds from Bouhammer’s new Twitter-themed shirt will go Soldiers’ Angels Project Valour-IT.

The United States and Japan agreed Saturday to strengthen the U.S. defense of its top ally against a nuclear attack by North Korea - Japan's top security concern.

Bahrain's Pakistan community has lashed out at the comments of a senior Al Qaeda leader who called for Muslims across the war-torn nation to join the fight against the US.