Why I say No to the military coup

With no introductions, here is my personal take on the Egyptian recent developments:

Well I disagree with the way they brought Morsi down; if it's going to be a democracy, then let the impeachment be through the voting ballots, not through military coup in a country divided heavily. It is easy to miscalculate what a majority is when we use as references pictures of thousands or millions marching and chanting against the president, but truth be said, millions in a country of 80 million individual is far from statistically meaning anything.

Even if scores of the population went down against Morsi, he still have as many supporting him, and throwing the votes of the millions who voted for the Islamist president down the trash is not only a slap against what democracy is standing for, but is also an open invitation for direct confrontations that can easily escalate into a civil war. Indeed brotherhood failed in dealing with several issues of economic or political nature, but isn’t it the case for most democracies and political governing systems throughout the world? The day an elected government manages to tackle all domestic challenges and successfully address them, then we’d have achieved that utopia no one talks about except in books of fiction. A military take over and mass detentions of Brotherhood figures doesn’t seem to be an achievement of a popular will, but most likely seems to be a rushed reaction to deal with an uneasy transition, and most likely to cause an even greater crisis given the stigmatization it has brought against Political Islamism and the alienation of a segment of the population’s will or political choice.

Some may argue that the political environment, as well as the judicial and institutional realities of Egypt may have prevented a democratic action to impeach the president or to bring on early elections, but let us remember that the Egyptian people were the ones voting for Morsi in the first place, and the ones taking on their disapproval to the street didn’t allow the president elect a fair period at the helm of the government to actually produce results. One year is not enough to judge a president (that is why in most democracies presidential terms span through 3 to 5 years), especially someone who took office after a revolution, an economy in the red and security in jeopardy.

Egyptians may have set the bar too high, and it's impossible for a president or a government to fix everything an entire chaotic country the first months, Transitions are hard and demanding, but Egyptians appear to forget that the nation is gathering itself out of a regime meltdown and is in a re-evaluation phase where all principles of governance and political institutions are put under scrutiny and reconstruction.

Maybe the Muslim brotherhood is not that good in many respects, but the reality is that they are the most organized and they won the elections. If the Egyptians are against them, then let them show it through political parties and political participation;

The best way to oppose some political or ideological organization in a democracy is to organize and face them in the battlefield, aka the elections; making a mess, encouraging anarchy or getting the military involved never solves anything but just brings the country to the brinks of a civil war.

Many you argue with tend to delegitimize the popularity of the Muslim Brotherhood by invoking that their supporters are mostly residents of rural areas and are not fully aware of the Brotherhood’s lack of good governance and whatnot, yet this argument seems closes to a self-condemnation because the very people who preach it disregard an important question: If the rural areas are so blinded into voting for the devil himself, then why didn’t the previous regime or the numerous NGOs set a comprehensive framework to spread awareness to rural areas or improve their living conditions as to draw them away from the Brotherhood’s grip? It is easy to point fingers, find excuses, and fall into a state of arrogance where we categorize a segment of the population as worthy of the right to choose their political representatives while denying it to others.

What is alarming in the current Egyptian crisis is the far reaching implications it has on the MENA region and the Sahel. Political Islam has always been stigmatized because of its tendency to promote violence and preach a bloody agenda of extremism, ultra-conservatism and anti-human rights policies, yet when the Political Islam renounced violence in the post Arab Spring through the participation of Islamist factions in the political life (something they have been banned from doing), the reaction from the street and from a certain segment of the population has been outright rejection of their legitimacy and reactionary refusal of an agenda they didn’t even have the chance to assess because of the many prejudices held against it.

Political Islam now is being given another excuse to lose hope in democracy and democratic tools of participation. The rule of law, although preached and professed to be for everyone now appears to be an exclusive right of the secular, the liberal and is forbidden for Islamist models of rule. This leaves no other means for the Islamist to voice their opinions and shape politics other than through violence, which is why the West, championed by the US is reluctant on approving of the military’s move given the disastrous implications it can set in motion in the future.

After Algeria and Palestine, Egypt joins the club of countries where the military unlawfully deposed a democratically elected government shaped by Political Islamist agendas, and the consequences as in these nations is a return of extremist violence, something which we already started witnessing in the Sinai where armed operations against the military are being conducted by Islamist factions.

Closing TV channels to prevent the Brotherhood from decrying the military takeover, rounding up their key figures and claiming that major cities are the only representative of the Egyptian will stems from a fear that Political Islam may become the key force driving politics and Egyptian domestic affairs, a turn event that is far from making the strongholds of corruption happy, and is sure to threaten the economic empire of the military as it did in Turkey with the AKP.

Egypt is in a turning point, and much of the region’s future development will be shaped by what actions are set in action in Egypt during the crisis. Be it a civil war, a return to armed confrontations, a radicalization of the Muslim brotherhood and its operations or a return to civilian rule through the restoration of the president elect are all potential outcomes that can either build or break modern Egyptian democracy, or at least the nation’s stability and security.

Mohamed Amine Belarbi

When Chemical weapons and terrorist groups are better excuses

Syria's Chemical Weapons are a true "game changer" for international terrorism

The last few weeks have been generous in events and catastrophes, from the Boston bombings to the Iraqi bloodshed, from the attack in Libya against the French embassy to the Somali terror wave and the Iranian devastating earthquake, yet the landmark that has been highly overlooked and is of critical importance is the suspected use of chemical weapons in Syria.

The French, British and Israeli intelligence community were affirmative in proclaiming that Assad’s regime indeed had recourse to chemical weapons against the rebels, and the allegations were soon to be followed by several pictures of Syrian casualties presenting symptoms of chemical poisoning which the White House deemed possible yet not supported by clear and irrevocable evidences.

Deemed a “red line” not to be crossed and a “game changer” by Obama, the systematic use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime seems to be a victorious challenge to the current administration who cannot but push away the red line further, hoping that Assad would deign cross it and save the US another humiliating and embarrassing stance.

Yet…

As much as it seem that a potential intervention is unlikely giving the cautious rhetoric of Washington, the events on the ground suggest a wholly different approach. The US has witnessed the last week a convening of various Arab leaders who, by coincidence or design, have been scheduled in the oval office for private talks with the president at around the same time period. From the Emirati crown prince of Abu Dhabi to the leaders of Qatar and Jordan, the choice Obama made is highly strategic since these countries are the main regional players in the Syrian conflict, described by Fox News as “believed to be arming or training the rebel forces that are seeking to overthrow the Syrian government”[1] in a recent article tackling the meetings Obama held with the aforementioned leaders.

The timing of the meetings and the announcement of the usage of Chemical weapons by the Syrian government suggest a covert preparation for an imminent action in Syria. If the evidence about a determinate US plan to intervene military against Assad are blurry, the arguments for such action are not lacking with regards to US interests and national security imperatives.

The chemical weapons stockpiled in Syria are significant in numbers, to the extent that it is believed and assessed by various intelligence communities that “The Syrians have one of the largest chemical weapons arsenals in the world.”[2] Chemical weapons are the main source of alarm for the international community when it comes to the Syrian conflict, first because of the prevalent presence of Al Qaeda affiliates in the battle ground and their noted superiority in combat and organization, and second because of the ease of use and deployment of chemical weapons in terrorist incidents as in the 1995 subway Tokyo attacks.[3]

The Al Nusra rebel front, one of the most powerful factions battling Assad’s regime and by far its most radical, didn’t hide its allegiance to Al Qaeda as not only a small part of the network, but as significant enough to rush the Al Qaeda in Iraq into a merger with the Islamist jihadist cell. The merger was announced by Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, head of the Islamic state in Iraq, who proclaimed: "We announce the abolition of the Islamic state of Iraq's name and Jabhat Al-Nusra's name and their amalgamation in one state under one name: The Islamic state in Iraq and the Levant."[4]

The news stirred a wide controversy regarding the armament of Syrian rebels, an armament pursued with eagerness by Qatar and Co who cannot wait to see Assad regime falling apart. Yet the issue of channeling the weapons to the right people is of little concern compared to the chemical weapons acquisition. The weapons delivered to the Syrian rebellion are of tactical use and have a low range of destruction, aimed primarily at inducing small-scale, targeted damage, while the chemical stockpile of the Syrian government contains primarily Sarin, a nerve gas agent that can spread over large areas and induce quick death through inhalation.[5] (The Tokyo subway attack stands witness to the deadly effect of Sarin that claimed the lives of 13 Japanese in 1995).

The ambitions of Al Nusra front, and of Al Qaeda de facto, to control and lay hand on chemical nerve agents is no news, yet how close the group is to attain such goal is alarming, and indeed helps explain the sense of urgency the intervention in Syria is prompting in the corridors of the White House.

In a recent article in the Telegraph, Colin Freeman writes:

The fight for al-Safira is no ordinary turf war, however, and the prize can be found behind the perimeter walls of the heavily-guarded military base on the edge of town. Inside what looks like a drab industrial estate is one of Syria's main facilities for producing chemical weapons - and among its products is sarin, the lethal nerve gas that the regime is now feared to be deploying in its bid to cling to power.[6]

The prospects of the Chemical weapons falling in the hands of extremist groups are recognized to be not only a domestic threat, but also a severe security breach for all regional actors including Israel and the Arab nations. Most probably the chemical weapons would be directed towards the spots where Al Qaeda is mostly present and where the odds for success are in the group’s favor. Iraq, with its weekly ever rising toll of deaths and attacks, would be the first country outside of Syria where the Sarin nerve agent would be deployed given the ability of the Al Qaeda operatives to smuggle the stockpiles into the wrecked country. Securing the chemical weapons is the priority of al Nusra front, and Syria as it stands now is not a safe haven to safeguard the precious prize. The need to move the chemical weapons to Iraq, if ever recovered by extremist cells, is apparent since the deployment of Sarin gas doesn’t need to be in large proportions. The rationing of the Chemical weapons into mobile portable loads carried by individuals for targeted locations is the modus operandi Al Qaeda would adopt given the restricted access it might have to the substance, and from then on the branching out of the chemical agent would take effect until tracking the initial containers becomes a futile intelligence efforts. The network of dormant cells Al Qaeda manages throughout the MENA region and beyond makes from the acquisition of nerve agent a true “game changer” in international terrorism.

Although many would recall the scandal of the “inexistent” Iraqi WMDs to refute the Chemical weapons excuse to intervene in Syria, the difference today is that we are faced with a situation where WMDs existence is not debated but held as a fact. The Syrian Chemical weapon stockpiles and the omnipresence of Al Qaeda affiliates in the battlefield is not debatable, and the recent battles ranging near military bases harboring nerve agents production and stockpiling facilities hint clearly to the possibility that a catastrophe situation might rise at any moment, a catastrophe where later containment is not an option.

Many have started calling for a more strategic approach towards supporting the Syrian rebellion, and it is now more than ever critical to adopt such a strategy if we are to avoid the unpleasant occurrence of a nerve agent attack in an Iraqi mall or a Lebanese public square.

Judging from the available mappings of Syrian chemical facilities, most installations trail along the western border with Lebanon and the Mediterranean Sea. This geographical occurrence is of high strategic importance: The necessity to control these facilities is easier since most rebel secured areas lay on the western part of the country, and a potential intervention from regional or international corps launched from Lebanon and the Mediterranean shores will allow a quick takeover of the chemical plants to secure and systematically destroy the nerve agents. The establishments of no-fly zone partly over Syria, and specifically over the Western border will enable a constant monitoring of the facilities and an instantaneous response if hostile groups are seen entering the bases.

Moreover, the differing strength of Al Nusra group and the more liberal rebellious factions suggests that the commanders in chief of the free Syrian Army should redirect their efforts and progressions towards the Western border to help secure the stockpiles of chemical weapons, leaving the battle for Damascus and the most costly fights for Al Nusra faction in order to undermine the capabilities of the group and let it bear most casualties and damages in an effort to overtake it financially and logistically in the post-Assad Syria. The redeployment of the free Syrian army fully in the Western part of the country, leaving the Deir Ezor and eastern Aleppo area for the Al Nusra Group will help mildly separate the two rebellious groups and facilitate the directed armament and logistical provision to the Free Syrian army instead of blindly empowering both factions.

The Libyan downfall and the following dispersion of vast amounts of artillery in the region have had a direct effect on facilitating the Malian crisis emergence and AQMI rearmament. Today we are faced with an even more devastating type of weaponry in an area known for its high volatility. The consequences of Chemical weapons falling in the wrong hands will inevitably set new standards for terrorist activities, and will have far reaching impacts regionally and internationally. This is a “game changer” whose significance the US administration and the Arab governments understand very well, therefore the necessity for intervention has turned from a debate into a consensual agreement whose first signals were the series of meetings with Middle Eastern leaders in Washington, and whose ultimate ending will be a dramatic military action in Syria; the road to the final action is and remains convincing an ever skeptical public opinion, a conviction that seems all too well settling down after a tragic set of events that shook the public consciousness and laid a state of fear we have so many times encountered before major military implications in foreign countries.

Mohamed Amine Belarbi

---

[1] Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/16/obama-meets-with-emirati-crown-prince-first-in-series-meetings-with-mideast/#ixzz2Rk014VJQ”

[2] https://medium.com/today-in-syria/b9e9411a7429

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin_gas_attack_on_the_Tokyo_subway

[4] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22078022

[5] http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/25/17917132-how-deadly-nerve-gas-sarin-kills?lite

[6] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10022753/Syria-Al-Qaedas-battle-for-control-of-Assads-chemical-weapons-plant.html

Intervention in Mali: Between necessity and exploitation (Part 1)

In order to offer our readers an insight on the current crisis originating in Mali, we are launching a 2 parts essay analysis that will help clarify the underlying motives for the Tuareg revolution in Mali, Al-Qaeda's influence in the region and the role of the international players in sculpting the outcome of the conflict.

The first essay, titled "THE INTRICACIES OF A MALIAN ‘AZAWADSTAN’ ;  A RALLYING CALL FOR IMMIDIATE INTERVENTION", is a guest post by Samson Faboye from Nigeria.

The second essay, by Mohamed Amine Belarbi, will focus on the opportunities the crisis in Mali offers for regional and international players, as well as the way they ought to be exploited.

THE INTRICASIES OF A MALIAN ‘AZAWADSTAN’ ;  A RALLYING CALL FOR IMMIDIATE INTERVENTION

"Everyone knew this situation was coming; everyone knew that AQIM was present in the region; everyone knew that the Tuareg rebellion from 2008 in Mali had not been decapitated. And yet the Malians did not act."....... Bazoum Mohammed, Niger's foreign minister.    

The situation in Northern Mali, where a rebellion by Tuaregs and Islamic Militants declaring a ‘liberated Azawad’  in the North of Mali and then pushing to the  government controlled South, has alarmed the international community, particularly France. From the dust raised in the recent clash between the Malian Military and extremist Islamic Militant groups; top of which is the ‘Ansar Dine and Mujao’ , both are thought be part of an extensive network of Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM)- though having different ideologies as against the Tuareg rebels of Northern Mali,  the rebellious forces united for a cause---‘shaking off Northern Mali or Azawad from Malian control’.

The vast arid North of Mali (an area the size of France) is covered by the Sahara and is populated by the Tuaregs (a normadic people who live in Mali, Algeria, Libya, Burkina Faso, Mauritania and Niger). Seen as light skinned (though they are called the ‘blue people’) they’ve complained of marginalization in their respective countries of residence. As such the Tuaregs have fought several rebellious wars against the government of Niger, Algeria and Mali.

Despite the separatist intrigues of the Tuaregs in the Sahara, their rebellions have been quelled by force and negotiations over the years by respective governments they rebelled against. However, a statement made by the foreign minister of Niger at the recent Bamako summit in October 2012 hosted to resolve the Malian crises, shows that all is not well with Mali, especially the city that hosts tomb of 333 saints (Timbuktu)! And even her neighbours are alarmed by this dawning gruelling fact.

The rebel held Azawad or Northern Mali is already at a phase of derelict lawlessness and there are fears that it may become Africa’s Afghanistan or Pakistan’s Swat valley…hence the name ‘Azawadstan’!

Among the issues calling for action in Northern Mali are:

    The clash between Tuareg separatist rebels  (MNLA) and Islamist militants. Though having variant ideologies, these groups united to kick out the Malian army from Azawad.

    The destruction of ‘mausoleums’ and tombs of Islamic scholars in Timbuktu—regarded as a world heritage site by the UN.

    The unhindered operation of Islamic militant groups especially (Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb) who are turning Northern Mali to a base or training facility for launching attacks in neighbouring states.

    Most concerned is the Nigerien government, who fear that the Malian instability might just precipitate in their country and serve a distillery for instability in the West African Sub-region.

    The recent capture of Diabaly and the attack on Konna by the Islamist militants, thus puting Bamako (the Malian capital) and the remaining government controlled areas at risk of being united under one ‘Azawadstan’

Intriguingly, the Malian crises does have some foriegn undertones. It is believed to be heightened by the influx of Tuareg fighters from Libya who fought on the side of the defeated Gaddafi loyalist forces during the 2011 Libyan revolution. Surely, the Libyan conflict did not end cheap. With proliferation of weapons during the conflict, it must have added to the lethal force of the Tuareg and Islamic separatist forces.

With hard lessons still being learnt from the Pakistani and Afghanistan situation, there’s a concern for the Malian case not to fall in that line.

There have been calls for an Ecowas military intervention force to liberate Northern Mali as any attempt to allow for an ‘Azawadstan’ may spark Tuareg separatist conflicts in other neighbouring countries and most the most chilling terrorist attacks in the West African subregion and even Europe!. Bearing in mind that Al-Queda linked groups hold sway in the territory, there’s an onus to restore sanity to the rebellious territory.

The Malian North which is a vast expanse of Sahara may not be familiar territory for any Ecowas intervention force. Moreover, there will be need for logistical air support from western powers—a cause which France is spearheading. With the Islamist militants now pushing towards Bamako, the French President has acceded to demands by the Malian Prime minister for help in the face of the ignominious defeat suffered by the Malian army in the hands of the rebels. The swift response of the French has thus encouraged a mobilization of WestAfrican forces to counter the activities of the Malian Islamists.

With the international scene wary of foreign intervention in crises ridden countries, whilst consention cannot be agreed on Syria, the world cannot afford to watch a helpless and hopeless Malian regime turn an Azawadstan!

Samson Faboye