New Promises, Old War

Today, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton traveled to Africa to issue a new pledge of support for Somalia in its on-going conflict with insurgent group Al Shabaab. Secretary Clinton also issued a sharp rebuke to neighboring Eritrea for its alleged support of Al Shabaab and promised to pursue sanctions. But, at a time when our armed forces are stretched thin and entirely committed to the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, what kind of support can we actually give?

Somalia has been plagued by war since the 1970's and has essentially been under failed state status since the beginning of the Somali Civil War in the early 1990's. Extremist Islamic groups began consolidating power by recruiting local war lords from 2004 to present. Ethiopia intervened and, together with African Union forces as well as international military support including US gunships, shut down the radical Islamic pseudo government called the Islamic Courts Union. But, in early 2009, Ethiopia withdrew, leaving behind the AU peacekeepers who were wholly unprepared for the coming rewnewal of conflict.

Here in the US, we only recently gained insight into new developments in Somalia when several Somali immigrants suddenly returned to Somalia to take part in the resurgent civil war. The catalyst was when one of the naturalized US citizens returned to Somalia and became the first American to ever carry out a suicide bombing. Now, Somalia is suddenly back on the map in terms of foreign policy. The country is under constant assault from a terrorist organization (Al Shabaab) known to have ties to Al Qaeda.

So why don't we have troops there? Simply put, we don't have the man power. The US can't afford to send valuable logistical resources and troops to Somalia when we are already falling behind in Afghanistan and trying to finish out the campaign in Iraq. Also, the infamous Black Hawk Down scenario is a sharp reminder of how easy it can be to get bogged down in Somalia.

The gut check here is rather bitter. Somalia is one of those places where we should have done it right the first time, but politics got in the way of conducting military opperations. Now, years later, Somalia is a breeding ground for Al Qaeda. But, the fact that the AU is beginning to stand on its own changes the situation dramatically. If an AU lead operation were to be successful in Somalia with help from the international community, the AU would gain extreme amounts of credibility in conflict solving. Right now, Secretary Clinton's diplomatic strategy, putting the pressure on those who supply Al Shabaab (allegedly Eritrea) and other insurgent groups, is the prudent course. If it gets to the point where we have to send military forces, I hope we send something harder to hit with an RPG than a black hawk.

Minnesota Radicals

A couple of days ago, an unknown story became front page news, carrying with it undertones of fear. The story ran on the front page of the NY Times and, shortly thereafter, became headline news across the nation. The story investigated an incident in which several immigrants from Somalia, who all lived in Minneapolis, had suddenly returned to their homeland to join rebel forces in the raging fight in and around Mogadishu. At least three have since turned up dead.

The fighting in Somalia is between disparate cells of rebels and insurgents and the main government force. Originally, the rebel forces were fighting mostly Ethiopian troops as Ethiopia had invaded Somalia to push out the radical Islamic groups. However, Ethiopia has since withdrawn from Somalia leaving government forces augmented by African Union peacekeepers (nice to see the AU stepping

up) to secure the country. The main rebel force is the al Shabaab militia comprised by a majority of Somalis. There are foreign elements which give the Shabaab links to groups like the Taliban and especially Al Qaeda.

This story, upon a closer read, becomes even more disturbing. Of the three found dead, one of the immigrants had blown himself up in a suicide bombing, at the same time becoming the first naturalized US citizen to become a suicide bomber. All research indicates that the al Shabaab militia wasn't involved with foreign groups until the past few years. Before they had a foreign element amongst them, they never engaged in suicide bombings. This would seem to indicate that the al Shabaab militia has been infected with a much more radical form of Islamic influence.

The clear link here is Al Qaeda, which has a history of operating in Africa and especially Somalia. In many of his early messages, Bin Laden actually used the US's intervention in Somalia in the early 90's (the infamous Black Hawk Down scenario) as a motivating factor. He praised the rebels to striking fear into the US and making their soldiers run like cowards. He also used it as a call to radicalize.

The Minneapolis men that have returned to join the fighting are all in their early twenties, a time in their life when they are most susceptible given their background to being radicalized. The issue here that is so disturbing is how these men were recruited. A few days after the story ran on the front page of the NY Times, CNN reported that two men had been arrested in Minneapolis for recruiting and radicalizing these young men. But the consequences of their actions send a message loud and clear: US citizens can be radicalized and even turned into suicide bombers.

Unfortunately, this continuously developing story will probably lead to greater scrutiny of immigrants from conflict areas where radical Islamic groups are known to opperate. That factor, coupled with radical recruiting, could be enough to push a candidate over the edge. But, the gut check here is that not every immigrant with an Islamic sounding name is a potential terrorist.