Top Got Topped

In July, two luxury hotels were blown up by suicide bombers in Jakarta, Malaysia. This dastardly act of terrorism came just in time for the anniversary of the Mumbai attacks last year. At the time, no group had come forward to claim responsibility for the bombings, but Indonesia authorities had linked it to a Jemaah Islamiyah splinter group lead by a notorious terrorist known as Noordin M. Top.

Today, Top got topped when Indonesian authorities engaged Top and his entourage in a gunfight and ensuing siege. The Indonesian authorities gave him an opportunity to surrender, to which Top and his men answered with more gunfire; so the authorities responded by blowing up the building where Top and his men were hold up.

The gut check here is simple. Top's group was responsible for a dastardly act of terrorism that ended the lives of many civilians. If he had been caught alive, he would have been executed anyway. At least this way they don't have to waste the time and money on conducting a trial. Now, if only we were as effective at hunting down singular terrorist leaders as the Indonesians, bin Laden wouldn't stand a chance. The Indonesians found Top two months after the Jakarta bombings. That's some serious motivation.

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.

Operation Treadmill

While the world was preoccupied with Iraq, Afghanistan quietly became more and more lost. Now, with Iraq winding down, the upcoming round of elections is providing a critical review of democratic progress in Afghanistan. With Karzai facing down two main challengers in a field of contestants, the elections themselves are far from decided, much less guaranteed to even happen given a new outbreak of violence. At issue is whether or not the US has succeeded in creating a secure environment in which democracy can flourish.

Since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the US presence in Afghanistan has done little to provide security. The Taliban as well as other insurgent groups have enjoyed tacit freedom in the no-mans-land area on the boarder betwen Pakistan and Afghanistan due to the extreme complexity of the terrain. As a result, the Taliban and other insurgent groups have been able to essentially ressurect their forces and produce a new wave of violence that is threatening the stability of the upcoming Afghani elections. In fact, reports indicate that Taliban and Afghani insurgents have reached a new level of sophistication in guerrilla warfare that has significantly increased their operating range, their combat effectiveness, and their overall lethality.

Part of the reason the mission Afghanistan has slid so far backwards is the policies and strategies of the Bush adminstration. Under Bush, the US basically contracted local war lords to provide intelligence and regional security. As a result, the war lords were basically given the freedom to enlarge their private armies and run their opium poppy trade, leading to a massive boom in the Afghani heroin trade. This drug trade boom put money directly into the hands of Al Qaeda and the Taliban. In response to this backsliding, President Obama announced his new plan for Afghanistan at the end of May and later developed a new drug policy.

But, even if his strategic plan enjoys marginal success, it is no guarantee that the US's political plans for Afghanistan succeed. In 2001, Karzai looked like the best choice to lead Afghanistan given that he would work closely with the US and had the charisma and character needed to lead. Now, he presides over what is largely seen as a corrupt government. The lesson that the US has continuously failed to learn is that we can't simply choose who should lead a country, the leader has to be organically chosen.

The gut check here is that Afghanistan is in a very precarious position. US forces have a long way to go to guarantee stability. If it's too dangerous, the elections might not be viable. If it is stable enough but the US is too involved, the elections will be seen as biased or even rigged. But, if the US holds too much back and the Taliban, Al Qaeda, or some other insurgent group have too much freedom to influence the voting, the Taliban could enjoy a political revitalization as well. The key is to provide a secure atmosphere so the elections can be held free of violence while not influencing the voting in any way.

From Jakarta to Mumbai

On friday, two American luxury hotels in Jakarta, the JW Marriott and the Ritz Carlton, were attacked by suicide bombers. Although no one has claimed responsibility for the attacks yet, the initial invesitgation by Indonesian authorities links the terrorists to a small Jemaah Islamiyah splinter group lead by a notorious terrorist known as Noordin M. Top. According to the AP, Top, an explosives specialist, has been linked to several previous bombings in Indonesia including the same Marriott and the Australian embassy. Jemaah Islamiyah has also been linked with Al Qaeda.

In a fitting juxtaposition, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appeared in Mumbai less than twenty four hours after the bombings in Indonesia to mark the brutal terrorist siege last fall. Underscored by such a horrendous act the previous day, Secretary Clinton issued a passionate call to action, calling on allies to do more to fight terrorism. How effective that call was will remain to be seen.

At issue here is the effectiveness of diplomatic efforts in fighting terrorism. India and Indonesia, as well as other countries in the region, have had a hell of a time dealing with terrorist groups due to the presence of both domestic and foreign cells as well as their increasing sophistication and secrecy. Also, when most people hear that these groups are linked to Al Qaeda, they don't really understand what that means. Al Qaeda literally translated means "the foundation." That name isn't just symbolic as most links to Al Qaeda aren't traceable like a money trail or a transfer of hard materials like explosives or weapons. More often than not, groups are linked to Al Qaeda by mere rhetoric or shared Islamic ideology or purely by communication, their own form of diplomacy.

The gut check here is that countries facing these threats of terrorism are already doing a great deal to protect their citizens. Ever since 9/11, terrorism has been the foremost international threat, and the US has seen fit to keep it that way. Countries like India and Indonesia who have suffered multiple horrendous terrorist attacks over the past several years and even more attacks before that are spending a great deal of resources to protect themselves from further harm. But, the reality is that they can only do so much. Secretary Clinton's call to action today, while nice in its symbolism, doesn't actually do any good. In fact, such prods will eventually shift from tedious to annoying to angering. No ammount of money, training or logistics can stop a well trained and hell bent suicide bomber. The only thing we can hope to do is to trace the actions back to the leaders and stop them like the Indonesian authorities are doing.

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.