Mali, Sahel et l'Europe

 

1. Situation critique du Mali

• Mali est au bord de l’effondrement en tant qu’État, la majorité de son territoire étant menacée par des groupes armés, dont des organisations terroristes affiliées à Al-Qaïda, à l’État islamique, ainsi que des milices ethniques.

2. Terrorisme et criminalité organisée

• Le financement du terrorisme au Mali provient principalement de sources locales : exploitation artisanale de l’or (liée à des organisations russes qui ont pris la succession du Groupe Wagner), extorsion, enlèvements, péages routiers, vol de bétail et trafic de drogue. La région est un corridor majeur pour les drogues entre l’Amérique latine et l’Europe.

3. Crise humanitaire et sociale

• On observe un trafic généralisé de personnes, de carburant, de tabac et d’armes. Les écoles fonctionnent à peine, sauf les madrasas religieuses, et le chômage des jeunes est massif, poussant beaucoup à rejoindre des groupes armés.

4. Réponse internationale et géopolitique

• Le président de la Commission de l’Union africaine, Mahmoud Ali Youssouf, appelle à une réponse internationale forte, mais l’attention mondiale fait défaut. Le Conseil de sécurité de l’ONU et les puissances européennes se sont désengagés, tandis que l’influence russe s’est accrue après l’expulsion des forces françaises et de la mission de l’ONU.

5. Impact sur l’Europe

• L’instabilité au Sahel, dont le Mali, entraîne une augmentation de la migration, du trafic de drogue et de l’insécurité en Europe, ainsi qu’une perte d’influence géopolitique majeure pour l’Europe dans la région.

6. Perspective historique

• L’auteur se souvient d’une époque où le Mali et ses voisins produisaient des intellectuels et géraient mieux la gouvernance. Mais ces dernières années, l’extrémisme, la criminalité, la corruption, la pression démographique, le changement climatique et l’hostilité extérieure envers les idées démocratiques ont aggravé la situation.

7. Négligence européenne

• L’Union européenne est critiquée pour son absence de stratégie cohérente envers le Sahel, ne s’y intéressant que lorsque les conséquences (comme la migration) atteignent ses propres frontières.

Time to look again at the global order

A new chapter in international relations

Victor Ângelo

Days go by and the world continues to see the dramatic images captured on the perimeter outside Kabul airport, now aggravated by the bomb attack. This is the most visible part of the shock and dread of Afghans who do not believe the promises made by the Taliban. But Afghanistan is larger than Kabul. In the country, especially in the major cities, there is the same panic and despair. Only there, the suffering is far away from the eyes of the world. Those who live in these regions and have the chance, seek refuge in Pakistan or other neighbouring countries.

There are those who think that these images will remain in the memory of humanity for many years to come. And that they will be recalled every time it is convenient to attack Western countries. This will indeed happen. These are scenes that leave a terrible representation of the West, of abandonment, incoherence, and improvisation. The memory issue, on the other hand, is more unlikely. The last two decades have unfortunately abounded in human tragedies. But each new misfortune tends to hide the previous ones. The memory of what happened in Syria, or more recently, of the dramatic situations that the populations of Lebanon, Myanmar and others experience daily, is increasingly faint. At the moment, the Afghan debacle takes up all the screen. 

What we must not forget is that in the eye of the hurricane of conflicts are people. It is time to think in terms of real people, men, women and children, who suffer all the violence, humiliations, terrors and miseries that these crises provoke. International security and diplomacy should be concerned, above all, with the daily lives of those who are victims of extremisms, abuses of power, and all kinds of tyrannies, whether they are in the name of an enlightened leader, a party that holds the absolute truth, or a religious flag.

Three decades ago, the UNDP - United Nations Development Program - helped us to discover an evidence that nobody before wanted or could see. With the release of the first human development report - and the following ones, year by year - it underlined that economic growth only makes sense when it is centered on individuals, in order to lift each one out of poverty, ignorance and ignominy. It is not the GDP that counts, but the progress that each person makes in terms of a life with more dignity.

The scenes around Kabul airport should have a similar effect. And just as the UNDP reports have served to create new alliances in development cooperation, the distress and uncertainties resulting from the handing over of power to the Taliban should be seen as opportunities to build bridges between the great powers, China and Russia included. This week's G7 meeting could have been used to engage Beijing and Moscow in the debate over the conditions of recognition of the new Afghan reality. Unfortunately, this did not happen. The only concern was the vain attempt to convince Joe Biden to extend the US military presence beyond August 31. The meeting confirmed once again that in the West there is no leadership other than the voice of America.

The G7 should be especially concerned about the kind of governance the Taliban will impose. Russia is aware of the risks to the stability of its allies in Central Asia. China is concerned about defending its interests in Pakistan - the Chinese do not rule out a scenario in which Pakistani terrorists and others might operate in the future from Afghanistan and threaten the economic corridor linking China to the Indian Ocean port of Gwadar. Both China and Russia would certainly have a great interest in participating in such a discussion with the G7 countries. This would turn a crisis into an opportunity for a rapprochement between rival powers. Everyone would gain from such a dialogue, starting with the citizens of Afghanistan.

This proposition may seem unrealistic. But the turn of the page imposed on us by the Taliban requires us to look at international relations with a new and forward-looking imagination. Who will take up this challenge?

(Automatic translation of the opinion piece I published yesterday in the Diário de Notícias, the old and prestigious Lisbon newspaper)

 

 

Our collapse in Afghanistan

Kabul: And After the Farewell?

Victor Angelo

 

Two days after the fall of Kabul, China conducted a major military exercise at the gates of Taiwan. It was a simulation of an attack, using a combination of air, naval and electronic jamming means. Taipei says that its defence space was repeatedly violated by Chinese fighter jets. And the exercise was seen as a dress rehearsal of what might follow.

It is clear that this military operation has been planned for some time, as part of a crescendo in recent months. But its intensity, level of penetration and intimidation seem to have been deepened, following what had just happened in Afghanistan.

Chinese leaders know that the American administration is fully focused on the aftermath of the chaos in Kabul. The Far East does not fit on Washington's political radar at the moment. More importantly, the new international reality - the image of a great power’s defeat - opened the opportunity to make the exercise more offensive, in a new test of American resolve regarding the protection of Taiwan's sovereignty.

Seen from Beijing, the events in Afghanistan indicate that American public opinion is less willing to commit itself to wars that are not its own, in distant lands, difficult to locate on the map and to understand culturally. Xi Jinping and his people have now become more convinced that the Americans will once again bow to the fait accompli. In this case, the reality that would result from the occupation of Taiwan by force. In this view, Washington would react with much ado, but would in fact hesitate until finally abandoning the hypothesis of a military response.

This may be a misjudgement on the part of the Chinese. But the truth is that the Americans have just projected an image that seems to confirm their choice of a policy of absolute primacy of national interests and that alliances with others only last as long as they do. That is, as long as they serve US interests. This image harms NATO, among others. Besides giving more arguments to those who say that the Atlantic Alliance is just a train of countries pulled by the US, it might make leaders like Vladimir Putin believe that they will not suffer major consequences if they cross certain red lines and threaten the security of European countries. It also undermines the fight for the primacy of rights and principles in political matters. Keeping human rights high on the international agenda when the population of Afghanistan has been abandoned to the primitivism of the Taliban is now more difficult.

Although it is still too early to assess the full consequences of the tragic end of twenty years of intervention in Afghanistan, the evidence is that it has changed the geopolitical chessboard in that part of the globe. We now have, side by side, three fanatical states, each in its own way. One, Pakistan, with nuclear capability. Another, Iran, with nuclear potential. And both in the orbit of China. The third, Afghanistan, is a powder keg domestically, a source of regional instability, and a possible breeding ground for international terrorist movements. Beyond the states, there are the people, who suffer the effects of fanaticism, oppression, corruption, and who live a daily life of misery and fear.

The European Union cannot look at these populations only through the prism of uncontrolled migrations. Unfortunately, this was the concern that guided the speeches of Emmanuel Macron and Josep Borrell, among others, when they spoke publicly about the new Afghanistan. It was as if they only saw hordes of Afghan migrants on their way to Europe. At a serious moment, which requires an innovative diplomatic strategy and an adequate humanitarian response, it is unacceptable to reduce the Afghan problem to a possible migratory crisis. The EU must learn the necessary lessons with regard to security, participation in conflict resolution in third countries and autonomy vis-à-vis the major powers. And it must seek to define a political framework to guide its way of dealing with backward-looking, hostile and inhumane regimes. As, for example, with the bearded men in Kabul.

(Automatic translation of the opinion piece I published yesterday in the Diário de Notícias, the old and prestigious Lisbon newspaper)

The Shael without Idriss Déby

New uncertainties next door in the Greater Sahel

Victor Angelo

 

In 1990, the Chadian rebel leader Idriss Déby returned to the country from Sudan. He led a column of armed men, composed mainly of fighters from his home region.  Days later he seized power in Ndjamena, with the approval of François Mitterrand. The French president knew his geopolitics. He saw Chad as the essential node for the interests, influence and security of France and its client states in that part of Africa. Therefore, it was essential that it be controlled by a strong man, consistent and friendly to France. Déby had this profile. And successive French presidents got used to turning a blind eye to systematic human rights violations, high-scale corruption, and the tribalization of power, so as not to weaken their ally in Ndjamena.

The support became even more solid when Déby decided that his troops would be, on the African side, the strong arm in the fight against the different jihadist groups that terrorize the populations of the Sahel. His military became by far the best prepared in the region. Even against Boko Haram, Chad's capability is far superior to Nigeria's. The UN mission in Mali (MINUSMA) has a considerable Chadian presence - 1400 troops, with a more offensive posture than most other blue helmets. In addition, Déby had just sent an additional 1200-man brigade, as part of the regional military cooperation known as G5 Sahel, to the three-border area especially targeted by terrorists - the triangle where Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso converge.

The military institutions of the countries in the region are structurally weak and kept that way by politicians, who are more afraid of possible coups than of terrorists. Of all the neighbours, only Déby, trained as an officer in France and hardened in the desert campaigns, was a true war chief. His combativeness was legendary. In 2008, a rebel faction arrived at the gates of his palace. Nicolas Sarkozy proposed that he be exfiltrated into a golden exile. Déby and other loyalists, some of them now members of the Transitional Military Council, refused, preferring to fight to the end. And they eventually defeated the assailants. Shortly afterwards, as the UN Special Representative, I discussed this crisis with Déby. I recall three points from that meeting. First, the recognition that his troops were neither organized nor equipped effectively. Second, the decision to spend a good deal of oil money on transforming his fighters into professional soldiers. Third, the decision to seek an understanding with Omar al-Bashir's Sudan, as he had already done with Gaddafi's Libya, so that neighbouring territories would not be used as bases for launching rebellions. And so it was. By late 2009, the difference was already clear. Since then, these capabilities have been consolidated. France, the United States, and other Westerners began to see Chad as the spearhead against terrorism and religious extremism. Criticism of dictatorship and nepotism have been put in the freezer.

But in these lands of instability, life takes many turns. Déby closed his cycle this week, perhaps in a similar way to the one he did thirty years ago. Only this time the rebel column was from the tribe next door, it came from Libya, and the president fell on the front line. Chad, Central Africa, the Sahel, France, and the Europeans present in the region became more fragile.

Several questions arise from the disappearance of Idriss Déby. What motivated President Macron to leave him without his usual support, when in 2019 he had sent fighters to quell a similar rebellion? Miscalculation? Who is behind this new rebellion, known as FACT (Front for Change and Concord in Chad)? What impact will the new reality have on the conflict in the Central African Republic? What to expect from the G5 Sahel and the fight against terrorism in this part of Africa? Each of these questions hides many uncertainties and concerns. The future of the poor people of Chad is the greatest of them.

(Automatic translation of the opinion piece I published today in the Diário de Notícias, the old and prestigious Lisbon newspaper)

 

 

Mozambique and the Northern challenge

Mozambique: a complex crisis

Victor Ângelo

 

 

Following last week’s terrorist attack on the town of Palma, eighteen civil society organisations sent an open letter to the President of Mozambique. In addition to condemning the acts of violence, the letter expressed concern and reminded President Filipe Nyusi that a crisis as serious as the present requires more and better public communication from national leaders.  The recommendation means that the leadership of the country does not pay due attention to the obligation to keep the citizens informed. The practice of playing down the problems is the norm. We cannot be surprised. Opacity, arrogance, and detachment are three of the characteristics that have traditionally defined the political culture of the elites in power in Maputo.

It is also noticeable that citizens do not understand what the government's strategy is, beyond the use of the armed forces, which, by the way, have shown that they are not entirely prepared for the challenge. NGOs do not believe in the national military capacity and know that there is no time to wait for the training of special forces in sufficient numbers. It is true that training special troops is essential. The willingness expressed by the Portuguese government to do so is to be commended. But the situation is urgent, for humanitarian and other reasons. What has now occurred in Palma, and what had already happened in Mocímboa da Praia and other district headquarters in Cabo Delgado province, may spread along the northern coast, especially to areas where Swahili is the lingua franca. NGOs recommend that the authorities ask the Southern African Development Community and the African Union for security assistance. I do not think they will. They do not want critical eyes around or to give the impression that the problem requires regional involvement.

It is clear, however, that this is a more serious conflict than has hitherto been thought. The offensive against Palma was planned in a professional manner. One of the conclusions that must be drawn is clear: behind all this there is an organising hand. It is essential to unmask this hand, which seems to me far more sophisticated than a vague jihadist connection.

Apparently, the central objective is to prevent the gas megaproject, which is being launched in the region, from going ahead. The price of natural gas on the international markets is at an all-time low and the trend is for it to remain that way. It is of no interest to the big gas producers for new competitors to appear, especially one that could have enormous impact. Mozambique's reserves are in third place in Africa, after Nigeria and Algeria. When they will start to be extracted - which will only happen if security is restored in the province - they will be in direct competition with Iran, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, which are respectively the world's third, fourth and eighth largest producers. I am not pointing the finger at anyone, but geopolitics recommends that we look at data like this. Especially if we take into account that future demand for gas could stagnate for reasons of the fight against climate change. International public opinion is less and less favourable to investments in hydrocarbons.

The fundamental point, beyond the clean-up of Palma, humanitarian aid and technical-military assistance to Mozambique, is to try to understand the roots and dynamics of this terrorist offensive. To minimise, to ignore the realities of social exclusion or to insist on stereotypical explanations - including those referring to alleged links to the so-called Islamic State - would be a mistake. We are facing an insurrection capable of serving certain interests and easy to promote. These are fighters who know how to survive with little, without the need for elaborate logistics. The weapons come from desertions, from previous ambushes, now from the attack on Palma, and from the illegal markets for military equipment in East and Central Africa. They do not want to occupy land, but to shoot the representatives of power and generate insecurity in areas with economic interest, but with a weak State presence. They are therefore highly dangerous individuals. They need to be taken seriously, but without simplistic approaches.

   (Automatic translation of the opinion piece I published today in the Diário de Notícias, the old and prestigious Lisbon newspaper)

 

 

 

 

 

Discussing security and governance in the Sahel

In the Sahel, a lot of military and little politics

Victor Angelo

 

The call came from Bamako. On the other end of the line was a former colleague, now back home after a brilliant career in the United Nations. The essence of his conversation was against the massive presence of foreign troops in his country. There are more and more of them, both in the framework of the UN mission - known by the acronym MINUSMA - and due to calls by France. Contrary to recent statements by Emmanuel Macron, who said that the war against terrorism in the Sahel was being won, my friend told me about the deterioration of the situation in Mali and in neighbouring countries. In other words, there are more military personnel but, paradoxically, less security.

Let us look at the latest statistics from the International Organization for Migration. They count about 1.7 million displaced persons due to instability and armed actions in this part of the Sahel, especially in the tri-border area between Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso - a region known as Liptako. It is estimated, on the other hand, that about seven thousand lives were lost in the last twelve months due to acts of terrorism and counterterrorist prevention and response operations. These are figures well above the average of previous years. What is more, a recent United Nations investigation shows that war crimes and atrocities have been committed in Mali since 2013. The report, which in addition to pointing the finger at terrorists calls into question the armed forces of certain states, has fallen into a deep hole in the Security Council and awaits debate at the Greek calends. 

Liptako is a vast territory, with an area where Portugal could fit three times over. The Fulas, as nomadic herdsmen and itinerant traders in long caravans, have traditionally shared these dry, harsh expanses with other ethnic groups. But ways of life have changed. Accelerated population growth in recent decades, coupled with enormous pressure from cattle rearing - a multiplication of herds -, increasingly irregular and scarce rainfall due to climate change, poverty and the absence of effective state administration have contributed to a widespread environment of social instability, rebellion and conflict. The rush for gold, which began to be exploited intensively on an artisanal basis some twenty years ago, has also attracted new waves of violence. This is the framework in which various armed gangs move and operate under the confused banners of the terrorist network of the Islamic State in the Greater Sahara (ISGS) or, further north, on the way to the border with Algeria, the people affiliated to Al-Qaeda. Religious fanaticism serves as an excuse or muddles along with banditry. For many young people, the Kalashnikov has replaced the shepherd's stick or the farmer's hoe in a context that is becoming progressively more arid, unpredictable, and dangerous. Someone from the region told me that joining an armed group is for many an act of self-protection.

There is a huge problem here that fundamentally requires two types of approach: one will be political and the other will be to combat desertification and poverty. I will mention only the political part, which requires the inclusion of all, without discrimination on ethnic grounds. It also means publicly showing a firm hand against corruption, in military institutions and state administrations. Inclusion and probity are two fundamental issues, which must be resolved by national elites.

 The European partners have closed their eyes and pretended not to see these problems. For example, they have been training officers in the Malian armed forces for years, knowing fully well that these officers have kept a tribal mentality and systematically divert resources intended for the country's stabilisation effort to their own advantage. We need to change the way we act in the Sahel. Dialogue with the countries in the region must be respectful. The future that is at stake is theirs, independently of the external dimensions. We cannot take the direction of the process away from them. Being more papist than the Pope in other people's land is a practice that must be put away once and for all, in a drawer of the past. But it must be a frank dialogue.

 

(Automatic translation of the opinion piece I published today in the Diário de Notícias, the old and prestigious Lisbon newspaper)

 

 

 

Europe's next door threat

The caricature of a megalomaniac politician

Victor Angelo

 

My text of last week on Islamist radicalism provoked several reactions. The Portuguese friends, who have always lived in Portugal, although with many tourist trips in the curriculum, were surprised by my description of the intolerance in certain schools and in some segments of French society. This is a situation that does not occur in Portugal. Here nobody intimidates anyone by mentioning Infante D. Henrique, Mouzinho de Albuquerque or the atheist José Saramago. Friends living in the Europe of immigration - in Belgium, for example - have recognised in my chronicle situations that are familiar to them. The rejection of values that we consider fundamental and life in social silos are commonplace. They added that it takes courage to talk about these things, in a balanced way and without falling into primary and racist recrimination. I have also received messages from former co-workers, who live out their Muslim faith in many parts of the world. For them, the problem lies in the mockery, the caricatures, their interpretation as an instrument of the Europeans' onslaught against Islam.

I remembered then that at the ceremony to honour Professor Samuel Paty, President Emmanuel Macron said that France would not give up the cartoons. I understand that position. What others see as an unforgivable offence is for us a simple expression of freedom. Religion is a subject like any other. In Europe, the collapse of the idea of blasphemy began in 1789 with the French Revolution.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan clung to Macron's statement about the drawings to treat his French counterpart as mentally ill. He said it repeatedly, so that there would be no doubt about the insult. For Erdogan, the drawing of a bottom end in the air is more shocking than the inhumane persecution of millions of Muslims by the Xi Jinping regime. He does not get nervous, he says nothing about it.

We live in unique times, with one head of state harassing another, from an allied country. Erdogan's hostility towards Macron is nothing new. It began right after the French president's term began in 2017. There are several points of friction between them, starting with the French opposition to Turkey's accession to the EU and continuing in Libya, Syria, in support of Greek sovereignty in the Mediterranean Sea and more and more. There is also enormous tension within NATO, where France accuses Turkey of holding back the organisation's strategy when it comes to regions in which Ankara is directly involved.

On top of all this, I can guess that Erdogan wants to break the alliance that exists between Paris and Berlin. He is investing against France knowing that Germany, where more than four million people with Turkish roots live, does not have much room for manoeuvre to take a stand in solidarity with France. By attacking this pillar of the EU and maintaining the recurrent threat of opening the gates to a new wave of migration to Europe, similar to that which occurred in 2015, Erdogan's Turkey constitutes the most important risk to the survival of the European project.

At the December European Council it is absolutely necessary that the leaders of the member states take a tough stance against the Turkish president. In international politics, there are only two possible positions before a bully: give in and end up paying a high price, or else confront him with all the necessary diplomatic arsenal.

Salman Rushdie warns us that "fundamentalism is not about religion, but about power". Erdogan sees himself as the leader of Sunni Muslims and the guardian of the faithful in the face of the so-called European attacks. He combines megalomania with fanaticism. In collusion with the radicals of the Muslim Brotherhood and with the financial support of Qatar, Erdogan has established in several European countries a series of associations which, under the guise of religion, culture and humanitarian action, promote totalitarian interpretations of the Koran and its image as a defender of the faith.

One of the tasks of the European security services is to monitor these associations and their most influential members. It is, however, an almost impossible mission. Monitoring every potentially violent extremist, to be done properly, requires around twenty officers, twenty-four hours a day. The real answer must therefore be political and shared by all European countries. 

(Machine translation of my opinion column of today, published in the Portuguese newspaper Diário de Notícias, Lisbon)

 

 

Fighting for a changed approach to security in conflict zones

Following what I wrote yesterday about the national armies in some of the Sahelian countries – that their low operational capacity is one of the key problems, on top of their human rights shortcomings and other serious governance issues – I was reminded by a friend of the example of Somalia. The international community, including European resources, have been engaged in the country for a long time with little results. Billions have been spent and many lives lost. However, the terrorists are all over, including in the capital city. And the national army, that we all have trained and keep repeating is essential to solve the insecurity threats, has a fighting capacity that is estimated at 8%. That means that almost everyone in the army is not prepared to fight an asymmetric war and cannot collect the intelligence needed to crush the terrorist cells. Or, there are two fundamental dimensions of any stabilisation project. They are not enough but if they do not happen nothing else can be achieved.

That’s why I keep repeating that we must look at these matters with frankness and be clear about what is going on and what needs to change. If we fail to do it, if we keep pretending and talk niceties, we will keep investing in the sand of those vast deserts. We will be wasting resources and lives. And we will be undermining the credibility of the international institutions and other players that are operating in such contexts. Can’t we find the courage to shift our approach?

The Taliban deal

I see the deal signed today in Doha, Qatar, between the U.S. Administration and the medieval armed group that is known as the Taliban of Afghanistan, a terrorist organization, as follows:

1.  It gives the Taliban a good amount of legitimacy and political standing. Both within their country and in the international arena. It is therefore a victorious move for them. It puts the Taliban in a much stronger position than the national government.

2. It is an electoral manoeuvre played by the U.S. President. Donald Trump wants to be able to claim, during the coming months leading to the November Presidential election, that he brought the war in Afghanistan to an end.  Or, at least, that he brought the American soldiers back home from a protracted foreign conflict.

3.  It will not lead to inter-Afghan peace negotiations. The deal was not discussed with the legitimate government in Kabul and it is not seen by its leaders as a commitment they own. The official government will keep fighting the Taliban.

4.  It does not include a justice and reconciliation approach. The atrocities the Taliban are responsible for are just ignored.

5.  It encourages other Islamist groups in other parts of the world to keep fighting.

6.  It took the American allies also deployed in Afghanistan, under the NATO-banner called Resolute Support Mission, for granted. They were not part of the process. They are just supposed to follow suit. Those NATO allies have about 16,000 troops on the ground.

NATO and the Sahel

As we approach the door of the London NATO Summit, which opens on 3 December, we cannot ignore one of the key questions the Alliance must address: what kind of role should it play in North Africa and the Sahel?

But before answering it, the member States should recognise that such region is closely linked to some important European countries. Its security will have an impact on those countries, sooner or later. And not just on matters of illegal migrations. An expansion of terrorist groups out there will end up by spilling over to Europe.

One cannot look at North Africa and the Sahel as if they were in a far corner of the world.

The Special Operations and the Special One

The recent American operation against the leader of the Islamic State must be recognised as a major success. In addition, I would mention three facts that are also of great import.

First, it was once again clear that the US Intelligence machinery is the best in world. They know how to establish information collection networks and they have the means and the capacity to achieve results in very hostile environments.  

Second, the US Special Operations Units are also top performers. They prepare well, train extensively the scenario they might expect and have the determination and the courage to undertake very risky operations.

Third, the President is a political disaster, whatever the prism you may use to look at him. The way he told the story was most embarrassing. He couldn’t go beyond his own self and was unable to give the moment the seriousness it deserved. He is just a poorly informed amateur. Fortunately, behind him, there is an intelligence community and a military establishment that know what they are supposed to do.

Afghan elections: people's determination

Tomorrow, it’s elections day in Afghanistan. It’s the presidential election, with the incumbent President, Ashraf Ghani, running against the leading politician Abdullah Abdullah, who has been the number two in governing arrangement that now comes to an end. There are another 15 or 16 candidates in the ballot paper. But the real contest is between the Ghani and Abdullah. They hate each other but have been able to sit side by side in many recent occasions. That’s striking. In my opinion, the fact that the country is somehow able to organise an elections day is even more memorable. It is true that in some areas there will be no vote because of the security situation. People are desperate for peace. They want to vote; they want democracy and normalcy to win.

It will be a very tense day, a risky process, with the Taliban and other armed groups trying to disrupt the election. I can only wish them a safe day and express my admiration for their perseverance. The Afghan people deserve all the support the international community can provide them.

Iran, West Africa and the info war game

We are witnessing the emergence of a new campaign against Iran that includes “information” about that country’s growing presence in West Africa, the Sahel and Sudan. It basically says that, following data available to certain security agencies – not named –, Iran is engaged in building a network of terrorist cells in those regions of Africa. Those cells would later be activated against Western interests in the countries concerned.

I have known these corners of Africa for decades. And I have several friends in positions of authority in the area, including in matters of internal security. There is indeed a serious increase of radical activities and armed groups over there. But their link with Iran seems very unlikely. Certainly, very difficult to prove. Those radicals are inspired by Sunni fundamentalism, whilst Iran is a Shiite proponent of Islam.

What I have noticed, and my friends have confirmed, is that the new radicalism in that belt of Africa is mainly supported by groups and mosques based in Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, especially in Qatar, as well as in Pakistan. In addition, there is also some influence coming from Egypt.

Security as a big issue

Terrorist threats will be a key security issue in the years ahead of us. 

In the case of the EU, some extrapolations indicate that in five-to-seven years we will have to keep a close watch on some 40 to 50,000 European residents that might be classified as S. This code letter means that one with an S in front of his or her name is a potential security risk, from a terrorist perspective. 

That’s a lot of people to keep monitoring. It will be very difficult to find enough resources to do it thoroughly. That means that cooperation and coordination between all the security agencies will be a fundamental requirement. It also means that the citizens must be prepared to ensure a greater level of security of their own collective initiatives.

The investigation must be thorough

The brutal acts of terrorism that occurred on Easter Sunday in Sri Lanka raise a good number of key questions. The answers are not yet known. They require time and serious analysis of every piece of information. One of the most important questions must be about the mastermind. The attacks have shown a very high degree of preparation, a well organised chain of command and a deep effort of indoctrination, the brainwashing of the suicide bombers. All this is profoundly disturbing. One needs to find out what kind of structure allowed this level of coordinated, well-targeted destruction. First, the families of the victims must know who is responsible. Second, we all need to be sure that such capacity to do evil is annihilated.  

Poor Sri Lanka

This Easter Sunday has been a sad day for humanity. In Sri Lanka, barbarians planned and executed a series of terrorist attacks against innocent people in churches and hotels. Scores died and many were wounded. And the country itself, still trying to find peace after so many years of a tragic civil war, has also seen its image being seriously affected. Everyone should express deep shock and strong condemnation of such violence.

Christchurch, New Zealand

The terrorist attacks against the people attending religious services in two Christchurch mosques must be condemned with the strongest words possible. There is no room for ambiguities. This type of violence is abhorrent to the most fundamental values the modern societies share. It should have no place in today’s world.

Racism of any kind, terrorism of any nature, blind killings of innocent people, these are some of the most heinous crimes one can commit. They must be punished with the appropriate severity. And the leaders must say and do the right things that can give comfort to the victims and their families and help to restore the confidence within the communities.

In New Zealand, the Prime Minister has been exemplary in the way she has responded to this very traumatic crisis. Congratulations to PM Jacinda Ardern. And also our deepest sympathies to all concerned, those directly affected and the people of New Zealand.

Sahel and the Islamist threat

Another link on the Sahel security situation:

https://africacenter.org/spotlight/the-complex-and-growing-threat-of-militant-islamist-groups-in-the-sahel/

Supporting the Kurds in Syria

All indications, facts and intelligence, and independent media reports, show that the so-called Islamic State is still a serious threat in North-Eastern Syria. It would be utterly irresponsible for any democratic leader do deny it.

Moreover, all the support that can be provided to those inside Syria that have demonstrated their determination to effectively fight the IS terrorists should be sustained. That’s the case of the Kurdish fighters under the banner of the Syrian Democratic Forces.

That support must include political negotiations with the Turkish government, even if one knows that such initiative is not easily accepted by President Erdogan. Without ignoring Erdogan’s belligerent approach towards the Syrian Kurds, my recommendation is to keep the strategic liaison with Ankara as close as possible. Turkey must be part of the Syrian stabilization process. There should be no doubt about that, as there is no doubt about the critical role played by the Syrian Kurds and their fellow allies. All this, as we make sure everyone understands that any form of terrorism, war crimes and violence are absolutely unacceptable. 

My reading of the G20 summit (2017)

On the recent G20, the negative issues on the table, either openly or coated in diplomatic words, could be summarised as follows:

- The risks linked to international uncontrolled massive migrations;

- The US withdrawal from the Paris accord on Climate Change

- New trends towards trade protectionism

- The attempts to side-line key international organisations, including the UN, the WTO and the Human Rights Council.

The positives, as I see them:

- Establishment of a new fund, to be administered by the WB, to promote the entrepreneurship of African women; USD 325 million.

- The review of steel overcapacity issue and the recommendation that a plan of action should be prepared by Nov. 2017 to address this most divisive economic and trade issue.

- More coordination on the fight against terrorism and violent extremism.

- The leaders have shown they want to find a common ground on a number of issues.