First, the update on what is going on : ( EuroNews )
We have given two posts to Mali; a third is needed. After the rebels and the hardware comes the intent. Who, how and now why!
A couple months ago, France sought to have the Malian problem solved by Africans and now here they are, in a former colony.
What’s changed? The rebels got ready faster than the African force supposed to face them. That’s what!
So that when France got a call from Mali to help, they could not refuse. Even though it had done just that earlier in CDR, also an ex-colony.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2013%5C01%5C14%5Cstory_14-1-2013_pg4_2
The UN had already recognized the need; it’s just that the timeframe to overcome it had been overestimated.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/french-jets-pound-islamist-strongholds/story-e6frg6so-1226553256495
The first moral hurdle, that of international agreement, the same that we cannot agree on for Syria, is cleared. The UK with transport planes and in respect of the Lancaster House accords, the US with surveillance and possible logistics as well as the Germans but without troops involved are backing the French. Algeria opened its airspace. In Africa, Togo, Benin, Niger and Nigeria as well as Senegal and Burkina Faso will provide about 500 troops each.
It then comes to mind to check for possible gains from the situation to be had by France in order to eliminate profit as a motive. That is a little bit more complicated but can still be answered. In general, what France gains by playing cop to Africa is that its ties to ex-colonies endure and the profits from that captive market are important. That is why France still has all these military bases in Africa.
What it stands to lose is already known : its remaining hostages in the Saharian region, some soldiers and attacks as promised here :
And a budgetary cost although that is often a disguised boost to the economy so …
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/2013/0113/With-French-air-strikes-has-the-war-to-retake-northern-Mali-begun
Also note in that article the fact that the help call came from a Malian government which is itself the result of a military coup 8 months ago that de facto opened the “door” to the rebels and maybe deterred France from acting any earlier.
I am not sure how to balance the gains and the price so that I’ll call that one a draw.
If the morals can be then closed by the simple mention made here yesterday that it is different for the Elected Islamists of Egypt than the imposition of armed men, it should not be forgotten that President Hollande has a national opinion to contend with. It can be compared to Libya which provided a popularity boost to then President Sarkozy.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/13/mali-high-stakes-francois-hollande
It is a sad part of politics but can be solved too thus : no French soldier lost his life in Libya while Lt Boiteux’s ( the helicopter pilot shot yesterday ) death immediately annulled the pure political gain of a “clean campaign”. Mali already lost 11+ soldiers and about as many civilians in the affair. The rebels 100+.
What the Libyan parallel brings to mind though is the long term risk assessment. Definitive Lapse of Reason covered the Libyan results a while back.
Let us remind our readers that we did not leave behind a unified Libya. Many towns are now half autonomous as Benghazi where the US lost a diplomat and Italy almost did too a couple days back. Regions also gained control on their affairs and national unity has not been rebuilt. Some of the very potent gear that used to be Ghaddafi’s is now in the hands of those very rebels in Mali making them tougher than expected as admitted by French officials. The full analysis can be found here and well worth the read :
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-war-in-libya-was-seen-as-a-success-now-here-we-are-engaging-with-the-blowback-in-mali-8449588.html
Will the same occur here and in general? Are these last minute order restoration stints giving the proper results? That may very well be the biggest risk in this case too.
A group of people having chosen to impose their will on others brought about a smorgasbord of troops and equipment and politics to bear down without any certainty that the lives lost on either side and in the population will yield tangible betterment.
And you can guess it will happen elsewhere soon; such is the folly of humans, again both sides.
Good reflecting on it all and see you tomorrow for another topic, Tay.
TY Clotilda, nervous Liker, mylady
Tay.
Hello Bogdan, good to have you back and thnx, Tay.
Hi Tay my friend,
My view is that from a moral or perhaps better described as common sense POV France is doing what we all promised we would post 9-11 – learn from past mistakes.
This Al Qaida like organisation poses a clear threat to Malian stability and its people and without intervention it could become a failed state where deadly organisations like this have been proven to prosper. It is better to nip them in the bud now than wait till they actually hurt you! This is a direct threat to France where due to former colonial links there is a large Malian/African community to whom such an organisation could reach out to and spread their poison creating a very credible domestic threat. Reading this morning and this weekend’s papers they have got hold of SAM systems and other advanced weapon systems from Libya and who is to say they haven’t got hold of anything more deadly? Yes, there were no WMDs in Iraq but thats not to say it won’t happen elsewhere! With such a large population France is only protecting her national interests and the security of her citizens – one of the first duties of any government.
We all know that unfortunately morals alone don’t shape international policy but when looked at from a purely moral POV France again can look herself in the mirror and be happy. Up until recent years despite abject poverty and appalling literacy rates Mali has retained a democracy since independence in 1960 – rather miraculous when you look at the region and protecting the people of the countries right to self determination can’t be bad can it? Yes when it comes to former colonial powers such as France and the UK such talk can seem hypocritical, but we can’t atone for past crimes and in the real world can’t allow ourselves to be tied by guilt over the past. The only way we can actively prove our remorse is to where possible help the people of former colonies to have the right to self determination in government and protection from violent and dangerous groups such as these.
As always all the best to you and yours.
Colky
Hello there Colky my old mate! I,m glad to have you here and want to thank you for the extensive comment. There are 2 points that you raised that I find essential.
First the atonement part which is quite true and that cannot be helped. The past is the past with all that we may regret but it does not have to preclude of the future so that yes, in such a case acting is the best option regardless.
Second is your kind look on Mali’s democratic survival. That ties in to the Libyan example in my post. Any country that managed to hold on to a semblance of modern state should be encouraged by all means. Libya but also Iraq as you mentioned and of course Afghanistan are clear reminders that when a people loses touch with peace & freedom, it becomes a big affair to reinstate those. Akin to a change of civilization which hardly fits in a decade as seen in the aforementioned examples. It is a very central argument to my posts of the last three days on this story that the attempt by Islamists and Tuaregs is undemocratic in nature which the chorus of appreciative voices heard all over Mali for the French intervention.
It can thus be said that whatever reservations our morals could make true are null & void in face of the alternative.
Or as you meant that, for better or for worse, at times, you just gear up and get to work!
Sadly, it does not seem on the menu for suffering Syria.
In any case, my thoughts to you and yours too, Tay.
Aaand TY mmoose!