Where In The World Is Timbuktu?

Last week, I wrote in some detail about the need for Western democracy to take decisive action in its stance towards the Israel Palestine question. I argued that it had fallen under the radar.

Yet this appears more and more a most prevalent issue in news reporting. Whilst the world has been engrossed in the likes of Lance Armstrong’s admission on Oprah, or whether or not Beyoncé actually sung live at the President inauguration (because such matters are of vital importance to the quotidian lives of the developed democracies), there have been further instances of warfare erupting across the globe: namely, in Mali.

Mali, a small land-locked country in Africa, is probably unknown to most, excepting its most famous of cities, Timbuktu. And even then, a majority couldn’t actually say that Timbuktu was in Mali if they were faced with a pin-the-tail-on-the-country scenario. I’ll admit myself that I know relatively little of this African country, but what has become increasingly apparent in my observations is that the information I have of the conflict is increasingly due to my French friends.

Hell, I only know the war in Mali is ongoing because of my French friends. That is not to say I’m self-absorbed: it’s just that we are gradually having our news dictated to us from Facebook instead of actual news channels. But then, the news channels and papers have proffered little in the way of coverage here.

In fact, the Mali crisis has been a recurring blight on the African continent since the middle of 2011, and its absence from our TV screens, laptops and tablet papers is something that should speak volumes of our preoccupations. The war here was a direct reaction to the situation in Libya that same year. For all the media circus on Gaddafi, this too was a seeming charade: few had real ideas of the problems in the African country before the British response.

This is where we expected our public conscious and journalistic preferences to take a turn: to focus on the global and its relation to us. Yet, we have failed to follow the sparks ignited by the Gaddafi revolution. Despite being amongst the poorest nations in the world, Mali was considered a beacon of African democracy; a self-sustaining country that had a recognisable and functioning government so sought after in other trouble states. This makes it all the more concerning that the media did not showcase the issue sooner. Essentially, the military seized power in March 2012. Tuareg rebels declared the independence of 'Azawad state' in the north, which was quickly taken over by al-Qaeda allies, effectively splitting the country in two and ensuring a continued battleground of hostility for the past 12 months.

Of course, no one ever expected the troubles in Libya to remain isolated events. In this light, we have become desensitised, almost to the point of morose boredom. The words of certain 20^th century Prime Minister ring true in our apathy: “A war in a distant nation that we know nothing about.” But surely, just as in the 1930s, we should still be concerned?

While the Malian government had been busy claiming the situation in the north was under control, rank-and-file soldiers felt humiliated and abandoned in combat with not enough military resources and food. “The Libyan crisis didn't cause this coup but certainly revealed the malaise felt within the army,” says Malian newspaper columnist Adam Thiam. “President Amadou Toumani Toure hasn't been active in tackling drug trafficking and al-Qaeda fighters, and the emergence of new rebel movements only added to the soldiers' frustration.”

The undercurrent of tension here is just a microcosm of the situation in many of Africa’s poorest nations. With recent rebel activity in Algeria, the continued threat is something that has become at least visible, if not palpable on the whole.

However, the difficulties in resolving the Libyan crisis are still bearing consequences. A strong leader (especially in the apparent absence of President Amadou Toumani Toure) that can unite a reluctant Malian army could spell the beginning of further African conflict, and a number of bordering states are set to follow in a cataclysmic domino effect.

The rebel group, MNLA, believe the only thing that can halt their advance into southern Mali is in fact a European intervention, so confident they are in their support, abilities and weaponry. “Western powers have underestimated that getting rid of Gaddafi would have severe repercussions in the Sahel region,” says Mr Kebe, a professor in Arab-African relations.

Once more it is an example of the Western endemic of half-heartedness in their resolve to find a permanent solution to a potentially volatile situation across much of Northern Africa. But, did Beyoncé actually sing the inauguration song live? I guess we’ll all be avidly tuning into the Superbowl next week. 

Fresh Fear In Egypt.

Over the past few days, fresh violence has erupted in the Egypt capital of Cairo, amidst growing concern for the stability of the country and the surrounding regions.

Tahrir Square, quickly becoming dubbed Terror Square, once again has been the centre of an occupation movement from many thousands of the capital’s citizens, in the longest demonstration campaign since the February revolutions that caused waves across the continent.

At first, the scale of the violence was not appreciated, with the claims of two deaths on Saturday also being widely disregarded. However, this first inclination to ignore the problems of a nation led to the dramatic uprising some nine months ago: this has to be one of the fastest repeats of history known in modern times.

By Monday morning, morgues had confirmed over 30 deaths, whilst number amassing to almost 2,000 were reported as casualties.

TV reports have shown the widespread use of tear gas, aggression, and make shift weapons from wood and other loose materials, including concrete. More importantly than the February demonstrations, other prominent Egyptian cities are now taking up arms in the protest, with action reported in Alexandria, Suez and Aswan.

The unrest has risen from the continued presence of the military as the official power keepers of the country. When first introduced as the interim preservers of peace in the winter months, they promised elections would be held in September, but notoriously these have been delayed.

Although elections are now due to start next week, the action already spreads a sombre tone over what was supposed to be a joyous moment for the Egyptian people to vote for the first time after three decades of autocratic rule under Mr Mubarak. Since the Egyptian people served their own warning notice of resolution to the government and army back in February, taking to the streets despite the widespread attempts from officials to uphold the then current system, it seems rather foolish of the current army officials to have taken the situation so likely.

Propositions to delay elections till the end of 2012 have however only serve to paint the current officials in the most dictatorial light.

Moreover, it provides an ample opportunity for any successor and their government to highlight the need for stronger control, resulting in a complete turn back to a tyrannical or oppressive parliament.

Undoubtedly, the fresh waves of violence and deaths will ultimately stain the transition to democracy and highlight the need for a civilian administration: the worry is that the violence could grow into a mob and the revolution play out in a much similar way to the struggle seen in close Northern territory, Libya. However, will the West sit back and have an ambivialent role before they step in again?

Just as happened at the beginning of the protests against Hosni Mubarak's rule earlier this year, it was the deaths above all that really brought the people out on the streets. Perhaps this totalitarian nightmare is an Egyptian curse not quite yet broken…

Liberation in Libya?

After a climatic six months, the final usurping of Colonel Gaddafi is hailed as the liberation of Libya. 

However, such a statement need be reserved for a time when the country has resumed a state of normality and stability. Whilst the shift of control is something to most certainly be celebrated, the country remains terribly fragile, with continued reports of fighting, gunfire and protests.

With a stint in charge that now spans six decades, Col Gaddafi has seen his leadership through a great many tumultuous situations. Resurgent and dwindling support extremities often characterised his period as head of state. Continued change in political support has ensured that there has never been adequate reflection of public sentiment over this period.

Now, with the rebel forces taking over administration of the African territory that has dominated news in 2011, there is a fear that this pent up frustration will out.

Key concerns include supply chains for medicines and foodstocks, power facilities, communications and, inevitably, law and order.

For example, with hotspots of violence being persistent across the country, there are more walking wounded than is normally anticipated for Libya. Add to this that the fighting targets and damages public places like hospitals and consequently there is little support. Moreover, with increasing power problems, hospitals would be unable to sustain proper standards of support.

A damaged hospital in Zawiyah.

This is but one example of how this conglomerate of issues corresponds to a growing concern for the area.

As Geoff Loane, the head of mission for the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) pointed out: "The absolute priority is that security is provided, as required for a big urban sprawl. As we saw in England, it's very easy to destabilise urban environments."

When looking over Gaddafi’s legacy, it need be remembered that for many of the population, he has been their only leader. Now there is free reign for fresh ideas and control.

Scenes of celebration - Too early?

Almost instantly, Libyan interim leaders have rejected UN military aid to keep control. At first glance, this appears the founding steps toward a new era of forced control. Where there is army control, it is often synonymous that there is no free government. That this should be a considered option is to cause great fear for many who have strived for freedom.

Yet, the force would be independently led. Elsewhere in the African domain, recent coups have seen armed forces successful manage to maintain peace in Egypt as it continues through its own revolution.

Moreover, when in desperate need for stability, a military force is indeed a ‘strong’ option. There has been no clear cut succession regime, particularly considering the fact that Gaddafi has not publically surrendered. In fact at time of writing, representatives for the dictator have rejected the proposed ultimatum to surrender, saying: “No dignified honourable nation would accept an ultimatum from armed gangs.” 

However, since this was never declared a war, civil or otherwise, there is a great desire to avoid such a position; and perhaps being seen to accept such a form of aid would be understood as many living within Libya as an admission of combat. Yet with restricted supplies and a resilient (if not absent) leadership, it is predicted that the problems could yet escalate further. 

Therefore, with no new figurehead or group claiming control, there is a vacuum that could potentially be filled by extremists or those inadequate to lead. With power remaining vulnerable across the state, there is chance for history to repeat itself.

Checkpoints are controlled by rebels, without a central law enforcement.

It is hoped that the release of 1.86 billion dinars in aid will ease the transition and form bridges between Europe and the African nation. But with port authorities and oil firms still blocked and various European countries remaining dubious until there is proof of development, it could be some time before Libya’s problems are resolved.

Hopefully, they will not span another 42 years. But who knows where absolution will come from?...