Category: Conflict & disaster

Categories
Conflict & disaster

[1313] Of Taliban celebrating murder

There is no moral in the killing of civilians.

The Taliban however has no issue with that:

KABUL, Afghanistan, Tuesday, July 31 — The Taliban have shot and killed a second South Korean hostage, the governor of Ghazni Province confirmed Tuesday morning.

[…]

The Taliban seized 23 South Koreans from a bus as they travelled through the province on the Kabul-Kandahar highway on July 19. [Afghan Police Find Body of 2nd Korean. NYT. July 31 2007]

Taliban supporters must be jumping up and down, celebrating murder in the name of Islam. Little do the Taliban realizes that by murdering those South Koreans, they make new enemies instead of garnering sympathy. Worse, the inhumane act only tarnishes the image of Islam, forcing the innocent others that rather not to be associated with neo-kharijism (I personally more inclined to use the term Islamofascist because that is what they are, an Islamist and a fascist) to face hostile generalization in an already difficult world.

In a times of conflict, misery is expected but killing civilians on purpose is more than immoral. But what do the Taliban and its supporters care?

Categories
Conflict & disaster Liberty

[1268] Of Fouad Ajami on the Fatah-Hamas conflict and Palestine

It isn’t a pretty choice, that between Hamas and Fatah. Indeed, it was the reign of plunder and arrogance that Fatah imposed during its years of primacy that gave Hamas its power and room for maneuver. We must not overdo the distinction between the “secularism” of Fatah and the Islamism of Hamas. In the cruel streets and refugee camps of the Palestinians, this is really a distinction without a difference. [Brothers to the Bitter End. Fouad Ajami. NYT. June 20 2007]

Categories
Conflict & disaster

[1260] Of divided and occupied Palestine

Now, we have Hamas-controlled Gaza and Fatah-controlled West Bank. Instead of fighting for Palestinian sovereignty, both groups have turned against each other.

BY THE end of this week, the Islamists of Hamas will have either destroyed the secular-minded Fatah in the Gaza Strip, or at least shown that they can. The relative quiet after a deadly burst of violence between the rival Palestinian parties in May was broken by a series of tit-for-tat killings that quickly got out of hand. After troops from the presidential guard of Fatah’s Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, fired rockets at the house of Hamas’s Ismail Haniyeh, the prime minister, the Islamist party launched a full-scale attack. Hamas troops have taken control of most of the Gaza Strip and have chased Fatah forces out of their bases, while several top Fatah commanders have either fled Gaza or been killed. [The road to Hamastan. The Economist. June 13 2007]

Earlier today, a state of emergency has been declared by the Palestinian Authority.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has dismissed the Hamas-led coalition government and declared a state of emergency.

Aides said the president would seek to call elections as soon as possible, after deadly clashes between his Fatah faction and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

[…]

Hamas fighters overran most of Gaza on Thursday, capturing the headquarters of Fatah’s Preventative Security force and hailing Gaza’s “liberation”. [Abbas sacks Hamas-led government. June 15 2007]

An election is useless if nobody would accept the democratic outcome. Whatever it is, at the moment, the Palestinian cause is lost.

I wonder how the election of Shimon Peres as the new president of Israel would affect the condition.

Categories
Conflict & disaster Liberty Politics & government Society

[1189] Of is that unity in Iraq real?

When I first read over the news about the occupying force in Iraq was constructing a wall between Sunni and Shiite Arab areas in Baghdad in hope to reduce violent contact between the two groups, I felt a hint of disapproval toward that plan, as much as I felt against the proposal to turn Iraq into a three-state federation. Yet, the continuing violence between the two groups does make a case for the erection of walls in the city. Existing walls have proven to reduce the number of attacks:

Although the strategy of using barriers to safeguard areas of Baghdad is not new, the Adhamiya plan to enclose the neighborhood entirely was promoted as an advanced security measure. About two years ago, the American military erected a wall along the section of the Amiriya neighborhood that borders the airport road. While hardly foolproof, it reduced the number of attacks on American convoys on the route. [Frustration Over Wall Unites Sunni and Shiite. NYT. April 24 2007]

The separation barriers roughly run along the periphery of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip is another supporting case of how it could reduce attacks. Nevertheless, it divides community, cutting friends and relatives from each others. I am therefore am undecided on the issue of separation barriers in Iraq.

While undecided, I am happy to read that there are those from both Sunnis and the Shiites Arab communities that oppose the walls. It does show that both communities are willing to work together toward an end, regardless of creeds. Perhaps, there is hope for Iraq after all.

The ability of the Arab Iraqis to trust the Kurds might be another signal of hope:

Arabs see them as a neutral force, the Americans say.

“The reason why people are willing to trust the 1-3-4 is because they’re Kurdish,” said Capt. Benjamin Morales, 28, commander of Company B of the 1st Battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry, the partner unit of Captain Hamasala’s company. “They don’t care about Sunni or Shia.” [In Twist of History, Kurds Patrol Baghdad. NYT. April 24 2007]

Yet, I doubt if this is a clear cut sign that Sunni and Shiite Arabs in general could live together. I feel so because the opposition to the walls might be fueled by common dissatisfaction against a force rather than true respect:

The American involvement in the wall’s construction has united Iraqis of different sects. Sunni political parties, as well as some Shiite groups, strongly oppose the wall. Shiite groups fear that though Sunni Arab neighborhoods are the ones being cordoned off this week, next month it could be Shiite areas as well. [Frustration Over Wall Unites Sunni and Shiite. NYT. April 24 2007]

Much like Keadilan.

The uniting factor is more of ad hoc in nature, rather than permanent. It is ad hoc because it is superficial. I do not believe commonality based on hate would produce lasting alliance. Once that commonality is removed, what other intransient factor would peacefully hold the communities together?

Categories
Conflict & disaster

[1164] Of North Korea versus Islamic Courts Union?

Interesting fact:

WASHINGTON, April 7 — Three months after the United States successfully pressed the United Nations to impose strict sanctions on North Korea because of the country’s nuclear test, Bush administration officials allowed Ethiopia to complete a secret arms purchase from the North, in what appears to be a violation of the restrictions, according to senior American officials.

The United States allowed the arms delivery to go through in January in part because Ethiopia was in the midst of a military offensive against Islamic militias inside Somalia, a campaign that aided the American policy of combating religious extremists in the Horn of Africa. [North Koreans Arm Ethiopians as U.S. Assents. NYT. April 8 2007]

Other salient points:

American officials said that they were still encouraging Ethiopia to wean itself from its longstanding reliance on North Korea for cheap Soviet-era military equipment to supply its armed forces and that Ethiopian officials appeared receptive. But the arms deal is an example of the compromises that result from the clash of two foreign policy absolutes: the Bush administration’s commitment to fighting Islamic radicalism and its effort to starve the North Korean government of money it could use to build up its nuclear weapons program.

[…]

Several officials said they first learned that Ethiopia planned to receive a delivery of military cargo from North Korea when the country’s government alerted the American Embassy in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia’s capital, after the adoption on Oct. 14 of the United Nations Security Council measure imposing sanctions.

“The Ethiopians came back to us and said, ‘Look, we know we need to transition to different customers, but we just can’t do that overnight,’ ” said one American official, who added that the issue had been handled properly. “They pledged to work with us at the most senior levels.”

[…]

The measure had special relevance for several African states that have long purchased low-cost military equipment from North Korea. Ethiopia has an arsenal of T-55 tanks that it acquired years ago from the Soviet Union and Eastern European nations. For years, it has turned to North Korea for tank parts and other equipment to keep its military running.

The Ethiopians bought the equipment at a bargain price; the North Koreans received some badly needed cash. In 2005, the Bush administration told Ethiopia and other African nations that it wanted them to phase out their purchases from North Korea. But the Security Council resolution put an international imprimatur on the earlier American request, and the administration sought to reinforce the message.

[…]

It is not clear if the United States ever reported the arms shipment to the Security Council. But because the intelligence reports indicated that the cargo was likely to have included tank parts, some Pentagon officials described the shipment as an unambiguous Security Council violation. [North Koreans Arm Ethiopians as U.S. Assents. NYT. April 8 2007]

Would we be seeing radical Islamists targeting North Korea in the future?