The US tried. It failed. Ethiopia tried (with US backing.) It failed. Now it is Kenya's time. The third country up in an attempt to restore some semblance of order to the bloody chaos called "Somalia." Will this effort end as did the two predecessors with failure, humiliating withdrawal, and the leaving of a geographic expression with no real reason to exist as a state in even more of a sanguinary mess?
The US failed as a combination of mission leap, one disastrously ill-planned operation, and the lack of both a policy focus and political will in and around the Oval. When Bill Clinton inherited the "humanitarian" operation initiated by George H.W. Bush, he neglected to define the goal of the force deployed in country. For reasons which escape rational analysis, his administration decided it was necessary to engage in regime change. This was odd as there was no real regime to change but rather a welter of tribal leaders engaged in a robust contest for supremacy. The man on the top at that moment was particularly unpleasant but no threat to the long term prospects for the Somali people.
In a fit of absent mindedness, someone decided--and others farther up the food chain confirmed this choice--to go after the Unpleasant Guy On Top. The result was the loss of nearly two dozen special forces troops, the bodies of whom were depicted being pulled around, naked, in the dirt of the streets by gangs of cheering women. This nauseating vision was displayed on the televisions of Americans with the result that Clinton and Company determined to cut and run rather than take proper action against the Somalis responsible.
This loss of political nerve was not justified and counterproductive, not only in Somalia but all over the Arab and Muslim world. It was this ostentatious failure of testicular and policy fortitude which gave the muscle to Osama bin Laden and his odious outfit as well as other advocates of violent political Islam.
With American support and assistance, the Ethiopian army invaded Somalia in the opening years of this century. They were successful in toppling the Islamic Courts Union (ICU) which was an effective government albeit given to policies and means antipathetic to American and Western norms. The ICU was speedily replaced by "the Youth" better known as al-Shabaab. This crew was orders of magnitude more dedicated to the cause of austere, violent political Islam than the ICU had been.
The Ethiopians rapidly found out that they had bitten off far more than they (or their now preoccupied American sponsors) could chew and swallow conveniently. For two years the Ethiopians held on, never secure even in their own bases, unable to broker a coalition of Somali tribal leaders willing to take over the burden of freeing their own country from the ever less popular zealots of al-Shabaab. Finally, the Ethiopians tossed in their towel and departed, leaving the field to the victorious "Youth."
From there it has been all down hill not only for the people caught in Somalia but for the West generally. As international diplomats played the game of creating a government and the African Union--well at least two member countries--deployed "peace keeping" forces to the center of Mogadishu, al-Shabaab consolidated its hold on the southern third of the country while pinning the Transitional Federal Government and its AU troops to a few blocks around the presidential palace.
During the same time, ambitious Somalis found a new and very profitable line of work--piracy. Even now with warships of several dozen navies on patrol, the maritime marauders commandeer ships every week with tens, no, hundreds of millions of dollars of ransom collected. The consensus of "experts" around the world is the pirates will not be defeated unless and until there is a functioning government with effective control of the Somali coast.
In recent months, the Gangbangers of Somalia, both landbased and maritime, have expanded their actions to include the kidnapping of Westerners frequenting expensive Kenyan resorts within in a convenient distance of Somalia. This has perturbed the Kenyans mightily. Even more disconcerting to Nairobi has been the tsunami of refugees flowing over the border. The tidal wave has grown since the drought enhanced famine has been worsened by al-Shabaab's stopping of food aid by international agencies.
The hundreds of thousands of Somalis self-dumped on Kenya is an unacceptable economic burden on the country. More, it represents a clear national security threat given Somali claims on the northern portion of Kenya and the large number of al-Shabaab agents living in Nairobi and Mombasa.
Kenya has clear reasons to see the end of al-Shabaab at least in the southern portion of the place. With this in mind, Nairobi aimed at the Somali port city of Kismayo. The port is the major source of al-Shabaab revenue: taxes on trade, particularly charcoal, headed for Yemen. It is also a prime source of pirates.
With its invasion, Kenya is doing a service not only for itself but for the West generally. Al-Shabaab is a threat not only to African states and the sea lines of communication but more broadly. Not only is it "officially" allied with al-Qaeda, al-Shabaab has direct operational links with al-Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula (AQAP) and Nigeria's Boko Haram. Adding al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) to the mix is apparently in the works. Given the widespread proliferation of weapons including MANPADS from the old Libyan arsenals, it is to be expected that al-Shabaab's military competence and potential for transnational terror will grow.
The biggest question is simply: Will Kenya succeed where others have failed?
The prognosis is, at best, mixed. The Kenyan armed forces have no real experience with war, even the limited sort of which al-Shabaab is capable. The forces are large, reasonably well equipped and trained, but without combat experience, it is hard to see if these factors are all that important. The launch of the invasion just as the annual rains were scheduled to start (they commenced on time) shows a lack of proper planning. The two thousand men across the border have been bogged down in the mud for some days now with the mechanical transport totally immobilized.
Overall the force (ten thousand at most) seems too small to deal with a highly mobile opponent along with the demands of MOUT--if the Kenyans do reach Kismayo. The Kenyan air dominance will not matter once their ground forces are in close contact with al-Shabaab fighters. The fight will become a slogging match between the mechanized, fire power heavy Kenyans and the more mobile, lightly equipped guerrilla opponents.
At that point, it will be what all asymmetrical wars must be--a contest of political wills. Already there are indications that the Kenyan opinion molding elite lack the stomach for a protracted war, which is exactly what the invasion will become without a game changer.
There is only one game changer which might be available. Not the African Union. Not the other states of the Horn of Africa. Nobody local is capable of altering the nature of the war.
The role of game changer properly belongs to NATO. Fresh off its "victory" in Libya, most of the NATO combatants already have a dog in the fight--the pirates. Certainly NATO ships have been heavily involved in the anti-pirate patrols and have actually killed pirates!
The leaders of France, the UK, the US and perhaps some of the others will be well advised to man up and back the Kenyan play. NATO has the aircraft, the ships, the logistics, the special forces, the intelligence assets necessary to change the game in Somalia quickly and surely. The pirates along with the bloody hands of the brutal killers of al-Shabaab provide more than enough justification for entering the war, even for invoking the doctrine of R2P.
There is no need to invoke the UN. Even the opposition of the AU can be ignored with impunity. The morass of Somalia is intolerable now--and will only get worse should the Kenyans suffer the same fate as did the Americans and Ethiopians. A robust NATO effort will be gratefully acknowledged (even if privately only) and might even silence some of the loud voices criticizing the alliance's efforts in Libya.
Get on with it, Messers Sarkozy, Cameron, Obama--the history books are waiting.
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment