tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post1361980781519298846..comments2023-11-17T03:55:40.736-05:00Comments on Ink Spots: Ignorance about Africa Part I: When smart people say stupid thingsLilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18373158801523577733noreply@blogger.comBlogger37125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-15341495887690480802010-10-30T16:46:50.028-04:002010-10-30T16:46:50.028-04:00Correct me if I’m wrong, but the last time the US ...Correct me if I’m wrong, but the last time the US military aided in the “search” for Kony, he was pinpointed, then mysteriously was warned before the Ugandan forces could bother to actually try to nab him. Odd that.<br /><br />Does no one else find it convenient that the LRA have advanced back into Southern Sudan right before the referendum that is likely to split Khartoum from the vast majority of its oil? And isn’t it convenient that Dominic Ongwen, one of the “commanders” on the ground in Western Bahr-el-Ghazal happens to have spent time in the South before—and has received training in Khartoum no less.<br /><br />Are we sure no one is using the LRA as a proxy force these days? Maybe proxy force is too strong a term, but are we sure no one in the area is “using” the LRA, either as a thorn in an enemy’s side or as an excuse to continue to run units in another country?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-60488621739527374412010-10-30T15:07:50.253-04:002010-10-30T15:07:50.253-04:00@@@ fnord,
Great question and here's my answe...@@@ fnord,<br /><br />Great question and here's my answer if Zumba Girl was kidnapped in the Heart of Darkness, then the US will do everything. Otherwise, Americans just don't care anymore. The Truth hurts but the US doesn't care anymore.<br /><br />Ask China, I'm sure they have more interests in that part of the world. Americans are just sick and tired of helping everyone out. We're tired. You guys do it from here on out, how about that.<br /><br />Anyone noticed the Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear today never got as big as Glenn Beck's rally? America is sick and tired of the world.<br /><br />#######Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-83146884064615028432010-10-29T20:03:29.265-04:002010-10-29T20:03:29.265-04:00Should have said that the Congress and American pu...Should have said that the Congress and American public perceived US forces in Somalia as being under the "UN" and that this fueled anger against American involvement.<br /><br />In practice, Gulliver is right. Gulliver, can you confirm that no UN forces [including the supreme Turkish commander] controlled any US forces during any part of 1993 in Somalia?<br /><br />Thanks for the update on Uganda and the LRA. Perhaps things have changed?<br /><br />As I understand it the UN created two organizations . . . ISAF and UNAMA. The UN unanimously approved NATO taking over ISAF. However, ISAF remains a unanimously UN endorsed mission.<br /><br />If not for this, would Malaysia, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE, Egypt, South Korea be formal members of the ISAF coalition?<br /><br />If Indonesia converts its bilateral ANP training mission into formal ISAF membership during Obama's visit, it will be because the Indonesians are joining a UN mission. At least that is how they will justify it.<br /><br />Did you see the Turkish drafted UNSC resolution unanimously passed a few days ago?<br /><br />How would you describe the language in the resolution [which calls for all UN members to contribute to ISAF, making a special plea for ANSF capacity building]?<br /><br />Gulliver did you notice the amount of discussion about Russia donating military equipment including Mi17s to the ANSF; and Russian public musing about training ANSF?<br /><br />It got a lot of play in the Afghan press. The Karzai GIRoA made it clear that countries can only send forces to Afghanistan and train ANSF with GIRoA permission and implied that no such permission had been granted to Russia.<br /><br />In fact I thought the GIRoA spokesperson was too impolitic in the way he put it.<br /><br />It seems clear that Russia is willing to donate military equipment and train ANSF if only Karzai would be willing to ask. [So far Karzai has refused to ask.]<br /><br />Personally, I don't understand what choice Karzai thinks he has. Why can't he make the request? We aren't talking about combat troops. Only NTM-A trainers or trainers that informally coordinate with NTM-A.<br /><br />If Karzai behaved this way with another important country, they would show him the finger.Anandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03040200275831896147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-89429218446106522332010-10-29T18:23:45.251-04:002010-10-29T18:23:45.251-04:00Anand --
The American people and Bob Dole didn...Anand --<br /><br /><em>The American people and Bob Dole didn't have confidence in "UN" commanders who had OPCON and coordination responsibilities over US forces.</em><br /><br />Wrong. No foreign officers had OPCON over U.S. forces.<br /><br /><em>This is why even though ISAF is a "UN command" created by the UN Security Council, the US always calls it a NATO command.</em><br /><br />Misleading. ISAF was created by a UN resolution and rotated national commands under UN auspices for nearly two years. In late 2003, NATO assumed permanent command of the force. So yeah, it's a NATO command. The only reason that ISAF now has responsibility for the entire territory of Afghanistan is because of the stability and direction provided by that permanent NATO command. So to call the whole thing a "UN command" is silly; ISAF is neither commanded nor directed by the UN at this stage.<br /><br /><em> It is about time America stood shoulder to shoulder by the Ugandans as they have stood by us. This means helping then on aids [which we are], cheap preventive health care, education, infrastructure and defeating the Lord's Resistance Army.<br /><br />Anecdotal reports from friends suggests that Ugandans hate the Lord's Resistance Army.</em><br /><br />Ugandan people may hate the LRA, and they've got good reason to. But the government of Uganda's position on the LRA is, so far as I can tell, complex. Museveni draws political advantage from the group's continued existence and continued threat (as Anon @1151 25 OCT's link does a good job of explaining), so to paint the situation in quite so black-and-white terms as you do is probably (again) misleading.Gulliverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12558335790019565924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-86314381549177160332010-10-29T17:59:30.884-04:002010-10-29T17:59:30.884-04:00Fnord, nicely said. I agree with you.
PS. Somalia...Fnord, nicely said. I agree with you.<br /><br />PS. Somalia was a UN mission headed by Turkey where Turkey was the largest contributor and with large contributions from Pakistan, India, Malaysia, Italy, many other European and Asian countries.<br /><br />It was not a US lead intervention by April, 2003. It was UN hatted. This is why the US public turned against it. The American people and Bob Dole didn't have confidence in "UN" commanders who had OPCON and coordination responsibilities over US forces.<br /><br />This is why even though ISAF is a "UN command" created by the UN Security Council, the US always calls it a NATO command.<br /><br />Fnord, American skepticism about international coalitions where the US provides a minority of the support has deep roots.<br /><br />4 of the 5 Afghan regional commands were headed by other countries for many years. The perception in the states is that the other countries didn't do a great job. But at least it wasn't a "UN mission" and at least Bush was president.<br /><br />Lil and MK, I am with you. It is about time America stood shoulder to shoulder by the Ugandans as they have stood by us. This means helping then on aids [which we are], cheap preventive health care, education, infrastructure and defeating the Lord's Resistance Army.<br /><br />Anecdotal reports from friends suggests that Ugandans hate the Lord's Resistance Army.Anandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03040200275831896147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-27355280311544020692010-10-29T09:15:12.500-04:002010-10-29T09:15:12.500-04:00Here is the address of the lawfare blog entry in w...Here is the address of the lawfare blog entry in which the Washington director of the HRW more fully explains their idea.<br /><br />http://www.lawfareblog.com/2010/10/human-rights-watch-responds/<br /><br />They believe only a small group of spec ops trigger pullers need be added to the Ugandan and Congolese forces chasing the LRA and suggest France provide those. The US would provide log and intel support. HRW thinks this would give the UPDF and the FARDC that little extra needed to finish the LRA. Their idea seems pretty well thought out to me.<br /><br />Jason Fritz: Local American politicians would have little hesitation in doing what needed to be done with child soldiers. They don't much mind being extremely tough with murderous juveniles in the US. The voters generally support them on this. As you suggest, national level politicians and especially bureaucrats may be different. This may be off topic but national types don't seem to have much confidence in the Americans to see what is.carlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-53093750121971361872010-10-29T04:19:05.790-04:002010-10-29T04:19:05.790-04:00I tried to get an answer at AM, but no luck. So I ...I tried to get an answer at AM, but no luck. So I try here: Why is it that its either an US owned Somalian style all out intervention OR nothing? Why isnt it possible to lend out a section of SF to track down the LRF for the locals and/or disrupt their logistics? If they are 400 strong, it would seem a matter of *finding* them being the real difficulty? Why would it need US triggerpullers?fnordnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-8629486240671778832010-10-29T01:59:39.872-04:002010-10-29T01:59:39.872-04:00Alma--nicely done. Carl, thanks for pitching in (w...Alma--nicely done. Carl, thanks for pitching in (was hoping you would). <br /><br />MK, my friend, we need a response to all of this. <br /><br />LilAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-24277990360914518382010-10-28T23:31:52.512-04:002010-10-28T23:31:52.512-04:00carl: you may be correct. I disagree, but I don&#...carl: you may be correct. I disagree, but I don't have anything to back that up and it's just a gut feeling. But I think you'd agree that it will give the political types pause before embarking on such an endeavor.Jason Fritzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18335313679058470722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-56595970272245809532010-10-28T21:38:35.181-04:002010-10-28T21:38:35.181-04:00Who is Zumba Girl and why is she so popular?Who is Zumba Girl and why is she so popular?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-46721157628004490312010-10-28T21:36:05.402-04:002010-10-28T21:36:05.402-04:00Jason Fritz: I must disagree with you regarding &...Jason Fritz: I must disagree with you regarding "bad optics" if it came to our forces killing or aiding in the killing of child soldiers. Once the behavior of these children was accurately described and people knew how lethal they are, I don't think many people would object. The British public didn't get into much of a dither when their forces had to do it in the 90s. Perhaps you underestimate the ability of the American people to see what is.carlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-52674578159602326622010-10-28T15:20:49.371-04:002010-10-28T15:20:49.371-04:00Gulliver:
It is true that by the time the Black Ha...Gulliver:<br />It is true that by the time the Black Hawk Down incident happened, there was already a noticeable movement in Congress—led by Senator Byrd—to get the US out of Somalia. Legislation was adopted in early September stating that the Clinton administration would have to report to Congress by October 15 about the progress of the operations, and to seek by November 15 congressional approval for a continuation of the intervention. And that text was adopted with a large majority both in the House and Senate. It looks like the change in US mission in Somalia and the US casualties of early August and September were pivotal in Congress adopting this text.<br /><br />Now about the larger US public… I found a couple of polls from the early Summer of 1993 that seem to indicate that there was indeed a relatively high degree of interest from the public for the Somalia intervention. A Gallup poll of June 5, 1993 asked “Overall, how closely have you followed the recent events in the African nation of Somalia: Very closely, somewhat closely, not too closely, or not at all?” and received the following responses: 16% very, 47% somewhat, 30% not too, 7% not at all.<br />I tend to think that respondents are likely to overstate their interest in current news, so that they don’t look like idiots in front of the individual conducting the survey, but still—it supports what you said about people having a rather clear idea of what the US was up to in Somalia. Point well taken.<br />(I can’t resist however citing another poll, from October 7, 1993—AFTER Black Hawk Down—which shows that only 57% of respondents could tell what continent Somalia is in…)Almahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11816039020710161677noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-87992462080568760882010-10-28T15:00:26.710-04:002010-10-28T15:00:26.710-04:00Agree with Alma here:
obviously the bar is higher...Agree with Alma here:<br /><br />obviously the bar is higher for a<br />humanitarian intervention, since they rarely, if ever, represent a US "vital" interest<br /><br />###<br /><br />And with Gulliver here:<br /><br /><br />Here's what impacted Americans most about Somalia: [WARNING: graphic photo]<br /><br />Not to mention this one (not graphic).<br /><br />###<br /><br />I'd also add the sheer shock effect of BHD: I've likened it recently to the battle of Ap Bac. Those rinky-dinks (sorry not to be politically correct) can shoot down *helicopters.*<br /><br />###<br /><br />The question to me is how durable a humanitarian intervention is. My personal answer is, Not very, unless one counts something like OIF, where the sunk costs are so great that extrication from the situation, and the imagery of defeat, that no one wants to declare failure.<br /><br />ADTSADTSnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-35127743655822266082010-10-28T14:57:09.025-04:002010-10-28T14:57:09.025-04:00I too agree with Zumba Girl and Matt from AM blog!...I too agree with Zumba Girl and Matt from AM blog!Zumba Girl FANhttp://mobilitywod.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-564702260648062642010-10-28T13:37:49.135-04:002010-10-28T13:37:49.135-04:00I think we should fee the skinnies because it'...I think we should fee the skinnies because it's the Christian thing to do.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-81977605546854881582010-10-28T12:52:39.977-04:002010-10-28T12:52:39.977-04:00At the risk of revealing more internal discord...
...At the risk of revealing more internal discord...<br /><br /><em> Black Hawk Down had the effect it had on US people not so much because of the treatment inflicted to US soldiers (most people know war is ugly, although, granted, seeing it from home on TV at dinner time definitely makes things much worse), but because the first thought of everyone was: "we go there to feed them and they treat us like THAT?"</em><br /><br />I don't agree with this at all. Maybe I'm overstating the general awareness of the average American, but I think most people recognized that we were past the feeding stage. There had even been legislation introduced (more than once, I think) as early as the summer of 1993 calling for withdrawal of U.S. troops, as the mission for which they had gone was mostly concluded (successfully at that), and there was some danger that they'd face increasing risk.<br /><br />Here's what impacted Americans most about Somalia: [WARNING: <a href="http://iconicphotos.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/22_paul_watson-jpg.jpeg?w=300&h=420" rel="nofollow">graphic photo</a>]<br /><br />Not to mention <a href="http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1993/1101931018_400.jpg" rel="nofollow">this one</a> (not graphic).<br /><br />I think it was more the sense of "wait a minute, they <em>put their hands</em> on our guys... and for what? So we can feed some skinnies?"Gulliverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12558335790019565924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-64249912263579148172010-10-28T12:31:45.303-04:002010-10-28T12:31:45.303-04:00Geez. I feel like the family’s golden retriever in...Geez. I feel like the family’s golden retriever in the middle of a bad divorce.<br /><br />Going back to the MK/Ex debate, it seems to me that the biggest disagreement here is on how much it is in the US interest to stop atrocities against civilians (with “interest” understood as some sort of ratio between expected pay-off and risks). MK underplayed the risks of such an intervention, while Ex overplayed them (it is not true that "things always go wrong", cf. the Brits in Sierra Leone). Obviously, there is a high degree of uncertainty in any such intervention, which is why one needs to have a (convincing) answer to the four Kilcullen/Exum questions as well as an answer to the Richard Clarke’s questions, and to communicate these answers right. Research shows most people to be ready to send troops in rather faraway places (including Congo) if they think the ends justify it(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/30/AR2005063000881.html). And obviously the bar is higher for a<br />humanitarian intervention, since they rarely, if ever, represent a US "vital" interest (whose definition Ex stretches a bit by equating it to "intervention justifying military intervention"—usually “vital” describes an intervention that aims at removing a threat to one’s population or territory; humanitarian interventions are rarely vital, unless you make the—tricky—point that not intervening to reduce human suffering when you could represents a <i>moral</i> threat to your country as a whole). Black Hawk Down had the effect it had on US people not so much because of the treatment inflicted to US soldiers (most people know war is ugly,<br />although, granted, seeing it from home on TV at dinner time definitely makes things much worse), but because the first thought of everyone<br />was: "we go there to feed them and they treat us like THAT?"... So yes, the bar is higher for interventions whose purpose is mainly humanitarian—but this does not mean that the feasibility of such interventions should not be examined on its own merits—and that the opinion of area <i>and</i> non-area experts is not needed when it comes to this…Almahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11816039020710161677noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-8611505312638104012010-10-28T11:51:40.435-04:002010-10-28T11:51:40.435-04:00http://petereichstaedt.blogspot.com/2010/03/why-ko...http://petereichstaedt.blogspot.com/2010/03/why-kony-will-never-be-captured.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-83783588628086174082010-10-28T11:38:10.861-04:002010-10-28T11:38:10.861-04:00Cat fight on Ink Spot !!!Cat fight on Ink Spot !!!Zumbama for Presidenthttp://en-gb.facebook.com/pages/Armadale-West-Lothian/Zumba-with-Allison/149438838418686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-72863628877557343232010-10-28T11:32:08.708-04:002010-10-28T11:32:08.708-04:00Finally, given we're here discussing it: Gulli...<em>Finally, given we're here discussing it: Gulliver--what crawled up your arse (I'm hanging out with Brits)? You're being awfully defensive all of sudden, it's unlike you.</em><br /><br />Defensive? Crawled up my ass? Huh?<br /><br />I just disagree, and I outlined the reasons why. It's no skin off my back.Gulliverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12558335790019565924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-30251716246298198862010-10-28T11:25:00.274-04:002010-10-28T11:25:00.274-04:00Lil,
You didn't even know that Al-Azhar and t...Lil,<br /><br />You didn't even know that Al-Azhar and the Syrian School system banned the Niqab way before the French. So wouldn't be talking. Experts, hah!!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-29541599092968824142010-10-28T11:13:33.691-04:002010-10-28T11:13:33.691-04:00My internet isn't good enough to respond in de...My internet isn't good enough to respond in detail (or to go through the trouble of logging in) so I'll just say this: MK nicely done. We've discussed this before and I agree with you. <br /><br />Jason, thanks for the links. I think you're right, a lot of people don't care about Central Africa and they're just not going to. It's nice to know you're still up for discussing. <br /><br />Finally, given we're here discussing it: Gulliver--what crawled up your arse (I'm hanging out with Brits)? You're being awfully defensive all of sudden, it's unlike you. <br /><br />LilAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-53489220579844689102010-10-28T10:52:15.084-04:002010-10-28T10:52:15.084-04:00If Zumba Girl was stuck in the Congo and the LRA w...If Zumba Girl was stuck in the Congo and the LRA was hell bend in kidnapping her, then I'll agree with a "Tears of the Sun" type operation.<br /><br />Otherwise let China take the lead.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-36175175314414556802010-10-28T10:51:48.027-04:002010-10-28T10:51:48.027-04:00And finally, while we're on the subject, an ob...And finally, while we're on the subject, an observation: If we're going to include folks like Joseph Kony on it, can we change the name of the State Department Terrorist Exclusion list to the List of Bad Guys that we Don't Like? The idea that some dude running around the <em>dense jungles of central Africa</em> poses a direct threat to western countries as a "specially designated global terrorist" is just too absurd for words. I've got no problem using legal authority to cut off resources to him, but "global terrorist"? Let's be serious.Gulliverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12558335790019565924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-41590882832746790142010-10-28T10:51:12.942-04:002010-10-28T10:51:12.942-04:00Furthermore, when you write that "there's...Furthermore, when you write that "there's considerable support within the USG for doing more" and cite the recent legislation, I think you're being a little bit disingenuous. Here's what you wrote:<br /><br /><em> The Lord's Resistance Army Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act received unanimous support in Congress and was signed into law by President Obama on 24 May 2010, <strong>requiring the USG to, among other things, develop a regional strategy including military options to 'eliminate the threat posed by the Lord's Resistance Army.' [emphasis mine]</strong></em><br /><br />Here's what the legislation requires as part of the strategy:<br /><br /><em>An assessment of viable options through which the United States, working with regional governments, could help <strong>develop and support multilateral efforts</strong> to eliminate the threat posed by the Lord’s Resistance Army.</em><br /><br />When you read this in context, it's quite clear that the Congress envisions U.S. participation in an international effort, and not necessarily <em>active</em> participation. Here's how you can tell: read the Statement of Policy.<br /><br /><em>It is the policy of the United States to work with regional governments toward a comprehensive and lasting resolution to the conflict in northern Uganda and other affected areas by—<br />(1) providing political, economic, military, and intelligence support for viable multilateral efforts to protect civilians from the Lord’s Resistance Army, to apprehend or remove Joseph<br />Kony and his top commanders from the battlefield in the continued absence of a negotiated solution, and to disarm and demobilize the remaining Lord’s Resistance Army fighters;</em><br /><br /><strong>Work with. Support. Multilateral.</strong><br /><br />I guarantee you a resolution expressing support for direct U.S. military action in DRC or elsewhere would not have passed with a voice vote.Gulliverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12558335790019565924noreply@blogger.com