Recently in Somalia Category

In a press conference today, Attorney General Eric Holder announced the Justice Department unsealed four separate indictments charging 14 individuals in Minnesota, California, and Alabama with terrorism violations, including providing money, personnel, and services to the terrorist group Al-Shabaab. An indictment in Minnesota charged 10 men for leaving the U.S. to join al-Shabaab, an organization with ties to al-Qaeda, as foreign fighters. In Minnesota alone, 19 have been charged with material support of al-Shabaab. Two women, naturalized U.S. citizens and residents of Minnesota, were charged with raising money to support al-Shabaab through door-to-door solicitations and teleconferences in the Somali communities in Minneapolis, Rochester, and elsewhere in the U.S. and Canada.

Holder noted that members of the American Muslim community "have been - and continue to - strong partners in fighting this emerging threat" through denouncing terrorist acts and those who carry them out, as well as helping law enforcement disrupt plots and radicalization.

As laudable as these efforts are, they happen too late in the process of radicalization. Facts about Somalia, al-Shabaab, and the region are too often ignored by the mainstream media and largely unavailable to these communities, even those actively engaged online.

Thanks JS (not the Armchair Generalist, another JS) for sending this story on Somalia a while back (that I'm just getting to now):

U.S. hires military contractor to back peacekeeping mission in Somalia
By Chris Tomlinson
ASSOCIATED PRESS
1:20 p.m. March 7, 2007

NAIROBI, Kenya – The State Department has hired a major military contractor to help equip and provide logistical support to international peacekeepers in Somalia, giving the United States a significant role in the critical mission without assigning combat forces.

DynCorp International, which also has U.S. contracts in Iraq, Bosnia, Afghanistan and Iraq, will be paid $10 million to help the first peacekeeping mission in Somalia in more than 10 years.

The article continues... blah blah blah... but it concludes on an interesting note:

The United States is not the only country seeking to provide private military services in Africa.

In 2005 the Somali government signed a $50 million contract with New York-based TopCat Marine Security to help create a coast guard to protect its coast and shipping from pirates. The State Department blocked TopCat from deploying because of a U.N. arms embargo, Hassan Abshir Farah, Somalia's marine resources minister said.

Farah said his government was now discussing a deal with the Chinese government and Chinese marine security firms.

Of course the US isn't the only one offering protection, private or public, to Africa. (why the focus on private military services? Right, it's the "in topic".) DynCorp's involvement isn't special, spectacular, or really innovative. Not really interesting but noteworthy is the reason given for the death of the TopCat deal, but I won't waste my time on TopCat. If you care, see Kathryn Cramer's post on the cease-and-desist order by State to TopCat Marine or see links off my recent summary of the events around the TopCat screw-up.

What is interesting is the last sentence. The Chinese are in a full court press on the continent, as I've noted in various blog posts. While they don't care about the plight of the people, they do care about the plight of the elites. There's money to be made on fishing etc (the same fish stocks China's poaching) that China is more than happy to help the gov't protect (for a fee). Also, keep in mind the Chinese way of sealing the deal is different than that the Americans. We include lawyers and the Chinese include promises of unrelated business to sway the decision maker as necessary, sweetening the deal and ignoring details to be dealt with later. While we look over the details with lawyers, China says "Deal! We'll work out the details later."

It will be interesting to see if we see a headline with both China and Somalia in it in the near future.

With all that is the happening in the Horn right now, I thought I'd revisit some of my posts from last year this time on Somalia and the Horn. It won't fully answer the question Why Somalia? but it will shed some light. I apologize for the year old info in advance, I don't have the time right now to update these posts but it is still useful background.

Back in November 2005, the TFG (Transitional Federal Government) of Somalia signed an interesting $55m contract (the post notes $50m but later info showed it was slightly higher). Why? Ostensibly as a response to the attack on the cruise ship, Seabourn Spirit, a few weeks before. This whole thing was fishy, between the attackers needing a mother ship to mount the blue water attack to what was a civilian cruise ship doing with military grade hardware that is illegal under international maritime law. More came out on this, which I wrote about in an obscenely long post that questions various potential backers of TopCat (SOCOM? OGA? idiots?), looks at Congressional oversight and US arms trade laws (the value of the contract was a red flag requiring Congressional authorization, a lower value and State, i.e. Executive Branch, could authorize itself), provides some background on PMCs, and some other points.

Briefly, South Korean ship seized off Somalia:

Pirates have seized a South Korean fishing boat off the coast of Somalia - the latest in a series of such attacks.

The Dongwon-ho 628, with a crew of 25, was fishing with two other South Korean boats in international waters, when two speedboats landed attackers on board.

US and Dutch naval ships gave chase, but held off when they saw the South Korean crew threatened with guns.

The boat is now in Somali territorial waters, but the Dongwon company says the crew is reported safe.

The South Korean squadron was 100km from the coast. How are the fishing stocks doing with all the foreign ships working the take?

Technorati Tags: Africa, Horn of Africa, Somalia, Current Affairs, Pirates, Piracy, Security, GWOT

News brief about Germany's new defense mininster, Franz Josef Jung, visiting...

...the base for German sailors patrolling off the Horn of Africa as party of the U.S.-led counterterrorism operation Enduring Freedom.

From Karthryn Cramer comes a tasty bit of news that the BBC wasn't actually wrong when it said Top Cat Marine Security was in a "mobilisation phase" (UK spelling). From Ms Kathryn Cramer:

[a] company that builds boats identical to Top Cat's seems to have set up shop in Panama

Panama is nice place to hide. A commentator on Kathryn's site says Casini, if it is Top Cat, can't hide in Panama because ITAR can still reach Pete, he being a US citizen and all. I don't think that is why he's hidingout. The US State Department's "cease & desist" is still a fuzzy red herring to me until I actually see something. The more I ponder this, the more it seems USG was involved. As I said in the past, somebody should have been fired for selecting Top Cat Marine security as cover. More to come for sure.

Technorati Tags: Panama, TopCat, Somalia, Casini

An interesting item was on the BBC News website about the Somali coast being the most dangerous coast in the world, along with a recent Naval War College article (Aug 2005) by a professor at the National Defense College of the Philippines reiterated future if not present links and partnerships between terrorism and piracy, suggests the (obvious) point the attempted cruiseship hijacking that was thwarted by a military grade counter-measure (which was on a civilian vessel for what reason? isn't mil grade hardware illegal?) had more to do with terrorism than piracy. Even it was piracy, it would likely lead to terrorism following any line of logical reasoning.

The BBC item included a quote from the Somali minister for Planning and International Cooperation, "Abdi Rizak". Dr. Abdirizak Jurile, apparently referencing the TopCat Marine Security contract for US$55m, told the BBC New website a contract with a private US security company was "in the mobilisation phase". The BBC News item was posted 5 January 2005, but a cease & desist order (and here on Kathryn Cramer's site) was allegedly in the works one month ago.

What does the good Doctor's mean when he says a contract with an American company, financed by "foreign friends," is in the "mobilization phase"? True, it takes time to move equipment and personnel into the area, but are we still talking about TopCat? Who was financing TopCat? The US$55m cost of the contract requires Congressional approval beyond State Department approval (or rubber stamping). See the Somalia / Horn of Africa category on this site and start at the bottom for background and other discussion on this.

First, who is the doctor? According to the former Governor of the Central Bank of Somalia, Dr Abdirizak Jurile has been controlling Transitional Federal Government (TFG) funds "without accountability, transparency and parliamentary oversight". The former Governor, Mr. Mohamud M Uluso, also alleges Dr Abdirizak has opposed rectifying the control issues Mr Uluso highlights. The timing of Mr Uluso's dismissal, 24 September 2005, and the cruise ship hijacking & subsequent TopCat contract  are tempting to link, but can they? The removal of Mr Uluso was unconstitutional and unlawful. He was removed by Presidential Decree and not by approval by the Council of Ministers as required. Mr Uluso's allegations surrounding his dismissal very interesting:                      

In addition, the allegation of disobeying order from the Prime Minister, Prof Ali M Gedi [see Marathon Oil / Range Resources and TopCat / Ogaden for more on Prime Minister Gedi] is baseless and preposterous. The President of the Republic, whose responsibility is to ascertain accusations concerning government officials through due process, did not offer me the opportunity for rebuttal on the false allegation made against me. Aside, the Governor of the CB has the obligation and duty to refuse orders contrary to law from the Prime Minister.

Furthermore, the Central Bank Act establishes the term of office of the Governor in order to protect him from such abuse of power, illegal removal on baseless accusations, and to let him fulfill his duty with integrity, independence  and accountability. The claim that an official can be removed by who appointed him has no legal basis and it is erroneous belief. TFG is subject to the Transitional Federal Charter, the 1960 Constitution and all democratic laws passed before 1969.

There may have been differences of opinions or expectations on the issues briefly described in the annex such as printing new currency, management of government funds, opening of accounts in foreign countries, role of the Central Bank, opening of Central Bank Office in Jowhar, and preparation of government budget.

Mr Uluso continues and requests international support to investigate his dismissal. The charges he makes are substantial and indicative of attempts to establish a properly functioning government without corruption.

So, where is the money coming from? Still no idea but perhaps supplemental financing for natural resource contracts? There were rumors Europeans would be pitching in some bucks but those have evaporated like Peter Casini. Curious.

Incidently, since 27 December 2005, one incident, without loss, was reported to the International Chamber of Commerce  on 2 January 2006: the three speedboats tailing a tanker in the Gulf of Aden.

My initials posts and discussions on Somalia stemmed from the TopCat Marine Security "deal" late 2005. Since then, topics for discussion have broadened to include an appropriately regional perspective. Hence, the creation of a new category: Africa. The "old" category of "Somalia" is being kept because of links found elsewhere.

There is so much happening right now and I just do not have the cycles to address all of it. In the Horn of Africa, Somalia to be precise, some forward progress may have been made a couple of days ago. The Aden Declaration will hopefully become one of many steps toward stabilizing Somalia and shifting it away from “failed state” status. With my limited time right now and with all the traffic to this site for Somalia / Horn information, I will post the Power and Interest News Report (PINR) on the Aden Declaration without comment.

From the Jamestown Weekly Journal of News and Analysis on International Terrorism comes news of US CT (counter-terror) / al-Qaeda operations in Kenya. Andrew McGregor writes (text is below) about operations along the Kenya-Somalia border as the Horn region become hotter than before.

Al-Qaeda Manhunt in Kenya
Andrew McGregor

Kenya is widely remembered as the site of the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombing that killed over 200 people and cast al-Qaeda into international prominence. The attack was followed by a 2002 suicide car bombing that targeted a hotel popular with Israelis near Mombassa and the attempted destruction of an Israeli airliner. In both incidents, the vast majority of victims were Kenyans. There is, however, a great difference in the perception of the ongoing terrorist threat in Nairobi and Washington. Over Kenyan opposition the U.S. has issued a new terrorist warning for Kenya, damaging the important Kenyan tourism industry. Kenyan officials claim their country is largely free from terrorist threat and is unfairly blamed for its unavoidable proximity to lawless Somalia.

The warning cites "continuing terrorist threats and the limited ability of the Kenyan authorities to deter and detect such acts" (U.S. State Department, December 30). One day after the warning was issued Kenyan Internal Security announced they were intensifying their search for suspected al-Qaeda members. Of special interest are two Mombassa-born Kenyans, Ahmad Salim Swedan and Salah Ali Salah Nabhan, both indicted in the U.S. for leading roles in the 1998 bombing and suspected of planning the 2002 attacks. Nabhan is believed to be living in Mogadishu. Kenyan security officials claim that al-Qaeda is active in the country only through infiltrators from Somalia. Muslims constitute about 10 percent of Kenya's population and are a majority in the port city of Mombassa.

U.S. and Israeli officials are highly displeased with the June 2005 acquittals of seven suspects brought to trial on conspiracy charges in the 2002 hotel bombing. Charges of planning a new attack on the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi in 2003 were dropped. The lack of convictions has fostered perceptions the U.S. that the Kenyan government is not serious about terrorism.

Despite the development of well-trained counter-terrorist forces, large areas of the sensitive Somali-Kenyan border remain poorly administered and beyond the operational range of conventional Kenyan police or their anti-terrorist squadrons. The recent seizure of a rocket launcher and ammunition by the poorly equipped Administration Police (AP) was the result of solid police work following a tip that weapons were being brought across the border. Without radios or other communications equipment, an AP constable had to wait two days to hitch a ride from a UN vehicle to the closest regular Kenyan police detachment to report the arrest (The Nation [Nairobi], January 3). With drought and a growing food shortage in the region there are fears of large-scale movement of nomads across the border that may be exploited by members of the al-Qaeda connected al-Ittihad movement. There are also security concerns in Mombassa, where the port security chief was recently murdered when he failed to accept a bribe to stop investigation of a large container-theft syndicate. A Kenyan MP and his family are being investigated in the killing (The Nation, January 4).

The U.S. occupation of Iraq is unpopular in Kenya, and the renewal of the terrorism advisory has been widely condemned by government and the media. The United States maintains a counter-terrorist force in Djibouti (known as the Combined Joint Task Force for the Horn of Africa) that has participated with Kenya in combined military exercises designed to combat regional terrorist activity. Although further security assistance has been offered to Kenya by both the U.S. and the EU, persistent corruption at all levels of government is hindering international cooperation and threatens foreign aid.

The American and British presence on the Horn is sneaking into the news more often. The secrecy over military operations in the region is slowly being lifted. From the rescue of cheetah cubs to this AP story, a new front is being readied in an area International Crisis Group lists as a "Conflict Risk Alert":

Should we look toward the Law of the Sea and anti-pirate laws to regulate Private Military Companies? The use of military force is based on international norms and agreements. Through either tacit or implicit permission of organizations and states, an actor, generally a state can use its military. Of course, it used to have freedom to wield its Weberian monopoly of legitimate force within its borders at its leisure, but times have changed.

The latest wave of globalization has reversed border ossification of the last 150 years to allow penetration of domestic policies. With mixed results, states have influenced internal politics of states (Tianamen, Cote d'Ivorie, Congo, FYR, PNG, Sri Leone, etc) to make their constituents 'feel' better about the world in which they trade and conduct commerce and communication because much of the time these external regions really had little, if any, direct impact on the outsiders. Today, however, we have military forces outside the direct control of the state and possibly outside the Weberian-defined norms.

The effect of these PMCs have to influence states and peoples, possibly outside the control of states, must be regulated. States and corporations do not not uncertainty by their nature, at least those who operate in the institutionalized with our Disneylands, 401(k), and minimal need for personal protective services.

Mercenary companies were once outlawed as interfering with state business. The Laws of the Seas, with its international cooperative construct that does not require ascension like the WTO, be a fair model for a global agreement on military force? The multi-lateral agreement between all states bordering the seas is functional, should it be extended? What about the growing piracy menace? Is it cover for 4GW 'warriors', terrorists, or something else?

There can be little doubt that the intersection of US and Chinese interests (i.e. oil, gas, etc) in Africa and the existence of failed or failing states will give ample opportunity for somebody to intervene. Between the stories of TopCat Marine Security trying to vie for a security contract (cease and desist? come on...), the UK adding to a substantial US presence, and front-companies (which could include TopCat?) the US could do a stellar job staying up-front, out front, and public with humanitarian and other helpful aid in the region in a real battle for hearts and minds. The Chinese are doing it, we need to do publically do it. This is espcially important as armed groups may be preparing major offensive:

Unidentified armed groups in the north of Central African Republic (CAR) may be preparing a major offensive, the African Union said in a report issued on Thursday.

Things are heating up in Africa. See this story from The Herald:

THE UK's special forces are being deployed to Djibouti, the impoverished state which dominates the entrance to the Red Sea, to join US Delta Force commandos in the hunt for al Qaeda training camps along the Horn of Africa.

Some 2000 Marines are already there backing up US Special Forces.

The Cheetah Cubs

According to the Department of State, "U.S. counterterrorism troops, carrying out humanitarian water improvement projects in the Horn of Africa region" found these two cubs and rescued them in Dec 05. It is good and expected our forces are in the region and there are no negatives to that from my perspective. The issue complicates when considering the "armed camps" protecting Chinese oil workers in the region.

The blogosphere is increasingly used to incite and investigate and this recent comment is a further example of this growing use of the new pamphleteers to influence events. The region in question has obvious links to other disucssions on this site (see the Somalia category and take your pick of readings).

How does the South African Ophir Corporation has recently announced a 75% stake in the Rova Energy Corporation figure into all of this? The maritime diplomacy of the Chinese, Yemini fields accessed from Somalia, and the general lawlessness of the region certainly makes for some interesting reading. More investigation on this surely to come. Comments, leads?

Possibly so, according to Kathryn Cramer's blog, Top Cat Marine Security Ordered to Cease & Desist.

...the US Department of States Bureau of Arms Control has issued a Cease and Desist order to Top Cat Marine Security on their pirate-fighting contract with Somalia....

But so what?

From the region are BBC reports of Eritrea ejecting UN peacekeepers monitoring the border with Ethiopia. This comes as a possible reaction to threatened UN sanctions resulting from a lack of compliance with a five year old peace agreement. Kofi Annan and the UN Security Council gave an unusually strong rebuke in response: "The Security Council unequivocally demands that Eritrea immediately reverse its decision without preconditions." The most recent flash point was Badme, far from the contested Horn areas and the coast. Is this related or coincidental? Keep reading for a lesson on complexity systems (you'll have to read my other posts... at some point I'll do another, overview).

The region has a lot going on right now. Rumors of something happening before Christmas seem to be gaining traction with reality.

However, some key questions yet to be answered:

• Was a "cease and desist" actually issued, assuming that is the appropriate legal remedy in this case? If not, will it be? Will it be a paper tiger?
  
• Does this mean the dissolution of TopCat Marine Security for either the purpose of protecting Somalia's coast or for good?
• Will those involved with TopCat regroup, if the haven't already, and continue on their planned path?
  
• If this was a clandestine operation, will USG do a better job next time? (Based on the participants in this fiasco I highly doubt this was a USG-sponsored adventure. If it was, somebody should be demoted or fired.)
• Lastly, will there be similar fanfare in the media over the termination of this coast protection solution? I doubt it because I doubt the validity and legitimacy of the whole TopCat endeavor.
• Will there be another public attempt at a private or public solution? Will the EU, AU, UN be more involved the next go'round, especially as a result of the publicity?
• OR was this all a complete shame by a criminal (see Kathryn Cramer's post on Casini & TopCat, the "man" behind TopCat Marine Security) and Somalia is no closer to security or will good things result from the publicity? Based on certain rumors and suggestions, I question the likelihood of this path... it seems like a lot of mobilizing went in behind the scenes to stop a scam artist and a lot interest from people other than District Attorney's (lawyers working for municipalities in the United States) and Attorney's General (lawyers working for states in the United States).

My money is on the last option AND the third option. This puzzle isn't complete, just one of the pieces has been dropped (kicked?) to the floor. While we don't have confirmation yet, Casini may be getting called on his failure / inability to deliver product to (shady) buyers and compliance with US Code (and apparently bankruptcy courts, etc). However, what is the real importance of the "cease & desist"? Does it not just legally halt TCMS's involvement? What was their REAL participation anyways? Providing some boats, making some wonder how long before the pirates are cruising on COBRAs, to the region, possibly some teeth? The change of scope from littoral anti-piracy to seeking the "mother-ship" and back was either a lack of discretion by the in-over-his-head Casini or ?

Kathryn Cramer has a theory it was related to insuring ships.

Information / feedback I have received and reviewed indicate TCMS was simply part of something larger and not a lone wolf out to make a few bucks. With TCMS out, will the underlying effort it was clearly providing cover for cease, burrow, or disperse? The access to natural resources (including Yemeni fields accessed from Somalia), the Chinese, and armed factions inland are at most related to the piracy problem and not direct consequences of privateering. The land-bound warlords obviously have at least some control (are there sealords in the area? Kevin Costner, are you out there? sorry...) over the pirates, but they aren't the whole game.

More to come for sure as the security situation of Somalia is dire. A reality underscored by the  reporting from Kenya of another hijacking of a ship of "unknown ownership and registry was seized in the pirate-infested waters of Somalia early Tuesday".

:: See also the Somalia and Africa categories for additional information, include Chinese and energy implications

Came across this tidbit on Somalia from a 1993 National Review Online article:

In 1984, Brazilian mining company Construtora Andrade Gutierrez announced a $300 million investment in a uranium mine in northern Somalia. The deal was to be financed by Banco do Brasil, and the host government agent was the Somali Arab Mining Company (Soarmico). Soarmico was itself a joint venture founded in 1978 between the Somali government, the Arab Mining Company based in Jordan, and Iraq.

But according to a dated World Energy Council report, Somalia has only a small reserve that would be (relatively) expensive to extract.

:: See the Somalia category for all preceding and future items on this thread ::

Without getting into details here, but Kathryn Cramer has done some interesting investigative work on those associated with TopCat Marine Security, which makes for an interesting read. Her information paints TopCat more like an Executive Outcomes / Sandline mercenary outfit than a respectable private military firm providing security services, of which there are many. Her research indicates a Fox News link to TopCat. Definitely worth the read.

Looking back at a previous post, I'm struck by a statement by a minister of the Transitional Government, Abdalla Haji Ali: "Besides donating assorted weapons to favored factions, unfortunately Ethiopian military personnel crossed deep in to Somali regions of Bakol and Bay in the last 48 hours."

The timing of Ethiopia's recent announcement of what may seem like public knowledge -- "We have a very active terrorist cell in Mogadishu, which has been involved in terrorist activities in Kenya" -- is curious. Both Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi's statement and Ali's statement were reported the same day.

Ethiopia's offer to "help" comes during ongoing African Union peace talks last week. The AU was apparently discussing plans to send troops to Somalia to guarantee the safety of the Transitional Government. Ethiopia has said that "should the process collapse, we very much hope it doesn't but if it does, we plan to protect ourselves, not sort out the mess in Somalia."

It sounds to me like preparation for putting boots on the ground in Somalia, if they have not already moved in as Ali claims they have, through proactive action.

The TopCat-led or fronted "mission" could be coming under the cover of Tim Spicer's hope (cover? hard to not question Spicer w/ the current problems of AEGIS) of humanitarian intervention through private forces since governments “won't make a decision to intervene…or [delay] until it is too late”. Use of PMC's (private military companies) for HIs (Humanitarian Interventions) is something many have written about, even in the NGO world of peace and serenity.

A side note: a paper listed in the previous link by Christopher Spearin, is located on the Sandline website. A reference Mr Spearin used is Col "Bernie" McCabe (ret.), the same as in my recent post. Only then, he was a Director for Lifeguard. He provided the information to David Isenberg, now of BASIC, on Plaza 107 (see "Background" and note 94).

Col McCabe, as Sandline rep, once said "we don't work for white powder gangs or rebel groups", preferring to work more noble causes, apparently. But Lifeguard was linked to supplying arms to Sierra Leone rebels and employed by mining companies for security. While on its face simply a security arrangement, it cross past the boundary of propriety as it was part of SL's working both sides (Sky Air Cargo) of the conflict. The region has a long history of working with private military companies. Puntland hired the Hart Group to protect its shores (why not hire them again? or are they...) in the past. Overall, listing the companies with previous engagements in the region currently connected to TopCat personnel (e.g. Lifeguard, Sandline) could make for an interesting map. Anyone going to do that chart?

This backgrounder by "Donna Somala" is interesting in its tracing and similar path my research has taken me. Of most interest is this (emphasis added on parts I've heard rumors of before): "It is evident that a US intelligence team will back Ethiopian troops when they invade Somalia in order to ensure the planned works of the Caluba oil pipeline project toward Somali ports. The interest of Ethiopia is purely economic and has nothing to do with IGAD’s so-called plan to disarm the militia."

In the end, I am confident boots will be marching in Somalia sponsored by this state or that state (Ethiopia and others), and probably including the United States in some direct or indirect manner (remember the $50m ITAR / AECA etc limits). Rumors indicate such, as does the news.