Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Mali Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Withdrawal and Relapse
SYSOP    5/12/2021 6:23:38 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Clare       5/13/2021 4:12:25 AM
The current violent conflict has nothing to do with 'tribal feuds'. There is no long history of 'tribal feuds' in this area as is so often and so inaccurately repeated. There has been a recent history for some 15 years of increasing tension over land and water as these resources have been lost but the conflicts have been minor and they have always been resolved at community level. They have been on a completely different scale to the appalling events going on in 2019-20 in E Central Mali when we estimate that 5-10,000 rural people lost their lives. The main drivers of the current violent conflict are a) money and the huge profits gained by armed criminal groups and hunters in a framework of little law and order, and who do not want the conflict to finish as a result and b) the vast and extraordinary amounts of money the jihadists have to recruit - much of which comes from cocaine trafficking and ransom payments and possibly other things too now such as profits of cattle theft. This conflict is NOT caused by any historic tribal issues. This is a scapegoat. It driven by money at its roots and can only be tackled by radical measures which cut off funding sources to jihadist groups - such as legalising the drugs trade and the vast profits made from illegal trafficking and preventing kidnapping and ransom payments. There is no emotional interest in or driving factor for conflict in Mali and without the money it would lose all momentum.
 
Quote    Reply

BamakoBlues       5/14/2021 5:30:51 AM
On the positive side, the article recognizes corruption as a major factor in Mali's abysmal security situation and the extent to which Mali's political class is implicated in corruption. But it fails to note the degree to which this corruption was made possible by the complicity of donors in collaborating with those who it knew were stealing much if not most of the budgetary and other assistance they provided. It also fails to blame the ECOWAS (CEDEAO) for its actions forced the junta to free the 30 or so high value detainees without whom many of the major cases of corruption which have emerged over the past years and in recent weeks would never have been impossible. The way you get the money back and prosecute others involved is by keeping people in detention until they return ill-gotten gains and "sing" out the names of their accomplices, as was done by Nigeria in recovering a good part of Sony Abacha's corruptly obtained fortune from his family. The donors talk a good ballgame on corruption but fail to take action when it is in areas which they support and when those involved include Malian staff members of their own assistance programs. The article's contention that France is leading the push against corruption is laughable The major contracts underlying the surfacturation scandal expose in the Verificateur General's report of 2014 were to French companies. And France supported IBK under whose administration government property own to the kitchen sink at INA was sold to cronies at Filene's Basement prices, and it did so until the very end when his position became untenable. His removal has not changed things much, as the article correctly notes.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics