Africa: “A Problem As Unique As Each of its Constituent Parts”

Still terrifying, but not as monolithic as some envision.
“Security issues are still terrifying, but not as monolithic as some suggest.”

Regarding Mr. Hipple’s article “African Navies Week: Al Shabaab is Only the Beginning”, he addressed a critical issue which all too often does not receive proper attention.  It is a daunting prospect to try and pull in the disparate threats from across the continent formulating a single threat analysis and, while his conclusion is accurate in that he points out the diverse threats facing the continent, from a purely security-focused perspective, it still lacks some necessary clarity.  The problem is the moment you start looking at how individual factors within a given country are driving conflict/instability, you quickly lose the scent of how it ties into the transnational threat groups.  There is also the problem of how far back you are willing to look, the specter of Colonialism is still present and the post-colonial relationships cannot be entirely discounted.

There are too many fundamentally different factors at play across Africa to compare the potential for total, though not collective chaos that threatens the continent and still have the comparison to Afghanistan be a strong one.  While Afghanistan is easily evoked as a common point of reference and there are elements of similarity that narrowly can be compared, each region of the continent has enough of its own issues to cause the wheels to come off of the Afghan comparison.  Additionally, once you make the comparison to Afghanistan it easily leads to a false equivalency.

The threat from Boko Haram (BH) is real and growing yet the Nigerian Government is wholly unprepared to handle it – their heavy-handed tactics have increased distrust in the government and have not deterred or degraded BH.  More importantly, the growing alignment between Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and BH marks a significant development in the connectivity of pan-African terrorism.  However, these groups do not monopolize the West African threat.  The spread of BH into Cameroon is tied to their evasion the Nigerian military’s offensive operations.  What is happening in Niger with regards to BH is mostly proximate.  The more apt comparison for the growing instability in Niger is the likeness to Mali where you see disenfranchised Tuaregs of the north returning from service in Libya (Gaddafi’s desert battalions) flush with weapons, training and a desire to have a say in their government.  In both Mali and Niger, the Tuaregs have been persecuted and altogether cut out of the political process by the ethnically separate majority in the southern capitals.

Disenchantment with the government in Bamako and simmering ethnic discord set the stage for French operations in January, however, what caught world attention was the marriage of convenience by the MUJWA and elements of AQIM.  Given the disassociated natures of the AQ franchise, it can be difficult to make sweeping generalities because the various strains (AQIM, AQEA, AQAP, AQI and AQSL) each have their own local idiosyncrasies, but one thing they do have in common is their ability to first bond with a local cause/faction on ideologically tenuous grounds and then quickly alienate themselves from the population with their unique extremist ideology which is often incompatible with local norms – see AQI and the Sunnis, AQAP and the Tribes of south central Yemen or AQIM and the Tuaregs.

My point is, while virulent strains of AQ exist across the corners of the continent and in their own right pose a threat, they have had difficulty building and maintaining strong and enduring relationships with other local movements.  The AQ-BH connection is growing, and AQEA/AS in the past two years “formalized” their relationship, however, when you look at the nature of the threat on the ground in Somalia for example, there is a definite rift.

Continuing in the East, while the threat from AS/AQEA has expanded beyond Somalia, it is worth noting that the focus of their ire has not been indiscriminate but has targeted those countries participating in AMISOM.  With regards to CAR, while Seleka partnership with anyone would only further degrade a poor situation, the nature of the Seleka rebels themselves does not lend itself to partnership with any of the aforementioned groups.  It is also worth noting that within days of capturing the capital, the rebel groups splintered and immediately fell into the same trap as their government predecessors – an inability to exert influence beyond the capital.  What this means in the long term is that the security vacuum is being filled by the rebels with no real solution.

Moving North, there is a fascinating and frightening mélange of issues at play in the Maghreb and the single commonality is that each of the governments in their various degrees of weakness is attempting to quell internal dissent.  Libya is the new frontier since the fall of Gaddafi, and the government has no ability to project power, they cannot control the capital let alone anywhere else are forced to in equal measure threaten and placate the militias within Tripoli.  However, the ungoverned spaces elsewhere have been, at least temporarily ceded, as the government attempts to consolidate power.  Tunisia is still dealing with the fall out of the Arab spring and has been unable to form a coalition government that meets the needs of both Islamic factions and strong secular sentiments/groups.

While the graphic paints a fairly grim picture of the continent, the reality is even grimmer yet as it fails to capture one of the longest ongoing conflict in the Kivu region of Eastern DRC.  Furthermore, with regards to the maritime threat, there are fundamentally different factors at play on the East and West Coast; while piracy is the end result, the elements driving them are quite different.  In HOA you have piracy being driven by the fact that Somalia is a failed state and pirates take advantage of their proximity of shipping lanes in the Bab-el-Mandeb.  Along the West coast, the piracy issue is being driven by the desire to exploit components associated with the off-short oil wealth of Nigeria.  The biggest problem as it applies to maritime security is that too many governments across Africa still perceive maritime security to be a luxury they cannot afford.  It is easy to discuss how it Maritime security has a chance to minimize the flow of extremists and the vast potential to make a positive impact, but like so many things, without sufficient local buy-in, the effort is dead on arrival.

It is difficult to address broad security threats across Africa without becoming hopelessly mired in the details; this is why all too often security threats on the continent are looked at in isolation without broader thought given to overarching threats.  This is further complicated by the fact that the commonality of the threats spanning the breadth of the continent, their origins and likely the solutions, exist beyond the security realm.  Uneven and underdevelopment, disenfranchised populations, and natural resource exploitation along often colonial lines drive what has to date been considered an acceptable level of instability.  The various extremist movements are indicative of systemic and structural failures.  Mr. Hipple’s article was a valiant effort at addressing one of these issues, but it is exceptionally difficult to frame the problem appropriately so as to address the relevant factors at appropriate depth while not missing necessary nuance and simultaneously addressing significant transnational factors.  Until the broader issues driving current conflict and instability are addressed, we are likely to see more of the same.

Timothy Baker is Marine Officer in the United States Marine Corps Reserve and a Masters Candidate at Columbia University.  The opinions and views expressed in this post are his alone and are presented in his personal capacity.  They do not necessarily represent the views of Columbia University, U.S. Department of Defense or the United States Marine Corps.

(Editor’s note: Another fine example of my over-simplification is the note that the map also showed “Somalia” as one unit, when in reality it is three distinct organizations each with different problems)

Indonesia and the Next Australian Defence White Paper

By Daniel Grant

800px-Marty_NatalegawaAustralia’s Abbott government has promised to write a new Defence White Paper within 18 months, and one of the key challenges it will face is considering the place of Indonesia in Australian defence thinking. As the fear of a direct Indonesian threat retreats into the past, it is being replaced by a view of Indonesia as a potential ‘buffer’ separating Australia from the vagaries of the East Asian system. But when the new government considers Australia’s defence options in the next century, it’d do well to remember that Indonesia gets a vote in the role it plays in defending Australia.

Historically, Indonesia has comprised an important, though unclear, element in Australia’s strategic environment. When Australia looks at its neighbourhood in isolation, Indonesia’s proximity and strategic potential makes it appear as a liability. But if the lens is widened to encompass the entire Asia-Pacific strategic system, a strong Indonesia looks more like an asset. During the Cold War Australia’s security concerns about Indonesia revolved around threats associated with Konfrontasi, communism and state collapse, with the prospect of a nuclear-armed Sukarno regime menacing briefly in 1965. But as early as the 1970s, Defence was also conducting studies of possible regional contingencies which involved Indonesia as an ally in achieving regional security. So recognition of our mutual strategic interests coexisted with security concerns about Indonesia.

In a recent Security Challenges article Stephan Fruehling argued that the 2013 Defence White Paper is Australia’s first ‘post-Indonesia’ strategic guidance document since the 1950s. By that he means that the document doesn’t even mention the possibility that relations between Australia and Indonesia might worsen, let alone gesture towards the ‘Indonesia threat’ of yore. Instead, it casts a pretty firm vote in favour of the ‘Indonesia as asset’ conception. This shift reflects not only Australia’s growing comfort with Indonesia as a neighbour, but also the prevailing uncertainty of the Asia-Pacific strategic environment and the attendant need for Australia to build partnerships in the region.

But Australians should be careful not to read this increasingly rosy picture of Indonesia’s strategic significance as a linear trend. While a stable Indonesia acts as a buffer regardless of its policy preferences, assisting it to play the role that we may need it to requires policy coordination. An effective joint response to contingencies involving regional defence against a hostile major power, for instance, requires planning premised on a shared view of Asia’s major power politics. Despite the shifts that have taken place in the bilateral relationship, a convergence of strategic perceptions at this level hasn’t happened, and is unlikely to happen in the near future. There are several reasons for this.

While Indonesia has warmed to the US security presence in Asia, in part because it helps to restrain China, it has also been careful to keep its distance from the US out of regard for China. As Indonesian defence thinkers look out at their archipelago from Java, a complex risk environment stares back at them. While a potentially hostile China is an important risk to be mitigated, overtly pushing against China heightens many other serious risks, not the least of which being major power war. Doing so would sacrifice Indonesia’s development goals for little net security gain.

The main thrust of Indonesian statecraft has been to exert diplomatic influence in regional forums to short-circuit adversarial strategic trends and develop mechanisms to moderate conflict. This approach has been sustained through a period when China’s maritime activism reached a crescendo, America was at its most engaged in decades, and Indonesia itself had its most pro-Western President ever. Because it’s in keeping with Indonesia’s non-alignment tradition, this approach has the critical buttress of domestic support. More importantly, it remains Indonesia’s most viable strategy.

The sense of vulnerability that comes from their geographic location makes Indonesians wary of becoming entangled in the strategic calculations of foreign powers. Australia’s appreciation of Indonesia as a ‘buffer’ is a case in point: the difference between ‘buffer’ and ‘battleground’ is one of abstraction. As disastrous as major power confrontation would be for Australia, for Indonesia the fighting would take place on its doorstep, if not in its living room. This means that Australia might more readily take actions which risk escalation, especially if it feels shielded from the worst of the consequences. Deepening defence cooperation with the likes of Australia is not without its risks for Indonesia.

The next defence white paper will surely assign Indonesia an important place. But Australia should consider the possibility that we’ve already seen the full extent of Indonesia’s ‘Westward’ shift. Indonesia remains a country that pursues regional security through diplomatic means, and in this sense remains aloof from the great power game in Asia. By implicitly or explicitly assigning Indonesia a role it’s unwilling to play, we’d be putting Australia’s defence policy on unstable foundations. It’s the job of the next white paper to chart a course that Australia and Indonesia can both stick to if the seas get rough.

Daniel Grant is the 2013 Robert O’Neill Scholar at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University. This article originally appeared on the Australian Strategic Policy Institute’s blog The Strategist

Events 20-26 October 2013

Events Week of 20-26 October 2013

21 October 2013 – Washington, DC – Center for Strategic and International Studies“The Future of the Marine Corps”. Following a decade at war and amidst mounting fiscal pressures, the Marine Corps is developing a new force structure designed to address the “new normal” security environment while maximizing scarce resources.  The Corps has already designed and deployed new crisis response capabilities in response to existing security gaps, and is making additional adjustments to help enhance its ability to contribute to joint shaping and combat capabilities going forward.  Join us for a discussion with Major General Frank McKenzie, USMC Representative to the Quadrennial Defense Review, for a look at how these adjustments relate to broader questions being explored as part of the Quadrennial Defense Review, as well as to the Corps’ future priorities.

21 October 2013 – Washington, DC – Center for Strategic and International Studies“Rare Earth Elements: Implications on US-Asia Environmental and Security Issues”.  Rare Earth Elements (REEs) are chemical elements that are critical for your mobile phones, laptops, green technologies, and even defense systems. Despite the fact that REEs are more abundant than silver and gold with known reserves in Australia and the U.S., China continues to monopolize global REE supplies, which could negatively impact the national security interests of other countries. Countries such as Japan, which accounts for two-thirds of China’s REE exports and relies on its supply to fuel its automotive and electronics industries, have argued that China’s monopoly over REEs are dangerous, as China can and has imposed trade embargos on REEs to gain political leverage. This roundtable, featuring many prominent speakers, will focus on pressing questions such as: Is China using REEs to gain geopolitical advantage, or is it genuinely concerned about environmental challenges of REE production? What does the current state of REE production imply for the economies and security interests of Japan, other Asia-Pacific countries, and the U.S.? And what can be done to mitigate China’s dominance of mining REEs?

22 October 2013 – London – King’s College“Afghan Question and the Role of Pakistan’s Military Establishment”.  As Afghanistan undergoes a historic political and security transition with the withdrawal of US-led Coalition forces, the role of Pakistan becomes ever more important. Facing unprecedented domestic security challenges, the Afghan situation looms large in Pakistan’s strategic outlook. The speaker, an expert on the Pakistani military establishment and Islamic world’s strategic affairs provides insight on how the Pakistani army and intelligence is currently debating the Afghan question. He is the founding director of IISA.

22 October 2013 – Washington, DC – Hudson Institute“Power Shifts in the Eastern Mediterranean: The Emerging Strategic Relationship of Israel, Greece, and Cyprus”.  The discovery of massive quantities of hydrocarbons in both the Israeli and Cypriot exclusive economic zones, and the selection of the Trans Adriatic Pipeline, redraws the region’s hydrocarbon map and will significantly impact energy security policies. This transformation has emerged as large political upheavals continue throughout the area.  Primary topics of discussion will be: 1) the emerging strategic relationship of Israel, Greece, and Cyprus; 2) changes in the region’s energy security environment; and 3) Turkey’s reorientation toward Islamism and the East.

22 October 2013 – London – International Institute for Strategic Studies“Recent Operations in Helmand”.  NATO and the Afghan government are focused on achieving full Afghan leadership of security across the country by the end of 2014, when NATO’s combat mission will end. This security transition requires NATO and Kabul to increase the size and capability of Afghan forces, develop the capacity of the Afghan state, reduce corruption and persuade ‘reconcilable’ insurgents to lay down their arms.

At the end of June, the Afghan government and NATO announced ‘Milestone 13’, marking a significant increase in Afghan leadership of security operations. Security in Helmand is now the full responsibility of the Afghan authorities. The British Army’s 1st Mechanized Brigade has just returned from there. Its commander, Brigadier Rupert Jones, will describe the developing capabilities of the Afghan security forces and the brigade’s role in supporting them.

22 October 2013 – Washington, DC – Stimson Center“Securing the Nuclear Enterprise: What Nuclear Crises Teach Us About Future Security Threats”.  Next spring, the U.S will join other world governments and organizations in The Hague for the 2014 Nuclear Security Summit. Like previous gatherings in 2010 and 2012, the upcoming summit will include debate about the steps the global community must take to prevent nuclear materials from falling into the hands of non-state actors. Central to this objective is the ability of nuclear armed states to maintain control over their weapons and sensitive materials. One way the U.S. can identify existing gaps in the control regime and prepare for the summit is by carefully studying previous nuclear weapons crises.

During its Cultural Revolution, China nearly lost control of its nuclear arsenal. This history – little known in the U.S. – is both chilling and critical to understanding Chinese attitudes towards nuclear security. In the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center’s (NPEC) new study, Nuclear Weapons Security Crises: What Does History Teach?, Chinese nuclear weapons management expert and Executive Director of Project 2049 Institute Mark Stokes tells the story of China’s near-nuclear crisis and the lessons that can be learned from it.

23 October 2013 – Washington, DC – Atlantic Council“Cyber Risk Wednesday”.  Cyber Risk Wednesdays brings cyber experts from government and industry together with policymakers to examine topics at the core of the Cyber Statecraft Initiative’s study of interrelated cyber hazards and underlying concentration of risks. The series is designed to expose stakeholders from the technology, policy, and risk management communities to vibrant new cyber topics and provide a venue for the exchange of ideas.

The launch event, held on October 23, will introduce the joint effort by the Atlantic Council and Zurich Insurance to understand how global aggregation of cyber risks could cause systemic shocks and ways, such as insurance and resilience, to mitigate them. A moderated discussion will analyse systemic cyber risks and explore their implications on the future of the internet.  The panel will feature Larry Castro, Managing Director at The Chertoff Group, whose prior government service includes over four decades at the National Security Agency.

24 October 2013 – London – International Institute for Strategic Studies“Prompt Global Strike”.  Today, only nuclear-armed ballistic missiles are capable of striking targets at intercontinental range within minutes. Conventionally-armed aircraft or subsonic cruise missiles could take many hours to travel the same distance. A number of states are, however, seeking to close this ‘capability gap’ by developing hypersonic long-range conventional weapons. The United States’ Conventional Prompt Global Strike programme is the most well-known example. However, China is also very active in this area and efforts in Russia also appear to be underway. James Acton will explore the implications – both positive and negative – of these weapons for international security, and especially nuclear deterrence.

24 October 2013 – Santa Monica, CA – RAND Corporation“Security Versus Privacy?”.  Does homeland security mean you can’t be secure in your own home? A steady drumbeat of revelations about the U.S. government’s trove of phone and electronic communication records of private citizens has unsettled many within the past few months. The government has argued that it needs this information to identify and apprehend terrorists and their sympathizers. But people are wondering if America is sacrificing privacy and civil liberties upon the altar of homeland security, and if so, to what extent? Are the fears of an oncoming police state grossly unjustified? Or should they serve as clarion calls for reform? Join us in discussing where to draw the proper lines between privacy, security, and liberty.

25 October 2013 – London – King’s College“Conventional Prompt Global Strike: What Happens When Technology Overwhelms Strategy”.  James Acton is a senior associate in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He is a member of the Trilateral Commission on Challenges to Deep Cuts and co-chaired the Next Generation Working Group on US-Russia arms control. Acton, who holds a PhD in theoretical physics, was previously a lecturer in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London.

25 October 2013 – Washington, DC – Cato Institute“Dangerous World?  Threat Perception and U.S. National Security.”  Last year, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey contended that “we are living in the most dangerous time in my lifetime, right now.” This year, he was more assertive, stating that the world is “more dangerous than it has ever been.”

Is this accurate? At this conference, experts on international security will assess, and put in context, the supposed dangers to American security. Speakers will examine the most frequently referenced threats, including wars between nations and civil wars within nations. Panelists will also discuss the impact of rising nations, weapons proliferation, general unrest, transnational crime, and state failures, as well as technological developments, climate change, and the requirement to maintain a stable global economic system.

26 October 2013 – Washington, DC – Georgetown / TED Talks“TEDx Talk”.  The professors giving talks are not just experts in their field of academia- they have achieved great feats beyond the classroom. Sonal Shah worked as Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of the first White House Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation, while Dr. Francis Slakey is the first person in history to both summit the highest mountain on every continent and surf every ocean in the world. For more information on our full list of speakers visit www.tedxgeorgetown.com

For the second independently organized TEDxGeorgetown event, the focus is on student engagement. Through a brief application, select students will have the opportunity to interact with the speakers in an intimate group setting. Tickets are free of charge.

Long-Term
29 October 2013 – Washington, DC – Disruptive Thinkers.  Execution is the new innovation.  All of our innovative ideas won’t amount to much if we can’t find a way to implement them.  And this month we get a chance to hear from Rob Holzer, someone who knows how to do just that.

29 October 2013 – Washington, DC – Atlantic Council“Regional Cooperation: An Imperative for Transatlantic Defense”.  Please join the Atlantic Council for an address by, and discussion with, Finnish Minister of Defense Carl Haglund, who will detail the importance of regional cooperation for transatlantic security.

Building on the successes of Nordic Defense Cooperation (NORDEFCO), Minister Haglund will make a case for NATO member and partner countries to follow a similar framework to sustain present-day interoperability levels and enhance military capabilities. NORDEFCO’s five members states—Finland, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden—use regional networking to increase their interoperability via cross-border cooperation, build-up and maintain necessary military capabilities, and provide cost-effective contributions to international efforts.

30 October 2013 – London – King’s College“Geographic Information Systems and the Geographies of War”.

30 October 2013 – Washington, DC – Foreign Policy Association“Georgetown Conference: Iran and the South Caucasus”.

31 October 2013 – London – King’s College“Terror Attacks on Energy Infrastructure – A Growing Threat?”.  The European Centre for Energy and Resource Security (EUCERS) cordially invites you to the fifth and final roundtable discussion in a series on Resilient Energy Infrastructure co-hosted by acatech – National Academy of Science and Engineering, Germany and the Konrad-Adenauer-Foundation in London, in partnership with KPMG.

31 October 2013 – Washington, DC – CNA“Asia’s Looming Hotspot”.  Rear Admiral Michael McDevitt, U.S. Navy (Ret.) will discuss the increasingly contentious dispute between China and Japan concerning sovereignty over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands in the East China Sea and the implications this dispute has for U.S. foreign policy. This talk is one of a series on “Hidden Dangers: Emerging Global Issues of the 21st Century” sponsored with the World Affairs Council of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. – See more at: http://www.cna.org/news/events/2013-10-31#sthash.cBXbR5bq.dpuf

01 November 2013 – Washington, DC – Atlantic Council“Tackling India’s Cyber Threat”.  India is becoming the second-largest victim of cyberattacks after the United States and earlier this year released its first national Cyber Security Policy. The purpose of this framework document is to ensure a secure and resilient cyberspace for citizens, businesses, and the government.

In particular, the policy aims to strengthen the role of the Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In) in coordination with crisis management efforts and awareness-raising activities on cybersecurity. Alongside protecting the country’s cyber infrastructure, the policy strengthens the significant role IT has played in transforming India’s image to that of a global player in providing IT solutions of the highest standards.

11 November 2013 – London – King’s College“New Nuclear Initiatives in Arms Control and Nonproliferation – Likelihood of Success?”.  President Obama’s renewed commitment to ‘a world without nuclear weapons’ along with ongoing challenges over Iran, North Korea, and within the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, have given rise to numerous new initiatives in arms control and nonproliferation. A panel will discuss four such initiatives, including the humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons initiative, the ‘P5 process’ with the five NPT-recognized Nuclear Weapon States, US-Russia arms control, and developments in Chinese nuclear policy.
 
13 November 2013 – Washington, DC – 10th Annual Disruptive Technologies Conference (Postponed)

14 November 2013 – India – The Diplomat“International Conference on Future Challenges in Earth Sciences for Energy and Mineral Resources”.

16 November 2013 – India – The Diplomat“Global Maritime International Conference”.

10 December 2013 – Washington, DC – USNI2013 Defense Forum Washington: Shaping the New Maritime Strategy and Navigating the Budget Gap Reality.

SC Episode 5: Africa

CIMSEC-LogoWe speak to James Bridger, author of a menagerie of CIMSEC Articles on Africa and an Africa/Middle East Asymmetric maritime security analyst for Delex. Episode 5, our revisit of African security issues (DOWNLOAD)  after African Navies week:

African Navies Week: Al Shabaab Is Only the Beginning
Searching for a Somali Coastguard
East Africa: More Than Just Pirates
Nigeria’s Navy: Setting Sail in Stormy Seas
Balanced Public/Private Effort for West African Maritime Security
East Africa: A Historical Lack of Navies

Particular to James Bridger:

Egyptian Instability and Suez Canal Security (Part I)
Crafting a Counter-Piracy Regime in the Gulf of Guinea
From Fighting Piracy to Terrorism, the PMPF Saga Continues
Re-examining the Gulf of Guinea: Fewer Attacks, Better Pirates
Pirate Horizons in the Gulf of Guinea

We talk about Somalia, Nigeria, piracy, terrorism, and the movie Captain Phillips. Join us on Itunes, Xbox Music, or the website. Stay tuned next week for our episode on USCG mobile training teams.

Fostering the Discussion on Securing the Seas.