You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Africa Horn
More on the seige and conquest of Balad
2006-06-05
Somali Islamic fighters seized a key town in the north yesterday after heavy clashes with gunmen allied to a warlord alliance, expanding their territory outside the lawless capital.

Columns of heavily armed Islamic fighters surrounded and pounded Balad, about 30km north of Mogadishu, as militiamen loyal to the Alliance for the Restoration of Peace and Counter-Terrorism (ARPCT) fled to safety, witnesses and militia commanders said. "After brief fighting, with the help of Allah and support of the people of Balad we have fully captured the town," Moalim Hashi, an Islamic militia commander said.

"Balad is now safe and secure and is under the control of the Islamic courts. The people have been liberated from the misdeeds of the ARPCT," added Hashi.

Independent sources have confirmed the take-over of the strategic town despite massive reinforcement from Mogadishu-based warlords led by Mohamed Afrah Qanyare and Issa Botan Alin, who rushed to the city with dozens of trucks mounted with machine guns and hundreds of fighters. Witnesses said several had people died - the exact figure was unclear - when the Islamic militia stormed the outpost, pounding it with artillery, rockets and machineguns.

They said the Islamic forces had captured 72 alliance fighters and had freed 18 prisoners from the Balad jail. There were also reports of massive defections to the Islamic militia's ranks.

The Islamists have been making steady gains in recent days, capturing various villages north of Mogadishu on Saturday amid artillery duels that killed at least 19 people. Since the war erupted in February, at least 332 people have been killed and more than 1,500 injured, many of them civilians.

Unfazed by dwindling battlefield fortunes, warlord Bashir Raghe Shirar, another key member of the ARPCT, vowed to fight on until they routed the Islamists. "We will continue fighting because Mogadishu is full of fugitive foreign fighters supported by few Islamic extremist elements. We want them out of this city," he said.

The ARPCT, formed in February, has reportedly received financial and intelligence support from the United States to help fight the Islamic courts, accused of habouring foreign fighters and of having links with groups such as Al-Qaeda.

The courts, which have declared a holy war against the alliance, deny the accusations and claim the warlords are fighting for the "enemy of Islam". The United States has refused to confirm or deny its support for the ARPCT. But US officials and informed Somali sources have said that Washington has given money to the ARPCT, one of several groups it is working with to curb what it says is a growing threat from radical Islamists in Somalia.
Posted by:Dan Darling

#15  Unfortunately, the Kenyan Government is corrupt and dominated by socialists. And it has a lot of Muhammeds in the upper levels too, kind of makes it hard to do much cracking down. Besides which, cracking down on Somalia would kill the khat trade, which pays for those nice houses that so many Kenyan government officials live in.
Posted by: Shieldwolf   2006-06-05 22:31  

#14  What about the Kenyans?

If I were a Christian Kenyan the prospects of an Islamic Somalia coupled with the indigenous jihadis would be troublesome.
Posted by: DanNY   2006-06-05 19:51  

#13   BOTTOM LINE SAUDIS ARE FUNDING THE ISLAMIC TROUBLES WORLDWIDE!!!!DOES BUSH NOT REALISE THIS????

I can't imagine the president is unaware, Cheregum Crelet7867 dear, but before he takes on the Princelings directly he MUST stabilize the oil situation, else the entire energy-using part of the world (ie pretty much all the countries on planet Earth) will head straight into a major economic depression when the supply is cut off. Upon which the entire world will blame the U.S., and immediately start to work as hard as ever they can to undermine our effort. We could fight a war against the entire world, but we'd best be prepared to move the entire country off-planet immediately thereafter.

Oh, and be a dear, and please don't shout so. It hurts my eyes. Thanks!
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-06-05 18:38  

#12  "The Punts and the Somalialandis (eesh), I think, would happily write off the rest of the country on condition they could have their independence"

Think Kurdistan, except not landlocked, and without Turkey breathing down its neck. Would they grab Baghdad? Dont think so.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2006-06-05 17:31  

#11  Good points, LH. The Punts and the Somalialandis (eesh), I think, would happily write off the rest of the country on condition they could have their independence. The only way the Ethiopians would come in is if they could grab the disputed desert areas (just like them, too, to fight with two different neighbors over two different piles of sand and rock).

I'd voted for a bigger bowl of popcorn, but the Islamicists who are currently winning are gonna be trouble for us, no doubt.
Posted by: Steve White   2006-06-05 16:45  

#10  I dunno Dan.

Folks here were having a high old time laughing at the TNG and the UN support for it. Well we went and supported the warlords, at whatever cost in multilateralism/hearts and minds, and now we have nothing to show for it. Zip. Nada. Maybe, just maybe, a different approach, working with the TNG might work better?

I wonder if Puntland and Somaliland are even interested in going after Mogadishu, since they want independence (I think). As for Ethiopia, theyve got their hands full with Eritrea. And I dont see that theyd go to war to pull our irons out of the fire. As long as the Islamists have the minimal sense not to directly challenge Ethiopian interests.

I dont think any options look to good. We just might be pushed into negotiating with the Islamists, to leave them alone as long as they dont support AQ. The deal we offered the Taliban along time ago, and are currently offering Hamas. Im not saying thats a great option (i dont know enough about the Somali warlords) but we have alot on our plate right now.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2006-06-05 16:41  

#9  BOTTOM LINE SAUDIS ARE FUNDING THE ISLAMIC TROUBLES WORLDWIDE!!!!DOES BUSH NOT REALISE THIS????
Posted by: Cheregum Crelet7867   2006-06-05 12:27  

#8  Troops on the ground aren't necessarily the only option, Steve, as I noted there are still two other militias of note before things get to that point. One problem that we should factor in is that most of the US aid to the Mogadishu warlords came in the form of cash, surveillance, and a handful of advisors rather than training, weapons, or perhaps even air support. The more territory these courts take, the more attractive that last option is going to become.
Posted by: Dan Darling   2006-06-05 12:18  

#7  Unfortunately, the Somalia situation, like Afghanistan just before the Taliban gained power, is more ambiguous than Good Guys and Bad Guys; it's more like Bad Guys and Worse Guys. In Afghanistan after the Soviets were defeated the warlords ran rampant, killing and looting and playing their little wargames without worrying about how many civilians were blown up when they shelled Kabul. Thinking of the warlords in those days as Good Guys would have meant thinking of Hek and his ilk as a good guy. From a local citizen perspective, without our knowledge of the larger forces and principles involved, it would have been rational to look at the Taliban, before it took power, as the good guys who would lessen corruption and supply some semblance of order. Likewise, in Somalia, the warlords are the ones who stole international food aid shipments and murdered anyone who got in their way. Remember why we were at odds with Adid in the first place. Being associated with the warlords in local civilians' minds has risks as well as benefits. I'm not suggesting policy changes here -- there's not a lot of choice in picking which horse to back. It's just that, to the best of my knowledge, we haven't yet found or developed a leader with the qualities of a Masood.
Posted by: Odysseus   2006-06-05 10:15  

#6  Special forces have the primary role here in bringing together a cohesive force to counter the fascists. More like initial work in Afganistan.
Posted by: Captain America   2006-06-05 10:01  

#5  Outstanding but scary comment, Dan, because it raises the spectre of the US having to put some troops in to stop the bad guys.
Posted by: Steve White   2006-06-05 09:50  

#4  If the people there want their squalid little Islamic Court, let them have it. Next news you'll hear is "no women outside without burkas", "no music, dancing, fun of any kind", "death penalty for spitting on the sidewalk", they usual extreme Taliban type stuff. Have fun in Somalia guys.

You'll be sorrrrrrrry!
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2006-06-05 07:42  

#3  Excellent insight, Dan. Thanks for the analysis.
Posted by: Scooter McGruder   2006-06-05 03:43  

#2   The open US involvement against the Islamic courts looks to be a late addition to the game. Aweys declared war on the Somali government back in October and he was calling for jihad as early as last March. By taking Balad he has shown himself a force to be reckoned with, incidentally, by taking one of the new government minister's strongholds and sending him fleeing for safety.

My guess is that the US saw Aweys building up fighters in Mogadishu (he blew $50,000 on "armored vehicles" earlier this month, which means he isn't hurting for cash) and tried to stop him as quickly as possible without sending our own troops in, which means backing the resident warlords.

Bottom line is that al-Qaeda fighters and their allies are simply speaking better than your average Third World warlord or thug. Their fighters are better trained, better motivated, and almost certainly better paid, which translates to victory for the bad guys in a place like Somalia. One of the whole goals of General Wald's Pan-Sahel Initiative besides getting el-Para was to train elite units of African militaries to the point where they could trade punches with the GSPC without serious US backing. Keep in mind that even the PUK, whose militia I have enormous respect for, was unable to beat the relatively smaller Ansar al-Islam after more than 2 years of back-and-forth fighting. Hell, the PKK is still a serious security threat to a country with as modern and professional an army as Turkey. The Mogadishu warlords and their allies in the transitional allies are fairly easy pickings by comparison so Aweys is going to eat 'em for breakfast at the behest of his al-Qaeda masters.

If you want someone to stop him, the militias of Somaliland and Puntland are probably the best bet, followed by the Ethiopian army. Just my $0.02 on the situation.
Posted by: Dan Darling   2006-06-05 02:44  

#1  If US and the west has to fight radical Islamists in Somalia, they have the warlord alliance to do it for them. The biggest mistake US is doing is to let the warlord alliance to loose. I do not understand who the stupid is allowing any victory to the radical Islamists in Somalia.
Posted by: Annon   2006-06-05 02:26  

00:00