But the goals of the rebels would be exceedingly important. The rebels who took power in Azawad were secular nationalists, largely opposed/ambivalent to Islamic extremism and seeking to become a part of the international community.
That is most definitely not what happened. The nationalists allied with Ansar Dine and MOJWA from the start. You might be able to pull off "ambivalent", but the fact remains that they were going to allow the Islamists to set up Sharia law in the new nation in exchange for their help.
They were instead shat upon copiously by the UN, the EU and everyone, citing such nebulous expressions as the importance of "territorial integrity" (which basically means looking nice on a map) and "illegitimacy".
They are illegitimate. Mali is one of the only functioning democracies in West Africa, but did they attempt to use their access to the political system to gain autonomy? No, they allied with Islamist extremists and started killing people.
The nationalists were allied with Ansar Dine from the start (MOJWA is another kettle of fish) but it was a very uneasy alliance created purely for convenience. The MNLA were obviously wary of Islamism from the start; you can see that in how they handled negotiations with Ansar Dine right up to the point that they formed an Islamist state. Though you could say that the MNLA's only goal was independence and they were prepared to make concessions if Islamism was the only way to get it; the proof is in the absolute failure of the Islamic state they pledged to create and the collapse in any dialogue with Ansar Dine. You should also take note that the concessions to form an Islamic state started to appear
after utter dismissal from the diplomatic community.
To deal with the subject of MOJWA, the rebellion basically went like this; MNLA capture a town, MOJWA tear down the Azawadi flags and take it for themselves. That's it in a nutshell. MOJWA were not friends of the MNLA and are ideologically opposed to seperatism. This can even be seen in their name - The Movement for Oneness and Jihad in West Africa. "Oneness" is the key. They are also predominantly black African in membership, not Tuareg or Arab.
Mali is, was and remains to be a corrupt hellhole. It is known that Amadou Toumani Toure was in cahoots with Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and encouraged them to take hold in Tuareg areas in exchange for not destabilizing the country. He is partly responsible for the Islamisation of the Tuareg youth, and after being ousted the country was governed by the military. That isn't the kind of environment that a democratic, peaceful nationalist movement will flourish in. The further problem lies in the structure of Mali; the political system provides very little ways to gain autonomy other than heavy lobbying/campaigning (which is largely ineffectual) and hoping that the majority party of the country decides to concede at least some level of autonomy to the North to the point that a nationalist government can be elected on a local level. That just isn't going to happen. In a corrupt, fraudulent country like Mali or Niger, your only option for independence is armed revolution. There must be a better way - but really, that's all there is for them. Perhaps this way hands will be burned on both sides and a democratic, peaceful nationalism/autonomism in the North may be given more acceptance. Who knows. Perhaps if they can get the Front for the National Liberation of Azawad in there, given that they seem to be more inclusive in supporting Arabs and other ethnic groups in the North, that may aid the autonomist/nationalist movement.
Scotland did not have the democratic right to declare itself independent or hold a referendum until this concession was made a few weeks ago. This is despite being considerably more autonomous than the Tuaregs could have hoped for in Mali or Niger or wherever they may be. When the agreement was given I was thanking myself endlessly that I wasn't in the position of a Malian Tuareg or a Chechen.
The Tuareg peoples are sitting on vast supplies of minerals and wealth that they cannot access and will never have control over because they have no state and are divided across different countries. Their wealth is one of the main reasons why we are getting so involved in Tuareg affairs, besides the potential for a renewal of Al-Qaeda/Islamist related activities.
Author
Topic: Egypt and the world and Libya - Now without Ukraine! (Read 376929 times)