AU Invasion of Comoran Island

[Generalissimo]

About 1,000 African Union troops are set to arrive on Moheli to support 400 Comoran soldiers [AFP]

African Union troops have been arriving on the Comoros island of Moheli in preparation for a military offensive to retake the island of Anjouan.

The government of the Indian Ocean archipelago refused to recognise the re-election of Colonel Mohamed Bacar on Anjouan in June 2007 beginning a stand-off with the island.

At least 200 Sudanese and 300 Tanzanian troops have so far landed in the port town of Fomboni, the AFP news agency reported.

Senegalese troops are also expected to arrive in the next few days, while Libya has provided transport assistance for the AU-sponsored operation.


Abdul Bacar Soihir, head of the cabinet of the Comoros union, told The Associated Press news agency on Thursday: "The invasion will be very soon."

More than 1,000 African troops are expected to take part, supporting about 400 Comoran soldiers.

Yahya Abdallah, the Sudanese commander, said as he arrived with a deployment of paratroopers: "We are happy to be here... The Comoran people are our Muslim brothers and we are proud to be able to help them."

Re-election 'illegal'

Each of the Comoros federation's three islands has its own president and government institutions. Bacar has ruled Anjouan since 2002, but his re-election last year was deemed illegal by both the central authorities and the African Union (AU).

"We have waited too long to please the international community and wait for these African troops"

Comoran army lieutenant
A Comoran army lieutenant said: "We are soon going to be able to solve this matter.

"We have waited too long to please the international community and wait for these African troops."

However, regional power South Africa and former colonial rulers France said diplomacy should not be abandoned.

Pascale Andreani, a French foreign ministry spokeswoman, said: "We remain ... in support of dialogue and a peaceful solution to this crisis.

"Colonel Bacar must, for that, immediately confirm his agreement to organise elections in Anjouan in the near future and allow the African Union troops to take position at the port and airport in Anjouan to prepare to make the elections safe."

The AU is backing Ahmed Abdallah Sambi, the archipelago's president, to protect the territorial integrity of the Comoros. Bacar has said he is seeking Anjouan's independence from the union.

The archipelago has survived 19 coups or coup attempts since it acquired independence from France in 1975.

From Al Jazeera.

What type of armament do the rebels have? I doubt that we will found out, but that's the $1000 question which will determine if this is more of a political exercise or if there is actually a reason why 1,000 combat-ready AU troops are being deployed along with the Comoros(ian?) military. Since the rebel's leader is a Colonel it would stand to reason that he commands some sort of military force which might stand with him. Also the Comoros has experienced 19 or so coup attempts in the last few decades so there might be weapons lying around and it's not hard to imagine some Comoran(? How do you say that?) troops stationed on Anjouan supporting this breakaway. Really this is also speculation and educated guessing based on lack of actual facts.

It's also genuinely surprising to me that the AU had the political will and logisitical capability to pull this off. Although I am saddened by the fact that Sudanese troops are participating in this; it really shows the AU's committment to human rights.

 

[kato]

It's also genuinely surprising to me that the AU had the political will and logisitical capability to pull this off.

Logistical side was handled by the French Navy.

 

[contedicavour]

Reinforcements for the 1500 Ugandans in Mogadishu are nowhere to be seen, troop levels in Darfur are still way too low, but somehow the AU finds 1000 well equipped troops to get rid of this minor nuisance of a dictator...

cheers

 

[swerve]

The differences here are -

1) the person who asked for them was an African head of state.
2) the objective was to preserve the integrity of an African state against a rebellion.
3) the rebellion was purely internal, & no other African state had helped foment it.
4) the state is sort-of (not very, but more than many other African states) democratic.
5) the operation has every prospect of being quick & easy

Therefore, the African heads of state -
1) can put on a show of African unity
2) can set a precedent for protecting themselves
3) aren't getting into a quarrel with any of their peers
4) can make a show of Doing The Right Thing.
5) can be in and out quickly & cheaply.

Darfur is a rebellious province being terrorised by its own government, is entangled with cross-border hostilities, & has no immediate prospect of a solution, Mogadishu is in a state which collapsed 20 years ago, where there is no immediate prospect of an end to fighting, & where neighbours have their fingers in the pie. Either risks making enemies, & being an open-ended, long-term & expensive commitment.

BTW, it seems to be a mopping-up operation now. Looks to have achieved most of its objectives in about 3 hours.

 

[contedicavour]

The differences here are -

1) the person who asked for them was an African head of state.
2) the objective was to preserve the integrity of an African state against a rebellion.
3) the rebellion was purely internal, & no other African state had helped foment it.
4) the state is sort-of (not very, but more than many other African states) democratic.
5) the operation has every prospect of being quick & easy

Therefore, the African heads of state -
1) can put on a show of African unity
2) can set a precedent for protecting themselves
3) aren't getting into a quarrel with any of their peers
4) can make a show of Doing The Right Thing.
5) can be in and out quickly & cheaply.

Darfur is a rebellious province being terrorised by its own government, is entangled with cross-border hostilities, & has no immediate prospect of a solution, Mogadishu is in a state which collapsed 20 years ago, where there is no immediate prospect of an end to fighting, & where neighbours have their fingers in the pie. Either risks making enemies, & being an open-ended, long-term & expensive commitment.

BTW, it seems to be a mopping-up operation now. Looks to have achieved most of its objectives in about 3 hours.

Regarding Mogadishu, there is now a government in charge who needs to keep control of the country. Reinforcing the 1500 Ugandans based in what used to be the airport should be a key priority.

cheers

 

[swerve]

Regarding Mogadishu, there is now a government in charge who needs to keep control of the country. Reinforcing the 1500 Ugandans based in what used to be the airport should be a key priority.

cheers

No, there is a government in place. It is not in charge. It doesn't even control its own capital securely, let alone the country. Two large parts of the country have alternative local governments, both more stable (one greatly so) than the notional national government, with more internal support, much longer-established, & therefore arguably more legitimate, & the rest is largely under the control of clan militias. The government is controversial, having been established outside the country & then plonked down in it. It depends mainly on outside support.

Somalia qualifies on only one of the 5 reasons why the OAU has supported the Comores intervention, & even that one is very shaky indeed.

 

[Generalissimo]

Well the AU won an easy victory but their overall amphibous capability was so lacking, it COULD have been much uglier if the Anjouan militia had been willing to fight and been capably led.

On the issue of Somalia, does anyone else think it would make things easier by recognizing Somaliland? If they want independence they certainly deserve it. Somalia is a failed state anyway, the international community might as well make the best of a bad situation by recognizing Somaliland and preventing it from being dragged down by its chaotic parent. Of course that would piss off the other Somalis very badly, but I think that addressing the "Somali problem" requires drastic action.

 

[contedicavour]

No, there is a government in place. It is not in charge. It doesn't even control its own capital securely, let alone the country. Two large parts of the country have alternative local governments, both more stable (one greatly so) than the notional national government, with more internal support, much longer-established, & therefore arguably more legitimate, & the rest is largely under the control of clan militias. The government is controversial, having been established outside the country & then plonked down in it. It depends mainly on outside support.

Somalia qualifies on only one of the 5 reasons why the OAU has supported the Comores intervention, & even that one is very shaky indeed.

By your definition of "government in charge" you would be excluding the vast majority of African states. Even when Siad Barre was still firmly at the helm of Somalia in the early 80s you had several guerrilla activity in the north and clans were effectively running local government.
Of the 2 mini-states you mention, Puntland is actually the personal fief of the current president of Somalia... so yes it is semi-autonomous, but not in the sense that ignores the president's wishes ! Regarding Somaliland, I agree that it has become a completely separate state, but it is far from peaceful, clashing with internal guerrillas and fighting with Puntland forces.
Anyway, my point was that the Ugandan contingent of AU forces in Mogadishu (forget the faraway Somaliland) should be strengthened. The speed with which Tanzanian, Senegal, Sudanese troops materialized thousands of km away from their bases ready to fight shows that where's there's a will and where there's some money, the AU can act.
Certainly, Darfur is another story because Sudan's government is still acting semi-hostile. But in Mogadishu you have a government requiring essentially heavily armed military police support, and this the soldiers playing around in the Comoros can certainly provide.

cheers

 

[contedicavour]

Well the AU won an easy victory but their overall amphibous capability was so lacking, it COULD have been much uglier if the Anjouan militia had been willing to fight and been capably led.

On the issue of Somalia, does anyone else think it would make things easier by recognizing Somaliland? If they want independence they certainly deserve it. Somalia is a failed state anyway, the international community might as well make the best of a bad situation by recognizing Somaliland and preventing it from being dragged down by its chaotic parent. Of course that would piss off the other Somalis very badly, but I think that addressing the "Somali problem" requires drastic action.

On Anjouan, their local dictator just fled to the nearby French island of Mayotte. Basically the French organized the logistics for the AU forces, and then helped the dictator out. Nice, they control everything there

On Somalia, the Somaliland bit should probably be recognized as independent, yes, but the priority should be where the bulk of the population lives, ie around Mogadishu. Helping the government with more AU forces (eventually to replace the Ethiopian troops who are really NOT popular in Somalia...) would definitively help.

cheers

 

[swerve]

On Anjouan, their local dictator just fled to the nearby French island of Mayotte. Basically the French organized the logistics for the AU forces, and then helped the dictator out. Nice, they control everything there

On Somalia, the Somaliland bit should probably be recognized as independent, yes, but the priority should be where the bulk of the population lives, ie around Mogadishu. Helping the government with more AU forces (eventually to replace the Ethiopian troops who are really NOT popular in Somalia...) would definitively help.

cheers

You're still missing my point. I'm not trying to justify OAU actions, I'm trying to explain them. You're arguing that they should act differently. I don't disagree, I'm just trying to point out their reasons for acting as they do.