Subscribe

US terrorism fight in Africa: Does it promote instability there?

After military operations in Libya and Somalia, US counterterrorism appears to 'live on the edge of international law.'

  • close
    Hundreds of newly trained Al Shabab fighters perform military exercises in the Lafofe area some 18 km south of Mogadishu, in Somalia, Feb. 17, 2011. International military forces carried out a pre-dawn strike on Oct. 5, 2013 against foreign fighters in the same southern Somalia village where US Navy SEALs four years ago killed a most-wanted Al Qaeda operative, officials said.
    View Caption
  • About video ads
    View Caption
of

A version of this post originally appeared on the Africa in Transition blog. The views expressed are the author's own. 

Alex Vines, director of Area Studies and International Law, and head of the Africa Program at Chatham House, a London based think-tank, has written a thoughtful article for CNN.

He looks at US counter-terrorism operations in Africa, including questions about their legality under international law and their impact (often unintended) on weak African states.

I agree with his point that US military engagements can -- and have -- caused greater instability in some African venues, rather than countering successfully terrorism and other forms of instability.

Vines tees-off his analysis with discussion of the Oct. 5-6 US military operations in Libya and Somalia.

Vines recalls on-again, off-again American involvement since 1993 in Somalia, and makes a convincing argument (at least to me) that the effect was to promote radicalization in that country.

Turning to contemporary terrorism, he reiterates the crucial point that “jihadi” terrorism is far from homogeneous: Boko Haram in Nigeria is very different from Al Shabab in Somalia. But, such groups do well in weak states that are poorly governed. That reality implies that institution building, promotion of good governance, and more jobs is the way to address terrorism, rather than the quick fix of military action. 

But that prescription requires sustained attention, now sorely lacking in paralyzed Washington.

Also salutary is Vines’ reminder that “counterterrorism policies live on the edge of international law.”

They can have consequences that are directly contrary to U.S. long-term interests.

The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of Africa bloggers. Our guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. To contact us about a blogger, click here.

Share this story:
 
 
Make a Difference
Inspired? Here are some ways to make a difference on this issue.
FREE Newsletters
Get the Monitor stories you care about delivered to your inbox.
 

We want to hear, did we miss an angle we should have covered? Should we come back to this topic? Or just give us a rating for this story. We want to hear from you.

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Save for later

Save
Cancel

Saved ( of items)

This item has been saved to read later from any device.
Access saved items through your user name at the top of the page.

View Saved Items

OK

Failed to save

You reached the limit of 20 saved items.
Please visit following link to manage you saved items.

View Saved Items

OK

Failed to save

You have already saved this item.

View Saved Items

OK