The Nightly News Without Brian Williams

Just days after declaring martial law, the Thai Military has seized complete control of the country in a bid to end months of debilitating political paralysis and street protest. In a televised address the head of the Army, General Prayuth Chan-ocha, stated that the coup was necessary “in order to bring the situation back to normal quickly” and to “reform the political structure, the economy and the society.” 

Thailand has been marred by six months of public protests, both by anti-government and pro-government forces, resulting in violence and economic stagnation. Pro-government protesters, known as the “red-shirts” support the powerful Shinawatra family whose populist political platform have allowed them win every election since 2001. On the other side are the “yellow-shirts”, royalist supporters who oppose the dynastic rule of the Shinawatras, and believe that their domination of government institutions eliminate the possibility of free and fair elections. 

The kidnapping of nearly 300 Nigerian schoolgirls has captured the attention of the entire world, catalyzing a global sense of outrage that has fueled an international campaign for their safe return. Noble as the public outcry over the crime may be, the media’s narrow focus on Boko Haram as a terrorist organization obfuscates some important elements of Nigeria’s socio-economic reality and history that contextualizes the existence of groups like Boko Haram in a nation that has risen so rapidly to a position of global prominence.

Nigeria is not only a rising regional power, but also a state that, over time, will have/has developed the capacity to compete with the G7 for economic strength. Recent updates to the measurements of the nation’s GDP indicate that Nigeria is, and has been for quite some time, the largest single economy in all of Africa. Unfortunately, this impressive evolution in development has not befallen the entirety of the Nigerian state. Since British Colonial rule, the necessary resources for development have been divided unequally along ethnic, religious, and geographic lines.

During the time of British dominion in Nigeria, governance was delivered through local leaders, and the level of development resources afforded to those leaders depended on their malleability to British interests. The British found the predominately Muslim North, who maintained an existing Islamic based social structure and system of rule, were far more opposed to the imposition of foreign institutions than their more diffuse southern counterparts. As a result, by 1950 there was only one university in the north, while a system of bureaucracy and education grew and took root in the South. Despite being home to nearly 54 percent of the population, the North produced less than 10 percent of the country’s primary school enrollments and 5 percent of secondary school graduates. Unsurprisingly, southerners dominated the government and other important sectors/public spheres. By the time Nigeria gained independence in 1960, the Western oriented, Christian south had an established institutional power base.

The ramifications of this legacy plagues Nigeria to this day. Despite the tremendous advances in Nigeria’s development, the economic situation in the northeast is appalling and getting worse. In all indices of immiseration, the North is considerably behind its southern counterparts– in health, employment, literacy, and infrastructure. Unsurprisingly, and perhaps not without warrant, the people of the North feel a profound sense of marginalization and that the predominately Southern government in Abuja does not care about their wellbeing. Socio-economic environments that combine public dissatisfaction, marginalized ethnic and religious groups, poverty, poor public health, lack of education, and an absence of state authority become obvious breeding grounds for militancy. Since 2009, Boko Haram has used the North as a home base, a staging area, and recruitment center for an ever-expanding war against the State.

The government’s response to the Boko Haram insurgency has done little to reassure the people of the North of their government’s consideration. The government has pursued a narrow military-based policy, instituting a state of emergency in parts of the North and committing to a scorched earth campaign that many in the region view as equally as violent and indiscriminate as that of Boko Haram’s. In fact, a recent Human Rights Watch Report documented a military raid in which soldiers set fire to thousands of homes, leaving hundreds of innocent civilians dead. Whether the operation was meant to target Boko Haram members or punish the civilian population for their possible support for the group is unclear. Regardless, military actions that result in the deaths of hundreds of civilians are unacceptable.

Indeed, the level of support enjoyed by Boko Haram is a question that should merit some debate. Most of the information from the North is transmitted via the Military to its commanders in Abuja. There are few foreign correspondents there and limited access to phones and other communication tools, much less the Internet. The validity of the government’s claims that Boko Haram enjoys no popular support seems dubious. At the very least, while the people of the North may view Boko Haram with anger and disgust, this does not consequently translate into support for the central government.

 Unsurprisingly, the Nigerian government’s military campaign has done little to quell the violence. On the contrary, the scale of Boko Haram’s operations has only grown over the past five years. In its early days, the group’s attacks focused on assassination of magistrates or attacks on security installations. Since then, Boko Haram’s operations have expanded to include civilian targets. In fact, despite the media’s emphasis on the kidnapped schoolgirls, it may well be one of the least barbaric of the group’s recent acts. In February, Boko Haram slaughtered 40-60 young students and teachers in Yobe State, and just weeks after kidnapping the 300 girls from their school, Boko Haram gunmen ran rampant in a public market in the North East, killing dozens of residents.

So Its Been a While...

To my brave 59 followers who, for whatever reason, have decided to continue to follow me despite a 3 year absence, I am happy to say that I am returning to the blogosphere. 

Over the past several years a combination of academic and professional commitments have, unfortunately, nudged extracurriculars to the periphery of my attention. Nevertheless, my passion for discussing important aspects of international affairs has not waned, nor has my joy in sharing those stories with others. So here we are. And none to soon, as events in world affairs continue to develop at a dizzying pace. 

The last two weeks have proven truly decisive in the Libyan civil war. It seems that, after 6 months of hard fighting, the Libyan revolutionaries can claim victory. Though Qaddafi himself has not been found, and pockets of Loyalist resistance remain, it is clear that the Libyan rebels have essentially toppled the Qaddafi regime.

Throughout the campaign doubts as to the military capacity of the rebel forces shrouded the entire movement with a sense of pessimism. True, after the initial air assault led by the United States, rebel forces suffered a host of military and strategic failures, often proving themselves incapable of holding captured territory. However, the sheer magnitude of their task is difficult to overstate. The rebels were not some guerilla group or insurgency – they were civilians, totally new to the battlefield. Before the war they were teachers, doctors, artists, craftsman, engineers that somehow managed to unify into a fighting force competent enough to fight the organized, well trained and well equipped Qaddafi military. With little preparation and few weapons the rebels have ousted Col. Qaddafi and are now facing the prospects of rebuilding Libya.

Despite amateur nature of the rebel military, the battle for Tripoli demonstrated astounding coordination, swiftness, and tactical prowess. The planning for the assault on Tripoli was carefully drawn out, and executed with shocking precision. In addition to the weapons and fuel supplied by the French British and Qatari intelligence organizations, around 100 rebels were sent to Qatar to receive special training specifically for the operation. Having cut off supply lines to Tripoli over the preceding weeks, the rebels activated sleeper cells within the Libyan capital who they had been supplying with weapons and ammunition for months, to begin their attack. In coordination with the insurgency inside Tripoli, rebel forces advanced from all sides, even by boat, arranging a flotilla from the town of Misurata in an operation the rebels called Mermaid Dawn. When the fighting inside the city became especially intense, the Qatari trained rebels were sent in as decisive reinforcements. From the west, intensified NATO airstrikes paved the way to Tripoli and successfully thwarted an attempted Loyalist counteroffensive against Zawiyah. Once in the city, the rebel offensive moved at a breakneck pace through the capital. Finally, on August 23rd the rebels managed to take Qaddafi’s command compound – effectively capturing the Libyan capital.  

Reports of heavy fighting in outlying Tripoli neighborhoods suggests that rebellious factions within the Libyan capital are beginning to revolt in coordination with the rebels of the East and West. In recent days rebel forces have effectively cut off and surrounded Tripoli, capturing the towns of Zawiyah, Ziltan and possibly Brega. In addition, another high ranking Qaddafi government official has defected, binging to total to three in the last week.

Still, Qaddafi has amassed his forces around the city center where they are well dug in, and maintains control of Sirte - a loyalist city to the south that remains a bastion of Qaddafi support.  In the past rebels have proven incapable of holding captured territory to forceful counteroffensives. Yet, with a significantly intensified NATO bombing campaign, it seems unlikely that Qaddafi could mass the needed forces for an effective counteroffensive without becoming incredibly vulnerable to NATO air support. 

From Boston.com's The BIg Picture Series. The United States is tentatively beginning the process of withdrawing a number of its combat troops form Afghanistan - a pledge that was made by President Obama in an address to the nation saying he would remove 33,000 troops by the end of 2012. However, a recent surge in violence seems to undermine the feasibility of such a draw-down - in recent weeks the Taliban have managed to take hostage the intercontinental hotel in Kabul, detonate a host of IEDs in and around the capital, shoot down a U.S. helicopter killing more than  20 Navy SEALs, and most recently taken over a British Council in Kabul. 

From the New York Times Battle for Libya series. In recent days, Libyan rebel forces have made substantial tactical progress in both the Eastern and Western fronts. Rebels in the West appear to have taken complete control of the strategically crucial city of Zawiyah, cutting off Col Qaddafi's most vital supply line, essentially isolating Tripoli. 

In the East, Rebels are facing fierce fighting in the vital oil city of Brega. Recent reports indicate that rebels now control two of the three main residential districts, though they have yet to penetrate into the city center. Still, Col Qaddafi's surely understands the importance of the city, and has the area heavily fortified and his forces dug in. 

Amidst recent speculative claims that the assassination of the rebel commander General Abdle Fattah Younis signaled a breakdown of the rebel structural unity into tribal factionalism, the Rebels have made a strong advance into the key city of Zawiyah, potentially cutting off the strategic supply route for Col Qaddafi's forces in Tripoli. The offensive is an important tactical maneuver into this crucial city, coordinated in conjucntion with rebellious elements within Zawiyah and baked by NATO airstrikes. 

If the offensive can be sustained and the town itself held, it would be a huge defeat for the Qaddafi regime, who rely on the town as supply route to Tunisia - especially vital as the NATO naval bockade and Eastern rebel forces have eliminated other supply lines. Without it Qaddafi's military, already facing food, fuel, and weapons shortages, could begin to feel even more pressure. Indeed, the advance would put the rebels in the West within 20 miles of Tripoli, and likely undermine Qaddafi's war efforts in the Eastern oil city of Brega.  

As the war in Libya rages on, Muammar Qaddafi's son, Seif al-Islam el-Qaddafi, declared that the government was fostering an alliance with radical Islamists elements within the rebel ranks. In an hour long television address, Mr. Qaddafi spewed out borderline delusional statements meant to show the world the great lengths the regime was willing to go to to remain in power. 

Mr. Qaddafi insinuated that he and his father would be willing to turn this war into one of bloody religious one, pitting more liberal secularist factions against "terrorist" groups the government has spent years eliminating. In fact, the comments represent a complete 180 for the regime, which for decades had styled itself as an anti-Islamist force that was keeping Libya from falling into the hands of extremists. 

This week, elements of the Al-Shabaab militant Islamic organization withdrew from the Somali capital, Mogadishu - the first time the city has been entirely free of the Islamist militia in years. 

Recently, Al-Shabaab has sustained a series of tactical and strategic setbacks that may have prompted the retreat, including the death of its leader in a recent gun battle, continued American drone strikes that have eliminated members of its top leadership, and the loss of military control of the Bakara Market. In general, the intensification of fighting over the past several weeks between the African Union Peacekeepers that back the Somali Transitional Federal government and Al-Shabaab have been costly for the militant organization, who are not as well trained or well equipped as their African Union counterparts.

Although the Somali President, Sharif Ahmend, has declared victory, Al-Shabaab's leadership has said that the withdrawal is part of a larger strategic shift in their operations that will move the organization's tactics from conventional warfare to the sort of "hit-and-run" techniques that are the trademark of organizations like the Taliban.