MS Risk Blog

Tigray Crisis

The security situation in East Africa has greatly deteriorated in the month of November mainly due to the conflict that has flared up in the unsettled Tigray region in northern Ethiopia. After just over three weeks of fighting, the federal Ethiopian government has claimed to have seized control of the Tigray capital Mekele, thus declaring victory over the Tigray People´s Liberation Front (TPLF) at the end of November. Still, this conflict poses a substantial threat to the unity and stability of Ethiopia and the wider Horn of Africa region.

During his two and a half years as Prime Minister of Ethiopia, Abiy Ahmed has faced serious crises which have resulted in him winning a Nobel Peace Prize through striking a peace deal with Eritrea, and has overcome both an assassination and a coup attempt. The month of November presented Abiy with a different challenge; that of a potential civil war in Tigray.

The disputed region had been the only area the TPLF politically ´controlled´ since they lost the election in 2018. This loss came as a shock to the TPLF who had run the country for 27 years, therefore Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has been in a struggle with the TPLF since 2018. In a battle of egos and as a result of losing substantial power at the central government, coupled with the postponing of elections until May/June 2021 (exacerbated by COVID-19), the TPLF held their own elections in September in defiance of Abiy´s government and as a way of claiming legitimacy, which in turn Abiy ruled unlawful. Tigray´s rebuttal was that it no longer recognised Abiy’s administration.

The conflict was started when Tigrayan forces allegedly attacked an Ethiopian base in Mekele. Abiy believed this crossed the ´red line´ and forced the Ethiopian troops to confront the TPLF on the 4th of November, with a state of emergency also being declared. From this point, things escalated quickly with the Ethiopian government bombing Mekele and mobilising forces to march towards the capital to unseat the TPLF. The violence has resulted in hundreds killed and injured, and a great number more displaced. Heavy shelling by the government has also come under scrutiny by the international community.

Few analysts were expecting a quick and easy win for the Ethiopian government due to the mountainous terrains surrounding Mekele, as well as the experienced and well armed 250,000 TPLF troops, who three decades prior ousted the military dictatorship. In this conflict the TPLF used the communications blockade to their advantage and were able to run a successful PR campaign where they bluffed about their capabilities. This bluff became apparent as TPLF were not winning any significant battles in this conflict and did not last more than a little over 3 weeks when the Ethiopian government claimed victory. It was a relatively quick conflict, but the consequences will last longer.

There have also been concerns about insurgency after this conflict, but this should be taken with a grain of salt as they have not managed to prove their capacity as an effective fighting force in or out of Tigray yet.

As aforementioned, the crisis has not been contained within Ethiopia. While Eritrea and Ethiopia have had a long and troubled history, Eritrea as shown its support to the Ethiopian government in the fight against the TPLF, with this subsequently fuelling tensions and has resulted in rockets being fired from Tigray into Eritrea´s capital Asmara.

The conflict also caused many to flee the region towards neighbouring Sudan. With Tigray encompassing 6% of Ethiopia´s 100 million population, the United Nations warned that the conflict could displace up to 9 million people. By the end of November, over 40,000 refugees had arrived from Tigray to Sudan, half of these children, and with the state of emergency set to last another six months, the UN expects another 200,000 refugees to arrive in Sudan in this timeframe. While Sudan has agreed to welcome the influx of refugees, it is clear the country is not ready for this with many villages being overcome, and with food and blankets provided for refugees quickly running out. Thus, the situation in Sudan is starting to unfold as a humanitarian crisis, however, only time will tell.

With Ethiopia being the only country in the world that transitioned from an empire to a country without breaking up, it is likely we are just seeing the aftermath now. What seems clear now is that Abiy has secured his re-election through this conflict, and that the TPLF will not be registered as a political party in the 2021 elections. This is the start of a post-TPLF future in Ethiopia. Lastly, the conflict has also illustrated a more repressive side to Abiy and the Prosperity Party, and we can expect more law-and-order campaigns across the country.

France’s Struggle to Balance Secularism

After a series of attacks, the French government is once again faced with the challenge of balancing key French principles and the relationship with its Muslim community. In the past two months France has been the subject to many egregious attacks by the hands of Islamic extremist. On September 25, a male with a butcher knife attacked people outside the old Charlie Hebdo magazine headquarters, where four people were wounded, two seriously. This occurred after the magazine had just re-published the magazine cover that incited the more brutal attack in 2015. More recently, Samuel Paty, a middle school teacher was beheaded after having a class on freedom of speech where he showed caricatures of the prophet Mohammad. Thirteen days later, three were killed (one beheaded) in The Basilica of Notre-Dame de Nice. The severity and timing of the crimes have built up a national debate between freedom of expression/speech and national security. The three attacks all share a common thread, they are all related to the French government’s response to the Charlie Hebdo magazine caricature of the prophet Mohammad. The suspect who attacked people outside the old Charlie Hebdo magazine headquarters told authorities that he undertook the attack “in the context of the republication of the cartoons”. Since the attacks occurred, France has needed to juggle the tradition of secularism and insensitivity to the Muslim community.

This is not the first time the issue has surfaced in France and the response to the violence by the French government has activated parts of the Muslim community that few issues have in recent memory. Often the debate is a result of terrorist attacks on French soil and unfortunately, the deadly attacks on French soil are becoming too familiar, which has caused the French government to react with strong overarching policies that appear to criticize Islam in a sweeping manner. France has the largest Muslim community in Europe, but they never integrated successfully. In total, around 5.7 million Muslims call France home and represent more than 8 percent of the population. The emotions about Islam in France has peaked due to terrorist attacks throughout the years. The individuals carrying out the attacks claim to do so in the name of Islam and even though Muslim leaders and French Muslims have repeatedly condemned any violence being done in the name of Islam, tensions remain very high. The attacks at the Charlie Hebdo headquarters that left 12 dead, followed by the targeting of a Jewish supermarket that killed 4, and later the horrific attack at the Bataclan theater and linked attacks that killed 130 people all triggered a number of issues relating to Islam among the French government and people. One after another Islamophobia was fueled revealing deep divisions within French society.

To the more recent attacks Macron’s government has responded with a clear stance: France will not give in to Islamic extremist and will protect key French principles. President Macron has asked the French Council of the Muslim Faith (CFCM) to agree to a “charter of republican values” as part of his suppression on radial Islam. The charter states two main principles: Islam is a religion not a political ideology, and the rejection of any foreign interference with Muslim groups. The measures also include a bill that includes restrictions on home-schooling, national identification numbers for all school children, a ban on sharing information of a person that allows them to be located by people who want to harm them, and tougher punishments on individuals who intimidate public officials on religious grounds.

In response, Muslims around the world erupted in protest, with tens of thousands expressing their anger over the French government’s call to “reform” Islam. In Bangladesh’s capital, 20,000 protesters took to the streets carrying signs reading “Freedom of Speech is not Freedom of Abuse” and “Boycott French Products”. The protest seemingly has not caused any drastic difference in the trade of French goods, but it shows that the French government’s response has angered Muslims around the world and not just those currently in France.

The vast majority of France’s Muslims do not support Islamic extremism, but often face unfair stereotypes. There is an audience in France for anti-Muslim rhetoric. In the last presidential election between now-president Macron and Marine Le Pen over 10 million people voted for Le Pen, the anti-immigration candidate who claimed France was being attacked by radical Islam. The popularity of Le Pen pushed fears about Islam into the mainstream, with many controversial laws being introduced after. France’s tradition of secularism may play into decisions by figures in French media and government to criticize Islam in sweeping manners. Things get worse when the government appears to back a particular side. Macron has continually publicly supported Charlie Hebdo’s right to publish whatever it wants. It should not be ignored that a presidential election will be happen in 2022 and Macron’s firmed stance could be perceived as a way to resonate with the 10 million individuals who voted for Le Pen’s harsher policy on radical Islam and the French citizens who are shaken by the terror attacks in recent years.

The discussion of freedom of expression vs the right to offend is highly likely to continue in French society and is a seemingly impossible problem France will continue to face. On one hand, freedom of expression is the bedrock of so many democracies and ensures a society that allows individuals to express their beliefs, thoughts, and ideas without government censorship. On the other hand, when a government stands behind crude expressions of opinions, it risks encouraging bias towards a group of people. If the division between French Muslims and the government are not sealed it is highly likely further division will occur with more Muslims feeling separated from their fellow French citizens. The government is going to have to find a way to stand behind key French values while also supporting the Muslim community against bias and hate. Taking such a strong stance behind one side has made the Macron government come across as bias itself. A society that allows freedom of expression and a Muslim community is not an oxymoron, and both are capable of living and thriving together.

South Thailand Insurgency

On the 14^th of November a roadside IED exploded in the Southern Narathawit province of Thailand destroying a vehicle carrying Thai soldiers to a wedding in a nearby village. This non-fatal attack is thought to be part of the South-Thailand Insurgency. One of the first since the COVID outbreak earlier in the year.

The South-Thailand Insurgency is a 70-year battle for independence fought by the, primarily Muslim, Malay Patani region of Thailand. This insurgency is seeking independence from Thailand, for the Patani people, and poses an ongoing threat in the region. Talks between the Thai government and the main belligerent BRN stalled in March 2020 and have not fully resumed since. Given the instability elsewhere in Thailand at the moment it is highly unlikely the Thai government will accept the BRN’s demands for succession, or a decentralization of power, but they are proposing some limited autonomy.

The quest for self-determinism began after the Second World War when the Thai government began a policy of Thaification in the area which had, until 1909, been part of British Malaysia. In the first 30 years of Thai rule the ethnically Malay Muslim area was largely left to rule itself. But in 1948 the Buddhist Thai government began to assimilate the Patani people into Thai culture.  At this point the traditionally neglected, and poor, region resisted Thai efforts to override their culture. Instead of creating a more harmonious relationship, the policies alienated them further. This policy of Thaification created an armed resistance movement in the 1960s, 70s and 80s, with the PLO modeled Patani United Liberation Organisation (PULO) being the most famous. However, by the 1990s the Thai government changed focus and instead made an effort to improve the economic situation in the region instead. As the economic reforms improved, support for the insurgency gradually declined.

Despite the improving conditions in the early 2000s a series of harsh policies from then Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra reignited the insurgency and helped to create the situation we have today. Over the past 20 years over 7,000 people have been killed as a result of the violence in South Thailand.

The most powerful group involved today is the Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN). The BRN’s primary goal is a self-governed state but it is believed they would accept some level of decentralised power. The Thai government had begun negotiations with MARA Patani, another insurgency group, in 2014 but the BRN refused to join talks until certain conditions were met.  In January 2020 BRN said these conditions were met, and the Thai government entered into peace talks and set out a framework for future negotiations. Talks continued until March, but after an attack on a government center in Yala on the 17^th of March, and the outbreak of COVID 19, talks stalled. Lines of communication remain open however and the government are still looking to return to the negotiation table as the pandemic calms down.

The government are proposing a “special administration zone” for the provinces near the southern border. But these zones will still be subject to Thai law and the Thai constitution.  It remains to be seen if the BRN will accept this solution, but given the ongoing pro-democracy protests in Bangkok, and the COVID 19 crisis, it is unlikely the authoritarian government will want to look like they are ceding too much control. The increased public scrutiny on Thailand due to the protests in the capital, will also create extra pressure for the Thai government and may present the BRN with a greater public stage on which to conduct attacks.

The attack on November 14^th was one of the first since the COVID 19 outbreak began earlier in the year. Thai military sources cite tightened border controls between Malaysia and Thailand as the main reason for a reduction in attacks. As COVID 19 is currently under control in Thailand, but not in Malaysia, it is highly unlikely that border restrictions will be removed soon. So, it is unclear if the November attack signals a return to violence or if it is an isolated incident. If an increase in attacks does happen it is likely to be on a more limited scale than previously until more freedom of movement is allowed between the two countries.

Currently there appears to be motivation from both sides to resume peace process talks but if there is an increase in violence it will be interesting to see the role that the COVID 19 induced delays have played, and how the Thai government responds while protests are ongoing in the capital.

Human Trafficking Problem in North Macedonia

North Macedonia has been widely known as an international transit for human trafficking. However during the coronavirus pandemic, the problem has been rising significantly. In August 2020 alone, authorities have discovered 322 illegal migrants throughout North Macedonia in several different operations. On 9 August, authorities discovered 94 migrants which consisted of Syrian, Iraqi, Afghani, and Pakistani nationals inside a truck. The migrants were discovered when a police patrol stopped the truck near the town of Radovish, 110 kilometers from the capital city of Skopje. However, the truck driver managed to flee from the scene. On 14 August, authorities discovered 148 migrants inside trucks from two different operations and arrested two people. The first operation was conducted in the town of Demir Kapija which the authorities found 103 migrants, including 29 children. The majority of the migrants were from Pakistan, which consisted of 81 people. Ten migrants were from Afghanistan, 8 from India, 2 from Egypt, and 1 each from Iran and Syria. The second operation was conducted in the village of Vaksince with another 45 migrants from Syria, Bangladesh, Somalia, Pakistan, and Palestine being discovered inside an abandoned truck. During this operation, the truck driver again managed to flee the scene. On 17 August, authorities discovered 80 migrants inside a lorry during an inspection on the road between Negorino and Gradsko, centre of North Macedonia. The driver of the lorry initially managed to escape but was quickly captured and arrested and is charged with human trafficking. All of the migrants were Pakistani nationals except one individual from Eritrea. The authorities stated that all of these discoveries on 9, 14, and 17 August have one similarity in regards to their embarkment location which was from Greece. The migrants have since been detained and will be transferred to a migrant shelter in the southern border town of Gevgelija, pending deportation to Greece. Authorities have also stated that while the Greek border with North Macedonia was closed earlier this year due to the coronavirus pandemic, trafficking networks have remained active, ferrying migrants who make their way from Turkey into Greece and then attempt to head north, through North Macedonia to more prosperous countries in the European Union.

As this problem has existed in North Macedonia, the government was expected to conduct vigorous measures to counter it. However, it has been reported by several investigations that the government’s efforts in combating human trafficking was still below the standard set by the international community. North Macedonian authorities have been reported for not having adequate funding and equipment to conduct proactive investigations in regards to preventing and countering human trafficking in North Macedonia. The Organized Crime and Corruption Prosecution Office (OCCPO) also lacked sufficient resources, including staff, to handle all cases under their jurisdiction. Other than that, corruption and official complicity in trafficking crimes remained an obstacle to conduct an effective and efficient countermeasure. For instance, although several cases have pointed to the involvement of corruption within the government which boosts the human trafficking practice, the government has not prosecuted any officials for complicity specifically pertaining to trafficking in the last 3 years. Ironically, the last 3 years was the period in which human trafficking in North Macedonia reached its peak. Moreover, instead of tightening the law, the government decided to reduce the minimum sentence for any complicit involved in human trafficking from 8 years to 5 years imprisonment.

In order to solve this problem, there is no other way for the government other than to strengthen its measure regarding its approach towards the issue of human trafficking. More cooperation with nations such as Turkey and Greece, which are also known as international transit points for human trafficking, is considered to be imperative. Investigation and prosecution must also be conducted in a more vigorous manner. Strengthening sentences for the complicit should be seriously taken into consideration as a step forward to fight this issue. Allocating sufficient resources to the authorities and prosecutors should also be conducted, while at the same time increasing the funding for anti-trafficking operation. Human trafficking should be taken seriously, as it is a criminal offence which mimics and supports one of the cruellest practices ever taken in the history of mankind, which is slavery. The betterment of humanity will always start by acknowledging the mistake of the past and make a strenuous effort on making it up.

Xi Jinping’s Last Temptation

It is arguable that China’s exponential growth over the last three decades has few, if any historical parallels. From being a developing third-rate economy to achieving the second largest global economy – in the process lifting millions of its citizens out of poverty with stratospheric GDP expansions. From a manufacturing led economy to a high-tech one; from coal fired plants, to leaders in renewables; and making a stand in industries of the 21^st century such as artificial intelligence. China is now also undoubtedly a global heavy weight in military terms. It is unquestionable, China has achieved in a short space of time, what many nations can only dream.

China’s rise and expansion owes a lot to a period in its history it probably considers as denigrating, humiliating, and loss of its national dignity. Its leaders vowed never again. From Mao Zedong to Deng Xiaoping and current Premier Xi Jinping – the battle cry has been to build a prosperous and powerful country worthy of international respect and recognition.

The paradoxical challenge for President Xi Jinping is how he manages China’s Jekyll and Hyde image on the world stage. In other words, China’s successful ascendency and aspirational expansionism, potentially leaves it needing to grapple with challenges of a domestic and geo-political nature. China has had to fend off accusations of dumping excess products like steel on the world markets; frowned at for the interlocking relationship between the state and its companies. Its increasing muscular activities in the disputed parts South and East China sea; repression of the Uighurs in Xinjiang; the tough new security law for Hong Kong; to the gordian knot – that is Taiwan, and perhaps the most sensitive issue for the Chinese ruling elite: The One China Policy.

Every rose has its thorn. With these issues simmering, can China manage to play offense and defence with the requisite dexterity, and in a manner that preserves its swashbuckling progress?

In early September, China’s foreign minister Wang Yi travelled to Europe for a five-country stop – primarily to iron-out what would appear to be wrinkles in the EU-China relationship. This visit came against the backdrop of US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s visit to Europe in which he called for an alliance of western democracies as a counterweight to China.

Thorsten Benner, director of Global Public Institute in Berlin claims Wang Yi’s visit “didn’t achieve minimum goals”. And why would he think so? because “he didn’t have anything substantial to offer that Europeans care about, like concessions on market access, and just reiterated tired and worn boilerplate clichés on Europe and China working together on multilateralism that hardly anyone falls for anymore.”

If Wang Yi flew into headwinds in Europe, there is no love lost in Sino-US relations, particularly in the last couple of years of the Trump Presidency. The two nations have been involved in a mutually damaging trade war, closure of diplomatic consulates, technology spates, and have traded nasty counter accusations over the lack of transparency in the handling of the Covid-19 pandemic.

How China conducts its rear-guard action at this juncture matters more than ever. The West is laser focussed on China’s Achilles heel such as its human rights record particularly concerning the Uighurs in Xinjiang, the draconian security law in Hong Kong, and its sabre rattling over any attempts by Taiwan towards declaration of independence. These issues are sensitive to China, or sets-off its red flag on the One China Policy.

China is sensitive about its history under the yoke of imperialism. It demands respect, and it bristles at any form of interference in its sphere of assumed sovereignty, or any hectoring by foreign powers. As Hu Xijin of the Global Times asserts “China must be a country that dares to fight. And this should be based on both strength and morality,” he wrote. “We have the power in our hands, we are reasonable, and we stand up to guard our bottom line without fear. In this way, whether China is engaged in a war or not, it will accumulate the respect of the world.”

The salient question observers of the West and China are asking is if China is not risking a recurrence of its past traumas it so desperately wants to overcome, by cracking down hard on dissent in Hong Kong, threatening to invade Taiwan, and sounding bellicose in fending off criticisms about it from the West. Is all this hostile attention not unwanted?

The Trump administration’s recent hefty sale of military hardware to Taiwan, China’s repeated combat drills in the Taiwan strait and its preparations to launch a third Aircraft carrier portends a dangerous dispensation. Once again, China’s soft spot might be on the home front, and Taiwan could well be a trigger.

Will Xi Jinping be able to resist the temptation to open a new chapter where China fought off a foreign adversary from its domain, or avoid the potential trap, and concentrate on continuing to build a powerful nation? China’s further rise will probably be contingent on the formula he adopts.