We have reasons aplenty to hammer the Islamic Courts Movement in Somalia that threatens to completely take over that failed state and recreate a safe haven after we destroyed their last Taliban-provided haven in Afghanistan in 2001.
As I've written, we are not the only ones with interests in the area and the fighting could expand with or without us.
The Ethiopians are escalating after recent successes by the ICM against the weak official government:
Somalia - Ethiopia launched an attack Sunday on Somalia's powerful Islamic movement, sending fighter jets across the border and bombarding several towns in a major escalation of the violence that threatens to engulf the Horn of Africa.
Which could expand (which I've noted) could expand as the article states:
The clashes could mean a major conflict in the Horn of Africa. Ethiopia, which has one of the largest armies in the region, and its bitter rival, Eritrea, could use Somalia as the ground for a proxy war. Eritrea backs the Islamists.
Yet it seems we've decided that force is not the answer. Even when al Qaeda and Iran are involved.
These are strange days indeed when the Coalition of the Willing includes Ethiopia but not America.
Did I miss VJ (Victory over the Jihadis) Day?
UPDATE: The Ethiopians are driving the jihadis back:
Islamic fighters retreated Tuesday as Somali government and Ethiopian troops advanced on three fronts in a decisive turn in the battle for control of this Horn of Africa nation.
I think it is rather early to say if this is a decisive turn. But no doubt the Ethiopian army is hammering the Islamic Courts Movement. Not too surprising since the Ethiopians are in organized combat units and the Somali jihadis are really just mobs used to a noise and gesturing type of combat where one side tends to get scared and run before real fighting takes place.
So are we involved in some way? Are the Ethiopians fighting based on promises of something from us?
ANOTHER UPDATE: Cliff May utters some nonsense regarding the Ethiopian advances:
I’ve just been talking with an FDD researcher who has been monitoring developments in Somalia via Arabic media. It does indeed appear that the Ethiopians are defeating Islamist forces there. Why are they achieving what American forces in Somalia in1993 did not and what American forces in Iraq today apparently are not?
More “boots on the ground” may be part of the explanation. The Ethiopians are not attempting to have a “light footprint.” They are not worried about whether they will be seen as “occupiers” or whether their “occupation” will be viewed as benevolent.
Secondly, the Ethiopians are not overly concerned about whether their tactics will win approval from the proverbial Arab Street – or the European Street or Turtle Bay. They are fighting a war; their intention is to defeat their enemies; everything else is secondary or tertiary.
Anyone have an alternative interpretation?
Let me offer an alternative interpretation.
First of all, in Mogadishu we lost fewer than 20 troops and killed 500 to 1,000 of the enemy. And much like our initial invasion of Iraq where we slaughtered Saddam's Fedayeen in the thousands when they massed to fight our conventional units, the Ethiopians are fighting massed jihadis and not an insurgency.
The "heavy footprint" point is ridiculous. If the Ethiopians have three brigades involved, I'll be shocked. This is a giant raid against jihadis who massed in anticipation of finishing off the official government in Baidoa.
The Ethiopians won't likely stay long at the end of their long supply lines, so talk of not wanting to appear as occupiers is silly. Ethiopia will not occupy Somalia--or even Mogadishu.
Neither we in 2003 nor Ethiopia today care much about opinion as the troops slaughter targets of opportunity.
Let me assure Mr. May that should the Ethiopians stay long, the jihadis will scatter and then there won't be any opportunity to make untenable contrasts between Ethiopian warmaking capabilities and ours.
The Ethiopians are doing some good work. But let's not get as silly as this analysis is.
MORE UPDATE: Some numbers:
The military balance appears indeterminate. Ethiopia has deployed 15,000 to 20,000 troops in Somalia. Eritrea has provided arms to the Islamic Courts militias and sent only about 2,000 troops to support them; but the Islamic Courts hold more territory than the TFG and have greater indigenous assets and popular support.
Depending on support troops involved, we could be talking 3 brigades to two divisions of Ethiopian troops. If at the high end, I'd think they can't stick around for long unless Ethiopian logistics are better than I think. The Eritreans could have a bare bones infantry regiment committed.
And the author cautions about assuming large numbers of casualties. He thinks there might not be many thus far. The shout and gesture form of combat may be in force despite the rival claims. Remember, it is no surprise that heavy forces could march so quickly in the face of the rabble militias facing the regular Ethiopian troops. The question comes after the Ethiopians get to where they are going. Do the militia effectively harass the regulars? Do the regulars even stay for long? Can the nominal government take advantage of the help Ethiopia has provided? Do Eritrean troops directly fight Ethiopians?
I'd guess the Ethiopians just want to level the playing field by knocking back the Islamic Courts militias and then pull back to pre-hostilities positions. And that the nominal government fails to hold the gains. And I guess that the Eritreans won't fight Ethiopians given the drubbing Ethiopia inflicted on Eritrea in their 1999 war. But you never know how rational (from our point of view) they will be.
We probably haven't escaped the need to hammer the jihadis camped out in Somalia.
