FRIDAY NEWS ROUNDUP — DECEMBER 18, 2020
Looking Forward to 2021, Ongoing Russian Hacking Crisis, Last Minute Foreign Policy Moves, Civ-Mil in the Biden Pentagon, Growing ISIS Threat in Mozambique
Happy Friday from Washington, D.C. Congressional negotiations are coming down to the wire, as they often do, but it looks like there is agreement on the broad strokes when it comes to stimulus. With the Electoral College casting its ballots on Monday, leading Senate Republicans have now begun outreach to the incoming Biden administration. At the same time, the rollout of the vaccine marks a moment of hope and pride — even as the pandemic remains dire. Simultaneously, one of the greatest, if not the greatest, breaches of our cyber defenses appears to be currently underway, demonstrating our adversaries give no quarter in trying times — no matter how you try to engage or appease them.
In a year marked by loss, David Cornwell, better known by his nom de plume John le Carré, was another in a tragically long list. Le Carré holds a very special place in the Policy Team’s heart as one of the Cold War’s most insightful commentators. His lead characters were morally compromised men and women pursuing morally compromised goals for morally compromised countries. There is probably no better assessment of international politics. He was also a keen observer of a particular moment in world history, when the British — and he really meant the English ruling class — recognized not only that were they no longer in sole control of their national destiny, but also that many of the national myths that had supported the structure of their greatness had been revealed to be hollow.
Last week, we honored the legacies of Representative John Lewis and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, with our inaugural Thurgood Marshall Award. Lewis and Ginsburg were two giants of recent American history who dedicated their careers and lives to advancing the cause of justice. You can watch a recording of the event on our Youtube channel.
This week, we launched our report on what the Biden administration can do to ensure that the United States and its allies retain leadership at the intersection of geopolitics and technology. You can find our Geotech Report here.
We also hosted Arash Azizi for a talk about his new book The Shadow Commander: Soleimani, the US and Iran’s Global Ambitions. Video of that event will be available on our YouTube channel later today.
Our colleague Chairman Mike Rogers wrote an op-ed for The Hill about broadening our understanding of Africa beyond counterterrorism. Joshua wished the Space Force a happy first birthday and looked ahead to what the Biden administration needs to do to be the most effective in the space domain for Space News. Joshua also reviewed Declan Walsh’s new book The Nine Lives of Pakistan: Dispatches from a Precarious State in the Diplomatic Courier.
This week in the Roundup, Dan has some reasons to be (cautiously) optimistic going into 2021. Joshua covers the massive ongoing Russian hack. Michael looks at the most recent agreements by Arab states to recognize Israel and wonders if it is all worth it. Ethan questions the wisdom of appointing a recently retired general officer to be Secretary of Defense. Erica analyzes the emergence of an ISIS affiliate in Mozambique. As always, we end with some news you might have missed.
This will be our last Roundup of 2020. All of us on the Policy Team and at CSPC wish you and your families a happy and peaceful holiday season. We are immensely grateful that you spend time with us every week and look forward to many more conversations about tricky policy issues in 2021.
Onward to 2021
Dan Mahaffee
While 2020 won’t officially end December 31st, there was a sense of unofficial conclusion on Monday. With split screen images of the Coronavirus vaccine rolling out of Pfizer plants in Michigan, while Presidential Electors met in statehouses across the country to cast 306 of their votes for President-elect Joe Biden, it was almost the perfect bookend. Like Monday, 2020 has been a split-screen event, with the pandemic and its impact running alongside our broken, deadlocked politics — and it hasn’t been fun to watch.
At year end, one of our tasks is to curate some of the best examples from the roundup for suggested inclusion in CSPC’s annual report. In looking back at 2020, it was bleak at times — and with the dreaded winter wave of the virus continuing to crest over the United States, there are many bleak and dire days to come. That said, there is also hope.
First and foremost, the vaccine rollout is a remarkable achievement of modern science, public-private partnerships, and global logistics. In less than one year since a pathogen appeared on America’s shores, Americans are being vaccinated against that disease, using a new method of vaccine that could transform public health. While time spent in lockdown and quarantine has seemed interminable, it has been a matter of life-or-death for many who could not adjust to work and learn virtually. Yet, compared to history’s many examples, where diseases would ravage society for decades before they became endemic or burned out, we started to turn the tide in less than a year.
While headwinds remain in terms of logistics and anti-vaxxer conspiracies, the rollout of mass vaccination will mark a shift back towards normalcy and the restarting of so many commercial, cultural, and, yes, emotional engines that have laid dormant. The resumption of dining, travel, entertainment, etc. will buoy depleted coffers and spirits. While more is likely needed, the outlines of the stimulus measures that appear to be moving ahead will help get us to that point. If we can have further hope, it is that the lessons of past delayed-and-drawn-out recoveries — and their consequences — are understood.
In the 2008 financial crisis, the drawn out recovery resulted in lasting political shocks. The outgrowth of the Tea Party movement and Occupy Wall Street came from the sluggish economic response and growing inequality. These problems remain — and are even exacerbated by the nature of a pandemic downturn — but key policymakers are also aware of these lessons. Over 2020, the actions of Fed Chairman Jay Powell reflected a willingness to act boldly and aimed to protect Main Street too. With former Fed Chairman Janet Yellen soon to take the helm at Treasury, a strong economic team is in place, hopefully, to work with Congress on further stimulus as well as much needed investments in infrastructure.
It is certainly murkier when looking ahead at our politics, and there will need to be some form of a break in the partisan fever for needed action. The cloud of disinformation and conspiracy theories about the 2020 election present real and dangerous threats to our institutions, but we can draw upon the stress test of these institutions to reform and renew them in the future. If there has been a consistent message from President-elect Biden, it has been to strive for unity. Even if we cannot overcome our partisan instincts overnight, we can hope that the calls for unity from the bully pulpit at least help us take a step back from our divisive politics. To address any of the challenges we face, at home and abroad, a voice of unity is desperately needed. As we are reminded in the more unlikely sources of election analysis:
“There are more Trump voters in California than Texas, more Biden voters in Texas than New York, more Trump voters in New York than Ohio, more Biden voters in Ohio than Massachusetts, more Trump voters in Massachusetts than Mississippi, and more Biden voters in Mississippi than Vermont.”
Finally, while that unity is needed to address the competition and threats we face from abroad, so is strategic vision. An accomplishment of the Trump administration was a clear-eyed understanding of the shift towards great power competition and the heated competition with China. Building on that vision, there is also hope for a more cohesive and clear-eyed response to Russia’s provocations. At home, there is also a growing bipartisan consensus on these challenges — with true cooperation across the aisle for needed action ranging from rebuilding and reshaping the military to ensuring continued tech innovation leadership. These early avenues of cooperation at home bring hope and can be complemented with the hope that also comes from renewed and reinvigorated dialogues with U.S. partners and allies on these topics.
In these darkest days of the year, it is fitting that so many of our religious and cultural traditions focus on light and rebirth, reflection and renewal. In what has been a challenging year, darkness is giving way to light on the horizon.
Long-Running Russian Hacking Campaign Discovered
Joshua C. Huminski
It emerged this week that the United States federal government was the victim of a months-long, highly sophisticated, and highly successful hacking campaign, likely originating from Russia. At least seven federal departments — the Department of Commerce, the Department of the Treasury, Department of Homeland Security, the State Department, Department of Energy and the National Nuclear Security Administration, and the National Institutes of Health — were targeted, but experts expect the number of agencies to increase in the coming days.
Put simply, this is one of the most staggering and widespread breaches in U.S. cybersecurity history.
Initial blame appears to be targeted at Russia’s foreign intelligence service, the SVR, which is believed to have leveraged SolarWinds — a widely used network-management software suite — as a vehicle for the attack. According to reports, the Russian hackers — also known as Cozy Bear or APT29 — used SolarWinds regular update patches to penetrate the network security in what was a sophisticated and savvy attack. The hackers even deployed a novel tool to bypass two-factor authentication, seen as bulwark against unwanted intrusions.
SolarWinds is reported to have 400 of the top Fortune 500 companies as clients, and over 300,000 users globally. According to the firm’s website, clients include all five branches of the U.S. military, the Pentagon, State Department, Justice Department, NASA, the Executive Office of the President and the National Security Agency. Given the size of SolarWinds network of users, the extent of the breach remains unknown — upwards of 18,000 users could have downloaded the patch in question. Such a “supply chain” breach is not unprecedented. In 2017, Russian hackers used a similar vulnerability in tax software to spread a virus in Ukraine.
Even still, SolarWinds has not been without controversy. The New York Times reported that the firm did not have a chief information security officer and employee emails and passwords were showing up on GitHub, a popular coding website. Reuters also reported that a security researcher found the password to SolarWinds’ update mechanism was “solarwinds123”; hardly a paragon of security.
It is believed that the attack was underway as early as March 2020, but it could have been present even earlier. Given the diversity of attack vectors, the tools used, and the stealth nature of the attack, unravelling its full extent will take considerable time as will purging the Russians from the networks. Merely deleting the SolarWinds software will be insufficient as almost certainly the hackers have leveraged that initial access point into a lasting stealth presence. While a “kill switch” was used by both FireEye and SolarWinds, that is unlikely to be nearly enough. Since the hack was active as far back as March, the proverbial barn door has been open for nearly nine months. The hack also follows closely on the heels of the FireEye hack disclosed last week. FireEye is one of the leading cyber forensics and investigations companies in the United States.
Thus far it appears to be a more traditional intelligence gathering campaign and not, as of right now, a disruptive operation. That said, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the hackers will use the information secured for Russia’s advantage. This was the case in 2016 when Russia’s military intelligence unit, or GRU, hacked the Democratic National Committee and released embarrassing emails. Unclassified data is still exceptionally valuable. The Chinese theft of the OPM database of background investigation and fingerprints undoubtedly helped their human intelligence targeting efforts. This is to say nothing of the fact that security and IT staff will be combing networks for the foreseeable future, tying up critical resources, time, and attention, including that of the incoming administration and Congress.
Not surprisingly, Russia denied any involvement. The embassy in Washington said the allegations were “unfounded attempts of the U.S. media to blame Russia.” It rather cheekily added, “Russia does not conduct offensive operations.” For his part, Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin denied responsibility in his annual televised call-in program echoed the denials, but did not elaborate further. (He also denied poisoning Alexei Navalny, saying “who needs him anyway? If [they] wanted to, they would’ve probably finished it.”)
The ultimate fallout of this breach is unknown. It certainly throws into doubt the efficacy of the federal government’s cybersecurity policies and investment over the last few years. Congress is already preparing for hearings and demanding briefings on the breach. The Biden-Harris transition released a statement indicating that cybersecurity will be a top priority and that as president he would “not stand idly by in the face of cyber assaults on our nation.”
It is unclear what the incoming administration will be able to actually do other than issue fairly banal and hollow statements. Nearly every administration has made cybersecurity a priority, yet here we are. Russia has yet to be successfully deterred from its cyber aggression under successive administrations and the potential for escalation is significant. Given Russia’s history of network penetration, to include industrial systems, the potential for catastrophic effects in the United States is not insignificant. Moreover, cyber defense is extremely difficult; offense has the advantage in both capability and initiative. The billions spent by the United States to strengthen the country’s defenses fundamentally failed to notice the breach for nine months.
If anything, it should be hoped that this breach is a watershed moment for the United States and one that galvanizes the federal government into action, but that remains to be seen. One hopes the incoming administration will prioritize addressing cybersecurity, but given past administration’s verbal commitments and little follow through, and the other competing domestic priorities of the Biden-Harris administration, one shouldn’t expect much.
The Last Minute Foreign Policy Bonanza
Michael Stecher
In August in these pages, I tried to capture my tepid approval of the Abraham Accords, the diplomatic and trade agreement among Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. Four months later, the assessment that it was “probably the most productive piece of international policymaking in the Trump administration” and “weak tea” remains, I think, pretty accurate. In the last four months, the administration has secured two additional diplomatic breakthroughs, as Sudan and Morocco initiate official relationships with Israel. Both of these should be understood as misuses of American power for extremely limited gains.
The Sudan agreement is the weakest possible tea. For years, Sudan and its dictatorial president Omar al-Bashir were pariahs in the international community: militia forces aligned with the regime conducted a campaign of genocide in Darfur; the country’s leadership harbored Osama bin Laden in the 1990s and he planned the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania there; the country was also involved in arming Hezbollah and Palestinian militant groups like Hamas. The county was on the State Department’s “State Sponsors of Terror” list, which cut the country out of parts of the international financial system.
Bashir was topped in a coup d’etat last year, however, and the new regime has been messily trying to move on from his rule. The military remains the most powerful institution in the country and, while they have an agreement to transition to a democratic constitution over the next few years, the country’s future is by no means assured. Sudan’s presence on the State Sponsors of Terror list gave the United States substantial leverage, removing Sudan from the list as part of the political transition would have boosted reformers. Instead, the United States used that leverage to get Sudan to establish diplomatic relations with Israel. This outcome is not bad by any means, but it is a huge missed opportunity to try and bring peace to this part of Africa.
The Morocco deal is worse. Morocco and Israel had an official relationship in the 1990s — including a head of government visit by Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1994 — that was suspended during the fighting in the West Bank and Gaza during the Second Intifada. Since then, the two countries have had unofficial interactions like the meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Moroccan Foreign Minister Nasser Bourita on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in 2018. 50,000 Israelis travelled to Morocco every year, even before this agreement, but at least they will now be able to fly direct and have an easier time getting a visa.
The price the United States paid for this was official recognition of Morocco’s claims to the disputed territory of Western Sahara. The region had been a Spanish colony until the 1970s, after which it was claimed and occupied by Morocco. An insurgency among the Sahrawi people had festered for decades — the attack by Polisario Front insurgents against a Moroccan border post last month heralded the end of the region’s ceasefire. The United States had historically supported the UN’s vision of a referendum to determine Western Sahara’s future, while Morocco, backed by France, promoted a vision of semi-autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty.
By officially recognizing Morocco’s invasion of the region, the Trump administration is undermining one of the bedrock principles of international law: that borders cannot be changed by force. The territorial integrity norm raises the costs for aggressors in war; attempts to win territory militarily will incur costs from the international community. Russia, for example, has faced sanctions from the United States and Europe as a result of its illegal occupation of Crimea. The Trump administration made this just another thing that could be traded away, in this case for something very small, slightly enhanced diplomatic relations for Israel.
It worries me when I find myself nodding along in agreement with John Bolton, but his op-ed in Foreign Policy on the subject gets this part right. “It is perfectly appropriate for a nation to modify its responsibilities in light of changed national-security circumstances, but it is quite another to gratuitously destroy a commitment, with no consultation, just to make a so-called deal in a completely separate context.”
In addition, this deal makes life complicated for another North African state undergoing a difficult political transition. Algeria has long supported the Sahrawi independence movement and been at least willfully blind to the use of its territory by Polisario insurgents. Taking this action damages U.S. policy towards Algeria as it emerges from a military dictatorship. If the ceasefire in Western Sahara really is over, the conflict could also pull in armed groups that are active elsewhere in the Sahel, including Al Qaeda and ISIS affiliates.
These conversations took place among Israel, Morocco, and the Trump administration’s pointman Jared Kushner for several years — though Netanyahu was apparently only lukewarm on the idea. The proximate trigger for the deal, however, was purely domestic politics in the United States. President Trump has been trying to strongarm Congressional Republicans into opposing the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act because the bill orders the Defense Department to rename military bases that currently honor participants in the failed 1860–1865 slaveholder rebellion and does not repeal Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which a group of snake oil salesmen argues infringes upon their freedom of speech online (to be clear, it does not).
Senator Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) is the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. He was instrumental in resisting the president’s pressure on those issues and so became a particular target of his ire on Twitter. Senator Inhofe is also the most important backer in Washington of Sahrawi independence and the Polisario Front. Kushner and White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows reportedly saw this as an opportunity to add another “win” to the Middle East Peace portfolio and punish a Republican dissident in Congress at the same time. Unsurprisingly, Senator Inhofe did not take the news well, accusing the president of having evil counselors, though pointedly did not lay any of the blame on the president himself.
The United States should play a constructive role advancing peace and cooperation among our partners. Many countries in the region officially pretend that Israel does not exist in order to promote the cause of Palestinian liberation, but that policy is strategically flawed. Adding political incentives to bring negotiating partners over the finish line is also good, as long as the outcome is worth the incentives. What we have seen here, though, is that the Trump administration appears to have lost interest in the costs associated with the deals they are making. The Sudan and Morocco agreements show that the Trump administration has hung a sign outside the White House that reads “everything must go” and other countries are lining up to get deals at clearance prices.
Choose Normalcy at the Pentagon
Ethan Brown
The overarching theme of this election cycle (from my humble perspective) was the calcification of the relationship between the military and civilian leaders. Like much else with the outgoing administration, rhetoric and sensational ideas repeatedly sprang up which undoubtedly fractured faith in the single-largest component of the government (the Defense Department). Much has been made of the manner in which the 45th presidency chose its power-brokers, with multiple vague and incredibly influential appointments appearing as nepotism. Throughout these recent years, “calmer” voices cried for meritocracy in a town and federal government where such a thing seems fantastical.
While most pundits were confident in a wager on Michele Flournoy grabbing the pivotal defense secretary gig, President-elect Biden went to a risky reserve for his pick to lead the defense department, submitting General (ret.) Lloyd Austin as his nominee for the Pentagon Chief.
There are a couple of issues with this selection — and speaking as a former military member and now thought-prognosticator within the DC echochamber (albeit remotely), I’d like to begin by saying this analysis decries the pick on ethical grounds. The relationship between the citizens of these United States and its national defense architecture is a “bridge over a deep and terrifying chasm”, and the idea of civilian control and oversight of the armed forces is one of the most sacred ideals which form the bedrock of our constitutional republic.
Choosing another former service member to represent the armed forces of the United States is a highly demonstrative move that carries considerable influence beyond most other cabinet positions. Gen. Austin certainly carries with him the expertise of an outstanding and accomplished career in the U.S. Army — four stars aren’t typically awarded for incompetence. He was the CENTCOM commander during a tumultuous and challenging time, although the handling of the Iraq withdrawal in 2011 casts a damper. Frankly, that entire scenario had no good outcomes, but it certainly serves as a strange justification by the President-elect for this pick.
It should be addressed that Michele Flournoy was no more embedded with the military industrial coven than Austin, indeed less so, yet progressive voices wanted nothing to do with a Flournoy pick on just those grounds. One doesn’t spend a career on Capitol Hill without developing ties and relationships, but close involvement in a variety of capacities (including Flournoy’s undersecretary for defense policy stint from 2009–2012) is different from having recently collected a retirement shadow box following a lengthy service career, while also transitioning to an executive board in the defense industry.
Certainly the retired General Austin hears this harsh critique and recognizes the stigma he carries with him if appointed. Further, we cannot claim that his appointment would result in the military industrial complex taking over as progressive critics might claim. In fact, similar concerns swirled around Mark Esper following his elevation from Army Secretary to Pentagon chief, and he seemingly executed the office with integrity and zero undo industry influence, if not a great deal of controversy on other issues as this space has covered in previous roundups. Esper, however, doffed his military uniform long before assuming his assorted prominent roles in policy.
What then, made Jim Mattis the viable exception to the rule? Quite simply, the dearth of good alternatives. Many voices from both sides of the partisan aisle accepted and even argued for the Mattis pick as a means of putting an adult in the room. While indeed the best alternative, and his sudden dismissal from a divisive White House seemingly validated those arguments, the choice to waive the retirement distance clause from the Pentagon chief sets an awful precedent that much of our work here at the Center focuses on: one that directly impedes effective governance. Various lawmakers have already openly stated their opposition vote for Austin’s confirmation, citing the apparent trend of putting a service member atop of the military. As Eric Boehm notes on the issue: “that’s the thing about norms — and laws too. Once broken, it’s easy to justify breaking them again, particularly if you’re doing it for your team this time, and even if you don’t like it or know it might be a mistake. Before long, it’s like it never mattered at all”.
Perhaps relationships had more to do with the pick than anything else — a variety of reports following the nomination announcement cite a close relationship between Biden and Austin, one the President-elect does not enjoy with Michele Flournoy. But in a post-election era that is touting a rebuild of our fractured society, choosing the best individual, even if you aren’t likely to be chummy, is more important.
This author wonders at some of the other qualified persons who weren’t given the nod — Tammy Duckworth (herself a distinguished veteran with plenty of foreign affairs and military policy experience), Jeh Johnson (more time in Senate-approved Pentagon positions) to name some popular and acclaimed candidates. And for a couple outliers of worthy consideration: Mike Mullen, long-since retired after an incredible military career and highly-respected across capitol hill. Or what about former Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson, yet another veteran who just so happened to have recently and successfully led (as a civilian) the most powerful force on earth?
The President-elect is not lacking a wide variety of capable nominees, as the 2016 transition seemingly faced. The perpetual hope is that cabinet selections are always rooted in meritocracy, and such an argument does not preclude Lloyd Austin. But again, the face and policy voice of the defense department should be in lockstep with effective governance. Appearances then matter a great deal when making the pick, and it appears here that applying standards to one candidate but not another brought us to another military man taking the reins. It undermines the legitimacy from the onset, and hardly serves as a course-correction from the previous four years.
A New ISIS Threat Emerges in Southern Africa
Erica Ngoenha
Following territorial losses in Syria and Iraq in 2018, the Islamic State focused on a new strategy for projecting strength and legitimacy. The terrorist group developed a series of regional provinces (known as wilayat) made up of affiliated extremist groups from around the world. In recent years, none of these provinces have been more potent than those operating on the African continent. The most successful of these groups has been Boko Haram, known as the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) since it pledged allegiance to ISIS in 2015. ISWAP’s prolific attacks, the latest occurring just this week, allows ISIS leadership to leverage and co-opt local militant movements to burnish its own reputation in the face of devastating setbacks in the Middle East.
To date, ISIS-affiliated groups and other extremist organizations have largely operated in North, East, and West Africa. Southern Africa has largely avoided the violence plaguing the rest of the continent. However, the dramatic rise of a new ISIS-backed terrorist group, Ahlu Sunnah Wa-Jamâ, or al-Sunnah for short, in the northern region of Mozambique suggests the terrorist threat may be migrating south.
The group’s exact origins are disputed, but it began operating in earnest as a terrorist organization in 2017 carrying out a series of rudimentary and amateur attacks primarily in the Cabo Delgado province of northern Mozambique near the Tanzanian border. Its ranks were generally composed of local disaffected youth. By 2018, the pace and sophistication of the attacks had increased. In 2019, al-Sunnah pledged allegiance to the Islamic State which announced that the group would make up part of its newest affiliate, the Islamic State Central African Province (ISCAP). As with many ISIS-linked organizations, the exact nature of al-Sunnah’s ties to ISIS central leadership is unclear. Most experts agree that the rise in the number and, more importantly, sophistication of the attacks is likely due to training and resources provided by ISIS. According to Mozambican government officials, the violence carried out by al-Sunnah has displaced 570,000 people.
This August, al-Sunnah pulled off its most daring and successful attack to date. Its fighters captured a key port in Mocímboa da Praia, a strategically located coastal town in Cabo Delgado that is home to an emerging energy industry. Mozambican authorities have still not regained control of the port despite deploying the military and foreign mercenaries. The group’s ability to capture and maintain control of territory marked a new and dangerous phase in its evolution. Success in Mocímboa da Praia has spurred further action. In early November, 50 people were reportedly beheaded for refusing to join al-Sunnah’s ranks. The group has also started conducting cross-border attacks into Tanzania, sparking fears of a growing regional threat.
In the span of three years, al-Sunnah has grown from a relatively small contingency of disillusioned youth to a powerful extremist organization capable of capturing and controlling territory and warding off attacks from professional militaries. Its rapid rise has experts fearing it could be the next ISWAP or al-Shabab.
Like those groups, al-Sunnah initially emerged in response to local grievances. Cabo Delgado is the poorest province in one of the poorest countries in the world. It sits at the northern extremities of the country, far from the nation’s power center in the southern capital city Maputo. Its distance from the capital feeds a sense of neglect and a perception of under-investment amongst the local population. Tensions between the north and south in Mozambique are a lasting relic of its 15 year civil war that pitted the colonial liberation movement turned ruling government party, FRELIMO, against a rival rebel group based in the north, RENAMO. Despite a landmark peace agreement in 1992, skirmishes continue between the two parties with RENAMO acting both as a paramilitary group and an opposition political party.
The geographical and political divisions are compounded by religious tensions. While Mozambique is majority Christian, the north is predominantly Muslim. This petri dish of religious divisions, political tensions, geographical divides, neglect, and poverty is only further complicated by the emergence of a $60 billion energy industry in the northern provinces. Recent discoveries of offshore oil and LNG deposits have sparked optimism of a route to prosperity for the country, but have further alienated locals who fear they will not see the gains from this economic boom. The situation has proven to be fertile operating ground for al-Sunnah.
Though the United States has largely stayed out of the conflict to date, the U.S. Coordinator for Counterterrorism and Special Envoy to the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, Ambassador Nathan Sales, visited Mozambique and neighboring South Africa earlier this month in a sign of increasing concern about the threat posed by al-Sunnah.
The question for the United States, Western allies, and regional powers is whether this is still primarily a local threat that can be reversed with regional coordination and enhanced counterterrorism operations, or if this is the beginning of a terrorist movement to rival the likes of Boko Haram and al-Shabab and an indication that ISIS’s influence on the continent is spreading.
As one observer noted, the African continent offers the best opportunity for ISIS to operate freely since losing the “territorial caliphate” in Iraq and Syria. A mix of weak central governments that often fail to respond to domestic needs, widespread poverty, a ballooning youth population, limited economic opportunities, pre-existing ethnic and sectarian tensions create a deadly milieu for violent extremism to flourish.
News You May Have Missed
Newly Revealed Video Rocks Chicago PD, Mayor Lightfoot
No stranger to scandal, the Chicago Police Department and City Hall spent the week responding to public outrage over the release of a video from a 2019 raid by Chicago police on the home of social worker Anjanette Young. Ms. Young, who is black, was handcuffed, while still nude, as police wrongly entered her home under a warrant with a mistaken address. Further fueling the controversy, the city also tried to sanction Ms. Young for breaching a confidentiality agreement and to block TV stations from airing the video — though a federal judge quickly quashed the latter on first amendment grounds. Of course, this comes at the same time as the president of the Chicago police union, John Catanzara, faces firing by the Chicago Police Board over Facebook posts that were Islamophobic, mocked First Lady Michelle Obama, and calling for the murder of college students. If Catanzara is fired, it will end a remarkable career with 35 filed complaints, multiple suspensions, and two unsuccessful attempts by past Chicago Police superintendents to fire him.
Gov. Cuomo Bans the Sale of Confederate Flags on Public Property
Thomas Triedman
New York Governor Cuomo signed legislation Tuesday that prohibits the sale of Confederate flags at state and local fairs and, more generally, on public property. Cuomo stated that “by limiting the display and sale of the confederate flag, Nazi swastika and other symbols of hatred from being displayed or sold on state property…this will help safeguard New Yorkers from the fear-installing effects of these abhorrent symbols.” Cuomo added that “certain technical changes [to the legislation] are necessary” to ensure that his actions pass the First Amendment test. Cuomo will most likely have a tough time protecting the legislation from the authority of the Supreme Court. If it is any indication, in 2008 the Supreme Court ruled 8–1 that the hate group Westboro Baptist Church could, on public property, shout obscenities at the funerals of military service members, suggesting the extent to which the First Amendment protects hate speech and hateful symbols on public property.
Romania’s High Court Allows Discussion of Gender Issues in the Classroom
Thomas Triedman
On Wednesday, Romania’s Constitutional Court annulled a law passed last June that barred all entities of the educational system from discussing gender-related topics in the classroom. The law was pushed forward by the Popular Movement Party, a Christian democratic political group in Romania, who hoped to permanently ban the “spread… [of] theories or opinions” stemming from the notion that “gender is a concept different to biological sex.” The Constitutional Court declared the law unconstitutional with the support of Klaus Iohannis, the current center-right president, who argued that a ban would violate the “individual freedom of consciousness” and would limit the “freedom of thought and opinion.” Romania has traditionally been more conservative on gender- and sexuality-adjacent issues (it is one of the only EU states that continues to ban marriage and civil partnerships for same-sex couples). But this constitutional decision and Iohannis’ support may suggest a transition towards more progressive practices.
South Koreans Banned from Sending anti-North Korean Regime Materials to the North
Thomas Triedman
On Monday, the South Korean government banned sending anti-North Korean materials into the North without permission from Seoul. President Moon Jae-in and his ruling party, who backed this new law, were immediately criticized by North Korean defectors and human rights groups. They worry that Seoul is not only limiting free speech among South Koreans, but is also compromising their democratic values by pandering to Pyongyang. Additionally, The Database Center for North Korean Human Rights points out that roughly two-thirds of defectors from North Korea had been exposed to outside information. The new law came under fire from American policymakers, too. Rep. Chris Smith (R -NJ), co-chair of a U.S. congressional human rights commission, said that “it may very well be that we will see South Korea put on a watch list.” President Moon’s party maintains, however, that the new restrictions were necessary to protect the South Koreans living near the border and to solidify important inter-Korean agreements.
The views of authors are their own and not that of CSPC.