A Dare To Stop Looking

by Rachel Pieh Jones

In Somaliland I took a picture of my neighbour and printed it for her.

The old woman gripped the photo with two hands and her face broke into an exuberant, nearly toothless smile. “I’m old! I’m old!” she shouted.

She was grandmother and nomadic shepherdess old, leathered by sun and wind and a physically challenging life. This was the first time she had ever seen a reflection of herself.

None of my neighbours in Somaliland had mirrors in their homes, none had glass window panes in which to catch their passing reflection. The bottoms of their pots were too blackened by soot and ash to reflect much of anything. We didn’t live by bodies of water and it rarely rained so the likelihood of catching a glimpse of oneself in a puddle or lake was slim.

Some of the younger girls kept tiny slivers of broken mirrors, divided among sisters or friends, in their stack of belongings piled in the corner or tucked away into the suitcases they used as shelving units.
In Djibouti mirrors and windows are slightly more common but before we got a full-length mirror (it took nine years) there were few places I could go to get a good look at my top half and bottom half at the same time.

Sometimes I stood on a goat-skin stool and tried to see my calves in our bathroom mirror but that offered a skewed perspective. Our bathroom mirrors are cloudy and chipped and warbled. Our windows have paint splotches and dust swirls and barely reflect.

Have you ever counted how many times you look in the mirror every day? Even a quick side glance? Last week I counted. I’m embarrassed to tell you the number and it is probably lower because I was conscious of it: 29. Twenty-nine times I looked at and thought about my reflection.

My neighbour had gone her entire life without seeing what she looked like. I can’t even go fifty minutes.

What if we stopped looking?
What if we limited our view to a partial—half our face, just an arm, the arch of our foot?
What if we stopped demanding the mirror affirm, inspire, authenticate?
What if we stopped asking the mirror for miracles and for courage?
What if we just started living our lives—loving our spouses and our kids and our friends, serving our communities, pursuing God?

What if we look at and really see other people instead of being so consumed with how we look?

I don’t want to look at myself twenty-nine times per day. I want to look at Jesus that many times per day. I want to think about how to creatively serve other people that many times per day.
What if we stopped looking in the mirror and started looking at Jesus? We could stop demanding the mirror reflect an image of us, stop demanding ourselves to perfect that image, and start trusting our way to being a reflection of Him.

A challenge: Let’s go one day, one single day, without looking in the mirror. No car windows. No store windows. No side glance while buckling the car seat or checking the rearview mirror. No make-up mirror. No selfie. No TV reflection while you’re working out. No checking out your butt in that photo someone took at that party while you were turned around.

I dare you to stop looking at yourself and see what you see.

Let us know how it goes.

Urgent News: Son of former "financier" of Al Shabaab's predecessor killed in Nairobi

Abukar Omar Adan being released, soon after his capture in Nairobi by Kenyan 

security forces early in 2007

By CYRUS OMBATI

NAIROBI, KENYA: Police are investigating an incident which a son of a prominent Mogadishu businessman and ex-chief "financier" of Islamic Courts Union (ICU) Abukar Omar Addaan was shot dead in Nairobi Friday.

The victim Sacid Abukar Adaan was shot dead outside his shop along Mombasa Road in Nairobi by gunmen who escaped with his mobile phone.

Witnesses said he was shot at close range at about 11am as he talked on his mobile phone. 

He was planning to get into his shop when the gunmen who were on a motorbike struck and later sped off.

 Police said they are yet to know the attackers. His father was a warlord in Somalia. The family of the victim which stays in South C is calling for investigations. He was rushed to Mater Hospital where he was pronounced dead on arrival. The incident happened as tens of police were deployed to Eastleigh in a major crackdown on illegal immigrants.

The officers literally surrounded the densely populated area searching both pedestrians and vehicles.

Police involved in the exercise said they wanted to detain those without identification documents.

Nairobi police boss Benson Kibue asked those who do not have documents and are illegally there to surrender. Police lorries carried away dozens of people to Kasarani police station where they were being interrogated.

The operation which started several days ago has seen more than 2000 people detained and especially from Eastleigh.

The ICU disintegrated into several smaller factions among them Al Shabaab after a defeat by the then Somali Transitional Federal Government and Ethiopian military in 2006.

Source: standardmedia.co.ke

Afghans flock to polls to vote for new leader

By The Associated Press KABUL, Afghanistan - Afghans flocked to polling stations nationwide on Saturday, defying a threat of violence by the Taliban to cast ballots in what promises to be the nation's first democratic transfer of power. Amid tight security, men in traditional tunics and loose trousers, and women covered in burqas lined up at polling centers more than an hour before they opened in Kabul and elsewhere. Excitement was high as Afghans chose from a field of eight presidential candidates as well as provincial councils. With three men considered front-runners, nobody was expected to get the majority needed for an outright victory so a runoff was widely expected. Hundreds of thousands of Afghan police and soldiers fanned out across the country, searching cars at checkpoints and blocking vehicles from getting close to polling stations. Some voters were searched three times in Kabul, and text messages were blocked in an apparent attempt to prevent candidates from last-minute campaigning. On Friday, veteran Associated Press photographer Anja Niedringhaus was killed and AP reporter Kathy Gannon was wounded when an Afghan policeman opened fire while the two were sitting in their car in the eastern city of Khost. The two were at a security forces base, waiting to move in a convoy of election workers delivering ballots. Niedringhaus, 48, an internationally acclaimed German photographer, was killed instantly, while Gannon, 60, was hospitalized in Kabul and is in stable condition. President Hamid Karzai, who has led the country since the Taliban were ousted in 2001, is constitutionally barred from a third term. Karzai cast his ballot at a high school near the presidential palace. "Today for us, the people of Afghanistan, is a very vital day that will determine our national future. We the people of Afghanistan will elect our provincial council members and our president by our secret votes," he said, his finger stained with the indelible ink used to prevent people from voting twice. Karzai's tenure has been heavily criticized as he has failed to end the endemic corruption and poverty in the country, which remains mired in violence after nearly 13 years of war. As international combat forces prepare to withdraw by the end of this year, the country is so unstable that the very fact the crucial elections are being held is touted as one of Karzai's few successes. The eventual winner faces deep challenges. Security forces will be left to deal with the Taliban insurgency without international troops. Billions of dollars in international aid are at risk with the coalition forces' withdrawal. Expectations are high among Afghans that the new leader will alleviate poverty and clean up the government in a country that Transparency International last year ranked among the three most corrupt in the world alongside Somalia and North Korea. Mohammad Aleem Azizi, a 57-year-old shopkeeper, said he voted to re-elect Karzai in the last election in 2009 but has been disappointed. "Security deteriorated, insecurity is getting worse day by day," he said. "I want peace and stability in this country. I hope the new president of Afghanistan will be a good person." Nazia Azizi, a 40-year-old housewife, was first in line at a school in eastern Kabul.

US aid to Egypt used for terrorism: Ethiopia official

Ethiopian MP Girma Seifu of the Unity for Democracy and Justice (UDJ) party

A Member of Ethiopia’s largest opposition party UDJ blamed Egypt’s financial assistance to al Shabab militants in Somalia for spreading terrorism in the horn of Africa. According to MP Girma Seifu of the Unity for Democracy and Justice (UDJ) party, American aid to Egypt is being diverted to finance terrorists in Somalia as Cairo seeks to weaken Addis Ababa and stop construction of the Ethiopian Dam.

“American taxpayers should demand answers from the Obama administration on why billions of their money is going to a country that funds terrorism in East Africa,” said Mr. Girma. According to a New York Times report on June 6, 2013, several Egyptian government officials were secretly taped discussing ways to increase funding for militants in East Africa in order to destabilze upstream Nile basin countries.

 MP Girma cited several United Nations (UN) weapons Monitoring Group’s evidence that show Egyptian arms support to Somali militants, some of whom have killed western tourists in East Africa. The UN document states that Egypt is also providing “intensive military and ideological training” to al Shabab, the same active group with terrorists like Abu Mansoor Al Amriki who was on FBI’s Most Wanted terror list.

The Ethiopian opposition MP said he is calling on all the Ethiopian Diaspora in America to unite and “take legal action” and inform their local US congressmen.

The MP also said Egypt and creditors blocking finance for the dam project is a “crime against the poor people of Ethiopia.”  He urged the World Bank (WB) and IMF not to give in to “corrupt”Egyptian lobbyists who are blocking the loans for the Ethiopian mega dam. The official asked the West to help Ethiopia build the infrastructure needed to feed itself instead of making the country forever dependent on food aid.

Somaliland Hails British Step Forward in Independence Bid

LONDON — A city in Britain has become the first to officially recognize Somaliland’s claim to independence. The vote — which is purely symbolic and carries no legal weight — is nevertheless being hailed by Somaliland leaders as a big step forward in their decades-long campaign to break away from Somalia.

Somalilanders celebrated outside Sheffield city hall after the council voted Thursday to recognize the region’s right to self-determination. Thousands of people of Somaliland origin live in the northern British city.

Somaliland’s Foreign Minister Mohamed Bihi Yonis attended the vote; he later told VOA of its symbolic importance. “Somaliland has the border, the population [in favor of independence], the currency, the independence, the elections, the democracy, the rule of law, the human rights record of Somaliland. And I think they have looked into all of those areas and realized that Somaliland has met the requirements of statehood.”

Somaliland occupies the northern section of Somalia.

The rest of the country has been plagued by lawlessness and violence since the overthrow of Somalia’s leader in 1991. Later that same year, Somalilanders voted in a referendum to become independent — a vote that has not been recognized by any nation.

Oasis of peace

Mohamed Yonis calls Somaliland a relative oasis of peace. “We have a proper functioning government and institutions, while the other part of Somalia is actually burning and having a lot of difficulties as you know — issues of piracy, terrorism, al-Shabab [Islamic militants].”

Somaliland did gain brief statehood upon its independence from Britain in June 1960. But its government chose to merge with Somalia.

Convincing the world that Somaliland should be recognized as independent will not be easy, according to Alex Vines of London-based policy analyst group Chatham House.

“Internationally, everybody says it would have to be led by Africa,” said Vines. “When you talk to African leaders, it’s like, ‘Well, we might consider it, but we wouldn’t be the first.’”

Somaliland authorities insist the region’s economy would support independence.

Thriving economy

The port of Berbera lies just west of the tip of the Horn of Africa. It’s a chaotic, dusty trade hub; camels, goats and sheep are transferred from trucks and carts into the market, to be exported across Africa and the Gulf.

Agriculture is the backbone of Somaliland’s economy; Minister of Livestock Abdi Aw Dahir Ali said the industry can grow even bigger. “It does not export only livestock from Somaliland. Berbera exports livestock from Ethiopia, from Somalia, from Kenya. So it’s a center of export of all livestock from the Horn.”

Somaliland authorities have handed out exploration licenses to a number of foreign oil firms, to the anger of the Somali government in Mogadishu.

The country also could offer an export hub for neighboring landlocked Ethiopia, said Vines.

“It wouldn’t be necessarily against the interests of neighboring Ethiopia. But the precedent of recognizing Somaliland would then add complexity to Ethiopia itself,” he said.

Somaliland authorities say talks with the Somali government are progressing. Observers say Mogadishu favors unity, though, and few expect any countries to follow Sheffield’s lead in the near future.

to view video click here: http://www.voanews.com/content/somaliland-hails-british-step-forward-in-independence-bid/1886918.html

Source: VOA NEWS

Ethiopia: Egypt and the Nile politics

BY YEMANE NAGISH, Reporter. An Interview With Ambassador Ibrahim Idris

Addis Ababa - BY YEMANE NAGISH, Reporter. An Interview With Ambassador Ibrahim Idris is director-general of the trans-boundary resources directorate at the Ethiopian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  Prior to that he had a long and distinguished career as dean of the Law Faculty at the Addis Ababa University. On top of that he was also known to be a well-published scholar who later left for the US after winning the Fullbright Scholarship. Most importantly, Idris served as Ambassador in Cairo from 2006 to 2011. After being hit with the Arab Spring that swept across the Middle East and North Africa, Egypt is on way to crown its next president, the former chief of the Egyptian armed forces, Field Marshal Abdel-Fattah Al-Sisi. Yemane Nagish of The Reporter sat down with the Ambassador to explore the possible political direction the country might take and the implication for the Nile and the Great Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). Excerpts:

The Reporter: Going back in history, can we evaluate what the Nile meant for Presidents Gamal Abdul Nasser, Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak?

Ambassador Ibrahim Idris: As far as I am concerned, the Nile has the same meaning for all three presidents. They all share one strong conviction: to cling onto the older water agreements that were signed on the River Nile. Among these agreements, the one signed in 1929 and 1959 are the most significant ones since these are the only ones that clearly talk about water share from the river. In the case of the first, the Egyptians signed favorable terms about this river since the British were the ones who signed the accord in the place of the upper riparian states, except Ethiopia, as they were the colonial overlords at that time. Whereas the 1959 agreement was also most preferred by Egyptians because the agreement gave 100 percent of the water to Egypt and Sudan. I think this desire to perpetuate the two agreements has been and is still shared by political leaders in Cairo.

But, how big is the Nile in the foreign policy of that country across the rule of the aforementioned leaders?

During my tenure there as a diplomat, I had a first-hand account of what the foreign policy of Egypt was. In that regard, I doubt that there could be a shift now or in the future leadership of Egypt. Even if one goes back to study their political history, especially during the era of those three leaders you have mentioned, the story is almost similar. The two most important agenda in Egyptian foreign policy direction are the issue of the Nile and the Middle East (the issue of Israel and the Palestine). I also observed that there is little debate on the subject of the Nile and that it is the least controversial issue in Egypt.

What about between the leadership and the general populace is there any difference of opinion?

Let me tell you one interesting fact. I remember that the general populace in Egypt had never been told that the bulk of this water is sourced from another country located to the south of theirs until very recently. More specifically, the talk of Ethiopia being a source of most of the Nile surfaced in Egypt after the meeting in Sharm al Sheik, where the riparian nations, with the exception of Egypt and Sudan, took a strong stance to ink the Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA) that was later signed. It was a meeting that spanned 21 hours and in connection with the decision to ink the CFA rumors of Ethiopia being behind the decision of other riparian states to sign the agreement spread. And together with that, the Egyptian public for the first time learned about Ethiopia being the source of this water body.

Going back to that meeting (Sharm al Sheik meeting), how was the debate and position of the Egyptians?

Generally, the Egyptians argued strongly on three points. The first one was on how to pass decisions regarding the River Nile. The Egyptians insisted that any decision that is passed should be based on consensus rather than votes. You see, back then there were nine riparian countries taking part in the talks. Hence, if it was to be decided on votes it was clear that the upper riparian states would have the upper hand. But, a consensus would give each country, including Egypt, the right to veto any position taken by the riparian states. The other one was the protection of what they call water security and water use rights. What this entails is simply this: they wanted not only their old shares of the water to be protected but also the rights to continue using the water, which they have acquired and extended since old colonial agreements. You see, this meant that there was no point to negotiate on the issue anymore, and, of course, the upper riparian states categorically rejected it. The third one was to hold the right to give consent to any water-related development activity that is undertaken in the upper riparian nations. We were trying to reconcile these issues for 21 hours. The thing is that this position of the Egyptians was hardly new to the other riparian nations and since the Kinshasa meeting they were given time to present alternatives on which we could come to an understanding. But, they were insistent, and finally the seven nations had to take a step, which they did by agreeing to sign the accord in Entebbe.

But the discussion went on for ten years. Surely there must have been some progress during that time. Why did things revert back to square one after all these negotiations?

Basically, the Egyptians came to a decision in the end that the CFA should grant recognition to the older agreements that favor them. And this in effect meant nullifying the whole effort of negotiating and drafting a new agreement. Why would there be a CFA, if it was to recognize the older accords, which were unjust? This did not make any sense and finally the seven had to move on with signing the CFA.

How does the CFA compare with older water treaties?

Simply, we can consider that the older colonial agreements are documents signed between the two lower riparian countries and a colonial power, while the CFA is a document shared by six nations. So far, Ethiopia and Rwanda have ratified the document and ratification of the others is pending, but it will become a legal document far more powerful in the future. But, as it is at the moment, the CFA has greater value in terms of offering a viable and reasonable alternative to the Nile than the contorted and slanted treaties that Egypt wants to keep alive. Regarding the content, the CFA is far better than the old treaties since one, it offers a sustainable solution to the Nile as it recognizes the rights of lower riparian countries to use the water and that there is a proper framework for Egypt to negotiate her right should it decide to join the accord. Second, the CFA also offers a futuristic solution to the water share by considering the development and protection of the water share by all riparian nations. How can people who are forbidden from taking a sip be expected to develop and insure sustainability of the water resource? Mind you about one-third or 50 million of Ethiopians are touched by this water body and what kind of logic would there be to argue that these people shouldn’t see any benefit coming from this particular river.

How do you see the strategy of Egyptian leaders in the past and those in power today?

Although the overall spirit remains, the strategies do change according to various factors. I do believe that the overall dynamics surrounding the Nile have seen a marked shift between the time of the previous leaders and now. For one, the upper riparian states as a group have altered their previous ways to come together for a common interest; this would surely impact the strategists. Another is that these upper riparian nations’ political, economic and social conditions are changing, which have a bearing on the matter. Also, the internal condition in Egypt is something to consider. In this regard, I see the politicians of this generation using the Nile to divert attention from the real issues in their domestic political spheres.

Can we say that Ethiopia has now acquired the strength to withstand the age-long Egyptian tactic of working to cut the country’s external financing? Can we say this shift has, in fact, happened? How do you view recent Egyptian moves to internationalize the issue?

In short, I think the shift is there economically. It is easily visible in terms of our development projects undertaken without external assistance. In fact, the main project on the River Nile, GERD, itself has been built without any external assistance. Yet, following the recommendation of an international Panel of Experts, Egypt has embarked on a campaign to internationalize the dam. Personally, I do not understand the rationale behind this effort. Look, to begin with, what they are claiming has no legal basis in international law. There is no law that would tell the upper riparian nations to be a bystander while lower riparian nations exploit a resource that they all share. Egypt is saying that we should not touch a drop of the Nile but, of course, the upper riparian nations reject it; I do not see this campaign going anywhere. Rather, if at all their concern is real regarding, for instance, GERD, the sane thing to do is be included in the process of implementing the Panel’s recommendations and voice their problems appropriately. Apart from that, with Ethiopia saying the dam project is paid for from their own resources and other upper riparian nations doing the same tomorrow, what the outcome of this campaign could be is confusing.

Recent developments have shown that Egypt has included the stringiest positions in their constitution. Does it amount to anything?

For Ethiopia or the other riparian nations it would not make any difference if Egypt choses to articulate its position on the Nile anywhere; whether on their policy document or their constitution . For what it is worth, this move has contributed more to alienating Egypt from the rest of the riparian nations and has badly impacted any hope of working together in the future. What Article 44 proclaimed is the dogmatic historical water right statement; this has been and still is rejected by other nations. So, I say, it is to no effect.

But, we have seen at times some positive diplomatic developments between the two nations only to regress back to older war rhetoric and tension. Why such a fluctuation? And with Marshal Al Sisi’s prospectus to secure the presidency, what can be expected?

All I can understand from this is that the Egyptians are still not concerned with the technical matters and the impact of this dam. Rather I feel that they are using it for their own domestic political agenda. This is why they keep oscillating between peaceful negotiation and war rhetoric. As far as the ex-military man coming to power is concerned, I am afraid I have to say that I cannot see any significant change from what they are not doing now or before. You see, Egypt has a long history of being ruled by a military leader, this prospectus president was also part of the administration during the previous military eras, and hence I do not see why it should be unique this time around.

Finally, where do you think the political turmoil in Egypt is going? Are they out of the woods?

It is really difficult to predict where the situation is heading. But one thing is quite clear: the political leadership, instead of addressing matters domestically, has opted to externalize them. This, in part, entails keeping the public in constant fear by telling them a dam project in Ethiopia has endangered its water security. But, one would have to wait and see how things turn out

Somaliland : Who Bolloré has to talk to in Berbera

Hargeisa has instructed a British lawyer to negotiate with the French group Bolloré to hammer out the details of the agreement to manage Berbera port.

Meetings began about two weeks ago between representatives of Bolloré Africa Logistics and the British law practice McCue & Partners to work on an agreement for the French group to run Berbera port. In fact, several months ago the Somaliland government instructed the firm’s main partner, Jason Daniel McCue, 44, to look for funding to develop the Berbera corridor towards Ethiopia.

This is a vast project including an oil pipeline, estimated to cost a total of around $2.5 billion. This mandate was attributed to the Berbera Development Company (BDC) founded by McCue in London in April 2013 to make the Somaliland port into a logistics hub for the whole region.

McCue and BDC have consequently also become Bolloré’s primary contact points for Somaliland. BDC has three directors in addition to McCue, who is interested in security via his MODA Alliance Group. They are the Britons John Richard Moore, 45, who heads John Moore & Co and Ibrahim Ali Yusuf, 41, plus the Canadian Ahmed Mohamed Abokor, 48.

The latter lives in Djibouti, where he is in partnership with the businessman Mohamed Said Guedi in the company Afro Shnagai-Djibouti. He is also one of the directors of Pontus Marine Ltd (ION 1359) – an industrial fishing company in Somaliland founded last year in London – alongside the British lawyer from Somaliland, Mohammed Yusef who is moreover the founder of Invicta Capital. Pontus Marine has one heavyweight as a non-executive director: the Conservative MP Henry Bellingham, a former Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in charge of African affairs.

Source: Indian Ocean Newsletter

Confronting Evil: Genocide in Rwanda

Alison Des Forges was Human Rights Watch's senior advisor in the Africa Division and one of the world's foremost experts on Rwanda. In the period leading up to the genocide, she worked tirelessly to alert world powers to the impending crisis in Rwanda. Her efforts did not stop when the genocide ended. She continued painstakingly gathering information on these horrific crimes, which she compiled into what has become one of the main reference books on the Rwandan genocide: "Leave none to tell the story: Genocide in Rwanda", published in 1999.



 Alison Des Forges campaigned vigorously for justice for the genocide until her sudden death in a plane crash in the US on February 12, 2009. She also documented human rights abuses by the new government of Rwanda after the genocide and advocated for accountability for all abuses, past and present.
Category
Nonprofits & Activism
License
Standard YouTube License

 

U.S. State Dept. issued the strongest Travel Warning on Kenya

Washington, DC - The U.S. Department of State warns U.S. citizens of the risks of travel to Kenya.  U.S. citizens in Kenya, and those considering travel to Kenya, should evaluate their personal security situation in light of continuing and recently heightened threats from terrorism and the high rate of violent crime in some areas. The levels of risk vary throughout the country. This replaces the Travel Warning of September 27, 2013, to update information about the current security situation.

The U.S. government continues to receive information about potential  terrorist threats aimed at U.S., Western, and Kenyan interests in Kenya, including in the Nairobi area and in the coastal cities of Mombasa and Diani. Terrorist acts can include suicide operations, bombings – to include car bombings - kidnappings, attacks on civil aviation, and attacks on maritime vessels in or near Kenyan ports. Although the pursuit of those responsible for previous terrorist activities continues, many of those involved remain at large and still operate in the region. Travelers should consult the Worldwide Caution for further information and details.

Kenya initiated military action against al-Qaeda affiliate al-Shabaab by crossing into Somalia on October 16, 2011, and on June 2, 2012, signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) whereby it formally joined the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM). Kenyan troops within AMISOM are now actively pursuing al-Shabaab in southeastern Somalia. In response to the Kenyan intervention, al-Shabaab and its sympathizers have conducted retaliatory attacks against civilian and government targets in Kenya.

On September 21, 2013, suspected members of the al-Shabaab terrorist organization, an Al-Qaeda affiliate, attacked the Westgate Shopping Mall in Nairobi, killing scores of innocent people, both Kenyan and foreign, and wounding many others. The siege at the mall continued for several days and five U.S. citizens were confirmed injured in the attack.

In the past year and a half, there have been numerous attacks involving shootings, grenades, or other explosive devices in Kenya in addition to the attacks described above. In total, over 100 people have  been killed in these attacks, and hundreds have been injured.

Approximately 53 of these attacks occurred in northeastern Kenya, mainly in Dadaab, Wajir, Garissa, and Mandera counties. Five attacks occurred in Mombasa. Most recently, on March 23, 2014, three unknown gunmen opened fire on a church service in Likoni, which is in the Mombasa area, killing six people and wounding 18 others. On January 2, 2014, 10 people were wounded in a grenade attack on a night club in Diani, a popular resort area on Kenya’s south coast near Mombasa. Fifteen grenade and improvised explosive device (IED) attacks have occurred in Nairobi, illustrating an increase in the number of attacks and an advance in the sophistication of attacks. In the most recent grenade attack, on March 31, six people were killed in Eastleigh. An attack also occurred on January 16, 2014, at a restaurant at the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport; no injuries were reported. Other targets in the past have included police stations and police vehicles, nightclubs and bars, churches, a mosque, a religious gathering, a downtown building of small shops, and a bus station. On December 14, 2013, an IED exploded on a passenger bus near the Eastleigh neighborhood, killing six people and injuring 30.

Kenyan law enforcement has disrupted several terrorist plots throughout the country. On March 17, 2014, police discovered a large and sophisticated car bomb in the Mombasa area, as reported in the local media. It is unclear what the intended target was.
Ethnic clashes sometimes occur in areas of northern Kenya. In Marsabit, over 50 people have been killed and 50,000 displaced by ongoing ethnic clashes that began in July 2013. In October 2013, a local Muslim cleric with alleged ties to al-Shabaab was killed in a drive-by shooting in Mombasa, prompting a day of rioting in Mombasa, which resulted in the deaths of four persons and an arson attack that damaged a church. While this violence is not directed at foreigners, protests and ethnic clashes are unpredictable. U.S. citizens are advised to check conditions and monitor local media reports before traveling to these areas.

Multiple kidnappings of Westerners have occurred in Kenya. On June 29, 2012, four international aid workers (from Canada, Pakistan, Norway, and the Philippines) were kidnapped in the Dadaab refugee camp in northeastern Kenya. All were rescued on July 1, 2012. In October 2011, two Spanish nationals working for a non-governmental organization (NGO) were also kidnapped in Dadaab. They were released on July 18, 2013.

The Government of Kenya directive of December 2012 ordering all urban refugees to relocate to refugee camps was overturned by court order and is not being implemented; however, U.S. citizens of Somali descent should be aware that they may encounter interruptions in their travel due to increased police scrutiny based on this directive. It is very important to carry at all times proof of identity and legal status in Kenya (i.e., valid visa). If you are detained by police or immigration officials, you should request to speak to someone from the Consular Section of the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi.

As a result of these recent events and threats, U.S. Embassy personnel are prohibited from traveling to northeastern Kenya, including the cities of El Wak, Wajir, Garissa, Mandera, and Liboi. U.S. Embassy personnel are also restricted from traveling to the coastal area north of Pate Island, including Kiwavu and north to Kiunga on the Kenya-Somalia border.

Although these restrictions do not apply to travelers not associated with the U.S. government, U.S. citizens in Kenya should take these restrictions into account when planning travel. The Embassy regularly reviews the security of these areas for possible modification.

There are no restrictions on U.S. embassy employee travel to Kenya's most popular tourist destinations such as Masai Mara, Amboseli, Lake Nakuru, Tsavo, Lamu Island, Hell's Gate, Samburu, Mount Kenya, and Malindi. However, as with the prohibited travel destinations listed above, the Embassy regularly reviews the security of these unrestricted areas for possible modification. Travelers should keep informed of local developments by following local press, radio, and television reports prior to their visits. Visitors should also consult their hosts, including U.S. and Kenyan business contacts, hotels, tour guides, and travel organizers.

Violent and sometimes fatal criminal attacks, including armed carjackings, grenade attacks, home invasions and burglaries, and kidnappings can occur at any time and in any location, particularly in Nairobi. U.S. citizens, including U.S. Embassy employees, have been victims of such crimes within the past year.

U.S. citizens in Kenya should be extremely vigilant with regard to their personal security, particularly in crowded public places such as clubs, hotels, resorts, shopping centers, restaurants, bus stations, and places of worship. U.S. citizens should also remain alert in residential areas, at schools, and at outdoor recreational events. U.S. citizens should use commonsense precautions at all times, to include the following practices: avoid crowded transportation venues; visit only legitimate businesses and tourist areas only during daylight hours; use well-marked taxis and be sure to lock vehicle doors and keep windows up; lock all lodging doors and windows; carry minimal amounts of cash and credit cards; do not wear jewelry which attracts undue attention; know emergency phone numbers; do not resist or antagonize armed criminals; and always be aware of your surroundings. These measures can help ensure your travel to Kenya is safe and enjoyable.

U.S. citizens who travel to or reside in Kenya are urged to enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) in order to receive the most up-to-date security information. By enrolling, U.S. citizens make it easier for the Embassy to contact them in case of emergency. U.S. citizens without internet access may enroll directly with the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi.

The U.S. Embassy in Nairobi is located on United Nations Avenue, Gigiri, Nairobi, Kenya; telephone (+254) (20) 363-6000; fax (+254) (20) 363-6410. In the event of an after-hours emergency, the Embassy duty officer may be contacted at (+254) (20) 363-6000. Travelers may also consult the U.S. Embassy Nairobi website for more information.

U.S. citizens should also consult the Department of State's Country Specific Information for Kenya, as well as Worldwide Caution, Travel Warnings and Travel Alerts, which are all available on the U.S. Department of State's, Bureau of Consular Affairs website. Travelers may obtain up-to-date information on security conditions by calling 1-888-407-4747 toll-free in the United States and Canada, or on a regular toll line at 1-202-501-4444 from other countries. Follow us on Twitter and the Bureau of Consular Affairs page on Facebook as well.

Source: state.gov

Countries With Less Religious Diversity Have More Faith-Based Violence

Is it easier to love thy neighbor as thyself if he practices a different religion?

Chalk up a win today for pluralism.

Emma Green - Reuters

On Friday, the Pew Research Center released a report on the countries with the most and least religious diversity, and the results—at least at first glance—are what you might expect.

There's very little religious diversity in the Middle East and North Africa, where most people are Muslim, as well as in Latin America, where most people are Christian. By far, the Asia-Pacific region, home to Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and non-religious people, is the most diverse part of the world.

What's more surprising, though, is that some of the least religiously diverse countries also experience some of the most religious violence. According to Pew's recent analysis of religion-related social hostilities, Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, Somalia, and Israel top the list of countries with the most conflicts motivated by faith, which include "armed conflict or terrorism, mob or sectarian violence, harassment over attire for religious reasons, or other religion-related intimidation or abuse." In terms of religious diversity, Afghanistan and Somalia are among the 10 least-diverse countries in the world, and Pakistan was also given a rating of "low" diversity. Israel and India are both considered only moderately diverse.

Take a look at these maps of religious diversity and hostility. In many places, they look like a mirror image, with the lightest countries on one showing up as the darkest countries on the other.

Global Religious Diversity

Pew Research Center, April 2014. Data are from 2010.

Religion-Related Social Hostilities Around the World

Pew Research Center, January 2014. Data are from 2012.

This trend seems to be the most prevalent in Southeast Asia and the Middle East. Countries like Bangladesh, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, and Thailand have among the lowest levels of religious diversity and highest levels of religious hostilities in the world. Similarly, Egypt, Iraq, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen rank at the bottom of the global diversity ranking but at the top of the religious hostilities list.

On the other end of the spectrum, this relationship still holds, if to a lesser extent. Canada and Australia both have high levels of diversity and low to moderate levels of hostility. This is also true in certain African countries, like Benin, Ghana, and Mozambique, as well as in some small Latin American countries, like Cuba, Guyana, Suriname, and Uruguay.

There are some notable exceptions. China is incredibly religiously diverse, but the country has also experienced a significant amount of faith-based conflict. Many Latin American countries are pretty uniformly Christian and peaceful, although Mexico and Colombia are notable exceptions, with much higher levels of violence than the rest of the region. And many countries are somewhere in the middle: The U.S. has moderate diversity and moderate hostility, as do several European countries.

Of course, these findings come with some limitations. The diversity study doesn't account for different denominations within religions, like Sunnis and Shiites in Muslim countries or Protestants and Catholics in Christian countries; apparently it was too difficult to gather enough data to make those distinctions. It's also impossible to make conclusions about cause and effect: Pluralism itself might help reduce violence, or countries that tolerate high levels of diversity might attract people less inclined to violence. And these trends may be related to overall patterns of violence and political instability in the world—in the past several years, some of the countries with the highest levels of religious affiliation have been hit hard by war, especially in the Middle East.

Still, the two studies reveal an interesting pattern: Spiritual consensus is not the key to peace or stability. And this seems to be true across faiths: The most violent, homogenous places include countries that are primarily Buddhist, Muslim, and Christian. It may not be true everywhere, but these data suggest something remarkable: Religious pluralism can be, and often is, compatible with peaceful societies.

theatlantic.com

Somalia: Prisoners Escape from Bosaso Jail

More than ten Prisoners on Friday escaped from a jail in the port town of Bosaso, northeastern Somalia.

Prisoners being assembled in Bosaso Central Prison

The inmates, who are convicted pirates managed to escape in the morning hours, but most them have been captured by the Custodian corps and returned to the Jail.

One of the Prison guards told Horseed Media that investigations are under way on how they managed to escape from the prison which is heavily guarded. The total of the escaped prisoners have been confirmed to be 15.

Police are hunting for the other two prisoners, who are being thought to be hiding in the town.

Last year, three people including the deputy commander of the corps in the Prison were killed after unknown gunmen carried a deadly attacked at the Prison.

Puntland authorities at that time accused the Somali terrorist group al-Shabab for being responsible for the attack.

Source: Horseed Media

Somalia: Islamic Terrorists Down But Still Nasty

April 4, 2014: For over a month soldiers and peacekeepers have been advancing south and driving al Shabaab men out of over a dozen towns containing more than 100,000 people. Counting those living in nearby villages and small settlements that comes to nearly a quarter million people liberated. The Islamic terrorists admit they have ordered their men to not stand and fight but to withdraw and organize terror attacks on security forces and pro-government locals. There are still several dozen towns and villages with Islamic terrorists still in them and basically living off (and terrorizing) the locals.

This includes a 200 kilometer stretch of the southern coast, including the port town of Barawe. Chasing the Islamic terrorists out of these towns is the easy part, what is difficult is setting up security in “liberated” areas. Al Shabaab has made public its plans to attack these new policing forces and regain control. In some cases the departing Islamic terrorists ordered residents to flee with them. Or, as the terrorists sometime put it, “with us or die.” There were no massacres against those who did not flee and few civilians left as the peacekeepers arrived. Al Shabaab leaders have been urging their men to develop better relations with civilians, in line with current al Qaeda doctrine.

Most al Shabaab men have taken these instructions to heart and there have been no mass killings of civilians recently. But the people in the former al Shabaab controlled areas are terrified that al Shabaab will do what they said they would and return. There is going to be a lot more fighting in the south, most of it terror attacks and small battles with groups of al Shabaab who get cornered and fight to the death (as many are wont to do.) Somalis are also angry with how the Islamic terrorists take what they want (as “taxes”) and are now confiscating any telephones they find that have cameras. Somalis report that the Islamic terrorists are very frightened of the approaching peacekeepers and desperate to keep the local Somalis so terrified that no one will cooperate with the peacekeepers to find where the al Shabaab men are hiding.  

April 1, 2014:  In Kenya (Mombasa) a radical Islamic cleric was shot dead in a drive-by shooting. He is the third Kenyan Islamic radical cleric to die like this in the past two years. This has led to unrest among Kenyan Moslems who accuse the government of assassinating Islamic radical clerics and persecuting Moslems in general. Many Moslems have a sense of entitlement and believe that the non-Moslem world is at war with them. These attitudes are a primary cause of Islamic terrorism and are difficult to deal with. The dead cleric has long been accused to preaching in support of Islamic terrorism and recruiting for al Shabaab.

March 31, 2014: In Kenya (Nairobi) three bombs went off in a market in a neighborhood full of Somalis. There were six dead and twenty wounded. Police immediately began searching buildings in the area and seeking al Shabaab sympathizers. By the next day police had arrested over 650 local Somalis for questioning.  

March 28, 2014:  In the southern port town of Barawe al Shabaab accused three local men of spying for the government and then killed them. The men may indeed have been government informants but the Islamic terrorists will often accuse anyone in the least degree suspicious and kill them just to frighten others away from becoming informants.  

March 25, 2014: Kenya ordered all Somali refugees living outside refugee camps to move to a refugee camp. The UN promptly criticized this measure but the government is under tremendous public pressure to reduce the Somali terrorist threat. Since many Somali refugees have been caught supporting or carrying out terrorist activities the UN protests are not popular at all in Kenya and the refugees will be pressured to go to the camps. There are about 525,000 Somali refugees in two Kenyan camps. The UN runs the camps but has no control over some 50,000 Somali refugees living mostly in the Somali neighborhoods of Nairobi and Mombasa. About 76 percent of the Moslems (four million people) in Kenya are ethnic Somalis who are citizens. Kenya is largely Christian with a Moslem minority (12 percent of the population) that has been harboring Islamic terrorists. Kenya also hosts nearly 300,000 other refugees from Ethiopia, Sudan, Burundi and Congo. Many Kenyans feel that the rest of the world does not appreciate what a heavy burden this places on Kenya.

March 23, 2014: South of the central Somalia town of Baidoa al Shabaab gunmen stopped a vehicle carrying eight clan elders from a government conference. When the Islamic terrorists discovered the loyalties of the elders they killed them.

In Kenya (outside Mombasa) masked gunmen charged into a church and opened fire on the worshippers, leaving six dead and many wounded. This gunmen then left and moved wards another church nearby but before they could get into that church police showed up and the gunmen fled. The attackers were believed to be Islamic terrorists, most likely Somalis because they were yelling in a language the victims could not understand.

March 18, 2014: In the north (Buloburde) al Shabaab used a roadside bomb against soldiers and peacekeepers and killed eleven of them. In the south a suicide car bomber and some Islamic terrorist gunmen attacked a hotel housing peacekeepers and killed eight people. Four of the attackers were also killed. Both these attacks followed similar violence a few days earlier.
March 17, 2014: Outside of Mogadishu Islamic terrorists attacked peacekeepers with a suicide car bomb, killing four people.

March 15, 2014: In Mogadishu a suicide car bomber set off his explosives prematurely killing only himself.


March 14, 2014: Kenya deported three foreigners (from Belgium, France and Algeria) who had been arrested in 2013 as they attempted to get to Somalia to join al Shabaab.  The U.S. announced rewards of up to $3 million each for information on three al Shabaab leaders.