ComingAnarchy.com

Sudan is scheduled to be cleaved in two, as previously posted on here, here and here. While many are celebrating this as a great move for freedom, the problem from the beginning has been deciding where Southern Sudan begins, as I noted in a previous post:

But where exactly is Southern Sudan? This is the bigger question that most news articles trumpeting the referendum are ignoring. The new border has not yet been precisely drawn, and beyond the local squabbles over grazing rights and water rights is the larger issue as the border will become the new border between Black Africa and the Arab World. The geographical margin is small, but any doubt leaves open the possibility of local violence that could mushroom into something much worse. The key hotspot is Abyei, a town located on the western most light blue box on the map below, and which is representative of a larger problem in what is increasingly likely to be a demarcation creating a new country in Southern Sudan.

There have been several reports over the past week about fighting erupting in multiple spots across the border. Abyei appears to be the most contested area, but there are stories of violence in a number of villages. And the United Nations Peacekeeping Force has a mandate that expires next month upon the scheduled independence of Southern Sudan, with Northern Sudan insisting that they leave by then. There is a proposal for an Ethiopian force to take its place.

The latest reports are that Sudan — which may soon be known as “Northern Sudan” — is gathering its forces near the disputed territories, and also reports that there could be genocide all over again in the border territories in the attempt to limit the territory that becomes Southern Sudan. As evidence that this is already occurring, the New York Times quotes a report that tens of thousands are fleeing, mass graves containing thousands of bodies have been found, and vigilante (or government forces) are going door-to-door in bordertowns to carry out executions on the spot.

So Sudan’s independence is not as smooth as some had expected, and as warned on these pages more recently. Independence — now scheduled for less than a month away — is not going to be easy.

One of Robert Young Pelton’s favourite authors — and I am certain referenced by Robert Kaplan — Britain’s greatest travel writer Patrick Leigh Fermor has died. He was eulogized this week by none other than Christopher Hitchens.

UPDATE: Kaplan on Fermor in the NYT.

I previously described the Gulf Cooperative Council (GCC) as the future EU of Arabia. It is certainly the most successful multinational cooperative body outside the EU, and is made up of the six monarchies of the Gulf: Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, and Oman. 25 May 2011 will mark the 30th anniversary of the organization’s founding.

For years there has been discussion that Yemen, the poorer republic to the south, could become a member state. And after the fall of Saddam, there was further discussion that Iraq could become a member as well. But both these candidate states have always seemed unlikely to me — they are republics that overthrew their monarchs, with larger and significantly poorer populations that make it an uneasy fit with the rest of the GCC.

But there has been much speculation in the news recently that the GCC could expand to include Jordan and Morocco. Jordan has officially submitted an application to become a member, and there is support and guidance for Morocco to submit an application soon.

There has been some criticism in international papers that the new members confirm the GCC as a club of monarchies. This could also increase the likelihood that democratic reformers inspired by Egypt and Tunisia will be subject to a Bahrain-like transnational army stopping protesters. But certainly Jordan stands to reap great economic benefits by tying up with the rich countries of the Gulf.

Endnote: Interestingly, a number of Gulf women fear that the admission of Jordan and Morocco to the GCC will result in the local men looking for wives in the two countries. With all the barriers for women in the Gulf countries to marry foreigners when compared to few restrictions on the men, an estimated 25% of men in the UAE are married to foreigners, causing a serious problem that has brought the spinster rate to as high as 30+%.

Osama’s “Will” was recently released by a Kuwaiti newspaper. The title of the document is misleading — a will, as a document that distributes assets and property, is not recognized in Islam, as inheritance must take place in accordance with Shariah principles. The document is in fact a final message to his children (not to join Al Qaeda) and wives (don’t remarry!). It was written in December 2001 — when Osama was on the run in Afghanistan and when he thought he might be killed. Notably, there is no message or mention of people such as Mullah Omar or Ayman Al Zawahiri, his comrades in arms in Afghanistan.

You can read an English translation of the will here. But without further commenting, reading the signing name, I thought this would be a good chance to introduce Arabic names. Osama signed the will as:

Abu Abdullah Osama bin Muhammad bin Laden

He is referred to in the Western press as Osama bin Laden? What do all the other names mean?

Arabic Names
On birth, in most Arabic countries that I’m familiar with, children are given one name. Osama bin Laden was named Osama at birth, and that was probably the only given name written on his birth certificate.

Osama’s father was Mohammed, so his name is extended to “bin Mohammed” (“ibn” is also used in place of “bin”). In some cases, the grandfather’s name will included as well. In some countries such as in the Levant, neither are used, resulting in a string of names.

(Other official spellings of his name are “Osama bin Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden” — Awad being his paternal grandfather.)

Bin Laden is the family name — unusual, in that it begins with “Bin”. A common beginning of tribal and family names in the Arab world is “Al”.

What about the first name, “Abu Abudallah”? When a man has a son in Arabic, he adopts that as part of his name used with friends. As Osama’s son was named Abdullah (after then-crown prince of Saudi Arabia Prince Abdullah), he adopts the name “Abu Abdullah.”

So if I was to Arabize my own name, it would be George bin Alfred Al Curzon — and as I had three daughters, some friends might call me Abu Mary. (Just remember that’s Sheikh George bin Alfred Al Curzon when addressing me properly.)

Arabic Romanization
Osama Bin Laden is also written as Usama or Bin Ladin, among other variants. That’s because Arabic has no unified system of romanization. Unlike Japanese, which has two or three majority schools of romanization used by various institutions, in Arabic, it’s a free-for-all when it comes to spelling in English. This causes all sorts of problems in today’s English-centric globalized world, as you can read about in more detail here.

Yesterday was the 41st Canadian General Election to elect members to the House of Commons of Canada in which the conservative government won what I would call a Koizumi-esque victory. The election saw a number of historical firsts, and may mark a turning point in Canadian political history.

The results for each of the main four parties were as follows:

Whereas previously elections in Canada were formed around the Conservatives and the Liberals, with Bloc Québécois as an interesting third-party spoiler, we now see a realignment between a genuine centre-right party (the Conservatives were created after the Progressive Conservative Party merged with another centre-right party in 2003) and the New Democrats taking their position as leading opposition party.

I call the victory of the conservatives “Koizumi-esque” because the election only came about the PM asked the Governor General to dissolve the house after the House of Commons passed a motion of non-confidence against the government, led by the Liberals. This non-confidence motion affirmed the charge of “contempt of parliament” found by the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs — the first time in the history of any Commonwealth nation that a government was found in contempt of parliament. Notwithstanding this charge, the popular vote was clear, and the Conservatives now have a solid majority from which to govern.

It was announced several hours ago that Osama Bin Laden was killed in a raid on his private compound on the outskirts of Islamabad, Pakistan. The raid was almost a year in the making, but the raid itself was over in 40 minutes.

Map from CBS News.

The compound was discovered by US Agents in August 2010 through detective work on the compound’s courier. Build in 2006, it was eight times larger than anything else in the area and was built at the end of a road. The building had no phone or Internet, had 18-foot high walls with no exterior windows, and two electrified security gates. On a third-floor balcony there was a 7-foot high privacy wall. The residents–Bin Laden, his youngest wife and their family, plus a courier and his brother, burned their garbage and it was not collected.

After discovering in August 2010, the CIA spent eight months of detective work until they came to the conclusion that the compound housed Bin Laden. It was built at cost of US$1 million, yet the courier and his brother had no explainable source of income.

The small team made up entirely of CIA personnel (the US military does not have authority to operate in Pakistan) went in with two Black Hawk helicopters. Pakistan was not informed of the raid beforehand, as the intelligence agency the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate has long been suspected by the US of maintaining links to groups close to al-Qaida.

A firefight ensued when bin Laden resisted and he, the couriers and several others were killed, possibly including bin Laden’s son. While one helicopter circled, it had mechanical failure before leaving the raid and was brought down. It was destroyed by its occupants before leaving the scene.

Muslim practice calls for a body to be buried within 24 hours of death, and U.S. officials have said that bin Laden has already been buried at sea in accordance with Islamic practices.

STRATFOR has a status update on the Mexican drug cartel wars, with an interesting animated map on developments over the past year.

The full report is only for subscribers, but the most important point in the summary report is: all cartels are suffering except one — the Sinaloa Federation. Although they may soon dominate the drug trade, the situation is likely to become more violent until the Sinaloa hegemony is complete.

STRATFOR reports that:

In order to reduce the violence, compromise with the lead cartel — once unspeakable — now looks like a real option for the Mexican government, which is incapable of eliminating cartels completely.

But that’s very inaccurate. Allegations of collusion between the Mexican government and the Sinaloa are at least two years old. More insidious is the fear that the favoritism towards the Sinaloa is because the Sinaloa have and continue to further their infiltration of the military and the police.

(See the map as of 2007 at a previous post here.)