U.S. Shutdown Somalia's Internet.

[Az]

can they do this ?

[Roman]

I did not realise the US has got this much control over the internet.

Can they do this to any country?

[MattHiggs]

As there is no one central information or server point. No.

People were actually in the country doing the pracrical work themselves. There are pics there of it I think?

[Saint Marcus]

I never criticised America on their actions, I'm pro-American.

Yes, and so am I

You're fooling nobody here, trust me


Anyway, back on topic.

Very said to hurt the economy of one of the world's poorest countries even further. To my knowledge the US hasn't presented any evidence that this company was knowingly involved with any terrosist organisation. I do expect that some Al Qaida members had their accounts with that company, but I don't think it's entirely fair to punish a company in this way, and certainly not a company that's a vital part of Somalia's economy. Sure the man on the streets won't notice, but enterprising part certainly will, and that will certainly hurt it's economy even more.

It's amazing how the West manages to hurt the poorest countries in the world even more all the time. This goes for all western countries, certainly not just the USA. Mugabe might be a dictatorial madman, he does understand that his county's main enemy is the west, and he's certainly right. With the exception of international aid organisations and the UN, the west has caused nothing but more suffering for the world's poorest countries (with some exceptions of course)

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by Colon
I think you’re misjudging impact of the measures. As you could have read in the article, Al-Barakaat provides communication services and handles money international transfers. (besides, decent communication infrastructure is essential to financial transactions) Money transfers from relatives and sympathisers abroad are very often a lifeline for a poverty-stricken country and when that country also happens to have had a civil war and warlords roaming the south, one understands this is hardly trivial stuff to the man in the street, even if he has never heard of the internet.

The problem is exacerbated by the fact that the Muslim organisation in Somalia that US are targeting (like Al-Itihaad) have captured a crucial position (with their civil activities) in the little economic and social fabric left of the country, so this all is hardly trivial stuff.

I will agree that this is a shattering effort- however,

I would support a temporary shutdown, IF it is followed up by reorganizing the company and severing terrorist links-the reason for this is that:, you could probably accuseAmerican Airlines of supporting terrorists for allowing them to fly in their planes- this company may have some terrorists involved in it- but, the easy thing to do would be to limit their control, expel them, etc.

Thus, a shutdown of 1-2 weeks is reasonable- beyond that, it is gettingi nto heavyhandedness accusations.

[DanS]

How can you blame the cable providers for shutting down services when an outstanding balance is due and there is no hope for collection? Also, it's not the US government's fault that Somalia is Al Qaeda Disneyland. I am quite happy to see them shut down the umbrella financial group that supports OBL. They should be as heavy-handed as is necessary. The idea that you will give the terrorists the kid-glove treatment went out with September 11.

While I have sympathy for the plight of Somalis sending money home (there are quite a few in the US and Washington in particular), the fact that this is brought up is a demonstration that there is demand for the services. A clean company could exploit the situation.

[Colon™]

MarkL,
the man in the street will notice, estimates for incoming money transfers via the hawala system (see below) range from $200 to $600 million, while official humanitarian aid is only a couple dozens of millions a year. Transfers from abroad are the only source of income for a lot of Somalis.

Darkcloud, Dan,
there are other much smaller companies providing remittance services but Al-Barakaat also is the biggest post and telecom company so there will still be a serious disruption. Just as serious is that those companies, like Al-Bakaraat, use the informal hawalad banking system, on which the US is cracking down because they suspect it is abused to finance Al-Qaeda. So if a company wants to start providing the same services, it can’t use the hawala system if it wants to stay out of trouble but the problem that a lot of people simply cannot afford anything beyond the hawala system. (eg, money transfers to Pakistan costs 15% commission if you use an official service, but only 1-2% with hawala)

My guess is that you can wait quite some time before you get a proper official money transfer system and a lot of Somalis don’t have that luxury.

[DanS]

Colon: you're confusing the two issues. Al-Barakaat was shut down not because it uses an informal banking system but because it is a front for Al Qaeda. If they can't have a system for transferring money (or a post, or a telecom co) that isn't a front for Al Qaeda, then they'll not be able to participate in our monetary and business system. Full stop.

The ultimate irony is that millions of muslims in other countries are suffering because of the tolerance of outfits like Al-Barakaat.

[Saint Marcus]

MarkL,
the man in the street will notice, estimates for incoming money transfers via the hawala system (see below) range from $200 to $600 million, while official humanitarian aid is only a couple dozens of millions a year. Transfers from abroad are the only source of income for a lot of Somalis.

That's very sad indeed. The US has a war on their hands, and don't care about who will suffer as long as they aren't American citizens. No wonder the US is rather unpopular in many third world countries. Who suffers most from the Sept 11th attacks? Certainly not the US...but the poorest in the world. Afghanistan, Somalia, and probably lots of others too.

Europe isn't much better though, or any other western nation. So saying I'm biased and anti-American doesn't apply here, cause I'm also very disgusted about the things Europeans did and do in the third world.

[Roman]

What would the third world do without the west? It would be even poorer than now. About $300 billion is transfered annually from the West to poorer countries. Now that's a huge amount of money and I don't think West can possibly be expected to do any more.

[Colon™]

” Colon: you're confusing the two issues. Al-Barakaat was shut down not because it uses an informal banking system but because it is a front for Al Qaeda.”

And where’s the evidence? Aside of the general suspicion of the hawala system I haven’t seen any.

Besides, whether hawala was an important factor or not for seizing Al-Barakaat’s assets, the fact remains that US demands hawala to be placed under formal control, if not eradicated altogether, and that anyone providing the system is the line of fire.

”If they can't have a system for transferring money (or a post, or a telecom co) that isn't a front for Al Qaeda, then they'll not be able to participate in our monetary and business system. Full stop.”

This is Somalia, the country is already continuously on the edge of famine, and I think most ordinary people there have other priorities than sifting through the dealings of the company to find out whether it is or isn’t a front company for Al-Qaeda.

[Chris 62]

More kid stuff in this thread.

Quite simple: You ally with the OBL boys, you are our enemy, and we will f*ck you any way we can.

I'll shed a tear for Somalia when they start behaving like a civilized nation, instead of one that drags dead men through the streets while laughing and singing.

They danced with the devil, now they got their asses burned.

To damn bad.

For them.

[Stefan Härtel]

I'll shed a tear for Somalia when they start behaving like a civilized nation, instead of one that drags dead men
through the streets while laughing and singing.

Hmmm... risky statement. Somalia can't become a civilized nation because it isn't a nation at all. It's a union only on the map. We're dealing with an agglomeration of 8 major peoples here.

[axi]

They should not have linked themselves with terrorists.

The Americans linked them with the terrorists. There is a big difference in that. I could link you with the Pope of Rome or Pamela Anderson, if I don't need to give you any proof. It's all arbitrary anyway, isn't it?

[TCO]

Originally posted by Stefan Härtel

I'll shed a tear for Somalia when they start behaving like a civilized nation, instead of one that drags dead men
through the streets while laughing and singing.

Hmmm... risky statement. Somalia can't become a civilized nation because it isn't a nation at all. It's a union only on the map. We're dealing with an agglomeration of 8 major peoples here.

I think you and Chris are actually on the same page. Somalia is not a nation. It's a piece of land controlled by various rival tribes and warlords. As such it makes a great place to base terrorist ops out of.