The Algerian Bombings: Targeting Europe?

Interesting article in TIME online:

With 15 years of a violent civil war against Islamist radicals, Algeria had attempted to preempt the dangers posed by the extremists by offering amnesties and granting religious authorities more influence in local government and social affairs. "They were hoping to buy peace at home by avoiding conflict with the AQIM," sniffs the French official. "Today's bombing was the AQIM's way of saying, 'Ha, ha — fooled you. Now you're going to pay.'"

The French look askance at Algeria's policy of accommodating Islamist sentiments (the French also feel the same about Britain's stance of tolerating extremists organizations as long as Islamist terror spares the U.K.). They say that the effort to "placate radicals" resulted in a chilling of relations with France — one consequence of which has been "choking off counterterror cooperation down to virtually nothing." Says the French intelligence official, "It simply gave extremists the space and time to regroup, recruit, raise money, and plan something spectacular."

(...) The French are cognizant that a resurgent jihad in Algiers means greater danger to French interests, citizens and territory. Indeed, since December 2006, AQIM had expanded attacks from small local targets to international interests in Algeria, including the December machine-gunning of a bus full of Halliburton employees and the March bombing of vehicles transporting Russian oil industry workers. Says the French official, "If the particulars of this attack are almost surely internally Algerian, the wider consequences just as logically apply to us. We're aware of that risk and have been anticipating it. But as today shows, you can never anticipate enough."

In this context: a must-read from Mathias Doepfner, publisher of WELT ("...und Deutschland toleriert sich zu Tode"). Germany, so Dopfner's message, practices too much tolerance vis-a-vis Iran and radical Islam.

Well, the U.S. in the last decades rarely enjoyed the privilege of too much tolerance from the German elites in politics and the media...

Comments

[Arnaud]

Thomas Dopfner should really spend more time writing editorials. Every time the guy picks up his pen, he is right on target.
Him being such a no non-sense guy, I am not surprised he is so successful running his media giant company.
Just imagine the German media scene without Axel Springer!!! God forbid.

[marisa]

Buckeye Abroad was right on target (last post) when he said "...and accept that war is sometimes the only answer. You cannot rationalize with an enemy who wants nothing from you except your destruction."

Ahmadinejad, like Saddam, is an evil man. I really don't understand why Germany thinks that negotiating with him will make him change his mind about the destruction of Israel. What can they possibly offer him in order to change his ideology?

[FranzisM]

La France never became independent from her former colonies, if the jihad wins these, it can can also devour the motherland from within its feelings of postcolonial shame.

Actually, this is already happening.

[neocon]

The society tries to convince us that strength causes violence.
On the contrary, it is appeasement and weakness that causes violence.
I recommend the article "Britain was once Great Britain"

As about "War is not the answer", there were many times in history when only war helped (WWI, WWII, to mention just some of them)

[joe]

Why would anyone want to target Europe?

[joe]

I see the BMS is back in the news in Germany. Germany wants to be a NATO undertaking. I have to ask myself why. The only reason I can conclude is Germany along with other members of the chocolate summit can use this fourm to prevent its deployment.

Hopefully the US has learned a lesson based on how Germany operates not to fall for this trick/trap.

[joe]

I see the BMS is back in the news in Germany. Germany wants this to be a NATO undertaking. I have to ask myself why. The only reason I can conclude is Germany along with other members of the chocolate summit can use this fourm to prevent its deployment.

Hopefully the US has learned a lesson based on how Germany operates in NATO not to fall for this trick/trap.

I am sure the US would fully support the deployment of an European BMS under the control of the EU.

[beimami]

marisa writes, "I really don't understand why Germany thinks that negotiating with him will make him change his mind about the destruction of Israel."

What makes you think that the German government REALLY cares if he changes his mind about that?

[marisa]

Destruction of Israel = no peace and stability. Germany’s foreign policy is all about bringing peace and stability to the world through dialogue (wouldn’t it be nice if it always worked?) They believe in Israel’s right to exist and if everybody just sits down and talks and behaves responsibly, then everything will be fine. And if Ahmadinejad misbehaves? Not to worry, the UN will deal with him, you know, through more dialogue.

Here's Steinmeier’s speech to the UN in Sept. 2006 where he outlines Germany's foreign policy: http://www.germany.info/relaunch/politics/speeches/092206.html. I would sum it up as “we can all just get along.”

[FranzisM]

beimami - What makes you think that Bush really cares to be more principled towards Israel than Pelosi?

I am not sure what to make of this Bush/Pelosi situation in the U.S.A. - on one hand it helps Americans to better understand the Merkel/Steinmeier shizophrenia, but on the other hand it leaves America with similiar difficulties.

[FranzisM]

joe - The rationale behind targeting Europe is, from the terrorist point of view you need to have Europe on your side to successfully draw a Hitler moustache on your enemy. European history has produced the archetype of evil,which has become the most valuable propaganda asset on the planet.

I shall in this context bring to your attention Hans Filbinger:

In a statement, Merkel said she wished that “beyond honoring the great life’s work of premier Hans Filbinger, critical questions about the Nazi era had also been posed.” She said this was especially important “out of respect for the feelings of the victims” of the Nazi regime.

Öttinger had outraged political and religious leaders on Wednesday when he claimed that “there is no verdict that Hans Filbinger handed down that led to someone losing his life.” Evidence directly contradicts this claim, as Nazi-era documents show that Filbinger was involved -- as a judge and prosecutor -- in death sentences against deserters during World War II.

Öttinger claimed during the eulogy that Filbinger was not a real Nazi, but like millions of other Germans was forced to bow to the pressure of the times.

Note that Filbinger personally attacked Merkel, by signing a petition* printed in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of Oct 2, 1993*, because the Familienministerium under her leadership was planning to publish a booklet blacklisting the VPM* as a dangerous psychocult. (For the Americans, if you know Larouche, then you have a good idea of VPM too.)

This is how a political leader pushing her party to put down the baggage of bigotry looks like.

[Doug]

Öttinger claimed during the eulogy that Filbinger was not a real Nazi, but like millions of other Germans was forced to bow to the pressure of the times.

Of course he wasn't. There were no real Nazis. It was all a big misunderstanding due to the pressure of "the times". Pressure from somewhere else, someone else who wasn't even German at all. Not really.

[joe]

With the continued revision of history, which is taking place in Germany, I thought the only real Nazis were Austrians.

Have I missed something again?

[FranzisM]

joe - Ali Larijani at the Munich conference talked about "Mr. Al Bradaie and other Europeans." If Mohamed El Baradei counts as an European, then he would be an Austrian, because that´s where his office is. Could this be the real Nazi you have missed?