The Red Folder

Archived from May 27, 2024.

Key stories for the week, brought to you by Lindsey Zhao and the Red Folder team.

Reading for the sake of reading sucks. Telling yourself to read to win a round is nice but ineffective. This condensed news brief helps you understand current domestic and international issues, analyze the news, and gives you opportunities to read more.

International Stories

3 key international stories for the week:

1) Somalia’s Struggle Against War and Climate Change Rowan Seipp

For the last decade, war-torn Somalia has dealt with every source of internal conflict imaginable, whether from Somaliland’s contentious territorial status, terror groups like Al-Shabaab, or civil conflict, peace has been elusive in a nation that has not held a central government since 1991. The failure of Somalia’s government and state has provided an ample breeding ground for piracy, drug trafficking, terror, and civil conflict against a population where 1 in 10 die before the age of five and where reaching 50 years of age seems like a lottery instead of a benchmark for most of the population. Amidst these crises, Somalia faces another existential problem that threatens to starve millions and worsen every other aforementioned conflict: climate change.

Rising temperatures and a climate change-driven lack of rain have exacerbated a multi-year drought that originated in 2015. Desertification in Somalia has resulted in repeated crop failures, resulting in 43000 deaths last year alone. Somalia has set itself as a clear-cut case for how climate change can wreak havoc upon the agricultural sectors of developing/equatorial nations with Somalia’s drought crisis reflecting the climate change-driven food insecurity that has struck the Sahel region. In addition to direct food insecurity, the drought has also raised the issue of deep poverty for millions within Somalia who look to subsistence agriculture as one of their only methods of financial sustainment.

On the opposite side of the spectrum, climate change-driven flooding in the Shabelle and Jubba rivers has displaced 219,000 people from their homes, thrusting even more into poverty. Despite the record wet season, the near decade-long drought is nowhere near a resolution as crop failures continue and the amount of rain from this year is considered a mere outlier. Thus, climate havoc and systemic poverty in Somalia have become inseparable from each other, as the drought has caused the deaths of 3.5 million livestock and gutted Somalia’s agricultural-focused society, contributing to the poverty rate of 70%.

The climate crisis is not constrained to the parched Somalian soil or the flooded bounds of the Jubba and Shabelle rivers but has now extended to the bloodshed that has raged upon those lands since 1991. According to the UN’s IOM program, drought has caused resource competition among individuals within communities, with farmers resorting to forming armed groups for illicit practices like cattle theft or fighting for land/water rights. The human cost of this type of violence is extensive, with an estimated 35-40% of all conflict in Somalia originating from intercommunal violence for resources. The Mudug region of Northern Somalia serves as a prime example, with over 100 deaths resulting from a clash between two clans over water rights. Climate-driven bloodshed also extends to the direct civil conflict between Somalia and the Islamist Al-Shabaab group.

Drought and the destruction of agriculture have resulted in the rural communities looking to the charcoal trade as a means of selling a fuel source for financial sustainment. Unfortunately, Al Shabaab has monopolized the trade and turned it into a means of revenue, earning 56 million dollars yearly off of taxing and trading with Somali communities. Despite the African Union’s best efforts to crack down on the trade, its persistence allows Al-Shabaab to sustain its conflict against the government at the expense of thousands of civilian casualties. Furthermore, with the African Union pulling its ATMIS mission, which has constrained Al-Shabaab to Southern Somalia, Al-Shabaab will likely escalate the conflict and drain even more aid resources, leaving the underlying drought crisis unaddressed.

Overall, the international community merely has to pull back the curtains to reveal the underlying climate crisis that resides under Somalia’s circular violence and instability crisis, with resolving the climate-driven drought increasingly becoming a prerequisite to reducing violence. Somalia and its 17.6 million people now find themselves trapped in a vicious cycle of crisis, with each new one feeding into the previous.

Read more here:

2) ISIS-K and Tajikistan Rowan Seipp

In March of this year, the Russian rock group Picnic was set to perform at Crocus City Hall music venue in Krasnogorsk, Moscow, and Oblast, Russia. What happened instead was a catastrophic terrorist attack. In a nation already ravaged by the problems of war, Russia was put into panic mode. Rumors swelled that Ukraine was behind the attack but ultimately the attackers were discovered to be from the terror group ISIS-K. 12 of them were Tajiks. This caused swift retribution.

Human rights organizations and Tajik officials have reported rising levels of xenophobia against Central Asians in Russia following the terrorist attack on the Crocus City Hall concert venue that left 144 people dead and hundreds more injured. Russian investigators say the assault -- Russia's worst terrorist attack in two decades was carried out by four men, all Tajik nationals. Other detainees are being held for aiding and abetting the attackers. This swung the spotlight firmly on the central Asian nation and raised serious questions about why Tajikistan was such a hotbed of terrorism. Effectively there are two reasons- A. how ISIS-K operates in the region, and B. pre-existing xenophobic rhetoric that makes radicalization easier.

ISIS-K operates as one of the most interesting terror groups in the world. Unlike IS, ISIS-K doesn't rely on a central command. While their message is the same as IS- “global Jihad against the West”- they fundamentally differ in how they enact their plans. While IS launches sweeping attacks in Brussels and Paris, ISIS-K works by recruiting locally and collecting taxes. Instead of one large caliphate, ISIS-K runs many semi-autonomous groups that they control. This poses a unique advantage because now ISIS-K has a local connection to the regions they run. In other words, people are more likely to work with a terrorist if the terrorist is their beloved neighbor. In its peak year of 2018, the number of ISIS-K members was estimated at several thousand fighters and their families.

While ISIS-K has a unique system that allows them to acquire fighters, they still need to radicalize them. Central Asia is practically the melting pot of xenophobia, allowing for radicalization. In Central Asia, radical Islam’s socio-political background has facilitated its development. This is because the movement seemed to be a remedy for those countries’ economic situation and the authoritarian local regimes. Other important elements that curbed its development included Central Asia’s strong social conservatism and the strong focus on this problem by the local regimes’ extensive security apparatuses.

Ironically, however, it's Russia that allows the radicalization to happen the best. Many migrants feel discrimination against them by Russian security. Along with that, many migrants are forcefully recruited by the Russian army for the war effort. Considering that most people don't want to migrate to a country to fight in a war, it's no secret why many Tajik migrants feel anger toward the Russian state. This is perfect for ISIS-K, who give them a place to violently express that hatred.

Read more here:

3) Promising Peace Talks or Another Putin Palter? Ella Fulkerson

Vladimir Putin is one of the least diplomatic presidents a country has ever seen. Despite this, in recent weeks, Putin has begun to signal his openness to peace talks. Given the desperate need for peace between Ukraine and Russia, one might expect a positive response. However, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky remains wary. This caution raises a crucial question: What is the context of Putin’s remarks, and why isn't President Zelensky more receptive to them? To understand this, it's crucial to investigate the background of Putin's recent statements and President Zelensky's cautious response.

The history of the Ukraine-Russia conflict is a complex tapestry of diplomatic struggles, historical grievances, and strategic maneuvers by multiple state actors. This context is crucial for analyzing the current situation. Putin’s proposed peace talks involve the alleged capability of withdrawing Russian forces from parts of Ukraine. This overture came shortly after he visited Belarus to meet with President Alexander Lukashenko. This development is significant for several reasons. Firstly, it echoes a similar situation in 2022 when meetings between Putin and Lukashenko preceded Russia's use of Belarusian territory to launch attacks on Ukraine.

This historical context explains President Zelensky’s cautious stance towards the current peace overtures. The past has shown that Putin's peace talks can be a prelude to further aggression rather than genuine attempts at resolution, and recent events have further complicated the situation. Russia has launched another round of attacks on Ukraine, undermining the credibility of Putin's peace gestures. These actions raise legitimate doubts about the sincerity of Putin's intentions and highlight the urgency of finding a lasting resolution to the conflict. President Zelensky's diplomatic efforts add another layer of complexity.

In a strategic move, Zelensky has sought to align Ukraine more closely with China as a counterbalance to Russian influence. This geopolitical maneuver underscores the broader implications of the conflict. Aligning with China could give Ukraine a powerful ally, strengthening its position in any negotiations with Russia. However, it also complicates the dynamics of the peace talks as the interests of multiple global powers become intertwined. Zelensky's caution is not just a matter of distrust but a calculated approach in a profoundly complex geopolitical landscape. In light of these developments, all parties involved must approach the prospect of peace talks with the utmost diligence and a steadfast commitment to achieving a sustainable and just resolution. The stakes are incredibly high, not just for Ukraine and Russia but for the entire region and beyond.

It is obvious that while peace talks are undeniably necessary, the crucial question remains whether Putin's openness can be trusted. This uncertainty underscores the need for careful and strategic planning in any potential peace negotiations. The international community must support efforts that ensure any peace agreement is robust, verifiable, and sustainable, addressing the immediate cessation of hostilities and the underlying issues that have fueled the conflict and, inevitably, stop the war in its entirety.