Clarification on Poaching

[Guest guest]

Sorry, I have made a mistake. Hamas is a Sunni group that has differences

with Hezbollah, a Shiite militia. Being Sunni would certainly bring Hamas

and al Qaida closer in their goals of poaching, amongst other things. The

militia movement in Somalia would thus appear to be Sunni. But Sunni Islamic

groups have their differences too.Nevertheless, it most surely is a

revelation that both Hamas and al Qaida are involved in wildlife

trafficking.

 

 

On 4/26/07, Merritt Clifton <anmlpepl wrote:

 

> >You say, " In Kenya, the major poaching factions aligned themselves

> >with the same Somali militias as al Qaida and Hamas. " Please

> >correct me if I am mistaken, but as I understand, Hamas is a Shia

> >group and al Qaida is a Sunni group and they have very different

> >objectives and political goals. They have never cooperated with each

> >other for any common cause.

>

> That is correct. They do not cooperate with each other any

> more than the ethnic Irish mobsters led by Bugs Moran cooperated with

> the ethnic Italian mobsters led by Al Capone in Chicago during the

> Roaring Twenties, and like the Chicago mobsters of that place and

> time, they do sometimes kill each other in territorial disputes.

>

> Nonetheless, both are engaged in the same kinds of criminal

> traffic in the same region, & long have been. Hamas appears to have

> been involved in trafficking rhino horn first, going back into the

> 1980s. Al Qaida saw the money to be made from trafficking in

> wildlife parts, & several years later found their own Somali

> militias to work with.

>

>

>

> > I would also be grateful if you could share some statistics on the

> success

> >or failure of 'shoot to kill' policies in preventing poaching in national

> >parks in Asia compared to those in Africa.

>

> Shoot-to-kill anti-poaching edicts prevailed in Zimbabwe,

> Kenya, South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, and Zambia from 1984 into

> the early 1990s. At least 160 alleged poachers were killed in

> Zimbabwe and 130 in Kenya, with no data available from the other

> shoot-to-kill nations.

>

> The first problem with the shoot-to-kill policies was that

> they gave anyone carrying anything that might look like a weapon

> cause to flee from anyone resembling a ranger or landowner.

>

> Among the " poachers " at constant risk were truck drivers

> lightly armed for self-defense against bandits--or lions and leopards

> if obliged to sleep outdoors after a breakdown. Serious poachers

> meanwhile improved their armament and shot back at the rangers.

>

> During the shoot-to-kill years, many international nonprofit

> organizations funded private anti-poaching militias. ANIMAL PEOPLE

> extensively examined the history of private anti-poaching militias in

> an April 1999 cover feature entitled " Can mercenary management stop

> poaching in Africa? "

>

> The weight of experience involving at least seven militias

> funded by private conservationists between the mid-1980s and the

> present indicates that they do not increase respect for law and

> order, may provide cover for covert operations to destabilize

> governments, import weapons and equipment which easily disappear

> without a trace (including helicopters), and in some instances hire

> individuals whose chief interest in fighting poachers may be to

> reduce the competition.

>

> Over time, ANIMAL PEOPLE found, the short-term achievements

> of anti-poaching militias were offset by catastrophic failures,

> especially at the political level after mercenaries abused the public

> trust.

>

> I'll be happy to forward " Mercenary management " to anyone

> interested.

>

> --

> Merritt Clifton

> Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

> P.O. Box 960

> Clinton, WA 98236

>

> Telephone: 360-579-2505

> Fax: 360-579-2575

> E-mail: anmlpepl

> Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org

>

> [ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing

> original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,

> founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the

> decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations.

> We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year;

> for free sample, send address.]

>