Story here. It’s all part of the ongoing civil war/coup crisis in Mali. Not that I have a side, but it’s just too good a headline not to use! 
It’s a shame that this is happening to Mali. We spent two years in Bamako and traveled to different areas of the country without problem. The government was stable and the people poor, but peaceful. Since it’s Muslim, alcohol-related problems were practically non-existent. The Tuaregs have acted up before, as they feel somewhat disenfranchised. That’s what happens when you try to channel nomads into an agrarian lifestyle. Back then they were easily supressed because they weren’t well armed. That’s changed, and the Malian army isn’t up to the task. It would be sad if the country turns into another military dictatorship with another African Big Man at the helm.
Why did anyone try?!
The stated reasons tend to involve population growth, and the desertification caused by increased numbers of nomads in that part of the world. More cynically, I would guess that it’s just part of basic political rivalry between the south and the north.
By at least some reports, the Touareg remain a slave society, I think.
I suspect some of this unrest in Mali is a direct result of the fall of Muammar Gaddafi.
Am I the only one who thought this was going to be about Volkswagen SUVs?
Well, yeah. That was all over the news. The Tuareg are armed with his leftover arsenal.
I can say this- there is more going on around there than we see. I was in Timbuktu in 2007, and it was crawling with US covert ops then.
I have no idea what is going on, but it’s something. This is not a straightforward story.
Which side would the U.S. be on, here?
They’re apparently imposing Sharia law, as well, which doesn’t bode well for women.
A report on the status of US troops in Mali.
Only half a dozen, if this is to be believed.
But, other than that, what reason would the U.S. have to take sides in Mali?
Because Mali is one of the few stable governments in the region, with an elected president, and which is friendly to American interests in the region.
Troops don’t usually do the covert ops. It’s my understanding (which admittedly isn’t based on much more than spending four days stuck on a cargo boat to Timbuktu hanging out with the poorest people in the world and their slaves) that there is a large intelligence presence.
The official story is we are helping Mali fight “Al Queda” in the desert. For example in 2009 the USgave five million dollars worth of military equipment to Mali for this purpose. The US has provided a lot of military support to Mali.
Personally, I’m not particularly convinced that is all that is going on. I’m pretty sure half the “Al Queda in the Mahgreb” incidents that get as far down as Mali are basically the same bandits and thieves that have roamed the desert robbing and kidnapping people forever, perhaps now emboldened to try to live up to the sexy new name we’ve given them. Wouldn’t you rather be “Al Queda” than "Bob’s band of bandits?"The area we are talking about is extremely, extremely poor and disorganized, and the people of the area largely practice a very tolerant, very relaxed Sufi-influenced version of Islam infused with mysticism and traditional religion. While there are some fundamentalist groups, the region as a whole is not open to radicalization. This is not the full story.
I have no idea why we are so invested in this conflict, or what side we are on. But I’m fairly confidence at some point in the future we will learn there has been a lot more going on. I’d guess it will involve uranium, and I know it has involved Libya. But I’m guessing we are seeing cold-war style realpolitik behind a lot of our involvement.
The NYT is reporting a split in rebel factions, between a secular group and an Islamist group, with the latter imposing sharia in the areas they are currently controlling.
Well, it ain’t so stable now. 
Aren’t there any countries in Africa that never have military coups?!
I’m hard-pressed to come up with one. Mali was kind of a shining example of how an African nation could govern itself without things blowing up in its face. Toure was duly elected in 2002 and re-elected in 2007, then forced to leave office before his second term expired. By most accounts he was a good leader and kept the peace for most of those eight years. Unlike Museveni (in Uganda), he didn’t yield to temptation and declare himself president for life, a move that didn’t please either the West or his own people. Africa is a difficult place to analyze, even for many experts.
Just four days ago Macky Sall beat Abdoulaye Wade (also known on the SDMB as the inviter of Haitian displaced and designer of this eye sore) in the Senegal general elections. In all of Senegal’s 50 years of independence it has never had a coup.
Both the NYtimes and the Economist had stories on democracy in africa due to this recent election.