Think Forward.

Ukraine et Soudan : deux conflits, deux regards différents... 3057

Aziz Daouda, 8 mon.
L’ensemble du monde occidental s’est retrouvé à Washington il y a quelques jours. Le président Trump cherche depuis son retour à sauver ce qui reste de l’Ukraine, et les Européens ne veulent véritablement pas que cela se fasse dans leur dos. Faute de jouer un rôle déterminant ils veulent au moins être là. I y va de leur crédibilité et surtout de leur image vis à vis du reste du monde. Surchauffée par une Europe à la langue plus longue que le bras, une Europe de plus en plus impuissante, l’Ukraine a subi, puis mené, une guerre qu’elle pensait remporter avec l’appui de l’Occident. A aujourd'hui elle a perdu 20% de son territoire et ce n'est pas fini. Au lieu que Volodymyr (Zelensky) aille traiter directement avec Vladimir (Poutine), il a cru plus malin d’aller chercher appui chez ceux qui, en fait, étaient déjà dans l’insuffisance depuis qu’ils ont délégué leur défense à l’OTAN, donc aux États-Unis. Les Européens vont l’apprendre à leurs dépens : on ne fait pas la guerre quand on n’en a pas les moyens. Ce même monde ne pipe mot sur ce qui se passe au Soudan. C’est moins «intéressant». Deux généraux, n’en portant que le nom, se sont lancés dans une compétition militarisée pour prendre le pouvoir, quelques jours seulement après avoir signé un accord pour se le partager. Depuis, la situation a évolué. Chaque jour, des vies sont perdues, des femmes violées, et des millions de personnes n’ont plus que l’errance dans le désert comme refuge... Pour le monde occidental, peut-être — je précise bien, peut-être — il ne s’agit que d’Africains qui, pour la plupart, se croient Arabes, et qui s’entretuent. La guerre au Soudan, particulièrement dans la région du Darfour, reste l’un des conflits les plus dramatiques et meurtriers depuis son déclenchement en avril 2023. Cette guerre oppose principalement deux forces rivales : les Forces armées soudanaises (SAF), dirigées par Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, et les Forces de soutien rapide (FSR), menées par Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, dit « Hemedti », ancien chef des milices Janjaweed. Ces dernières, avec leurs milices arabes alliées, sont responsables de massacres massifs, notamment à l’encontre des populations massalit et d’autres groupes non arabes du Darfour. En fait, ceux qui se considèrent comme arabes tuent et chassent de leurs terres ceux qu’ils ne reconnaissent pas comme leurs semblables. La BBC vient de consacrer une enquête à ce sujet et a produit un documentaire qui interpelle la conscience collective, si, bien sûr, ce qui reste de conscience humaine prenait le temps de le voir. Le conflit est essentiellement une lutte de pouvoir entre les deux chefs militaires, qui avaient signé faut il le rappeler un pacte pour gouverner ensemble le pays. Le basculement dans les affrontements armés a été brutal et s’est étendu à plusieurs régions, notamment au Darfour, où les FSR et leurs alliés sont accusés de graves exactions. Les Janjaweed, milices se disant arabes auparavant soutenues par Omar El-Béchir, ancien président du Soudan, sont à nouveau actives sous la bannière des FSR, perpétrant des violences à caractère ethnique dont ils ne se cachent même pas. Sont également concernés dans l'affaire, le Mouvement de libération du Soudan (ALS/SLM), rebelles historiques du Darfour, fragmentée entre Minni Minnawi et Abdelwahid Mohamed al-Nur. Les massacres sont d’une ampleur terrifiante. Selon l’ONU, à Al-Geneina, capitale du Darfour occidental, entre 10 000 et 15 000 civils massalit ont été tués entre juin et novembre 2023 par les FSR et les milices arabes alliées. Plus largement, on compte plus de 150 000 morts en deux ans dans tout le Darfour, avec 13 millions de déplacés, soit la moitié de la population soudanaise, poussés au bord de la famine. Des ONG comme Médecins Sans Frontières alertent sur le risque imminent de massacres dans des villes comme El-Fasher, lourdement assiégée. Les violences comprennent également des destructions d’infrastructures civiles, écoles, mosquées. Les exactions sexuelles systématiques sont un autre aspect du massacre. Suite à une attaque meurtrière il y a quelques jours, Médecins Sans Frontières vient d’ailleurs de fermer le seul hôpital encore en fonction à Zalengei, chef-lieu de la région, rendant impossible toute activité médicale. Ce n’est pas le premier hôpital à fermer ainsi. Malgré les preuves abondantes de crimes de guerre et de crimes contre l’humanité, la réaction internationale reste largement inefficace. Si les États-Unis et l’ONU reconnaissent officiellement la gravité du génocide, leurs interventions directes et sanctions restent timides. L’Union africaine et l’ONU peinent à déployer des forces capables d’imposer la paix et de faire respecter le droit international. Les pays arabes, quant à eux, n’exercent aucune pression notable sur Hemedti ou Burhan, ce dernier jouant un rôle de poids au Soudan depuis longtemps. Ce silence est dénoncé comme une complicité par de nombreux observateurs, qui y voient une forme de racisme institutionnel dévalorisant les vies africaines, en particulier celles des populations massalit victimes des FSR. Le fait que Hemedti et ses alliés se réclament «arabes» en s’attaquant aux groupes dits «africains» contribue, selon certains, à l’indifférence des pays arabes, plus préoccupés par leurs dynamiques régionales que par les droits humains. Les organisations musulmanes internationales aussi n’ont pas non plus pris position avec force, malgré l’instrumentalisation fréquente des arguments religieux par les belligérants. Le conflit est également marqué par une contradiction religieuse profonde: le meurtre, l’injustice et la guerre entre musulmans sont formellement condamnés par l’islam, sauf en cas de légitime défense ou de lutte contre l’oppression. Or, les massacres perpétrés au Darfour sont régulièrement dénoncés comme contraires à ces principes par des intellectuels et leaders religieux musulmans, sans que ces condamnations aient un impact concret sur la violence. Le conflit a provoqué la plus grande crise humanitaire mondiale actuelle, avec les 13 millions de déplacées. L’accès aux soins, à la nourriture et aux abris, reste plus que limité. Les populations civiles vivent dans une insécurité extrême, prises dans des luttes ethniques et politiques instrumentalisées par des chefs de guerre assoiffés de pouvoir. La communauté internationale, les pays arabes et les acteurs musulmans semblent manquer à leurs responsabilités, laissant se perpétuer cette tragédie sous un silence inquiétant. Cet état de fait interroge non seulement la conscience collective mondiale, mais aussi la capacité réelle des institutions internationales à protéger les populations les plus vulnérables face à des violences d’une telle ampleur. La situation au Darfour et dans le reste du Soudan reste un cri d’alarme urgent à ne pas ignorer. L'espoir est que soit arrêtée au plus vite la guerre en Ukraine mais également au Soudan car là aussi se sont des générations innocentes qui paient le prix de la violence guerrière.
Aziz Daouda Aziz Daouda

Aziz Daouda

Directeur Technique et du Développement de la Confédération Africaine d'Athlétisme. Passionné du Maroc, passionné d'Afrique. Concerné par ce qui se passe, formulant mon point de vue quand j'en ai un. Humaniste, j'essaye de l'être, humain je veux l'être. Mon histoire est intimement liée à l'athlétisme marocain et mondial. J'ai eu le privilège de participer à la gloire de mon pays .


10200

33.0

April 6: The Moroccan Idea That Conquered the World... 285

Aziz Daouda, 1 d.
- Society - Sports -
2.2 min read.
April 6 is now etched into the global calendar as the International Day of Sport for Development and Peace. A celebration championed by the United Nations, echoed across all continents, and enthusiastically embraced by millions of athletes, institutions, and enthusiasts. Yet behind this worldwide recognition lies an origin that often goes unnoticed. It’s a Moroccan idea, that of Hamid Kamal Lahlou. The irony is striking. While the world fervently celebrates this day, Morocco—the birthplace of the initiative—sometimes seems to lag behind, as if hesitating to fully claim its paternity. Yes, there have been scattered initiatives and events here and there. But they fall far short of what we might have hoped for. We won’t list the few organized manifestations, so as not to ruffle feathers by omitting any. In any case, there are no major events from the sports authorities, such as the ministry, the National Olympic Committee, or the major Royal Moroccan Sports Federations. Is this simply an oversight, or a more subtle form of distancing? The question deserves to be asked, especially when you know the personality of its originator. Kamal Lahlou is not a consensual figure. Journalist, sports leader, communicator, he has established himself over decades as a singular voice in Morocco’s media and sports landscape. His career is dense: former handball player, originally a physical education teacher and inspector, committed actor in the development of national sports, he has held important responsibilities, notably within the Moroccan National Olympic Committee and the Association of African National Olympic Committees. He remains president of the Royal Moroccan Weightlifting Federation and vice-president of the Mohammed VI Sports Champions Foundation. But beyond titles and roles, it’s his words that stand out and his stance that impresses. Direct, clear, often critical, Lahlou disturbs as much as he inspires. He practices neither doublespeak nor complacency. In an environment where restraint is sometimes elevated to an implicit rule, his frankness cuts through. He points out shortcomings, challenges decision-makers, and defends a demanding vision of sport as a lever for development and national influence. This positioning has earned him as many admirers as detractors and doubtless even more denigrators. Some praise his courage and consistency, others reproach him for a tone deemed too incisive. Still others find nothing to fault him for, yet behind his back, lavish him with gratuitous reprimands. But all agree on one point: Kamal Lahlou is an incontournable figure, impossible to ignore. His patriotism admits no ambiguity. Behind every statement, every critique, emerges a clear ambition: to see the Kingdom take the place it deserves on the international sports scene. The April 6 Day fits precisely into this logic. By proposing to dedicate a date to sport as a vector for peace and development, Lahlou sought not personal legitimation, but recognition of the fundamental role sport can play in modern societies. He thus transcribed, in his own way, the royal vision of sport and the role the country can play on a universal scale in service of peace. So why this relative discretion in Morocco around this day? Is it the price to pay for free speech? The backlash of rivalries that have no place? An implicit way to marginalize a figure deemed too independent? A means to silence an ambitious voice? Or simply a deficit of collective memory? Whatever the answers, or the answer, one reality remains. April 6 is an idea born in Morocco, carried by a Moroccan, and adopted by the entire world. At a time when the country seeks to strengthen its soft power and highlight its successes, it might be time to reconcile origin and celebration. For recognizing this initiative to Kamal Lahlou is not just about honoring a man. Does he really need it? It’s rather about embracing a part of contemporary national and global sports history, and reminding that beyond infrastructure and performances, ideas too can change the world. And if it’s the Kingdom of Morocco at the origin, that’s even better.

Mediterranean: The Great Erasure of the Amazigh in Eurocentric Historical Narrative... 782

Aziz Daouda, 3 d.
- Politics - History - Society -
2.9 min read.
The history of relations between the two shores of the Mediterranean is deeply biased. Behind the lazy opposition between a supposedly dynamic North and a South relegated to the margins lies a more serious omission: **the systematic erasure of the determining role of the Amazighs (Berbers, Moors) in the formation of Mediterranean Europe**. This erasure is neither neutral nor accidental; it stems from a genuine ideological construct. Long before the colonial era, Amazigh populations structured most of North African space and held a central place in the political, military, commercial, and cultural dynamics of the Mediterranean, forming essential pillars of its history. They ensured an almost continuous link between sub-Saharan Africa and the northern Mediterranean. From Al-Andalus to medieval Sicily, their imprint is deep and enduring. A symbol of this centrality, the conquest of the Iberian Peninsula in the 8th century was led by Tariq ibn Ziyad (as named in the sources) at the head of a predominantly Amazigh army. Chronicles emphasize its largely Berber composition. This reality is systematically downplayed in favor of an Arab-centered narrative that invisibilizes the predominant Amazigh component. Without the Amazighs, there simply would have been no lasting Muslim implantation in Western Europe and the subsequent impacts. Reducing Al-Andalus to a mere outgrowth of the "Arab world" is a grave falsification by oversimplification. The dynasties that drove its golden age, foremost the Almoravids and Almohads, were of Amazigh origin. Emerging from Saharan and Atlas Berber confederations, they refounded the political balances of North Africa and Al-Andalus, building a Hispano-Moorish civilization that remains vibrant today. This fundamentally Amazigh civilization marked urban and monumental architecture, still visible in Seville, Marrakech, Fez, or Cordoba. It structured religious and legal thought with reformist Malikism among the Almoravids, doctrinal rigor among the Almohads for Muslims, and Maimonides' thought for Jews. It also durably impacted the political and military organization of the western Mediterranean. Southern Spain and Portugal still bear visible and toponymic traces of this Amazigh presence today. Ignoring them mutilates a deeply shared history. To refresh this memory, what better than a little tour of Spain's Extremadura. This influence did not stop at the Andalusian shores. In Sicily and southern Italy in general, particularly Palermo, interactions between North African worlds and European spaces were constant during Islamic and then Norman periods, via military contingents, trade networks, and knowledge transfers. These circulations included a significant Amazigh component, often retroactively dissolved into the vague formula of "Arab influence." Couscous is still present there, accompanied by orange blossom almond sweets. By speaking indistinctly of "Arabs," dominant narratives erase the real plurality of actors and obliterate the African depth of these exchanges. This erasure stems from several cumulative biases. First, **Eurocentrism** and the inability to admit that African populations were co-founders of Mediterranean Europe. Second, **historiographical Arabocentrism** and the tendency to homogenize the Muslim world by invisibilizing its non-Arab components, primarily the Amazighs. Finally, **colonial legacy**, with the need to smooth and hierarchize narratives to legitimize a supposed European civilizational superiority. The result is clear: the Amazighs are relegated to a secondary, folkloric, or local role, even though they were structuring actors of the western Mediterranean. Their impact is unequivocally one of the most important in the region's history. Correcting this bias does not boil down to adding a "Berber" chapter to already-written history books. The narration itself must be reconfigured. It involves reinscribing the Amazighs at the heart of the Mediterranean narrative. Southern Europe is not solely the heir to Rome and Christianity. It is also, in part, the product of North African contributions, particularly Amazigh ones, visible in its political structures, urban landscapes, culinary and clothing arts, certain names, and imaginaries. Isn't the name Maurice an example of indelible impact? The western Mediterranean must be conceived as a space of co-construction, not as a theater of unilateral diffusion from North to South. Recognizing this is not a reflex of identity politics or any ideological claim, but a minimal requirement of scientific rigor. Mediterranean history has been flattened to serve power logics, at the cost of extreme simplification of trajectories and actors. The Amazighs are among the great erased, if not the only ones excluded. Fully reintegrating them into the narrative is not "rewriting" history in the sense of distorting it: it is **repairing** it, by restoring to the Mediterranean its African depth and true complexity. This approach is essential to ease relations in the region and build a solid future for its populations, whether in political, economic, or simply human terms. For centuries, this unbalanced narrative has permeated academic, media, and political discourses. Yet the Mediterranean has always been a sea of circulation, not domination; a space of permanent interactions, not a border between hierarchized worlds. From Antiquity and likely before, it has been a zone of mutual fertilization between African, Levantine, and European civilizations. Archaeology demonstrates this powerfully. Phoenicians, Romans, Carthaginians, Egyptians, Numidians, and of course Amazighs structured its commercial, cultural, and scientific exchanges. The idea of an autonomous Europe, the sole source of modernity, is merely a late reconstruction. Not so long ago on a geological scale, the strait between Morocco and Spain was barely more than one kilometer wide... It falls to historians, teachers, and school systems on both shores to correct this, with a view to a common future founded on an equally shared past.

Chapter 5: Formalize & Systemize 1121

Satta Abraham, 5 d.
A working implementation begins with a narrowly defined document type. The unit of construction is a skill, which combines input schema, feature computation, semantic rules, generation constraints, and validation logic into a single packaged pipeline. The input schema defines the structure of accepted data. Each field has a fixed type and meaning. Inputs outside this structure are rejected or normalized before processing. This step removes ambiguity at the entry point. The feature layer computes derived values from the input schema. These computations are deterministic and expressed in standard tooling such as SQL or Python. The outputs include numerical transformations, aggregations, and formatted representations. Once computed, these values are stored and reused across all downstream operations for the same input. The semantic layer maps computed features into categorical labels. These mappings are expressed as explicit rules that define thresholds and conditions. The rules function as a translation layer between raw computation and narrative intent. Changes in business definition are reflected by modifying rules rather than rewriting logic. The generation layer receives three inputs: original data, computed features, and semantic labels. It produces structured text under strict constraints. The model is restricted to expressing provided values. No additional facts are introduced. Output formats are predefined, often as structured JSON containing narrative sections. The validation layer compares generated text against deterministic outputs. It extracts numerical values, categorical claims, and references, then checks them against the feature and semantic layers. Any deviation indicates failure. Output is either accepted or routed for correction. A complete skill behaves like a compiled artifact. Input enters through a fixed interface. Output is produced in a predictable format. Internal logic remains inspectable and versioned. Once a single skill is stable, the same structure can be replicated across multiple document types. Financial reports, product summaries, operational dashboards, and compliance documents follow identical architectural patterns. Variation exists only in schema definitions, feature logic, and semantic rules. As the number of skills increases, duplication appears in semantic definitions. Terms such as “strong performance,” “declining trend,” or “high risk” recur across domains, often with subtle differences in meaning depending on context. A static rule system cannot represent these contextual variations efficiently. Each skill encodes its own version of definitions, which leads to inconsistency and maintenance overhead. A knowledge graph introduces a shared semantic layer. Concepts are represented as nodes, and relationships between them are explicitly defined. Each concept carries attributes such as context, domain, and threshold values. This allows meaning to vary based on surrounding conditions rather than fixed rule files embedded in individual skills. In this structure, a query retrieves the appropriate definition of a concept based on context parameters such as industry, market state, or organizational role. The semantic layer no longer evaluates rules directly. It resolves references into context-specific definitions drawn from the graph. Feature computation remains unchanged. Inputs are still transformed into deterministic values. The difference lies in how those values are interpreted. Instead of fixed thresholds embedded in code or configuration files, interpretation depends on graph queries that return context-aware mappings. This creates composability across systems. Multiple skills reference the same underlying semantic nodes. A change in definition propagates through the graph without modifying individual pipelines. Consistency emerges from shared structure rather than replicated configuration. The generation layer remains unchanged. It still receives features and resolved semantic labels. The difference lies upstream, where those labels are derived from a shared semantic space rather than isolated rule sets. Validation also extends naturally. Outputs can be traced not only to feature computations but also to the specific semantic definitions used during interpretation. This adds a second layer of provenance, linking each statement to both numerical derivation and contextual meaning. The system shifts from isolated pipelines to a connected network of shared meaning, where document generation becomes an application of structured knowledge rather than repeated local interpretation.

Chapter 4: Tokenomics & Failure 1125

Satta Abraham, 5 d.
Token usage in direct generation scales with both input size and document count. When identical datasets are used repeatedly, the same information is reintroduced into prompts and reprocessed each time. This creates redundancy across runs. A staged pipeline changes this behavior by separating computation from generation. Feature computation runs once per dataset. The results are stored and reused. The generation step receives only derived values and semantic tags rather than raw input data. Let Tin represent the original input size and T'in the reduced representation produced after feature extraction. For n documents derived from the same dataset, direct generation cost scales with n⋅Tin. In the staged system, cost splits into a one-time computation cost plus n⋅Tin. As n increases, the amortized cost of preprocessing becomes negligible relative to repeated generation savings. This structure also changes verification cost. When outputs depend on raw inputs embedded inside prompts, validation requires rechecking both computation and interpretation. When outputs depend on precomputed features, verification reduces to checking alignment between text and deterministic values. This reduces the scope of manual review. A second effect concerns failure containment. In end-to-end generation, errors in reasoning, calculation, and phrasing occur in the same process, making attribution difficult. A staged pipeline isolates these responsibilities. Feature computation is deterministic and testable. Semantic classification is rule-based and auditable. Generation is constrained to express only pre-validated inputs. Validation operates as a final comparison layer between text and deterministic outputs. In practical terms, this structure prevents entire classes of errors that arise when models are allowed to both compute and express facts. Numerical inconsistencies, misapplied rules, and unsupported claims can be traced back to specific layers and eliminated without affecting unrelated parts of the system. The result is a system where cost and correctness are both controlled through separation of responsibilities rather than increased model complexity.