A crucial question is: does the new approach help or hurt the declared goal of finding a lasting solution to Somalia’s crisis?
It is hard to determine in advance the positive or negative outcomes of any new policy. However, I can speculate with some certainty instances where the policy might be successful, and where it might backfire. Before I do so, I would briefly discuss Somalia’s current environment, and the status of our collective identity.
Today’s Somalia:
It is fair to say that Somalia’s current environment is one full of grievances, hostility, and mistrust. This is because we committed unspeakable atrocities against each other. The tragedy is that most of the indiscriminate killings and destructions were committed in the name of the state, first allegedly to maintain its integrity, and later to restore or safe it. What began as genuine uprising against the dictatorial regime soon turned into horrible civil war that led brothers kill each other.
As if that was not enough, we are now in another round of the most violent warfare, one led by few psychopathic individuals inciting more violence, and whose goal is nothing but power and self-aggrandizement.
As if that was not enough, we are now in another round of the most violent warfare, one led by few psychopathic individuals inciting more violence, and whose goal is nothing but power and self-aggrandizement.
Collective Identity:
As result of this hellish experience, our collective identity as Somalis is seriously damaged. Our God-given identity as one ethnic group with one religion, language, culture, and history is in shambles. Some of our current leaders deny our cherished characteristics; instead they emphasize subtle differences. In this unnatural climate, these leaders have many examples to proof their case.
The US’s Dual-Track Policy:
Reacting to the bewildering perpetual violence in our country, American policy makers seem to have devised a policy that has all the hallmark of Somalia’s current bizarre environment: alarming, ambivalent, and one that is also positive and timely.
In my first reaction, I was alarmed, questioning how the Obama Administration, despite its much-publicised extension of olive branch to all Muslims, abandons the TFG, which it co-sponsored. The administration did not take similar measures in their dealings with Iraq and Afghanistan governments; they did not go beyond these countries’ weak governments.
The new approach is at best contradictory: how the US administration can co-sponsor bloated 500-merber government leaders, reasoning that it is inclusive, representing all regions and clans, and at the same time bypass these leaders and engage their counterparts in the same regions and clans? Where would the process of engagement end?
Notwithstanding my initial negative reaction, I think the new approach has a double-sword nature: it can help or hurt finding last solution to Somalia’s perpetual violence depending on how it is carried out.
First, if the policy is judiciously implemented taking into consideration Somalia’s unique religion, culture, and historical ties, the odds of success are high. If, however, the new policy is put into effect in accordance with the current concocted classification of Somalia as a conglomerate of hostile clans, the risks are great.
Ethiopian leaders’ pursued the second road. If anything they succeeded in containing violence within Somali border, a feat as far as their country’s security is concerned, but it certainly cripples TFG’s efforts in nation-building Instead of helping as brothers to heal, they exploited our weakness, riding the speedy clan train.
Second, if the new approach focuses on development projects, such as agriculture, water, health and education, it would be beneficial. However, if the policy is used as a cover up of CIA’s operations, it would be counterproductive.
The policy in some respect is a positive and timely. It is the first time the US government has a comprehensive policy towards Somalia since the collapse of state in early 1990’s. Most of the past twenty years, despite our suffering, the US and its international partners, had either no policy, or if they had one, it was uncoordinated and contradictory. As Carson admitted the previous responses of Somalia’s internal crisis were, “too feeble, too slow and too uncoordinated.”
The policy is also positive because it is a rejection of the so-called “constructive disengagement”, which called for hand-off policy towards Somalia, leaving Somalis to solve their own mess. This approach was ill-conceived at best, considering the fact that it was Bush administration’s narrowly-focused war on terror that greatly contributed the mess itself.
The diversification of contacts would also be positive if American officials are genuine to discover and appreciate the complexity of Somalia’s internal political dynamics and go beyond the facade external appearance.
By engaging clan leaders, American officials would be surprised to find leaders who jointly advocate a project, but separately advance different or opposing one; leaders who fight as one team today, and are in conflict with each other as separate teams the next day; leaders whose militia are fighting during the day, but are socializing together at night. American guests will soon realize that the nebulous clan phenomenon is not good candidate to be a partner. And that I consider is a positive development.
Finally, the U.S.’s dual-track policy is timely. Somalia’s name is famous in all wrong reasons. It is known as the land of clan-warfare, terrorism, piracy, the worst country in the world, the most corrupt, and the longest stateless country in world in recent history. The cancer that put into comma our state is spreading like wild fire in the region and beyond.
Fed up of this enigmatic and endless violence, the Obama administration seems to be ready to act. More importantly, the new approach serves notice to those who incite and perpetuate the violence, as well as those who undermine the effort to end it. I am sure U.S. partners will soon be on board. For that I welcome.
In conclusion, despite its resemblance of Somalia’s unnatural environment, the U.S.’s dual-track policy would be constructive if American officials are curious enough to discover the intricacy of Somalia’s internal political dynamics that propels the seemingly endless violence, while avoiding potential hazards that undermined previous approaches.
To this end, I believe the best road is to engage one team that at least has all the shades of this constantly changing, unnatural environment.
Notwithstanding my initial negative reaction, I think the new approach has a double-sword nature: it can help or hurt finding last solution to Somalia’s perpetual violence depending on how it is carried out.
First, if the policy is judiciously implemented taking into consideration Somalia’s unique religion, culture, and historical ties, the odds of success are high. If, however, the new policy is put into effect in accordance with the current concocted classification of Somalia as a conglomerate of hostile clans, the risks are great.
Ethiopian leaders’ pursued the second road. If anything they succeeded in containing violence within Somali border, a feat as far as their country’s security is concerned, but it certainly cripples TFG’s efforts in nation-building Instead of helping as brothers to heal, they exploited our weakness, riding the speedy clan train.
Second, if the new approach focuses on development projects, such as agriculture, water, health and education, it would be beneficial. However, if the policy is used as a cover up of CIA’s operations, it would be counterproductive.
The policy in some respect is a positive and timely. It is the first time the US government has a comprehensive policy towards Somalia since the collapse of state in early 1990’s. Most of the past twenty years, despite our suffering, the US and its international partners, had either no policy, or if they had one, it was uncoordinated and contradictory. As Carson admitted the previous responses of Somalia’s internal crisis were, “too feeble, too slow and too uncoordinated.”
The policy is also positive because it is a rejection of the so-called “constructive disengagement”, which called for hand-off policy towards Somalia, leaving Somalis to solve their own mess. This approach was ill-conceived at best, considering the fact that it was Bush administration’s narrowly-focused war on terror that greatly contributed the mess itself.
The diversification of contacts would also be positive if American officials are genuine to discover and appreciate the complexity of Somalia’s internal political dynamics and go beyond the facade external appearance.
By engaging clan leaders, American officials would be surprised to find leaders who jointly advocate a project, but separately advance different or opposing one; leaders who fight as one team today, and are in conflict with each other as separate teams the next day; leaders whose militia are fighting during the day, but are socializing together at night. American guests will soon realize that the nebulous clan phenomenon is not good candidate to be a partner. And that I consider is a positive development.
Finally, the U.S.’s dual-track policy is timely. Somalia’s name is famous in all wrong reasons. It is known as the land of clan-warfare, terrorism, piracy, the worst country in the world, the most corrupt, and the longest stateless country in world in recent history. The cancer that put into comma our state is spreading like wild fire in the region and beyond.
Fed up of this enigmatic and endless violence, the Obama administration seems to be ready to act. More importantly, the new approach serves notice to those who incite and perpetuate the violence, as well as those who undermine the effort to end it. I am sure U.S. partners will soon be on board. For that I welcome.
In conclusion, despite its resemblance of Somalia’s unnatural environment, the U.S.’s dual-track policy would be constructive if American officials are curious enough to discover the intricacy of Somalia’s internal political dynamics that propels the seemingly endless violence, while avoiding potential hazards that undermined previous approaches.
To this end, I believe the best road is to engage one team that at least has all the shades of this constantly changing, unnatural environment.
Said Liban
E-Mail: Saidliban45@yahoo.com
We welcome the submission of all articles for possible publication on Terror Free Somalia Foundation Send your comments and articles to terrorfreesomalia@gmail.com
E-Mail: Saidliban45@yahoo.com
We welcome the submission of all articles for possible publication on Terror Free Somalia Foundation Send your comments and articles to terrorfreesomalia@gmail.com
Abdirahman Warsame is the Executive Director of the Terror Free Somalia Foundation.a national grassroots organization that opposes terrorism and supports democracy in Africa. regular contributor American Thinker http://www.americanthinker.com/abdirahman_warsame/ . .Pajamas Media and .other American conservative organization
my tale
Reality: Here is my perspectiv and analysis of what could be perceived as the reality on the grounds regarding Somaliland. First off i want to make it clear. Somaliland will not achieve indipendence. Because if one is gonna make a ignorant statement like that then that person is way off. The african union will not ever recognise Somaliland as long as there is a Somali president sitting in Somalia. USA will not recognise Somaliland atleast not in this decade. Why? Because they are already taking the big heat from china, russia and the arab league for trying to give south sudan indipendence. And even if the US wanted to recognise Somaliland, then the decision would have to be consulted with the African union. And there would be oppositions by many african countries, such as Sudan, algeria, morocco and egypt for example. Egypt will not even tolerate Somalia to be carved up, because that would make Ethiopia the biggest and strongest country in whole of East africa. They have the nile dispute and the Egypt need more then Sudan support, but even Somali support. The Arab league would also be attacking the international community if Somalia would be carved up, because they wouldnt tolerate another arableague member state to be splitt.
Somaliland is a option for the internation community to support. Thats their opinion. They want to help Somaliland so that Somaliland can solve the internation communities problems. Such as piracy, detaining somali pirates in somaliland courts. Using the port of berbera to ship aid to Somalia. Of course they will help to develop Somaliland on the process. But nothing more. The international community doesnt have the power or intention to that, there is too much interest and politics at stake. The arabs,africans, and even westerners have something to lose for it.
Somaliland became a country 1991, because they saw eritrea fighting for their indipendence and that the world community was ready to accept a country seceding from ethiopia. They thought that a country seceding from Somalia would have the same luck. Isnt it why Somalilands indipendence was declared just 11 days before Eritrea indipendece?
And last but not least. I am not hating. I love all Somalis as my fellow country men. And i dont want the Somaliland goverment to poison the young generations mind with indipendence and hate for South somalia (konfuuria). What happened under siyad barres time, died when siad barre died. It was a tragic event and it should have been stopped. But what is important is that reconciliation process must start. North Somalia, must unite with South Somalia and they must get past thid qabil. And this will be only done with the help of the future of Somalias goverment strongly support fro nationalism. Nationalism must be supported everywhere in Somalia and alliegence to the Somali flag.
It was the north that was strongly advocating for Somali unity, even though the british and italians didnt like it. Why cant the same movement start again, but this time with the young diaspora? With the sons and daughters of all clans in Somalia to be advocating for unity, this will happen.
Thank you for reading and i hope you overlook my bad spelling. Post your opinion.
US to build ties with breakaway Secessionist Somali republics : The misguided and dangerous obama policy
Somaliland: The Myth of Clan-Based Statehood . Educational Segment : Somali 101
Ms. Arbour Support for Somaliland's Secession aka al-shabaab
No Unity, No Peace
my tale
Reality: Here is my perspectiv and analysis of what could be perceived as the reality on the grounds regarding Somaliland. First off i want to make it clear. Somaliland will not achieve indipendence. Because if one is gonna make a ignorant statement like that then that person is way off. The african union will not ever recognise Somaliland as long as there is a Somali president sitting in Somalia. USA will not recognise Somaliland atleast not in this decade. Why? Because they are already taking the big heat from china, russia and the arab league for trying to give south sudan indipendence. And even if the US wanted to recognise Somaliland, then the decision would have to be consulted with the African union. And there would be oppositions by many african countries, such as Sudan, algeria, morocco and egypt for example. Egypt will not even tolerate Somalia to be carved up, because that would make Ethiopia the biggest and strongest country in whole of East africa. They have the nile dispute and the Egypt need more then Sudan support, but even Somali support. The Arab league would also be attacking the international community if Somalia would be carved up, because they wouldnt tolerate another arableague member state to be splitt.
Somaliland is a option for the internation community to support. Thats their opinion. They want to help Somaliland so that Somaliland can solve the internation communities problems. Such as piracy, detaining somali pirates in somaliland courts. Using the port of berbera to ship aid to Somalia. Of course they will help to develop Somaliland on the process. But nothing more. The international community doesnt have the power or intention to that, there is too much interest and politics at stake. The arabs,africans, and even westerners have something to lose for it.
Somaliland became a country 1991, because they saw eritrea fighting for their indipendence and that the world community was ready to accept a country seceding from ethiopia. They thought that a country seceding from Somalia would have the same luck. Isnt it why Somalilands indipendence was declared just 11 days before Eritrea indipendece?
And last but not least. I am not hating. I love all Somalis as my fellow country men. And i dont want the Somaliland goverment to poison the young generations mind with indipendence and hate for South somalia (konfuuria). What happened under siyad barres time, died when siad barre died. It was a tragic event and it should have been stopped. But what is important is that reconciliation process must start. North Somalia, must unite with South Somalia and they must get past thid qabil. And this will be only done with the help of the future of Somalias goverment strongly support fro nationalism. Nationalism must be supported everywhere in Somalia and alliegence to the Somali flag.
It was the north that was strongly advocating for Somali unity, even though the british and italians didnt like it. Why cant the same movement start again, but this time with the young diaspora? With the sons and daughters of all clans in Somalia to be advocating for unity, this will happen.
Thank you for reading and i hope you overlook my bad spelling. Post your opinion.
US to build ties with breakaway Secessionist Somali republics : The misguided and dangerous obama policy
Somaliland: The Myth of Clan-Based Statehood . Educational Segment : Somali 101
Ms. Arbour Support for Somaliland's Secession aka al-shabaab
No Unity, No Peace
Reality: Here is my perspectiv and analysis of what could be perceived as the reality on the grounds regarding Somaliland. First off i want to make it clear. Somaliland will not achieve indipendence. Because if one is gonna make a ignorant statement like that then that person is way off. The african union will not ever recognise Somaliland as long as there is a Somali president sitting in Somalia. USA will not recognise Somaliland atleast not in this decade. Why? Because they are already taking the big heat from china, russia and the arab league for trying to give south sudan indipendence. And even if the US wanted to recognise Somaliland, then the decision would have to be consulted with the African union. And there would be oppositions by many african countries, such as Sudan, algeria, morocco and egypt for example. Egypt will not even tolerate Somalia to be carved up, because that would make Ethiopia the biggest and strongest country in whole of East africa. They have the nile dispute and the Egypt need more then Sudan support, but even Somali support. The Arab league would also be attacking the international community if Somalia would be carved up, because they wouldnt tolerate another arableague member state to be splitt.
ReplyDeleteSomaliland is a option for the internation community to support. Thats their opinion. They want to help Somaliland so that Somaliland can solve the internation communities problems. Such as piracy, detaining somali pirates in somaliland courts. Using the port of berbera to ship aid to Somalia. Of course they will help to develop Somaliland on the process. But nothing more. The international community doesnt have the power or intention to that, there is too much interest and politics at stake. The arabs,africans, and even westerners have something to lose for it.
Somaliland became a country 1991, because they saw eritrea fighting for their indipendence and that the world community was ready to accept a country seceding from ethiopia. They thought that a country seceding from Somalia would have the same luck. Isnt it why Somalilands indipendence was declared just 11 days before Eritrea indipendece?
And last but not least. I am not hating. I love all Somalis as my fellow country men. And i dont want the Somaliland goverment to poison the young generations mind with indipendence and hate for South somalia (konfuuria). What happened under siyad barres time, died when siad barre died. It was a tragic event and it should have been stopped. But what is important is that reconciliation process must start. North Somalia, must unite with South Somalia and they must get past thid qabil. And this will be only done with the help of the future of Somalias goverment strongly support fro nationalism. Nationalism must be supported everywhere in Somalia and alliegence to the Somali flag.
It was the north that was strongly advocating for Somali unity, even though the british and italians didnt like it. Why cant the same movement start again, but this time with the young diaspora? With the sons and daughters of all clans in Somalia to be advocating for unity, this will happen.
Thank you for reading and i hope you overlook my bad spelling. Post your opinion.
Reality: Here is my perspectiv and analysis of what could be perceived as the reality on the grounds regarding Somaliland. First off i want to make it clear. Somaliland will not achieve indipendence. Because if one is gonna make a ignorant statement like that then that person is way off. The african union will not ever recognise Somaliland as long as there is a Somali president sitting in Somalia. USA will not recognise Somaliland atleast not in this decade. Why? Because they are already taking the big heat from china, russia and the arab league for trying to give south sudan indipendence. And even if the US wanted to recognise Somaliland, then the decision would have to be consulted with the African union. And there would be oppositions by many african countries, such as Sudan, algeria, morocco and egypt for example. Egypt will not even tolerate Somalia to be carved up, because that would make Ethiopia the biggest and strongest country in whole of East africa. They have the nile dispute and the Egypt need more then Sudan support, but even Somali support. The Arab league would also be attacking the international community if Somalia would be carved up, because they wouldnt tolerate another arableague member state to be splitt.
ReplyDeleteSomaliland is a option for the internation community to support. Thats their opinion. They want to help Somaliland so that Somaliland can solve the internation communities problems. Such as piracy, detaining somali pirates in somaliland courts. Using the port of berbera to ship aid to Somalia. Of course they will help to develop Somaliland on the process. But nothing more. The international community doesnt have the power or intention to that, there is too much interest and politics at stake. The arabs,africans, and even westerners have something to lose for it.
Somaliland became a country 1991, because they saw eritrea fighting for their indipendence and that the world community was ready to accept a country seceding from ethiopia. They thought that a country seceding from Somalia would have the same luck. Isnt it why Somalilands indipendence was declared just 11 days before Eritrea indipendece?
And last but not least. I am not hating. I love all Somalis as my fellow country men. And i dont want the Somaliland goverment to poison the young generations mind with indipendence and hate for South somalia (konfuuria). What happened under siyad barres time, died when siad barre died. It was a tragic event and it should have been stopped. But what is important is that reconciliation process must start. North Somalia, must unite with South Somalia and they must get past thid qabil. And this will be only done with the help of the future of Somalias goverment strongly support fro nationalism. Nationalism must be supported everywhere in Somalia and alliegence to the Somali flag.
It was the north that was strongly advocating for Somali unity, even though the british and italians didnt like it. Why cant the same movement start again, but this time with the young diaspora? With the sons and daughters of all clans in Somalia to be advocating for unity, this will happen.
Thank you for reading and i hope you overlook my bad spelling. Post your opinion.