Italy, please don’t listen to him. Africa has already expressed itself differently.

February 9, 2024

In a recent interview, the President of the Federal Republic of Somalia, Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, expressed with some nostalgia the memory of the brotherhood that once linked the Italian fascist colonizers of the Mussolini era to the African people. He spoke of a people-to-people relationship, inviting the “owners” of the arable lands and plantations, without reflecting on the period when the plantations between the two rivers in the Horn of Africa were unjustly taken from the indigenous owners and cultivated by the Italian colonialists. The latter exploited and dehumanized indigenous workers, forcing them to perform arduous and inhumane work. When has a certain brotherhood ever materialized?

He should be ashamed of himself for making such a request. As an African, he should reflect on his words and their consequences. Before speaking, it would be appropriate for him to find out more. Fortunately, today’s Italians, like many other peoples in the contemporary world, have developed a critical awareness and have dissociated themselves from the crimes committed in the past. Similarly, Africans today, along with all those who have suffered historical injustices, have worked to overcome the painful past by writing about and condemning colonialism as a crime against humanity.

I want to communicate a thought derived from my dual identity as an Italian and an African to today’s Italians.

Dear Italians, I urge you not to return to the plantations. If Italy were to return, let it be to support projects such as that of the National University, one of the most significant in the field of authentic, equal, and beneficial interpersonal relationships for both peoples, which had already started in the 1980s. This is the type of collaboration that should characterize an eventual return.

Returning to recover the land is unnecessary, as it was obtained illegally. There is no refund for properties obtained unlawfully during the fascist period nor for industries such as that of the Duke of Abruzzi, for which restitution is impossible. If Italy were to return, it should do so to compensate for what was wrongly perpetrated in that period.

As regards the “Messenger,” who acts as an exclusive representative of himself, I highly recommend reading works such as “Black Skin, White Masks” by Frantz Fanon (1967) and “Frantz Fanon and the Psychology of Oppression” by Hussein Bulhan (1985). Furthermore, it might be useful to explore texts such as Hegel’s “The Phenomenology of Mind” (1966), Mannoni’s “Prospero and Caliban: the Psychology of Colonialism” (1968), and Orlando’s “Slavery and Social Death”. (1982).

I hope this enlightens him not to distort the message, aware as an African of the horror in the words accompanying his outbursts. I am not the spokesperson for the people of Somalia, since they are capable of expressing themselves independently. However, I find myself speaking as an African and a Somalilander, who would like to convey profound disgust at the words uttered by those declaring being in the role of leader of a nation.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Dr Jama Musse Jama has a PhD in Computational Linguistics, and has extensive research publications in mathematics, ICT and the role of art and culture in development. Founder of the Hargeysa International Book Fair, and currently Director of the Hargeysa Cultural Centre in Somaliland, Dr. Jama has also a Senior Research Associate position at DPU, University College London, UK. Dr. Jama can be reached @JamaMusse or email: jama[@]redsea-online.org

Disclaimer: The viewpoints expressed by the authors do not necessarily reflect the opinions, viewpoints of Somaliland Chronicle, and its staff.

Notice: This is an article by Somaliland Chronicle and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Under this license, all reprints and non-commercial distribution of this work is permitted.

Somali Irredentism: Threat to the Security of Kenya and Ethiopia

Editor II

February 2, 2024

African borders are a complex tapestry reflecting a rich mosaic of ethnic groups and cultures that spans multiple nations.

Beneath that patchwork, there is a smoldering issue of Ethno-nationalism which is too visible in Somalia in relation to its neighbors.

As a result of the recent geopolitical development, Kenya and Ethiopia find themselves at a particular juncture where dealing with Somalia expansionism has become a critical issue to preserve their territorial integrity as well as regional stability and peaceful coexistence.

Across the continent, many ethnic groups straddle borders that separate between African nations while their identities transcend the borderlines.

Borana in Ethiopia, for instance, extend all the way across the Kenyan border, while Afar in Djibouti share blood ties with their brothers in Ethiopia. The Maasai people too, live in both Kenya and Tanzania. This is a true emblematic of the complex ethnic landscape of the continent.

In 1964, African heads of states convened in Cairo and made a solemn pledge to respect the borders that existed on their achievement of national independence. This resolution, borne out of the need for harmony among African nations, aimed to prevent border conflicts caused by ethnic affiliations. Yet, Somali Irredentism poses a serious threat to this framework of border stability.

Entrenched in the principle of inherited ownership over all territories Somalis inhabit in East Africa, Somalia has historically disputed the borders of its neighboring countries.

In the 1960s, insurgencies were ignited in Kenya and Ethiopia, with Somalia asserting claims over Somali-inhabited regions and later on in 1977, Somalia directly waged war on Ethiopia in an attempt to seize the Somali region of Ethiopia by force.

Despite African Union’s principle to respect colonial borders, Somalia elites never cease to advocate for the regaining of these perceived ‘missing territories’.

President Hassan Sheikh who recently addressed the public in protest of the MoU between the Republic of Somaliland and Ethiopia underscored this sentiment and openly declared that there are territories Somalia is supposed to reclaim (implying the Somali regions of Ethiopia and Kenya). He described Ethiopia as a traditional enemy to Somalia.

In a similar vein, Somalia-born US lawmaker Ilhan Omar has stated that her country of origin Somalia will one day search for its missing lands.

In late 2006, Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys, head the committee of the Islamic courts Union (ICU) that then controlled much of Somalia, declared, “We will leave no stone un-turned to integrate our Somali brothers in Kenya and Ethiopia and restore their freedom to live with their ancestors in Somalia.”

Moreover, on January 3 this year, the Somali Ministry of Interior, Federal Affairs and Reconciliation released on its official twitter account a poster featuring a map of a previously unrealized Greater Somalia, with the Somali flag drawn over all Somali inhabited areas, including parts of Kenya and Ethiopia, although it was deleted later on.

To mitigate Somali Irredentism, official recognition of the Republic of Somaliland as a sovereign and independent nation emerges as pivotal solution which could end the dream of uniting all ethnic Somalis under the Somalia administration and also upholds the African union’s pledge to respect existing borders at the time of independence as articulated in the 1964 AU declaration.

Such recognition not only realizes Somaliland’s long over-due dream of recognition, but also serves as a deterrent against further Ethnonationalism ambitions to disrupt the colonial borders agreed by the AU.

In light of the recent MoU between Ethiopia and Somaliland, Ethiopia is set to become the first country to officially recognize the Republic of Somaliland as a sovereign nation, setting a precedent for regional stability.

Kenya, with its Somali-inhabited regions, faces similar imperative to protect its territorial integrity against Somalia’s ethnic expansionism and to prevent future border disputes, Kenya must uphold the AU 1964 declaration of adhering colonial borders and support the recognition of Somaliland.

The issue of Somalia Irredentism surpasses national boundaries, threatening the stability of the region. Kenya and Ethiopia, as key players in East Africa, must take proactive steps to address this challenge, recognize Somaliland and defend the sanctity of existing borders at the time of independence.

The recognition of Somaliland serves not merely as a diplomatic gesture but as a strategic step for safeguarding the security and prosperity of East Africa. The time for action is now, as Kenya and Ethiopia chart a course towards a future defined by stability and mutual respect among nations in East Africa.

Ismail Shirwac is a diplomat based in Nairobi currently serving as the First Secretary of the Republic of Somaliland mission in Kenya

Controversial Ilhan Omar Asserts Dominance Over U.S. Policy in Somaliland-Ethiopian Memorandum of Understanding

Staff

January 28, 2024

In a charged address at a Minneapolis hotel, Representative Ilhan Omar claimed an unprecedented influence over U.S. policy regarding the Somaliland-Ethiopian Naval Base Agreement. Omar, facing increased scrutiny due to her recent removal from the Congressional Foreign Relations Committee, stirred further controversy by referring to Somalilanders as “Somali imposters” These blatantly racist remarks, delivered with fervent nationalism, have prompted concerns about her suitability in handling international matters.

During her speech, Representative Omar boldly stated, “The United States Government will do what I tell them to do about it,” referring to the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). The context of her removal from the Foreign Relations Committee adds an extra layer of concern, with critics questioning whether her statements are fueled by unchecked nationalism rather than a nuanced understanding of international relations.

Omar’s passionate plea for confidence in the Somali diaspora in the U.S. took on a distinct nationalistic tone. Emphasizing, “It’s the confidence that we need to have in ourselves as Somalis,” she asserted that as long as she is in the United States Congress, no other country will take Somalia’s waters, and the United States will not support actions she deems as theft.

In an unusual congratulatory note to Somalian President Hassan Sh Mohamoud for opposing the MoU, Omar proclaimed, “Somalia is Somali, Somalia is one, we are brothers, and our lands are indivisible.” Her reference to “missing lands that we should be getting back,” including the Northern Kenyan territory of NFD and the Ethiopian Somali region, echoes back to the irredentism of the dictatorial regime of Siad Barre, which contributed to the downfall of the Somali Republic.

It’s noteworthy that Ilhan Omar’s apparent adherence to the destructive Somali ideology is linked to the late dictator Siad Barre, under whose regime Omar’s father served. Barre’s brutal dictatorship was marked by egregious human rights violation that culminated in the massacre of tens of thousands of Somalilanders by the very regime whose Omar father has served, raising concerns about Omar’s ties to a dark chapter in Somalia’s history.

Omar’s controversial statements, along with her recent removal from the Foreign Relations Committee, have fueled skepticism about her commitment to diplomatic prudence and nuanced foreign policy. Critics argue that the Congresswoman’s unchecked nationalism may jeopardize the principles of gratitude and loyalty expected from a public figure who sought refuge in the United States. The ongoing scrutiny surrounding Omar’s actions and statements raises important questions about her role in shaping U.S. foreign policy.

African Union’s Strategic Role in Ethiopia and Somaliland’s MoU

Staff

January 28, 2024

The recent memorandum of understanding between Ethiopia and Somaliland, which allows Ethiopia sea access, is a significant milestone in the Horn of Africa region. This arrangement, soon to become a treaty, will formally recognise Somaliland’s sovereignty within its borders as they were in 1960, a notable development given Somaliland’s three decades of de facto international engagement. Although the concept of territorial lease is relatively new to Africa, it has a solid foundation in international law. For nations in the Horn of Africa, such agreements are more than just legal formalities; they symbolize a deep mutual respect and understanding. Furthermore, these agreements embody a commitment to shared prosperity, reflecting the objectives of the African Union.

Somalia’s characterization of the agreement as an “aggression” on its sovereignty mirrors the ongoing conflict between the two countries. Despite Somaliland gaining independence before Somalia on June 26, 1960, and the absence of a ratified Act of Union, Somalia persists in making territorial claim over Somaliland. This is despite the fact that the unlawful Somalian occupation of Somaliland between 1960 and 1991 ended following a liberation movement that stopped the Hargeisa Holocaust, also known as the Isaaq genocide – one of the gravest crimes against humanity.

The African Union’s call for calm and mutual respect between Ethiopia and Somalia is a standard diplomatic response to emerging tensions. However, this strategy will not adequately address this conflict. As highlighted by Matt Brydon, Director Sahan Research, in a recent Aljazeera interview, the conflict from the memorandum of understanding is between Somaliland and Somalia, and not between Ethiopia and Somalia. Ethiopia is only acting on the a fait accompli of Somaliland’s independence.

The international examples of Kosovo and Bangladesh’s declarations of independence show that a ignoring the root cause will not work. For example, India’s recognition of Bangladesh escalated tensions with Pakistan. However, the global community didn’t treat this as merely a bilateral issue between Pakistan and India. As more countries recognised Bangladesh, tensions decreased, eventually leading to Pakistan’s acceptance of the situation on the ground.

Efforts to stop nations from recognising Bangladesh would have been unproductive and such conflicts, particularly in the Horn of Africa, cannot remain unresolved indefinitely. This is evident in nearby Yemen, where unresolved disputes have been exploited by external forces. As Africans, it’s crucial to prevent such situations in both Somaliland and Somalia. Often, these external actors are undemocratic and do not prioritise the welfare of African nations. It’s important to ensure that such interference does not occur in our region.

Somaliland’s situation is fortunately less complex than that of Bangladesh. In 2005, the African Union’s fact-finding mission acknowledged the unique circumstances of Somaliland, suggesting it receives special consideration. All the African Union needs to do now is to act on the recommendations of this fact-finding mission. A public statement confirming that Ethiopia’s scheduled recognition of Somaliland does not breach the African Union charters and the principle of colonial borders would suffice. This would clarify that it’s within the rights of individual African states to either recognise Somaliland or resume diplomatic relations, based on their recognition in 1960.

The African Union ought to complement such statement with action by allowing Somaliland to join as an observer. This move would support stability and democracy in the region. The AU’s role should go beyond just suspending undemocratic regimes; it must also recognise and encourage the only democracy in the Horn of Africa. Importantly, the AU should reject the narrow-minded and fearmongering arguments, such as those from the US, which use Al-Shabaab as a pretext to undermine Somaliland’s aspirations. Somaliland has commendably managed to keep its territory free of pirates and terrorists without any external aid. Therefore, it is unfair to place hurdles in Somaliland’s way due to Somalia’s.

Somaliland Chronicle’s X Space Gathering on Sunday Jan 28, 2024

Editor II

January 27, 2024

portrait-01 — "The only thing that's missing is the sovereign recognition," says Saad Ali Shire, foreign minister of Somaliland.

Join Somaliland Chronicle on January 28th, 2024 for hosting the Republic of Somaliland Minister of Finance Development – Dr. Saad Ali Shire – to discuss the Advantage of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Republic of Somaliland and the Federal Government of Ethiopia.

Mark your calendars for Sunday, January 28th, 2024, at 08:00 PM Hargeisa Time or 12:00 PM US Eastern Time.

Please send your questions in advance to editor@somalilandchronicle.com to have them addressed by the guest.

Ethiopia Welcomes DP World’s Intent to Further Develop Berbera Port

Editor II

January 25, 2024

Oumer Hussein, Ethiopian Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), said the government welcomes DP World’s desire to cooperate with Ethiopia in the development of Somaliland’s Berbera Port.

The Ambassador told state media that DP World’s desire to cooperate with Ethiopia is a welcoming approach that the government is working for.

Ethiopia “would like to cooperate on port development with not only DP World, but also with any interested companies or countries,” Ambassador Oumer said.

Such cooperation with DP World would be an “extension of [Ethiopia’s] robust partnership with the UAE and it is more rewarding than similar accords that would be concluded with other parties,” the Ambassador further said. On the trade volume between Ethiopia and the UAE, the Ambassador stated that UAE’s investment in Ethiopia has reached US$2.4 billion mark whereas Ethiopians are also investing in the UAE is also increasing. “The two governments’ strong aspiration is the driving force for the growth of Ethio-UAE diplomatic ties. In my view, the huge investment potential is still untapped,” he said.

Last week, following a “productive” meeting with Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Demeke Mekonnen on the sides of World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem, Chairman and CEO of DP World, said that he was “thrilled to announce our joint commitment to enhancing the Berbera Port, a key gateway for regional connectivity.”

Calling the partnership “strategic”, the CEO further said it will “not only solidifies economic ties but also paves the way for sustainable growth.

“As we stand at the forefront of change, the DP World and Ethiopia alliance signifies a bold step towards a brighter, more connected future,” Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem said in his statement posted on his LinkedIn.

On 01 January, Ethiopia and Somaliland signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), to enable Ethiopia “to secure access to the sea and diversify its access to seaports.” Ethiopia said the MoU “includes provisions for the Ethiopian government to make an in-depth assessment towards taking a position regarding the efforts of Somaliland to gain recognition.”

In a televised interview aired two days ago, Somaliland’s President Muse Bihi said “the agreement specifies that Ethiopia’s imports and exports will utilize the port of Berbera.”

A tripartite agreement between Ethiopia, DP World and the Somaliland Port Authority signed in Dubai on 01 March 2018 provided DP World with a 51% stake in the Berbera Port, while Ethiopia would have taken 19%, with the 30% to remain under Somaliland’s Port Authority. The agreement also outlined plans for the government of Ethiopia to invest in infrastructure to develop the Berbera Corridor as a trade gateway. But Ethiopia has since lost its stake over what Somaliland said was failure to fulfill the required terms to complete the shareholder deal.

#Ethiopia Transport Minister in #Somaliland to look at more Port options for Ethiopia

An Ethiopian delegation led by the transport and logistics minister Alemu Sime has arrived in #Hargeisa, the capital of Somaliland, to look at more port options for Ethiopia.

The delegation… pic.twitter.com/1NNxf1OpvG
— Addis Standard (@addisstandard) August 9, 2023

Ethiopia has upped its interest in making use of Berbera Port. In August last year, an Ethiopian delegation led by the transport and logistics minister Alemu Sime traveled to Hargeisa, the capital of Somaliland, to look at more port options for Ethiopia.

The delegation has met and discussed with the Somaliland government officials about making Berbera Port an additional option for Ethiopian import export trade activities.

Subsequently, in November last year, Alemu Sime said that Ethiopia was negotiating with Somaliland government to secure direct access to seaport.

“Greater Somalia” Ideology: Similarities with Fascism

Staff

January 22, 2024

By Adam Muse Jibril

Characterization of ‘’Greater Somalia Ideology’’ requires to underline three component dimensions it includes; Somali Irredentism, Clannism, and Radical Interpretation of Islam based on Sheik Ibn Taymyha version. The combination of these three parts forms the concept of exclusion and absolutism, which means anything that doesn’t agree with this absolutism is considered as Infidel. Ethnic based exclusionism has been defined as Fascism and Nazism by many Scholars included Atonio Gramsci who connected Fascism to a category of socio-economic and political system, the superstructures of which generates ideological context of fascism (Fascism Taylorism) where the ruling elite belong to political view of populism, and agree that fascism is a mass political movement that emphasizes extreme nationalism, militarism, and the supremacy of both the nation and the single powerful leader over the rights of individual citizens”. That means a totalitarian system in which, not only freedom of other opinion is forbidden, but all kinds of activities outside of the Great Leader context are excluded.

Somalia had experienced a political and social order during the Siyad Barre regime Similar in many aspects to Italian fascism led by Mussolini, the founder of the Italian Fascist Party who became the Prime Minister of Italy in 1922, where he established a totalitarian system of government. The Siyad Barre regime has raised and lived on two extreme ideological bearings “Greater Somalia Ideology” that designed unification of all Somali ethnic groups under one flag. The other extreme banners he raised were Scientific Socialism which meant establishment of a totalitarian regime of one party run by secret services. The hegemony of this ideological extremism led to a catastrophic consequence both on internal and external fronts. Internal front, the Military Junta, under Siyad Barre, turned the whole country into a tightly constrained Military Barrack under which all kinds of crimes against humanity have been committed.

External front, the Barre regime committed to change all existing conflicts, in the Horn of Africa, from simple traditional disagreements and disputes to much complex politico-religious protracted wars extended to regional and global spaces in both extent and strength, and then turned them into direct military confrontation within regional parts (Somalia and Ethiopia-Kenya) and to global conflict with the involvement of West and Soviet blocks during the cold war era

through engagement of Somali Irredentism based invasion against Ethiopia causing unimageable material destruction and countless human life.

This protracted regional war waged by Siyad Barre against neighboring nations with global involvement and devastating consequences generated three horrific events on the opposite direction of progress: Firstly, the power basis of Siyad Barre tyranny have almost broken and finally collapsed. Secondly, the majority of Somali clans decided to fight against the regime which put the beginning of the armed struggle and made the Somalis believe that Ethiopia is the only country ready to host the Somali insurgents, three main opposition organization appeared; SSDF representing Majeerteen clan, SNM representing Issagi clan, USC representing Hawiye, and SPM representing Ogden emerged out of people’s uprising. This uprising lacked National unity and, as a result was highly fragmented on clan-lines, but irrespective of their fragmentation they were able to overthrow the regime in 1991.

The collapse of the regime could not lead to national unity of the opposition because of the clan cleavage. But the Somali National Movement of Somaliland, SNM, as the most organized, and allied with its constituency declared reconstitution of the Somaliland State. The declaration of the rebirth of Somaliland state is related with the story of the relationship between Somaliland and Somalia, on one side, and the Somaliland and Ethiopia on the other side, which reflect the hard experiences suffered by Somaliland from 1960 to 1991. In1960 both Somaliland and Somalia got their independence and united under the Somali Republic, under which Somaliland had been brutally humiliated and marginalized, politically and economically. The events occurring nowadays had been shaped by the history of the eighties and nighties of the last century.

In1984, Siyad Barre’s armed forces completely ruined two big cities in Somaliland, Hargeisa and Burao, on almost the same scale of destruction which Gaza is undergoing. The Somali army also massacred hundreds of thousands of innocent people in 1984-5. Moreover, while the entire inhabitants of Hargeisa and Burao were escaping their own way to the Ethiopian borders as refugee seekers, they met indiscriminate bombardment by the Siyad Barre airforce killing and massacring thousands of innocent people. Moreover, unlike Somalian aggression, the Somaliland refugees have been warmly welcomed by both the government and people of Ethiopia. The contrast of the Somali government’s inhuman treatment to the Somaliland people, and Ethiopian support to Somaliland people created the historical events that we are witnessing today. These very events occurring nowadays among which the Memorandum of understand between Somaliland and Ethiopia would put the future roadmap towards hoisting the banner of peace, democracy, and unity for Africa, which will hopefully end all extreme and narrowminded ethnic ideologies such as Somali Irredentism, which would open the doors wildly for more peaceful future for Africa.

About the Author

Ambassador Adam Jibril Muse held various positions in Somaliland government including Representative to the United Kingdom and Ethiopia. He can be reached adamjibril47[@]gmail.com.

Disclaimer: The viewpoints expressed by the authors do not necessarily reflect the opinions, viewpoints of Somaliland Chronicle, and its staff.

Notice: This article by Somaliland Chronicle is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Under this license, all reprints and non-commercial distribution of this work is permitted.

Engagement not Appeasement: Why the Somaliland – Ethiopian MoU Deserves US Support

Staff

January 21, 2024

The Horn of Africa stands at a crossroads, hope and uncertainty swirling amidst longstanding tensions. Yet, a glimmer shines through the dust in the form of the Ethiopian-Somaliland Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). This agreement, promising economic benefits and enhanced Red Sea access for Ethiopia, represents a potential leap forward for both nations. Yet, it has also cast a long shadow, igniting concerns about its impact on regional stability and the direction of US policy in the face of Somalia’s objections.

Ethiopia, a landlocked for centuries, sees the MoU as a bridge to the sea that will unleash its potential as a regional political and economic powerhouse in Africa, while Somaliland, a de facto independent state for over three decades, sees in it a pathway to international recognition. And although the roads to the shared crossroads may differ, both countries see the benefits they stand to gain converge remarkably well.

For Ethiopia, the MoU unlocks a maritime gateway, granting access to Somaliland’s strategic Red Sea coastline. This vital access fuels long-held aspirations for trade, tourism, and economic development, propelling Ethiopia beyond its landlocked limitations. For Somaliland, the agreement offers not just economic opportunities through Ethiopian investment and development projects, but also the possibility of international recognition, a long-denied validation of its independence and democratic journey.

These aspirations, intertwined like the circles of a Venn diagram, find synergy in the MoU. Ethiopia’s strength and stability, coupled with Somaliland’s proven track record in combating piracy, can forge a formidable joint force, safeguarding the vital Red Sea shipping lanes and ensuring a secure and prosperous maritime environment for both nations.

Ambassador Hammer’s presence at the IGAD session, and his apparent adherence to the outdated “one-Somalia” narrative, has raised concerns about potential undermining of the MoU’s potential advantages. Somaliland, a de facto independent state for over three decades, has demonstrably carved its own path, boasting a stable democracy, success in combating piracy and Al-Shabaab, all without significant US assistance. Ignoring this progress is not only a shortsighted political opportunism but it also fuels resentment and questions about the true motivations behind the US Administration’s stance.

One possibility lies in the inertia of outdated US policy, clinging to a unified Somalia despite its internal complexities. Another lies in the influence of certain narratives seeking to downplay Somaliland’s achievements and exaggerate the perceived threat of the MoU. These narratives, amplified by President Mohamoud’s inflammatory pronouncements and threats of war, paint a concerning picture of a region teetering on the brink.

Furthermore, Somalia’s persistent struggles against Al-Shabaab, despite substantial US support, raise troubling questions about its true commitment to eradicating the terrorist group. The possibility of Al-Shabaab being used as a proxy force, mirroring historical missteps like the “Cobra Effect,” adds another layer of complexity and underscores the need for a cautious and nuanced approach. But these narratives are nothing more than using the MoU as a cover for obstructing African solutions for African problems.

Beyond potential missteps within US policy, a broader landscape emerges. China, with its increasing economic and diplomatic footprint in Africa, offers an alternative approach. Their model of pragmatism and non-interference aligns well with the MoU’s focus on mutual benefit and regional development. While caution is always warranted with any external actor, considering alternative partners may be crucial in navigating the intricate realities of the Horn.

It’s worth noting that this isn’t the first time Somalia has reacted negatively to Somaliland’s international agreements. The 2016 deal between Somaliland and DP World to develop the Berbera port, and Somaliland’s subsequent bilateral ties with Taiwan, both triggered similar waves of objection from Mogadishu. Yet, both agreements have proceeded, demonstrating Somaliland’s agency in pursuing its own development trajectory. This history underscores the importance of avoiding knee-jerk reactions and instead engaging in dialogue that respects the aspirations of both sides.

Ambassador Hammer’s statements and apparent appeasement of skepticism risk undermining the genuine progress achieved by both Somaliland and Ethiopia. Prioritizing temporary appeasement over a long-term vision for regional stability would be a dangerous misstep. Both Ethiopia and Somaliland stand to benefit immensely from the MoU, and focusing on their shared goals is paramount. The path forward lies not in clinging to outdated narratives or succumbing to empty threats.

A sustainable solution requires a deep understanding of the region’s intricate realities, a genuine respect for the aspirations of both Somaliland and Ethiopia, and a commitment to constructive dialogue that prioritizes regional peace and prosperity. Only by embracing the MoU as a beacon of progress, recognizing the convergence of interests it embodies, and navigating the currents of skepticism with nuance and foresight, can we navigate the brewing storm in the Horn and pave the way for a shared future built on mutual respect and shared gain.

Ethiopia and Somaliland Unyielding: Firmly Dismiss Arab League’s Opposition of Bilateral MoU

Staff

January 18, 2024

In resolute responses, Ethiopia and Somaliland have unequivocally rejected the recent Arab League Statement condemning their Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). Somaliland, in a press release today, expressed deep regret over the League of Arab States’ decision during its emergency meeting of foreign ministers on January 17, 2024.

The League’s statement affirmed support for Somalia’s security and sovereignty, declaring the MoU between Ethiopia and Somaliland null and void. In a scathing rebuke, Somaliland criticized the League’s stance as hostile, unfair, and a blatant interference in internal affairs. Asserting its independence, Somaliland emphasized its right to establish agreements with friendly nations, warning of consequences if incitement against the MoU persists, accusing Mogadishu of irresponsibility that could escalate conflicts in the Horn of Africa.

Ethiopia’s State Minister of Foreign Affairs, in a forceful tweet, categorically rejected the Arab League’s statement, deeming it an attempt to interfere with Ethiopia’s internal affairs and sovereignty. Ethiopia, while maintaining bilateral relations with many Arab states, expressed dissatisfaction with the League’s stance, suggesting it serves the interests of only a few members.

Against the backdrop of the MoU, Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa, Ambassador Mike Hammer, is set to attend the 42nd Extraordinary Summit of IGAD, focusing on Ethiopia-Somalia relations and Sudan. Notably, Ethiopia declined an IGAD summit invitation on technical grounds. Mr. Hammer’s visit’s purpose, including potential U.S. pressure on the MoU, remains unclear.

Meanwhile, the Somali Federal Government has accused Ethiopia of violating its sovereignty through the MoU with Somaliland, and threatening war despite Ethiopian forces’ presence in Somalia under the ATMIS mandate. However, Somaliland, despite lacking international recognition, has functioned as an independent country and entered into similar agreements with foreign entities in the past. Its main port of Berbera and free trade zone is managed DP World.

Interestingly, Somalia perceives the collaboration between Somaliland and Ethiopia as a greater threat to its stability than the Al-Shabaab terrorist organization, which recently claimed responsibility for a bombing in the Somali capital.

Clarifying Historical Realities: Somaliland’s Right to Unilateral Agreements

Editor II

January 13, 2024

Somaliland Strategic Advisory Group (SL-SAG)

For immediate release – January 12, 2024

In the pursuit of an accurate portrayal of the historical and political landscape in the Horn of Africa, it is imperative to address recent tensions between the Somalia Federal Government and Somaliland, specifically regarding theMemorandum of Understanding (MoU) between Somaliland and Ethiopia. The following points elucidate Somaliland’s legitimate right to engage in agreements independently and unilaterally:

I. Unratified Union: It is crucial to acknowledge that the Somali Republic originated from the envisioned 1960 union of two distinct territories – former British Somaliland and former Italian Somalia. However, the Act of Union between the two governments was never legally jointly ratified by the Somaliland and the Italian Somalia parliamentary bodies. The Somaliland legislature agreed to 27 articles, but the Somali-Italian legislators never ratified these agreed-upon articles. Instead, they independently drafted and signed two separate articles, leading to an illegitimate union. Hence, in 1991, Somaliland emerged from the aftermath of genocide, a fact recognized by the United Nations in a 2001 report investigating Somalia’s genocide against Somaliland.

II. Sovereignty Reclaimed: Somaliland, in response to theatrocities committed against its people, reclaimed its sovereignty, establishing a distinct trajectory separate from former Italian Somaliland. Simultaneously, the Italian Somaliland formed the Federal Republic of Somalia, and both regions pursued independent paths.

III. Non-Participation in Federal Government Formation: The people of Somaliland did not participate in the process leading to the formation of the Somalia Federal Government. This decision, according to Somaliland leadership, was a precaution against a recurrence of the deceitful political maneuvering that occurred in Mogadishu in 1960. This non-participation underscores Somaliland’s commitment to self-determination and unique governance aspirations.

IV. Commitment to Self-Determination: Somaliland was never part of the process of forming the Somalia Federal Government, emphasizing its dedication to self-determination and distinctive governance aspirations.

V. Democratic Governance Structure: Somaliland operates under a governance structure consisting of a directly elected government, parliament, and independent judiciary. This unique political system reflects an unwavering commitment to democratic principles, ensuring effective checks and balances within the state apparatus.

In conclusion, the Somalia Federal Republic must adopt a realistic perspective and recognize Somaliland as an independent country. While maintaining open channels of communication, both Somaliland and Somalia can collaboratively establish the groundwork for enduring peace and mutual prosperity in the region. Acknowledging each other’s sovereignty and fostering effective communication can pave the way for resolving long-standing disputes in the future.

1 234...79 Page 3 of 79

Investigative Reports

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

About the Author

About us

Most recent

Most popular

Subscribe