• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About sharma-arke451

  • Rank
  1. The pundits went about their poisonous work today before the first corpse was in its grave. Can Egypt avoid a civil war? Will the “terrorist” Brotherhood be wiped out by the loyal army? What about those who demonstrated before Morsi’s overthrow? Tony Blair was only one of those who talked of impending “chaos” in bestowing their support on General Abdul-Fattah al-Sisi. Every violent incident in Sinai, every gun in the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood will now be used to persuade the world that the organisation – far from being a poorly armed but well-organised Islamist movement – was the right arm of al-Qa’ida. History may take a different view. It will certainly be hard to explain how many thousands – yes, perhaps millions – of educated, liberal Egyptians continued to give their wholehearted support to the general who spent much time after the overthrow of Mubarak justifying the army’s virginity tests of female protesters in Tahrir Square. Al-Sisi will come under much scrutiny in the coming days; he was always reputedly sympathetic to the Brotherhood, although this idea may have been provoked by his wife’s wearing of the niqab. And many of the middle-class intellectuals who have thrown their support behind the army will have to squeeze their consciences into a bottle to accommodate future events. Could Nobel Prize-holder and nuclear expert Mohamed el-Baradei, the most famous personality – in Western eyes, but not in Egyptian - in the ‘interim government’, whose social outlook and integrity looked frighteningly at odds with ‘his’ government’s actions today, have stayed in power? Of course not. He had to go, for he never intended such an outcome to his political power gamble when he agreed to prop up the army’s choice of ministers after last month’s coup. But the coterie of writers and artists who insisted on regarding the coup as just another stage in the revolution of 2011 will - after the blood and el-Baradei’s resignation – have to use some pretty anguished linguistics to escape moral blame for these events. Stand by, of course, for the usual jargon questions. Does this mean the end of political Islam? For the moment, certainly; the Brotherhood is in no mood to try any more experiments in democracy – a refusal which is the immediate danger in Egypt. For without freedom, there is violence. Will Egypt turn into another Syria? Unlikely. Egypt is neither a sectarian state – it never has been, even with 10 per cent of its people Christian – nor an inherently violent one. It never experienced the savagery of Algerian uprisings against the French, or Syrian, Lebanese and Palestinian insurgencies against both the British and the French. But ghosts aplenty will hang their heads in shame today; that great revolutionary lawyer of the 1919 rising, for example, Saad Zaghloul. And General Muhammad Neguib whose 1952 revolutionary tracts read so much like the demands of the people of Tahrir in 2011. But yes, something died in Egypt today. Not the revolution, for across the Arab world the integrity of ownership – of people demanding that they, not their leaders, own their own country – remains, however bloodstained. Innocence died, of course, as it does after every revolution. No, what expired today was the idea that Egypt was the everlasting mother of the Arab nation, the nationalist ideal, the purity of history in which Egypt regarded all her people as her children. For the Brotherhood victims today – along with the police and pro-government supporters – were also children of Egypt. And no one said so. They had become the “terrorists”, the enemy of the people. That is Egypt’s new heritage.
  2. Cairo massacre: After today, what Muslim will ever trust the ballot box again? This marks a tragic turning point, from which it will take Egypt years to recover The Egyptian crucible has broken. The “unity” of Egypt – that all-embracing, patriotic, essential glue that has bound the nation together since the overthrow of the monarchy in 1952 and the rule of Nasser – has melted amid the massacres, gun battles and fury of yesterday’s suppression of the Muslim Brotherhood. A hundred dead – 200, 300 “martyrs” – makes no difference to the outcome: for millions of Egyptians, the path of democracy has been torn up amid live fire and brutality. What Muslim seeking a state based on his or her religion will ever trust the ballot box again? This is the real story of today’s bloodbath. Who can be surprised that some Muslim Brotherhood supporters were wielding Kalashnikovs on the streets of Cairo? Or that supporters of the army and its “interim government” – in middle-class areas of the capital, no less – have seized their weapons or produced their own and started shooting back. This is not Brotherhood vs army, though that is how our Western statesmen will mendaciously try to portray this tragedy. Today’s violence has created a cruel division within Egyptian society that will take years to heal; between leftists and secularists and Christian Copts and Sunni Muslim villagers, between people and police, between Brotherhood and army. That is why Mohamed el-Baradei resigned tonight. The burning of churches was an inevitable corollary of this terrible business. In Algeria in 1992, in Cairo in 2013 – and who knows what happens in Tunisia in the coming weeks and months? – Muslims who won power, fairly and democratically through the common vote, have been hurled from power. And who can forget our vicious siege of Gaza when Palestinians voted – again democratically – for Hamas? No matter how many mistakes the Brotherhood made in Egypt – no matter how promiscuous or fatuous their rule – the democratically elected president Mohamed Morsi was overthrown by the army. It was a coup, and John McCain was right to use that word. The Brotherhood, of course, should long ago have curbed its amour propre and tried to keep within the shell of the pseudo-democracy that the army permitted in Egypt – not because it was fair or acceptable or just, but because the alternative was bound to be a return to clandestinity, to midnight arrests and torture and martyrdom. This has been the historical role of the Brotherhood – with periods of shameful collaboration with British occupiers and Egyptian military dictators – and a return to the darkness suggests only two outcomes: that the Brotherhood will be extinguished in violence, or will succeed at some far distant date – heaven spare Egypt such a fate – in creating an Islamist autocracy.
  3. Two positions add to one The question then is, with the Egyptian military having been an acutely embarrassing partner of late - what was Washington supposed to do? Should it have presented it with an ultimatum? Cut aid, after years of lavishing the military with significant funds? The conventional wisdom among the Middle East policy establishment, especially those allied with Israel is that Washington needs to maintain a close relationship with the military at all times. Some claim that the Egyptian military is an indispensable and reliable ally in a sea of turmoil, and supporting it serves US national security interests. For them, the emerging civilian forces - popular as they may be- whether Islamists or secular - are neither reliable nor friendly. Others argue that refraining from criticising the generals allows Washington to exercise some degree of influence over their decision-making. Washington's newly appointed Middle East "peace envoy", Martin Indyk, argues that the US should be communicating with the military of the Arab world's "largest, militarily most-powerful, culturally most-influential, and geostrategically most-important country" through private channels, and not work against it. Reversing roles Some within the minority of the Washington establishment advocate severing relations with the Egyptian military if it doesn't refrain from violence. They see any perceived complicity between the US and the authoritarian Egyptian military to be harmful for US interests in the long-term, especially since it allows for a backlash among Islamists in the region. But it seems far-fetched that this warning would be heeded in Washington. Would freezing aid make sense at a time when the US is fast losing its relevance in the region? Already losing its leverage and influence, notably regarding the dramatic events taking place in Syria, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon and the region in general, Washington is not about to give up one of its few strategic pillars in the Middle East. The Egyptian military is privy to all of this and understands all too well its own utility for the US in the region. For example, what if Egypt chooses to be the one to walk out? I reckon there would be major panic in the American capital and no less in Israel. After all, isn't Egypt what helps America maintain stability in the region and help preserve Israel's security ? The way forward… Washington would've liked to see the generals refrain from violence, empower the civilian government, allow for a quick return to the democratic process, and eventually return to the barracks. But the US did not voice its opinion loud enough, and didn't make it clear to the generals that failure to heed their advice has consequences. As the spiral of violence gets underway on Egypt's streets, America needs to show the value of its leverage over Egypt's military. The White House statement and Secretary of State's condemnation of the violence is hardly a good start. Everyone has condemned the violence; even the Egyptian generals! Neither pillow talk in private nor regrets in public are useful to stop the escalation. True leverage over a client starts with America telling the Egyptian generals: end the emergency law, stop the violence and allow a return to the ballot box. Or else. Marwan Bishara is Al Jazeera's senior political analyst and the author of The Invisible Arab: The promise and peril of the Arab revolutions, now available in bookstores. Follow him on Twitter: @MarwanBishara The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.
  4. The US's cozy relationship with Egypt's military should be reexamined. As the situation escalates into a full-fledged confrontation between the Egyptian military and supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood, Washington is once again playing catch-up with its own clients. Happy to see the back of the Islamists, the US administration refrained from referring to the military overthrow of President Morsi as a coup even when influential members of Congress recognised it as such. The Obama administration wanted the coup to work; it did not want blood on its hands. But if they hoped to appease and influence the military, they were wrong. The generals adamant on containing, if not breaking the Brotherhood, saw the political challenges facing Egypt as security problems that require the use of force. They imposed emergency laws that allows more control, but in reality it led to more escalation. As they prepared to publicly crackdown on Morsi's supporters through force, Washington remained largely silent. US calls for restraint, dialogue, and a return to the ballot box seemed more rhetorical than practical or effective. America's eagerness to maintain a close relationship with the military and remain relevant in the country has prevented it from taking a clear stand. Investing in the Egyptian military Egypt is a "major non-NATO ally" with the military to military liaisons at its core. Egypt's military relationship with the West took off after the 1979 Peace Treaty between Israel and Egypt, rendering Egypt the second-largest recipient of its bilateral assistance after Israel. This required, among others, a major military and financial investment that totalled $66bn since the peace treaty. The American wooing of the Egyptian generals has cost the US $1.3bn a year since 1987. Heavy-duty gifts like 1,000 tanks and 221 fighter jets worth billions signified the US's commitment to Egypt. In 2011 - the year of the revolution - Egypt received almost a quarter of all of America's Foreign Military Financing funds. The American-Egyptian courtship has resulted in, among many things, an Americanized Egyptian defense force. Over 500 Egyptian officers benefit from the American military education system every year. These include top Egyptian officers, including the country's defense chief, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who went to the US Army War College in Pennsylvania, as well as the commander of the Air Force, Reda Mahmoud. The education stints of the Egyptian officers in US military colleges, the training programs, and the joint military exercises have led to enduring ties between the establishments of both countries.
  5. Abtigiis;960619 wrote: Kadaa Shar'maarkoow...shar ha ka taline! Aadan Barre has said aloud what other Kenyans government officials may be thinking inside. That cannot be a crime...if at all his only crime could be naivety and impulsiveness. Laakin adiga Somali ahaan, adigoo ka eegaya danta Somaliyeed ee guud iskana ilaawaya danta reernimo ama qaladaadka Xassan Sheikh (oo ficil waa wax shaydaane aaan ficil ku qaadin), ma saxbaa in Somalia Ethiopia iyo Kenya "sarsar" looga dhigo? I think it is a big NO! Sharcina ma aha, sax na ma aha. Sxb abtigiis kugu ma ogeen fahan daro ee see camal? read what i said properly. you just said what i said in another way. tan kale, the jubaland is not a one clan stake as you put it, although loo kala badan yahay. ninyahoow bahasha weey kaa maqan tahay
  6. Miskiin-Macruuf-Aqiyaar;960567 wrote: I had a little ixtiraam for this xlidhibaan, after Yuusuf Xasan of Islii. Laakiin intuu iskugu kaadiye. Afxumaa waxa. Sarsarka uu sheegaayo oo uu Kiinya dhul kale Soomaaliyeed kusii siiyo rabo, tan NFD maa ku filnaan weysay ay xooga ku heystaan walina laga samrin. Sarsar kulahaa, mayee goos goosasho. "Anaga, anaga" kulahaa. Kiikuuyo muu ismooday. The man said the truth, unless you don't want to hear. and here, adigaa isku kaadiye. it is true that, somaliland and puntland are sarsar for Ethiopoia, and Kenya is eyeing jubaland as a sarsar. pure truth. whether that is acceptable or not, depends on the nationhood in the person. some will sell the whole of Somalia for a single yuan.
  7. it is disturbing really, and mostly the mode of the killing and not the death. it is filled with hate and humiliation. revenge is the best counter, and only that is enough. how to, time will tell.
  8. , many of whom are forced to queue for weeks in order to renew their temporary asylum seeker’s documents, is just part of a daily digest of humiliation endured by foreign nationals. Abdi, the Somali businesswoman in Diepsloot, said that her son’s asylum seeker certificate was stolen when her store was looted. Police, however, refused to allow her to open a case of theft or compile an affidavit attesting to the theft of the documents in order for the Department of Home Affairs to issue her son new set of documents. “When I went to Diepsloot police on Friday they said it is too late [to open] the case,” she said. “Then I said, okay, I want to make affidavit but they said, ‘No, go to Home Affairs’". Home Affairs, she said will want to see proof from the South African Police Services that the documents were indeed stolen. This is how the trouble starts, researchers said. "The way the state treats foreign nationals essentially represents the way ordinary people treat foreign nationals," Misgun adds. Despite attracting the biggest number of asylum seekers in the world, The Southern African Migration Project (SAMP) found that South Africans receive foreigners with a jaundiced eye. It is a tenuous contradiction, activists said. "On one hand, South Africa wants to promote solidarity and unity on the African continent and yet there is move towards a more restrictive asylum regime," Sicel'mpilo Shange-Buthane, executive director of the Consortium for Refugees and Migrants (CoRMSA), in Johannesburg, told Al Jazeera. Shange-Buthane said the government's move to shift reception centres for refugees from the city centre to the border regions sends a clear message: "We don't want refugees in the cities." This gives credence to the findings of the SAMP survey that 63 percent of South Africans wanted electrified fences on the country’s borders. With just one perpetuator brought to justice for the 2008 violence, the South African judiciary is allowing for a culture of impunity to settle, as the foreigner is institutionalised as a soft target, unlikely to enjoy state protection on any level, said Landau of the ACMS. Social integration On Sunday the Somali president urged South Africa’s president Jacob Zuma to investigate the killing of Abdi Nasir Mahmoud Good, the Somali trader. Experts and activists said little is likely to change, unless and until African leaders threaten economic consequences to South Africa's expanding operations across the continent; by their own admission a shot in the dark. As of now, there remains little incentive for local politicians to demand their communities to respect foreigners when they are unable to provide services or at least better reasons for their inability to deliver. Little wonder, then, that more than 60 percent surveyed in the SAMP report believe that violence against foreigners usually occurs because of the latter's penchant for crime or taking away jobs from South Africans. With national elections due in 2014, addressing the concerns of foreigners is unlikely to feature prominently on the electorate's wish list. The solution, Landau said, involves focusing on building "a more equitable society where economic rights are applied equally". Misgun, the lecturer in Sociology agrees that focusing on shifting attitudes without improving peoples' lives is counterproductive. He expressed the view of many researchers when he said: "If people were not fighting over a bag of corn or sugar, it [the situation] might be a little different." Follow Azad Essa @azadessa and Khadija Patel @khadijapatel on Twitter Source: Al Jazeera
  9. “You need money to open the shop again and I now have none,” she said. Abdi also previously worked as a street vendor in Diepsloot. She said the discrimination she faced every day forced her to give up her stall. "I don’t look like a South African and I wear this,” she said, pointing to her hijab. “Every day I was getting too much trouble, people were swearing me, they were shouting me, stealing my stuff ... they don't like us,” she said. Just days before the looting of Somali-owned stores in Diepsloot, some 60 km south of Johannesburg, in the township of Sebokeng, foreign-owned stores were also systematically looted after a protest against poor governance in the area catalysed into a campaign to root out foreigners and foreign-owned businesses from the township. By the time the police stepped in, all foreign-owned stores had been looted, the belongings of foreign nationals were burned and foreigners were driven out of the township. Despite the targeting, the South African government has been quick to caution against labelling this surge in violence as xenophobia because "preliminary evidence indicates that these acts may be driven primarily by criminality". Al Jazeera requested comment repeatedly from the office of South Africa's president of the department of home affairs and the South African police services, but recieved no response. Labelling the violence as just crime creates a false debate, said Biniam Misgun, lecturer in the School of Sociology at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, in Durban. "When you see a group intentionally attacked and their shops looted because they are foreign, then you cannot just say it's criminality driving this," Misgun told Al Jazeera. Misgun's assertions that these are hate crimes are corroborated by statistics. In 2011, around 120 foreign nationals were killed, of whom five were burnt alive. In 2012, 140 foreigners were killed and 250 others injured in violent attacks across the country, reported the African Centre for Migration & Society (ACMS) in Johannesburg. In 2013, the Centre estimates that at least three attacks on foreigners take place weekly. Complex issue Understanding the context of xenophobic sentiment in the grand intersection of race and class in a South Africa mired by a complex social and economic history is difficult. As the largest economy on the continent, South Africa has attracted foreign Africans from as far afield as Nigeria, Ethiopia, the DR Congo and as close as neighbouring Botswana. They come as political refugees or economic migrants, with one goal: a better life. Following the end of apartheid in 1994, thousands of Chinese and South Asian foreign nationals have been living and conducting business across the country. Instead of South Africans thriving on its much-vaunted multicultural identity, foreigners have been painted in the popular imagination as criminals, job snatchers, and parasites arriving in throngs to eat at an economy battling to feed its own people. New research released last month from the Southern African Migration Programme (SAMP) found that more than 50 percent of South Africans believed foreigners constituted a majority of the country's population. In reality, foreign nationals amount to less than five percent, or 2.2 million people out of a population of around 50 million. The SAMP study, investigating the incidence of xenophobia in South Africa after the horrific attacks of 2008 which killed more than 60 people, also debunks the popular notion that xenophobia was a disease of the poor. That these attacks are taking place in already rough neighborhoods is worth remembering, Loren Landau, director of the African Centre of Migration and Society (ACMS) in Johannesburg, said. The study found that xenophobia is firmly embedded across all economic and social strata of South African society but with incidents of violence are more likely in impoverished areas where a riot can sometimes be the only way to the draw government attention. Government attitude Researchers suggest that the root of the problem lies with the government’s attitude to foreigners, especially foreign African nationals. Foreign nationals entering the country and trying to integrate into society narrate tales of daily strife with authorities. They report harassment at police stations, neglect at hospitals and abuse at immigration offices. Abuse is widespread, migrants said. Last Monday, in the midst of this upsurge in violence against foreign nationals, security staff at an office of the Department of Home Affairs turned a fire hose on hundreds of refugees queuing to renew their documents. Businesses owned by foreigners have been attacked [Al Jazeera] The cold sting meted out to the hundreds of refugees
  10. Brutal murder of Somali in South Africa draws ire of foreign African nationals over rising xenophobic violence. Violence against migrants has flared in recent weeks, especially in some of South Africa's poor areas Johannesburg, South Africa - In a country with a history of violence like South Africa, there are few scenes of brutality that can still shock the nation. The video that emerged on YouTube last weekend of a Somali man lying flat in a Port Elizabeth street has shocked many South Africans out of a general complacence over the rising incidence of violence against foreigners in the country. The man, who was stripped naked, his genitals pelted with rocks, stones smashed over his head all the while receiving kicks to the face, became the latest victim of xenophobic violence in the country. The 25-year-old man, Abdi Nasir Mahmoud Good, died of his injuries. Good is just one of the victims of the xenophobic violence that flared through northern Port Elizabeth and up to four other towns and cities across the country last week. Five other Somalis were injured in the violence and almost every Somali-owned business in Port Elizabeth’s Booysen Park was burned or looted. Good's family said he had been trying to salvage his goods in the small store he owned in Booysens Park when he met the ire of a mob. National problem Before the wave of violence hit Port Elizabeth, the sprawling township of Diepsloot in Johannesburg was a scene of chaos after a Somali shopkeeper killed two Zimbabweans he suspected to be thieves on the evening of Sunday, May 26. Angered by the shootings, Diepsloot residents turned their attention on the Somalis, Pakistanis and other foreign nationals doing business in the township. Nineteen foreign-owned stores were attacked in a frenzy of xenophobic violence and looting over the next two days. Though calm has been restored to Diepsloot, the Somali store at the centre of the issue remains closed. A co-owner of the store, Amina Hassan Abdi, a Somali woman who fled the conflict in the Horn of Africa in 2007, said the violence essentially destroyed her livelihood.
  11. Maaddeey;954912 wrote: Is Madoobe any better, Che?. ninki maaddeey ahaa waa dhar dhigtay. war isku xishood waryee:p
  12. Gudigii Xaqiiqa raadinta IGAD oo ku taliyay in lawada hadashiiyo dowlada dhexe iyo maamulka Jubbaland Gudigii xaqiiqa raadinta IGAD ayaa kasoo saaray warbixin waxyaabihii ay kasoo ariiriyeen Muqdisho iyo Kismaayo.Warbixintan oo aanan wali si rasmi ah u helin ayaa naloo xaqiijiyay in soo baxday waxyaabaha ugu muhiimsan ee ku qorana ay tahay talo soo jeedin ah in la wada hadashiiyo Muqdisho iyo Kismaayo. Waxaa xusid mudan in go’aan ka gaadhida arimaha la isku hayo laga sugayo shirka Midowga Africa ee maalinta sabtida ah ka furmaya Addis Ababa shirkaas oo ku go;aan qaadan doona soo jeedinta gudiga xaqiiqa raadinta IGAD iyo natiijada kasoo baxda wadahadalada madaxda Africa shirkaas ku dhexmari doona. 27/05/2013 ayaa la filaayaa in go’aan cad kasoo saaro midowga Africa khilaafka u dhaxeeya Muqdisho iyo Kismaayo.
  13. Taleexi;951450 wrote: XX dhegihiisa iyo afkiisu isma maqlaan. The name Somaliland evolved and it simply means habraha admin, no more no less. :cool::cool:
  14. to my knowledge, aaliyyah is the least tribal than the accusers.