Tigrean In Sheep’s Clothes…….! By Mohamed Heebaan September 19 , 2009 Abdul Ahmed III is an odd name for a Somali, or for that matter for a Muslim. But he could be neither. In either case, the name is the least problematic about this writer. The writer posted on some Somali websites an article titled “Understanding the collapse of Somalia: challenges and opportunities for restoring a nation-state.” The impression one gets from the title is that the writer would perhaps shed some light on the reasons behind the collapse of the Somali government, and possibly suggest some of the best ways to tackle the fragmentation prevalent today, and restore the unity of the country. Unfortunately the writer says something in the title, and the opposite in the body of the article. In other words, the hopeful title of the article is a deliberate deception of the sinister message delivered in the body of the article. An accurate summary of the article and appropriate title for the message it conveys would be “Somalia is dead, and it should forever remain that way!” The writer obviously harbours deep antagonism towards Somalia, its country, and its people. His antagonism shows NOT in the superficial forms of trashing and name calling, but the careful choice of his words, and policy proposals he advocates. For example, his name of choice, that he uses over and over, for our country is NOT Somalia, but former-Somalia—as though Somalia and its people and its country have vanished from the face of this earth! The prescription he penned for Somalia unequivocally underlines the writer’s deep animosity against Somalia and its people, because line after line, paragraph after paragraph, the writer emphasizes two reinforcing points: Somalia’s demise is irreversible, and the attempts to restore the unity of the country are doomed and hopeless: “The collapse of Somalia is irreversible, restoration of Somalia is beyond mechanistic policy design”1 He wrote. In other words, Abdul Ahmed III is saying that Somalia’s demise is permanent, and all the efforts to restore the unity of the country are an exercise in futility! And if the death sentence that he given Somalia wasn’t clear enough, he writes it in block letters for everyone to see, “For the Somalia that once was, the nation state that existed from 1960-1991 may not be restorable at all to its original state.” He declares. In the two examples that I have just given, the writer had given Somalia a death sentence, and was saying that no one should try to resuscitate it, because it is hopeless. But the writer moved from describing Somalia as a dead entity, into devising and proposing a sinister policy of dismemberment, which he euphemistically calls “Decentralization”, that he clearly knows would kill Somalia for good: “If empirical evidence is a guide and an authority for devising a solution to Somalia’s problems, then one would most certainly and at a minimum explore a solution based on DECENTRALIZED, traditional or regional authorities.” He writes. And again, if the writer’s aims and intentions towards Somalia were not clear enough, he expresses his agenda in an explicit manner that would leave no doubt in anyone’s mind, when he says, “The de facto partitioning of Somalia is a real outcome that may be just irreversible.” The writer dismisses as wrong headed the international community’s policy of treating Somalia as a one country, because he says Somalia had been a unified country only for 31 years, from 1960-1991: He writes, “The international Community uses a rather obsolete paradigm based on viewing Somalia as a single entity. In reality Somalia has been single unified entity only for 31 years (from 1960-1991).” The above point clearly underlines Abdul Ahmed’s ignorance about world history, and how tribes, clans, communities, towns, and regions evolved into states and nations. Tell me any country in the world, and I will tell you when the people in that country evolved from communities and disparate towns and regions into a unified state. The writer time and again criticizes the UN, the US, and the international community for supporting the effort to create a central Somali government that may unite the country. Instead he wants the Dismemberment that he euphemistically calls Regionalism must be given the focus: “The international community must realize that Somali regionalism (whether it is a virtue or a vice) must be acknowledged. It must also be a parameter to consider when devising a policy for reconciliation and post conflict institutional building. From policy design perspective, regionalism is an essential element to consider. US, UN and the international community must view the former-Somalia as a country that consists of distinct and divided regions.” In the very next paragraph, the writer abandons the rhetoric about regionalism, and calls upon the world community to stop treating Somalia as a single country, when he says, “It is therefore sensible for the United States, United Nations, and the EU to abandon the premise of Somalia as a single monolithic entity.” Now, there is an unavoidable question here, and it is this: why is it bothering Abdul Ahmed III if the world keeps treating Somalia as a single country? It is bothering him because, apparently, he wants to Somalia to become several little Bantustans, all of which are controlled by the Tigrean regime in Addis Ababa. But he didn’t stop there. Instead the writer openly and explicitly called on the US to lead the way for partitioning of Somalia, when he says, “The United States in particular has a unique opportunity to treat Somalia as decentralized(i.e. dismembered) entities without officially affirming the country’s dissolution.” In other words, the writer is calling upon the US to dismember and partition Somalia, but should refrain from stating that publicly!! As an introduction for his proposal for dismemberment and partitioning of Somalia, the writer says Somalia’s problem has its root in “A complex social problem with broad political implications. It is particularly an acute social problem in managing and maintaining modern state.” The uses I. M. Lewis as a scholarly source to solidify his claims and says, “As far back as 1993, the world-renowned Somali affairs expert and anthropologist I.M. Lewis stressed the importance of recognizing the social clan structure.” I find it interesting the writer cites I. M. Lewis for two reasons: 1—I. M. Lewis is one of the few people on earth that would agree with the dismemberment of Somalia that Abdul Ahmed III is advocating. 2—I. M. Lewis is perhaps the last person on the planet whose views would be given any merit when the interest of the Somali people are seriously considered, as I am going elaborate shortly. SECESSION, DISMEMBERMENT AND DESTRUCTION… Many Somalis and particularly those in the secessionist north have been scratching their heads, unable to understand why the chaotic southern Somalia has been receiving so much moral and material support, while the stable, reasonably democratic north had been shunned by the whole world? This is somewhat astonishing because whatever government concocted in southern Somalia is immediately and always supported by the whole world. But the stable, democratic, and peaceful secessionist north had been completely shunned, and all of its appeals for recognition have fallen on deaf ears! However there is a good reason for this seemingly strange action by the international community, because the world community knows secessions for what it is: secession means dismembering and destroying a country! And that is the very reason why all the international organizations such as the UN, African Union, the Arab League, European Union, Organization of Islamic Conference, ASEAN, OAS, and all the countries in the world, east and west, north and south, big and small, have shunned the secession of Somaliland, because no country wants the destruction and the dismemberment of Somalia to be registered in its name! Even the Tigrean regime that fully supports the secession and the dismemberment of Somalia is, nevertheless, very careful not to offer any public recognition to the secession. Ignorance is the source of animosity. And familiarity breeds friendship. It is an established fact that the more we learn about a people of a certain country, and learn their language and culture, the better related, better understanding, and much friendlier we become towards the people of that country. That is the reason why many of the students who study in foreign lands be it in Australia, China, US, Malaysia or Egypt develop connection and loyalty towards the country in which they studied. And what goes for foreign students also goes for Orienatlists, who also develop strong connection and loyalty towards the peoples and countries whose culture and language they studied and mastered. Now like the orientalists everywhere, and as someone who studied the Somali society, its culture, language, and history, I. M. Lewis was naturally expected to have a feeling and loyalty for the Somali people. And when the tragedy struck and our nation fell apart, I. M. Lewis was expected to be one of the leading advocates for Somalia’s unity, and the safeguarding of its national interests. Unfortunately, I. M. Lewis did no such thing. Instead, the supposed friend of the Somali people has become a cheerleader for the secession, and a leading advocate for Somalia’s dismemberment and destruction! Somalis are one people, and one body. You either like them, or you don’t! And I. M. Lewis’ logic of being in love with one region of Somalia and of hating the rest—hatred manifests itself in the advocacy for the dismemberment and the destruction of the country—is contradiction in terms! The fact that I. M. Lewis embraced the destruction of Somalia, a project rejected by the whole world, shows the orientalist’s true colours. And it is when viewed his actions in that context that I. M. Lewis’s treachery against the Somali people become ever so clear! In conclusion, Abdul Ahmed III is his own worst enemy, because he forgot or perhaps doesn’t know the first rule of writing, which is to know your audience! Had he delivered his piece as a lecture to some Americans in the Arizona desert, or to the Tigrean regime in Addis Ababa, he would have had a better luck. The Americans, not knowing much about Somalia or African clan structure, would have found the whole speech exotic and interesting. And the Tigrean regime would have enjoyed it because it reinforces the designs and policies they have been pursuing against Somalia for close to two decades. However to concoct a Tigrean agenda laced with hatred of Somalia, and of all the people on earth to come to the Somalis themselves, and lecture them on how better off they would be to have their country dismembered and partitioned is nothing short of utter *********! If Abdul Ahmed III wants to be taken seriously, he first needs to be original. Rehashing Males Zenawi’s tired policies is no way to earn respectability! Mohamed Heebaan E-Mail: mohamed19456@hotmail .com

Regionalism and Alternative Forms of Governance: A Critique on Centralized, Top Down Approach to the Problem of Somalia By Abdul Ahmed Sept 16 , 2009 It is often counter intuitive and very difficult for many scholars, policy makers, journalist and even politicians to explain or make sense of the collapse of the former Somalia. Many others fail to explain the prolonged socio-political conflict in the most homogenous nations in the African continent. However a close examination of Somali social groups reveals that Somalia is a complex dynamic organism of a system of self organizing assorted groupings. The Somali problem can be reduced (at least conceptually) to a problem of complexity that involves “competition and coordination” by the groups, which could result in order and/or disorder. It is a paradigm in which the the clans either compete for governing the state ( in the case of Mogadishu or Southern Somalia) or establish a convention to govern the states through agreed system (in case of peaceful northern quasi-independent states of Somaliland and Puntland). Equally, the current state of affairs in Somalia can be put in plain words as a contingent outcome of a dynamic and complex socio-political system; a system that consists of self-regulating, competing entities that endogenously organize into diverse groups and regional polities. While the Somalia as whole may depict a sad picture of human failure and socio-political collapse, yet a deeper look of at a finer scale would show the existence of vibrant and stable regional governments/polities amidst the disorder that is Somalia. These stable regional polities embody a rich source of alternative routes to stabilizing the rest of what use to be Somalia; a model for resolving conflict and additional tool or at least an experience for the international community. Amongst the most elemental driver of regional stability and collective coordination is the Somalia clan norms and the clan system. The Somali clan system - and its modern manifestation as regionalism - is an established convention complete with a social structure, laws, administrative rules and well defined social norms for social interaction. It is also in essence the most reliable meta-institution through which the Somali people conduct their affairs. Through the clan system Somali people organize and regulate all aspects of social life within and between clans. They employ hybrid of modern social techniques and local customary laws that function as mechanisms for clan self preservation, inter-clan cooperation and conflict resolution and generally as a guide for interaction between clans and within each clan and even formation of traditional regional polities. Historically the clan system enabled Somali people to form their own independent governing structures or even their own traditional states. Historical or traditional polities are outcomes of highly complex co-evolution of clan system’s , social norms and pastoral society. This an evolutionary process however must have been unequal in the areas inhabited by Somali people. For instance, recorded evidence that some areas in Somalia had a very advanced governing structures (Sultanates / Kingdoms in Obbio, Hafun, Taleeh, Hadaftimo and Hargeisa) while other areas remained less developed or under Arab Sultanates. (Some of these are mentioned in Luigi Bricchetti Robecchi's Journeys in the Somali Country 1890-91 ). Today however, there is empirical evidence of similar patterns of emergence of traditional polities in the nation that was Somali Democratic Republic. (e.g. Puntland and Somaliland). The emergence of alternative polities in Puntland and Somaliland after the collapse of Somalia is very important to understand. Both Puntland and Somaliland constitute the re-emergence of traditional independent (or quasi independent states) in contemporary Somalia. This does not mean that I particularly support or justify the legitimacy of any but a mere practical truth on the ground one that must be understood for what it is and even used to foster stability in southern Somalia. Today’s regional authorities or regional polities are based on collective conventions and pacts achieved through clan systems. They also offer diverse and alternative institutional arrangements to cope with the failure of the former Somali Democratic Republic. However to make use of any diversity of institutions , one must disect, understand analyze and attempt to replicate the process that leads groups to organize and eventual formation of regional polities. It is equally important to acknowledge that these two northern states came to being and continue to exist practically with no support from the international community. (This is particularly true in case of Puntland). On the other hand, the international community, (primarily the UN) spent an enormous effort and material in constituting a central government for the entire country that was Somalia. Many of these attempts failed and the last attempt to constitute a central authority for Somalia is on life support. Puntland and Somaliland, for instance, employed diverse institutional arrangements, that included civic organizations, former security forces, intellectuals, extensive of clan based discussions (led by traditional clan elders) to form a collective pact to govern their affairs. This created Puntland in 1998 and Somaliland earlier in 1992. Though not conclusive, there is compelling evidence that it is highly likely that today’s Puntland (and to some extent Somaliland) are historical outcomes or contingencies of the local traditions to self-governance that predate modern day Somalia. Today’s Puntland for instance is made of several traditional sultanates that existed in the area prior to the colonial era. It is this long tradition of self reliance and local administration that enabled these regions to constitute functional authorities. It certainly is not random chance that the both Puntland and Somaliland have emerged while many other peaceful remained trapped and eventually consumed by the Somali Civil War. As in the pre-colonial era, the success of “clan sanctioned agreements” have become empirical reality and a solid ground that can ascertain a respected representative authority; indeed clan sanctioned agreements are empirically grounded accomplishments that endogenously bring people together - just as it were in the pre-colonial era but perhaps with a modern twist of quasi-state entity. Both Somaliland and Puntland are exemplary “empirical evidence” of how an authority is distributed to sub-clans through a bottom up functional organs nominated by the clan orders or projected by them. The Somaliland and Puntland experiments are in sharp contrast to the “4.5 power sharing plan” of the TFG, in which a distant “arm chair intellectuals” designed a power sharing scheme to distribute power to Somalia’s clans without the participation of local clan members, elders, regardless of the reality on the ground or the local metaphors. Of course, the UN and many policy analyst would claim that the “4.5 power sharing plan” is a clan neutral and attempt to justify it as fair means to distribute power to the Somali clans. The fact is however that the pre-conceived notion of fairness is one that is exogenously imposed or at least is perceived as imposed solutions (not endogenously derived as in case of Puntland). The perception of imposed rule (whether fair or not) affects the expectations as well as the behavior of Somali clans. Why would Somaliland or Puntland would want exchange whatever relative peace and prosperity for a future possible prosperous Somali nation state. It is these institutional and cultural factors that must be understood by the international community and Somalia enthusiasts. Somalia does not need prescriptive paternalism or policy designed at far away places by all well meaning elitist westerners or for that matter any non-Somali; A local Somali solution is more likely to succeed than any other prearranged solutions to create central authority. The world renowned public policy expert Dr Elinor Ostrom after extensive empirical studies suggested that policy analysis and policy design In the 21st be broadened to include a greater attention for regional and local governments. She also has pioneered the concept of institutional diversity in policy analysis to align centralized policy making with empirical realities of human choice and evolution of choices. In fact institutional diversity enables policy makers, decision makers and policy analysts to find solutions for complex problems from more than one source. Understanding this clan driven , real Somali regional dynamics is fundamental because most important decisions related to regional security, regional development, and the possibility of reconstituting a nation state for the former Somalia would demand participation and interaction of all local stakeholders. Moreover, the quasi-independent regional polities such as Somaliland and Puntland provide “alternative mechanisms” as well as “socially acceptable policy prescription” to Somalia’s problem. They also represent examples of a distinctly successful normative policy approaches available to those engaged in helping Somalia end its long civil conflict. Employing diverse approaches or diverse institutional arrangements is perhaps one way to manage the complexity that is Somalia, to cope with uncertainty and facilitate coordination of diverse actors. Employing expanded search for solutions that includes using the alternative institutions, direct involvement and consultation with Puntland and Somaliland can only help the idea of reconstituting a Somali nation-state. To that end, the International community must acknowledge and position it self to deal with various regional institutions including the quasi independent state of Puntland and Somaliland. If metaphors are the concepts we use to understand one thing in terms of another, the world community must acknowledge the local metaphors; local preferences, respect the choice of the regional groups without affirming the dissolution of the state. The United Nations and United States must not treat any potential central authority such as TFG to be the only option for stable and prosperous Somali peninsula. Instead the international community must consider diverse contingencies each of which could possibly lead to credible resolution to the Somali problem. In doing so however, the international community in general must pay a close attention to local preferences, existing intuitions/ governments and most of all local metaphors. Finally, because metaphors and narratives play an important role in public opinion and hence behavior, effectiveness of policy and implementation of policies; It is extremely important that policy designers create action and policy through language based on local metaphors that focus on viable and stable regions of the Somali peninsula rather than ambitious plans of creating strong central authority or restoring a Somali nation-state without local mandate. Abdul Ahmed III Email: abdul.ahmed@asu.edu

delete

Sheh-Boston inaa ka, musaafiriyo rabey. juxa....Imagine world where everybody is Muslim. Isn't such homogeneity boring? LooooL@juxa..who could ignore sheh

A&T...I'm hard-pressed to believe you actually care about the looma,ooyaan.

^ LoooL...good one, I walked right into that one.

LOL But you are wrong about Cara. their journey to Atheism/Agnosticism A religion in the making?

Originally posted by sheherazade: Geel Jire, will u marry me? I'm bored. Where's Alle-Ubaahne

A&T...You see want to see the poor people of Kismayo who are enjoying peace to be killed and displaced? And who will replace Al-Shabaab exactly that will ensure peace and free commerce?

He's senile old man,and judging from his time in politics and government, he's more of bureaucrat than politician.Perhaps Riyaale could appoint as his vice-president.Maybe that would shut him.

^This might not be speak to the subject at hand, what's extacly Al-Shabaab's end goal in Somalia?

^I'm not that exictable habo I wanted to see how much Ibti would take before she says f you. Aight Ibti cl..why?

Ibti-The dim room is within the context if your accepted standards and religious virtue. N of course, it would be something you would have assigned onto. Don't tell me something as palatable as that won't lead you there. C&H xaasid

Ibti-The dim room is within the context if your accepted standards and religious virtue. N of course, it would be something you would have assigned onto. Don't tell me something as palatable as that won't lead you there. C&H xaasid

dp

^ cl-I know, but I think there's something beyond that exterior shell. Ibti You do realise all GOOD relationships that gets initiated in the open space lead to a room with dim light.

A little over a year ago, I published an article entitled “Peace in Somaliland is at the Fork of Ephemerality and Endurance”. In that article I discussed how the government, opposition parties and the Guurti are contributing in their own way to the collapse of peace in Somaliland. It is my belief that the political malaise forewarned in that article came to plague Somaliland, reaching a critical mass with the current face-off between the political parties. There are also new twists to the old parable of political decadence in Somaliland. While the Structure of governance – the parliament, the Guurti and the House of Representatives – and their respective roles, responsibilities and sphere of power has a lot to do with it, the standoff is also in large part a result of tribal politicization and opposition parties whose only aim is to attain power at any cost. As I stated in the aforementioned article, when people have peace, the natural conclusion is that development follows. Yet, Somaliland has accomplished nothing in the last 18 years. Neither the government nor the opposition parties have any plans to develop the economy, education, health care, infrastructure, agriculture and so forth. Yet, the average Somalilander is oblivious to the causes of their problem and their role in it. Tribalism and Democracy are awkward bedfellows. Democracy is normally defined as Current Qabiil dynamics in Somaliland's political impasse A&T Take a stab at it. Somali-Sayid Wise man you are, but tell me who are the residents of Qardho. Surely I and NGONGE have no cousins there

^It is easy to whip clan sentiments anytime of the day whether an individual think it's in this interest or not.

^You could outsource your friendship to India if you don't have the time or the energy to carry on with this relationship without feeling exhuasted or overwhelmed. Call this number 401-285-0701. Outsource your frienship

^Not everything calls for open spaces and nothing sinister about closed spaces. *Imagining a date with Ibti. Sitting in the barsada with family next door*

Nuune..Maybe so, but little marketing could change the price. Fufu...That way you phrased just sounds wrong.

^I wouldn't recommend ride homes, just a chitchat on elavator

What if this was man selling his "virginity"?

Cl...Tell me Ibti again, poke eyes kulahaa. The farah with the nice smile must have tooth for her to say We welcome the best talent as long as the respect the organization's mission.

Clan is nothing but a hide-out for the incompetent and primitives Couldn't say that about nation states since they exist to the exclusion of others.