Being an African Union peacekeeper in Somalia must be one of the world’s worst jobs, even in a down economy. The African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) is a bootstrap operation whose troops face rocket attacks, suicide bombers, and improvised explosive devices. They do this in service of a strategy in which they and their governments lack confidence, as restrictive rules of engagement seemingly do not allow an effective defense against militant attacks. Compensation can be sporadic, as peacekeepers were forced to go six months without pay last year. And the recent attacks in Uganda make clear that the insurgent group al Shabaab intends to make peacekeeping in Somalia even harder. Though commentators agree that last week’s bombings that struck Uganda were designed to weaken the AMISOM mission by undercutting Uganda’s commitment, missing from the public discourse has been a comprehensive account of AMISOM showing how the mission developed, its strategic goals, and the challenges it faces. Early rumblings for peacekeeping in Somalia African countries first endorsed the idea of peacekeeping in Somalia in September 2006, when most of Somalia’s key cities were controlled by the Islamic Courts Union (ICU), an Islamist group that ultimately splintered and gave birth to al Shabaab. Somalia’s UN-recognized transitional federal government was at that time holed up in the south-central Somali city of Baidoa, in imminent danger of being overrun by ICU forces. This first peacekeeping plan, which was developed by the East African regional development organization Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD), can be described most charitably as a tepid effort. Though IGAD’s plan called for 8,000 troops from member countries to support Somalia’s transitional government, it was hampered by two significant problems. The first barrier is endemic to African Union (AU) efforts in general: lack of funding. Though AU peace and security commissioner Saïd Djinnit estimated that the first year’s deployment would cost $335 million, the AU had nowhere near that level of resources available. The second barrier was one of design, in that—in an effort to prevent political problems—the deployment plan specified that IGAD countries bordering Somalia could not contribute troops. This left a limited universe of countries that were eligible to send troops: Somalia was one of IGAD’s seven members, and three other countries were neighboring states. What followed was bureaucratic shuffling as the ICU continued to make gains. Though IGAD’s early September deployment plan ambitiously called for peacekeepers to be in place by the end of that month, when December 2006 rolled around there were still no troops in place. The UN Security Council got into the act of passing further resolutions at the beginning of December with Resolution 1725, which authorized the IGAD mission, as well as the restriction that states bordering Somalia could not contribute troops. Ethiopia invades Of all the countries worried by the ICU’s rise, Ethiopia had the deepest concerns due to previous Islamist attacks launched into its territory from Somalia in the 1990s and the ICU’s territorial designs on the ****** region, which was inhabited by a majority of Somali speakers. Despite the slow bureaucratic movement toward the deployment of peacekeepers—and despite the provisions in the IGAD plan and UN Security Council Resolution 1725 that states bordering Somalia should not introduce troops—Ethiopia intervened unilaterally in an effort to push back the ICU and stabilize the transitional government. Though Ethiopia quickly dislodged the ICU from Mogadishu and other strategic cities, it eventually faced a powerful insurgency. Al Shabaab split with other insurgent factions in late 2007, blasting them for working with secular powers and failing to adopt a global jihadist ideology. During this time, African nations prepared for Ethiopia’s inevitable withdrawal in two ways. First, the regional IGAD mission was broadened to the AU-wide AMISOM mission. Second, the first contingent of AU peacekeepers was deployed to Somalia even before Ethiopia withdrew: in fact, a 1,700-strong Ugandan force arrived in March 2007, within months of Ethiopia’s invasion. Ethiopia maintained the largest foreign footprint in Somalia until January 2009, when it withdrew in the midst of intense fighting; the trucks filled with Ethiopian soldiers hit a roadside bomb almost immediately as they left Mogadishu. At that point, AMISOM forces took their place: a total of 2,850 troops from Uganda and Burundi. Uganda and Burundi remain the only two countries to have contributed troops to AMISOM even though Ghana, Nigeria, Malawi, and Burkina Faso committed to deploying soldiers. That promised support has never materialized. AMISOM today Why have other countries been so hesitant to devote their militaries to AMISOM? The two primary reasons have been lack of confidence in the mission and general inertia. Many AU countries have reservations about AMISOM’s mission. Currently AMISOM is conceived of as a peacekeeping operation, with rules of engagement reflecting that design. Traditionally, peacekeeping missions are designed to help implement peace agreements that have been reached by conflicting sides. In contrast, peace enforcement operations are designed for situations where the parties do not have an agreed-upon ceasefire, and violence is consequently prevalent. While peacekeeping operations have cautious rules of engagement, peace enforcement missions have greater allowances for use of force. Nigeria’s then-foreign minister Ojo Maduekwe clearly expressed this concern last year when explaining why his country had not provided the troops it promised. “'The situation in Somalia constitutes a threat to international peace and security in the region, hence the need to review the mandate of the peacekeeping mission to a more effective one,” he said. Similarly, following Sunday’s bombings, Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni again called for the AMISOM mission to shift from peacekeeping to peace enforcement. But one question is where the resources for this expanded mission can be found. In February, when the AU rejected a similar Ugandan request for a change in mandate, a Ugandan minister noted that a sticking point had been the “increased burden” it would entail, including “new troop requirements and equipment.” Diplomatic sources also worried at the time that an expanded mandate “could complicate the mission and suck the troops into a no-win situation.” In addition to concerns about the AMISOM mandate, simple inertia is another reason that countries have been hesitant to contribute: there is a free-rider problem at play. The AMISOM mission has clearly suffered due to its nebulous strategy, lack of funding, and limited participation. Uganda is attempting to use the recent bombings as an opportunity to shift to what it considers a more appropriate strategy, while al Shabaab hopes that its attacks can undercut Uganda’s political will and deter other AU countries from committing to AMISOM.

Originally posted by Jacpher: Press and hold down the power button for about 10 seconds. All your problems gone. .... Agree

Haaye niyow waad fashilantee Ilaah baaan kugu dhaarsee madax adayga iska daayoo caadi iska dhig hadaba ,,,, Just go back to your original script and leave this alone ,,, it is not fun anymore ..

Aniga madaxa igu dhufo ..............

Man, you're getting more confused by the day ..... from Somalilander ,,, to a pirate ,, then now crying for some blue flag ,,, and starting to cheer some Somaliweyn thing ,,,, what is next tolow ,,,, Alshababism ?? ,,,, U know the schools will open again soon and you will have to stick with one of you ....

Originally posted by nuune: Just brooke my right hand arm last nigjht(for the 6th time, saeme arm), an my robotic hund is wryiting this mesaje Ta kelena inaad ku darto bay ahayd niyow ,,,, i know u can write with your teeth then ,,

their whole existance baa ah wax aan loo dulqaadan karin .....

loooooooooool@your default ,,,,,, i was thinking the same ,, Morning all ............... been raining the whole night and still can't get the sun out of those clouds ,,, lol

She was probably waiting her baby on the internet and then disappeared when she got one ,,,, Tuujiska ,,,,, ninkii Feebaro ahaa ha la doono niyow sidani si maahee ,,, horta gabadh Baranbaro la odhan jiray xagee bay ka dhacday iyaduna ?? lool

loooooooool ,,, ,,, A very sexy love letter .. it is on FB now ,,,

(1) Somali land waxay Somalia ka goosatay 1990's (2) Puntland baa ka daba boodoo waxaa lagu sameeyey Garoowe. Copy-Cut : Laakiin, waxay ku kala duwanaayeen "Goosashada". Puntland Somali wayn ayay jaranjarro u ahayd (3) Somali land Hees gaar ah iyo Calan ayay hore u samaysatay. Puntland calankii Somalia waa anfici waayoo, mid kaloo hadda kii Somalia laga jecelyahay ayay samaysatay. Walibana sidii wiil yaroo xalay dhashayna waa loogu heesaa, oo heeso badan ayuu leeyahay [big Grin] (4) Somali land dadkii Koonfur ka yimi, waxay ku sheegtay laajiyiin iyo Ajnabi. Macne kastaba iyo dana kastaba hakala haato, hadda arrinkii Puntland ayaa ku dhaqaaqday, oo maanta dhawr boqoloo Somali ah ayaa Boosaaso laga masaafuriyey. ( Copy-Cut ) (5) Somali land doorashadeedii xummad ayay kicisay, aniga laftigaygan kula hadlayana qandho ayayba igu ridday. Dee waataasoo hadda Puntland ayaanu ka bilaabaynaa ( Copy-Cut ) (6) Somali land 3 Xisbi ayaa ka dhisan. Annaguna, waxaanu soo wadnaa 3 Xisbi

Madax adakaa inkaari ku dhacdaygu ,,,,, Waar waa lagu fahmaye ,,, try again sxb ... ha soo indho cadaane ,,,

Good News Indeed ............. Now they should be reintegrated and sent back to the region to serve as police/military officers. Now let's hear more of "shacab baa la qafaashay" nacnac ......

[Edited] It's not funny. Where do you find sh*t like this? :eek: Grrr. I feel sick. [ July 20, 2010, 01:15 PM: Message edited by: sheherazade ]

Anigu waxaan aqaan nin la yidhaahdo GW ...... i hope in la fahmay

^ ^

Ups and Downs

Sheekadaa nuune ayaan u dhaafayaa niyow ,,,,

Idinkana gabadh baa la idinka raacay ,,,

Inaalillaaahi ,,,, waar Thread kana ma noolaa ,,,

Hadaad og tahay siduu Jacaylbaro ku baxay ,,,, mabaad hadasheen ,,,

Originally posted by Cowke: Calm the south down and invade the north and bring them under occupation.

APA-Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) Chief of defense staff and military experts from the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) on Monday begin a three day forum in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia to discuss new troop contributions for Somalia. The on-going closed session is being held in the presence of chiefs of defense staff and military experts from IGAD member states, namely, Ethiopia, Uganda, Djibouti, Kenya, Sudan and Somalia. The forum is being held to assess the IGAD summit decision, which was held a week ago in Addis Ababa, where the leaders decided to deploy additional 2,000 peacekeeping forces to Somalia. Accordingly, the experts and chiefs of defense staff are discussing who should contribute troops and how and when to deploy them to Somalia. Uganda, which was recently attacked by AL Shabab,a militant group based in Somalia, has already decided to send additional 2,000 troops to Somalia. If Uganda alone sends the 2,000 troops, the number of troops to be sent to Somalia will rise more than the initially decided 2,000 troops, which was decided by IGAD leaders a week ago in Addis Ababa. Currently, around 5,500 Ugandan and Burundi troops are on the ground in Somalia, helping the weak Transitional Federal Government (TFG) of Somalia in stabilizing the country, which remains without a central government for the past 19 years. Last week’s attack in Uganda by AL Shabab forced IGAD member states to seriously consult on how to fight against Al Shabab. Next week’s African Union summit in Uganda is also expected to give ample time to discuss the issue of Somalia.

Somalia is trying to kick-start a peace process. Will it work? It’s difficult to imagine things getting much worse Somalia is in the midst of a bold experiment: to see whether the development of a new constitution can help to bring peace to a country in desperate straits. Mired in violence and civil disorder, Somalia is No. 1 on the Failed States Index of Foreign Policy/The Fund for Peace. Pretty much the only thing Somalia is known for these days is radical dysfunction. A new democratic constitution? You’ve got to be joking. Somalia’s Transitional Federal Government has been in place since 2004, but it doesn’t even control the capital city, Mogadishu, and its capacity to survive without the support of 5,000 African Union troops is slight to non-existent. Civil war continues, and major chunks of the country are under the control of al-Shabab, a radical Islamic movement that recently displayed its willingness to export terror to neighbouring countries by killing more than 75 people in Uganda. Pirates ply their trade with impunity off the Somali coast. Somaliland, a breakaway region in the northwestern part of the country, has enjoyed de facto independence for close to 20 years; it has held successful elections and operates in relative peace. Somaliland wants no part of the constitutional process – or of Somalia, for that matter – seeking, instead, recognition from the AU and the international community as an independent state. Puntland, a Somali region in the northeast, is also relatively safe and stable; willing to be an active part of a new Somalia, it’s watching this constitutional process with interest, but is in no position to determine the outcome. In short, no one’s in charge. So this seems far from being Somalia’s constitutional moment, despite the fact that one of the opposition forces joined the transitional government in 2009. Usually, one might expect that a constitution would follow a peace process, not precede it, or that the process of constitutional negotiation would itself be an instrument for ending violence and making peace. But, so far, the Somalian constitutional exercise has involved only fragments of the political forces whose involvement will be necessary to establish a broad new social compact and the constitutional agreement that would be its legitimate expression. Yet, with the vigorous support of the United Nations, the transitional government has established the Independent Federal Commission on the Constitution (IFCC) to come up with a new constitutional design; the 30 or so members have been labouring over the past few months to produce a draft constitution – ensconced in Djibouti, north of Somalia, because it’s too dangerous to do the work in their own country. A UN Development Program team is supporting them, and the UN is underwriting the costs. The IFCC has produced an impressive document – a draft constitution plus explanatory narrative – that is now being sent out to the country for reaction. Based on sharia (Islamic law), the constitution has strong human-rights provisions, including those for gender equality (the requirement of female representation in key national institutions, the banning of female genital mutilation and the acceptance of abortion if the woman’s life is in danger). It also proposes a federal system, with significant power being allocated to yet-to-be-created regional states. Now comes the public consultation, a fraught and dangerous business. The simple act of discussing this document could be enough to mark you as a target. So radio will be heavily used to get the word out and to provide a venue, and some thought has been given to producing a small, pocket-sized version of the document that people will be able to hide when they’re out in public. In September or October, the IFCC plans to assess public reaction and, on that basis, produce a final version of the constitution, which will be put to a referendum in the spring of 2011. If the proposed constitution is supported by the people, the plan is to begin implementing it as the law of the land, with a general election to follow. By 2012 or so, if all goes according to plan, Somalia will have a bunch of shiny new governments, both in Mogadishu and in the new regional states, whose authority will be grounded in the new constitution and in democratic elections. A new Somalia will have been born. Will it work? Dispassionate analysis would say no. Is it worth a try? Probably yes. After all, you don’t need to worry too much about breaching the Hippocratic principle of “first do no harm.” It’s difficult to imagine things getting much worse in Somali, no matter what you do. But could this bold initiative actually do some good? If I were looking for a glimmer of hope, it would be this: It will be the first occasion in a very long time that Somali citizens will be consulted about something, that they will be invited to become political actors, instead of suffering victims. If the referendum happens and if the citizens of that tragic country use the occasion to shout out loud and clear for an end to violence, perhaps, just perhaps, they might be heard. Since nothing else seems to have worked, perhaps it’s worth giving this a try. That, possibly, is the calculation of the UN and of the Somali constitutional commissioners who are putting their lives on the line in this noble, but daunting, cause.