Shedding Crocodile Tears for Unity: A response

[Taleexi]

Shedding Crocodile Tears for Unity: A response

 

Mohsin Mahad

December 23, 2005

 

In an article carrying the above title, Ibrahim Hassan Gagale has dwelt at length on the injustices inflicted on the North by the South since the two parts united in July 1960 and gave these grievances as the justification for the secession of the North from Somalia. Ibrahim then adduced all sorts of convoluted reasoning to assert the legitimacy of Somaliland’s independence without providing the legal basis for it, whether national or international. Normally, one would ignore Ibrahim’s antics. But since this is shared by almost all secessionists, it is worthwhile to respond to him and debunk the fallacies which the secessionists have naively come to believe as matter of truth.

 

My response to Ibrahim is aimed at two levels. First, it is to take him to task from the outset for his presumptuous claim to be speaking in the name of the people who inhabit in the North West region of Somalia which he calls the North and at other times Somaliland. Speaking in our name as he does is to take liberties with the rights of the majority of the people in that area who do not share his complaints nor subscribe to their treacherous secession. Secondly, I will also argue that that the targets of his complaints are misplaced and that his legitimization of the secession rests on make-believes and wishful thinking.

 

The first injustice mentioned by Ibrahim is what he calls the raw deal meted out to the North in the allocation of the top union posts. Ibrahim has a point here. The North, as it was known at independence, and I speak as one of them, did not get a fair share of the key union posts even when you grant that the South was always entitled to a lion’s share given its superior geographical and population size. But if the leaders of the South at the time did not give the post of prime minister to the North, having taken the presidency, the blame lies not with them. Ibrahim should instead blame his own leader at the time, Mr. Egal, from his own clan, who, as Prime Minister of the government of the newly born independent country of Somaliland, had led his entire government and all parliamentarians to Mogadishu and who on our behalf accepted the union happily and unconditionally. No one can say they were under duress. At the time, it was the union that mattered and everything else was of no importance. After 45 years since the act of unification, we now face some born-malcontents, who are now raking the past and complain about something that almost every one in Hargeisa has at the time applauded with open arms and heart.

 

If the South has been somewhat mean initially after the act of union, this was in no time rectified in other ways. As those of us old enough will remember, the Northerners, irrespective of their clans, had come to dominate the civil service from the time when Mr. Abdurazak Haji Hussein was Prime Minister during the presidency of Aden Abdulle Osman. The high-water mark in the North’s ascendancy was when the late president Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke named Mr. Egal as his Prime Minister in 1967. And finally, the last prime Minister we had under Siyad Barre was again from the North. In this regard, Northerners had held the post of prime minister twice between 1960 and 1991, both times from the ***** clan.

 

Those of us from non-secessionist regions in the North had only to contend at the best of times with one or two low ranking ministries and even for that we were always most appreciative.. The union and Somaliweyn were all that mattered to us, something now derided by the secessionists in Hargeisa. If any clans can complain of unfair treatment in Somalia, these are the Digil and Mirifle, the Gabooye and others who remain the have-nots up to the present time.

 

Ibrahim’s other complaint is the atrocities against the Isaaqs by the regime of Siyad Barre. Needless to say, almost all Somalis of goodwill have abhorred these crimes as they equally decried similar crimes committed against other clans who also suffered under the dictatorial regime. Where Ibrahim and like-minded secessionists are wrong is to shift the blame from the dictator and his regime and conveniently condemn the people of the South as collectively guilty because the dictator came from South (to be precise, he comes from the Somali Regional State of Ethiopia). If that logic were to be followed, then other clans in the North would hold the Isaaqs guilty as a whole for the crimes committed by the SNM in Borama and other non-***** areas in the North. And within Southern Somalia, the Hawiyes would be held responsible for the massacres and ethnic-cleansing committed by their fellow warlords in Mogadishu against other clans. It is one thing to accuse those who are quilty of crimes against humanity but it is madness to seek retribution from innocent civilians who themselves had suffered under the former dictator or under the current warlords who rendered Somalia lawless, destitute, and impoverished.

 

On the basis of his grievances, Ibrahim goes on to make tendentious assertions as support for the legitimacy of the secession of the North. I will list assertions and then respond to them

 

Assertion 1

 

(Southerners) abuse the word "sacred unity†The unity between Somaliland, Djibouti and Somalia is never sacred, it is of choice, but the national and territorial unity within each country of these three is sacred and inviolable.

 

This assertion is correct in so far as it applies to Somalia and Djibouti but not Somaliland. When Djibouti gained its independence in 1977, it chose not to unite with Somalia. That choice was accepted by Somalia and today Djibouti is a separate, independent Somali-speaking territory that is recognized by the international community, including Somalia. The case of former British Somaliland is different. It chose, unlike Djibouti, to give up its independence from first July 1960 when its government and people freely chose to unite with Italian Somaliland and formed present-day Somalia. This union has been recognized by the international community. Somaliland has hence ceased to exist. A non-existing country therefore cannot have national and territorial unity as Ibrahim would have us believe. It is Somalia that has national and territorial unity which includes the North West region. Somalia’s unity and territorial integrity is annually reaffirmed by the Security Council, the African Union, the League of Arab States, IGAD and the Organization of Islamic Conference. The colonial borders of that former British colony are now a matter of history. Only the secessionists delude themselves in believing that they can put the clock back and undo what cannot be undon.

 

Assertion 2

 

Somaliland has legitimacy for independence because it is one of the countries that achieved indpendence in 1960.

 

The fact that those other counteries achieved their independence in 1960 does not confer any legitimacy for the restitution of former British Somaliland which ceased to exist as a separate country from first July 1960. It now exists as an integral part of Somalia.

 

Assertion 3

 

Somaliland has legitimacy for international recognition because it has recognized borders with Somalia and Djibouti. The border passing between Somaliland and Somalia is not different from that between Kenya and Tanzania....

 

Ibrahim must live in a world of self-delusion when he asserts that Somaliland has recognized boundaries with Somalia and Djibouti. Recognized by who, apart from the secessionists? For the rest of the World, Djibouti has borders only with Somalia. A non-existent country recognized by no government cannot have recognized boundaries with any country no matter how often the secessionists knock their heads against the wall.

 

Assertion 4

 

The independence and international recognition of each of the 54 African counteries are based on the colonial borders and Somaliland is not different from them.

 

Somaliland would have been a separate independent country with its former colonial borders, like Djibouti and other African countries maintaining, if it did not join Somalia in 1960. Since it did join Somalia, it has thereby ceased to exist to have boundaries. It cannot be compared to the 54 African countries that retained their independence and are members of the UN. It is not only Somali unionists but the whole international community which supports Somalia’s unity and territorial integrity. One cannot revive the dead and Somaliland is dead as a separate country.

 

Assertion 5

 

Speaking the same language and sharing the same religion and colour are not the absolute to determine unity. The 18 Arab countries would be united today if language, religion and colour determine unity.â€

 

I agree with Ibrahim. But the geographical and historical situation of Somalia cannot be compared to the Arab world whose member countries spread over two continents and have never shared one common homeland before the European colonization of Arab countries. The Somali homeland in the Horn of Africa on the other hand should be compared to one single Arab country. No Arab or country was divided like the Somali homeland. A better comparison than the Arab world would be the division of Germany after the Second World War into West and East Germany. Thanks to the collapse of the USSR, Germany was able to reunite again. It was the same thing with the Somalis. As the colonial powers of Britain and Italy gave up their colonies, the Somalis, like the Germans, came together once again as one country as they were before colonization.

 

Unlike anywhere else, the Europeans came to a territory inhabited by one homogenous people and then divided them into five parts, arbitrarily forcing clans into their separate ambits. Clans found themselves on both sides of artificial boundaries. Those clans in the British area had no special bonds among them that distinquished them from other clans in the other colonized Somali territories. Indeed some of the clans in former British Somaliland had far stronger blood ties with clans across the border in Southern Somalia and the Somali Regional State of Ethiopia than they had, or now have, with their neighbouring clans in the North.

 

Even at the height of the British colonial rule in British Somaliland, the regions of Sool, Eastern Sanaag and Cayn had rarely been part of the British colony except on paper. Having fought the British for 21 years under the leadership of Sayed Mohamed Abdalla Hassan, the British had one solitary district commissioner in the area whose presence was rarely felt by the inhabitants. Otherwise, they had wisely left these areas to their own devices with the Garaads responsible for much of their affairs.This strong nationalist background puts these people poles apart from those in Hargeisa who were imbibed in the virtues of loyalties and service to British colonialism and who nostalgically look back to those times as their golden era. It is ironic to see how these secessionists have copied the gun-boat habits of their former colonial masters and think they can bring the Darwish homeland to its knees by invading their territory. Little do they know that those who resisted the mighty British forces for so long will have even less to fear from their later-day copy cats.

 

With 45 years since independence, there have even less attachment today to the North in Sool, Eastern Sanaag and Cayn regions. Almost 90 percent of the people in these regions were born after independence and have no special link with the North. Their hearts and minds are not towards Hargeisa but Mogadishu, their capital. And for now, as we await the revival of Somalia, they are part of the Puntland Regional administration. Almost all economic links are with Puntland as Boosaaso has replaced Berbera.

 

The same thing can be said, perhaps to a lesser degree, abuot other non-secessionist clans in the North West region. The Issa clans tend to gravitate towards Djibouti in the absence of a Somali government. The Awdalites, aware of the massacres committed by the SNM, are for the time being subjugated but they have not surrendered, and above all they have not been converted to the secession. With Riyale as the president, more by fate than choice, a handful of Awdalites are cashing on it while the going is good. Come an effective Somali government, and the secessionists will find all appearances of public support for their secession drain away overnight everywhere..

 

If future Somali governments and parliament were to agree to a referendum for letting the secessionists breakaway (a highly improbable proposition), a plebiscite in which all Somalis of voting age will participate, Ibrahim should be in no doubt that it is not the whole North that would be given this choice to break from Somalia but only those areas that want to secede. It will not include other regions in the North which want to be part of Somalia like Sool, Eastern Sanaag and Cayn. You cannot also count on the Issa and Awdalite regions. It could well be that even among the secessionist heartland, some clans, who are presently lukewarm about the secession, may choose to throw their lot with Somalia.

 

While the secessionists are conspiring to destroy our unity, it is ironic to remember that the support for our unity predates our independence and goes back to the time when the UN was establishied. It was after all the former British Foregn Secretary, Ernest Bevin, who proposed to the UN in 1945, after the end of the second World War, that all the four Somali territories under their administration (namely Italian Somaliland, British Somaliland, the ******, and NFD) be united. Unfortunately, it was the USA and the USSR who opposed the idea fearing that Great Britain was motivated more by imperial aggrandisment rather than an honest desire for Somali unity. It is sad that when people like Ernest Bevin or the present-day international community are tirelessly supporting Somali unity, you have Ibrahim and his co-secessionists who are bent on destroying it. I believe they will fail, and from the ashes we all created, a new nationalism will be born - hopefully sooner rather than later. It is never too late for Ibrahim and his like-minded secessionists to repent and redeem themselves.

 

Mohsin Mahad

E-Mail:mohsinmahad@yahoo.co.uk

 

source: wardheernews.com