Taleexi Posted February 6, 2006 Different views of the same country Mohamed Mukhtar February 05 , 2006 Words are not merely used to describe the realities around us, but they enable us to shape what we see and form our attitude towards it. When people look at a big object, everyone standing around that object has his or her own unique view. Thus how people look at a country like Somalia greatly depends on from the angle one views. Some people see Somalia as a petri dish in which extremism breeds and develops. A war-torn country with no prospect to pull itself out of a fatal dive towards state failure. A state dominated by clan-based warring factions and groups with no economic development opportunity. A land sprinkled with sharia courts where the society is patriarchal and women do not enjoy the same benefit generously applied to their male counterparts. While others may consider Somalia as a place where extremism lacks general approval. A nation whose people have shown an incredible resiliency to survive under a collapsed economy that even challenges conventional ideas about economy. A nation state that has emerging strong civil society that can lead the country back to normality. A territory where women are not only valued for their reproductive capacities but are considered to be the backbone of the society. None of the above views is new and the aim of this article is not to explore why people may have different views of the same object or country. However, the above descriptions give different ways of explaining the peculiar circumstance in Somalia and they are not mutually exclusive. Somalia has been hotly debated and speculated upon since the demise of Siad Barre’s government. The civil war in Somalia and its effects raised the profile of Somalia in the worst way possible and the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington on 11 September 2001 led some countries, analysts and journalists to consider Somalia as a failed country, which terrorist networks use as a safe haven. In the early 1990s, the world was undergoing an unprecedented transformation because of the sudden arrival of cutting edge technology and the end of cold war. Unfortunately, Somalia was failing as a state during that period, but it has not remained immune from the globalisation trend and its society has been utterly unprotected from the advantageous and disadvantageous of globalisation. Somalis have managed to survive utilizing the country’s geographical location between Africa and the Middle East. The seaports of the country play a key role in the transhipment of consumer goods to Kenya, Ethiopia and beyond. Since there is no viable government that maintains the rule of law or has power over its borders, the country is regarded to be the breeding ground in which trans-national and non-state security threats can easily get a foothold. The uncontrolled ports and borders that promote commercial activities are also said to attract illegal activities including terrorism. It is widely suggested Somalia’s problems can infect other countries in the region and once trans-national criminals become established in Somalia, it is easy for them to infiltrate and expand their operations in other countries in the region. To counter this, Somalia is reported to be at or close to the top of the list of countries where war on terror is fought. However, Somalia is not subjected to a bombing campaign like Afghanistan, as there is no government that harbours any terrorist or meaningful targets to be bombed at. That leaves Somalia to be at the centre of invisible war – mainly covert operations such as snatching operations, and speculation. The impact and extent of terrorist activities and counter-terrorist measures are hard to tell since they are done in secret. In July 2005, a report published by the International Crisis Group noted, “… away from the spotlight, a quiet, dirty conflict is being waged in Somalia: in the rubble-strewn streets of the ruined capital of this state without a government, Mogadishu, al-Qaeda operatives, jihadi extremists, Ethiopian security services and Western-backed counter-terrorism networks are engaged in a shadowy and complex contest waged by intimidation, abduction and assassination.†However, speculation is rampant. The terrorist threat in Somalia has been thrown into wide-ranging speculation. The ICG report said, “A March 2005 UN report portrayed Somalia as home to an ‘army’ of Jihadi fighters supported by a network of at least seventeen terrorist training camps. In reality, jihadism is an unpopular, minority trend among Somali Islamists.†It is not only the international organisations that have a number of different theories and perspectives from Somalia. Most of Somali political leaders have tried to exploit the war on terror to enhance their political positions. Ken Menkhaus, a professor of Political Science, wrote, “local and regional authorities in Somalia are falling over one another to establish themselves as the trusted local ally of the West in the war on terrorism. Several set up antiterrorist task forces within days of September 11, in hopes that cooperation with the United States would increase their importance to us and, hence, the likelihood of foreign aid and/or political recognition.†Somalia is not the first failed state or in complete turmoil. Soon after the cold war, many countries failed to function without the support of the superpower countries. Unfortunately, Somalia found itself in a ping-pong position between neighbour countries and offshore friends. In the dark, many countries meddle Somalia’s internal affairs, and in the light, the same countries express their willingness to help Somalis to form a government as if they had no self-interest or strategic reasons. Therefore, it is no wonder that several attempts to reconcile the warring Somali factions have failed. The outcome of the Somali National Reconciliation Conference held in Kenya is gasping for air now and it seems that it is going to follow the same trajectory as the one held in Djibouti since many of the same dynamics that were present at the previous government seem to be at play within the current government. Equally, it is little wonder that the fight against terrorism is interpreted differently. Surely, a failed state on the doorway of its neighbours or a country that can export terrorism is a grave matter, but looking at Somalia from one angle only and speculating the rest would definitely lead us to fail piecing together the big picture, which is the disappearance any vestiges of a central government. The circumstance of Somalia reminds us the story of the blind men who were asked to describe an elephant after they had felt the elephant. The first one described the elephant as a wall after he had touched his broad and sturdy side. The second depicted the elephant as a spear after he had touched the tusk. The third one believed an elephant to be a snake after he had stroked the trunk. The moral of the story is whether one describes Somalia as unruly place imbued with terrorists or bad country ruled by warlords, Somalia is a country without a viable government. However we view, Somalia is only accountable when there is a functioning government. Mohamed Mukhtar London Email:mohamed323@hotmail.com source: wardheernews.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
