Dangerous regional meddling following coup

The events unfolding in Egypt are troubling and potentially catastrophic if not brought under control soon. The death toll is steadily rising as millions of pro and anti Morsi supporters continue to protest in the streets.

I read an article today to try to better understand what is happening because I find it difficult to imagine how a democratically elected leader can be pushed out of office after just one year in power. I knew it could not simply be the work of the protesters in Tahrir square. What I learned is that a lot of the government bureaucratic machine in Egypt, formed during the Mubarak era and inherited by Morsi, are still led by opponents to Morsi's government. Consequently, many services, such as subsidized energy resources and security (police) were not functioning efficiently during Morsi's year-long tenure, leading to anger among the populace.  This was a predictable domestic challenge for the new government.

Even more concerning, I learned that Saudi Arabia and the UAE have already announced support for the recently announced interim government, and have pledged billion of dollars in foreign aid. Meanwhile, Qatar and Turkey were, according to this NYT article, key backers of the Morsi regime. What this means is that multiple regional powers are getting involved in a very major way in Egypt's domestic political issues. This is dangerous because, like in Somalia, when foreign influences get involved in support or opposition of political factions, differences exacerbate and a negotiated agreement becomes less possible. Remember the Aideed vs. Ali Mahdi competition which resulted in the civil war? The tragedy is this usually ends in a lot of bloodshed.

Egyptians need to resolve Egypt's problems without being held down by regional power politics. President Morsi was elected democratically, so if the new government wants to maintain legitimacy and stability, it will need to hold immediate free elections. Only then can we gauge the will of the Egyptian people.

Is China in Africa a new form of colonization?

China has overtaken the World Bank to become the top lender to African countries, having committed nearly $75 billion to the continent in the last decade. Why exactly is China so interested in Africa all of a sudden? I think the biggest reason is, as China's economy grows, its enormous population's need for resources is also growing, and thats where African nations appear attractive. 

China invests in African countries that have some sort of natural resource that would benefit it. eg: in exchange for access to Gabon's iron ore reserves, China's developing railroad and port infrastructure. This sort of interaction happens across Africa, and some call it a "resources-for-infrastructure" model. Chinese officials say it is a mutually beneficial interaction, but some critics call it a new form of colonization.

There are a number of problems that have arisen with China's activities, leading some African populations to become skeptical. China has been criticized for low labor safety standards, poor quality of buildings, roads and other infrastructure, counterfeit products, and land grabs following projects. There are also complaints that China brings laborers from abroad, rather than employing local laborers.

But we cannot ignore the positives here. There are tangible infrastructure benefits to China's engagement - just look at how Chinese built roads have had a positive impact on transportation and commerce in Kenya. China is investing in places where many avoid - including DRC and Somalia; China gave millions in military aid to the AMISOM peacekeeping forces in Somalia. Complete facts and figures on China's investments in Africa, however, are unknown.

China's economic interest in Africa is clear but political motives are yet unclear. It seems China has a deliberately un-political relationship with African countries. This can be positive in some cases, allowing for more sovereign decision making by governments, but also has downsides. Unlike Western countries, China does not emphasize good governance and anti-corruption in its engagement with officials. This is why undemocratic governments in particular prefer working with China. Nevertheless, these governments should recognize the huge importance of good governance and anti-corruption for their own national development and progress, regardless of outside pressure.

Jubbaland Mess

There are currently five men who are claiming to be president of newly founded Jubbaland State in southern Somalia. This was at last count but the number could have gone up. What is happening in Jubbaland is confusing for a lot of people, including myself, but it gets back to the fundamental problem of Somalia's political development.

Ultimately, Somalia will have a federal system of governance, with regional governments taking on key leadership roles. Gone is the era of Siyad Barre-style strong central government. We now are in the era of Somaliland, Puntland, Galmudug, Hiiraan State, Himeen and Heeb, Khaatumo, Jubbaland etc etc. But as governance decentralizes, the country still needs centralization for key diplomatic, security and other national-level functions.

The current government of President Hassan Sheikh appears to be serious about realizing a viable federal state system in Somalia. The Prime Minister and President frequently visit the regions and seek to be involved in dialogue on local issues, from Somaliland to Jubbaland. Jubbaland in recent months has become a huge mess for the federal government and everyone else involved. From the time that Kenyan troops entered Jubbaland in late 2011, it was clear that this piece of strategic land would be contentious.

At play in Jubbaland are numerous interests, including diverse clan interests, Kenyan, Ethiopian and IGAD involvement, and the central government's role. As the various actors push and pull for leverage in the formation of Jubbaland, tensions are surfacing and are causing problems in Mogadishu. This months effort to remove the Prime Minister through a no-confidence vote in Parliament is linked to the Jubbaland dispute. With five recently declared presidents of Jubbaland, its clear that talks to form a representative government have failed. IGAD (Kenya and Ethiopia) has its preferred candidate, who it is supporting vigorously. Clan tensions as well as regional tensions are flaring up.

Ideally the federal government should be taking the lead in organizing the Jubbaland political process. IGAD has had a unusually high level of involvement in the Jubbaland issue, organizing multiple conferences. IGAD is a regional actor and should respect the sovereignty of the Somali government, and should not side-step the federal government to push a particular candidate. The federal government needs to be more assertive in its role and quell the confusion in Jubbaland before it flares up into greater fragmentation, or even violence.

FDI and a Mogadishu luxury resort

I read a Wall Street Journal article " A bet on peace for war-torn Somalia." I was a bit turned off by the tittle - why does every article about Somalia include the words "war-torn" or something equally negative in it. Nevertheless, I was happy to see an article about Somalia's growing economy; an economy overlooked and undervalued because of the protracted insecurity.

Overall the article is very enlightening - it discusses a new resort being built along Liido beach by an American businessman, Michael Stock. His resort opens this month, and includes a $500 per night villa. Stock says investing in Somalia "is like getting in at the bottom of the stock market." He's right about that. I predict population numbers, property values and demand for infrastructure like resorts will continue to climb, and Stock's investments will pay off. Of course, this all depends on stability and improved security.

The article seems to exaggerate the uniqueness of Stocks investing, at one point calling him "a mini mogul of Mogadishu." The reality is that there are many business moguls in Mogadishu investing in multiple sectors and who have put more into the economy than Stock. He is unique, however, in that he is not ethnic Somali. He's a white guy and he'll definitely face some obstacles including xenophobia, however, his "foreignness" may in some cases be an asset in a city as divided as Mogadishu.

The article also mentioned that Stock hosted Warren Buffet's son in Somalia, and flew him around the country. This is pretty amazing because it shows that more non-Somali investors are starting to look at Somalia. More FDI is critical for a country with such little capital to rapidly grow, and if investors with pockets as deep as Warren Buffet get into the market, it will open the way for much more investment.

Rumi on Somalia

I find the poetry of Jalal ad-Din Muhammad Rumi to be powerful. The 13th century Persian poet had a way with words that resonates within me. His words on love draw me nearer to my love.  Rumi was a Sufi theologian, and his love of God is a strong theme through much of his poetry. He does not comment on political issues, but in the gems of wisdom that he shares, one can gleam valuable lessons.

Below are a few of my favorite quotes that I believe can inspire Somalia and Somalis today.

"The wound is the place where the light enters you"

Somalis have suffered many wounds in recent years - from civil war to gender based violence to famine, among others. They have seen incredible pain and hardship, but the above quote should remind us all that wounds and hardships are where light and wisdom can shine through. Some of the most powerful change agents in Somalia today have suffered incredible personal tragedies, but these wounds have truly made them see more clearly, and made them more willing to sacrifice for their country.

"Where there is ruin, there is hope for a treasure"

The once stunning city of Mogadishu is now in ruins. But since 2011, things have been steadily changing for the better. Al-Shabaab is a dying force and the central government is increasing its reach and productivity. Mogadishu is being re-built at a rapid pace - with construction material pouring in from Asia through Mogadishu port. As people re-build the city and re-build their lives, they should remember that a treasure lies under it all. Natural treasures, human treasures, societal treasures. With hope and hard work, Somalia can be a prosperous and peaceful nation sooner than we thought possible. 

"If you are irritated by every rub, how will your mirror be polished?"

Along the way to stability and prosperity, there will be countless roadblocks. Entrenched local, political, commercial and international interests will block the way towards progress. Some developments and/or compromises may not be popular. But ultimately, revealing these roadblocks is evidence of progress, and will enable the people to deal with them appropriately. As Rumi might have put it, the challenges Somalia will face in re-building will help polish and enhance the ultimate outcome. 

"Let the beauty we love be what we do. There are hundreds of ways to kneel and kiss the ground."

Somalia of 20 years ago is not Somalia today. And the Somalia of today will not be the Somalia of tomorrow. The Somali population needs to recognize differences among the population, especially as diaspora from all over the world move into the country to seek out opportunities. The differences could either lead to clashes or compromises and understanding. Al-Shabaab is the ultimate example of the bloodshed intolerance can cause. Rumi reminds us to appreciate beauty in whatever form it appears.

Jubilance of recognition

In January 2013 the U.S. government officially recognized the Somali government, following 21 years of no recognition. This is big news because it opens the way for increased engagement in Somalia by the U.S., international financial institutions and, ultimately, many other countries that will follow the U.S.'s lead. By recognizing the Somali government, the U.S. has essentially granted legitimacy and placed a degree of faith in the new Somali government to deliver for Somalia. Thus, the recognition is a major policy success for the Somali government, and will open many doors.

More importantly perhaps, it is a symbolic success. I say it is more important as a symbol because a key reason for the failure of multiple Somali governments is the lack of legitimacy and trust in the government by the population. President Hassan Sheikh's government, however, has so far maintained a high degree of popularity, cutting across clan and regional differences. As many Somalis both inside and outside the country already supported the new government, they saw the U.S. decision to recognize the government as another example of success by the government.

President Hassan Sheikh went to Washington and met with President Obama and Secretary Clinton, just as they announced the recognition. He subsequently held multiple events in Somali diaspora communities, including Minnesota. A friend who attended the President's event in Virginia said it was a huge event, with roughly 400 people in attendance - an unprecedented turnout. She said she met some Somalis who came from as far as New York and North Carolina to see the President's speech. She said as Hassan Sheikh spoke, he was frequently interrupted by a jubilant audience as they broke into patriotic songs. Songs that she said many Somalis had not heard in years, including Qolaba Calankeey. They also sang the national anthem, Soomaliya Toosoo, multiple times during the presidents speech. Flags were waving and there was an overwhelming sense of hope in the air. People liked what Hassan Sheikh had to say, particularly his pledge to focus on security and justice.

Interestingly Hassan Sheikh mentioned in his speech that rumors about his government should not be given credence, and he said some elements seek to destroy the popularity of the government through false reports. Maintaining the popularity of the government is important but if President Hassan Sheikh really seeks to maintain it, his government will need to show tangible successes. Because if history tells us anything, its that the Somali population can easily lose faith in an official or system if it does not deliver.

ICAO CACAS continues to take Somali national revenue

All nations have a right to control their airspace. But currently in Somalia, this right is being challenged by a little known aviation authority.

Shortly after the Somali government collapsed, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) decided to help Somalia manage its airspace, and recruited ICAO, the International Civil Aviation Organization to help provide this service. UNDP and ICAO established the Caretaker Authority for Civil Aviation in Somalia, known as CACAS. The small office has been based in Nairobi since 1997 and has collected aviation fees on behalf of the Somali government, and the money is supposed to be put into a trust fund for Somalia's future authority. The mandate also allows for the revenue to be used for operations (CACAS salaries and expenses), as well as towards infrastructure development so that the inevitable transition from CACAS control to Somali control can take place.

In the past 15 years of its existence, however, there is little evidence that CACAS has done anything to build Somali capacity so that a transition can take place. CACAS has actually been doing the opposite, strengthening its own grip on Somali civil aviation. Why? Because it is a lucrative authority to have. Airliners and nations have paid tens of millions of dollars to CACAS in civil aviation fees over the past 15 years, and this money is largely unaccounted for, apart from the lavish salaries the employees receive. To ICAO's credit, the international body has recently run audits of CACAS's finances and discovered problems. It doesnt appear, however, that ICAO has done anything to fix these problems.

Its time for CACAS to be closed down. Somalia has a new central government, and President Hassan Sheikh has already publicly expressed an interest in reclaiming Somalia's civil aviation from the controversial CACAS body. The Somali government, as well as the Somaliland and Puntland regional governments, already provide civil aviation services and collect civil aviation fees for planes that land in Somali territory.  This means they have some capacity already, and are able to do what CACAS is currently doing more widely. This is not to say they couldn't benefit from some infrastructure support. CACAS argues there is no clear government in Somalia - apparently treating regional governments as equal in legitimacy to the central government. Central governments hold control of civil aviation authorities, but can discuss details of operations and revenue with regional governments.

Somali control over its own civil aviation will be a major victory for the new government for political reasons, but also because it desperately needs domestic revenue.  CACAS, however, will surely fight to delay such a transition, just as any organization would fight for its own survival. Nevertheless its mandate was temporary and if the international community, particularly ICAO and the UN, drag its feet on this issue, the Somali government and population will continue to perceive it as an effort to strip Somalia of its sovereignty and national revenue.

When welfare stifles progress

I recently visited London to see friends and relatives and had a great time - especially shopping on Oxford street and having lunch at an amazing french restaurant near London bridge. I had the BEST crepe outside of Paris. My overall conclusion - London's a fabulous city to visit but not so great to live.

Partly because its ridiculously expensive, but primarily because it doesn't look like there is much upward mobility for low-income people. Immigrant communities in particular appear concentrated in low-income communities (esp. East London) and you don't see many non-whites in professional careers. There are probably many reasons for why this is the case, and I don't want to simplify the issue, but I want to make an observation about what I see as one of the key root causes - the overly generous UK welfare system.

I'll use Somali immigrants/refugees in the UK as an example. Many of the Somali Brits I encountered either dropped out of University or did not bother going to University at all. Most had low-wage jobs such as bus drivers or store clerks, or were completely unemployed. I was scratching my head - trying to figure out how they can live in such an expensive city with little or no revenue. 

Then I discovered that the UK welfare system is exceptionally robust, especially when compared to the American system. Almost every Somali family I encountered lived in government provided housing, and the families appeared dependent on this. Based on the small sample size I interacted with during my visit, I got the sense British Somalis are not seeking out higher education or good jobs because they feel comfortable with their quality of life under government support. This is sad for many reasons, especially because it will lead to a generations of young people who will never achieve their potential, educationally or professionally. 

I strongly believe governments should provide welfare for those in need because no developed nation should have citizens starving or left homeless. And besides, what are taxes for if not to provide services for the people! However making sure people sufficiently work for their betterment is also important, its what makes us human, and too much government support stifles this initiative.

A key public policy puzzle facing all developed governments is how to provide assistance to those who need it, but not create dependency or complacency. From what I saw, the UK is far from finding the right balance. While I disagree with most of the conservative party's platform, I hope David Cameron's administration will make strategic policy changes to cut down some of the overly generous assistance packages, while being careful not to harm families that rely on essential services. At the same time, more efforts should be made by the government to enable immigrants and other low-income people to achieve higher education, since that is the key towards more productive futures. 

Water boundary dispute

Somalia and Kenya have a complicated relationship - sometimes as good neighbors and friends, and other times as rivals. As Somalia re-builds and the government reasserts its national sovereignty, more conflicts may arise over territory and resources with Kenya, Ethiopia and other neighboring nations.

One conflict that has led to recent diplomatic tensions between Somalia and Kenya is the issue of the territorial water boundary. Somalia believes the water boundary is perpendicular to the coast line, which is in line with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) recommended standards. Both Somalia and Kenya ratified UNCLOS in 1989 however the two countries never reached final agreement on where the boundary lies. Kenya believes the water boundary should be along the line of latitude - similar to its boundary with Tanzania.

Rather than wait until agreement and legal clarity is reached, in early 2012 Kenya went ahead and granted oil and resource exploration contracts within the disputed water territory to three companies - Anadarko, Total and ENI. Somali government officials and others have responded with outrage - calling the contracts a violation of Somalia's national sovereignty. The Kenyan government appears to be ignoring these protests, however, it will need to come up with a more robust reply.

Given Somalia's instability and relative weakness over the past few years, it has been able to do little to prevent Kenya from selling rights within the disputed territory. With the new Somali government in place, however, more protests to the UN and others could put a dent in Kenya's plans. It appears Somalia has a stronger claim to the water, based on international law, however ultimately, a mutually agreeable solution will likely result in the division of the disputed territory between the two countries.

An imperfect resolution is better than no resolution at all. Ending this legal ambiguity would free up both countries to begin resource exploration and extraction.

Expectations too high for new president?

On September 10 Somalia elected a new president, Hassan Sheikh Mohamud. This is exciting for a number of reasons: 1) he is a new face 2) he is not Sheikh Sharif 3) he has no corruption or criminal background. As a matter of fact, he seems to have a very promising background in education - as co-founder of SIMAD University in Mogadishu, in addition to his experience in development. I'm optimistic about Hassan Sheikh - and so are most Somalia watchers. Perhaps the optimism is currently so high, however, that it will be impossible for the new government to live up to expectations. This is similar to what President Obama faces today: it seems as though no matter how many accomplishments he makes in office, he is unable to reach the expectations of his supporters.


But getting back to the Somali election process, I'm confused as to how a seemingly good man came out on top in an election riddled with corruption, slander and intimidation. I hear he had some powerful supporters pushing him to the top but just who are they? If we're able to answer that question (which is no easy task) then we will better understand what Hassan Sheikh's presidency will bring, and whether he is at the steering wheel of his own government or not.

His first task as President will be to select a Prime Minister. There are lots of rumors out there about who the next PM will be but Hassan Sheikh appears to be careful and slow (its already been almost the maximum 30 days) in his selection process. This is good in the sense that he is properly vetting candidates, however, its already leading some to question his ability to be decisive and lead. Once the PM and cabinet ministers are named, however, a more full assessment of the government can be made.

the transition that keeps going

Somalia's transitional process seems to be never ending. The first transitional government (the Transitional National Government) took office in 2001, and here we are in the year 2012 and still have a transitional government in place. As a transition, most states do not recognize it as a full government, which weakens Somalia's ability to engage fully with the international community. The country needs a permanent government to take it forward, but unfortunately must rely on transitional governments (that are increasingly more corrupt and incompetent with each iteration) to lay the groundwork for a new government. 

August 20, 2012 is fast approach - the date by which a new government should be elected. The entire international community seems to be united in calling for the TFG to complete the transitional tasks and elect a new Parliament, which will then elect a new President and Speaker. Somalis around the world are hoping for a fair election and a new and stronger government to take office.

In true Somali form - every Somali man between the ages of 35-65 and who can afford a plane ticket to Mogadishu is running for the Presidency. There are only a handful, however, who have a shot at unseating President Sheikh Sharif -Ambassador Addow, Professor Samatar, Professor Badiyow etc. With his war chest he's accumulated over the years, and the alliances he's built with Speaker Sharif Hassan and other key players, it appears Sheikh Sharif is well placed to buy his way back to the Presidency. 

Just to be clear on my opinion, the reelection of Sheikh Sharif would be a tragedy for Somalia. This is  because today, things are looking up for Somalia. Al-Shabaab is being defeated, commercial activity is picking up, and people are returning back to Somalia from refugee camps, and even from cushy places in Europe and America. There is a sense of hope and renewal that needs to be enhanced by the next government. But almost every Somali I speak with says that this progress is happening in spite of President Sheikh Sharif, and not because of him. Somalis fear the reelection of Sheikh Sharif would mean hopes for progress will be shattered and the Somali government will continue to be run by a small group of corrupt individuals.

Interestingly, one businessman told me if Sheikh Sharif is re-elected, he will pull a lot of his money out of Somalia because he is afraid the economy will collapse.

For many Somalis, any face is better than the same failed face they have had as president for the past four years. Change is possible, Somalis need more positivity and an Obama-like "Yes We Can" campaign. Despite overwhelming odds against the desires of ordinary Somalis, they can have an impact on who becomes the next president. Ordinary Somalis are the Elders, the MPs, the media, the civil society groups - there are lots of points of leverage in this election and the people need to be stronger and more vocal about their aspirations for their country's future. I hope they do speak up and refuse to grant a failed government another few years to continue as they were. The alternative government may be better or worse, but at least they'll be given a chance to prove their worth. 

Khaatumo joins the many states of Somalia

Once upon a time there was Somalia. Then there was a civil war and the erosion of the state, and at the end of it, there was only the remnants of what was once a united country. Since the collapse of the Siad Barre regime in 1990, several mini-states have popped up across Somalia, including the breakaway region in the northwest called Somaliland, the semi-autonomous region in the northeast called Puntland, and by 2012, dozens of smaller mini-states states including Galmudug, Himen and Heeb, and now the newest mini-state: Khatumo.

Khatumo is slightly different from other new states because it is a state within a breakaway state: Khatumo lies in territory claimed by Somaliland. The history of the state is complicated. Just as an overview, the region is claimed by Somaliland but the local community shares closer clan-ties with Somalis in Puntland and other parts of Somalia. The founders of Khatumo say the state was founded because the region is neglected by Somaliland and Puntland's government, and assert Khatumo is independent of both regional governments, and is part of the national Somali state. This got the Somaliland government so upset that they sent in the military to Khaatumo stronghold Buuhoodle in January, just after the state was announced, resulting in deadly clashes and even more tensions between the two states. Mediations are still stalled due to high tensions.

This is a pretty bizarre situation, given that Somaliland has fought for years for the right to peacefully succeed from the wider state. To respond so violently to Khaatumo's secession is ironic. I personally don't mind Khaatumo state - I think its just one of many local states that will make up the future federal Somali state. The goal now should be to make sure these various states do not hold narrow clan/local interests above a national interest, otherwise the system will collapse and the country will be weak. Some argue that to ask mini clan-based states to not hold clan interests paramount is paradoxical, and so staunchly oppose the new trend in mini-states. I still think its possible to have a strong federal system.

Its rumored that Khaatumo State officials were invited to next weeks Istanbul II conference on Somalia, which is causing outrage in Somaliland. The results of this conference will be important for Somalia as a whole, not just one region or another, and so Khaatumo's participation is important.

Global diaspora of ideas

Somalis are the new Jews. You can find Somalis in almost every country on earth - a truly global diaspora. I can't tell you how many times I discovered Somalis living in random remote countries like Morocco, Zambia, Thailand, Syria, Brazil, Mexico and in large numbers in China. I even have Somali relatives in Hungary, Vietnam and Norway. Hearing about these surprising location got me thinking - maybe there is a Somali in every country on earth. And what does this mean for Somalia once the country becomes stable?

While many Somalis are content in their adopted homelands, some still feel an itch to move back to Somalia and get involved in the country's progress somehow. Already there are large numbers of diaspora who have returned to the country and now lead major organizations, businesses, are Ministers in the government - even the Prime Minister, Abdiweli Mohamed, is from the diaspora. Buffalo New York to be exact. These are largely the daredevils in the diaspora who somehow see a greater interest (whether sincere or selfish) in going back to Somalia rather than staying abroad. But the vast majority still see the risks as too high given instability, even if they have a strong desire to go to the country.

When Somalia becomes peaceful, there is a good chance people will flood back to the country to start businesses in the largely untapped market, get involved in development work, try to become politicians, or just retire in the country (like my mother plans to do). This diaspora will struggle to communicate, not just because one guy will speak English, another Norwegian, another Arabic and the fourth Malay. They will struggle to communicate because the countries in which they were raised, educated and assimilated to have hugely different cultures and this can lead to conflict. An American Somali may return to Mogadishu with liberal ideas about the role of government in citizens' lives, while a Saudi Somali might have a more conservative approach. Of course one cannot generalize about how being from a country can affect a persons perspective, but one thing is for sure, there will be many many many diverse and conflicting perspectives that could potentially collide in Somalia very soon.

Whether Somalis embrace this diversity of ideas and harness it to achieve progress, rather than conflict, is what remains to be seen. A larger marketplace of ideas and perspectives could be a huge asset. Politicians and social leaders should begin thinking now about how to achieve a positive interaction that melds diverse ideas and brings out the best results.

Clan - love it or hate it, you need to include it

I enjoy talking about Somali politics and culture, but when people bring up clan and clanism, i tend to recoil. Its like a curse word when discussing Somalia because all I associate clan with is divisive politics.

But recently I met a Somali-Kenyan man with 30 years experience in the development field and he changed my perspective on clan. He made a compelling case based on his experience with numerous communities inside of Somalia for why clan is important, but he also recognized that is can be misused. He described how he witnessed community meetings where clan and sub-clan structures were used to mediate conflict and re-establish peace. Respected clan elders - sometimes called ugaas, aqil, sultan etc - discuss problems and refer to the xeer - a traditional somali legal code - to resolve these problems. These legitimate authorities - the elders and the xeer - have made conflict resolution possible throughout Somali history. Fast forward to today. This exceptionally intelligent man said the reason Somalia's political quagmire is still unresolved is because clan structures and traditional law is not made central to the mediation process. Rather, they play peripheral roles in favor of western-inspired government and legal systems.

His argument struck me as valid, and I think it could prove transformative if enough people hear it. Most people who work on or follow Somali politics (including myself) come from other countries and use very un-Somali political frameworks to analyze the Somali problem. Worst of all, we make recommendations to policy makers based on these non-Somali frameworks. Rather than using what exists - traditional clan laws - we are trying to create new institutions inspired by western structures. This will certainly take a long time, and may not even prove possible in the somali context.

He added that anyone who thinks clan can be ignored is foreign in their outlook, and out of touch with Somalia's reality. I think thats absolutely true, especially because diaspora tend to parachute into somali political discussions without much experience inside the country, but nevertheless feeling more qualified to speak to governance and other issues than people from within somalia. With a PhD in European history, why wouldn't you have everything necessary to find solutions for Somalia?

Ignoring clan though comes from a  good place. It comes from seeing how societies can be harmonious when the population is united on a national level, not a more narrow clan level. It also comes from seeing how clan has been and continues to be used in Somalia for harmful and divisive purposes by some leaders. But this fear of clan is based partly on ignorance of clan systems. Clan can be divisive, but it can also unite communities. It brings order and justice through traditional legal systems. It leads large numbers of people to act as a family - even when they have little blood ties.  The good in clan needs to be harnessed, and the bad controlled for.

So rather than ignore clan in any future thoughts on Somalia, i'll make sure to recognize it as one element necessary to understanding, and ultimately resolving, problems facing Somalia.

Getting Somalia Wrong

I just came across this book review by Magnus Taylor about BBC journalist Mary Harper's new book, Getting Somalia Wrong. This is definitely a book worth reading. 


"Harper's book has grown out of 20 years working on and in the country, and functions not as a conventional history of Somalia, but rather as a discussion of several key themes central to its present state. Pleasantly surprising was the thread of black humour that runs throughout, created by the description of several historical events that exemplify an admirable, and slightly crazed, Somali independence of spirit.

First is the story of the 'Mad Mullah' - warrior poet Seyyid Mohamed Abdulle Hassan - who fought the British to a standstill in the early 20th century and described himself as 'a stubborn he-camel' from whom the British would get 'war and nothing else.' When his troops killed a British commander sent to pursue him, he penned 'a brutal celebratory poem' detailing how his dead body would be 'left to the carrion eaters.'

In a neat historical parallel, eighty years later, warlord General Mohamed Farah Aideed had a $20,000 bounty placed on his head by Admiral Jonathan Howe - commander of the US 'humanitarian' mission Restore Hope. Aideed responded by promising to pay $20,000 to anyone who brought him the actual head of Admiral Howe. Whilst such violent reactions might seem anathema to us, they underscore a fundamental self-confidence that Harper clearly respects. Long-time scholar of Somalia, Ioan Lewis, puts it another way - Somalis have 'an open contempt for other people.'

What Harper is trying to do is to resurrect a basic level of respect in discussions about Somalia. From its portrayal as a lawless place, riven with fundamentalist Islam, and latterly suffering the effects of a terrible famine, she argues that these aren't the only things that happen in the country. Her real interest, I think, was in profiling modern-day Somalia where 'more than two decades of conflict and crisis have forced Somalis to invent alternative political and economic systems.' These innovations in the economy, the livestock trade, money transfers and telecommunications reveal something that will be new to many readers - successful Somalis making money. She also clearly admires the political developments in Somaliland - the northern territory that seceded from the Somalia after the collapse of the country's central government in 1991. Still unrecognised by the international community, Somaliland has slowly developed its own hybrid democratic system with some traditional structures still in place, and is generally peaceful and heading in the right direction.


In conversation Harper refers to Somalia as being "like a complex mathematical equation" - the moving parts being the country's bewildering clan system, and although some Somalis reportedly deny its modern-day importance, Harper "would take any Somali on who said the clan system was not relevant." Whilst clans were suppressed under Siad Barre's pseudo-socialist regime, and their resurgence in the 1990s is sometimes seen as the cause of the civil war, they remain the shifting bedrock upon which Somali society is built. I ask what she thinks defeat of the Islamist group Al-Shabaab would do for the country. The answer is perhaps surprising - far from ending the violence, Harper predicts that Somalia might, at least initially, take a step backwards, as the more ingrained divisions would resurface and regional clan-based groups take up arms again against each other. Whilst she deals harshly with the violent and reactionary Islam of Al-Shabaab, she states that their presence has softened the influence of the clan in Somalia. Whilst this has been achieved "largely through fear," she also argues that there might be some things to learn from this about the way Somali society works."


See full review here: http://allafrica.com/stories/201201301453.html

Racism and the inferiority complex

I hate racism against any and all people. But the one type of racism that is most disturbing is when a population is racist towards their own, and elevate another. I saw this most clearly in Kenya than any other African country I've visited.

This past weekend I was denied entry into a hotel in Malindi, Kenya because I'm black. This has never happened to me before so I was caught off guard, and actually began making excuses for why the hotel guard was turning us back. I thought it must be because the hotel was full and he just didn't want to explain in detail his reason. My Kenyan friend, however, was fuming, and said if we were white he would never turn us back. She insisted that the guard let us in. The guard finally agrees to call his manager and ask for permission to let us in. While on the phone, he leaned down to get a good look at who was in the car as he spoke with his boss. He then said into the cell phone "No sir, they are all blacks in the car." I was shocked and dumbfounded. Never had I been so blatantly discriminated against in my life, and of all places, in Africa by Africans!

Its become clear that in this beautifully diverse continent, some populations have yet to shake-off the colonial mindset that elevates whites above all others, and as a result, they treat whites or other foreigners with far more respect than their own fellow Africans. Many, but certainly not all, Kenyans suffer from this inferiority complex, and its tragic to see in the 21st century.

a model: barefoot college

Click this link to see a great TED video about Bunker Roy, an Indian who started an extraordinary school that "teaches rural women and men — many of them illiterate — to become solar engineers, artisans, dentists and doctors in their own villages."

I think this model could be replicated in rural areas of Somalia.

http://blog.ted.com/2011/10/17/learning-from-a-barefoot-movement-bunker-roy-on-ted-com/

Consciousness necessary for change

One of my favorite authors, Leo Tolstoy, once wrote the following in his diary:

"I was cleaning a room and, meandering about, approached the divan and couldn't remember whether or not I had dusted it. Since these movements are habitual and unconscious, I could not remember and felt that it was impossible to remember - so that if I had dusted it and forgot - that is, had acted unconsciously, then it was the same as if I had not. If some conscisoul person had been watching, then the fact could be established. If, however, no one was looking, or looking on unconsciously, if the whole complex lives of many people go on unconsciously, then such lives are as if they had never been."

On a personal level, these words can have a profound impact on an individual, forcing one to assess whether they act consciously in their lives, because, as can be gleaned from this quotation, to live unconsciously is to not live at all. As dramatic as that sounds, I tend to agree with the statement because to live unconsciously is to live without intention, and I believe intention is essential to making ones actions (and life) have any meaning at all.

I may be distorting Tolstoy's original message, but I think this lesson can be extrapolated to a national level, and that entire populations can live unconsciously. This could result from a culture that does not value change for the better, perhaps because they do not believe change is possible. Or a population that does not recognize all that is happening around them, the beautiful and the ugly, because they are so caught up in the routines of life.

In countries like Somalia, after years of instability - a government full of corrupt politicians, a stagnant economy with few jobs available, and frequent military clashes between dozens of different factions - it is no surprise that the population has developed a culture of pessimism and largely do not believe in positive change. This condition has left many Somalis in a basic routine, largely comprised of a focus on survival, the need to  find subsistence for family, and the effort to gain refuge in another country, preferably somewhere in the West. I'm no phsychologist, but based on what i've seen and read, and people i've met, I believe this condition is pervasive in Somalia, and has led to the living of unconscious lives.

Once the population lives more consciously, and takes every bomb blast as an abomination - not a common occurrence - and every act of corruption by politicians as inexcusable - not business as usual - then only then will they have the will to change their condition, and to truly live with consciousness and intention. This consciousness must first manifest on a personal level before it can translate into national progress.

Somalia the Playground

I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories. They tend to explain major events with simplistic and cynical reasoning, and I tend to have more belief in the basic good nature of human beings to believe in the vastness of most conspiracy theories.


But then last week Kenya invaded Somalia. This must be the biggest political/military blunder since the Ethiopian military invaded the country in 2006. Somalis, especially those who have a tendency towards conspiracy, are shouting off the rooftops. A pattern has developed, they claim. Every time Somalia shows a hint of stability, some neighbor invades the country, putting the peace process and development efforts back to square one.


Ethiopia invaded Somalia in 2006 with the expressed purpose of fighting "terrorists." The invasion successfully pushed out of power the Union of Islamic Courts, the first governance system to bring stability, rule of law, and safety to the population in over a decade. Business was booming, the diaspora was returning to the country to rebuild homes and the sense of hope was never so high. But with the swift movement of the Ethiopian military, the UIC disintegrated and all that remained was a militia that branded itself al-Shabaab. Ethiopia's invasion helped to create al-Shabaab, and after two years of devastating conflict, Ethiopian troops pulled out of Somalia, leaving the country largely in al-Shabaab's control.


Fast-forward to today: Just as al-Shabaab became weaker than ever, as a consequence of the drought, decreasing finances and overall disillusionment with the organizations authoritarian and draconian rule, Kenya decides to invade. The invasion followed the kidnapping of a French tourist from northeast Kenya's coastal town of Lamu, and the Kenyan government announced that it would not tolerate Somali rebels crossing the border and wreaking havoc in Kenya. But the impact of this invasion will be far-reaching and resounding for  years to come if Kenya does not pull out soon. Already, al-Shabaab is crying out its new rallying cry - to fight the infidel Kenyans that are invading, raping, pillaging and bombing Somali brethren. This was similar to the information campaign launched during Ethiopia's invasion and unfortunately, it will almost certainly resonate with ordinary Somalis who until recently despised al-Shabaab. The insurgent/terrorist group will now be seen as the defenders of the homeland once again.

Bombing

On October 4th, a bomb went off near the Kilometer 4 junction in downtown Mogadishu. The death toll was over 70, and hundreds were wounded - some charred, some in pieces, some still smoldering from the impact. I saw the aftermath on a video that was posted online just a couple of hours after the bomb went off. I regret watching that video and seeing the dead bodies, some clearly young children. This is a rude awakening, reminding us all that while Mogadishu appears to be improving, just below the surface are fundamental problems. Al-Shabaab may have "pulled out" in August but they are far from gone.


The most tragic part of this bombing was the victims: they were mostly young students who were lining up outside the Ministry of Education to receive results from an examination. The Turkish government offered scholarships to Somali students, and these young kids had the smarts and confidence in themselves to try their luck at the chance to study abroad, hoping for a better future. I'm sure their families were tremendously proud of them, but unfortunately this hope and pride was shattered by terrorism.

 Al-Shabaab has become nothing more than a terrorist organization with a bankrupt ideology. With every murder of an innocent individual, more and more Somalis increase their loathing for the organization. Although I may at some time thought al-Shabaab was just a violent political movement, now I believe they are beyond the pale and cannot be dignified with the title of political movement. They are inhuman terrorists. If they cared at all for the Somali people they would not be killing them in such violent ways. The sole purpose of al-Shabaab now appears to be terrorism, and wreaking havoc on Somalia so that no government can establish itself. And it looks like they are succeeding.


This bombing and mass murder of innocent young people will nevertheless backfire on al-Shabaab because terrorism doesn't sit well with Somalis. My hope is that the people are angry enough to mobilize against al-Shabaab following this tragedy, and deal the organization a serious blow.


Somalis have been trapped by fear long enough. At a certain point, fear isn't enough to contain the hope for change.