Colliers on Post-Conflict Reconstruction

A friend of mine just told me about Ted.com, a brilliant website that has short video's done by leading intellectuals and leaders from all fields, talking about a valuable idea they wish to share with the world. I just listed to Paul Collier's video called "New Rules on Building Post-conflict Nations." I personally found it very valuable. Some of his ideas are not new but he did mention some novel ways of approaching post-conflict reconstruction.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/paul_collier_s_new_rules_for_rebuilding_a_broken_nation.html

Summary of Collier's Ideas on Post-Conflict Reconstruction

His main point is that post-conflict reconstruction approaches are usually based on political approaches, and this has proven to be a failed strategy. Forced political settlements, short-lived peacekeeping deployments and premature elections usually do not create stable, legitimate government. He argues that the game of politics must be changed from a zero-sum game to a positive-sum game, and this can be done by first creating security and then building prosperity.

He says three interdependent actors play key-role in post-conflict countries: the Security Council because they control peacekeeping troops, donors because they provide aid and assist in economic recovery and the post-conflict Government because it has the power to do economic reform and be politically inclusive.

These three actors are interdependent because if the Security Council doesn’t commit to recreating security, there won’t be the environment for investment to occur. Without policy reform and aid, economic recovery cannot happen. Collier called for a Compact of some sort to bring together the three actors to make mutual commitments.
He also identified three critical steps in post-conflict reconstruction:

Jobs

Young men especially need jobs to prevent militancy. Most governments expand civil service and have bloated bureaucracies because uncompetitive economics makes private sector expansion difficult. Collier recommends these governments focus on the construction sector because construction isn’t exposed to international trade and can generate jobs fast. The post-conflict government’s policy priority should be to break bottlenecks in the construction sector by enabling legal land acquisition, skill-building, and increasing firms.

Improvement in Services

This is important because populations must see the post-conflict government providing for them, and collaboration with NGOs is a wise way to provide these services. Government ministries can plan policies and distribute finances to NGOs that provide necessary services on. This will allow NGOs to compete with each other, and the government can put its name on services that reach the population.

Clean Government
The typical post-conflict government doesn’t have money even for basic requirements. If donors just put money in and leave, that money can easily be wasted or captured by corrupt politicians. Scrutiny and technical assistance should come with finances. On a broader not, politicians shouldn’t have much money otherwise the wrong type of people are attracted to the job.

Why Somalia is a failed state

I got an e-mail the other day advertising an event titled "Why States Fail." I immediately thought maybe, just maybe, this lecture could give me some insight on the case of Somalia. In the end, it actually did clarify a few things- sort of. It's expalantion was a theory based on political economies.

The lecturer was Daron Acemoglu from MIT. His thesis is that states fail when they do not have inclusive political and economic instititutions. Hence, to prevent states from failing, make sure these institutions are strong and inclusive, rather than extractive.

Inclusive institution allow for a more level playing field, rule of law and a broader coaltition of leaders, while extractive institutions have barriers to economic and political advancement for most of the population, except for the few that extract their money and power from the rest.

When a state has inclusive institutions, according to Acemoglu, a sufficient amount of the population has their interests met, and feel as though there is space for them in the current system to improve their condition, either financially or politically. Further, there is room for growth and development when institutions are inclusive because it enables the reallocation of benefits and creative destruction- changing those institutions or practices that are no longer moving the nation forward. When institutions are extractive, the amount of freedom to allow for creative destruction no longer exists, and nations are stagnant wherever the elite believe they can benefit and extract the most from the population. Inclusive institutions are therefore more favorable to growth and development.

How does this apply to Somalia?

Somalia, with its zero-sum political climate, certainly doesnt have inclusive political institutions. According to Acemoglu, however, nations that adopt inclusive economic institutions will more likely move in the direction of inclusive political instutions as more of the population is financially empowered. There are many factors that are invovled in this transition, and Acemoglu says a "lucky confluence of factors" must occur to enable nations to make such a transformative transition. I'd sure like to hear more about what that confluence entails.

Somalia has one of the worlds most open markets, and is therefore largely economically inclusive. The problem, however, is that there is insufficient rule of law and property rights that would enable more effective economic institutions and growth. Nevertheless, this research suggests that if the transitional Somali government increases the robustness of the already largely inclusive economic institutions, then the inclusive political instutions will more likely follow.

I'm not sure of the predictive power of this theory, but it certainly is a strategy the Somali government should look into as a means of stabilizing the country and enabling development in the long-term.

Somalia and DR Congo

I just attended a highly informative talk today on the DR Congo. I walked away feeling angered by the situation in the DRC, and really hoping the Congolese people would mobilize to force change and claim peace.

What struck me was the similarities between the conflicts in Somalia and the DRC:

1- Both DRC and Somalia are considered failed states. Their central governments are largely seen as illegitimate and incapable of governing effectively.

2- Both countries were colonized by Europeans, although the genocide of King Leopolds Congo "Free" State was surely more devastating than the random assortment of Somali colonizers.

3- Both nations had nationalist post-independent leaders who were soon after replaced by dictators (Mobutu and Barre). After decades in power, these dictators were overthrown by popular uprising.

4- Both populations now feel the dictators weren't so bad after all, considering the chaos that has resulted.

5- Both nations are rich in natural resources (Somalia's have yet to be really exploited).

6- Neighboring nations and the international community play a heavy role in the conflicts, and their differing agendas exacerbate tensions.

7- The discourse about how to resolve the troubles in these countries always involves a role for outside actors, when in fact it will take the people themselves to advocate on their own behalf, and bring about positive change.

God bless both countries, the people have suffered long enough.

Do humans deserve to Starve for living near Bad guys?

The U.S. reduced its funding to Somalia last year [2009] after its Office of Foreign Assets Control expressed fear that the extended supply line and insurgent-heavy areas where aid agencies were operating meant aid could be diverted to a group with links to al-Qaida. Associated Press


In response to this step by the U.S., the WFP has dramatically downsized its food distribution in some regions of Somalia- regions holding some of the most at-risk and vulnerable populations in the nation.  


This situation is outrageous. How can food aid be denied to a population in desperate need, simply because the aid "could be diverted" to groups with alleged links to al-Qaida? Since we could be feeding a few enemies, we should therefore stop delivering food and leave the entire populations of those regions to suffer. I respect Obama tremendously but this is one of the most unethical decisions taken by his administration, and I'd urge his government and all others to lobby to overturn this tragically misguided policy. 

What Kind of Leader Does Somalia Need

Joseph Nye describes in his book The Powers to Lead that there are two kinds of leaders; transformational and transactional. A transformational leader has the ability to unite divided groups with a shared goal and transform the direction and condition of a nation. Transactional leaders unite populations gradually through existing institutions and checks. There can be a combination of transactional style with transformational objectives and vice versa. Why am I mentioning this on a blog about Somalia?

Somalia needs a Transformational Leader


The nation needs a transformational leader who can show the Somali people- who have suffered for far too long- that they CAN move forward, CAN live in a peaceful nation and CAN have stable and productive lives. What is needed is a leader to inspire trust and rally followers towards an objective of rebuilding Somalia to the beautiful, safe and prosperous nation it ought to be. A leader who moves beyond narrow divisions of clan or ideology, and shows Somalis that they have so much in common that makes them great. A leader that is willing to sacrifice and work tirelessly for the ultimate goal of guiding his or her people towards positive change. The leader cannot just preach this vision, but must educate the population so that they believe in it and develop a broader sense of identity and shared goals. The transactional style of warlords and the current government cannot work. The institutions simply aren’t in place to allow for transactional changes, and the longer the nation waits the more generations will be lost.

Machiavelli once wrote that its important for leaders to seem to be moral. I think there is some value in Machiavelli’s writings but this one I disagree with completely. Certainly in the case of Somalia, it is necessary to move beyond a leader who seems to be moral, and seems to care about the needs and aspirations of the people. Somalia- first and foremost- needs a leader who is deeply moral, and cares sincerely about rebuilding the nation and helping the population. Lastly, this leader must truly understand and empathize with the needs of the Somali people, and cannot be an opportunist, divisive figure or disconnected Diaspora member.

That is what is needed today but unfortunately there doesn’t appear to be anyone who fits the bill rising from amongst the Somali people. There must be a Somali Barack Obama or Nelson Mandela- I refuse to believe there are none. 

Suicide Attack at Graduation Ceremony

On Thursday December 3, 2009, a massive bomb blast went off in a crowded Mogadishu hotel where hundreds had gathered to watch a graduation ceremony for medical students. These were not your typical college students, they were extraordinary young people who dodged bullets and risked their lives every day to go to university for the past few years in hopes of becoming doctors- one of the most desperately needed professions in Somalia today. And on the day that undoubtedly started off with joy and celebration, a 'national disaster' (in the words of President Sheikh Sharif) occurred. A suicide bomber entered the hotel and detonated a devastating bomb. 22 people died and 60 were injured in this callous attack. 3 cabinet level ministers who had come to honor the graduates were among the dead.

This tragedy must serve as a wake up call. The nation has dealt with suicide bombings in the past, but this one is particularly tragic. It is a tragedy because it reveals the utter pointlessness of where the conflict has gone. Whoever is behind this attack somehow found it in their interest to attack an institution of hope. They saw benefit in killing innocent people who had gathered to celebrate a bright future for Somali students and for the nation. They found it justifiable to kill students who aspired to help heal their fellow countrymen and women. Such violent distorted logic must be understood and confronted.

Somalis need to rally in opposition to this attack and turn this into an opportunity to change direction, reject violence and begin reconciliation.

State Building in Somalia

Since 9/11, US foreign policy has increasingly focused on international terrorism, and Somalia has been impacted by this shift because of allegations of "terrorists" hiding in the country, and the fear that any failed state has the potential to turn into a terrorist safe-haven. US government officials have even called the Horn of Africa a "front line in the war on terror."

The US has largely followed a strategy of state-building as its major tactic in counter-terrorism in Somalia. Consequently, it supported the 2006 Ethiopian occupation to overthrow the Union of Islamic Courts and install Abdullahi Yusuf's Transitional Federal Government. This was a major policy mistake, and has resulted in political developments that move counter to US objectives: Social and economic collapse, humanitarian crisis, growth in piracy and extremism and the creation and growing strength of al-Shabab. Nevertheless, it was a sincere effort to put in place a more 'amenable' government from the perspective of Western governments.

Dangers

State-building attempts in Somalia have been a failure. Policy makers clearly did not understand the extremely fragile nature of the process and the dangers that can result if it's not done carefully. There are several theoretical frameworks that describe the violence inherent in state formation, but lessons from Somali history alone could have provided evidence enough of the precariousness of such an endeavor. Since European colonization's divide and rule tactics, Somalis have perceived control of central government as a zero-sum game. Thus any attempt to establish a central authority will place rival groups at odds, and lead to conflict. If an outside military force is brought in to prop up a government, without fail, Somalis put aside their differences and fight the occupying force with a (usually) unexpected ferocity.

Another danger in state-buildling is the narrow western definition of a state tha is often forced on developing countries, including Somalia. This influenced the perception that the TFG, as a western secular model, was more legitimate than the UIC, a Somali-style Islamic model, regardless of the popularity and success that the UIC had in the country. Western countries including the US put pressure on developing nations to modernize, liberalize and create western-style Westphalian governments. It is important to note, however, that European states had over four centuries to create their modern state structures, and it is unreasonable to expect developing countries to successfully adopt heir styles of government in a short period of time, and more importantly, in such a different socio-cultural context. It is further questionable why such models out to be imported, displacing traditional models, and whether such importation leads to greater upheaval. This foreign pressure on Somalia has eased in recent years, for example the acceptance of Sheikh Sharif's Islamic-based government. But here is still the gap between the governments recognized as legitimate within Somalia, verses those recognized internationally.

A Vision for Building a Somali State

Nevertheless, the only way of bringing stability to Somalia and countering criminal forces within the country is through the creation of a stable government. Establishing that government must be a Somali-led effort, and the US and international community can support this effort by engaging diplomatically, not militarily. Further there must be a more historic, cultural and linguistic expertise among policymakers determining how the state building process should look like. Understanding the xeer for example, a customary code that organized nomadic Somali communities for centuries, can help in envisioning a Somalicized governance structure.

On a positive note, Somalia was the first post-independence African nation to have a successful democratic transition of power when in 1967 the government of Aden Abdulle Osman voluntarily passed power after free and fair elections onto the government of Abdirashid Ali Shermarke. Although this historical fact demonstrates the success of a democratic government, since then the leaders have represented narrow clan interests and this has solidified clan distrust and enmity. 

Most importantly, the popular will of the Somali people is critical to any successful government. John Stuart Mill wrote "The people for whom the form of government is intended must be willing to accept it; or at least not so unwilling as to oppose an insurmountable obstacle to its establishment." The voise of the people is critical in state formation and history has show that Somalis clearly refuse to allow their voices to be ignored. The attempts at government in the past few years have failed because the population did not buy into the regimes, although the ICU had the most buy-in of any recent regime. The Somali people will support a leader who has a positive impact on their lives- whether by bringing security, providing jobs or developing local economies. Making tangible progress in livelihoods is the surest way for a leader to earn support enough to lead such a scarred and fragmented country.