|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
More on politics & human rights |
economy & development |
peace & security |
health
Print this page
Somalia: Getting It Wrong, Again
AfricaFocus Bulletin
Nov 30, 2006 (061130)
(Reposted from sources cited below)
Editor's Note
"Unfortunately for Somalis, the United States and other members of
the UN Security Council are taking actions that make war more
likely, not less. The State Department wants to loosen a UN arms
embargo and allow deployment of a regional peacekeeping force, a
move that will be viewed as an act of war by the Council of Somali
Islamic Courts. ... [the resolution] would bring the UN into the
coming conflict on the side of Ethiopia and give a green light to
Ethiopia's deployment in Somalia."
This comment comes from John Prendergast and Colin Thomas-Jensen of
the International Crisis Group, writing in the Boston Globe and on
AllAfrica.com. UN, European, and many African commentators share
similar concerns, but the United States, joined by China and
Russia, are reportedly still pushing the resolution.
This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains the opinion piece by Prendergast
and Thomas-Jensen, an alert from the International Crisis Group,
and excerpts from a recent report from the UN's Integrated Regional
Information Network (IRIN).
Other recent reports of related interest
Can the Somali Crisis be Contained?
International Crisis Group 10 August 2006
http://www.crisisgroup.org
UN Monitors Warn of Escalation in Somalia
http://allafrica.com/stories/200611210156.html
U.S. State Department Report says Up to 12 Countries Could Be Sucked into Somalia Conflict
http://allafrica.com/stories/200610231146.html
For additional background on Somalis and references to other sites,
see http://www.africafocus.org/country/somalia.php
++++++++++++++++++++++end editor's note+++++++++++++++++++++++
Getting It Wrong In Somalia, Again
Guest Column
November 29, 2006
By John Prendergast and Colin Thomas-Jensen
Washington, D.C.
http://allAfrica.com
[John Prendergast is a senior adviser and Colin Thomas-Jensen is
the Africa advocacy and research manager at International Crisis
Group. The article was originally published in the Boston Globe on
November 29, 2006.]
Already notorious as the world's only state without a functioning
government, Somalia may be about to deteriorate even further. The
country is rapidly sliding back toward war. As an Islamist militia,
the Council of Somali Islamic Courts, consolidates control over
large swathes of southern Somalia, neighboring Ethiopia has sent
thousands of troops over the border, and both sides are preparing
for a showdown. A return to war could bring about the same horrific
famine conditions that precipitated a US military intervention 14
years ago, and damage rather than advance US counter-terrorism
objectives in a vulnerable region.
Unfortunately for Somalis, the United States and other members of
the UN Security Council are taking actions that make war more
likely, not less. The State Department wants to loosen a UN arms
embargo and allow deployment of a regional peacekeeping force, a
move that will be viewed as an act of war by the Council of Somali
Islamic Courts, or CSIC. The Bush administration must resist the
urge to tackle political problems with military solutions, roll up
its diplomatic sleeves, and engage in a multilateral effort to
negotiate an agreement between the Ethiopian-backed Somali
transitional government and the Council of Somali Islamic Courts,
the de facto authority in much of southern Somalia.
Terrorists, including those associated with Al Qaeda, have preyed
on the lack of a functioning central government to smuggle weapons
through Somalia's porous borders, unguarded ports, and uncontrolled
airstrips. Somalia has consequently been a terrorist staging ground
and a haven for the perpetrators of Al Qaeda bombings against the
US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the bombing of a beachfront
hotel in Kenya, and a failed attempt to bring down an Israeli
passenger aircraft off the Kenya coast. Al Qaeda's activities in
Somalia were aided, abetted, and protected by elements of the
Council of Somali Islamic Courts, and the Courts' rise to power
poses a security threat to the region.
The US policy response, understandable at first glance, has been to
focus overwhelmingly on capturing terrorists, neglecting in the
process Somalian appeals for assistance in building a functioning
state. But state building and counter-terrorism are not mutually
exclusive, and the US approach of supporting warlords that served
its interests has been shortsighted.
This past spring, pitched battles between the CIA's warlord proxies
and militias loyal to the militia killed hundreds of Somali
civilians in the capital, Mogadishu, and injured or displaced
thousands more. Ill-advised financial support to some of the
predator warlords who have caused Somalia's anarchy -- committing
crimes from extortion to rape -- only increased the popularity of
the council as it became synonymous with law and order.
The rise of the militia corresponds with the political implosion of
an internationally backed transitional government located in the
town of Baidoa. Government officials have defected en masse,
leaving behind a vulnerable institution that lacks the military
muscle to face the CSIC alone. Ethiopia, the Bush administration's
chief counter-terrorism ally in the region, has responded by
deploying forces to protect what is left of the transitional
government. Ethiopia does not like the kind of Islam the Council is
promoting, and fears a strong Council could destabilize parts of
Ethiopia.
As battle looms, the hyenas are closing in. A UN investigation
presented to the Security Council this month suggested that no
fewer than nine outside actors -- including Ethiopia and its enemy
Eritrea -- are funneling weapons to either the transitional
government or the militia. By doing so, they are breaking the
14-year UN arms embargo and priming the country for war.
While many Somalis don't want their personal freedoms restricted
and reject the Islamist extremism preached by the militia, they are
even more opposed to foreign intervention. The militia has painted
its jihad in nationalist colors, and this has led to an outpouring
of popular support.
UN investigators recommended strengthening the arms embargo and
freezing the assets of all Somali-owned and operated businesses
linked to arms trade. It also warned that the entire region could
explode into conflict unless the international community makes
diplomatic efforts to contain the spillover.
Rather than heed this advice, the United States is pushing for just
the opposite by tabling a resolution in the UN Security Council to
partially lift the arms embargo to allow a regional peacekeeping
mission to protect the government in Baidoa. In effect, this would
bring the UN into the coming conflict on the side of Ethiopia and
give a green light to Ethiopia's deployment in Somalia.
The United States should focus on averting a war, not triggering
one. Before endorsing a military solution, the United States should
work multilaterally to apply targeted sanctions to parties that
violate the arms embargo and economic pressure to the council's
business partners.
It should also invest in a peace process, which means getting
involved in promoting a power-sharing deal between the weak
transitional government and the council. Rebuilding a government in
Somalia is the only viable way to combat the terrorist threat and
prevent violent Islamist extremism from expanding. Delicate
diplomacy is required to reconstitute this transitional authority
as a government of national unity. Only then will the United States
help create an effective counterbalance to the Islamists and an
eventual partner in the international struggle against terrorism.
Somalia conflict risk alert
International Crisis Group
http://www.crisisgroup.org
11/27/2006
Contacts:Andrew Stroehlein - Brussels 32 (0) 2 541 1635
Kimberly Abbott - Washington 1 202 785 1601
The draft resolution the U.S. intends to present to the UN Security
Council on 29 November could trigger all-out war in Somalia and
destabilise the entire Horn of Africa region by escalating the
proxy conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea to dangerous new
levels.
Instead of siding with one party in the civil conflict - the weak
and fragmented Ethiopia-backed Transitional Federal Government
(TFG) - the Council should apply maximum pressure on both it and
the Eritrea-backed Council of Somali Islamic Courts (CSIC) to
resume negotiations without preconditions. The proposed resolution,
which has the backing of African members of the Security Council,
would authorise deployment of a regional military force (IGASOM) in
support of the TFG and exempt that entity and troop contributing
countries - Ethiopia, Uganda and possibly Kenya, amongst others -
from the existing UN arms embargo. While its objectives are to
strengthen the TFG, deter the CSIC from further expansion and avert
the threat of full-scale war, it is likely to backfire on all three
counts.
Crisis Group has consistently opposed deployment of a regional
intervention force - especially one involving front-line states
such as Ethiopia - unless it has the consent of all warring
parties, and called for more robust enforcement of the UN arms
embargo. The UN Monitoring Group, which reported on 16 October,
similarly cited the dangers of such a deployment and urged instead
strengthening the arms embargo through surveillance of all Somali
borders.
Despite international recognition, the TFG has never enjoyed broad
support or legitimacy within Somalia, and the TFG parliament split
badly when it debated the issue of foreign troops in March 2005.
Actual deployment would likely fracture the parliament beyond
repair and reinforce the impression that the TFG is simply a proxy
for Ethiopia. The loss of legitimacy in the eyes of the Somali
public would be irreversible.
The CSIC, which controls most of south central Somalia, has
repeatedly declared that it will wage a "jihad" against any foreign
troops on Somali territory, including the Ethiopians already
deployed there. It would likely perceive Security Council passage
of the resolution as tantamount to a declaration of war. Rather
than wait for the TFG to arm itself, it might well launch a
pre-emptive attack on its seat in Baidoa. The CSIC is viewed as a
danger to its neighbours because of its irredentist views, and
support for international terrorist elements and cross-border
Ethiopian rebel groups. In addition, it threatens to unseat the
internationally recognised TFG. Instead of prioritising military
protection of the TFG against the CSIC - which is itself receiving
military support from as many as eight external countries - the
international community should challenge the CSIC to reform its
stance on each of these points and work towards a negotiated
solution with the TFG.
The TFG and CSIC are scheduled to meet in Khartoum in mid-December
for a third round of Arab League facilitated peace talks. Although
previous talks made little headway, more effective international
pressure on the parties, including a more active involvement from
the UN Secretary General via his Special Representative, would
increase the likelihood of success. Without this, the resolution
would give the CSIC an excuse to withdraw altogether and would kill
any hope of a negotiated ceasefire. Military confrontation would be
the only remaining option.
Instead of authorising deployment of a regional force, the Council
should push both parties to resume peace talks immediately. First
on the agenda should be a comprehensive ceasefire covering:
- disengagement of opposing forces;
- withdrawal from Somalia of all foreign troops and military
trainers; and
- deployment of an International Verification Mission to monitor
compliance with the agreement.
Any UN-sponsored military deployment should be designed to support
an agreed ceasefire, not undermine efforts to achieve such a
ceasefire, and should be made up of forces acceptable to both
parties. If either party fails to demonstrate genuine commitment to
this process, the Council should impose travel bans on its leaders,
freeze assets and authorise economic sanctions against business
interests.
As so often in Somalia, the consequence of an ill-considered
intervention is likely to be more conflict, not less. Military
measures must remain a weapon of last resort.
Somalia: A question of balance
20 November 2006
Integrated Regional Information Network (IRIN)
http://www.irinnews.org
[Excerpts only: for full text see the IRIN website]
Mogadishu, 20 Nov 2006 (IRIN) - After more than a decade of brutal
factional fighting, the road-blocks and gunmen have been cleared
off the streets of the Somali capital, business is thriving and
Mogadishu is being rebuilt. But strict standards of religious and
behavioral discipline are being introduced, and questions are being
asked about the vision of the new authority, the Union of Islamic
Courts (UIC).
For now, gratitude for security and freedom of movement takes
precedence for most Mogadishu residents. Others have fled to
refugee camps, complaining of persecution and loss of business.
"There are two sorts of freedoms," pointed out a Mogadishu
businessman. "Going about our daily lives is the most important
freedom we can have now." But he said one freedom may come at the
price of another. "People do not want to lose their personal
freedoms."
Humanitarian prospects
The extraordinary turnaround in security means people can go about
their daily life: traders can safely take home their earnings;
children can go to school regularly and without fear; clinics and
hospitals can concentrate on primary healthcare instead of
constantly dealing with the trauma of conflict.
A recent visitor from the diaspora, who has not been to Mogadishu
in six years, was astounded by the changes. "I drove through areas
no one has driven in 15 years - like Bermuda [named after the
Bermuda Triangle, previously one of the most dangerous areas] -
without any security escort or even a gun. Five months ago this
would have been unthinkable, even with a heavy security escort," he
said.
Stability under the UIC has opened up new prospects for
humanitarian assistance. For the first time in more than a decade,
food aid has successfully been brought into the newly opened port
for distribution outside the city. According to Leo van der Velden,
Deputy Country Director of World Food Programme, Somalia, the new
authority had "done the right things and said the right things" to
encourage humanitarian access, and that good security allowed
transporters to safely carry and deliver.
CARE International confirmed that a consignment of sorghum from the
United States had arrived in the port in October, and was
successfully handled, transported and delivered to areas outside
the city - a logistical achievement impossible for more than a
decade, when the port and its resources became a flashpoint for
factional fighting.
Freedom of movement has also allowed access to the displaced camps
in Mogadishu. For years, thousands of internally displaced people
have suffered 'a forgotten tragedy' in the city. Now the displaced
are also benefiting from safety and small-scale community
assistance. In October, the Al Bayan court militia escorted small
consignments of food to the camps, donated by the local community.
"We are doing what we can," said the chairman of Al Bayan, Mohamed
Ibrahim Bilal.
But despite the change, security fears resulted in the humanitarian
community withdrawing from Somalia in September. The move followed
the murder of a foreign cameraman and an Italian nun in Mogadishu,
and the assassination attempt in Baidoa on the President of the
Transitional Federal Government (TFG). Since the withdrawal, talks
between the UIC and the TFG have stalled. The two sides met in
Khartoum twice since the UIC victory in a reconciliation meeting
sponsored by the Arab League and supported by the international
community. The third meeting scheduled for late October did not
take place after the two sides failed to agree on fundamental
issues. Fears of regional conflict increased after the UIC declared
Jihad on Ethiopia for deploying troops inside Somali territory -
which Ethiopia has consistently denied.
In November, the US embassies in the region issued a warning
against "reports of terrorist threats emanating from extremist
elements within Somalia, which target Kenya, Ethiopia and other
surrounding countries". It warned of suicide attacks, particularly
in Kenya and Ethiopia - seen as regional US allies and supporters
of the TFG. The US accused the UIC of harbouring alleged terrorists
and extremists, while the US in turn has been accused of supporting
the defeated warlords.
Establishing standards
On the streets of Mogadishu, there is much debate about 'moderates'
and 'extremists'. A local journalist said his personal freedoms had
changed in many ways since the takeover, "good and bad". "In some
areas there is no music or cinemas, radio stations have closed
down, we have no freedom to write, and they are doing public
executions." He says there is a 'wait and see' atmosphere.
"When it comes to security, we feel freedom. When it comes to
personal freedoms, we feel worried."
Since coming to power in June, the UIC has implemented Shari'a law,
but avoided issuing official directives on details of social and
religious conduct. Instead, it has used punishment and propaganda
to set new standards. Public floggings were meted out for men and
women accused of selling drugs, chewing khat and 'immoral
behaviour'. There are public lectures and radio appeals addressing
religious commitment, behaviour and morality, and the
interpretation of the Koran.
But the new climate of punishment and restraint may not sit
comfortably in a culture known for its personal freedoms and
egalitarianism - and the UIC is wary of launching an assault
against certain aspects of Somali culture.
Banning khat
The UIC's new ban on khat will prove a critical test of acceptance
of the new restrictions.
...
The daily importation of khat from Kenya and Ethiopia is costly,
and its narcotic effects have contributed to conflict and
lawlessness. It is seen as a social evil by many. But it provides
countless small traders, mostly women who are heads of households,
with a livelihood, and its daily use is socially and geographically
widespread. No Somali government has been successful in abolishing
the trade.
Dress code
There is also consternation over new standards of dress code. In
UIC offices, men who dress 'western-style' are frowned upon.
Visiting businessmen and women say they sometimes struggle to
conform and do not understand the disapproval around details of
behaviour and dress. ...
Sheikh Sharif emphasises that the increase in 'modesty' is not the
result of any official declaration by the UIC. "The Islamic Courts
has made no decision about [this] because Somali women dress the
way it is intended in their religion. I do not wish to impose
anything like that." Some of the UIC leadership says the debate
over dress is provoked by pro-western critics.
Badge of loyalty
But there is much debate - in private - by Mogadishu residents as
to whether people are changing their habits through religious
choice, or just to protect themselves. "Women are already taking up
the veil not out of choice but as a precaution, so that no-one
singles them out," said one businessman. ...
Humour on the streets reflects the fact that the new path to power
is through religion. "Everyone is becoming a sheikh these days,"
observed one hotelier. Red and white checked headscarves are used
fairly ubiquitously by the UIC - from the leadership and the
militia to their supporters. The scarves are seen as a badge of
loyalty. For those who want to demonstrate strict religious
commitment, musical ring tones on mobile phones have been replaced
by recordings from the mosque.
Centralising policy
Some of the social confusion comes from the absence of policy. Soon
after the takeover, cases were being reported of women being
ordered to wear the hijab. But the UIC leadership explains these
incidents as the challenge of centralisation. There are 27 branches
of the courts in Mogadishu, and 11 outside the city, all used to
operating autonomously. Different local courts were imposing
different standards and implementing different punishments.
Centralisation of the courts did not take place until late
September....
Balancing act
The confusion over codes of behaviour illustrates the struggle
between the moderates and hardliners within the UIC. Since the
takeover, there has been increased emphasis on 'jihad' and visible
militarisation of society - including seminars on jihad for men and
women, and training camps to unify the militia into a centralised
force. Some UIC leaders see security and 'defence of the country
and the religion' as the priority, and have made it the rallying
call.
The hardliners - known as the Shabaab group - invest in
militarisation, advocate strict religious codes and punishments,
and shun contact with the non-Muslim world. They include key
figures in the UIC - including Chief of Security for Mogadishu,
Sheikh Abdullahi Mo'alim Ali 'Abu Utayba', who stated publicly,
according to local journalists, that people who failed to pray five
times a day should be shot. ...
Key members of the UIC leadership are working to secure
international support and assistance in rebuilding Somalia. There
is consternation in the movement that, having successfully
delivered peace and unity in Mogadishu after nearly two decades of
chaos and conflict, the humanitarian community has pulled out. The
moderates are concerned that isolation from the international
community serves to strengthen extremism and undermines
opportunities for humanitarian assistance.
Sheikh Sharif said the UIC could provide security for international
organisations to work in Mogadishu, and had encouraged humanitarian
groups to take advantage of peace in the city.
"We had started negotiations and the process was going well, but
then the humanitarian community declared it was leaving the areas
where the UIC was in control. We regret that because we see it as
a violation of people's rights." ...
To date, humanitarian organisations are unsure about the
implications of the takeover. According to Philippe Lazzarini, head
of OCHA-Somalia, many of the Somalis most in need are in
south-central Somalia, most of which is controlled by the UIC. He
told IRIN there was need for dialogue and engagement.
"In order to get access to those in need it is imperative to engage
with the authorities in control, including the UIC," he said.
...
AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with
a particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.
AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org
|
