Abtigiis;754763 wrote: :D that thread you talk about is a parody. Others could read it as my feeling, not you. You are too advanced for that. I was speaking as a pirate. With a pirate persona and attitude against Azanians. Ngonge will be upset with me for taking you bait and explaining myself too much. But for the record, I am not cheering Azania, I will cheer an Alshabab demise. If that is not clear, then so is your I have no problem with Alshabab beaten, but let it done by Amisom and not Kenya. As if the Ugandan's have taller and finer noses and softer hairs than the Kenyan's? If I tell you the truth, I consider your objection to Kenya to be based on principle and nationalism (despite my hits against you). I will be dishonest if I say I see you as opposed to this project from clan perspective. But the way you are selling your position is really precarious. I may be committing the same error on the other side, but I am a bit compromised because i see a unique opportunity to finish-off Alshabab in this current moves. Minus Alshabab, I will take my war to Gandhi and the fools who follow his project. You will see. :D @parody No matter how you spin it, you have been supporting the Azania project for the last few days. I do not understand why you are running away from your stances. Xatta anagaii baad na maagtay oo magacyo noo bixisay, oo kii xumaa ee The Zack ahaa nagu fasaxday No, I do not (and I mean this) read too much into what online personas say about my intentions or motives. To do so is to fundamentally misunderstand the function of online forums. Marka haku daalin, nationalist tahay iyo waxaa. Waxaan ahay waa ahay awoowe, and there is nothing you say or do to change it. Just make sure what you write is something that you can defend.

^^ :D This is what I wrote, which you disputed. xiinfaniin;754737 wrote: According to Daily Nation, Kenya is attempting to reach some sort of compromise with TFG (Sharif) and calm things down a bit... And this is what I read in Daily Nation: 'However, he said, the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia is sending a delegation for “bilateral talks to strengthen cooperation between the two countries”, possibly a polite way of saying the two sides have agreed to sit down and hammer out a deal on the military operation.'

^^ :D When it comes to the professed kinship between Siilaanyo and the Queen, the fingerless Dr has no chance to compete. He is a proud Somali man with reasonable claim on a kinship link to H's noble houses

^^Kenyan invasion is not necessarily only to establish state. There may be other reasons for committing boots on the ground. How elementary waryaa!!! I cant believe you are arguing this nonsense you are going for. I don't disagree that Kenyans are full of themselves. But I only reported what news piece I read. You called me a liar and I had to provide an evidence to defend my honor and fend off your deliberate effort to impeach my integrity.

^Are you asking for evidence of your support of Azania? You just said you cheer for it conditionally. In the spam of three or four days you produced most readable essays in SOL history in support of Azania. Your whole fight with me is based on my opposition to Azania. I always supported Puntland and opposed Azania even when it was being conceived in Nairobi hotels by Prof Gandi, and you never protested. Now you sensed a hint of feasibility of this project, you seem to be jumping on the tolka bandwagon. That is good and dandy but dont protest denying that you are a supporter, even if conditional :D PS: I don't buy your newly found rationalization of justifying Kenyan invasion on the basis of AMISOM presence. AMISOM is a foreign force but it is not a country. TFG is weak but it represents all Somali stakeholders with the exception of Alshabaab who willfully rejected it and fought. It is NOT analogous to Prof Gandi's paper state.

Anyways it is interesting Siilaanyo went to England after Faroole came back

^^Prof. Abtigiis, here is the news piece I read yesterday: 'However, he said, the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia is sending a delegation for “bilateral talks to strengthen cooperation between the two countries”, possibly a polite way of saying the two sides have agreed to sit down and hammer out a deal on the military operation.' http://www.nation.co.ke/News/9+Shabaab+men+killed+in+battle+with+Kenya+army+/-/1056/1262996/-/uwq2vc/-/index.html What you posted however is not a news, it is an opinion. Again there is a difference if you care to know. As for Azanians, if you believe me , I have never heard such creators with a such a creative name and nationality. I heard certain professor called Gandi who wrote academic paper for Kenya whose thesis was that Kenya could use its Somali natives to create a buffer zone from which to defend its economic interest more effectively. I agree there are indeed convergence of interests but it is between Kenya, and the West. Somali interests diverge greatly from this Kenyan incursion.

^^He brought him to the Somali soil, ya ungrateful separatist

Somaliland should thank Puntland for this :D

Kenya has no intention of occupying Somalia under the guise of fighting terrorism. Internal Security minister George Saitoti Friday said that the government was only determined to secure its borders but not annex Somalia. “We have never nursed territorial ambitions to annex Somalia or take their land. The Kenya Government is simply standing its mandate to defend the country and its people,” he said. His sentiments were echoed by President Kibaki who said the decision to carry out military action against the Al-Shabaab was in response to escalating insecurity and violation of Kenya’s territorial integrity. Addressing the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) at Perth, Australia the President stated that Kenya is not at war with Somalia but is carrying out action against the Islamic militia which is a non-state actor and perpetrating blatant attacks, abductions and killings of innocent civilians. He said the country had no intention of keeping troops in Somalia longer than is necessary, but will undertake the mission established under the operation to protect its territory. President Kibaki informed the session, chaired by the Prime Minister of Australia Julia Gillard, that the country’s current mission in Somalia is meant to deal with the continued threat posed by Al-Shabaab to Kenya’s national security and economic interests. “Our mission in Somalia is therefore, based on a legitimate right to protect Kenya’s sovereignty and territorial integrity”. http://www.nation.co.ke/News/Kenya+does+not+intend+to+annex+Somalia++says+Saitoti/-/1056/1263506/-/aiwpq2z/-/index.html

US ambassador to Kenya Scott Gration. The United States has denied involvement in the ongoing operation against Somalia's Al-Shabaab terror group October 28, 2011. By LUCAS BARASA Posted Friday, October 28 2011 at 13:31 The United States has denied involvement in the ongoing operation against Somalia's Al-Shabaab terror group. US ambassador to Kenya Major General (rtd) Scott Gration said Friday his country was only assisting Kenya in ensuring internal stability. “We don’t have military operation outside the border of Kenya,” the envoy said during a news conference at the Department of Defence headquarters. Mr Gration who once served as an instructor at Kenya Airforce denied reports that the US was assisting Kenya in the operation against Al-Shabaab. “We have been providing our assistance in an overt way through the Kenya Navy, Army and Air Force for long time and we will continue. We are not in Somalia. Our support is through equipment,” the ambassador said. He said the US was ready to give Kenya more equipment if it wants. The envoy who was accompanied by Defence minister Yusuf Haji and Chief of the Defence Forces Julius Karangi said the US enjoys good relationship with Kenya. Mr Haji said Kenya is yet to get official communication from Somalia’s President on why he did not want Kenyan forces to fight Al-Shabaab in the country. “We hope we will get the information by Monday,” Mr Haji said.

^^Whether it is a 'conditional cheering' or heartfelt one, cheering for Azania and Kenyan invasion you have been and still are. With all things your online persona is known for, flip-flopping was not one of them. Until now, that is. Which is a very serious transitioning... Don't deny the charge when the evidence is available and readily accessible. Puntland was not born out of a foreign intervention. That it is tribal in its score is not a moot point. But it is not analogous with this foreign supported, one man show you are peddling here. A distinction with considerable difference if you care to ponder on it.

^^The 'disgruntled groups' you are speaking of are tools of Kenyan scheme. They are taken by Kenya's promise of political dominance in the region. So for Sharif to put efforts in wining them back to his column would be a futile thing to do. Somalis of all walks of life have deep roots in Kenya. It is even astonishing that Sharif got the courage to oppose Kenyan invasion given Kenya's overreaching influence on the lives of millions of Somalis, Sharif included. According to Daily Nation, Kenya is attempting to reach some sort of compromise with TFG (Sharif) and calm things down a bit. But even if Sharif is bought back by Kenya, the damage is already done and one of the casualty of this invasion will be the TFG itself. And that throws Somalia's political road map into real disarray.

I understand your argument for invasion. I don't understand your motivation to attack xiin. Enjoy reading what is posted and appreciate the facility of SOL adeer. It is another perspective of Kenya's invasion in southern Somalia.

Kenya simply can't afford to go to war with Somalia right now The Guardian home Friday, October 28, 2011 Kenya has a right to defend its people and its visitors, but will it be able to deal with the consequences? The word "war" is one that Kenyans go to great lengths to avoid invoking. Ethnic clashes, post-election violence, cross-border raids, security operations – these are all things that the average Kenyan is broadly familiar with – but war is something that other countries do. Such an open display of aggression and hostility runs counter to the euphemistic and allegedly peaceful instinct of our national culture. So the news that the Kenyan army was going into Somalia in pursuit of al-Shabaab following the kidnapping and death of Marie Dedieu, our first out-and-out war since independence, has caused surprise and significant concern. It's not that Kenya and Somalia do not have a shared history of violence. Dedieu's death was, unfortunately, the latest in a long line of hostage-takings that al-Shabaab and other Somali groups have committed in Kenya. Each episode is a harsh indictment of our security forces and their apparent inability to protect our people and our most valuable industry: tourism. The concern is that the belated response from the security forces to these events is more often than not ham-fisted, brutal and generally perpetrated against Kenya's own significant Somali population rather than any member of al-Shabaab or other militia groups. It's hard to rage freely against the crime without some trepidation, as most of us fear the brutal "security operations" that the government implements in north-eastern Kenya, and the news of European and North American involvement in the shadow of Libya only makes it harder to process. The north-eastern area of Kenya is a tough region, and has been problematic for Nairobi since before independence. It forms part of the "homeland" of "Greater Somalia", which in the colonial era was split between Abyssinian (modern-day Ethiopian), British and Italian spheres of influence. The theoretical agreements between these governments quickly proved practically unenforceable, even though they were enough to disrupt the traditional transhumance of communities in the region. Absurd borders along fictional geographical lines (of latitude and longitude) were the basis of competing imperial interests in a region that offered very little economic benefit for these powers – the perfect mix for fights about nothing to drag on endlessly. Overall, the three entities spent a great deal of time and money trying to prove that the Somali people living beyond their borders were foreigners, in order to justify excluding them from trans-border grazing areas, while the Somali people tried to sustain their traditional way of life and keep the sense of broader community alive. These half-hearted attempts at creating some kind of order sowed the seeds for some of the mistrust of governmental action in the region today. The Somali people were never included in the decision-making process and continued to view all three powers with suspicion. Today, considering the rag-tag nature of the al-Shabaab militia, it is unlikely that the Kenyan military will be able to adequately distinguish civilians from combatants, Kenyans from Somalis. No one denies that Kenya has a right to defend its people, but there is some concern for the security of civilians in the region, who continue to bear the brunt of internal brutality and external apathy. Just before independence, an irredentist movement tried to unite Greater Somalia and the response from Nairobi and Addis was typically violent but ineffective. The governments often supported various clans in their incursions across the new boundaries to try to gain political favour, further blurring the lines between historical, political and economic tensions. At independence, the pattern continued more or less unchecked. The independent government in Kenya promised to support the secession of the north-eastern territory, but quickly reneged on the deal, fuelling the so-called Shifta rebellion, which continued as a low-intensity conflict for the better part of the last five decades. As it stands, Kenya cannot afford to go to war right now. Aside from internal structural problems and the open question of next year's general election, the struggling dollar has contaminated the economy further as the woes of our biggest trading partners bleed into our own problems. With a bloated government, which was put into power in part to keep the peace and which will continue to grow as constitutional changes create a more federal system, government expenditure has never been higher or, arguably, less productive. All of this comes in the shadow of a slow response to what experts are calling the worst drought in the region in 60 years. (As one Kenyan noted on Twitter, it seems that in Africa they always have money for war but never enough for food.) Even so, the changing circumstances of al-Shabaab's increasing aggression and apparent lack of central command have led to unspeakable violence against Somali and international civilians, and is a question that demands a robust answer. The troubling issue is whether the Kenyan government, even (or especially?) with French support, is in a position to manage the inevitable fallout.

Kenya’s Somali mission causes a devastating blowback at home Friday, October 28, 2011 For 20 years, Somalia has been a deadly quagmire for foreign troops: American, Ethiopian, even Canadian. Now another country, Kenya, is learning the risks of sending soldiers into one of the world’s most dangerous and war-torn states. Less than two weeks after ordering hundreds of its troops across the Somali border in a bold military offensive, Kenya is already seeing a rising toll in collateral damage. Three grenade attacks inside Kenya, including one on Thursday, have killed five civilians and injured scores more in suspected retaliatory attacks by Somali militants and their allies The grenade attacks will inflict severe damage on Kenya’s tourism industry, a key sector of the economy. Foreign embassies have issued warnings to travellers to stay away from the East African country, and hotels in Nairobi are already seeing cancellations. The kidnapping of four Western aid workers and tourists by Somali gunmen in Kenya has further damaged the tourism industry. The Kenyan invasion is also hampering refugee movements and aid deliveries by the international famine relief effort, which is trying to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe in southern and central Somalia, where up to 80,000 people have already died. The number of Somali refugees reaching Kenya has plunged dramatically, from an average of about 1,000 daily last month to just 100 a day this week. “Escalating fighting across the south of Somalia is making it even more difficult for our partners to safely deliver life-saving support to children and their families,” said Elhadj As Sy, a senior official of Unicef, the United Nations fund for children. As for the military offensive itself, it has become bogged down in heavy rains and mud in southern Somalia, with few gains except empty desert so far. Despite logistical support from France and its own tanks and warplanes, Kenya’s troops have still not captured their first key target, the strategic town of Afmadow, 100 kilometres from the Kenyan border, where the Somali militant group al-Shabab is preparing its defences. The Kenyan forces clashed with al-Shabab fighters on Thursday for the first time. Kenya said it killed nine al-Shabab insurgents and suffered two injuries on its own side. “The history of recent foreign military interventions in Somalia is universally bad,” said Roger Middleton, an Africa analyst at the Chatham House think tank in London. “Foreign troops entering Somalia have often left behind a situation that is worse than the one they sought to improve.” The United States withdrew its forces from Somalia in 1994 after the notorious Black Hawk Down battle, where 18 of its soldiers were killed in the bloodiest U.S. combat loss since Vietnam. Canada pulled its troops out of Somalia after revelations that some of its soldiers had participated in the torture and beating death of a Somali civilian. In 2006, Ethiopia sent thousands of its troops into Somalia, but failed to pacify the country. Instead the invasion strengthened the influence of the Islamist radicals of al-Shabab, who gained control of southern Somalia and Mogadishu after the Ethiopians pulled out. The Islamist militants, who have links to al-Qaeda, had vowed to take revenge in Kenya after Kenya launched its invasion. Last week, the U.S. government warned of “an imminent threat of terrorist attacks” at malls and nightclubs in Kenya. And then the grenade attacks began. On Monday, one person was killed and scores were injured in two grenade attacks at a bus stop and a bar in Nairobi. Two days later, a Kenyan man pleaded guilty to one of the attacks and identified himself as a member of al-Shabab. The attacks show how the Somalia conflict is spilling across borders and mutating into hit-and-run terrorist tactics. On Thursday, in the latest attack, heavily armed gunmen in northern Kenya ambushed a civilian vehicle with rocket-propelled grenades and machine guns, killing four people, including a school teacher and a government official. Al-Shabab militants were again the suspected culprits. One of al-Shabab’s senior leaders, Sheik Muktar Robow, said on Thursday that he is telling militants in Kenya to launch bombing attacks. “A hand grenade is nothing,” he told hundreds of Shabab supporters in a rally near Mogadishu. “We want you to carry out big painful blows to Kenya.” Last week, al-Shabab publicly displayed the bodies of dozens of soldiers that it claimed to have killed in Mogadishu, including many Burundians from an African Union peacekeeping mission. In an attempt to portray the conflict as a religious war, they displayed Bibles and crucifixes from the Burundian soldiers.

Why Somali President wants Kenya army out Friday, October 28, 2011 Somali President Shariff Sheikh Ahmed is opposed to the deployment of Kenyan troops in his country because he believes it is an attempt by Kenya to create an autonomous Jubaland. Communication from as far back as March 2011 between President Shariff and President Kibaki shows that the Somali leader asked Kenya not to deploy to Juba region an estimated 2,500 young Somali soldiers who had been trained and equipped in Kenya. President Shariff was worried that the youth, if deployed in the Juba region, would help former Somali Defence minister Mohamed Ghandi whom Mogadishu suspects is attempting to create a separate state for himself between Kenya and the Juba River. President Shariff on Monday issued a statement saying Kenyan troops were not welcome in Somalia. He said Kenya had gone against the original agreement of providing logistical support when it sent in soldiers to pursue the Al Shabaab militia group. His statements were however criticised by several Somali leaders including the military spokesman and ordinary citizens who said they welcomed Kenya's help to tame the al-Shabaab. Yesterday, President Shariff and his Prime Minister Abdiweli issued a statement denying that there was any agreement between the two governments for the intervention of Kenyan military in Somalia. They said they were opposed to Kenya's intervention but conceded that the two countries had a common interest to fight against the militia group. "The government will not break its decision on this issue., Wew have asked Kenya to assist the Somalia fovernment in training and supporting the Somali a army buy not to intervene in Somalia,” President Sharif said at the joint press conference he and his PM addressed after a closed door meeting. “We do not have agreement with Kenya. We understood that we need to defend against the militants but there is no proof saying that we agreed with Kenya," PM Abdiweli said. Somalia’s pro-government militias of Ahlu Sunna Wal Jamma and Ras Kamboni have supported Kenya’s intervention and criticized the TFG president for opposing the presence of the Kenyan military. Internal Security minister George Saitoti yesterday wrote to the Somali government demanding an explanation on President Shariff's remarks as well as conflicting media media reports about the Somali government’s position on the ongoing military co-operation. "In the light of this the Kenya Government is seeking clarification of the Somali government’s position as it is essential to have a unified approach in dealing with the destabilization of Somalia by Al Shabaab and its threats to peace and security to Kenya and the region," Saitoti's letter read. "In the meantime Kenya with collaboration with IGAD and AU, is continuing with the operation against Al Shabaab." While Kenya wanted the soldiers it had trained to form a buffer between Kenya and the Al Shabaab-controlled regions around Mogadishu, the Somalia Transitional Government wanted them sent to Mogadishu to fight Islamist militia. Ethiopia too has objected to the creation of Jubaland mainly inhabited by the ****** and Merehan clans. Addis Ababa feels that would encourage separatist passion in the ****** Region of Ethiopia. The decision by the Kenya government to recruit mainly from the ****** resulted in complaints from other clans. The ****** clan primarily lives in the Central ****** plateau of Ethiopia, the North-Eastern Province of Kenya, and the Jubaland region of Southern Somalia. They also inhabit Somalia's major cities such as Mogadishu and Kismayo. The ******* mostly live in Jubaland, Gedo and Lower Juba regions in Southwest Somalia and in Northeast Kenya. They are considered the most fierce nationalists among the Somali people and have always played key roles in both the Somali uprisings. In a letter dated March 21 and addressed to President Kibaki, the Somali President acknowledges the role Kenya has played in training and equipping the army of youths. "Excellency we are particularly indebted for the training and equipping our forces in Kenya. We pray that a peaceful Somali and region will enjoy Strengthened friendship and prosperity," states President Shariff. The letter was handed to President Kibaki in Nairobi by Somali Prime Minister Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke. Due to suspicions against his former Defence minister Ghandi, President Shariff in the letter to President Kibaki transferred the responsibility of the coordination of the youth recruits from Ghandi to then Defense Minister Abdullah Boss. "I write to you this letter to inform you that the bilateral security responsibilities including the coordination and follow up of Somali force training in Kenya that we previously assigned to our former Minister of Defense and current Minister for Air and Land Transportation HE Mohamed Abdi Gandi is hereby transferred to our current Ministry of Defense," the letter says. The Somali President further transferred the responsibility of regional administrators trained in Kenya to the current Interior minister of Somalia, Abdirashid Mohamed Hidig. "There are people who are unhappy of the training that you have provided for our forces and the regional administration and wish to deny this region and Somalia any peace and stability. We wish to correct this situation administratively by bringing the military force under the department of Defense and the regional administration under the ministry of interior," stated the Somali President. In late March 2011, Gandi hosted elders from the Marehaan and ****** - who are the main clans in Gedo and Juba regions of Somalia - at Chester House in Nairobi to discuss the stalemate in the deployment process. In the meeting Gandi discussed with the clan elders a possible withdrawal of support to the government. Meanwhile, thousands of Somalis at the Dadaab,Ifo and Hagadera refugee camps yesterday held a peaceful demonstration against President Shariff and to voice their support for the military operation. Hagadera camp Chairman Kussow Abdi Nuni said they supported the intervention as frequent incursions into Kenya by Somali militiamen had negatively affected their peaceful stay in the country. He said Shariff’s sentiments were out of touch with the reality on the ground as al-Shabaab had carried out frequent raids forcing humanitarian organisations working in the camps to scaled down or stop their operations altogether putting the lives of thousands of Somali refugees in jeopardy. “As the refugee community we have to be grateful to Kenya for giving us a safe haven for more than two decades. We condemn insecurity and that is why we support the Kenyan opearion in Somalia”, said Kussow. Source: The Star

The illegal Kenyan invasion of Somalia crystallizes IGAD/EAC Political Initiative The ongoing illegal Kenyan military invasion of Somalia, which has left experts on East Africa region with many questions about motive, timing and objectives, crystallizes the Regional Political Initiative (RPI) of the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development and East African Community (IGAD/EAC) on Somalia. Important members of IGAD/EAC are Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi, and Rwanda. In the past, the UN Security Council has turned down several times the request for no fly zone and naval blockade on South Central area controlled by the militant Al Shabab. It has also resisted the approval of an additional 11,000 AMISOM forces. The Kenyan action contravenes the UN and African Union Charters and infringes the sovereignty of Somalia. It definitely undercuts the case for no fly zone and naval blockade. The Kampala Accord (KA) and the Communiqué of the meeting of the International Contact Group held in Denmark on September 29, 2011, both have made reference to a Regional Political Initiative (RPI). Details of the RPI are scant. The only plausible goal of the RPI could be to keep Somalia’s political dispensation under the control of IGAD/EAC and to force the international community to foot the bill. Article 4 (n) of KA says: The Heads of state of the region (IGAD and EAC) shall constitute a political bureau with participation UN (UNPOS) and the AU similar to Burundi Regional Peace Initiative. The Bureau shall oversee and monitor compliance of the TFIs with agreed benchmarks and the timelines to implement the transitional tasks and to advance the Somali peace. Article 3 of the KA say: All Parties [President and Speaker] ……..Cognisant of the concerns of the troop contributing countries not to squander significant military progress and the readiness by the Regional Heads of States (IGAD and EAC with the participation of United Nations (UNPOS) and the African Union) to oversee and monitor and guide any agreement by the Transitional Federal Institutions on bringing to an end the phase on 20 August, 2011 and thereafter bringing in a new dispensation. Point 8 of the Communiqué of the 18th Extra-ordinary session of the IGAD Assembly of Heads of State and Government reads as follows: [iGAD] Reiterates its earlier decision on the centrality of the role of IGAD and reaffirms that the Somalia process must be anchored in IGAD and calls on all actors working towards peace in Somalia to do so in consultation and concurrence with IGAD. Somalia, a failed state listed as a front of Islamic threat, serves the leaders of IGAD/EAC as an insurance coverage for their political abuses and corruption in their own countries and as a cash caw to receive special privileges and massive financial, military, and diplomatic assistance from the US Administration and European countries. President Sheikh Sharif, Speaker Sharif Hassan and Prime Minister Prof. Abdiweli M. Ali of K-TFG have failed to explain to the Somali public and parliament the story behind the RPI. The clashes between Somali factions along the Somali Kenyan border and the recent spate of kidnapping of foreigners from inside Kenya have disturbed the security and economic situation of Kenya but they were not sufficient to justify a military invasion of Somalia. The old rivalry and mistrust between Somalia and Kenya, the catastrophic famine and drought ravaged Somalia, the Kenyan campaign to change the existing maritime border, the decline of Al Shabab power, the beginning of the rainy season and the incalculable human and economic costs as well as the political and legal problems associated with military operation against a neighbor country were factors necessary to be considered against the Kenyan invasion of Somalia. The Kenyan government changed several times the justification and explanation of the legality and its intended aims for sending its military inside Somalia. First, Kenya invocated article 51 of the UN Charter as self defense from foreign armed attacks. Then, it argued that it invaded Somalia on the invitation of the K-TFG. Finally, it claimed the blessing and support of IGAD/EAC and African Union. The declared aim of the Kenyan Government is to capture Kismaio and stay in Somalia until there were no Islamic insurgents left. On October 18, a Kenyan delegation composed of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Defense travelled to Mogadishu to issue with K-TFG a lopsided joint communiqué that supported the Kenyan invasion under the excuse of ‘common enemy.’ Apart from the communiqué, K-TFG leaders remained in denial, silent or vague about the Kenyan invasion. The K-TFG President and the Minister of defense left the country for a private visit to Turkey in the face of the international political flare up on the Kenyan invasion of Somalia. The Transitional Federal Parliament (TFP) avoided to debate on the joint communiqué and its consequences because for the livelihood of the parliamentarians Nairobi and Kenya are more important than Mogadishu and Somalia. Back from the Mogadishu trip with the joint communiqué in hand, the Kenyan Foreign Minister Moses Wetengula headed to Addis Ababa for consultation on the next move. Kenya and Ethiopia agreed to hold an extra ordinary meeting of IGAD Council of Ministers on October 21, 2011. Before IGAD’s meeting, President Muwai Kibaki held Cabinet meeting on the issue and later briefed the media and Parliament on the ongoing military operation against Somalia. Kenyan opposition parties expressed their strong objection to the Kenyan military adventure dubbed “Operation Protect Nation” and decried it as illegal and imprudent. Since 2009, Kenya pursued aggressive intervention policy towards Somalia. For the preparation of military action, Kenya received helicopter gunships from USA and large infantry equipments from China. The former Minister of defense of D-TFG Prof Mohamed Gandi reached a personal understanding with Kenyan officials for the recruiting, training and arming of 2,000 forces selected from specific clans of Jubba regions (Lower Jubba, Middle Jubba and Gedo) for the establishment of Jubbaland State later renamed Azania State. Donors covered the costs of those forces. President Sheikh Sharif, former Prime Ministers Omar Abdirashid and Mohamed Abdullahi Formajo opposed the deployment of those forces in Jubba regions and asked their relocation in Mogadishu, a request summarily and angrily rebuffed by the leaders of Azania State. Besides, two other events may have changed the political calculation of IGAD/EAC and precipitated the Kenyan invasion of Somalia. First, the high profile visit of Prime Minister of Turkey Recep Tayyib Erdoĝan to Mogadishu with more than 300 million dollars of aid and the large pledge of 500 million dollars made in Istanbul by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) have revived the historical alliance between Turkish and Somalis. The second event is a process of reconciliation among Somali Islamists secretly initiated by the government of Qatar. The Foreign Ministry of Ethiopia reported that the suicide attack of Al Shabab in Mogadishu on October 4 has faltered the Qatar’s efforts. A glance at the joint communiqué that was concluded with K-TFG President but signed by the Minister of defense, one discovers the degree it degrades K-TFG and its leaders. Point six of the communiqué says, “The President is committed to the implementation of KA.” Since KA brings K-TFG under the RPI, point six preempts the President’s deviation from the will of Kenya. The communiqué permits the Kenyan forces to operate indefinitely into Somali territory without accountability. After ousting Al Shabab from Kismaio, Kenya will control the political process of Jubba and Gedo regions and will make the proposal on the partition of Somalia a fait accompli. Four Somali forces or Militias are fighting on the side of Kenya. They are Raskambooni militia, Azania militia, Ahlu Sunna Wal Jama militia, and forces under K-TFG flag. One can expect that the Kenyan invasion of Somalia will create new conditions and pretenses on the ground. Nationalists, clan and Islamist forces will emerge in the regional theatre. Somalia will not overcome the current fragmentation and anarchy under the Regional Political Initiative of IGAD/EAC. Somali Citizens should resist foreign designs. They should claim the ownership of their country and build their common future based on their culture and aspirations.

Like in Libya, the scramble for Somalia is for its natural resources - for the WEST! Norway oil interests push Kenya into Somalia proxy war (WaGoshaNews) When the British couple, Paul and Rachel Chandler was kidnapped and held for one year by Somali pirates, the UK government did not use tanks and military jets to hunt for the abductors.But the case is different in Kenya, where few days after the abduction of foreign tourists and aid workers, the country crossed the border into Somalia, claiming it was chasing the Al-Shabab militants, whom it said were behind the kidnapping. Al-Shabab, a desperate Islamic militants, who felt the heat in the capital, Mogadishu denied taking part in the abductions of the foreigners in Kenya, although Kenya it self has no proof to show that it was Al-Shabab that had actually captured the foreigners. For the last two months Somali gunmen from both sides of the border have been operating freely in the area, killing innocent refugees, raping and wounding some others. Kenyan officials are aware of this and were reluctant to take any action. Kenyan military incursion against Al-Shabab Reliable sources in Kenya and Somali governments confirm that Kenya has been pushed by Norway, which has long time dream of the war-torn country’s oil resources. A Kenyan official who declined to be named told Wagoshanews that Nairobi authorities received millions of dollars from the Norwegian government to attack southern Somalia in the pretext of fighting against Al-Shabab. “The Norwegian was angry with Somali parliament’s recent decision of rejecting a plan aimed at changing Somalia’s sea boundaries that could allow Norway to drill free of charge oil from the region”, added the official. Since 2006 Norway has been making efforts to find an opportunity of drilling Somalia oil, but according to Somali politicians, Norwegians have been looking for dodgy deals that will give them rights to benefit from Somalia resources. Norway attempts to trap Somali leaders on oil resources In 2007, Norwegian officials were playing tricky diplomatic game on Somalia crisis. Diplomats used to issue comments on how best the country’s crisis could be resolved, sometimes using sympathy words to Islamic Courts leaders in Eritrea. Norway also attempted to talk to some Somali cabinet members to ensure that it’s given rights to Somalia’s oil reserves. During this time Norway had also been working on how to change Somalia’s sea boundaries after some negative signs emerged from its efforts to loot Horn of African oil reserves. Norway attempts on how to use UN to get Somalia oil Norway had contacted with the UN regarding the Somalia sea boundaries in order to make some changes that will enable her to achieve its hidden agenda. The UN asked Norway to work with UN office on Somalia affairs and Somalia leaders on how to succeed in this issue.The former UN envoy to Somalia, Ahmad Ould Abdallah backed Norwegian bid and signed papers to ensure that the boundaries change are made according to Norwegian needs.But again the UN needed a signature of the Somali leaders to back the Norwegian bid, and it was Shaykh Sharif Shaykh Ahmad, the Somali interim president, who signed the Norwegian bid in Turkey, when officials from Norway approached him and convinced him to sign. [N.B.: Such signatures of the TFG, however,are legally not even worth the paper on which they are written. But, as could be observed in Libya, it seems not to be important any more if international and national laws are bent or broken - as long as the Western robber barons get the profits to cover their artificial debt-holes into which now the whole global economy could fall.] It’s not clear how Norway had succeeded to convince Mr Ould Abdallah and President Sharif, but sources within Somali and Kenyan governments say huge amount, possible millions of dollars were paid to secure the deal. Norway, Somalia oil cooperation during Siyad Barre rule A Somali minister who declined to be named said Norway tried producing oil in Somalia after successful; oil discovery in North Eastern part of the country (known as Puntland) and southern Somalia between Barawe to Jubba regions in southern Somalia. But some western countries that had more influence than Norway stopped the plan. President Siyad Barre was for the plan, but it was difficult to implement it without the consent of the powerful Western countries. Kenyan ministers, buffer zone affair. As Kenyan military incursion continues in southern Jubba regions, Norway is said to be using some individuals in Kenyan cabinet to persuade the Somali government to support the idea of creating a buffer zone in Jubbaland region. Norway believes the creation of Jubbaland administration will facilitate its conspiracy of stealing Somalia reso urces. Reports say the recent visit of Kenyan ministers to Mogadishu was to put more pressure on President Shaykh Sharif Shaykh Ahmad, who opposes the so-called Azania state backed by Kenyan government. The ultimate goal of Norway is to use the rule Jubbaland and loot its resources through Kenyan government, specially the suspected corrupt ministers who are in the fore front of this ill advised project. [N.B.: Since Canadian Charles Petrie, the former right-hand-man of exUN-envoy for Somalia Ould Abdallah, quit his UN career and became an obviously even better paid consultant to the Norwegian government to foster their interests and deals concerning Somalia, several civil society organizations have demanded that - like it is now in place for EU officials - a many year ban is imposed also on UN employees, during which they have to abstain from playing lobbyists or consultants on the payroll of member governments or private corporations and companies, whose affairs they had to regulate in their former positions.]

In support of yet to born clannish entity, Prof. Abtigiis is gradually transitioning to zero in terms of credibility. He max'ed out his rationalizations to defend the Kenyan invasion, haddana mala'awaalid iyo sheekooyin kaluu galay. Waryaa marshadani waa ku gashay , NGONGE waa ku lumiyey. Rag iska celidii waa kula fogaatay

^^ :D Waryaa Fiqi, horta a correction is in order: It is not Jubbaland, IT IS Azania that is being carried on the backs of Kenyan tanks. After that slight correction, what you said is what I knew Faroole's motivation in support of this project is. The rationale is to solidify federalism as a permanent feature in Somalia's future structure and shape. I am enjoying your piece not because I endorse its content but I luve its spirit for it fundamentally contradicts the suspicion of Gabal, Prof Abtigiis and brother The Zack. Namely those of us who oppose it do so for clannish considerations. Yours is indeed a proof of the whole concept resting on a new clannish scheme to as you said have a veto like vote on the issue of Federalism We support the TFG as the means to fight Alshabaab. The PM was right yesterday, not today. Sharif has the correct stance on the issue. And he shall be supported. The Kenyan approach is wrong. It is a step back to the old days of warlordism.

Mintid Farayar;754334 wrote: As for the Kenyans, I deeply believe the kidnappings were the needed pretense for this invasion. The moving of the Kenyan Army Command Center from Nairobi to Garissa in November 2010 combined with the Wikileaks cables drove this point home. Now mind you, the Army Command Center was based in Nairobi since Kenyan Independence. The real determinant of how things will go down in the next few days will be the looming clash in Afmadow. The Kenyans started with 2 battalions with a combined manpower of 1600. Within days, they've increased it to 4000 men, along with the assisting Somali militias. Afmadow is where we will see whether Al Shabaab will fight or melt into the savanna to conduct guerrilla warfare. If the Kenyans take Afmadow(only 90km/50mi northwest of Kismayo), it will be an easier sprint to Kismayo to cut off the power/financial source. If the Kenyans get bogged down in Afmadow, they will then need to rethink their gamble. In addition the Kenyans are moving up a second force up the coast from the South(currently in the town of Oddo) towards Kismayo, attempting a double pincer movement. Military analysts say Kenyan forces certainly have the capability to continue conducting operations, but the number of Kenyan forces currently deployed is insufficient to completely eradicate al Shabaab or even to secure the areas the Kenyans have seized thus far. We shall see how this develops. But it's all part of a wider struggle much bigger than Somalis or Kenyans... Opposing Kenyan invasion need not result in doubting Kenya's military capability as a well oiled conventional army to outrun Alshabaab resistance. I do not expect bloody battles on the muddy fields in Jubba jungles. It will not be Hannibal vs Roman army. That is to say, Kenya will most likely win the battle for Kismayo if it proceeds with the invasion. It will however lose the war. And that will be so for two primary reasons. 1) The nature of Alshabaab resistance and tactics that will inevitably be employed by Alshabaab will ultimately frustrate Kenyan efforts. For Alshabaab this region is their last stance. And because of the terrain and shifting clan loyalties, I see no anomaly to compensate that assumption. 2) The political front will prove Kenya's effort fruitless for Kismayo is one of the city's in Somalia that most in need of a holistic approach. And Kenya persistently pushed a peculiar notion of forming of a forced state with no consultation with local stakeholders and outside of TFG framework. Reading from reactions to the expressed opposition of Kenyan invasion on this forum, proponents of Kenyan invasion are fundamentally misreading opposition factors/reasons. Contrary to the prevailing conventional wisdom, the region is question is not necessarily a D region (O, H and MR being the main players). There are legitimate stakeholders outside of D groupings from clan standpoint whose role will be effectively denied if Kenyan way is to be had. It is in this spirit that Sharif (I am speculating here) is voicing opposition, on top of the apparent subversion of TFG framework. Combine both those factors, and you get the perfect recipe for Alshabaab resistance, effectively countering Kenyan invasion and subsequent political entity which is assumed to ultimately be formed. Also Kenyan invasion as orchestrated now clearly suggests the notion of containing Somali conflict remains the prevailing approach for the relevant stakeholders. And that itself creates a sense of frustration with the madness of the powers that be with regards to the question of Somalia, which makes Alshabaab NOT the biggest factor of Somalia's instability. With kenya army going deep in Jubba valley the world is clearly being disruptive to the UN road map, which Mahiga has been advertising to the Somalia diaspora.

Puntland's support is neither here nor there. If anything it discredits The Zack and Prof. Abtigiis's assertion that those of us who opposed the invasion did so because of clan considerations. The reason Faroole is supporting it is very narrow. In his fight to put federalism as a permanent mark in Somalia's constitution he is hoping the new entity that will emerge out of Kenyan invasion will be in his column in relation to federalism. Very shortsighted indeed.

^^I did not listen either. But from I can read he did not explicitly call Kenya to withdraw. But I guess in the diplomacy lingo calling something 'sharciyad maaha' have a similar effect. That is why Kenyan officials seem to be thrown out of balance, attacking Sharif and calling him alshabaab. Whatever has transpired in that meeting in Villa Somalia, I think Sharif's stance now is correct. I know this is not devoid of politics but opposing Kenya to effectively attempt to capture strategic port of Kismayo unilaterally and without regard to TFG is the correct stance.

Che, despite its shortcomings and conditions that surround it, the TFG you lament is a great improvement from where things were prior to 2004. Prior to this entity, majority of Somali lands were under the control of ruthless warlords. Criticizing TFG on the grounds of incompetence is justifiable but it must be put int eh context of the large narrative awoowe. How easy it is to forget the days of Mogadishu warlords and strongmen, the spaaro schemes and other criminal enterprises that reigned supreme in most of our lands. What you have in the TFG is majority of Somali stakeholders collectively represented in one political arrangement by which the world has a leverage and influence to provide guidance and financial help. The problem is not necessarily TFG incompetence and lack of accountability for both characteristics are built in by design. But the problem is the world not helping. Indeed the world is taking advantage of the TFG's weakness and limited political legitimacy. The solution shall never be to do away with the only national arrangement Somalis have today for that would be extremely foolish thing to do. The solution in my opinion is to improve it by bringing other stakeholders aboard with the TFG and transition the country from this transitional status. We have to start somewhere awoowe. TFG is that somewhere. And remember without TFG, Turkey would not have a platform to operate and do all the wonderful things they did. Now the challenges facing TFG are many. 1) Alshabaab, 2) world that is not helping build its capacity, 3) Somali stakeholders scheming against it to disrupt and derail it. AMISOM have helped by enabling TFG leaders to operate in Mogadishu, and by neutralizing Alshabaab threat in the capital. Where they came short, and that is primarily due to the world not doing its part, is to effectively help Somalis grow capacity to govern and develop security organs to maintain stability in areas they control. I am largely in agreement with your stance on foreign intervention. But this 'zero progress' report of yours is in clear conflict with the realtiy on the ground. We need to build on what we have thus far achieved, not destroy it in a mere nationalistic exuberance. My opposition to Kenya's invasion is largely due to it having the potential to introduce another complicating factor into the political landscape of the south, posing clear threat to the TFG arrangement. Foreign packed political entity that lack the relative cohesion of the TFG is not good for Somalia. Some are supporting the invasion and Azania project in the name of fighting alshabaab. Others, noticeably Puntland leadership, are supporting it in the hope that this new entity will solidify Somalia's Federal nature. I think both are mistaken. For the fact that the Kenyan army will lose men and treasure will itself produce a layer that will be hard to get rid off. No question that TFG is poorly orchestrated and implemented. Its incompetence and lack of accountability are real challenges. But the way going forward should be to improve it and use it as a vehicle to bring Somalia back. Disrupting it by introducing new political layers is not helpful and will take Somalia back.