Horn, have you checked this site. three long pages. Real Discussion

Horn, have you checked this site. three long pages. Real Discussion

The world seems to be paying attention to the Somali strife. Specialists urge US to focus on Somali strife Islamist advance seen to threaten a wider conflict By John Donnelly, Globe Staff | September 28, 2006 The Boston Globe WASHINGTON -- Africa specialists criticized the Bush administration yesterday for not paying more attention to the increasingly volatile situation in Somalia, saying that senior officials were consumed by their efforts to stop the fighting in the Darfur region of Sudan. In Somalia, Islamist militias have taken one town after another in the south-central part of the fractured nation since capturing the de facto capital Mogadishu in June. Now, they appear poised to attack the small town of Baidoa near the country's western border with Ethiopia. Baidoa is the base of the increasingly powerless Somali transitional federal government, which is backed by the United States and Ethiopia. Analysts predict that if the Islamists attack the town, which appears likely, the conflict could evolve into a wider war with Ethiopia. ``We're completely distracted by Sudan," said J. Stephen Morrison , director of the Africa program at the Center for Strategic & International Studies and a State Department official during the Clinton administration. ``We should be engaging the Islamists . . . and find out what their intentions are." Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday delivered a major speech on Sudan before the Africa Society of the National Summit on Africa , calling on the government in Khartoum to end hostilities immediately and unconditionally accept a UN peacekeeping force. The fighting in Darfur has led to the deaths of several hundred thousand people and displacing an estimated 2.5 million people since 2002. Rice talked about Somalia only in response to a question from Melvin P. Foote , president of Constituency for Africa , a Washington-based advocacy group, who asked what the administration was doing about problems in nearby Somalia, Ethiopia, and Eritrea. On Somalia, Rice said, ``We have been trying, despite the difficulties there, to support a transitional government that might be able to . . . help the country come together." She said the United States would not negotiate with any group that works with terrorists, a veiled reference to the Islamists who form the Consultative Council of Islamic Courts, the formal name of the extremist militia that is rapidly consolidating its grip on the country. Somalia's interim Prime Minister Ali Mohamed Ghedi earlier this week appealed for outside help, saying it was needed to ``protect the region from the expansion of this Al Qaeda network, these terrorists." It is unclear whether Al Qaeda has recently made serious inroads in Somalia. CIA officials had been traveling extensively to Somalia before June under the protection of warlords, to whom the intelligence officers paid tens of thousands of dollars for information. The warlords are generally rivals of the Islamists. The CIA has been seeking three men in Somalia believed to have organized or participated in the 1998 bombings of US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Most analysts say that small terror cells exist in the country, but that the chaotic nature of the country -- it hasn't had a functioning government in 15 years -- also poses a risk that Somalis could turn in members of a terror group for a ransom. The question now is whether the Islamists, which appear to be led by members of Al Itihad Al Islamiya , a radical group that is part of the Islamic courts and led by hard-liner Hassan Dahir Aweys , want to provoke a war with Ethiopia, and what would trigger an Ethiopian decision to fight. Among the worrisome factors: Aweys has said his movement aims to take over all historic Somali areas, including those in Ethiopia; Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi , who is ruthless and pro-West, views Somali Islamists as a threat; and the tiny country of Eritrea, which has a recent history of bloody border wars with Ethiopia, is sending arms and money to the Ethiopian opposition movements in Somalia. ``My principal worry now is the Islamic hard-liners are creating conditions in which war with Ethiopia is increasingly likely," Kenneth J. Menkhaus , a Somali specialist and professor of political science at Davidson College , said in a telephone interview from Davidson, N.C. ``A war would be bad for everyone -- the Ethiopians, the Somalis, the region, the US. The only people to benefit would be the [islamic] jihadists." Robert I. Rotberg , director of the program on Intrastate Conflict at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government , said Ethiopia is clearly worried about Eritrea's involvement and also wants to ``nip separatism in the bud. If Ethiopia adopted half a Bush [administration] mentality, they would want to strike a blow to maintain their power. Ethiopians would like nothing better than an all-out direct battle for Baidoa." The two countries have frequently been on a war footing since Somalia's independence in 1960. Somalia has claimed that Ethiopia occupies a part of its territory, the ****** region. In 1977, the two countries waged a war over the ******, which Ethiopia held after receiving substantial military assistance from Russia and Cuba.

Granted they seize the control of the most parts of Somalia, What would their form of government be? One of our brothers, Hirad, argues, "Islamism, for me, on the other hand, is an ideology—and a radical one—adopted by a group of people of the same faith seeking to dominate all other forms of authority in the land, and perhaps the neighboring entities. " I don't object to their existence but their power sharing method by virtue of their clan base and their pursuit to coerce people into their fold. "You either with us or we will crush you:†That is the frame of mind that these Islamic warlords manifest in public. They deny the elected government and try to prevent it from engaging civil services and providing basic needs to its own people. They wish the government perishes today, and they deride neighboring countries that without their protections to the fragile institutions of the government, they would have conquered Baidhabo and imposed death penalty on the president and his prime minister. Their political orientations in Islamic clothing are to reconfigure Somalia into Taliban-style rule whereby they want to take our society into the dark ages, depriving them of basic liberty and the freedom of expression. In addition, in Ayah(s) 159 and 160 of Surah 3: Ali Imran, the Qur’an reads as follows: “It is part of the Mercy of Allah that thou dost deal gently with them. Wert thou severe or harsh-hearted, they would have broken away from about thee: so pass over (their faults) and ask for (Allah’s) forgiveness for them; and consult them on affairs (of the moment). Then, when thou hast taken a decision, put thy trust in Allah. For Allah loves those who put their trust (in Him)â€

Paragon, nothing has changed and no new territories brought under their rule. It is the same people and same territories. The difference is their unity from prior tribal fragmentations. We had Aideed, Ali Mahdi, and Cisman Ato, replaced by Qanyare, Suudi, and Abdi Qaybdiid. They then were replaced by Aweis, Shariif and Indhaade. Barre Hirale's allied forces are still in the city. The missing thing is that he was substituted with Hassan Turki and his tribesmen as a new ally. Only forced replacements and substitutions dominate the southern politics, but the one thing that blossoms the picture is their ability to restore peace in in a lawless city. It shouldn't, therefore misguide us into thinking that they can continue consolidating their power to further regions.

The migration of Arabs continued, and to some extent still continues, and by intermarriage the Somali race has been formed. According to this source Tribes and their Stock states that Somalis are a byproduct of two races. But Personally, I believe Somalis are descendents of Pharaohs and there are both archeological and historical findings that will to lead to such conclusion. Some of the things we practice in our culture are traceable to that era including the derivation of the Somali words, not the ones emerged after the arrival of Islam and European influence, and female circumcision. There is a book written by Mohamed Siciid Gees that mainly discusses on this subject

The Secessionists Tactics of Misrepresentation: Has Adan Iman Over stepped? By: Ali Bahr, Ph.D. August 30, 2006 In his recent article titled “Deficiency in the Samatar’s Response to ICG Report†posted in Hiiran.com , my friend Adan Hassan Iman, took the liberty, I thought, to misrepresent the general sentiments of Awdalites. What I took an issue with that provoked my reaction to his article was the substance, or the lack thereof, of his deliberately distorted picture of the Awdalites, if not his outright dishonesty that caters to only his secessionist sentiment. But to be clear up front, lest others perceived my disagreement with him as a personal attack on Mr. Iman, this is merely to express my Awdalite viewpoint that was not represented in Mr. Iman’s all-feel-good analysis on the region. The Awdalites, just as is the case in all other clans in any region in greater Somalia, differ in their views about any things and everything. They are governed by their individual different principles, major among them, though not limited to, include nationalistic sentiment and loyalties to nationhood; clannish or local interest, grievances, disappointments, disapproval of and the feeling of let down or failure, as well as one of total blind support and acquiescence for Rayaale’s government. These differences are expected of any group of people, and Awdalites are no different. Such variables will definitely factor into the formulation and presentation of the nuances in the ways and the whys these communities live and operate in their respective daily routine. It is, therefore, profoundly irresponsible to misrepresent such human character and complex social dynamics reflective of the masses residing in a region as big as Awdal. Their social welfare is defined and shaped by various factors and aspirations that are necessary for their different roles of engagement and adaptation to their environment. One cannot but easily observe at first glance that there exist different subclasses and sub clans within and under the Awdalites’ one-big-clan umbrella. Some Awdalites expressed inequalities, nepotism and injustices in the employment system that the president himself encourages in the region. Unfortunately, Mr. Iman lungs into the Awdalites complex social strata may be in desperation, without having observed these critical social factors that specifically and distinctively define them, and he ended up presenting to his audience an utterly inaccurate plutocracy’s statistics that suits only his secessionist propaganda. Mr. Iman’s article riddled with slogans and secessionist’s rhetoric is so typical of the secessionist’s propaganda machine that never bothered with the art of governing, of which most important among them is the art of listening or having an actual conversation with the real people in order to know their concerns. Mr. Iman focused more on accommodating the secessionist’s radical philosophy manifested itself in the form of corrupt and dysfunctional politicians that he and his SOPRI are willing to entertain in order to promote secession. Case in point is Mr. Iman’s blanket and unchecked statements regarding the Awdalites, such as the following: “The residents of Awdal see themselves at the top of the state, in parliament and at all levels of the state bureaucracy. Residents of Awdal are at the center, not at the periphery or feel disenfranchised. Awdal sentiment towards Somaliland is strong and this is evident from the way they participate in the political process and go to the polls on election daysâ€â€¦â€¦â€¦..†the idea of Somaliland was a good one. It served the people of Awdal very well. The accomplishments they have made are due to the stable political environment of Somalilandâ€â€¦â€¦â€¦.. I am not sure where and how Mr. Iman came up with these plutocracy’s statistics to determine how well the Awdalites have been because of secession and the achievements they wouldn’t have otherwise made that were able attain under Rayaale’s government. It is my gut feeling that Mr. Iman has either deliberately mislead his audience or has not been reading the rising mercury indicating the simmering anger, frustration and the feeling of let down, or the misgivings that at least some Awdalites have about Rayaale’s government, least among them are complaints about the constant intimidation and suppression of the dissent voices in the region by Rayaale’s loyalists. Reports also cited some general feeling of isolation that has been echoed across the region, jus like other regions in Somaliland. Under these circumstances, there are, indeed, few things more frightening than this steadily increasing discontent of the people in the region. These are not far fetch stories, by the way. One could read these sentiments on Somaliland.org, Awdalnews.com, and in other websites, where people express their disappointments with Rayaale’s government. I won’t go into specifics, suffice to say that the City of Borama itself is described as an isolated place, “Gari Go’an†where no good road leads to nor one leads out from it. All signs indicate that it is a matter of time before a significant number of citizens have become convinced that the proposed channels for change are not functioning to their favor and civil disobedience arises; in which case, God forbid, the government, as usual, embarks on force to silence such uprising. It has happened under Egal’s government, as we all know it. However, Mr. Iman’s all- feel-good report on the region missed those facts by a mile. I wonder if he has been there lately. My point of contention with Mr. Iman’s article has also everything to do with the fact that he consciously and purposefully misrepresented many Awdalites, including myself, who are completely against the secessionist’s movement that promotes the disfiguring of our nation. I found it strikingly frightening, for the lack of a better word, that so much of what the secessionists theorize on Somaliland’s long-sought-after recognition that evaded them thus far, has little to do with how people in the region feel about this anti-nationalistic movement. The secessionist machine has been, for a long time now, running around selling northern Somalia to the least bidder without regard to the dissent voices in the region, exactly the same way Mr. Iman hosted his big sign on the top of the famous Borama mountain “ Shar laga Naadiâ€, reading “Awdal Is for Saleâ€. And while accusing the Samater brothers for being insensitive or not being keen enough to understand the pain of the Somaliland people, Mr Iman, himself remains oblivious to the fact that he is doing exactly the same thing he is accusing on others, “using the people of Awdal as a complaint sheep that could be herded into shedâ€, to use his exact words. The Betrayal of the Somali Nation: From the SNM movement down to the current SOPRI organizers, there are so many, who had benefited from and were able to realize their childhood dream because of the opportunity and support provided by their nation. They are today’s doctors, engineers, MBA’s, professors, the agronomists and many with whom our nation invested on yesterday, but unfortunately turned their back and walked away when our nation fell on its knees. If that is not treason of its worst form, I don’t know what is. If this not a moral assault on future generations or an outright attempt of concealment of history from today’s young generations and to deny their common birthright and heritage, I don’t know what is. If that is not unpatriotic act and betrayal of a nation when she is on its knees begging us to help her stand up again, I don’t know what is. For many years before she was brought down to her knees by her own sons and daughters, Somalia, the nation, was nursing so many of her children regardless of what region they came from. She could have done even better had it been utilized to its potential. She was the symbol of freedom and hope for those who came as refugees from Kenya, Ethiopia and Jibouti. Whether it was offering free education or financial support, the nation has done a lot with its meager resources to educate its people. It was the spirit of that nation that helped the Somali script to be written in 1971-72 campaigns, as we know it. It was the spirit of a nation when the government introduced the national service program to help educate those who were not able to read or write. It was the spirit of a nation when we dealt with the infamous drought of 1973-74 when the government succeeded to resettle thousands of affected population and saved the lives of thousands who would have died otherwise, as it happens nowadays. Ironically, many of today’s secessionists were the beneficiaries of that generous caretaking of their nation. Call me naive, but why men and women who had been given the opportunity by our nation to be educated free of charge from elementary through college with full medical care; the hope and the dreams that the Somali nation and its people had invested on, would advocate for the disfigurement of their nation or for war against their own people; a war against their own brothers and sisters; mothers, fathers and children. Why this anger? Why such attack on the symbols of our nation and national identity, a fundamental unit for human social life? More tragically, many secessionists who found opportunity in foreign countries and are enjoying the fruits of unity and strong belief of nationalism under their respective host nations, have chosen to, from the distance, advocate for divisive and destructive actions in their own motherland. Even when exposed to the ultimate triumph of nationalism enjoyed under all progressive society, one that demands as its first condition that it must be kept upon the high moral ground, a secessionists still failed to appreciate such model for good governing. Though they seem to enjoy the fruits of such sacrifice for strong and united nation based upon the soundest principle of uncompromising enthusiasm, they, unfortunately, animate forces committed to the death of their own nation in their own motherland. Such an outrageous moral-corrupt new wave of Nuevo- politicians in today’s Somalia in everywhere have become the glorifiers of violence and they are more dangerous even than the traditional dictatorial tribal politicians of yesterday. Such a radical group tends to project a behavior of “one against all and at any costâ€. More disturbing is Mr. Iman’s so typical secessionists’ threatening contention that war is imminent if and when Somaliland fails to be recognized. Here, I quoted Mr. Iman for the benefit of my readers. “There is a different consciousness in Somaliland now, one enriched by the failure of the earlier culture, which is to reclaim the independence granted to them by the British on June 26, 1960. There will be bloodshed should Somalilanders of today are taken back to different era in the pastâ€â€¦â€¦ Advocacy for war against the rest, the other Somalis, is a disturbingly common theme that the secessionists use more often just to rule out any possibility of having a dialogue, a peaceful dialogue with those who stand for Somali unity. Secessionists contend war as the only option, war as the ultimate ratio and the only certain option with which they believe they have to engage the rest of Somalia. This contention for war as the only political discourse is underscored by today’s persistent military conflict between Somaliland and Puntland. There are Trained Somali military men armed to the teeth in Sool and Sanag, who are being used to kill other Somalis, probably, their own cousins and uncles. What a shame. The Downside of scaled-down clan governing system The secessionists thus far failed to recognize the growing dissent voices in the region. What they have in their disposal is a half empty basket that they failed to sell for the last 16 years. Thus far the Hargeisa government failed to bring even Togdheer into the fold successfully and in its totality; forget Sool and Sanag who remained free to decide their destiny, whether that is joining Puntland or stay as different entities. Many Awdalites cannot guarantee support for secession after Rayaale leaves office. Therefore, the Samater brothers are right in their assessment that there are increasing off shoots of concerned groups in the region that cannot be forced to join Hargeisa government even if Somaliland is recognized. Furthermore, there is possibility for the traditional clan loyalty gaining strength, which could weaken this delicate balance of clan power sharing. There are already reported noises of unsatisfied SNM remnants coming down from the shelves and threatening to regain power. Coupled with clan sentiment, such political opportunity is not far fetch for them to gain command and control of the leadership; and such scenario presents threat for Rayaale’s government and others. If history taught us one or two things about the end result of downscaled clan governing system, lets briefly compare the Djibouti of the sixties and early seventies to the Djibouti of today. Djibouti was once a melting pot for people of all nationalities prominent among them were the Gadabourse and the Issa. Today, one can hardly see a Gadabourse man holding an important position in the government. Many ********** freedom fighters who risked their lives for the independence of Djibouti have been chased out of Djibouti, many others lost their jobs when replaced by newcomers of the Issa nationals if not put in prison to humiliate and frustrate them. Many of them died in exile and the surviving few still remained in exile without ever being honored for their struggle for freedom. They are simply buried unknown. Tell me why Hargeisa will be any different than Djibouti? It is about time that secessionists listened and start a dialogue with the growing nationalist voices that they cannot afford to ignore them any more. We have reached an era that dissent voice ought to be accommodated and heard if the secessionists want to address the issue of Northern Somalia with a sense of political maturity and with civility. There are nationalists with theoretical, historical and legal accounts that can present their version of nationalism with vigor and precise historical facts. If the secessionists care enough to read these dissent voices and want to reflect on them, may be they should read (carefully that is) the writings of many scholars and prominent figures who are from the region themselves. Read Jama Mohamed Qalib (Jama Yare)’s article, on Wardheernews, and his perspectives on the past and present situation of Smaliland.. The name Jama Yare is synonymous with Somalia, specifically with Somaliland. A Hargeisa son, a decorated civil servant, who has paid his dues in building and promoting Somali unity all his life, has been deported from Somaliland by Rayaale’s government because of his nationalistic sentiment and promotion of Somalinimo. I wonder if the forefathers and nationalists of Somaliland, such as, Ahmed Gurey, Sh. Bashir, Farah Omar, Omar Ku joog, and the great Mullah (Mohamed Abdulla Hassan) would have a chance of surviving under the current anti-nationalist in Hargeisa today. They were neither Mujahidin nor members of SNM, but rather pure Somali nationalists. Equally important, today’s nationalists cannot afford to watch this blatant attack on nationalism and ought to organize their forces and present an alternative to this highly charged running away train of secessionists’ propaganda. Many northern Somalia nationalists have already made their voices heard with abundance of factual historical evidence that will decisively shift the imbalance of misrepresentations and distortions made to the history of the region. Read Abdalla Hirad’s “SOMALILAND: Haunted by its Founding Mythology†in Wardheernews, or “ The illusory: Smaliland-Setting the Record Straight†prepared by Northern Somalis for Peace and Unity (NSPU). These and many others are working to present a better vision and for the region that will shape the general course of political trends into nationalistic ideology reflective of their historical ties with the rest of Somalia. The Organized Attack on the Samater Brothers and Other Nationalists What I observed and I thought worth pointed out is that the Samaters have become a common mailing address for many secessionists’ hate mail these days. The distinction, however, in my opinion, between the Samater brothers and those who are attacking them is the higher moral ground that the brothers took when it comes to the prevailing Somali politics, specifically the issue of secession. Not withstanding the far advanced moral-intellect capabilities that the Samater brothers attained and promote in their capacities as the agents of Somali unity, they made a conscious choice of defending and upholding the animating principle of national character, a sense of consecration of our Somali nationalism…. a moral and noble cause; whereas the secessionists, on other hand, chose to defend a fraction of a region in the greater Somalia at best, if not, and more appropriately, a clannish enclave. Therefore, Mr. Iman is one of the latecomers who joined the stone throwing campaign at the big mountain, the Samaters. To their credit, which says volumes about their political maturity and intellectual attainment, the Samater brothers neither complain nor succumb to personal attacks, but instead managed to absorb all that the secessionists threw at them thus far. They remained the big mountain that symbolizes Somali unity; something earned them respect and statesmanship among their peers. I wished Mr. Iman had shown respect for his elders and recognized their invaluable contribution to the Somali struggle instead of defending the undependable ICG report or quoting Professor Mazrui; a man that ridiculed northern Somalia by his demeaning and condescending name-change suggestion (from Somaliland to Somalistan). Read Faisal Roble’s article “ Mazrui’s Visit to Somaliland & His Call for Somalistan Nationâ€. More disturbing than the name-change suggestion was the reaction of the secessionists, who welcomed and the applauded the suggestion of identity change, just to have a reason to dissociate from the rest of Somalia. I wish Farah Omar were still alive. He was a Northern Somalia nationalist who left with us, along with his nationalistic sentiment, the infamous quote (“my people and my country are too small to be dividedâ€). Unfortunately no one is quoting him these days and no one will know him in the near future if things stay in the course that the secessionists want them to go. In conclusion, I will suggest the following to my friend Adan Iman: Unless we agree to disagree but give each other our individual space and God given right to operate in the region we both came from, as all democratic societies do, we will live with our individual quilt. You will live with the quilt of turning your back to your country when it needed you. I will live with the quilt of going against my own friends to defend the same nation that they walked away from. Ali Bahar, Ph.D. aib_1@yahoo.com

Contact Group says TFG is illegitimate Suldaan, I didn't know you were such a distorter of facts. The quote you highlighted reflects the opinion of a representative from the Swedish International Development Co-operation Agency. It is not even comparable to to the popular USAID. The Contact Group, which includes the U.N,EU, AU, AL, and U.S recognizes the TFG as the legitimate Interim government of Somalia. Our government needs our support.

I wholeheartedly agree with this article SOMALIA: A NATION IN LIMBO: BETWEEN ISLAM AND TRIBALISM In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful, “Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious; for the Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive Guidance. The Qur’an, Surah 16, Al Nahl, 125. Hardly two years since its inception, that we witnessed the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) crumbling right in front of our eyes. Ministers stampeded to resign. Those Transitional Federal Institutions which took two years to patch up with the assistance of the whole wide world are now almost disintegrating. The sad thing is that it is all happening from within—except, perhaps, for a slight touch from the Islamists, on the one hand, and a little pressure from Ethiopia, on the other. How fragile! And, it is not as if this is happening for the first time. It is the third time that the TFG has been threatened to collapse rather than celebrate a victory, since its inception less than two years ago. First, it failed to celebrate its nativity. No sooner than, at least, two of its institutions—the Parliament and Cabinet—had just formed, that the whole world was surprised by the schism between a sizable segment of the Parliament, led by the Speaker; and the government, together with the other segment of the Parliament, led by the President and the Prime Minister. The split between the parties had denied the government the luxury to move to Mogadishu—the Capital—from Nairobi, where it was conceived. Then, by a stroke of luck, President Ali Abdallah Saleh of the Yemen Republic intervened and succeeded to strike an agreement between the two parties. The ensuing events led to the convening of an Extraordinary Session of the Parliament in Baidoa, which the TFG uses as its current base. However, the group of Mogadishu warlords, who as well as being members of the TFG Cabinet, had also been part of the opposition, continued to oppose the Aden Accords, and, therefore, kept on denying the TFG to take seat in Mogadishu . Here again, and for the second time, the TFG failed to celebrate the victory achieved by the reconciliation between its parties in conflict until then. But then, the Islamists defeated the Mogadishu warlords—again—by a stroke of luck. Thanks for the US which supported the warlords, and galvanized the population of Mogadishu hard enough to support the Union of Islamic Courts—thus, producing a popular uprising. Many in the world had, at the time, cautiously viewed the Islamist’s victory as a probable blessing in disguise, hoping that immediate talks between the TFG and the Islamists could produce an agreement, which would make winners of all sides—the Somali people, the Islamists, the TFG and the international community. That did not happen soon enough—not yet, at least—and the prospect of that happening sooner has been overtaken by events, least among them has been that the Islamists crowned a known radical cleric (by western standards), by the name of Hassan Dahir Aweys. The international reaction has been such that the Security Council would recognize the TFG as the sole authority in Somalia. Even then, Mogadishu has remained a no-go area for the TFG. However, rather than celebrating the victory derived from international recognition this third time, also, we find the TFG crumbling in the face of danger—of being wiped out by the deafening political propaganda of the Islamists, if not by their encroaching military machine. Even worse, the government’s hands are tied by the circumstances of its likely demise. Its inherent inability to fend off an attack is coupled by its internal political paralysis to even reach an agreement within itself to participate in the Khartoum talks—let alone reach one with the Islamists. As a result, and for a moment, the edifice seemed to be dead. Certainly, with little or no devices, of their own to resolve the conflict, the TFG would have been dead today—if it was not for the intervention of the Ethiopian Government, that is. It is now hoped that a reshuffle will be made, within the week with a, hopefully, leaner Cabinet. So much for secularism and its effective tool—democracy—in Somalia, shall we say? Whatever the base, I pray that it is not the end for the fledgling government, for everybody’s sake. Actually, the government may have crumbled by simply collapsing under its weight. It has been top heavy—there has hardly been a Cabinet comprising over one hundred members anywhere in the world! At least, it has not been part of the memory of this author. One rationale for the inflated Cabinet, according to the Somali political elite, has been that it met the demand for political equitability under the 4.5-formula regime. An elite which completely disregards public accountability in both political and financial terms. Hence, they sought to exercise their loyalty to the darned 4.5-formula, which means loyalty to themselves and to their individual power bids. The formula was conceived by the warlords in their session in Sodere, Ethiopia, in 1997. But, it was first implemented during the Arta Conference, in the year 2000, under the aegis of the Government of Djibouti. In a paper, posted in Somalia-watch.org., on the eve of the commencement of the Eldoret Conference, in October of 2002, Fatun M. Hassan, the former Charge d’affaires of the Somali Mission to the United Nations and this author wrote as follows about the formula: “Speaking of the so-called “4.5-formulaâ€, we find it troubling in so far as the objective of the process, in the end, is the formation of a system of government. The goal of clan politics does not transcend the quest for mutual recognition; and it is not definitely a smart approach to running the affairs of a State. It is our strong belief that “clanismâ€â€”which is the value that the so-called “4.5-formula†could only, and would definitely, encourage—is almost always counterproductive. The recent past of the Transitional National Government (TNG) is only but an example. President Barre’s failed government is another case in point.†When the rallying elite, in Eldoret, led by the same warlords, opted for the 4.5-formula as a power sharing method, for the second time, many of the educated Somalis, including this author, had pleaded with the Conference to, at least, confine the use of the formula to the sharing of the parliament seats, and recommended that the Cabinet posts, and beyond, be allocated (appointed) on merit grounds—by virtue of one’s power base or technical expertise.. It had not happened! Now we understand that the Cabinet will be significantly reduced, as a result of the current crisis. Here again, one keeps their fingers crossed that the leadership can get away with it—especially with the precedent already in place. In other words, will the new Cabinet obtain the Confidence of the Parliament, if the Cabinet members were significantly reduced? Will Ali Geddi pull off with a significantly reduced government? There is also one other side to the problem. There are so many educated Somalis who blindly, if condescendingly, deride at the merits of the 4.5-formula. They do so in oblivion of the fact that it has been the only thing that worked to bring about a political semblance among the Somalis, even if temporarily. More confusing even, many of those people, who saw the 4.5-formula fit for use as a framework of equitability under the former Transitional National Government, are now distancing themselves from it, on the grounds that the formula is heavily clan-oriented. At the Djibouti conference of 2000, a sample of those same people had defended the 4.5-formula and its negative implications that it was not about “justice†but that the issue was about a “solutionâ€â€”implying a solution to the protracted statelessness. Those include many who had later supported Abdiqassim Hassan’s National Transitional Government, and who now tacitly or openly support the Islamists. They tend to forget that, clan-based or not, the formula takes care of the factors of political equitably among the Somalis, who are clan-centered by their very nature. Speaking of clan orientation, I must not pass here without emphasizing the fact that clan segmentation not only defines the Somali social structure, but it is also reflected in the population distribution map of Somalia. Somali clans are geographically divided in their kinship right claims to land and in their trans human migration as nomads. They have not intermingled in their traditional nomadic setup, and are yet to do so, except in major population centers. Even if, and when, finally, a democratic system is installed, Somalia’s administrative and political map will still reflect clan-based regions or federal States. Given this social and geographical reality, how on earth can we escape from clanism in the next few centuries? How can one reconfigure Somalia without a clan-based map, if at all? As a tip for those myopic friends, I may suggest that the challenge is even greater than you can imagine. In fact, we shall have to fight clanism in its own embryo—the clan village—if we ever get there—by introducing direly needed individual and civil society rights and principles . I challenge all for an alternative. What is the alternative? Some might argue: Islam is the only way. And I challenge them: why has not Islam abolished our form of clanism for the last fourteen centuries? And, in fact, one can safely argue that the Somalis have been Muslims for a good part of the last 14 centuries. Many critics of my previous article: “Somalia is Gone for Good, unless …†posted in warheerNews.com, Hiiran.com and in many other websites, insinuated that I was anti Islam. But, are we surprised that, only a few days back, the Islamists claimed control of Galkayo? Apart from being an act of disruption for the resumption of talks in Khartoum, it may mean the start of a renewed war in the Mudug region of Somalia. This does not come as a surprise to this writer at all. Long before it happened, I had referred to such a possibility in my earlier article of May 30, 2006:â€Somalia: the Dilemma of the TFGâ€, posted in WardheerNews.com and many other websites too. In that article I had written as follows: “Reports have also recently surfaced that Egypt, Eritrea and others have been grooming Abdiqassim Salad Hassan, who has recently been visiting Cairo, for return to office. Abdiqassim Hassan, the former President to the TNG, is said to overseer the network of his militiamen and the war-profiteers, who control the Deep South, largely in the name of Islam, anywhere between Afgoye (25 kilometers south of Mogadishu) to Kismayo (500 miles south of Mogadishu). Conspiracy theorists have been expressing the concern that Abdiqasim's plan embodies a strategy that his forces capture Mogadishu against all odds and then move on gradually as far north as Galkayo. If true, this is an ambitious plan, to say the least. But that may somewhat explain the wild goose chase of the Americans in Mogadishu. The US may have, once again, delved head on into the clan politics of Somalia, by assigning the warlords against their cousins in Mogadishu.†I simply say that I am not anti-Islam, but I am anti-Islamism—and, therefore, Islamists. As a Muslim, I must share with you how I profess my faith. A Muslim, simply, is an individual who adheres to the faith as a spiritual human, and who seeks peace within oneself, first, and with the world around her or him, next—therefore surrendering his will to Allah. Islamism, for me, on the other hand, is an ideology—and a radical one—adopted by a group of people of the same faith seeking to dominate all other forms of authority in the land, and perhaps the neighboring entities. They advance a pristine, if honest, conception, not even interpretation, of Islam to delineate their vision and strategies for power grapping and subsequent legitimacy. They galvanize the average illiterate person in the street to modernity, education, culture, some aspects of technology and modern structures in their misinterpretation of the text, if not in their deliberate misrepresentation of the same. Here, I refuse to profess Islam as a source of power—political power for myself. Certainly, unlike many who seek to profess Islam as an ideology to gain power, I fail to rebind myself as a born-again Muslim and for the wrong reason; let alone support anyone on that score. Having cleared up the issues and questions surrounding my faith, I seek to bring your attention, dear Somali, to read the above cited Ayahs (125-128) of Surah 16: Al Nahl, which I fetched from one of the best translations in the world—that of Abdullah Yusuf Ali. I believe the text in there is very clear; and I leave the interpretation up to the reader. However, in my interpretation, God gives several instructions to his Prophet, the most loved human being in His Domain. The same message is meant to all of us in humanity, though. The message is for us to teach about (1) Islam with wisdom and preaching (not by violence or compulsion). (2) Use ways that are polite and kind, for only Allah knows who is on the Right Path. (3) And if for some reason, you must retaliate, you must do this fairly and in equal force or magnitude; not more. (4) In addition, to fairness, Allah requires patience of the faithful; thus instructing that it is preferred that we give some leniency to our foes, because that is the better way in His eyes. (5) Beyond the mandatory patience, Allah instructs His Prophet neither “to grieve himself†nor to “distress himself “because of their plotsâ€. (6) In this context, God promises that He is on the side of those who remain patient and those who do “goodâ€. The term “good†must be underlined here. In Islam, “good (ness)†is an important element of the faith, which carries the sense that God is always there watching over all, even if there were no observer forces, police or peacekeepers around. One must, and is expected to, do the better thing. One must err on the side of patience by doing the good things. If you do not, ultimately, wining or doing well may mean that you lose on the side of God, which is considered the worst thing that can happen to one. I wonder, therefore, where do Islamists find texts more powerful than this to commit the crimes they do against humanity, social good and existing social, political, and, even, against other spiritual institutions—institutions contrived over a long time with a great difficulty? It is the product of sheer arrogance or utter ignorance, I might safely argue. In Ayah (55), of Surah 7: Al ‘araf, too, the Qur’an reads as follows: “Call on your Lord with humility and in private for Allah loveth not those who trespass beyond bounds. Do no mischief on the earth, after it hath been set in order. But call on Him with fear and longing (in your hearts): for the Mercy of Allah is always near to those who do good.†Again, the concept of “good†is repeated here with emphasis that His mercy is near to those who do “goodâ€â€”al Muhsininn—in Arabic. In fact, any strife which involves killing people and shedding blood (in my interpretation), or endeavor thereof, translates into trespassing of God’s bounds. The consequences could only be worse for those who commit such wrongdoing in His Name. On the other hand, what is better than humility and prayers to God, “with fear and longingâ€, to improve our lot as humans? Clearly, political games and power jockeying schemes involve rebellion against Allah’s throne (of authority) and are considered, therefore, as “mischief on the earthâ€â€”therefore, we are forbidden in Ayah 56, of Surah Al A’raf, of the Qur’an. The phrase “...after it had been set in order …†must be underlined here—in Arabic, “bacada islaaxihaâ€â€”has two connotations. Means (a) “set in order†in divine terms, alluding to the creation, evolution and final design of the earth, and (b) “order†in human terms, in situations where there is peace or, at least, trends towards peace and stability. The first meaning is in a spiritual sense; the second is in a worldly sense, assuming that humans are the vicegerents on the earth, according to the Qur’an (Surah 2: Al Baqarah. Ayah 30). In addition, in Ayah(s) 159 and 160 of Surah 3: Ali Imran, the Qur’an reads as follows: “It is part of the Mercy of Allah that thou dost deal gently with them. Wert thou severe or harsh-hearted, they would have broken away from about thee: so pass over (their faults) and ask for (Allah’s) forgiveness for them; and consult them on affairs (of the moment). Then, when thou hast taken a decision, put thy trust in Allah. For Allah loves those who put their trust (in Him)†Given the above situation, where the prophet himself, Peace and Prayers be on him, is being commended for being gentle and NOT harsh-hearted to his followers, lest they break away from him, I wonder where do individuals like Mr. Hassan Dahir Aweys and company ever find the vision, the guts and the rationale to try and use Islam for their power ends and with such compulsion? Who the heck are they to claim as much authority as they do? Do not they have the sense that the Somali people have remained Muslims for the good part of fourteen centuries? Do not they see that they, themselves, are inviting the land-locked Ethiopia, next door, who is waiting for such an opportunity? Do not they read history—that, if it was not for the Saudis (despite all the criticisms leveled at them by many Muslims), who had allowed the use of the radio (and later the television); many Islamic countries would have remained dark up to this day? I mean we are here—technologically speaking—because they had enough courage to break many taboos since the inception of the Saudi State during the last century. They had enough courage to let non-Muslims into Saudi Arabia to help them explore and produce oil, which happens to be—in addition to the spiritual blessings—the greatest material blessing of God on that land. They allowed the use of radio, and later, television, despite public grievance—the same media outlets some Islamists in Somalia have been reported to object to today—in this 21st century. Some Islamists, when asked: where do they find their justification to apply Text Shari’a, as they do; they point to several Ayahs in the Qur’an such as Ayahs 44 of Surah 5: Al Ma ‘idah, which ends with the expression: “…if any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) unbelieversâ€. Or, Ayah 45 of the same which ends as follows:â€â€¦ if any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed they are (no better than) wrongdoersâ€. Their misinterpretation is most evident in their literal application of the law of retaliation. An example of the gross misinterpretation, or misrepresentation, they sometimes make has been in allowing a boy to stab someone to death, in public, in retaliation for the killing of his father; or, the Court allowing someone to eat away the defendant’s lower lip in retaliation for his own, in the mid nineties. Here, also, we have educated Somalis, some highly qualified, condoning the rule of law by this method. That cannot be considered the rule of God. It is indeed a great “wrongdoingâ€, and reeks of great disbelief in Islamic terms. Politically speaking, I need not say more but to quote a statement from Dr. Ali Faqi in his article, “The Brutal Occupation in the South: a litmus Test …â€, posted in WardheerNews, of august 5, 2006, regarding the wrongdoings some who are in the upper echelon of the leadership of the Islamic courts perpetrate on the people of some of the southern regions: “The barbaric rule in the Lower Shabelle region for example collects illegal taxes including a 40,000 Somali Shillings a month per house from residents of most districts of the Lower Shabelle who do not have jobs and sources of income. Anyone who does not pay these fees either goes to jail or loses his property. The revenue generated from illegal taxation, chopping trees for charcoal and over fishing is used as a financial source for acquiring military arsenals to maintain the illegal occupation. Let me remind you again that these are the only places in Somalia where outside clans abuse the locals and impose rigid rules. It is a religious and moral responsibility to speak out against injustice and evildoers and this is what I am doing.†Of course, the experiences of the people of the South, as Dr. Ali Faqi recounts it above, has nothing to do with Islam or anything Islamic. That is sheer tyranny. But in a general sense, the above Ayahs (55, 56) of Surah 5: Al ‘araf, speak to a situation where there is no sense or regime of justice; or where the leadership seeks to conceal or fail to apply the existing system of justice—where tyranny, despotism and extreme injustice is the rule rather than the exception. The Somali people had, for centuries, had their sense and system of justice, derived from Islam, very well intertwined with their culture. The people of Somalia do not need to alter that aspect of their existence for the worse. Applying Shari’a law in the new Islamist fashion can only make the system worse for all. For now, Somalia is hanging between tribalism and Islamism as a system of government. In the meantime, and pending the jury’s return on the choice between the two main proposed frames for government in today’s Somalia, can they be boxed in together into one ideology? No one knows! Today though, that is what reconciliation requires of the parties in contention for power in Somalia. Simply put, the coalition of Islamists are themselves denominated by their clannish divides; and the TFG is essentially a contrived juxtaposition of clans under the so-called 4.5-formula. For the two parties to come to a settlement and form a government together, they will need to endorse one another’s ideologies and acknowledge each other’s structure. And, why not? Both tribalism and Islam have been here—coexisting for centuries. Actually, what is new is the type of leadership. The wadads (clerics) and waranles (temporal leaders) of old had somehow managed to make it together. It seems that a similar expectation has become the challenge to the current political elite and to the new breed of political clerics, alike. Those two features—ideology and structure—of the differences between the two sides shall remain the knot they will need to work around, if not to resolve them completely. The question is: can they? Will they? What if they cannot? But then, one only hopes that that is the end of the problems. Because, even when, somehow, the division along temporal versus theocratic rule is finally, and if finally, resolved, there comes the next inherent problem. Our Somali elite are intently bent on obtaining political posts—beyond reason, indeed. Every one of us requires offices for himself and then for his brothers, then for his cousins and, then, distant cousins, because they constitute one’s political party, so far. Ali Elmi Afyare, a Somali poet, had once observed in one of his poems of the sixties: “Dawlad wada Karraanniyi dunidaba ma joogto ehâ€. Roughly translated, it means: “There is no such a government where all of its people hold offices in the governmentâ€. This last Cabinet—in which more than one hundred of its two-hundred-and-seventy-five member parliament held Cabinet posts—was typical. In the end, one wonders if it matters, at all, which ism works. After all, the average Somali citizen had been politically manipulated under the banner of one ism or another since independence in 1960. Former governments used nationalism, exploiting the greater Somalia goal, which only galvanized the neighboring countries towards Somalia and had almost rendered the young Somali Republic isolated in the international political and diplomatic circles. The Islamists and their cohorts seem to be repeating the same mistake today. They are forgetting that we have hardly recuperated from the damages the nation has suffered because of that misguided policy in their propaganda against the neighboring countries. The gullible people have also spent the last two decades without a government, suffering the designs and manipulations of its political elite, which kept them apart, stateless and doomed to become the victims of waste dumping, environmental degradation, poor social services and diminishing economic and industrial infrastructure. It shall be unfair that they do also become divided and manipulated in the name of their Faith this third time around—Islamism—God for bid. Hence I shall end this paper by quoting from the Qur’an again, that it might reach the eyes, ears and hearts of those who are wrongly trying to employ Islam as a political tool. I will conclude this piece with Ayah (256), Surah 2: Albaqarah, which reads as follows: “Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy handhold that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.’ Abdalla a. Hirad MHirad@aol.com http://www.wardheernews.com/Articles_06/August_06/16_somlai_in_limb_hirad.html

HI folks. Let me share with you this interesting article. More interesting articles on Wardheernews 'Talk of the Town' section. http://www.wardheernews.com/Articles_06/August_06/24_the%20enemy_we_love.html

Muunad so you don't have a problem with Minyaro if you were an aging wife. In the U.S some women I have seen have had no problems with Minyaro even though everything about it is kept within and between the family. They also bear fictitious names as to misguide and beat the welfare system if the husband don't work or the IRS records

I like the message MINYARO Unfelt she was as she seeps in Interrupts the calm unwittingly She marches with force to a feeble soul Odorless she is and yet intense Intoxicating in ways I will never know She steals his soul he surrenders His mind I skip grudgingly The yearning for her dulls my essence My mystique and admired scent an ascertained void I attempt a notice, I revamp some more He won’t look my way for she has a hold The rivalry in tow tires my soul Should I not be the one he serenades? Instead, it is she, he intoxicates I retreat in defeat as I toss and turn I wonder and wonder his where about I am forced to take my sadness to bed She lingers through insomnic nights I find myself in vie with her The silver lining visible no more My inner voice warns to wig Callous she is this vile Minyaro I try and try to no avail Obliged I am to the overthrow No amount of love will bring him back His senses parted to mystery Feverish he is to all around The spectacle of me is foul to him My loving stare is envisaged evil Imaginary others in the room I see none I confess to him He all but ceases to me and all He is sinister and seethes as I ask why Where is the money for the child’s milk? What has taken over my beloved one? Has the evil eye fallen on us? The air is full of her return The cycle of evil in arrival The wrath of her return upon us again This evil minyaro The slayer of families The lover for men The ruin to society By Yasmeen Maxmuud, Contributing editor, WardheerNews Email:yasmeen_maxmuud@yahoo.com

I congratulate the author for the monumenal work he has done. I can relate to that article for its academic richness, eloquence, and length in pursuing the subject case by case. I gather he will be writing Part II and III as the paper states. Saxib, this one is Tsunami and I think that this time the never-ending pool of secessionist articles that have been submerging us will be to put to rest. Thanks

Now, allow me to further comment on the Majiyahan skirmish which pitched Adde's forces against the locals, which I trust prompted your impulse in raising the question. C'mon. How could you be so sure that the Majihana conflict prompted my impulse in raising the question? Anyway, I thank you for the contribution , you and Oodwayne. I will be more active after the next two weeks. If Allah says.

I concur with the author of this piece. Mogadishu Islamic Court Justice: Stabbing to death in public For we have reached the place … Where you will see the miserable people, those who have lost the good of the intellect. --- (Canto III) DANTE, Inferno (Adopted from Links by Nuruddin Farah) A few days ago in Mogadishu, a young boy of 16 stabbed his father’s killer to death in front of hundreds of spectators who watched as a photographer from Shabellenews took pictures that portray the graphic horror that unfolded before them. No one tried to stop the horror. The poor man, who stood near a tree, with a hood covering his head and chains tying his feet and hands, fell to the ground after being stabbed in the neck. The boy finished him off by stabbing him repeatedly in the chest while the poor soul lay writhing on the ground. Regardless of the guilt of the man, the manner of his execution makes one shudder in disgust and horror. It seems that the death sentence and mode of execution were passed by one of the multitude of Islamic courts that sprang up in Mogadishu with the lack of a strong central government. Islam instructs us to slaughter sheep humanely by using a sharp knife that cuts the jugular vein quickly to prevent the suffering of the animal. In Saudi Arabia, one of the few countries that practice public beheading, the executioner uses a sharp sword that cuts the head of the accused with one stroke bringing immediate death. The barbaric execution that took place in Mogadishu violates these instructions and gives us a picture of cruelty, barbarism, misguided justice and failure to appreciate the value of human life. This cruel execution brings to my mind a story in the novel links by the great Somali Writer Nuruddin Farah in which the main character in the book, Jeebleh, stops a young boy from torturing an Alsatian dog in labour. Jeeble intervenes forcefully and drives the boy away. He then helps the dog deliver its litter. Jeebleh nearly lost his life when two young men sneak into his hotel room and try to murder him. Jeebleh wonders whether the assassins were after him for the way he treated the elders of his clan in an earlier encounter or for helping the Alsatian. When I saw the pictures of the execution, I thought that I was in a dream and reading a chapter from Links. But this is was no fiction. It is a real story that actually took place in Mogadishu. Only in this case of the poor man stabbed to death by a 16-year old boy, the crowd lacked a courageous soul like Jeebleh to prevent the barbarous act. Any one trying to protect the poor man would probably have faced the same fate. The case of this man raises an important issue apart from the way that he was executed. Was the man from a small clan that could not protect him and demand a proper way of execution? There are precedents to this in Somalia. A friend of mine told me about a man from the south who was hanged by a mob in a village between Qardho and Bosasso. The man allegedly raped an old woman in the village and his punishment was death by hanging. Another friend of mine told me about a woman that was stoned to death in Hargeisa after the city fell to the SNM. Although the three incidents are different, they share the same mode of barbaric and cruel execution. They also share the fact that the executed person may have hailed from a minority clan that could not protect his/her poor soul. In Mogadishu there are hundreds of murderers who kill and rape with impunity. Their crimes go unpunished because of the strong clans protecting them. The Islamic law of Mogadishu seems to apply to the poor, weak and unprotected. No one condones the act of murder committed by the executed man, but the manner of his execution is reprehensible. If there was a need for his execution, it should have been carried in a proper Islamic manner. This incident clearly portrays the need for a strong central government in Mogadishu that brings back law and order to this troubled city held hostage by warlords and Islamic courts controlled by cruel individuals who practice laws that are far removed from true Islam. Let us all condemn this barbaric act and pray for the people of Mogadishu. Ali H abdulla aliegeh@gmail.com

Arabs resemble pretty much Somalis. Don't go anywhere else, the author must look at his own brethren and how they mistreat the Gosha people whom the Nomads call them jareers, which is analogous to Abiid. I have had the stories of my grandfathers and uncles who used to travel to Arabia via the Red Sea. Hardly, were they mistreated or called Abids. Somalis in the past had a special status in the Arab world ,esp Yemen and UAE but when we reverted to a stateless society and our plight turned unbearable and intrusive to the point of being irresistable economic burden upon growing nations, then haven't we experienced the dissatisfaction and all the dislikes with the racial undertones. Racism is everywhere

"So it is left to the African Union (AU) to take the lead. The AU's charter includes a provision that colonial-era boundaries should not be redrawn without consent from all the parties - in this case, Somalia and Somaliland." Suldaan, two questions need be considered and I believe that if these two things are paid attention and addressed, everything will be solved. "Somaliland", a tribal entity today If we ignore its historical significance has no marked border boundaries. Truth is that the last government of Somalia built the infrastructure that 'Somaliland' boasts of having today and of which has so far sustained its competitive nature and existence. The British, you so proud of its colony, has never dared venturing the reconstruction and development of the region even after its 21 years struggle with Sayid Mohammed Abdulle Hassan who fought for the independence of our country. If you could only, you or OOdweyne, explain to me why the British obviated the need for developing the region. It came, collected the supplies of meat for its troops based in Aden, created more havoc to our people, secretly signed illegal treaties with Ethiopia only to hand over our territories (remember, a large portion of your clan territory is now under the Ethiopian rule), and is still on the pursuit of our division. There will never be recognition as long as there are Sool and Sanaag populace, two regions of Puntland. Recognition, if ever granted, would also lead to a tribal war, so it is better and wise that we avoid our internal disagreements and unite as one people. The same reason the Somali clan in Hargeisa and Burco want to secede makes Somalis in Sanaag and Sool to remain with their brethren

I like the name.

“SOMALILANDâ€: Haunted by its Founding Mythology? A Response to Professor Jhazbhay’s Article By: Abdalla A. Hirad April 17, 2006 “Somaliland voluntarily joined Somalia after receiving its inde­pendence in 1960. In 1991, after a tragic union with Somalia, Somaliland opted to return to its original British Protectorate boundariesâ€. The statement cited above was written by Professor Iqbal D. Jhazbhay, a South African of Indian origin, speaking about Somalia, in his article, “Somaliland & the African Unionâ€, posted in wardheernews.com on April 12, 2006. Professor Jhazbhay expresses this opinion in search for recognition for a break-away region of the Somali Republic—namely, “Somalilandâ€. Obviously, the Professor prefers the option of war, as announced by the oligarchy politically controlling only a part of the region, to peace within the region and to the reconciliation of the people of the region with their brethren in the rest of Somalia. His preference is clear, as he quotes the following threatening statement from the self-proclaimed leadership in the region, and in his defense of the dismemberment of Somalia: “Somaliland's leaders have defi­antly proclaimed that it rather go to war than join Somalia and give up its hard earned indepen­denceâ€. What independence and from what? I ask I am a Somali from “Somalilandâ€. This sentence alone—I presume—says a lot more about the question of “Somaliland†than Mr. Jhazbhay can ever say about the subject in a thousand-page book. And I disagree with him. By the same breath, in which I agree with the son of Somalia, Nuraddin Farah, the world renowned novelist, as he is reported to describe “... Somaliland as the best kept secret …†I am sure he wrote those words not with an intention to dismember Somalia, as Jhazbhay would interpret them to mean, but out of pride with the reported achievements of the region in terms of its relative peace and stability, compared to some other parts of Somalia. The professor may have craftily taken the statement out of its proper context. Nevertheless, the fact remains that all good Somalis would be proud of “Somaliland†in that respect. To quote Professor Hussein Adan (Tanzani), though, as Professor Jhazbhay does, in defense of the tenets of the argument for the secession, is equivalent to asking the Pope to argue in defense of Christianity. The world would have been better swayed by Professor Jhazbhay’s article a lot more readily, and perhaps be more sympathetically influenced by it, if he would speak to the plight of the people of Kashmir. In any case, writing speeches for the leaders of “Somalilandâ€â€”on occasions, when they visit Johannesburg— does not in its self qualify the good professor to make decisions or prepare internationally targeted policy advisory notes about Somalia’s dismemberment. I would rather that he keeps doing what he has been doing since his newly found contract with the oligarchy—essentially that of lobbying on behalf of the leadership within the Muslim community of Johannesburg, if at all. And even that is —I am sure— contrary to the official policy of the South African government on the territorial integrity and national unity of Somalia. The professor further tries to augment the strength of his devilish insinuation as he continues to argue: “Those who would see Somalia and Somaliland "united" will argue the recognition of Somalil­and will only further fragment the region. That the recognition of Somaliland will render the very term "African Union" a misnomer. That the Transitional Federal Government in Somalia offers hope for change.†And he adds, “Unfortunately, the reality does not speak to this. The country continues to spiral further into a decades-old state of anarchy.†Here again, and so ostensibly, the Professor—it seems—wishes to see “Somaliland†recognized at any cost —even if that means Somalia spiraling into even greater civil war, than we have seen so far. It is indeed tragic that right minded people like Professor Jhazbhay can easily subscribe to this scenario of doom for Somalia, despite the efforts of the whole wide world to bring about complete national reconciliation in Somalia. A world whose international perspective the professor describes as “uninformed†among other things. It is saddening to read Professor Jhazbhay’s words uttered under the cloak of the African National Congress (ANC) of the Republic of South Africa, and within the sachet of, as he proudly claims to be a member of, the ANC's Commission of Reli­gious Affairs! By comparison, I still find the words uttered by the former and first ever Foreign Minister of post-apartheid South Africa, ringing in my ears until this day. We were honored to be in the presence of the Minister at the UN Delegates Launch, in one of the General Assembly Sessions of the UN in the early nineties. He expressed his recollection of his admiration for the industrious people of a sister African country as well as his sorrow for the situation of Somalia at the present, in the one and same statement. He asked us, a group of Somalis, in words to the effect of: “what happened to Somalia, which used to produce those seasoned diplomats who had struggled …†more than all with the people of South Africa over the years, to end apartheid? Thanks to the Minister for the complement; but, here we are, a little over ten years later, with one of his countrymen calling for the dismemberment of Somalia—perhaps unaware that Somalia could help in those days, even if nominally, because it was united, strong and solid in its solidarity with the nations of Africa and the freedom loving world to liberate the sister African nation from apartheid—an effort which is today celebrated by all South Africans no matter what the color of their skin. A Return to a State of Nature? I grant that when a civil society is dissolved, a compact disintegrates, a social contract crumbles, or, in more common words—a state fails—there is a tendency for the constituent sub-entities to “return to the state of nature in which they were beforeâ€, as John Locke would argue, in his time. There are no qualms about this. Social and political theorists have been in agreement on this fact throughout history. The case of Somalia seems to reflect the facts in a typical reality—I must admit. A reconfiguration back from that “state of nature†is the notion advanced by the theorists of the dismemberment of Somalia. That “Somaliland†can “shift for itself†now that the “Act of Union†has ceased to exist, since the collapse of government in 1991. I must hastily state, though, that “Somalilandâ€, as a phenomenon, does not symbolize a “return to the state of natureâ€, as its advocates claim, and I will explain the reasons in due course. It simply does not fit that description. There are, however, other ways in which the phenomenon has presented itself since the collapse of government in Somalia, January 1991. It has, indeed, presented itself within “Somalilandâ€, contrary to the claims that “Somaliland†represents “the state of nature.†Therefore, the mythology of “Somaliland†is crumbling under its weight of myths as we speak, I might already conclude. But bear with me, dear reader, for I will explain how. The answer in refuting the question of “Somaliland†as a “state of nature†lies in the answer to the question: what constitutes “the state of nature†to which entities might return in Somalia? It is pretty clear: clans—organization on the basis of kinship—which has been, and remains to be, the traditional way of organization and structure for the Somali society. Thus, Yasin R. Ali correctly argues in his article “Kismayo and Sool: A thought for Puntland†– A Responseâ€, posted in WardheerNews.com on April 12, 2006 correctly writes: “… and there’s a perfectly solid reason for that: in the aftermath of the disintegration of Somalia’s central government, the Somali people reverted back to the next level of political unity: the clan. Mogadishu was once the most integrated Somali city in the Horn of Africa region. Today, it is dominated by a single Somali clan-family whose “claim†is grounded on the ideology of traditional land ownership. Under that same ideology, the SNM rebel movement “liberated†Waqooyi Galbeed [NW] regions of Somalia from the former military dictatorship and declared unilateral independenceâ€. But “Somaliland†does not factor in as a clan territory. The former British Protectorate comprises the land of a number of sub-clans lumped together by the colonial masters of old—particularly the British—without the wishes or will of the natives themselves. “Somalilandâ€, like all the other partitions, therefore, has been a superimposed reality on the Somali nation, including the Italian colony in the south, later known as the “Italian Trusteeship Territory of Somaliaâ€â€”which also comprised—still does—a bunch of subclans. The evidence of this fact is widely reflected in the recent history and the nature of the civil war—clan feud being one of its manifestations. It is, therefore, morally disrespectful to the people of the region, if not to the nation as a whole, to try and re-impose those colonial divisions on the people of the Somali Republic, more than half a century after the British and Italians have left. Needless to mention that it sure feels insulting to the South African people and government—after liberation from apartheid—and to the nations of the African continent as whole, to see a South African drumming up support for the dismemberment of Somalia. I am of the strong conviction that, fortunately, that is not the policy of the government of South Africa. History attests to the fact that no sooner than they obtained their independence from the British and the Italians, the entities (the British and Italian colonized parts) signed an un-negotiated, unconditional union, to break the manacles and political division imposed by the colonial powers. As a matter of fact, on the occasion of the celebrations of “Kanna Siib, Kanna Saarâ€, at the zero-hour of 26 June, in Hargeisa—the Capital of the North—the Somali National Anthem was playing as the blue Somali national flag replaced the British. Needless to emphasize that both the National Anthem and the flag already existed as part of the paraphernalia of the southern part, which was not even independent as yet. To argue that “Somaliland†existed as a state before July 1, 1960 is, therefore, only a later fabrication. Indeed, the visiting delegation from the North to Mogadishu to commit to the act of union with the South, immediately after 26 June, refused the advice of the SYL leadership to delay the union by sometime, on the grounds that the visiting delegation had no mandate to discuss options—other than to commit to the act of union. Indeed, the SYL recalled the delegation for continued talks, history goes, only after the masses in Mogadishu took on rioting against the SYL leadership within the next two days or so. And a reunion was committed without any negations. The North had to accept the initiations of the South which had the benefits of ten years of preparation under the UN trusteeship arrangement. To argue that those clans would seek to return to the state of colonization, after an independence of more than fifty years, or accept an icon of that colonial era as a symbol for their new existence is flawed in theory and insulting to the free spirit and the fabric of the Somali society, and particularly to the people of the region. After all, it took only four days for the people of the then newly independent Somaliland to join their brethren in the other part—the Italian colony—who were, in turn, also anxiously counting the days until they obtained their independence from the Italians—only to amalgamate with the North, the same day they attained their independence, in July 1, 1960. And it was not a matter of coincidence that the British Protectorate obtained its independence only four days before the independence of the Italian South. It was actually as a result of a conscious and popular demand by the people of the then “Somalilandâ€, despite the persuasions of the British and its sympathizers from within to wait a little longer for the protectorate to mature into a state, before its union with the South. But with the Haud and Reserve area given away to Haile Selase’s Ethiopia, a few years back; with a suspicion that the British may never leave later; with rumors that Ethiopia was engaged in secret negotiations with the European powers, demanding the annexation of more Somali territory; or, simply, the Somali people fearing a re-amalgamation might never materialize later, immediate reunion was an early and an inevitable choice in the Somali psyche of that day. Therefore, the “Somaliland Protectorate†had never transpired into a state of its own right to return to in 1991, as some have falsely claimed thereafter. I must re-emphasize that it had only existed for four days in which, essentially, preparations were being made for travel and, in effect, reunion with the other part. Hence, to speak of “Somaliland†ever being a state is also a very flawed assumption. “Somaliland†was, at best, defined by its colonial history not by its independence of only four days before immediate re-union with that other part of the partitioned Somali nation. A return to the state of “Somaliland†represents a platitude or an empty inanity, at best. As to the argument that it has been the only option for those clannish sub-entities, comprising “Somalilandâ€, to “shift for themselves†into a reunion under its banner, after the collapse of government in 1991, one easily finds the banality of the statement in the fact that Somalis in all parts of Somalia have returned to “their state of natureâ€â€”the clan organization—as a base to renegotiate from, for reunion. Hence, there has been no entity—no state—in place for “Somaliland†to secede from, as of the day when the government of Somalia collapsed in 1991. There were only clusters of clans everywhere, including the bunch that make up the claimed myth of “Somalilandâ€. What makes “Somaliland†so different, one might ask, from the rest of the nation in its structure, for its people not to return to the “state of natureâ€â€”the clan structure? Or, is it different at all? On the contrary, one does not need to look hard for the answer in this regard. The dispute over Sool and Sanaag (formerly two regions of the former British Somaliland) between the existing “Puntland†and “Somaliland†stems from the fact that the subclans in those two areas belong to the larger ****** clan, and would rather stay with “Puntland†comprising their kinsmen than be hurriedly bulldozed to become part of a “Somalilandâ€, which is not of their choice. And there lies one worst kept secret, for Professor Jhazbhay to note, if he would! The recurrent and insistent claim by the oligarchy of “Somaliland†that all the clans within the region are committed to and supportive of the secession has never been substantiated and is ethnographically and politically refutable. The fact that militia from “Somaliland†and “Puntland†are facing each other in a dangerous confrontation in Adhi Caddeeye, between Burao and Lasanood, hundreds of miles short of the claimed boundaries of “Somalilandâ€, says it all. The fact also underscores the prediction that the war fronts will multiply should the oligarchy and their cohorts push their luck any further, with or without the full reconstitution of Somalia. There is, therefore, also a greater degree of probability that the hard won peace in the region might be tested to its peril if the secession is pushed to the limit. “Somalilandâ€, at best, has, therefore, been a face-saving concoction by—a strategically contrived excuse for the alliance of—the clan elite seeking the secession as matter for falsely demarcating their claimed jurisdiction of influence, in their jockeying for power at the national or regional level. A large proportion of the people of the North—comprising all clans—do not indeed subscribe to the motto and the mantle of the secession. The fact that the people of “Somaliland†had their share of sectarian violence under the banner of :â€Somaliland†and have had their equitable share of power resources in the Transitional Federal Governmentâ€, attest to the fact that “Somaliland†is still a murky political undertaking, if primarily regional rather than national; that, in essence, even the Issac, the majority clan in the area are divided on the issue; and that, as an issue, the question of the secession can be a quick sand for those not fully informed. Professor Iqbal Daood Jhazbhay comes in handy as one of those victims of ignorance. However, even if we come to consider some of the experiences of countries like Ethiopia and Eritrea as a cine qua non example for the argument towards the fission of Somalia, which the professor celebrates as a great example for the purpose of confusion, the phenomenon did not take place in many other countries, which have survived their civil and political conflict. Countries such as Uganda, Rwanda (which experienced the greatest genocide in modern history), Burundi, Congo, Mozambique, Angola, Liberia, Sierra Leone and the Ivory Coast all make cases in point, as examples in Africa, in this regard. There have been even some countries elsewhere that have fused again including the two Germanys and the two Yemens, after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Some are still struggling in the process of re-amalgamation as in the cases of the Sudan and its south, the two Koreas and China and Taiwan. Finally, and by way of concluding remarks, the unionist constituency in the region has been struggling to outwait the saber-rattling of the secessionists for war, as Jhazbhay confirms, in the above quotation from the leadership of “Somalilandâ€. They have been waiting for a government of Somalia to come to power as an ultimate option for solutions. And that, in my considered view, has been the safer option than to directly confront the secessionist constituency on a head on collision course, in order to avoid violence in the short term. It seems therefore a stronger pull out of the myth of “Somaliland†by the union oriented clans in the North is as dangerous as a stronger push for the secession by the secession oriented clans. In the long term, however, one hopes dialogue and compromise on all sides will avert an approaching tragedy as a way out. The next safest thing to do is for the region to break up into its constituent clans to avoid unnecessary tension and civil war, so that those clans who wish to secede can freely do so and those who wish to stay united with the rest of Somalia can freely do so. Thus, in all cases, the mythology is bound to crumble for each sub-entity to return to its original state of nature and “shift for itself†as it sees fit. It is a matter for the constituent clans to choose between the scenarios. And it takes all to make it one way or the other. The frightening thing is that people of Professor Jhazbhay’s mind are of the opinion to push so recklessly for the secession to incite civil war within the region, even sooner than the TFG can ever intervene! And that is the other worse kept secret! Confronted with the efforts of the international community to uphold the territorial integrity and the national unity of Somalia, if possible at all, as a constraint, the Professor simply dismisses the international position as simply “ignorantâ€, as he wrongfully argues that “these uninformed perspectives are held arguably due to sheer ignorance, stupefied indifference, or a lethal combination of both.†So much for professor Jhazbhay’s claimed love for “Somalilandâ€, wisdom in resolving the problem and for his international expertise on the question of Somalia, if at all! Abdalla A. Hirad E-Mail:MHirad@aol.com Source: Wardheernews Abdalla Hirad, scholar who has given papers to the Somali Studies and African Studies Association, and former program officer for UNDP on Somalia.

Great exchanges. We are learning.

Ali H. Abdulla is a remarkably brilliant author with farsighted views of our nation and people. He writes with such an ease and flavor but with strong premises, rational thoughts and persuasive appeal, both in emotional and ethical background. His warrant , the underlying stated and unstated belief is that Unity will make Somalia stronger if we care about our children in the future. He has raised an important topic "balkanization" of Somalia. This article "Banana Republic", an offshoot to the "Hidden conspiracy to Balkanize Somalia", also sheds more light, to those of us and the narrow minded, of the conspiracy. Banana Republics Ali H. Abdulla April 14, 2006 Who really benefits from a weak Somalia? Balkanization refers to the division of a place or country into several small political units, often unfriendly to one another. The term balkanization comes from the name of the Balkan Peninsula, which was divided into several small nations in the early twentieth century. Somalia fits the above description as a place inhabited by one race that shared a lot of the ingredients for the formation of a country. We can compare it to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia that was united by King Abdul Aziz Bin Saud to become a modern state. Somali recorded history documents two similar unsuccessful attempts to get united as a country under one leadership. Both attempts were frustrated by foreign powers. The first attempt failed when Portugal used cannons, a new weapon, to massacre Ahmed Gurey and his Somali warriors. The second attempt failed when the British imperialists used air power, another new weapon, to murder thousands of Somali freedom fighters in the north. The scale of devastation and the thousands of death resulting from those air raids bear the hallmark of illegal chemical weapons, which Churchill used against the Kurds as well. Many people believe that British forces resorted to poisoning the water wells used by the magnificent Arabian Horses known to the Somali freedom fighters as Sunari. The balkanization of Somalia started in earnest when the British, the architects of most deadly conflicts raging in the world today, and its allies won the Second World War, and Somali speaking people became united under the British imperialists. Those who argue for a Somaliland based on the borders of former British Somaliland always omit the fact that areas referred to by them as the south were also under British rule from 1941 until 1948. The British ruled the world by using a strategy of divide and rule. It worked for them in India, the Middle East and Africa. As part of that strategy, they chose not to unite the Somali speaking people fearing for their interests after realizing the deeply nationalistic sentiments of the Somali people. The fear of a strong nationalistic and united Somalia controlling the Strait of Bab El Mandab, through which British merchant ships passed, prompted the British to divide Somalia. They allowed the Italian fascists to rule the South again, and surrendered the Haud and Reserved areas to the historical enemies of the Somalis and the Northern Frontier district to Kenya. The foreign Pens The new call for breaking up the Somali Republic is spearheaded by a group of scholars who mostly lobby for the recognition of Somaliland. It is part of the continuing conspiracy to complete the balkanization of Somalia, a task that could not be completed by Britain when Somali Nationalists opted for unity in 1960. Many of us fail to comprehend that people like Lewis promote the policies of their countries. When Lewis spent time in the north, he studied the Somali pastoralists as an anthropologist. The colonial office must have used the data he gathered when drawing the final map of Somalia after realizing the danger posed by these proud and fiercely nationalistic people to its interests. Lewis quotes his predecessor Burton as having said about the Somalis “a fierce and turbulent race of Republicansâ€. Although the British signed the agreement to hand over the Haud and reserved areas to Ethiopia on the 29th of November 1954, the data Lewis gathered after 1954 must have influenced the British colonialists when they finalized their vision for a divided Somalia. The latest addition to the bandwagon of foreign pens is an African Muslim scholar who goes by the name of Ali Mazroui. On a recent visit to Somaliland, he urged the leaders and intellectuals of Somaliland to eliminate the confusion between Somaliland and Somalia and adopt the name of Somali-Stan like Pakistan and Afghanistan. When he arrived at Egal International airport, Mazroui was received like a state president. Three important Ministers welcomed him at the airport and the president of Somaliland attended a state dinner in his honour. The unexpected head-of-state reception for a humble professor must have affected and touched him deeply. The Somali-Stan remark from Mazroui is worth pondering. Did the professor make the remark in a moment of bliss brought on by our dazzling Somali hospitality? Or was he insulting the intelligence of our leaders in the north by suggesting to them to join the “Stans†of this world if they refuse their Somali-ness. If he were sincere in his remark he would probably have suggested removing the name Somali altogether because replacing the land with “Stan†as the professor has suggested does not eliminate the confusion. The tragedy of the matter is that common Somali folks are misled into believing that a few foreign scholars whose carriers are on the wane can attain recognition for them. They come out in droves welcoming them with flowers and folk dances. The mobilization of our kids and women to wave flowers to foreigners who are no-bodies in their own land is demeaning and reminds one of the tactics of the old regime. Would Mazroui receive such a reception in his native Kenya? In a recent rebuttal to “The hidden conspiracy to balkanize Somaliaâ€, someone volunteered to explain what the professor meant in a long scholarly interview in a radio show meant for the masses. It seems that I am not the only person who finds it difficult to understand professor Mazroui. Professor Willia, Ochieng, from Kenya says about the guy “True, he has published immensely. I cannot claim to have read even half of what he has written. What puzzles me, however, is that I cannot remember a single important thing from his material. I know he will respond by claiming that it is not his fault. If I am too dense to understand his writing then what has that got to do with him? But apparently his American hosts also have a problem with him. Despite his many lectures and literature in the United States they do not seem to understand what he says, or wants. Are they also as dense as I am? What exactly has professor Mazrui been trotting around the world telling his listeners?†You have to read the whole article to understand where professor Willia is heading with this vicious attack on Mazroui. I do not reproduce this piece to attack or demean the famous Mazroui but to remind our brothers in the North that Mazroui is not the right man to lobby for their recogntion. In fact no foreigner has the ability to argue their case. Foreign scholars like Lewis and Mazroui think of us as specimens for their scholarly fieldwork and theories. They benefit from us and do not care much about our future or fate. The half loaf suggested by Lewis and the Somali-stan suggested by Mazroui are sinister new models that if successful will only add to their portfolios. The need for a constructive dialogue Instead of using foreginers to lobby for them, those calling for secession need to explain to several million Somalis the real reasons prompting them to run away from their brothers like lepers.; the resons prompting them to behave like an angry Somali husband who yells at his wife “I divorce thee†3 times; the reasons prompting them to consider as taboo the logical task of opening a dialogue with their brothers in the south regarding the future of their mutual country. Democracy is not a selective thing. One cannot choose and pick its tenets to satisfy a certain agenda. The voice of those in the north who are for unity should be heard and allowed to participate in shaping the future of our country. They should be allowed to talk to the people and explain their vision for a united and strong Somalia. We should look at the pros and cons of unity and prepare a balance sheet that lists the assets and liabilities. This should be done after we get rid of the hate and fear. Hate destroys those who practice it and consumes them. They cannot think clearly. We have all suffered under the corrupt civilian government and the dictatorial repressive regime. If we can find forgiveness in our hearts for some of those who govern us today and who were part of the repressive regime, then we should be able to find room in our heart for forgiving our other Somali brothers most of whom had nothing to do with the repression and destruction.. I know that wounds take a long time to heal but 15 years is long enough to forget and to embark on a healing journey that brings us all back together under one roof but with different terms. Terms that will guarantee the non-recurrence of the hell that we have all been through. We should learn from South Africa and other countries who managed to heal their wounds. We should seek the help of the likes of Mandela to achieve unity instead of seeking the help of those who are keen on our divison. Given the chaos raging in most of the south, some of us may pose the valid question. Who should we negotiate with? The answer is quite simple and obvious. The dialaogue should not be with those murdering warlords but with the decent peace loving civil society members. We can start by: * Opening a constructive dialogue with members of the civil society groups in the south. * Creating truth and reconciliation meetings under the supervision of prominent figures who care about us. * Introducing Student exchange programs * Initiating a constructive dialogue between the traditonal leaders of the north and the south. * Sending Peace missions to the south to help them put their chaotic house in order. The case for a United Somalia One of the most powerful arguments used by the camp opposed to the secession is the fact that Somalia is a homogeneous country whose people speak the same language, worship the same God and pretty much look the same. The most effective rebuttal I have heard so far to this argument came from the President of Somaliland Mr. Rayale, when he remarked at a state dinner thrown in the honour of Mazroui that Arabs too share the same characteristics but are divided into more than 21 countries The rebuttal of our president may make sense to many, but we should not forget that the Arab world used to be one country under the Ottoman Caliphate. When the west started its campaign to loot the riches of the Muslim world, they devised a clever scheme of divide and rule. They divided the Arab world into many small countries making it easy for them to control and siphon off the riches of these countries. It is easy to deal with a population of several hundred thousand than with a population of hundreds of millions. Regardless of the arguments used by both sides, the truth of the matter is that the world is becoming a small global village where the competitive edge belongs to those who are united politically and economically. China and India are the fastest growing economies in the world. Their combined population constitute more than a third of the world population. Their economic boom is a result of their united population despite the different languages and religions. Those who call for dividing Somalia do not realize that they are advocating the creation of small banana republics that are weak enough to be exploited by powerful multinational corporations. The best definition I could find for a banana republic is “a small country (especially in Central America) that is politically unstable and whose economy is dominated by foreign companies and depends on one export (such as bananas)†Somalia fits this description. Banana and livestock used to be and will probably remain for a long time our main exports. The danger of depending on one commodity for export is made painfully clear by the ban imposed by Saudi Arabia on Somali livestock leading to economic hardship to our people. A united Somalia would be able to diversify its economy and embark on a program that makes it the Singapore of Africa as Ambassador Sahnoun predicted in a Reuters interview recently. Somali people are dynamic entrepreneurs who with unity and good governance will fulfill this prophecy. The other problem with a banana republic is that a few privileged groups enjoy all the benefits of the state while the majority remain in abject poverty. Those who call for division should ask themselves the simple question. Why do western scholars and those emulating them call for dividing us when Europe is heading towards a united entity with a single currency called the Euro, a European Parliament and a European Central Bank? When Europe realized that it lags behind the United States of America and Japan, they decided to unite their economies in order to be able to compete against these economic giants. They realized that unity stands for prosperity, strength and stability. The famous Berlin Wall crumbled and Germany became united again because both sides realized that it was in the interest of Germany to become united. Neither the Soviet Union nor the other European nations wanted to see a untied and strong Germany again. They thought that years of different political and economic systems would be enough guarantee to keep the two Germanys apart but the people of Germany proved them wrong. The Somali people will prove to the world that they can be a united country again. One that has learnt from the past; one that practices free enterprise and a genuine democracry. Concluding remarks We have to make a choice between : a strong and united Somlaia, and small banana republics exploited by greedy multinational companies and powerfull foreign countries that can corrupt our weak leaders to use our country as military bases and dumping grounds for their nuclear and chemical waste. When making this difficult choice, we should think about our future generations who will be affected by these choices. Before we make the choice, we should try to eliminate the hate and fear factors that we have been fed over 15 long and painful years. Ali H. Abdulla aliegeh@gmail.com Source: Wardheernews

Originally posted by samuraiW: though Sayid Mohamed and his dervishes were gaining ground on the British in the Sool plateau, areas in Hawd and Nugal valley terrain, it was the South that conceptually formulated the nationalist standard along with nation state framework earlier on and in a far greater intensity than the North. , Tata … Samuria, Though the English harmed our country more than the Italians, they supported and funded the SYL up until the referendum when the leaders from both parts of Somaliland, seeking the independence of our country, had the chance of which country they should elect to be as their temporary trusteeship. We voted for the Italian , for we believed that Italia was more trustworthy than English. I disagree with how you interprated the need for the House of Elders or lack thereof. Most developed countries have House of Elders or the Upper House. They just employ different political terms but they happen to be the same in terms of meaning. The Senate of the U.S serves the same objectives as the house of Guurti even though they are more complex and politically modernized than our Guurti. "The Framers of the Constitution created a bicameral Congress out of a desire to have two houses to check each other. One house was intended to be a "people's house" that would be very sensitive to public opinion. The other house was intended to be a more reserved, more deliberate forum of elite wisdom. " Besides, the word senate was derived from "senex" According to this Wikipedia online, which means "old man". The House of Elders, i believe, could hinder the power to set up a potential stalemate in the government by any president harboring a disservice to his counntry. They can enforce the constitution, limit the power of the president, and respond with an effective solution. For instance, the U.S president cannot sign a treaty or reach an agreement without the ratification of the senate . -------- This is just a rough draft of me. I hope to leave my two cents worth should time permits.

MM, can you enlighten me of the reasons they call that state a "tribal state" when in fact it is a Somali state region of Ethiopia. Don't you think that title is totally primitive state title? Why can't they realize of its political ramifications. If you look at the history of the North of Somalia, There used to be tribal titles in every territory, given by the English , but when the modern state of Somalia was created, all of those tribal titles were gotten rid of. The Somali state region of Ethiopia, bearing this title as such, is more of a uniter than a divider like the "tribal state" some of their leaders constantly employ when refering to the region.

Professor Ali Mazrui urges modification of Somaliland's name to [somalistan] By Dr. Mohamed –Rashid Sheikh Hassan= HARGEISA, 6 April 2006--Professor Ali Mazrui, the famous African historian and eminent "You may consider modifying your name like Somalistan, which has similar ending like those of other Islamic countries such as Pakistan, Afghanistan etc." Source: Awdal News

But who can understand their dialect? Except them