THE ARAB LEAGUE AND SOMALIA

[Deeq A.]

The so-called Arab league membership of Somalia in theory and practise has long been destructive for relations between Somalis and Arabs. Most Somalis speak little or no Arabic. But believe that as an “Arab state” Arab world has to help them. They are bitter about the failure of the Arab League in its nonexistence of attempts to end the civil war and the inadequate aid to the thousands of Somali refugees in Yemen, Egypt, Kenya and Ethiopia. “Why are the Arabs so indifferent?” asks a Somalis. “We are Muslims, so why did the Arabs leave us?

Many of us believed that the Arabs would come to our aid and end our suffering. But nothing has been done to stop the killing; they come with the USA (Operation restore hope) and leave when the USA left. In fact, in the Arab world, Somalia becomes synonyms with all that bad.

What Arabs wish for us is authoritarian leadership that legitimised by appealing to their kind of Islamic tradition is evident and problematic for the political future of our country. But then the question is more critical; Does the Arab intervention in our country, starting from Siad Barre period, through Al-Itihaad to Al-Shabaab, inevitably lead to Arabisation of our society and justification of political dictatorship?

It is not the theoretical or theological but the practical political dimension of Arabisation that is especially relevant in the discussion about the future of our country. Despite everything, the Arabs are so diverse that the relationship with Somalia must be understood mainly in its historical and political context. The theory is essential; practice is more important. What I mean here is the claim of some Somalis of being descendants from Arabs, and the real treatment Arabs gave to Somalis.

Strictly speaking, history teaches us little or nothing. And what is put forward as “evidence” can often describe in terms of” what was to be demonstrated”. Particularly in keyhole history – which is always lurking when homeland and nation staged – the preconceived conclusion sends research that turns it into discourse rather than critical and contradictory analysis.

The origin of the Somalis is controversial. Traditionally, some Somalis claim to be descended from Arab tribes. Therefore, let me first concentrate on the critical concept of ‘being Arab mentality’ that some Somalis believe.  In my opinion, its entirety of ideas that a group makes about themselves and collective behavioural patterns in which this idea expressed and passed on to other generations. In other words: it is about identity, a fleeting and controversial concept. In Benedict Anderson’s terms, this is an ‘imagined community’, a construction that cannot directly be derived from the facts and has a significant emotional component. This is also what Arlie Russell calls a “deep story”: a psychological discourse that filters reality and freezes in a one-dimensional perspective. There is always talk of translators, a social stratum that lends form and content to that identity building, of ‘political brokers’ who put forward a version as it were. What I intend here is to dispel the idea that at least for some Somalis the notion that they’re descendants of Arabs. And that this notion is based not on facts but its an imaginary cultural construction. Consequently,  historians, anthropologists, archaeologists and linguists agree that modern Somalis are not descendants from Arabs.

Let us look deep into the family bond that some Somalis claim of being descendants from Arab. They claim their genealogical names often goes back to the Quraish, the tribe of prophet Mohammed peace be blessing be upon him, and that weighs heavily in the Islamic world. But something is not right. Those genealogies have only about 28 generations. Let the average time between father and son be 25 years, even then 28 ages go back only 700 years in history. A gap of over seven hundred years remains until Mohammed(AS). In addition to the lack of direct genealogical lineage to Quraish, another connecting identity with Arabs could be the Arabic language; however, let us find if a shared language could justify Arab identity claimed.

LET US LOOK THE CRITICAL ASPECT OF LANGUAGE

Being an Arab is not ethnicity; instead, it’s the language that one makes an Arab.

Arabic belongs to the circle of the Semitic languages, which are a branch of the Afro-Asiatic language family. In principle, all Arabs can communicate with each in Arabic. There’s two kinds of Arabs; native Arabs (Yemenis) and Arabised nation (the rest of Arabs).

In the 7th century, the Arab Empire grew bigger and bigger. The advent of Islam in the 7th century caused the Arab empire to expand. There was, as it were, an Arabisation of non-Arab countries. Peoples who until then had their language and religion adopted the Arabic culture and language. This happened in countries in North Africa, among others. Egyptians, for example, are descended from the ancient Egyptians and are later Arabised after Islam reaches Egypt.

The North African Arabs were generally Berbers again with their language and customs. Peoples in Iraq and Syria also did not have an Arab streak, but later started Arabising. Persia that is now called Iran does belong to the Arab empire, but again no Arabisation has taken place there. Although the Persian language (also referred to as Farsi) does have many Arabic loanwords.

The Islamic world and the Arab world are not the same. The Arab world is not equal to the Islamic world. The Islamic world is much larger than the Arab world. Islamic countries are not connected or much less connected to the Arab culture, no Arabic language spoken, but in those countries, Islam is the main religion. Somalia is part of these countries but at the same time, a member of the Arab league for political and strategic reasons.

The collective linguistic identity of all Arabs is the written Arabic language (standard Arabic), which has distanced itself only slightly from the medieval, classical writing language. The overarching medium of the written Arabic language and the uniformity of the Islamic traditions reinforce awareness of supraregional solidarity.  All Arab countries use the Arabic language as the official language. The Arabic language is the primary means of communication at the national level in all Arab states.

In this case, Somalia is an exception. Somali is the official language of about 21 million speakers, of which about 10 million speakers live in Somalia and the rest in Kenya, Ethiopia, Ogaden and Djibouti. Besides Somali, the second official language is Standard Arabic.

On the other hand, the Arab influence one can trace back when the companion of the prophet peace and blessing be upon him landed on our shores and brought Islam to the country, and this influence expresses it in all kinds of loan words. The loanwords mainly used in the sectors of trade, politics and religion. Somalis do not speak Standard Arabic at all, and it’s not their mother language.  And only those with education talk to Arabic.

IN THE ARAB LEAGUE SOMALIS ARE PEOPLE WITHOUT HISTORY

In all Arab states teach students the works of literature of Arab League member states and their history. However, Somalis as being poetic people having great literature and cultural tradition are absent in the Arab school’s classrooms because its works of literature not written or spoken in the Arabic language. Therefore, as a member of the Arab league and without historical contributions mentioned, Arabs consider us people without a culture.

Somali, therefore, has a unique language history. Looking at the language of Somalia, a picture emerges of Somalia, which is unknown to many Arab people. For the Arabs, Somalia is a country just for war, poverty and refugees. Somalia’s history and culture go way back in history than most Arab states, but because it’s not in the Arabic language, this is lost.

Similarly, the Arabic script was traditionally customary, but this changed when Latin script adapted for Somali writing.

JOINING THE ARAB LEAGUE AND TREATMENT RECEIVED

Somalia joined the Arab League for more than 46 years ago. But it never buttered well. Under the rule of Siad Barre, there has been an Arabisation wave in the country. However, the irreconcilability of Arabisation of Somalia has belied the practice, albeit not too convincingly. And almost exclusively within the state, most of the population are free from this Arabisation project articulated by a senior politician for financial gain and religious groups such as al-Shabaab.

The Arabisation of our society derives a good part of its political significance in the Arab world, especially Saudi Arabia during the cold war, and from the fact that they like to have the ideological monopoly on control and exploitation of our country. The Arab states, except maybe IRAK and SYRIA never accepted and treated well Somalis. During the 1977 war with Ethiopia, they betrayed Somalia despite promising help and even some member states like Libya and Yemen fought on the side of Ethiopia.

Later Somali refugees that left to Yemen looking for safety, after the collapse of the Somali state, find the hope of a brotherly reception is quickly lost. A historical bond, a shared origin and sharing the same religion appear to be an insufficient basis for fraternisation.  Somalis also complain about discrimination. Verbally abused on the street, the  Yemenis mistreated Somali maiden working for them. They call me all the wrong names and think they never get exhausted.

Although Somalis are Muslim, their social position in Yemeni and in general Arab society is weak. Yemenis often look down on them and say they are untrustworthy. You often hear stories about Somali women (who mostly work as a house maides) accused of stealing gold or other valuables from their employers. But Somali women themselves said that they are regularly suspects of theft so that their employers can put them on the street without paying their salaries or even have them arrested. Middle-class families often employ housekeepers as a status symbol but are not always financially able to pay the salary. Even Egypte which we had a long relationship going way back to the pharaoh period the discrimination and dehumanising of  Somalis is without shame displayed on their TV screens. Situations in rich Arab countries are even worse, and every Somali knows how badly they treated and dehumanised.

MORE ARAB INTERVENTION ON STEROID

Internal clan wars that no one understands about not only have cost many victims for years but destroyed fundamental aspects of our culture. Somalia has for years been a sad example of how a state can completely disintegrate until there is no central government authority left at all. This situation allowed wealthy Arab states to intervene in our country more in politically, culturally and even injected their kind of Islam in our society.

Transforming Islam into a strategically deployable weapon is for some countries an integral part of their foreign policy. It is the primary way in which state projects power and secures influence in countries of the Islamic world. It has proved to be a very successful strategy so far, made possible in part by the United States.

Centuries of religious traditions within Somalia (including our Shafici madhab), are being wiped out by an influx of imams educated in Saudi Arabia and teaching materials produced in Saudi Arabia based exclusively on Hambali madhab.

The Arabs and especially Saudi Arabia and UAE did not make a secret the fact that they intend to dismantle the Somali state through dividing into small clan controlled enclaves or bringing in under the control of Ethiopia.

No intervention can function without the active or passive collaboration of local elites and the resignation of the population. Arab cultural and political interference in many cases are encouraged, or even explicit collaborated from Somalis. One or more Arab states finance most of our elections. They destroyed our natural habitat through games or catching endangered wild animals, monopolised our trade on livestock—destroyed centuries-old trees and forests for charcoal trade. They took over our ports without proper agreements. They are illegally fishing in our shores.

QATAR AND FARMAAJO ADMINISTRATION

The other Gulf states boycott Qatar and have imposed severe economic sanctions against the country. The Gulf states’ conflict with Qatar, Somalia declared to be neutral but rallies behind  Qadar. The reason for Qadar support follows the support of Farmaajo’s campaign, which is bankrolled by the Qadar. But what about Qatari aid to Al-Shabaab?

Indeed, there is hard evidence that Qatar supports terrorist movements, collected among others by the American Foundation for the Defense of Democracies based on public sources.

Persons on the UN terrorist list have been able to carry out their activities from Qatar in peace and under the watchful eye of the authorities.

For example, Qatar-based terrorist Abdel Rahman al-Nuaymi, a leader within Al-Qaida, was able to send hundreds of thousands of euros to Al-Qaida in Syria in 2013. He also sent money to the Somali terrorist movement Al-Shabaab. He still resides in Qatar and walks around there freely.

I don’t know whether money from Qatar treasury flows to terrorists. I have no concrete indications for that.  However, there is now a load of publications and research which illustrate the extensive support from Qatar to jihadists in different countries.

In practical terms, if we were almost forced to make a choice; either you trade with Qatar, or you choose to do business with the other countries around Qatar. We should have chosen for the interest of our economy on the side with Saudi Arabia and UAE. There’s no worth mentioning political and economic relation with Qatar. It’s purely financing of Farmaajo that the interest of the country become subservience to the benefit of Qatar.

Without Somalia opening its Airspace, Qatar would have faced very pig economic hardship. What did Somalia gain from that relationship? Nothing but few dollars to Farmaajo’s administration and a few obsolete second-hand military gears. These few support have also played a central role in Qatar’s efforts to redefine the regional order and self-promotion on a global stage.

What did we lose in siding with Qatar?

Opportunity to bring in more investment and infrastructure development from the Golf states. Military training and military gears and medical aid as provided by UAE.

ARABS AND RACISM FACED SOMALIS

Some problems are universal but can be solved. Others are emerging as global epidemics that seem to have no cure. I indeed count racism that in the Middle East and North Africa is very much alive. The average Arab, not the whitest himself, turns out to have a chronically condescending view of everyone who is a bit darker than him. For example, Somalis discover that they are systematically called slave by the Arabs when they arrive in their country.

Meanwhile, almost every other week, Human Rights Watch publishes a report on abuse and violence against Somali and other African illegal immigrants in countries such as Egypt, and unlawful expulsion of Somalis by Saudi Arabia, and the appalling exploitation of dark workers in the Arab Gulf states. When a Somali person presents itself as an Arab, it is quickly: “Yes, but you are not Arab”.

In some Arab countries like Libya, despite, it is widely said, racism is at odds with Islamic teachings they go even further than calling Somalis slave, the underlying stereotype: if you are black, you are not a Muslim. No, then you are unbelievers or Christians. That’s how backwards are the Arabs; your skin colour (if it is darker than theirs) does make you less, or non-Muslim let alone accepted as an Arab.

WHAT POLITICAL LESSONS CAN WE LEARN FROM ARAB WORLD?

There is no region where international democracy promotion is higher on the list than in the Arab world, especially the Middle East. After all, when it comes to constitutional matters, the Arab countries are incredibly unfavourable compared to the rest of the world, including Africa south of Sahara. Even from a historical perspective, the situation is bleak. Contrary to the spirit of the times in almost all Arab countries, they are now less free than they were three or four decades ago.

In general, it is difficult to estimate the extent to which the political changes of recent years have prompted by international pressure. But one thing is sure; marginal or no Substantial reforms in all Middle Eastern countries are taken by those in power who also control the change agenda except some liberalisation here and there. Liberalisation is not democratisation. Indeed, a degree of liberalisation serves precisely to strengthen the ability of authoritarian regimes and a safety valve for pent-up expectations and frustrations.

How do we imagine the political democratisation of the countries of the Middle East? Is there real change based on agreements between regimes and opposition and under the benevolent control of pro-reform leaders? However, experience in the Arab world has shown that sweeping political changes can both preceded and followed by periods of significant turbulence and uncertainty. However, a gradual and top-down transition almost always leads to half-baked reforms and hybrid regimes, sometimes even to democratic regression, as developments in Egypt show.

OIL WEALTH BEFORE DEMOCRATISATION

There is a range of political, economic and cultural conditions that make democratisation in the Middle East difficult, even unlikely. It may sound paradoxical, but the wealth of the region may well be the main obstacle to political change. Generally speaking, oil-producing and other resource-rich states do not have an impressive reputation when it comes to democracy and human rights.

The chronology is not unimportant here; first oil and then democracy proves extremely difficult; first democracy and then oil go well together. The countries of the Middle East belong to the first category. Norway and the Netherlands to the second category. Oil before democratisation is something we Somalis has to learn to avoid. The federal government is trying to auction our oil without democratisation process completed or even a genuine reconciliation between antagonists clans done.

The proceeds of oil or other raw materials provide regimes with the means of power to maintain the political status quo. They allow the authoritarian to buy off a critical part of the nationals. The rise to secure money from natural resources or, as in Somalia from development cooperation, reduces the need for new political regulation and democratic institutions; no taxation no representation will be the motto. Besides, oil wealth has for a long time given the Middle East rulers an almost untouchable position in geostrategic considerations of Western countries, and it has generally not been conducive to democratic political change.

For a long time, the security of oil supplies in Western capitals has seen as serving the continuation of the authoritarian political order in the Arab world.

Oil wealth leads to laziness. It invites to rentier behaviour. Oil wealth hinders economic modernisation and diversification of production options and growth, perpetuates social inequality and frustrates political ambitions. From a financial point of view, the Middle East is no longer a shadow of the dynamic region that it seemed back to a few decades ago. The countries of the Middle East are falling further and further behind.

And there is another crucial reason why most regimes in the Middle East have long been able to keep out of all political democracy; They had reliable political, economic and military support from the West. The crucial geopolitical significance of the region and its vast oil resources give rise to continued political and military interference in the area, including long-term colonisation, and also determined that the democratic content of those in power has never been of any significance.

The meaning of democratic institutions determined by the context in which they function, but they are never irrelevant. A political order can only democratise if people necessarily want it and if necessary institutions are present and functioning. However, for the time being, no regime in the Middle East has been prepared to hold completely free elections, except for the Iraqi government and the Palestinian Authority. Paradoxically these two countries are the least independent Arab nations in the region. Because of these reasons, it’s us Somalis who need to keep away from the Arab world and their dysfunctiona and nonadaptive social and political system.

Dr. Mohamed Hassan Tifow can be reached at mxtifow@yahoo.co.uk 

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Caasimada Online. For publication please email your article caasimada@live.com. Thank You