VOA: Debate between Editors of Wardheernews.com and Awdalnews.com

[NASSIR]

Duke and Mansa, great points.

 

Che, if the secessionists can honestly answer these questions, I'll be the first to recognize their state.

1. What was their flag. Was it different from the light blue with a star in the middle?

 

2. Which countries recognized their juridical claim to statehood, name one or two.

 

3. Was the independence granted by Britain in preparation for the union of two Somali regions or the disunion thereof?

 

 

Does Somaliland have the normative legitimacy to their quest for statehood?

 

Only a few cases of secession from existing member states of the United Nations were legally recognized as possessing normative legitimacy for their acclaimed right to an

external self-determination

, and those few cases came from states or empires constitutionally arranged as

federal systems.

Federally arranged states partly disintegrated owing to egregious violations of their federal charters prior to their legal merge. For instance,

Eritrea

was an autonomous unit federated with Ethiopia under the sovereignty of Ethiopian Crown, and the ratification of their subsequent agreements was sanctioned by the U.N. Therefore, these unique territories (such as the Baltic states, Eritrea, and East Timor) under states constitutionally arranged as federal systems, possessed legitimate struggle against annexation, not secessionim struggle because the administrations of the states with which they were federated dissolved the federal agreements protecting their religious and linguistic rights as well as their widest measure of self-government. Besides the population in these new states were demanded of absolute loyalty and to submit to other assimilationist pressures for reasons of state integrity and security. According to Raymond C. Taras in his. article Ethnic Conflict and International Norms, he captures the legal exceptions to the international normative regime on secession. “Between 1945 and 1990, many separatist movements existed, but only one-Bangladesh—succeeded. In the early 1990s,

a number of successful secessions did take place, but they were mostly concentrated in Communist states that were organized as federal systems and were in the throes of collapse.

(2)  

 

Evaluating further on whether “Somaliland” had possessed the attributes of statehood based on the history of the legal merger of the two regions of Somalia, let us revisit the

Covenant on the Civil and Political Rights (CCPR), and the UN General Assembly Resolution 1514(XV)

of 1960, the latter was implemented through the Charter-based mechanism. In an analytical framework to the time when both British and Italian Somaliland were granted independence and merged thereafter, one would come to know whether the break-away entity of Northwestern Somalia ever transpired into a state of its own. Under article 1 of the CCPR, the subjection of peoples to alien rule and exploitation violates the UN charter, so it can be said immediate steps were taken, in

non-self-governing territories (Colonies),

to transfer all powers once and for all.  

 

Article 6 of Resolution 1514(XV)

also proclaims that, after the transfer of all powers in non-self-governing territories to the people concerned, disruption of the political and territorial integrity of a country formed subsequently is incompatible with the charter. As it is evident from the widespread protest demonstrated by our leaders in

1959,

the Legislative Council in Hargeisa appointed a commission to represent their voted resolution passed on April 6, 1960 by the elected members of the Protectorate on their political desire and heartfelt aspiration for an independence and immediate union with Somalia(3).

Britain was quick to acquiesce to such popular demands though it regretted the short interval of timing under which the responsibility of the protectorate were to be transferred to Somalia.

 

Another important document states that widespread political protests arising from the secret

liquidation of the Hawd Reserve to Imperial Ethiopia

forced Britain to “accept the eventual unification of British Somaliland with Italian Somaliland,” (4).     

 

Whereas the newly formed state of Kosovo possessed the attributes of autonomy under

federal Yugoslavia,

Somaliland had possessed no such attributes of autonomous status. Kosovo had its own separate assembly, police, and bank until 1990 when Serbian rule was imposed on them that repressed the ethnic Albanians who are ethnically distinct from the Serbs. The existence of historical rivalry and animosity between the two also dates back to the Ottoman period. For instance, Muslim Albanians were in better position than the Serbs. A further root cause of their conflict was when Albanians allied with Germany and Italy during WWII in their quest for pledged “Greater Albania” during which Muslim atrocities against the ethnic Serbs occurred.

Elmi, Mohamed.

[Suldaanka]

Che, if the secessionists can honestly answer these questions, I'll be the first to recognize their state.

1. What was their flag. Was it different from the light blue with a star in the middle?

 

2. Which countries recognized their juridical claim to statehood, name one or two.

 

3. Was the independence granted by Britain in preparation for the union of two Somali regions or the disunion thereof?

ehehe

 

What is next? Did Somaliland have a passport? Did Somaliland had embassies? Very simplistic indeed.

 

If it suites you well. Somaliland had a flag, had a government and it was interacting with other nations as a soveriegn independent territory. That is what counts.

 

According to the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States (1933) what constitutes as a state is:

(1) a permanent population;

(2) a defined territory;

(3) government and

(4), capacity to enter into relations with other states

 

Somaliland meets all those requirements and in the 1960s it were able to enter into "treaties" with other states forexample Somaliland and the UK governments reached a number of treaties including this treaty on her independence.

 

As for if the UK prepared SL for Unity. That is nonsense. It was the Somaliland people and in particular the Somaliland politicians that were asking for independence and were pushing the UK to accord that independence at the same time as Southern Somalia's independence. In fact, the UK's Office for colonies adviced Somaliland about the time frame for a smooth independence to being around early 1970s. Somaliland's leaders rejected that advice and hence the fast-tracked independence for Somaliland was set.

 

Somaliland had her own flag during the colonial times up until 26 June 1960. It could have kept that flag and her independence if Somaliland wanted to remain independent. But that wasn't the case at that particular time. Somaliland was pushing for unity not just with Mogadishu but A Union of all Somali speaking territories which includes Djibouti, NFD and Ethiopia's Somali region.

 

We all know that the 1960s Union was a total failure. Not only was the aim of uniting all Somali speaking territories never materialised but also the two regions which united could not get along. The country that was created by the union of 1960s is no longer in existence. That country is a failed state now.

 

The new government in Mogadishu has no legal rights over Somaliland since the people and government of Somaliland have nothing to do with its creation or whatever new constitution the warlords or religion-lords agreed upon in foreign capitals. These new documents are not binding in Hargeisa and hence are null and void.

[General Duke]

^^^^Suldanka you are clutching to straws as usual, dear lad dont confuse yourself. Somaliland is part of Somalia much like Puntland and the areas controled by Al Shabaab and so on.

 

Its just a symptom of the war my brother and nothing more.

 

 

Oodweyne adeer get a deeper voice and also all the nonsense you write hardly gets you anywhere JB’s copy and paste is more effective if I had to critique the secessionist. A witless pretentious secessionist does not make the grade with the Duke. You know that already though.

[AfricaOwn]

^^Keep saying "Somaliland is part of Somalia" to your death then.

[Suldaanka]

Originally posted by General Duke:

^^^^Suldanka you are clutching to straws as usual, dear lad dont confuse yourself. Somaliland is part of Somalia much like Puntland and the areas controled by Al Shabaab and so on.

 

Its just a symptom of the war my brother and nothing more.

Sxb, there is a difference between putting your head in the sand and imagining things to be the way you wished to be. And raising your head up and openning your eyes to see the reality on the ground first hand. I choose the second option while you and your ilk are enjoying the first one.

 

Somaliland is real my friend. And there is no amount of anything would be enough to bring it back. Her people have crafted a path for her and the caravan is not going to stop for anyone.

 

Today, Somaliland has all the trappings of a state but the only thing which is missing is the official recognition by the international community. We expect that to take place sooner or later. But the main thing for us is to look inwards and do whatever it takes to put the necessary mechanisms in the meanwhile.

[General Duke]

^^^Suldanka, Somaliland is real like Minnesota and Texas and any other state within a state. No one doubts that, the issue here as you agree it is not recognised and the realities of the world dictate that it probably will never be.

 

You have to come to terms with this my old secessionist friend.

 

AfricaOwn Somaliland is NW state of the republic of Somalia. How is that?

[Mintid Farayar]

The VOA debate was ill-informed in its premise in that it presupposes that the stumbling block to Somaliland recognition is based on the positions of other Somalis and Somali regions.

 

Even the better informed in Arab states(as well as the larger international community) know the obstacles are regional powerful states who oppose it for their own national interests.

 

Here's a quote from today's article from a reputable Dubai publication:

 

Egypt has successfully lobbied the Arab League to block Somaliland’s recognition. Egypt is locked in a perpetual struggle with Ethiopia over Nile River water rights and sees a greater, united Somalia as a strong counterbalance to Ethiopia. Link

 

Egypt happens to be one of several states in the wider African, Arab, and European world that holds this anti-Somaliland position. However, there are others in those arenas that are more amenable to the Somaliland case.

 

However, the non-Somaliland Somalis are quite irrelevant (I mean no disrespect, just simply stating the current geopolitics) to the debate since they're viewed as pawns in the greater game with no control of their own regions as present circumstances display let alone able to affect what happens in other regions/regional politics. Hence, African Union/United Nations mandates to place more peacekeepers, Ethiopian incursions into sovereign Somali soil, national navies patrolling of Puntland's shores, French commando missions within Puntland to grab pirates are all exercised without consultations with the rest of Somalis (outside of Somaliland).

 

This is the real work that's cut out for the Somaliland administration (lining up enough regional support from non-Somali states).

 

So the point is moot, my dear lads...

[xiinfaniin]

May Egypt live long enough to fence off the wicked designs intended to undermine the territorial integrity of our suffering land.

 

Mesra baladii, wa suudaanu ardhii

[NASSIR]

Egypt's influence is largely minimal. "Somaliland" has no legal and moral case for its secession.

What a ludicrous position for the secessionists.

 

It has no moral case since it's one Somali clan whose fiefdom does not stretch further their clan territory.

 

It has no legal justification since it was never conceived as a state. It's a region only defined by its shameful colonial heritage--with all its historic atrocities against our people. Even so, Britain's military rule after WWII in Somalia can be said to be a defining feature of Somalia's colonial past.

Of course, the Arab states like many other African and Asian states respect our territorial integrity, but there's no strong case before the international community to warrant the dismemberment of Somalia, neither moral nor legal.

[General Duke]

^^^Nicely put.

[NASSIR]

Duke, as a matter of fact, it's not even one Somali clan, but sub-clan. Yet still, this same sub-clan are divided over this narrowly defined political card for a bigger slice of the pie.

[rudy-Diiriye]

its voa...why bother? it reeks like cia all the way to high heaven!

[Taleexi]

Dear SOLers,

 

A Somali thinker by the name Osman Hassan penned down squarely the challenges facing the Somaliland's quest for recognition

 

An excerpt of the piece states something like this...

 

......"the Self-determination, if granted, is a double-edged sword, from which Somaliland has as much to gain from it as it may lose. Acting as the devil’s advocate, suppose, as could well happen, the Awdal region were to withdraw, from the current secessionist Somaliland, or a future independent one; will Somaliland then oppose it by force since it is on no moral or legal ground to reject it, being itself the product of self-determination an/or secession in the first place?. Some might consider the example of Awdal as a hypothetical exercise. I beg to differ. But if Awdal’s withdrawal from Somaliland is considered by some as far fetched, one could turn to a more realistic and closer case, namely the SSC regions. While Somaliland never tires to claim self-determination as if it was its own preserve, it would at the same time deny it to the SSC regions. Worse, it went to the extent of invading and occupying Sool and its capital Lascanod. Nothing could make a mockery of this principle than this blatant double standard."......

 

Read the article here in full -- Challenging Somaliland’s Claim to Sovereignty

[Shankarooni]

Chicken scream only when the sun is about to shine

 

The more they scream the brighter it gets..

 

Throughout all my life, I have not seen a signal Somalian opposed to somaliland without using an ill tribal daydream scenario. This makes me more confidant that those who call for unity most of them are clannish and thus with very low mentality.

 

Makes me love somaliland more...

[xiinfaniin]

Originally posted by Shankarooni:

Throughout all my life, I have not seen a signal Somalian opposed to somaliland without using an ill tribal daydream scenario. This makes me more confidant that those

who call for unity most of them are clannish and thus with very low mentality.

 

Says the confident man.