Ethiopia-SL MoU: A threat to Somalia's sovereignty and regional stability

[Illyria]

Historical context: Which way to the sea?
Ethiopia has been landlocked and has sought a sea outlet intermittently for most of her history, at least since the Middle Ages. In 1776, Edward Gibbon, a renowned English historian, wrote: “Encompassed on all sides by the enemies of their religion, the Ethiopians slept near thousand years, forgetful of the world by whom they were forgotten.”6 Moreover, encouraged by the scramble for Africa among rival European powers in the nineteenth century, Emperor Menelik II of Ethiopia intensified his search for access to the sea. In 1878, in a letter to the heads of the governments of Italy, France, Germany, and England, he stated, “My road to the coast, to Zeila, Tojura, and Aden is at present closed by the Muslims.”7

Before 1952, when Eritrea (a former Italian colony on the Red Sea) was federated with Ethiopia, the eyes of Ethiopia’s leaders were fixated on the Eritrean port of Assab and the Somali port of Zeila, both on the Red Sea.8 Menelik’s efforts ended in failure. However, Emperor Haile Selassie, who ruled Ethiopia from 1930 to 1974, relentlessly sought to gain sea access. In a letter to the United Nations in 1948, he wrote: “Prior to the race of European powers to divide up Africa, Ethiopia included an extensive coastline along the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.”9 Haile Selassie tried to annex Zeila, a historical Somali port town, to Ethiopia between the late 1920s and early 1950s. To secure Zeila, he initiated a radical strategy of negotiating colonial power to exchange the Haud region for Zeila, which the current MoU is said to be centered
on, and which is adjacent to Djibouti. Haud is a large swath of Somali territory and has been part of present-day Ethiopia since the Anglo-Ethiopian treaty of 1897 when Britain ceded it to Ethiopia for the latter’s support in suppressing Somali clans.10 That attempt failed, primarily because, based on strategic interests, the colonial powers— particularly Britain and Ethiopia—failed to reach an agreement. There was also fear of repercussions from Somalis in those areas.11

 

Recommendations
For Somalia:

• It is imperative that Somalia actively assert its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Enhanced engagement with Somaliland is necessary, acknowledging the deep-seated aspirations for secession among some segments while aiming for a resolution that respects the collective will of all Somali people. Discussions should be approached with a vision for unity that accommodates diverse aspirations through inclusive governance, potentially offering broad autonomy to Somaliland. This approach would address fears of marginalization while preserving national unity and promoting cooperation

For Somaliland:

• Somaliland needs to recognize that not all communities within its territory support secession. Negotiations should be guided by realism and pragmatism, aiming for an agreement that addresses Somaliland’s legitimate concerns while acknowledging the benefits of a united Somalia. This requires moving beyond the zero-sum mentality that has prevailed over the last thirty year

For Ethiopia:

• Ethiopia’s demand for “sea access” does not justify infringing upon the sovereignty of another nation. Ethiopia is a landlocked country, and demanding territorial waters, a naval base, and a commercial port that belong to another country is an act of aggression. This could result in a prolonged conflict with Somalis both within Somalia and in the diaspora, as well as within Ethiopia itself. History has shown that Somalis have defended their territory against Ethiopian advances, notably forcing a retreat in 2006. Further, any attempt by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed to cross into Somalia could significantly bolster al-Shabaab in a manner reminiscent of the group’s emergence following Ethiopia’s previous military ventures, which ended in failure.

For the International Community:

• The international community must extend beyond mere affirmations of Somalia’s territorial integrity to actively discourage any actions that threaten Somalia’s sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity. A firmer stance against Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s aggression is required, one that emphasizes the need to respect international laws and norms. Diplomatic pressure, along with offers of mediation and support for dialogue, should be pursued vigorously, as heightened nationalism and fear have created a conducive environment for conflict.

For All Parties:

• International organizations such as the United Nations, African Union, Arab League, and Intergovernmental Authority on Development must recognize that the Memorandum of Understanding, as it stands, risks igniting an avoidable and unnecessary war. Such a conflict would likely result in the exponential and overnight metastasis of al-Shabaab, the largest and most resourceful Al-Qaeda affiliate in the Horn of Africa, and in the growth of ISIS, which has a foothold in Somalia. A cloud of war is hovering over the Horn, presenting a clear and present danger that necessitates action, not mere affirmation

https://8v90f1.p3cdn1.secureserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Ethiopias-MoU-with-Somaliland-.pdf

[Xaaji Xunjuf]

The problem is Somalia doesnt feel it has an issue with Somaliland it feels it has an issue only with  Ethiopia  at least that is what we are sensing from the bunker.. As for  Somaliland it actually believes in ay Somaliya wax kaga  xidhanyihin thats why it gave everything for the talks the past 12 years.. How ever Somalia believes it can ignore Somaliland while building up and they hope then when they strong enough they can re claim re take  Somaliland with force this was or is their ideology 

 

Ethiopia just threw Somaliland a new idea a new hope  is the deal is it more in favour of Ethiopia probably yes but  there is no altarnative offer from Somalia ever other then hagraadaamo so m wa shimbiriyoo heesa hees wanaagsan heesa

 

 

[Xaaji Xunjuf]

As for the whole  narrative that  not the entire Somaliland republic wants to be independent well that can easily be  agreed on we just put this to the test and we can hold a referendum on independence UN supervised  . if the majority of the people wants to be  with a Somaliland then we should respect this. if the majority of the people want to unite with the bunker then that should also be respected

[Illyria]

Re-read it slowly and carefully, then we shall discuss the merits of the article.

[Arafaat]

2 hours ago, Xaaji Xunjuf said:

As for the whole  narrative that  not the entire Somaliland republic wants to be independent well that can easily be  agreed on we just put this to the test and we can hold a referendum on independence UN supervised  . if the majority of the people wants to be  with a Somaliland then we should respect this. if the majority of the people want to unite with the bunker then that should also be respected

I think such a solution could be possible, but only after a period (+10 years) of SL collaborating and being part of the Somali state system, and for all politicians in the spectrum be allowed to engage as part of the system and with their communities. Such as was the case in South-Sudan, and agreed in the Arusha agreement. Toban sano ha la wada shaqeeyo in to a Union and then put the question back to the community in terms of directions. 

Laakinse maanta umadii xero jabhadeed ayee ku xidhan yihiin guarded by a bunch of colonels that only know the barrel of the gun, and putting everyone with own thoughts in to jails. you can’t have a democratic open discussion and decision making in such an environment that is closely emulating fascism. 

[Xaaji Xunjuf]

Somaliland is a democracy the presidennt was elected and he will only leave through elections the parliament is elected every one is elected  there is nothing  there for u to dislike 

 

 

[Arafaat]

3 hours ago, Illyria said:

Historical context: Which way to the sea?
Ethiopia has been landlocked and has sought a sea outlet intermittently for most of her history, at least since the Middle Ages. In 1776, Edward Gibbon, a renowned English historian, wrote: “Encompassed on all sides by the enemies of their religion, the Ethiopians slept near thousand years, forgetful of the world by whom they were forgotten.”6 Moreover, encouraged by the scramble for Africa among rival European powers in the nineteenth century, Emperor Menelik II of Ethiopia intensified his search for access to the sea. In 1878, in a letter to the heads of the governments of Italy, France, Germany, and England, he stated, “My road to the coast, to Zeila, Tojura, and Aden is at present closed by the Muslims.”7

Before 1952, when Eritrea (a former Italian colony on the Red Sea) was federated with Ethiopia, the eyes of Ethiopia’s leaders were fixated on the Eritrean port of Assab and the Somali port of Zeila, both on the Red Sea.8 Menelik’s efforts ended in failure. However, Emperor Haile Selassie, who ruled Ethiopia from 1930 to 1974, relentlessly sought to gain sea access. In a letter to the United Nations in 1948, he wrote: “Prior to the race of European powers to divide up Africa, Ethiopia included an extensive coastline along the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.”9 Haile Selassie tried to annex Zeila, a historical Somali port town, to Ethiopia between the late 1920s and early 1950s. To secure Zeila, he initiated a radical strategy of negotiating colonial power to exchange the Haud region for Zeila, which the current MoU is said to be centered
on, and which is adjacent to Djibouti. Haud is a large swath of Somali territory and has been part of present-day Ethiopia since the Anglo-Ethiopian treaty of 1897 when Britain ceded it to Ethiopia for the latter’s support in suppressing Somali clans.10 That attempt failed, primarily because, based on strategic interests, the colonial powers— particularly Britain and Ethiopia—failed to reach an agreement. There was also fear of repercussions from Somalis in those areas.11

 

Recommendations
For Somalia:

• It is imperative that Somalia actively assert its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Enhanced engagement with Somaliland is necessary, acknowledging the deep-seated aspirations for secession among some segments while aiming for a resolution that respects the collective will of all Somali people. Discussions should be approached with a vision for unity that accommodates diverse aspirations through inclusive governance, potentially offering broad autonomy to Somaliland. This approach would address fears of marginalization while preserving national unity and promoting cooperation

For Somaliland:

• Somaliland needs to recognize that not all communities within its territory support secession. Negotiations should be guided by realism and pragmatism, aiming for an agreement that addresses Somaliland’s legitimate concerns while acknowledging the benefits of a united Somalia. This requires moving beyond the zero-sum mentality that has prevailed over the last thirty year

For Ethiopia:

• Ethiopia’s demand for “sea access” does not justify infringing upon the sovereignty of another nation. Ethiopia is a landlocked country, and demanding territorial waters, a naval base, and a commercial port that belong to another country is an act of aggression. This could result in a prolonged conflict with Somalis both within Somalia and in the diaspora, as well as within Ethiopia itself. History has shown that Somalis have defended their territory against Ethiopian advances, notably forcing a retreat in 2006. Further, any attempt by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed to cross into Somalia could significantly bolster al-Shabaab in a manner reminiscent of the group’s emergence following Ethiopia’s previous military ventures, which ended in failure.

For the International Community:

• The international community must extend beyond mere affirmations of Somalia’s territorial integrity to actively discourage any actions that threaten Somalia’s sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity. A firmer stance against Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s aggression is required, one that emphasizes the need to respect international laws and norms. Diplomatic pressure, along with offers of mediation and support for dialogue, should be pursued vigorously, as heightened nationalism and fear have created a conducive environment for conflict.

For All Parties:

• International organizations such as the United Nations, African Union, Arab League, and Intergovernmental Authority on Development must recognize that the Memorandum of Understanding, as it stands, risks igniting an avoidable and unnecessary war. Such a conflict would likely result in the exponential and overnight metastasis of al-Shabaab, the largest and most resourceful Al-Qaeda affiliate in the Horn of Africa, and in the growth of ISIS, which has a foothold in Somalia. A cloud of war is hovering over the Horn, presenting a clear and present danger that necessitates action, not mere affirmation

https://8v90f1.p3cdn1.secureserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Ethiopias-MoU-with-Somaliland-.pdf

Mr.Ilyria,

It’s an excellent piece propositioning a rational and way forward based on recongnising defacto political state or status in Somaliland. The key actors or missing link here is SSC-Khaatuma, for their position is key to unraveling the overall acceptable directions of Somaliland(or the North). Approaches comparable who the Arusha agreement should be explored that have helped and played a key role for resolving the conflict between Sudan-South Sudan. 

For now it seems both Somalia and Somaliland are ignoring the main causes of the dispute, with Somalia thinking that they focus should be on Ethiopia given the limited leverage Somaliland has. Whereas Somalilands thinking is that talks and resolving things with Somalia has no added value to Somaliland, and it’s only Ethiopia and int community that can offer it what it needs. Read  this piece below on Somalia’s strategy on the issue. Confirming Somalia’s currency strategy of diplomatically targetting Ethiopia, and thinking that Somaliland has no cards or leverage in the game. 

I think both sides thinking is wrong, for they are not looking at the key causes and effects and neither portrays the political realities on the ground correctly. 
 

https://hiiraan.com/op4/2024/feb/194892/mou_itoobiya_somaliland_vs_somalia….aspx

[Arafaat]

11 minutes ago, Xaaji Xunjuf said:

Somaliland is a democracy the presidennt was elected and he will only leave through elections the parliament is elected every one is elected  there is nothing  there for u to dislike 

 

 

Xaaji, Somaliland does even control 8 out of the 23 electoral districts Somaliland itself has identified in its legal frameworks. Next to that there is a reason why u have advocated for Ethiopian base to be put in to Ceel Sheick(the Presidents native lands), as all the other regions wouldn’t accept Somalilands government decisions, hence showcasing that your ‘democratic’ control and sovereignty over all the territories is based on shaky grounds. 

[Xaaji Xunjuf]

its only good to choose for ceel sheikh thats a reason to stop the borama clan to stop crying thats onlysmart and not antagonise the borama clan

 

Somaliland only lost 2 and a half districts and those 2 and a half districts are in sool and  are laascanood district taleex district and half of the xudun district.. it still nothing to wory about prior to ina rayaale conquered laascanood we also had this issue , but we will recover SL will re take those two and a half districts in the sool region

 

 

 

 

[Arafaat]

6 hours ago, Xaaji Xunjuf said:

its only good to choose for ceel sheikh thats a reason to stop the borama clan to stop crying thats onlysmart and not antagonise the borama clan

If you start thinking from their and your clan perspectives, opinions and interests, and you sell own clans native lands to foreign companies because it’s in your clans interest and good according to your own clans perspective. what’s holding back reer Awdal to do the same and sell to whatever foreign entity? Or others for that matter along that long coastal line where many clans have native lands? 

Where is the national interest markaa, ielen clan interest ayaa badashay national interest? I am just saying try to look at issues from a broader perspective then one’s own, specially when perspectives are one dimensionally clan held, as clans perspectives can change as easily.  

[Xaaji Xunjuf]

your right there should be national interest how ever the Somaliland government  doesnt want to upset clan region  or other sort of constitencies . in my honest opinion i wouldnt lease any part of Somaliland to Ethiopia if it was up to me. How ever the Somaliland leaders and i understand where they coming from  Ethiopia today is desperate to have a sea out let  , and Somaliland is desperate to have recognition i understand where the SL governemt is coming from the only issue i have this is  they shouldnt allow Ethiopia to have a sea out let, for that will allow Somaliland to have a set back economically , unless Ethiopia is willing to give something in return like farm land in Ethiopia to be leased to Somaliland in order for Somaliland to export fruit vegies coffie and even qat who knows that could work

 

 

[Che -Guevara]

32 minutes ago, Arafaat said:

If you start thinking from their and your clan perspectives, opinions and interests, and you sell own clans native lands to foreign companies because it’s in your clans interest and good according to your own clans perspective. what’s holding back reer Awdal to do the same and sell to whatever foreign entity? Or others for that matter along that long coastal line where many clans have native lands? 

Where is the national interest markaa, ielen clan interest ayaa badashay national interest? I am just saying try to look at issues from a broader perspective then one’s own, specially when perspectives are one dimensionally clan held, as clans perspectives can change as easily.  

Xaaji and others would have us believe there's something unique about Sland. Had Hargeisa been honest with its people and others from beginning, they wouldn't be in this situation.

 

[Xaaji Xunjuf]

What u been by Honest are u saying SL leaders lied to its people  apart from Abdurahaam tuur alayaraxma raximin who never believed in the SL ideology  the rest of the SL leaders that came after him whole heartly were behind it , ina  cigaal ba yara ma ma leeyahay in between 1994 ila 2001 , but after 2001  he to gave up after the arta conference   xamaasada dadka ka badan.  Somaliland aqoonsi wa arin political ah  its not legal its not something else .. EGYPT and the Arabs have been anti Somaliland more then then the bunker can ever be . If Somaliland fell  in their geopolitical interest it was recognised in 1991, but that isnt the case. Hada imika meel laga noqda ma leh

 

 

[Illyria]

12 hours ago, Arafaat said:

Mr.Ilyria,

It’s an excellent piece propositioning a rational and way forward based on recongnising defacto political state or status in Somaliland. The key actors or missing link here is SSC-Khaatuma, for their position is key to unraveling the overall acceptable directions of Somaliland(or the North). Approaches comparable who the Arusha agreement should be explored that have helped and played a key role for resolving the conflict between Sudan-South Sudan. 

For now it seems both Somalia and Somaliland are ignoring the main causes of the dispute, with Somalia thinking that they focus should be on Ethiopia given the limited leverage Somaliland has. Whereas Somalilands thinking is that talks and resolving things with Somalia has no added value to Somaliland, and it’s only Ethiopia and int community that can offer it what it needs. Read  this piece below on Somalia’s strategy on the issue. Confirming Somalia’s currency strategy of diplomatically targetting Ethiopia, and thinking that Somaliland has no cards or leverage in the game. 

I think both sides thinking is wrong, for they are not looking at the key causes and effects and neither portrays the political realities on the ground correctly. 
 

https://hiiraan.com/op4/2024/feb/194892/mou_itoobiya_somaliland_vs_somalia….aspx

In a nutshell, we have got shifting regional balance:
    a) Somali Republic is slowly rising from the ashes, albeit
        i) SL is losing its footing with more than 60% of its claimed territories out of its control,
    b) Ethiopia is disintegrating with its three major States (Tigray almost destroyed, Amhara on fire, and Oromo on the brink) in conflict with the Federal government.

Said shift is vexing respective leaders, which gives way to their being unhinged, and thereby destabilising the entire region.

[Xaaji Xunjuf]

4 minutes ago, Illyria said:

In a nutshell, we have got shifting regional balance:
    a) Somali Republic is slowly rising from the ashes, albeit
        i) SL is losing its footing with more than 60% of its claimed territories out of its control,
    b) Ethiopia is disintegrating with its three major States (Tigray almost destroyed, Amhara on fire, and Oromo on the brink) in conflict with the Federal government.

Said shift is vexing respective leaders, which give way to their being unhinged, and thereby destabilising the entire region.

 

 

Sixty percent    SL lost  only   two districts in Sool pretty much nothing has changed it has still 85 percent  of the Territory British Somaliland  . So u dont have to overeact at all . if Somaliland lost 60 percent of its territory that means it would have lost  all of sanaag all of sool and half of Togdheer  and even parts of saaxil. When in fact it last  only two districts of Sool. Which it  will fight for to get it back . SL controls  5 out of the six capitals of all its regions  , it only lost laascanood wiich it ruled for over 16 years