Looking Back at the TFG Elections in Djibouti. Fatah and TFG parallels

[Nur]

CIA-Trained Security Chiefs Elected to the Palestinian Leadership

 

What Actually Happened in Fatah's Elections?

 

By Esam AL-Amin

 

“He is our guy.”

George W. Bush speaking of Palestinian security chief Muhammad Dahlan, June 4, 2003

 

August 14, 2009 "Counterpunch" -- The U.S. government has been meddling in the Palestinian internal affairs since at least 2003. Its effort is to transform the Palestinian national movement for liberation and independence into a more compliant or quisling government, willing to accede to Israel’s political and security demands.

 

The tactics employed by the U.S. include military, security, diplomatic, and political components. With the ascension of Hamas after the 2006 legislative election, U.S. strategy has been fixed on unraveling the election results. Its aim for a political comeback of the pro-American camp within the Palestinian body politic has been initiated with the convening of Fatah’s national conference this last week.

 

During the week of August 4, 2009, the Palestinian National Liberation Movement Fatah, convened its sixth national conference in its 44-year history. Fatahhas historically been considered the largest Palestinian faction, but that perception changed when it lost the legislative elections to Hamas in January 2006. As the group wrapped up its conference after eight days, it announced the results of its elections. The international media, particularly western outlets, framed the election as “fresh” and “new” faces ascending to power in the movement. But what actually happened in the vote?

 

Fatah’s internal structure is unlike most political parties or resistance movements. It is not hierarchical and its members’ loyalty largely follows a system of patronage and factionalism embodied in a 23-member Central Committee.

 

The Central Committee is technically supposed to reflect a system of collective leadership and the political program of a national liberation movement. Even its founder, the late Yasser Arafat, who led the organization from its inception in 1965 until his death in 2004, did not have an official title beyond that of a member of the committee and commander-in-chief of its military wing. But over time, in the eyes of many Palestinians, Fatah’s leadership has symbolized, a system of cronyism, corruption, collaboration with Israel, and political failures, especially since the Oslo process.

 

Although its internal charter calls for a national conference every four years to elect its leadership, the major questions at the eve of this conference were: Why did it take Fatah two decades to convene this one? Did the election of Fatah’s new leadership reflect the aspirations of the Palestinian people and a new and fresh approach to the political process? And finally, who are the backers of the main individuals who were recently elected to lead it?

 

Fatah’s Central Committee led by Arafat made the strategic decision in 1988 to negotiate a political settlement with Israel, and accept the United States government as the main broker. For two decades, especially in the aftermath of the 1993 Oslo accords, the Palestinian issue gradually receded from the international agenda, becoming an almost exclusive affair between the U.S, Israel, and the Palestinian leadership whether it was the PLO or after 1994, the Palestinian Authority (PA).

 

Most neutral Middle East analysts such as Robert Malley, the Middle East Program Director at the International Crisis Group, and a former National Security Council (NSC) staff member during the Clinton administration, observe that American negotiators throughout several administrations (both Democratic and Republican) have mostly adopted the Israeli point of view and placed most of the pressure on the Palestinian leadership (whether Bill Clinton with Yitzhak Rabin and Ehud Barak, or George W. Bush with Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert.)

 

During the first term of the Bush administration, Arafat, as the head of the PA, was isolated, while Washington promoted those within the Palestinian leadership such as Mahmoud Abbas (imposed on Arafat as prime minister in 2003), and former security chief Muhammad Dahlan, both of whom embraced the American strategy in the region. In 2005, Bush declared his freedom and democracy agenda, demanding elections in the Palestinian territories, and hoping for a Fatah victory to implement his vision.

 

However, the administration soon abandoned its agenda of promoting democracy in the Arab world when Hamas won a landslide victory in the January 2006 legislative elections. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice expressed shock about the results saying, “No one saw it coming.” A Department of Defense official told David Rose of Vanity Fair in 2008, “Everyone blamed everyone else,” “We sat there in the Pentagon and said, ‘Who the f*@# recommended this?’?”

 

Ever since that election, the American administration employed three different but overlapping strategies in order to undo the results. These efforts by the State Department, the White House and the Defense Department, were scantily planned and poorly coordinated.

 

Throughout 2006 and the first half of 2007, the State Department used its diplomatic resources and political muscle to topple the democratically-elect ed Palestinian government led by Hamas. In an April 2008 report, Vanity Fair disclosed that an American talking point memo emerged after a U.S. diplomat accidentally left it behind in a Palestinian Authority building in Ramallah. The document echoed Rice’s demand that Abbas dissolve the national unity government and take on Hamas.

 

Meanwhile, as detailed by Vanity Fair, neo-con and NSC deputy director Elliot Abrams was plotting a coup in Gaza against Hamas with former Gaza security chief Muhammad Dahlan in the spring of 2007. It included coordination with Israel, several Arab countries such as UAE and Jordan, payments to Dahlan of over $30 million, the training of five hundred security personnel, a campaign to destabilize Gaza, and a torture program against Hamas members and other Islamists.

 

Dahlan admitted as much to the magazine’s writer, David Rose, saying that he told his American counterpart who was pushing for a confrontation with Hamas, “If I am going to confront them, I need substantial resources. As things stand, we do not have the capability.”

 

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported on June 7, 2007, that the American administration had asked Israel to authorize a large Egyptian arms shipment, including dozens of armored cars, hundreds of armor-piercing rockets, thousands of hand grenades, and millions of rounds of ammunition. Rose explains that Abrams’s plan stressed the need to bolster Fatah’s forces in order to “deter” Hamas. According to a senior administration official the “desired outcome” was to give Abbas “the capability to take the required strategic political decisions (i.e. fulfilling the Israeli conditions for a political settlement) and dismissing the (Hamas led) cabinet, establishing an emergency cabinet.”

 

But Dick Cheney’s Middle East advisor, David Wurmser, admitted the failed effort when he told the magazine, “It look(ed) to me that what happened wasn’t so much a coup by Hamas but an attempted coup by Fatah that was pre-empted (by Hamas) before it could happen.”

 

The third effort, was mainly overseen by the Pentagon, and led by Lt. General Keith Dayton. In a speech before the pro-Israel think tank, the Washington Institute on Near East Policy (WINEP) in May 2009, he said that the Office of the U.S. Security Coordinator, which he has been leading since December 2005, is “an effort to assist the Palestinians in reforming their security services.” But according to the notes of a meeting between Dayton and a Palestinian security chief in Ramallah in early 2007, the real purpose of the mission was revealed when Dayton said, “[W]e also need to build up your forces in order to take on Hamas.”

 

Since 2007, Congress has given Dayton $161 million dollars to implement his plan. In addition, this year Congress appropriated an additional $209 million dollars to Dayton for the 2009 and 2010 fiscal years, to accelerate his program after receiving high marks from Israeli security chiefs. In the past year alone, more than 1,000 Hamas and Islamic Jihad members have been arrested and detained without trials, with many tortured and killed under interrogation, by U.S.-trained Palestinian security personnel in the West Bank. Amnesty International and many other human rights organizations have condemned these actions and called for an immediate halt to the human rights abuses of Palestinian detainees in PA prisons.

 

In his WINEP speech Dayton acknowledged this crackdown when he said, “I don't know how many of you are aware, but over the last year-and-a-half, the Palestinians have engaged upon a series of what they call security offensives throughout the West Bank, surprisingly well coordinated with the Israeli army.” He further admitted that during the 22-day Gaza war last winter, U.S.-trained Palestinian security forces prevented Palestinians in the West Bank from organizing mass protests against the Israeli army, which ironically allowed for the reduction of the Israeli military presence in the West Bank in order to redeploy those troops to Gaza. Dayton added, “As a matter of fact, a good portion of the Israeli army went off to Gaza from the West Bank— think about that for a minute, and the (Israeli military) commander (of the West Bank) was absent for eight straight days.”

 

After a failed coup and brutal military offensive failed to dislodge Hamas from Gaza, the Israeli and U.S. strategy sought to intensify its pressure against Hamas through a suffocating economic siege in Gaza, massive security detentions in the West Bank, financial squeeze in the region and political isolation internationally. Meanwhile, according to several Hamas spokesmen, including the deposed prime minister Ismael Haniyya in Gaza and political chief Khaled Meshal in Damascus, the main obstacle to any national reconciliation with Fatah has been the detention of hundreds of Hamas members and the PA’s security collaboration with the military occupation overseen by Dayton.

 

The next phase in this effort is to reinvent Fatah and present it as a viable political alternative to Hamas and other resistance movements by improving the living conditions in the West Bank in contrast to Gaza’s devastating siege. But more important, the plan envisions a new Fatah that is considered a reliable partner willing to accomodate Israel’s conditions for a political settlement. The sixth Fatah conference and accompanying elections was thus convened to dispose of its corrupt and dysfunctional image.

 

For over a year, the Central Committee, the highest body in its structure, could not agree on many major issues, including where to hold the conference (the final decision was to hold it in the occupied Palestinian territories, which means that Israel has a veto on which delegates from abroad would be allowed to participate). They also squabbled about which delegates would be appointed to the conference, which would determine the composition of the new leadership, as well as the political program and the role of armed resistance against the occupation. Abbas and his inner circle vetoed the decision of the committee, and decided to hold the conference in Bethlehem, virtually hand-picking all the participants to guarantee the election outcome.

 

Historically, the delegates to Fatah’s national conference were elected or appointed by the Central Committee, but at least fifty-one percent came from the military apparatus. Since most of the military wing has either been disbanded or wanted by the Israelis, a large number of the delegates to this conference were security personnel substituting for the military ones. This fact guaranteed that the election results would be skewed towards the security chiefs and their supporters.

 

The original number of delegates was supposed to be around 700. Then it increased to 1,250 but eventually mushroomed to 2,355. Less than ten percent were actually indirectly elected by the virtue of their positions, while the overwhelming majority was appointed by a small group in Ramallah led mainly by Abbas and other power brokers such as Dahlan and former West Bank security chief Jibreel Rujoub, who used to hang the picture of former CIA director George Tenet above his desk alongside that of Arafat.

 

The number of Central Committee members was also increased from 21 to 23, with 19 directly elected by the delegates. Abbas was to appoint four members later, but he himself was chosen by acclamation, to avoid embarrassment if he does not garner first place in a direct election. The 18 individuals who were elected at the end of the week-long conference comprised four from the “old guard” who are considered close to Abbas, and 14 new members, three of whom are former security chiefs who’ve been close to the CIA. These include Dahlan, Rujoub, and Tawfiq Tirawi, a former intelligence chief, who is currently heading a security training academy in Jericho under the supervision of Gen. Dayton.

 

From the outset, this conference was heavily tilted towards delegates from the West Bank. Unlike previous conferences, Palestinians in the Diaspora were hardly represented since Israel allowed only a few people to enter from abroad. While Gaza’s population is equal to that of the West Bank, less than 400 people were selected as delegates from Gaza, while there were over three times as many delegates from the West Bank.

 

But most of the Gaza delegates did not even attend because Hamas prevented them from leaving the strip, demanding in return that hundreds of its detained members in the West Bank be freed by the PA, which it summarily refused. In short, aside from Dahlan, who no longer lives in Gaza, not a single elected person is from or lives in Gaza. This prompted the entire Fatah leadership in Gaza, including former Central Committee member Zakariya al-Agha, to resign en mass one day after the conference, protesting not only the results, but also the whole election process.

 

Similarly, Fatah members abroad did not fare well. Only two people were elected to the Central Committee, though more than two-thirds of Palestinians (eight million) live outside of the Palestinian territories, many in squalid refugee camps, with the “right of return”, considered a hot- button issue in future negotiations, up in the air. On the other hand, the overwhelming majority of the new members were either from the West Bank or already living in Ramallah as part of Abbas’ closest aides, affirming the American-led ‘West Bank first’ strategy.

 

Some of the historic old guard who oppose Abbas’s political program such as Central Committee secretary Farouk Kaddoumi or Hani Al-Hassan did not even attend or run as candidates. Kaddoumi condemned the conference, questioned its legitimacy, and went as far as accusing Abbas and Dahlan of plotting with the Israelis to poison Arafat, eventually causing his death.

 

Other former members who ran as candidates were defeated and cried foul. Former prime minister and negotiator Ahmad Qurai (Abu Alaa) questioned the credentials of the delegates and the integrity of the election procedure. When Abbas chief of staff, Tayeb Abdel-Rahim lost, he demanded a recount and was eventually declared a winner, after the election committee claimed he was actually tied for last. Many delegates, especially female candidates, all of whom lost, criticized this blatant cronyism. Nevertheless, several popular and “clean” candidates were able to win a seat such as Marwan Bargouthi, who is serving five life sentences in Israel, and Mahmoud Al-Aloul, a former mayor of Nablus.

 

As Palestinians watched this conference unfold, many were hoping that it would be the beginning of a national reconciliation and the establishment of a unity government. However, it seems that as a result of this conference Fatah itself may further disintegrate, as its Gaza leaders and Abu Alaa are threatening to launch a new faction called “Fatah Awakening,” further increasing division and tension within the Palestinian ranks.

 

The next step in the strategy of the pro-American camp is to hold presidential and legislative elections in the Palestinian territories next January, hoping to present a rejuvenated Fatah as an alternative to Hamas and other resistance movements. Jonathan Steele of the Guardian further exposed on June 22, 2007 the U.S. "hard coup" of June ’07, as well as its political strategy. He detailed US officials' conversations with several Arab regimes. These were, among others, “ ‘to maintain President Abbas and Fatah as the center of gravity on the Palestinian scene’, ‘avoid wasting time in accommodating Hamas,’ ‘undermining Hamas’s political status,’ and ‘calling for early elections.’”

 

In the words of Gen. Dayton, the Palestinian personnel trained by the U.S pledge after their graduation that they “were not sent here to learn how to fight Israel, but were rather sent here to learn how to keep law and order.” The main purpose of these security battalions is to halt any resistance to or rejection of the occupation including non-violent means. He then added that senior Israeli military commanders frequently ask him, "How many more of these new Palestinians can you generate, and how quickly?”

 

Many of the questions, posed by ordinary Palestinians before the conference, remain unanswered. What is Fatah’s political program in light of the current Israeli intransigence and pre-conditions? What of national reconciliation with other Palestinian factions and the establishment of a national unity government? What is the role of resistance against the occupation, the suffocating siege against Gaza, and most importantly, the continuous collaboration with the Israeli security agencies and military against their own citizens?

 

These questions persist while Israel’s occupation and its brutal policies, the expansion of settlements, the separation wall, the detention of over 11,000 Palestinians, the expropriation of land, the depopulation of East Jerusalem’s Palestinian residents, and the denial of Palestinian refugees’ right of return, continue unabated.

 

Simply put, the U.S. wants a Palestinian leadership that will answer these questions in a way that is satisfactory to Israel. As one State Department official said to Vanity Fair regarding American objectives in the Israeli-Palestinian struggle, “[W]e care about results, and [we support] whatever son of a b..tch [w]e have to support. Dahlan was the son of a b..tch we happened to know best.”

[Abu-Salman]

Walaal, is there a parallel between Sh C. janaqow/Prof Sh Cadow/Sh Sharif & co, islamically learned super-achievers and a corrupt Fatah who was rejected through the last election?

 

Did not the former forsake their comfortable routine and were already known for assisting their compatriots or calling for Shariah implementation while the latter Fatah & co were solely resting on the legacy of Arafat?

 

What country other than Djibouti would have been an "ideal" place to negociate an Ethiopian retreat and a more legitimate authority?

 

Is there a figure more consensual and able to unite us than Sh Sharif, who never ceases urging for negociations, a figure which will likely get fuller support?

 

Is fighting now the only alternative for a "perfectly transparent" process or should we find a ulamas-mediated compromise granted the humanitarian catastrophe as well as the genocide raging in oga-denia?

[Haatu]

well replied

[Fabregas]

Originally posted by Abu-Salman:

Walaal, is there a parallel between Sh C. janaqow/Prof Sh Cadow/Sh Sharif & co, islamically learned super-achievers and a corrupt Fatah who was rejected through the last election?

 

The former have more Islamic knowledge, which probably makes their situation even worser.

[Nur]

Akhi Al Xabib Abu Salman

 

 

You write: Walaal, is there a parallel between Sh C. janaqow/Prof Sh Cadow/Sh Sharif & co, islamically learned super-achievers and a corrupt Fatah who was rejected through the last election?

 

I wouldn't say "Islamically Learned", and the description of "Super "Achievers" may fit in the case of Brother Ibrahim only ( Two Masters and a PHD in Education and Political Science). The Islamicaly learned are busy teaching our people, Jazaahumullahu Kheiran.

 

I think there are parallels, but not a complete symmetry. The parallels are in the following perspectives:

 

1. Both Organizations are infiltrated by known agents of foreign interests.

 

2. Both Organizations are holding their Election under occupation.

 

3. Both Organizations are being remotely directed, they ave no free will.

 

4. Both Organizations are out of touch with their peoples needs and aspirations of total freedom.

 

 

You write:

 

Did not the former forsake their comfortable routine and were already known for assisting their compatriots or calling for Shariah implementation while the latter Fatah & co were solely resting on the legacy of Arafat?

 

You know I was a supporter of the Islamic Courts from day one, my thread on the first page is a permanent testament. But, in Islam, we dont follow people, people are prone to make errors of judgement, we follow the Quraan and Sunnah, thats how we know who to follow.

 

You write:

 

What country other than Djibouti would have been an "ideal" place to negociate an Ethiopian retreat and a more legitimate authority?

 

Somalia is so large, dont tell me there is no single safe place to hold a meeting if we care to be really free of outside influence of our internal affairs. Besides, would you negotiate with a rapist or a thief while in your house? negotiations are an option when you have other options, not when you are confined under occupation and molestation.

 

 

You write:

 

 

Is there a figure more consensual and able to unite us than Sh Sharif, who never ceases urging for negotiations, a figure which will likely get fuller support?

 

I am upset with you brother Abu Salman, how can you forget about me ? Seriously though, the issue is not about uniting Somalis, as most of them are already united in their desire for Islam, the problem is the few who reside outside of Somalia inconvenienced by not being able to conduct business in Somalia or the Warlords, of course with the Support of Client State Ethiopia, and the window dressing African Union and UN.

 

 

You write:

 

Is fighting now the only alternative for a "perfectly transparent" process or should we find a ulamas-mediated compromise granted the humanitarian catastrophe as well as the genocide raging in oga-denia?

 

If you can find a totally free Ulima not afraid speaking their minds, I am all for their wisdom, but where are they? I think they are in the Bushes of Somalia, and there is a tag on their heads by the warlords.

 

 

Nur

[xiinfaniin]

Sharif’s government is trying to build a nation while its opponents are tirelessly trying to destroy what Sharif is building. Sharif’s government recognizes its opponents and tries to engage with them in a peaceful manner. Alshabaab wants considers Sharif’s government dawladah riddah and fights them on that theological ground.

 

There are no parallels here. To be sure one can always draw false parallels when none can be found.

 

An enemy that’s resolved to permanent take Palestinian land occupies Palestine close to hundred years. Somalia though a failed state is not an occupied land. The reason it failed is primarily due to internal unrest, and not necessarily solely by outside occupation. Fatah is a decidedly secular group, Sharif’s group and even most of his Somali allies have political orientation that is Islamic in nature. Jabbuuti hosted a reconciliation conference whose outcome was the departure of Ethiopian troops from Xamar. Hence the reason the war still is raging in Xamar is not because of occupation.

 

 

Fatah claimed political legitimacy when it was voted out. Fatah started the war. Sharif won the parliamentarian election hosted by Jabbuuti where all were invited. Alshabaab boycotted the peace conference in Jabbuuti, the subsequent political outcome and started the war to topple Sharif.

[Abu-Salman]

Was not Somalis internal rifts the lever historically exploited by Ethiopia and its clients in order to prolong chaos and suffering?

 

Is thus not reconciliation and a consensual government all the more required?

 

Which precise Somali location other than Djibouti was considered unanimously safe and neutral enough by all interested parties?

 

Beyond accusations on particular figures suddenly "losing" their free-will or popular support, is it not a fact that both local and international Ulamas have welcomed the Djbouti process as a major step forward, while the new TFG is ever eager for a pacific settlement?

 

What other practical alternatives remain to mitigate the unprecedented humanitarian situation, avert further foreign invasions as well as Somalis becoming disenchanted with claims to Shariah implementation (whose precondition is an Islamic authority convincing the whole country)?

 

 

Finalemente, and most crucially, why those advocating for an alternative, if there is one, get a consensus from the most learned Ulamas, both in Somalia and elsewhere, ya akhi Nur?

[Nur]

Akhi Xiin

 

You write:

 

An enemy that’s resolved to permanent take Palestinian land occupies Palestine close to hundred years. Somalia though a failed state is not an occupied land.

 

I take this statement as "Politically Correct", since you have written off Western Somalia occupied by Ethiopia as an Ethiopian Territory?

 

Which Somali government have officially relinquished the idea of a United Somalia which includes Western Somalia? the late Siad Barre was a hero in this regard standing tall towering over political pygmies masquerading as peace negotiators with an enemy that is burning Somali Villages in Western Somalia, raping our women wholesale, killing our children as per Human Rights Watch Report.

 

The problem with politics is that those involved in this profession become very creative and hallucinated like artists, they paint pictures far from reality of what is on the ground, if you follow them closely, you wouldn't know the difference between facts and fiction. If politicians serve anything, its often their personal interests, not their nations. Calling a spade a spade is what is required in Somalia brother.

 

Shareef's government has given away a nation and served its rival Ethiopia much better than its own army who is practically ruling most of Somalia's self declared regions, he has divided the unity of the resistance, sold the soul of a nation that is not used to bow for invaders. Somalia under Shareef will serve the interests of Ethiopia and the US more than that of its people. If not, why are they so much supportive of his government?

 

Djibouti's election was a warlord election process, Sharief was added for legitimizing criminal warlords and weakening the resistance by causing internal division. Djibouti as you know is home to US East African Military Operations that works in concert with Ethiopia who illegally invaded and continues to invade Somalia with an American Support, As we speak, US and Nato are struggling to make a mock elections in occupied Afghanistan, why don't they hold the elections in nearby Baghdad? it would be as legitimate as Shareefs government?

 

 

Abu Salman brother

 

Internal Somali rifts was created by Somalia enemies, cant you see that the TFG is based on 4.5 Clan politics that are not allowed in the West?.

 

Reconciliation is good, but not when an enemy with an interest in your division and chaos is looking over your shoulder in your own house and clearly supporting criminal warlords who have kept Somalia captive in chaos for the last 18 years.

 

 

Akhi Abu Salman you ask

 

Finalemente, and most crucially, why those advocating for an alternative, if there is one, get a consensus from the most learned Ulamas, both in Somalia and elsewhere, ya akhi Nur?

 

 

I assume that you mean Why DON'T they get a Consensus

 

Brother, Somalis want to be free from foreign invasions and occupations. Our Ulima have spoken, they advised Shareef to expel the African Merceneries of Uganda and Burundi out of Somalia in order to hold reconciliation, which he refused just like Abdullahi Yusuf, and they have asked the resistance to sit with the Shareef faction of the Islamic Courts Union who is now in alliance with the Criminal Warlords coalition. The problem is that the more Shareef tries to please foreign players, the more that he will radicalize unaffected Somalis.

 

 

Nur

[Kashafa]

^^ Zaadakallahu cilman wa camalan, yaa Shaykh-ul-SOL, as always, you make short work of the flimsy arguments of our brothers who are suffering from jah-wareer, wahan, iyo xubul-dunya(refer to the xadeeth, ghuthaa ka ghuthaa al-sayl). To these fear-stricken brothers, who whimper like whipped dogs at the specter of Ethiopia and it's allies, to them I dedicate these ayahs:

 

 

I will add my input when time permits inshallah.

[xiinfaniin]

Nur,

Somalia, the republic, is NOT occupied. It FAILED but not occupied. That is a fact, not a fiction. What took Somalia down is not foreign occupation. Somalis took Somalia down. They overthrew a legitimate government without thinking through what the alternative would be. After the government fell, instead of holding the country together, they started killing the innocent, burning the villages, starving the needy, ultimately destroying a beautiful capital, causing unparalleled mass expulsion of the residents of Mogadishu. The cascade continued and poured unto other major cities in the south…it still continues.

 

Emotions and clichés aside, ****** is a Somali land occupied by Ethiopia, just like Golan Heights is a Syrian land occupied by Israel. But Syria yaa Nur is not occupied. The analogy may be a bit off still the point is made. Somalia is a sovereign nation that tragically lost its center. It’ s ridiculous to act like disadvantaged rebel group when you are a nation state.

 

And if by resistance you meant Alshabaab, you are endorsing the wrong group. You can confuse yourself thinking those whom oppose Sharif are in the business of liberating Somalia, but the fact remains that they are indeed lunatics on the fringe of Islamic theology, an ignorant bunch who have no clue what Islamic governance looks like. As they kill and maim, they too will be killed and maimed. It will be ugly, and wont please those who would like Somalia back. This group is fighting current world order using Somalia as a stage. And Somalia does not need that. It has no capacity to do so.

 

It’s good to know however that your alternative for Somalia is alshabaab, those whom you called resistance group. Doodaadu meel la qabtay yeelanaysaa, noqon mayso raggaan damcay inaan la jeex jeexo oo sidii nin saliid macsaro marsan iga siibtey.

 

Sharifkii dirintiisa ha la tago, oo halkaa bun ka ha lagu cuno weeyye taan wadnaa

[Nur]

Akhi al kareem Xiin

 

You write:

 

Somalia, the republic, is NOT occupied. It FAILED but not occupied.

 

I fail to see a Republic, and if the Ethiopian hegemony ( coming and going inside Somalia as they please ) is not an occupation, I respect your choice of definition, if the two of us who understand what Sovereignty means can not agree on its practical manifestation in real life, I suspect that we are in for a long night before we see the sunshine.

 

You write;

 

What took Somalia down is not foreign occupation.

 

I guess that makes Meles Zenawi happy for not being accused of invading to overthrow the short lived ICU government of Sharif and Dahir Aweis in 2006!

 

 

You write:

 

 

Somalis took Somalia down. They overthrew a legitimate government without thinking through what the alternative would be.

 

Any chance that these Somalis who took Somalia down are the current Warlord Chiefs in Sharif's government, more than once, and who led Ethiopia to occupy Somalia when the ICU chased them away? and now you are championing them as peacemakers that we must follow? Akhi, if you can't say the whole truth, don't say any.

 

 

You write:

 

After the government fell,

 

By The Ethiopians and their Warlord allies!

 

 

You write:

 

 

instead of holding the country together

 

Tangential departure from truth!

 

 

You write:

 

 

they started:

 

1. killing the innocent, ( Collateral Damages by the Ethiopians and the Ugandan and Burundi Merceneries)?

 

2. burning the villages, ( Ethiopians in Western somalia)?

 

3. starving the needy, (BY Occupiers who need to come as aid donors)

 

4. ultimately destroying a beautiful capital, This one is the best! The Shabaab, destroyed a Beautiful Mogadishu, Not the Warlords, Not the Ethiopians, Not the Ugandan Mercenaries!

 

5. causing unparalleled mass expulsion of the residents of Mogadishu. The cascade continued and poured unto other major cities in the south…it still continues. ( I thought that in international law , this phenomena is called Collective punishment, when all civilians are targeted to create a rift between them and their resistance.

 

 

Brother, are these the Warlords, Ethiopians and the African Union? or do you mean that resistance against their occupation and molestation of our nation caused these crimes as a thoughtless futile exercise ?

 

Do you mean, if only the Crazy Shabaab, laid down their weapons, followed the Wise Shareef government and their clans, that today, we would have been a safe, Sovereign nation? Brother, you need to smell fresh camel milk, if it was not for the Shabaab card, Sharif wouldn't have been of any use for the regional chess players and King Makers, he was Selected to weaken the resistance, and divide their unity in order to realize their regional strategic plan that went haywire due to the incompetency of their clients.

 

Brother, you are tuning to the wrong channels for information, if you really believe what you are writing, my sincere advice for you is balance it by listening to those you hate, may be, you will find out that you have been misled by the warlord and their friendly media spewing lies as a form of alternative propaganda war which, as a learned person, you should suspect, at least give it a thought.

 

you write;

 

 

Emotions and clichés aside, Western Somalia is a Somali land occupied by Ethiopia, just like Golan Heights is a Syrian land occupied by Israel. But Syria yaa Nur is not occupied.

 

 

Akhi al xabiib, I am bit confused here, please simplify for me your statements logically.

 

1. Golan Heights is part of Syria

 

2. Golan Heights is Occupied By Israel

 

3. But, Syria, IS NOT OCCUPIED?

 

 

Brother, if an inch of a nation is occupied, the entire nation is occupied. Forget our Western Somalia under Ethiopian Occupation, I ask you, and Allah is our witness in the day of judgement,

 

A. Is Somalia Today A Sovereign Nation?

 

B. Does Ethiopian incursions constitute an infringement of territorial integrity of Somalia?

 

C. Or do you believe that Sheikh Sharif and His warlord Parliament have approved while free, the Brotherly Civilized Ethiopian Incursions into Somalia to flush out the Barbarian blood thirsty Shabaab bad boys, who kill, the "innocent", destroy our country and are the root of all of Somalia's problems and evil?

 

 

You write:

 

It’ s ridiculous to act like disadvantaged rebel group when you are a nation state.

 

Brother, How do nations act? specially when their military who stood as the best in Black Africa has been reduced to a ragtag clan loyal militia by the very people you are championing as "Government"? also enlighten me yaa akhi al kareem, if you can build a Sovereign nation with the assistance of a nation whose interest is the inverse of tha of Somalia's? A Weak divided Somalia is Ethiopia's strategic objective, and Shariif and Company are their bad and corrupt contractors.

 

 

You write:

 

And if by resistance you meant Alshabaab, you are endorsing the wrong group.

 

I mean by "resistance" any Somali who surrenders to Allah alone, and never to anyone else.

 

You write:

 

 

You can confuse yourself thinking those whom oppose Sharif are in the business of liberating Somalia, but the fact remains that they are indeed lunatics on the fringe of Islamic theology, an ignorant bunch who have no clue what Islamic governance looks like

 

 

Brother, I oppose Sharif and his government, He is no Prophet, Nor a Messiah, I did not elect him, like millions of somalis, and nor does he represent me in any sense, he represents the interests of those who paved his way to assume a make-believe leadership, I further disapprove his policies, and choice of allies, local and international, you have read my posts for a long time, do I sound that I am out to lunch?

 

Brother, my advice to you as a Muslim is to disengage your full throttle of emotional Salvos and unsubstantiated allegations, a little bit, Allah says in Quraan, " Do not allow your hatred to a group, make you unjust (in your allegations), Be Just, that is closer to Taqwaa"

 

 

You write:

 

As they kill and maim, they too will be killed and maimed.

 

This is a first for me brother, this does not sound like my brother Xiin the wise, and consensus making Sheikh. You have been on the side lines like me as a critic, but I sense that lately, and against my disbelief, that you have taken a personal ownership of enmity toward anyone who opposes Sharif, and specially the Resistance and dissent groups, both political and armed wings. To speak this way about the Shabab, who together with other resistance groups helped ending the Ethiopian presence in Benadir, and forgive 15 years of warlord and their Ethiopian masters well documented crimes against humanity, shows deep fractures in your reality lenses, its about time, you readjusted your vision brother. If you are predicting that the TFG Warlords will kill and maim the Shabaab, Allah is watching, and Allah will decide who is his ally and who is the enemy of Allah, so sit back and wait, because I am waiting for your predictions. " Fantadhir, innahum muntadhiroon"

 

 

Youw Write:

 

It will be ugly, and wont please those who would like Somalia back. This group is fighting current world order using Somalia as a stage. And Somalia does not need that. It has no capacity to do so.

 

 

Brother, There is a single ORDER in this world, that of Allah, every other ORDER that is not connected to Allah as a source, is as flimsy as a spider's web, and those who seek protection from such an ORDER, are seeking protection from that flimsy spiders web, [b} Dacufal taalibu wal matluub[/b]

 

 

You write:

 

It’s good to know however that your alternative for Somalia is alshabaab, those whom you called resistance group. Doodaadu meel la qabtay yeelanaysaa, noqon mayso raggaan damcay inaan la jeex jeexo oo sidii nin saliid macsaro marsan iga siibtey.

 

 

Walaal, Allah wuxuu leeyahay: " Haddad wax is ku qabataan, u celiya Allah ( Kitaabkiisa) iyo Rasuulka ( Sunnadiisa), haddaan labadeennu xaqdoon nahay, waxaan shaki ku jirin inaan isku saf noqon doonno, Allah ayaan noo wada baryayaa inuu na wada hadeeyo, xaqana noo wada tuso, xaq ahaan, baatilkana noo wada tuso baatil ahaan, naguna kulmiyo waddada toosan uu raalli ka yahay, gaaladu haba nacaane.

 

 

Nur

[xiinfaniin]

Adduunyo!

 

First off, it is not my style to comment every line you write. So forgive me for not doing so.

 

You need to pay attention here Nur. Somalia is not occupied. No matter how you put it or whether you inject Ethiopia in to this discussion Somalis are primarily responsible for taking Somalia down. That they have been sustained by external powers seeking to exploit the opportunity Somalis afforded them is a secondary matter. Syria lost Golan Heights ya Nur and that does not mean Syria is occupied or lost its sovereignty as a nation state. This is elementary Wallaahi. Somalia is not occupied. Ethiopian incursions represent the political and security manifestations of a state that lost its center.

 

But all of that, including the customary mention of Zenawi in almost every topic, is discussing on the periphery of the Somali conflict. Sharif, warlords, secessionists, ahlu sunnah wal jamaacah, PL, and alshabaab are Somalis. Not withstanding alshabaab’s expedient fatwas, these entities are all Muslims. What you are supporting (you can say otherwise but you are supporting a fringe group that has rejected every effort to settle this conflict since the birth of Sharif’s tfg) is not an alternative at all. What you call resistance is a reactionary group that espouses ideological teachings that are militaristic in nature, and completely out of line with how a conflict amongst Muslims is resolved. Even worse, their objectives are unreasonably retaliatory in nature, not at all conducive to the bigger masaalix of the Ummah including security and stability in the region. They attacked an entity that was in its infancy, militarily weak and politically fragile in the hope to topple it, forcing it to seek outside help in more pronounced fashion. That is precisely the reason the flow of Somali refugees continues even after Ethiopian troops withdrew. Not sure what the source of your protest was but when I said as alshabaab kill and maim, they will be killed and maimed, I was speaking to a reality on the ground. It’s the nature of things yaa Nur. Every action, foolish or otherwise has a reaction. Alshabaab and the militaristic policies they chose are breathing into life a warlord system that has been more or less diminishing. This warlord phenomenon is showing vital signs of life. And the irony is this uncompromising group, alshabaab that is, seems to be offering all the excuses, security or otherwise, for those who would like Somalia down.

 

Speaking of world order, I can’t believe you are resorting quranic reference to debunk that statement of mine. The world order is a reality ya Nur. It has a political, economic and military ramifications. Challenging it I don’t mind. Denying it yaa Nur is not an option. But choosing Somalia to down this well-oiled regime is a nonstarter. It’s unwise. Unrealistic. It defies the sunan of Allah. One should not call out for a dual whose task one is ill prepared.

 

In the big scheme of things, even this world order is within Allah’s plan. Perhaps it will take a gradual plan to exact a more fairer order.

 

ducada aamiin

[Nur]

Xiin bro.

 

Lets agree to disagree here, Somalia is NOT Sovereign! you need to prove that it is! If Not Sovereign, it follows that its occupied, geographically and unfortunately, intellectually.

 

Blaming the victim is not new, if one lowers his guard and a thief steals his property, we can always blame the victim, the reality is that our own evil in the form of the Warlords, was strengthened by foreign interests that will never allow Sovereignty for Somalia, so, it comes to two choices:

 

1. Wishy washy expectations that playing politics will soften the situation for Sharifs Islamic state to take root (under Ethiopian Hegemony, (Sorry, I cant help sticking Ethiopia everywhere)

 

2. To resist aggressive violation of our freedom and a territorial integrity to live the life we chose for ourselves.

 

 

I have never suggested that Sharif is Not Somali, nor His criminal warlords who have lately resorted to create a secterian Sufi-Salafi clan warlordism, which is what they do best and benefit from. My take was that the resistance has a legitimate reason for not joining a government that was established by Somalia's arch-enemy Ethiopia, and a government who includes known War criminals, and foreign paid agents. If this is not true, please explain to me , I am all ears, or eyes in this case.

 

Its rather uncalled for you to call names, Foolish and Reactionary which is a Communist era title, why not call them the current "terrorist" label that is labeled anyone who has a legitimate unaddressed grievance by those who are bent on oppressing them.

 

The fallacy with your logic stems from what you consider Masaalix, which is a topic we discussed before when you posted the Sheikhs article and I criticized it, and subsequently you dropped it. I don't think that the Prophet SAWS would have tolerated the torture of Al Yaser, or the misery of struggle during the 23 years for the purpose of establishing Islam in Arabia, if the Maslaxa was for people to have good food and safety only.

 

Brother, I will assure you that real safety is not to compromise on establishing Islam in Somalia, with full Sovereignty and at peace with ourselves and the world, but through strength, and not through weakness. Allah SWT says, that Security belongs to those who believe in Allah, and who have not corrupted their belief with oppression and injustice which was the argument Allah gave to Prophet Abraham when His people argued with him on the dangers of not surrendering to other than Allah, and in your case ( The New World Order), which I see as the epitome of injustice and oppression of the weak and defenseless in Somalia.

 

Brother, you seem that you cant get over the fact that Sharif is not wanted in Somalia, at least by a large percentage of the people, he torpedoed himself when he single handedly entered into an agreement with Ethiopia as if the rest did not count. Shareef stole the drum of Somali Statehood, he finds very difficult to find a place to beat so his warlord clowns can dance to its tune, hence, the reason why the Shabaab are spoilers of his party, literally his political party.

 

I really don't care about your wishes for the Shabab or for all of Sharif's adversaries, but, its unimaginable for you to label them as more evil than the warlords. I have yet to see you criticize their gruesome actions of the past 18 years and continuing, or even to show even handedness in your criticism. As I can see, you seem to have taken a clear position, that all those who board Sharif-Noah's arch are good, and all those who are left behind will perish. Let us wait and see brother, I have seen sobering revelations materialize before my eyes in the past ten years that I can humbly say, that it ain't over until its over.

 

 

As for the New World Order, I see things through an Islamic lens, Order is what Allah ordains, and there is no order in what is known as world order, its disorder and thats the stark reality. If you had lived with Abraham, I think that you would have discouraged him from demolishing their false Gods which you see as "foolish" as the what the Shabab are said to have done.

 

I have no doubt that events that led to the rise of Islamic Courts were Allah's plan to show us that collectively we can rid the nation of the evil of warlords, and that living under the auspices of the Sharia is possible.

 

Nur

[Abu-Salman]

I think there is no need to lose our focus as we all agree here on the Fundamentals:

 

 

1- Somalis land, ie in Oga-denia, is occupied with the blessing of Western powers; however, and despite any present incursion, Somalia frontiers are recognized and could be secured through a consensual government.

 

 

2- Somalis, however all Muslims, with their clan and others lines of division, and more generally level of Islamic and moral awareness, are clearly the prime responsible of this tragedy; however, that lever has been and is still exploited by foreign interests.

 

 

3- Only a sound state, largely supported internally, could gather the necessary wherewithal and prepare us for effective resistance, in accordance with Qur'aanic injunctions.

 

 

5- Finally, only the unanimously respected Ulamas, whether they be Somalis or non-Somalis, could interpret the Qur'aan and Sunnah for a settlement.

 

 

What it should then be really about is the latter opinions and how to reconcile them...Fiqh rather than politics!

[xiinfaniin]

I accept your offer to agree to disagree.

 

We live in two different realities. In my reality Somalia is not occupied and its misery stems from the fact it failed due to internal strife, which is political in nature.

 

With all due respect understanding the current world order does not put me in league with those who were hesitant to accept Abraham’s message. Such simplistic thinking is what pulling Somalia back from the race toward peace and stability.

 

On the bigger picture, and when things are put in context, Somalis are not oppressed group, and Ethiopia is not an empire capable of subjugating Somalis in Somalia. The fall of Somali state did not start in 2006. Emergence of Islamic courts did not end the Somali civil war; it only tamed one city and its environs. The fall started in 1991, and Ethiopia was not involved in a significant way. In fact a two rebel groups entered their respective capitals roughly at the same time, Aydid headed one group, and Zenawi was the leader of the other. As the Mingeste regime fled, and Zenawi militia entered Adis, Ethiopians kept and took care their institutions they served their ministries and institutions, loyally, and meekly staying on their capacities, seemingly resigned to their fate. The outcome was starkly different in Mogadishu ya Nur. As Siyad’s regime fell, retreating soldiers robbed off what they could from national institutions while Aydid’s militia raced for their share of the loot. As the populace vacated the city, and the order of governance collapsed, the killing of innocent (at times mass execution of entire communities) started. Within few years time, the national treasures were sold to outside vendors, government buildings scrapped, and the symbols of Somalis struggle for independence torn down, skinned for its precious metals. And well before that, the regime itself committed atrocities that sewed the seed of the 1991 destruction. In Hargeysa, in other places, the memory of the infamous aerial offense is still fresh. But so was the case in Ethiopia’s toppled regime. As you can see however while in Ethiopia a regime was replaced, in Somalia a nation was destroyed. I leave others to dwell on conspiracy theories but I cannot help but observe that the tribal nature of Somalis and the injustices and political grievances inherited from the previous regime played a major role. And that mistrust does still exist. Where I am going with this is that it’s easy to lump events together, it’s easy to assign blames to other forces, but the roots of Somali civil war is known, and all the efforts to rewrite it or deny will be futile. Somalia’s conflict is political in nature hence what Somalia needs are not more wars to liberate occupied swaths of land but it needs a sound understanding of the roots of its conflict and a political will to reconcile its desperate political entities so the country can come back again. When the state gets back on its feet, and a functioning government takes hold, other issues of national interest can be taken up and prioritized.

 

Awoowe as I said before Sharif and current TFG is a political arrangement that can be improved. It’s not Noah’s arc as you sarcastically referred to. It’s however a departure point from which a reconciliation process can commence. It does not desire to overpower its adversaries, and if alshabaab is militarily defeated they have themselves to blame for they rushed a war that was unnecessary and not needed. Ahlu sunnah wal jinni is alshabaab sibling, they were intellectually defeated two decades ago, and have been awaken delivered to political victory by alshabaab’s extremist approaches in demolishing graves that only contain bones of dead Muslims.

 

Finally on the masaalix Ummah matter, I did not remember dropping a discussion if I did accept my belated apologies and please refresh my memory what was the topic you referring to. But to say Muhammad (scw) did not consider the safety of his followers as was manifested in his approaches in that era is utterly untrue ya Nur. Even the Quran makes the same point in line with Muhammad’s Mecca policy (law tazayalluu lacathabna ladiina kafaruu). In fact life is a sacred being in quran, saving one life equals saving the entire humanity, and killing it is akin to killing the whole humanity. There are exceptions of course but this alshabaab notion of easily killing and taking innocent lives while aspiring for lofty objectives is deeply flawed one.

 

You accuse me of being harsh on alshabaab,and it’s true that I was and still am a firm critic of their misguided policies and their lack of consideration of the political context in which they operate. I grant you that. But accusing me of not speaking out against warlords and their behaviors when they were relevant in Somali politics is to put it mildly a misplace blame. Obviously I don’t consider Sharif a warlord. I consider him a Somali leader who has a good heart and right ideas. His entity is realistic political arrangement, and as I said many times it can be vastly improved. Opposing it because hebel iyo hebel baa ku jira waa childish attitude.

 

Shariicah will take hold when responsible Islamic system is put in place, and that will take time, but insha Allah it will gradually come to fruition. Makeshift courts and arbitrary execution do not represent the implementation of Shariicah Islamiyah. Shariicah requires a consenting critical mass, competent jurists, and a reasonable judicial infrastructure. It requires more than enthusiastic followers. It requires knowledge and fiqh.