Independent Somalia: the state that never was

[BiLaaL]

As usual the reporter makes numerous, inaccurate assertions. One rather curios assertion he makes is about the lack of a genuine liberation movement in Somalia prior to Italy's withdrawal. This will come as a surprise to most Somalis who believe that SYL and its founders earned us our freedom from colonial rule.

 

Not only were SYL dishonest about their achievements but a

I recently came across paints its members as a bunch of corrupt individuals - as evidenced by the tactics SYL members employed to win seats in the elections which immediately followed our independence.

 

The truth behind SYL may not be as clear cut as we've been led to believe. As difficult as it is, Somalis will one day have to question the various myths surrounding SYL and its actual role in the liberation struggle.

 

 

Independent Somalia: the state that never was

 

by Jean-Marc Mojon Jean-marc Mojon– Tue Feb 16, 11:28 pm ET

 

NAIROBI (AFP) – When Virginio Bresolin passed away recently in Merka, a coastal Somali city run by Al Qaeda-inspired rebels, so did the last of a generation of Italians who emigrated under Mussolini.

 

He worked as a blacksmith, spoke fluent Somali and rusty Italian, and few people noticed when he died.

 

Fifty years after independence, indifference characterises how most feel about the former colonial ruler of Somalia, a country where 60 percent of the population is under 18 and 80 percent has known nothing but conflict.

 

Abdullahi Halane Mohamoud, a 62-year-old Merka resident, hardly takes issue with the Italians invading in the first place but only seems to regret that there wasn't more in it for Somalis.

 

"Italian colonisation only used people as servants and never provided proper education opportunities. Most people who lived during that time were left illiterate," he said.

 

Somalia's independence started comparatively well and in 1967 even produced the first post-colonial African leader to step down gracefully.

 

Adan Abdulle Osman accepted his electoral defeat, transferred power to Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke and retired to his farm near Merka, where he died in 2007, aged 99.

 

The handover ceremony took place in the garden of Villa Somalia, the former residence of Italian colonial governors and now the fortified redoubt from which the country's Islamist president is battling even more Islamist rebels.

 

Somalia has been mired in violence for three decades and is now best known to the outside world for being the place that inspired the Hollywood war movie "Black Hawk Down" and the reason the term "failed state" had to be coined.

 

Like any colonisation, Italy's left scars in Somalia too.

 

One instance of colonial oppression vividly remembered by many older Somalis is the construction of a canal still known as Asayle -- a Somali world for a mourning veil -- in reference to the men decimated by forced labour there.

 

"My uncle worked there and has told me harrowing tales. He used to say that officers would trample on their backs when crossing the water channel to avoid the mud," said Mohamed Abdi Elmi, 56.

 

But Somalia's case was very different from most others on the continent, as evidenced notably by the nation's "three independences".

 

In November 1949, Somalia was granted independence by the United Nations but placed under an Italian-led trusteeship.

 

On 26 June 1960, the northern protectorate of Somaliland acquired independence from Britain. Five days later, Italian Somalia became fully independent and merged with Somaliland.

 

But the lack of a founding liberation struggle left the country without an experienced political class.

 

President Sharmarke -- whose son is the current prime minister -- was assassinated in 1969, then Mohamed Siad Barre seized power and thrust his country into the cold war, choosing to side with the Soviet Union.

 

More than a by-product of colonial times, the deadly chaos that erupted with Barre's ouster two decades ago is often blamed on a double vacuum.

 

The cold war ended and with it a system that had propped up Barre's regime. Simultaneously, Italy's political order was turned upside down by the Tangentopoli crisis, a nationwide police probe into political corruption.

 

"The country best equipped to steer Somalia at the time was not able do so. The Italian political class was floundering," one observer explained.

 

Italy couldn't make its voice heard when the world's new American masters -- puffed up with their doctrine of humanitarian imperialism -- led the 1992 UN invasion of Somalia.

 

The disastrous cycle of violence that ensued was interspersed with numerous peace talks, in which Italy's expertise was overshadowed by US hegemony.

 

The 2004 transitional federal charter still lists Italian as an official second language but ties between Somalia and its former colonial rulers are withering away silently.

 

In contrast with the way the British administered their colonies, Italians accounted for half of Mogadishu's population after World War II.

 

Conversely, unlike its European neighbours bursting with immigration from the former colonies, Italy is now home to a mere 6,000 Somalis.

[Jacaylbaro]

In November 1949, Somalia was granted independence by the United Nations but placed under an Italian-led trusteeship.

 

On 26 June 1960, the northern protectorate of Somaliland acquired independence from Britain. Five days later, Italian Somalia became fully independent and merged with Somaliland.

[N.O.R.F]

The article is stuff and maalayacni [no disrespect Bilal].

[Meiji]

Bilaal,

 

I fail to see the link between the article you posted and SYL.

 

Clearly you are opposed to the legacy SYL men left behind. Fair enough, you are entitled to your opinion.

 

Can you tell us the purpose of your topic?

 

- Is it to discuss SYL performance and the first period of civilian government led by SYL party?

- Is it to discuss whether Somalia actually was an independent state or not?

- Is it meant to make Somali people more critical about the SYL history?

 

What exactly are you after?

 

PS: Do you favor the legacy of Barre's dictatorial regime?

[BiLaaL]

Norsky, no offence taken. I agree with you to an extent. The article is littered with rubbish. Still, one has to admit that it also contains a few grains of truth. Those few grains shouldn’t be overlooked.

 

Meiji, my comments regarding SYL were prompted by the following in the posted article:

 

But the lack of a founding liberation struggle left the country without an experienced political class.

The above jibe clearly alludes to SYL. They were the only liberation movement in existence during the period in question. I’m not opposed to SYL or its legacy (much of which I find inspiring). Nor do I share the view of the journalist in questioning whether the notion of an independent Somali state ever existed. It clearly did.

 

If we are to be honest, SYL’s record does contain some dark moments – as is the case with all liberation movements. Yet we hardly discuss it. SYL’s failings post-independence contributed to the rise of Barre and his regime. Regardless, discussing some of SYL’s shortcomings is not meant to diminish its achievements – which remain significant even to this day.

[Wiil Cusub]

To understand this article and Bilaals standpoint about SYL please read this article from Feb 27th 1960 then you will see how our problem in 2010 is legecy from SYL and Italian product.

 

Somali Take-off

Feb 27th 1960

From The Economist print edition

The Somalis, too, will soon be faced with the task of running their own affairs—and getting on with their neighbours

A GALE of constitutional change is blowing through the Horn of Africa. On February 17th, British Somaliland had a general election, the second ever held in the protectorate, and a party of swift change won a decisive victory. Elected Somali members now dominate a Legislative Council that three years ago did not even exist. The timetable for independence has been written in New York, not in Whitehall. In 1950, the United Nations set a term of ten years on Italy’s trusteeship of Somalia, and in June the Italians make their unreluctant exit. The British can only follow. The Somalis are determined that they should go, and there is indeed no earthly reason for hanging on—beyond responsibility for what is left behind.

Somalia and Somaliland start off with roughly the same disadvantages; both are harsh, hot lands of sand and rock without water

, known mineral wealth, industry or anything else that makes life easy. But the Italian trust territory has had a clear political lead over the protectorate for which, indirectly, it can thank Mussolini and his imperial dreams. The British military caretakers who took over Somalia during the war exerted themselves to decontaminate the territory from fascist influence by an educational programme that was considerably ahead of anything suggested for the protectorate. Then the Italians came back, uncluttered by other colonial commitments, and more immediately aware than the British that they were working to a fierce timetable.

Somalia has virtually governed itself since 1957. Its several political parties and the maze of their tribal ramifications promised a situation of singular confusion.

But the Italians, keeping democratic scruples under strict control, picked their man and stuck to him. At the general elections last year, the Somali Youth League, led by Mr Abdullahi Issa, won 85 of the 90 seats, two-thirds of them unopposed because of the “regrettable technical errors” of their opponents.

The protectorate’s election last week was not distorted by any such technicalities

, but the result was hardly less conclusive. The Somali National League (SNL) has won 20 of the 33 seats available; the Somali United party, a new group that shortly before the elections joined forces with the SNL, has won 12 seats. This leaves the National United Front, which won most of the seats in last year’s rather timid attempt at elections, and whose members the British authorities were seriously coaching in the arts of government, with only one seat, although it got nearly a third of the total votes cast. The victorious SNL, led by Mr Mohammed Egal, is the party loudest in its demands for quick independence (it boycotted the earlier elections) and its victory is being proclaimed by Cairo radio as a smack in the eye for imperialism. But the decisive factor in the election was probably not so much the party platforms, which were all much of a muchness, as the complex inter-play of tribal, sub-tribal and family loyalties.

 

All the parties agreed that the protectorate should join up, sooner rather than later, with Somalia. Mr Lennox-Boyd foreshadowed this last year when he promised British help should the protectorate seek some form of “closer association” with Somalia. Possibly when the time comes the two sides will be less keen than they are now on a complete union and more in favour of some kind of federative solution. The SNL is not on particularly warm terms with the Somali Youth League in Somalia, while for its part, the government at Mogadishu may cool towards the idea of straightforward fusion. At present Somalia’s government is picked from members of the Hawiya tribe—an ascendancy that is unjustified numerically, and would be very hard to maintain if a deluge of protectorate Somalis were to join forces with the opposition. Then comes the question of Commonwealth membership. For the commonwealth club to refuse this British territory admission would seem unlikely; but there is no certainty that the new member would be invited to bring a guest.

 

[Meiji]

Originally posted by BiLaaL:

I’m not opposed to SYL or its legacy (much of which I find inspiring). Nor do I share the view of the journalist in questioning whether the notion of an independent Somali state ever existed. It clearly did.

 

SYL’s failings post-independence contributed to the rise of Barre and his regime. Regardless, discussing some of SYL’s shortcomings is not meant to diminish its achievements – which remain significant even to this day.

In these dark days of religious extremism, foreign interferance, secessionism and clan-confederalism we ought to walk a fine balance between objectively analysing our past in order to understand our problems of today and not agreeing with those who are opposed to the notion of Somali nationhood, i.e. views propagated by the above mentioned ideologies.

 

You can not use an article, that clearly is against Somali nationhood and even tries to deny the existance of a Somali nation-state, as the starting point of your criticism against SYL and their political campaign for Somalia's Indepedance and Somaliweyn. I expect these kinds of topics from men like JB and others who are against Somalia and all it stood for.

[BiLaaL]

^ I’m aware of the sensitivities surrounding this issue. This may not be the best time to discuss it. I take your point.

 

ps – I’m sure JB & Co. don’t harbor any ill-will towards Somaliweyn. The ongoing instability in the South can create some uneasiness for our brothers in SL and this is understandable.