Mr. Mohamed Heebaan, Ali Bahar Ph D Vs Abdul Ahmed III, Janet Britt

[Abwaan]

Originally posted by dhufayz:

kan danbe waa warreeqaan anaa garanaya

lol...@Warreeqaan... new word?

[Che -Guevara]

Dhufayz..Have you read any of the articles or gleaned anything useful from them?

[kyz]

Che -Guevara, I have already read from other source before you post it and I agree most of Abdul Ahmed's article. other guys do not have any alternative solutins or Ideas . they are just blaming this gentleman who is doing all his best to edecate us our problems and their solutions I think we better appritiate him for his efforts .

the blame game is not leading us to any where.

thanks che for your sharing of this important topic

[Paragon]

The Former Somalia; Facts and Fallacies

By Abdul Ahmed III

October 01, 2009

 

 

......I am taken aback and amazed by the paranoia being proliferated by some in the name of

pretentious Somali patriotism and imaginary national unity. One must ask what this

paranoia is!. What on earth is this Hue and Cry about Nothing? Why would anyone claim

that my colleagues and I want to divide the former Somalia? Didn’t the Somali people

themselves do that? It is bewildering to see this over-enthusiastic shriek for attention! -

That is all it could be! just an unpleasant scream for attention as I explain below.

In the following paragraphs, I attempt to discuss three relevant issues, (i) Uninformed and

clumsy analysis of Mr Heebaan and Dr Bahar (ii) The core of the subject and the facts

that my earlier articles presented (iii) An informative response to the fair critique of Dr

Musse.

Abdul Ahmed III's reponse in pdf format

 

PS: I have been following this debate and it's strange how Abdul Ahmed touches on issues that are strangely similar to mine here in SOL, though I got ostracised for them for speaking of them. Even better Abdul Ahmed III now backs his arguments with evidence, which I no access to currently. I'll have to read this again.

 

Che, thanks for the topic. Very interesting.

[Che -Guevara]

You are welcomed.

 

The Fallacy of Regional Panacea

By Mohamed Heebaan

Oct 13, 2009

Abdul Ahmed’s and Janet Britt’s(who acknowledged to have co-authored the piece or their study with him) display their enthusiasm for Somali regionalism below, when Abdul Ahmed writes,

“The international community must realize that Somali regionalism (whether it is a virtue or a vice) must be acknowledged. It must also be a parameter to consider when devising a policy for reconciliation and post-conflict institutional building. From policy design perspective, regionalism is an essential element to consider. US, UN and the international community must view the former Somalia as a country that consists of distinct and divided regions.”

 

Mr. Ahmed takes one step ahead and urges the US and international organizations to abandon the idea of Somalia as one country altogether, when he writes, “ It is therefore sensible for the United States, United Nations and the EU to abandon the premise of Somalia as a single monolithic entity.”

 

Abdul Ahmed, once more, takes one step further and puts the onus on the US and demands that America bring about the regionalism that he is proposing, and make it a fact on the ground, when he writes, “The United States in particular has a unique opportunity to treat Somalia as decentralized entities without officially affirming the country‘s dissolution.”

 

It is very clear from the quotes given above that Abdul Ahmed and Co. are using every persuasion possible to have Somalia decentralized or dismembered into various regions. And the question is, what kind of regionalism are they proposing for Somalia?

The indication we gather from the writings of Mr. Ahmed and Ms. Britt suggests that they do not want a region

web page

[SayidSomal]

Abdul Ahmed III’s Faulty Logic:

 

From the moment that Rachel Carson penned the Silent Spring, celebrated book that has inspired many environmental scientists, the accidental birth of the irreversibility theory of ecology has came to dominate in the scientific literature of nature. From the perspective of shared ecology, Rachel Carson’s observation of defiled spring season by human abuse neglect, social scientists learned the importance of human behaviour and the impact of their environment. Decades later, the pioneering work of irreversibility of ecology has made immense contributions to the ecological protections and human awareness. Yet Abdul Ahmed III and his colleague’s seminal work on irreversibility of human social organizations, its dynamics, entropy, and political orientations is neither pure science nor a credible social science. This theory has been tested in our physical/environmental world, but yet to be proofed in our social world. As we shall see in the later part of this piece, this theory particularly defies the common sense of Socia-political affairs of the Somali society.

 

At the outset, Science of irreversibility is new to anthropologist and other social studies as a subject and as discipline. It is also a subject that we are proud of its contributions to society as the planet we live in becomes unpredictable from human predators. But is science of inertia applicable to the dynamics of human organizations to create or destroy political associations? More specifically, is reversibility theory applicable to future predictions of the make up of the Somali state? The answer is no because humans are recumbent to construct or destroy ideas as they see fit. What is science then? According to Webster’s definition, Science is “knowledge covering general truths of the operation of general laws, esp. as obtained and tested through scientific method [and] concerned with the physical world." The bold emphasise is mine to illustrate that the physical world has certain relevance when it comes to general truths.

 

In a nut shell, irreversibility is true in the physical world because it deals with substances, metals and other elements of nature not to mention time and space. In other words, if nature is deformed, given the human pressure that exist, it is certain that we see, listen or observe a remarkable or unremarkable scenes of a changed world.

 

Let us also see what philosophy says about irreversibility. From metaphysical standpoint of what exists, to revisit the scepticism philosophy of the 19th century Europe, Physical world exists and is tangible while ideas do exist but is not corporeal. If Abdul Ahmed III’s argument is proof me the Somali state (some form of central authority), then that idea has yet to materialize. But If Abdull Ahmed III is arguing that there will be no Somali state in the future with strong or loose central authority, then he is dead wrong no matter how clever he makes his presentations from the new experiments that sounds more like pseudo scientific rather than a pure/conventional social Science

 

No one can save us from people like Lenin or Karl Mark to fashion a superficial economic or social ideas that alter geopolitical landscapes of the world. Similarly, capitalism world of extreme nationalism in yesteryear is now promoting globalization and borderless society. Contrary to Abdul Ahmed III’s irreversibility theories, we have seen French dominance under Napoleon; the rule of Holy Roman Empire ; and the Prussian principalities in Europe that all reverted back to tribal living arrangement under the banner of nation building with the new inventions of flags and demarked borders. Furthermore, ultra nationalism of Europe that pitted Franco-German rivalry that had reduced Europe into rubbles in the early part of 20th century is now shifting toward ideas of shared immigration, common markets, shared currencies and host of other visions for United Europe. This example illustrates that men is not subject to irreversibility theories that are relevant to the psychical world, but is guided by philosophical interpretations of laws of governance, manipulation of ideas and moral doctrines of social orderliness how ever one defines.

 

The hypothesis that lifting the borders in Europe will bring harmony among Europeans only exists in the minds of present leaders. Also, it is no secret that some European countries led by England, to prove more solidarity with Anglo Americans, are showing defiance for complete unionization. That is why England opted for Maastricht treaty and still in more isolated position in this project designed by Franco-German alliance in post war Europe. Abdul Ahmed and his team should have emphasised how ideas are powerful in shaping or reversing human associations, co operations, negotiations, conflicts or conquests. In more extreme example, Ahmed and his team would have a difficult to stop Marshal Tiito, if he rises from his grave from the mausoleum in Belgrade, to bring Croatia, Bosnia, Slovenia and Serbia back to the old Yugoslavia. Nothing could stop humans to buy new ideas and nothing is irreversible in human dealings. What we should pray is to see the irreversibility of people like Hitler, driven by hate to slaughter millions of people to attain their racist agenda. For that kind of occasion, we must consult with our moral principle and say that stopping genocide-- yesterday Jews, today Tutsis----should be irreversible.

 

In the context of Somali politics, I would not delve too much on irreversibility of Puntland and Somaliland for the simple fact that Somali clans are unified when the threats are coming from outsiders (Ahmed has in mind from the anarchy in Southern Somalia), but are in a perpetual and hostile conflicts within their own defined regions (Ahmed conveniently ignores this fact). That is a reality today in both Somaliland and Puntland. Clans in both regions are contesting for power, and if one losses power grip, they tend to disassociate with the defacto union and hence are bound to upset the balance of power. The intricate politics of Sool, Sanaaag and Cayn in Puntland speak louder than our words. In fact, if truth be told, and perhaps this is uncomfortable truth, the expatriates from these regions are currently having a conference in Nairobi on the future destiny of SSC region, which if negotiated settlement of power sharing is not reached, will definitely alter the geographic shape of Puntland permanently.

 

Similarly, a not too distance ago, when electoral commission of Somaliland fumbled the electoral boundaries of Awdal regions, the Awdelites protested this injustice by wrapping themselves with the five star blue flag in a sign of solidarity for federalism. Yes, federalism, and yes a powerful display of Somali flag and not Somaliland flag. Ahmed should know that old chestnut that says politics--- the politics of reversibility---make strange bedfellows! Irreversibility question is not permanent, but a relative subject that is fluid, with a shifting alliance and counter alliance in so far as Somali polity is concerned (another convenient fact that Ahmed ignores).

 

Clearly, the presumption that elders gathered under a shade of tree to form regional entity does not say much about the future of Somalia. I commend that effort because peaceful regions have also been a heaven for brothers and sisters fleeing from Mogadishu mayhem. However, what I strongly disagree is Ahmed’s claim that these regions are separate and apart from Southern Somalia when factual evidence suggest that all regions in Somalia are economically harmonized and socially integrated more so than when the state of the Somali state existed. Only Somalia as whole is severed from the international relations politically and not economically. Somalia as whole is well incorporated into the globalizations as evidenced by the World Bank on their studies of the spin-offs of the civil war in regard to finance (Hawala) and communications (cell phones and Internet). Apparently, within Somali borders, the capital goods move freely and people settle where ever they choose, a piece of evidence that make us proud in the face of difficulties to form central authority. Thus, show me the Somali state (central state) is neither science nor a rigorous study of the concept of irreversibility.

 

Where is the irreversibility that Ahmed is fond of? Perhaps the impassiveness of Federal government of Somalia in the domestic affairs is the sole theory that explains mechanics of entropy-irreversibility in the social dynamics of Somali people in post 1992. According to this theory, it has created a bunker mentality where Somali people segregated themselves indefectibly. Consequently, the current impasse of Somali politics is irreversible. This is a very simplistic political deduction with a separatism flavour, a flawed logic at best, and a dangerous game of rising separatist tendencies from North West and North East of Somalia at worse.

 

Obviously the power of ideas that all humans, no exception to Somalis, are capable of creating new ideas while preserving some old ideas are missing from this theory. In more definite terms, to say that there is only a former Somalia would require the birth of accepted federal government that would, among other things, oversee a clearly stated question of the Union in open and transparent plebiscite. Hence, considering the facts on the ground, if Somali is divisible, so too for Somaliland and Puntland. Before that, we request from Ahmed and his team a reprieve from the declaration of death to Somalia that has been on a life support for the last two decades. To unplug that important oxygen of hope, using empirical data that has been skewed, would amount to academic dishonest.

 

Deka Ismail,

Email: dekaismail@ymail.com

London, UK

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Ninkaan la dhoho inni Axmed saddexaad - soomaalidii torsh bey ka daba qaateen

[Hamile]

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Former Somalia

By Abdul Ahmed III

Nov 07, 2009

My recent articles about the Former Somalia are NOT the cause of the collapse of what use to be Somalia (1960-1991). The articles document and verified that the collapse of the former Somalia is real and irreversible. However, some recent articles on WardheerNews keep propagating a fictional notion that my colleagues and I intend to dissolve “the de-facto partitioned former Somalia”. Some even contend that the study is somehow unfair to the Somali people. In the following paragraphs, I attempt to guide these authors to the reality of the collapse. I intend to hold them accountable for some of their technical mistakes and in the process help clarify number of misconceptions that they may so obsessively hold dear.

 

There is a fine line between dogma and lunacy, a line that could be easily crossed by anyone whose objectives are based on creed and not the command of science! Anyone can argue any absurdity in this age of “internet facilitated news/opinion” outlets. One can actually argue that rooster crowning is the reason for the daily rise of the sun, even create a web-site called Here Comes the Sun- (perhaps even embed the Beatles song of the same name). It may look real to some but it certainly is not a scientific argument. In the following sections, I would like to further elaborate the above statements with specific reference to the Articles of M Heebaan and Deka Ismail. In doing so I also would have to acknowledge many eloquent articles such as those by Abdul-Aziz Mohammed. While I may disagree with AbdulAziz Mohamed in one way or another, I thank him and respect his reasoning and professionalism.

 

1-Authorship and Intellectual Courtesy: Heebaan’s Point Examined

 

The fact that Dr Britt and I collaborated on some work is not uncommon in academia nor should it be an issue as Heebaan would like to think!. Please note that in most academic and research institutions, faculty/research teams collaborate on various projects, often bringing together faculty members from various departments. In the United States, projects are led by a Principal Investigator(s) and are supported by number of research collaborators. Any report they produce is coauthored by all those who contributed. It is not uncommon to see number of authors on a report. 2-Heebaan and Ismail’s Generalities

Generalities are an intellectual ally of the amateur, the non-specialist, someone who knows about a given subject but doesn’t quite specialize in that area/subject!. Generalities include among other things lack of crisp and detailed reasoning such as broad statements that mask depth of knowledge. It is convenient to hide behind broad statements! This is because often vague generalities employ presuppositions that are inevitably wide in scope and elegant in obscuring any plausible logical progression of arguments from a sound premise to a verifiable conclusion. This approach can work quite well for preachers or politicians running for office! It however fails miserably under scrutiny in scholarly circles and intellectual discussions. Broad general statements fail because it is not enough to explain intricacy of any given issue by just floating generic statements (however well meaning they may be). Such generalities are therefore relegated to discussions such as phenomenological debates. (Not necessarily philosophy but certainly not scientific).

 

It also is weird and unheard of to see a critique of any published scientific work being solely on the basis on personal believes and/or metaphysical arguments. In principle a scientific arguments/findings are distinctly different from metaphysical statements that are not verifiable. This has been settled and accepted during the Astro-German debates on philosophy and science. It is therefore irrelevant for me to entertain Heebaan’s idea of “positive regionalism” and “negative regionalism”. With the definitions provided by Heebaan, these terms are informative linguistically but they are technically void.

 

Similarly Ismail’s long article seems to be elementary by lumping together tales of metaphysics, misleading claims on science and many other outlandish arguments. Most of these claims are indeed insignificant to the dynamics of collapse of what use to be Somalia as I will explain throughout the article.

 

Another important point is the abuse of technical terms. For Instance, the use of technical terms “Cooperation and Conflict” are well defined in mathematics upon which our study is based. But Conquest and the re-incarnation of Marshal Titto are not scientific. This is indeed a blunder, it is revealing and it represents the essence of Ismail’s article !

 

An authority, be it an institutional or a knowledgeable person usually refrains from misuse of terms and broad general statements of condemnation in science. But that is the ethics of research, scientific debate and that may not be true for Somali politics which I am not interested to engage here.

 

Moreover, The reckless use of terminology should be a bigger issue to rectify for Ismail. It is wrong to use terms unconventionally unless the person doesn’t know the term he/she is using (inadvertent fraud). For instance, Ismail calls my data skewed data; the term “Skewed” is statistical term that has a specific use and could be used to only something that you have VISUALLY or ANALYTICALLY confirmed to be deviating from a well defined point. It is NOT just a casual phrase to be used to justify one’s goal at any cost.

 

3- The Irreversible Collapse

It is illogical to debate the facts on the ground; rejection of facts should not justify the constant attempts of Heebaan and Ismail to identify individual authors as the enemy to contend with. It is redundant for me to reiterate what I said more than once (but may be redundancy would help here). So I reiterate, I do NOT have the intention NOR the means to divide the former Somalia. The collapse is somehow complete,The de-facto partition was accomplished by the Somali people! It is the Somali people who destroyed what was once a nation state. Therefore any undue blame and debate about these facts is just a nostalgic! A fantasy of return to the past! As any nostalgia this is at best impractical because if nothing else “the arrow of time is irreversible”! Please note that It is grace to acknowledge the truth that what was once a Somali nation state is NO MORE!

 

4- Trade and Economy in the former Somalia

Empirical data from early 1990s to 2009 shows a continual deterioration of trade and economic relationships between “the South and “Puntland” and “the south and Somaliland”. Most recent data shows that importation of agricultural products that often tied the north to the south is almost negligible to non-existent. (We account for zero shipments from the south to Puntland in 2009). There is also limited trade between “Puntland and Somaliland”, Puntland and with the Somali inhabited areas in Ethiopia.

 

The idea of a strong economic ties or free trade connecting all areas of the Somali peninsula is unsubstantiated claim. The suggestion that there is more trade in the post collapse era between Puntland and the South or Somaliland and the South may not be the case. In fact there is NO any RELIABLE comparative data or comparative studies evaluating the pre-collapse level of trade and post collapse economic activity. I dispute Ismail’s fabrications!. Ismail must document the claim that today’s trade is far more robust than pre-collapse era!. This again may be another careless imaginary tale! (A tale to justify anything at any cost).

 

In fairness, any and all authors have the right to explain their points (however vague), they have every right to conduct studies that contradict any findings. However No author has any right whatsoever to fabricate facts or unfairly insult others just for the sole purpose of advancing their idea, opinions, desires regardless of how beautiful their ideas may seem to them. !.

 

Similarly, the entire premise of Heebaan that Ethiopia is a land locked country dependent on the former Somalia is untrue. Economic activities are determined by mutual dependencies and shared economic interests. Please note that even when Eritrea was integral part of Ethiopia, the port of Djibouti was available and often used by Ethiopia. I do not have any data that shows economic collapse of Ethiopia because of Eritrea’s independence in 1990s. (for that matter any country in the world).

 

These arguments about Ethiopia are of course NOT a subject I am most interested in. However since Heebaan continually uses these examples it would be good for him to justify Djibouti’s direct trade relations with Ethiopia. It is also fair to ask Heebaan to quantify many other implicit claims that accuse Somaliland and Puntland. I am sure the residents of the North would prefer ties with a friendly state than an occupying army of Jihadists (even if they may claim to be ethnic brotherhood of being Somali).

 

5- Canonical Errors : Ismail’s Claims

It is hardly the hallmark of a learned person to throw sweeping statement condemning a research to be unscientific! It is NOT common to see a prudent individual announcing flawed judgment about origins of scientific concepts particularly if one doesn’t know those concepts or their historical development well enough. Such injudicious statements are almost always a reflection of the person that makes them. It takes credentials and scholarly authority to refute any findings. But it takes even more than that (more than one person more than few scholars) to condemn any work as non-scientific. It is very uncommon that a published work is so casually indicted to be unscientific; For it goes through panels prior to its publication. Any critic would know better or publish works that contradict the work they intend to critique.

 

Similarly, the unqualified questioning of social dynamics and irreversibility is surprising. One could ask about certain parameters and factors but cannot casually question well known scientific concepts. The study of irreversibility has started in mid 19th century. There is an ample literature that shows the use of these concepts in economics, physics, social science, evolutionary biology and anthropology. For instance Hadamard studied sensitivity of initial conditions, Comte suggested the idea of social physics as early as 1820s. Even the use of irreversibility in environment is related to sociology and social dynamics in a socio-ecological system. It is social dynamics that affects the environment, be it carbon emissions or desertification, or fisheries were the concept of collapse and irreversibility are more intuitive. Ismael must acknowledge that Irreversibility is NOT invented by the writer R Carson.! – Did Carson popularize it for the general public? may be for the non scientist ! But in that case Ismail shouldn’t make such historically inaccurate statements.

 

There is also a large contemporary scientific work dealing with irreversibility in social sciences. These include social and historical dynamics by Edgar Zilser in 1930s, the present-day rigorous work on of historical dynamics by Turchin. The earlier work on Economics by Veblen and various works in Anthropology by many researchers including Oschinsky. Modern studies in finance and uncertainty conducted by many researchers including Ben Bernanke. Social interaction and Game theory by Thomas Schelling, studies on neighborhood dynamics by Jiang and technological marketing by Arthur.

 

Contrary to the misleading assertions of Ismail, the idea of irreversibility appears almost in every aspect of life from physical science, social science, governance, commerce and technology and more. It has helped companies and governments realize the affects of their policies. Therefore the validity of our study in using concepts related to irreversible process would be the least to worry about for Ismail. (I wouldn’t solicit Ismael’s advice). Nonetheless, as a consequence of the incorrect assertions about the applicability of concept of irreversible processes, Ismail must now climb higher peaks! Ismail must revoke at least couple of Nobel Prizes that directly or indirectly used irreversibility concept in dealing with social dynamics in economics and geo-politics. If not then, Ismael must note that Science is NOT a statement of belief, it is methodical NOT casual It is procedural and follows a well prescribed conventions

 

6- On Ideas, Political Opinions and Political Organization

 

One of the arguments of Ismail was why does Europe want to unite now when as late as 50-years back the Europeans fought bitter wars? The logical response to that question is that United Europe doesn’t reverse any preceding state of affairs! Europeans have gradually evolved politically and economically without “central command” as Heebaan and Ismael would love to force on Somali people. They have evolved through decentralized natural evolution to a common interest!

 

Moreover Ideas and thought on how to govern exhibit irreversibility traits. This is contrary to Ismail’s claims that ideas are not physical entities that cannot be subject to evolutionary concepts. In fact ideas evolve spread and change; evolution of some ideas and public opinions such as (regionalism in the former Somalia) get to a point where it becomes the dominant public opinion and perhaps a policy that becomes irreversible! Such policies may simply emanate from individual clan affinity and perhaps even an unconscious deeply held clan trait (regardless of whether it seems logical or fair to others). No one can make Northern Somali States fall in love with a centralized regime based in Mogadishu!. I recommend an extensive literature review on evolution and spread of ideas – Ismail would be amazed to discover that ideas behave much like fashions and fads – amusing but true!

 

7- Somaliland: A Shining Star

 

While I do not support or oppose Somaliland’s secession, I must admit that Somaliland is a shining star of hope in the Somali peninsula and an example of a good locally driven democratic system for all Africa. They have started from scratch and built on the goodwill of the local communities, the traditional clan leaders. They have perfected the art of negotiations and settling of differences. This is particularly important because while there may be political differences between the parties and the leaders (may be even some clans), yet there is stable political, social order and fairly well established liberties for all the residents of Somaliland including those who may and may not agree with the State and/or the government. Ismail’s suggestion that some protestors waved the flag of the Former Somalia is just an evidence that in Somaliland people are free to protest. (We burn Flags in the US !). Somaliland’s system is an exemplary democratic system that must be an aspiration for all those who care for the Former Somalia.

 

While Ismail’s implicit message that some clans may choose to remove themselves from Somaliland is a plausible. Yet such desires do NOT necessarily restore the former Somalia nor do they change the de-facto end of what use to be Somalia. Ismail’s point however supports my conclusions that clan self-segregation is central to Somali political organization and can only be dealt with through clan based consultation such as the Guurti system of Somaliland.

 

Here is the link

http://wardheernews.com/Articles_09/Nov/06_former_somalia_abdul.html

[Abtigiis]

Paragon,

 

Abdul Ahmed is articulate and good in discussing some theories ( sometimes giving too many examples of where the said theories are used, in what seems to me as selling the validity of the theory to us just by invoking names of individualks who have used it or are associated with). But there is nothing scientific about his research methods and conclusions.

 

If at all it seems he has made up his mind about what to recommend as a solution to Somalia and merely used the process of research and referencing to relevant social theories as a basis to justify his own pre-concieved solutions.

 

He is selective in picking data as is evident from his claim that trade between North and South has declined, whereas he doesn't want to pay attention to the massive influx of Southererns to Hargeisa and the impact it will have on social dynamics, particulary when clan is the issues he discussses. He set out to prove that the North and South are getting apart, but the truth is the two people know about each other more now than when they were under one regime.

 

As Dr. Ali Bahar suggested in one of his rebuttals, this is nothing more than a predatory act of trying to cash-in from the misery of a people for self-aggrandizement. One parochial look at an aspect of the somali society, i.e, clan, and suddenly Abdul has found fodder for the enticing 'irreversibility' theroy he so fondly talks about. And he is trying to intimidate readers that if they challenge the relevance of the theories he likes to the somali situation, then they are challenging Science itself!!

 

His conclusions that a meeting between Guurtii's of different clans are the entry point for national reconcilliation is false and simplistic. There is no need to follow his reasonings or prescriptions to bring somalia back. All that Somalia needs is money. Even the seemingly hapless TFG can impose itself and turn into credible government if properly funded.

[Hamile]

waryaahee you say, All that Somalia needs is money. Even the seemingly hapless TFG can impose itself and turn into credible government if properly funded. ? that is sophisticated you think ?

 

 

I thing abdul is smart man, he point out true things. he showed the lies of other people against him. you are scared of the true in somaliya.

[Hamile]

Abtigiis & Tusbax

You are not following the debate. it is clear try to read it again

 

Deka says

At the outset, Science of irreversibility is new to anthropologist and other social studies as a subject and as discipline....

 

Abdul says

Contrary to the misleading assertions of Ismail, the idea of irreversibility appears almost in every aspect of life from physical science, social science, governance, commerce and technology and more. It has helped companies and governments realize the affects of their policies. Therefore the validity of our study in using concepts related to irreversible process would be the least to worry about for Ismail. (I wouldn’t solicit Ismael’s advice). Nonetheless, as a consequence of the incorrect assertions about the applicability of concept of irreversible processes, Ismail must now climb higher peaks! Ismail must revoke at least couple of Nobel Prizes that directly or indirectly used irreversibility concept in dealing with social dynamics in economics and geo-politics. If not then, Ismael must note that Science is NOT a statement of belief, it is methodical NOT casual It is procedural and follows a well prescribed conventions

 

he is very clear , he reply to deka mistakes

 

Abtigiis & Tusbax wake up man

[Abtigiis]

Originally posted by Hamile:

waryaahee you say, All that Somalia needs is money. Even the seemingly hapless TFG can impose itself and turn into credible government if properly funded. ? that is sophisticated you think ?

It is not sophesticated. As a matter fact, it is a simple answer. but who said somalia needs a sophesticated solution? What makes you believe sciences of doom and untested, grand models and theories needs to be invoked for the political and social challenges in Somalia to get resolved?

 

As to whether Abdul is smart or learned person is incosequential to this debate. And since I am not going to sit and write an exam on what his logic is, I don't need to read all his stuff. Suffices to see that he has found a theory that he thinks explains the failures of Somalia and why it cannot be revived. I am only saying that his recommendations are not scientific and can not be pedelled as methaphysical triusms for the simple reason few research procedures were rigourously followed. It is always possible to find fault with any research particularly when it deals with social science.

 

What impressed you about Abdul's reply to Deka doesn't impress me at all. In fact, it is the epitome of what is wrong with his reasoning: Some used irreversibility theory in different social desciplines and hence there is nothing wrong if I use it to analyse Somalia and its future. He is right, and there is nothing wrong in so doing. In fact, it is a useful academic exercise. But they are nothing more.

 

If there was a time and interst, one would have gone through his research methodology and the factuality of his data and would have provided a response. But it is also fine if those who have no time dispute his conclusions based on their own experiences, knowledge, and interactions with well-informed people. At the end of the day, his recommendations remain the opinions of an individual, and those of Dr. Bahar and others will remain contrary views.

 

It is also wrong to assume that a research is unbiased just because a set of procedures and guidelines are followed. Bias comes in at different stages, even at the outset. From the utterances of Abdul when responding to his crtics, it is clear that he harbours some inherent biases.

 

Such kinds of shallow but well-articulated research papers appeal to intellectual virgins. You must not be mesmerised by how fancy the touted theories and models sound! Quite often, many models that seemed ground-breaking succumbed to the test of times and circumstances.

 

"Everything is irreversible in the sense that time does not run backwards. And nothing is irreversible in that the consequences of anything can be reversed". The concpet of irreversiblity seems to me like a broad and empty box. You can fit whatever you want to put in. It is generic and can be adapted to any given situation. If you view this way, the situation Abdul describes in his research (for instance of diminishing trade between North and South) can be reversed in short period of time.

 

Not everything is irreversible paryiculary when it comes to nation-bulding. Does the irreversiblity science apply to Germany? (which was broken into two but later come back to unite?)It will be intersting to see what Abdul would have recommended had this 'science' been applied to analyse the Germany case in 1970s. Surely, it would have talked about how living conditions, attitudes and etc etc between West and East Germans diverged and hence would have concluded that there is no prosepct for a reunion.

 

What I am saying is Hamile must not support Abdul's assertions solely because Abudl is saying he has a proof other scholars and desciplines used the concept of irreversiblity. Others used and the concept exists, so what???? Does it mean that the concept has a monopoly over the various ways one can look at and analyse the Somali crisis? No.

[Che -Guevara]

Saving Somalia: Theseus Paradox

 

by Abdul Ahmed III

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

 

 

 

Trapped in unlikely fantasy of a political settlement and/or unified statehood, many Somali affairs scholars, policy makers, journalist and politicians seem to be locked in a failing approach to constitute a lasting settlement. This is in part because of their overemphasis on forming a unified, centralized, Somali National Government. It is a fanciful thing to dream about formulating a lasting solution to the protracted Somali crisis, particularly one that calls for a centralized national government. But analysts and scholars are not alone; in fact international policy makers tend to further similar goals without understanding and/or appreciating the fundamental social origins of the Somali problem. They justifiably but erroneously perceive Somalia as a single monolithic nation-state in need of international support to reconstitute a central authority. In the following paragraphs, I attempt to point out (1) the obsolete paradigm with which the Somali problem is often viewed and analyzed. (2) Rationality of collective clan behavior and its impact on statehood (3) the mismatch of clan based morality with statehood (3) and (4) Feasible policy options for the post collapse era.

 

 

 

Since last 20-years, the clan social system and its political implication was either ignored or misunderstood. It may be misunderstood as is manifested by the power sharing schemes that were designed for Somali groups to share power since 1991 which only resulted in 15 failed governments). More importantly , policy makers and the international players may be using an obsolete model of Somalia. Perhaps Somalia of 2010 is not the same Somalia of 1990; Is this Theseus Paradox ? But prior to casting Somalia as an obsolete model let us examine how and what drives the evolution of Somali politics. Is it the clan system? Is it the need for a nation-state?

 

 

 

Notwithstanding the contemporary socio-political evolution of Somali inhabited areas particularly the birth and demise of the short lived Somali Democratic Republic. There is no historical data proves the existence of a unified Somali entity or a long lasting Somali peace. The idea of peaceful unified state for all Somali inhabited areas has always been an imprecise, unattainable and fuzzy concept.

 

 

 

Since the beginning of recorded Somali history, clan based rivalries and all out wars had unleashed worst of human nature in an endless fierce competition for everything material and non-material alike. All Somali clan conflicts embody an element of pride to uphold, revenge to conduct, clan interest to better, clan based morality to fulfill and resources to compete for. Clan empathy and clan based morality have always been the driving force behind most clan conflicts. Clan empathy and clan based morality assert an obligation that often supersedes any other form of social recognition and human virtue.

 

 

 

It must however be admitted that clan conflict alone did not and does not preclude sense of nationhood. Somali people are known to unite often in defense of their common interest when and if such interest is realized. Yet, historically, each clan (or group of clans) preferred to govern their affairs. In fact pre-colonial Somalia is known to be a nation of many states with diverse forms of self rule and a form of governance that distributed authority among the clans. This traditional, decentralized system was also a mechanism for conflict resolutions that ensured transient but effective peaceful co-existence.

 

 

 

Centralized governing structure in the Somali peninsula was first initiated by the European rulers. The fascist wars against Somali sultanates in central and northern Somalia (1922-1929) were the first attempts to centralize authority. The centralization of authority was later legitimized by the subsequent Somali governments between 1960 -1991. Rigidity of this imposed centralized control over clan affairs had rendered the clan based social interaction of Somali people so brittle that it eventually caused the demise of centralized authority and with it the sense of nation-state. It can also be argued centralization has produced some form of rent seeking behavior of clans on the expense of other clans.

 

 

 

In spite of the popular claim that clan competition is a result of dictatorship (of Barre regime) or even a result of colonial era legacy, there is yet to be any empirically grounded finding that documents such claims (except of course few deductively attained conclusions). On the other hand, clan based rivalry and factionalism is historically and culturally ever-present (before and after the Barre regime). Clan conflict was very common in pre-colonial era, during the European rule and persisted throughout the short existence of Somali nation-state (1960-1991). Moreover, clan rivalries at times involve the use of missionaries, foreign powers to gain edge on other clans; a trend that continues till today.

 

 

 

The modern manifestation of clan alliances with non-Somali entities includes the use of foreign basis to fight the last Somali government in 1980s. As is with the case everything Somali, the use of foreign power is either condemned or commended, depending on the clan, its interpretation and the prevalent clan morality at any given time. For instance the all clan based Somali faction SSDF, SNM, USC, SPM have used foreign basis primarily Ethiopia to fight against their unified nation-state. The supporters now defunct United Somali Congress tend to have whole heartedly supported the launching of cross border raids from Ethiopia on Somalia including bombing of civilian targets, movie theaters, postal stations and the like. These acts were justified on the basis of clan morality and indeed these campaigns eventually led to the overthrow of Barre government in 1991. This also was (at least partially) a cause for the ensuing massacre of civilian population in Mogadishu 1991 which again was justified through clan morality. It is this clan based moral value that allows one group to blame others when and if their clan interest is rivaled. For instance, the clans that supported USC’s alliance with Ethiopia in 1989-1991 seem to condemn SNF’s alliance with Ethiopia 1992-1994 to uproot extremist groups in the town of Luq Southwest Somalia.

 

 

 

What is the rationality of morality based on clan interest? If it is not a residue form Somali evolution from primates, this clan based morality would be a self serving moral relativism that is most inconceivable and most intellectually debilitating for any sane human. Each clan’s action are noble to its own members! To each clan, its history is more glorified than all other clans. This is the constructed social reality of clan based morality. Indeed, this clan based morality supplants any other virtue including nationhood, statehood or even humanity. Therefore, policy makers must account for the realities of this society and the implications of clan social structure on policy, politics and a nation-state. This is particularly important when the international community wants to impose a common and unifying Somali nation-state

 

 

 

Many policy makers and scholars tend to minimize the importance and/or the relevance of clan identity in Somalia’s protracted conflict. They claim that calling attention to the role of the Somali clan is simply a restrictive primordialist view (even though clan identity doesn’t necessarily disallow other constructivist and instrumentalist views). It is the clan that allows the emergence of clan politicians that could manipulate the clan (an instrumentalist view).

 

 

 

Some scholars even argue that foreign powers are the reason Somalia could not constitute peace. Others argue that factors such as delivery of social service, justice and economic opportunity play far more significant role (in part to justify their attempts to constitute central authority). Yet, these scholars fail to explain the manifestation of clan based behavior amongst Somali populations in the west. They conveniently ignore or are perhaps unable to admit the role of the clan as observed in Somali communities in the west. For instance, clan identity is demonstrably and unmistakably most ubiquitous and most noticeable in all social realities of Somali communities in Northern America and Europe. It is the very factor of clan that drives social bond not to mention the role of the clan in business, civic and other associations.

 

 

 

We now know that western social justice and economic opportunity cannot and could not do away with clan based morality, clan conflict and clan dynamics in general. In fact, clan affiliation exclusively governs the entire processes of social, political and civic transactions of Somali people. It is the single most significant factor to consider while addressing the Somali problem.

 

 

 

It must not surprise anyone that even the religious extremism prevalent in Southern Somalia has an element of clan. Today’s religious fundamentalist do come from predominantly certain areas or are stronger in certain areas. Most of the extremism confirms to the dictates of the clan system in a subliminal manner. The recent conflicts in Jubbaland are clear indication of this fact

 

 

 

In October 2009 while at a Somali related event, I was shocked by the claims of a prominent scholar who argued for the need to eliminate the Somali clan system (as if it is something that could be just casually deleted from the psyche of the society). Although, well meaning, purely logical analysis to find solutions for the Somali conflict often leads to impractical, overzealous solutions that have no local mandate or support from the very people it is intended to help

 

 

 

The burning question is, do the Somali politicians and their international allies pay enough attention to the significance of the clan as a social issue (not a political one).? Do they asses the effect of this social reality on policy toward political settlement? I argue that most politicians and all the international players did not and do not understand the issue of clan based society as a social one with political implications. The solutions that the international communities and the Somali politicians devised since 1991 were solely political solutions to primarily a social problem. The focus I believe must not be a politically driven power sharing plan but rather a social program that facilitates a political settlement as I explain below.

 

 

 

Historically, Somali clans constituted rule of law, self rule and governance of social and natural resources through a unique and distributed system of command and control that relied on consent of the clan groups. A form of a robust clan democracy that enabled Somali clans resolve conflicts, share resource and even rally for a nationalistic cause. One such clan sanctioned unity is the 1530s unity under Imam Ahmed AlGhazi which was purely based on clan understanding rather than a centralized control by far away authority

 

 

 

The efforts of international community seem to focus primarily on constituting a central authority for all Somalia without any due attention to the underlying social realities of the post collapse or the social origins of the political question of Somalia. It seems that the clan reality is synthetically incorporated into the question but not in its natural format. For instance the 4.5 scheme used to assemble the interim Somali parliament is a measure intended to provide fair power sharing among clans, yet most of the current members of the parliament do not have local mandate from the regions they are supposedly to represent. (This is particularly true for the parliamentarians from Somaliland and Puntland).

 

 

 

More over, the paradigm used to design policy is an obsolete one based one a unified nation-state with political rivalry. Unlike the 1980s and early 1990s, the Somali population in the horn of Africa has more of a clan based social, political and demographic re-alignment. The New York Times reported in the 1990s that nearly four hundred thousand residents of Mogadishu have been forcefully removed from their home in Mogadishu. Most of these immigrated to other parts of Somalia mainly to Jubbaland, Puntland and Gedo Region. Similarly commerce routes and trade relationships have been reconfigured since the collapse of the state. For instance Puntland has far more robust trade with the ****** region than with the Southern part of Somalia (mainly due to clan relationship/affiliations). These realities must factor in any policy design for the former Somalia.

 

 

Most planners, analysts and international players face the Theseus Paradox when dealing with the issue of Somalia. Today’s reconfigured new realities are not fully recognized and appreciated by the interaction al community and Somali politicians alike.

 

The State of Puntland and the Republic of Somaliland who have successfully in constituted a socially approved, clan facilitated social solutions to political problems in their part f the former Somalia. They represent new realities , a new dimension that must be recognized and awarded. Ignoring them will not result a better solution for the Southern Somali groups.

 

 

 

Former warlords (now politicians) and their international allies must not impose a centralized unifying entity on Somali people. The international community should only facilitate regional settlements to address genuine grievances of Somalis against their fellow Somali. The international community must also respect the dominion of the clan group over administering their own affairs as they see fit rather than be a nuisance. There is no and there will be no central government without the approval and blessing of all Somali clans and that cannot begin with power sharing scheme like the 4.5 plan. It must begin with clan negotiations, local settlement, independent states and perhaps eventually a union of Somali states.

 

 

 

Arguments on how to find a political solution for Somalia has become “argumentum ad infinitum” except that the arguments were always centered on national government for a unified Somalia. Perhaps the best way to save Somali people is to allow alternative approaches including the formation of regional groupings of self-administering states that could eventually unite in a confederation of Somali states. The idea of regionalism in the former Somalia is NOT an exactly episode of A Nightmare on Elm Street series. The Somali people are clan based society and perhaps the solution to their problems could only be achieved through genuine, robust, bottom-up, partitioned clan negotiation.

 

 

 

If the last 20-years could serve as a historical lesson, continuing with the misguided approach of centralized, national unity government will produce and only guarantee more of clan based rivalry zeal and for further destruction. The alternative approach of regionalism and self-rule, on the other hand, has been an incredible success story in Puntland and Somaliland. It is time for the Somali people and the international community to move on and accept the reality. It is time to acknowledge that we all have been trapped in Theseus Paradox! Today’s Somalia is not the Somalia that once was.

 

 

 

Abdul Ahmed III

Email: abdul.ahmed@thoapi.org

Contributor to The Horn of Africa Policy Institute

www.thoapi.org

[Hamile]

i am surprise tusbax you are just saying he is wrong i thing you hate the man for qabiil reason

[Hamile]

i am surprise tusbax you are just saying he is wrong i thing you hate the man for qabiil reason

[Hamile]

he answer to bahar

you are not following the debate