Dummies for Somali Politics: Part one - Rudy-drops

[rudy-Diiriye]

Sudden Interest In Somalia Points To Suspect Western Corporate Interests

 

IIn her book The Shock Doctrine, Canadian author Naomi Klein argues that Western governments often use humanitarian relief and reconstruction as an excuse and an opportunity to force poor or strife-torn countries to adopt neoliberal economic models that ultimately serve the interests of Western corporations.

 

Citing examples from Chile, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Russia, Argentina, among other countries, she shows how political and economic turmoil has been used as an entry point by Western countries to introduce economic reforms that would ordinarily be unpopular with local populations.

 

In Iraq, for instance, after the ouster of Saddam Hussein, US companies made a fortune providing security and other services to Iraqis, all in the name of promoting democracy and good governance.

 

In Chile, the US government actively undermined the presidency of Salvador Allende, a left-leaning democrat, and supported the coup that brought Augusto Pinochet to power.

 

Pinochet, in turn, unleashed neoliberal reforms that were in line with US interests.

 

In Sri Lanka, after the devastating tsunami of 2004, land previously occupied by fishing villages was taken over by big hoteliers.

 

Capitalism

Klein refers to these events as “disaster capitalism” — “orchestrated raids on the public sphere in the wake of catastrophic events, combined with the treatment of disasters as exciting market opportunities.”

 

While I would not go so far as claiming that the London Conference on Somalia hosted by the UK government last month was yet another business opportunity for Western governments and companies, the timing of the conference is certainly suspect.

 

Facing massive unemployment and recession at home, Western countries may be looking at Somalia as an opportunity to expand markets and revive local industries.

 

It is possible that Western countries have woken up to the fact that Somalia represents an untapped source of natural resources and a destination for Western goods.

 

Somalis are in need of virtually every service, and have huge infrastructure shortfalls, which could be filled by Western companies.

 

Also, the country’s resources have remained under-exploited for 20 years, and its leaders could be persuaded to give rights and concessions to Western companies in exchange for aid.

 

Indeed, two days after the London conference, the Guardian newspaper reported that Britain was seeking oil-drilling rights in Somalia.

 

The Canadian company Africa Oil has apparently already begun oil exploration in Puntland.

 

Is aid the carrot that is being used to obtain these rights? It’s possible.

 

In London, Somali Prime Minister Abdiweli Mohammed Ali told the Observer that in the future, a share of natural resources would be offered in return for help with reconstruction.

 

“There’s room for everybody when this country gets back on its feet and is ready for investment,” he said.

 

And Who Exactly Is In Charge?

Questions are also being raised about who will drive the reconstruction project.

 

BBC journalist Mary Harper, the author of the newly-published book Getting Somalia Wrong?, told this writer that despite the impressive groundwork done by Britain in engaging with, listening to and learning from Somalis, the final communiqué emanating from the London conference appeared “rather thin and vague on many key issues.”

 

For instance, the question of who exactly will be in the charge of the country once the tenure of the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) expires in August this year is not spelt out clearly.

 

The conference endorsed the establishment of a Constituent Assembly to replace the TFG, but its task seems to be focused purely on governance issues, such as the preparation of a constitution, the establishment of institutions and preparations for elections.

 

But this Assembly will not manage donor funds. Nor will it manage or collect taxes from ports and airports.

 

The task of managing Somalia’s economy appears to rest with the newly-established Joint Financial Management Board, comprising representatives from Britain, France, the European Union, the World Bank and the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) (and later any future government), which aims to “increase transparency and accountability in the collection and efficient use of public revenues, as well as international development aid, and which will help strengthen Somali public financial management institutions.”

 

The Board’s stated objectives are to minimise corruption, maximise the use of funds in the public interest and improve accountability and transparency on where and how Somali revenues and donor funds are spent.

 

At face value, this appears to be a step in the right direction given the corruption and financial incompetence within the TFG, United Nations agencies and humanitarian organisations.

 

Lack of trust in the TFG’s and the UN’s ability to deliver development to Somalia and use funds appropriately was probably what prompted the establishment of the Board.

 

Somalia is desperately in need of a financial facility that can monitor how donor and domestic funds are used.

 

However, Canada-based Abdirizak Mohamed, editor of Hiraan Online, is worried that the Board is yet another nail in the coffin of Somalia’s sovereignty.

 

“We may have lost our sovereignty when we allowed African troops into Somalia and when the UN Security Council expanded the mandate of Amisom a day before the start of the London conference. But now with this new Management Board, comprising European donors and the World Bank, we have lost our independence to manage our resources.”

 

The presence of the World Bank in the Board also raised questions about the philanthropic intentions of Western donors.

 

Is Somalia going to be revived through loans from the Bank, and if so, will Somalia be in debt before it is on its feet?

 

The other issue that is not clear is whether the oversight function of the Joint Financial Management Board will supersede agreements that prevent donors from monitoring UN agencies.

 

The European Community has signed a Financial and Administrative Framework Agreement (FAFA) that does not allow it to do external audits of UN projects that it funds.

 

The UN is expected to manage EC contributions in accordance with its own rules and regulations, which allows for a lot of pilfering and mismanagement.

 

Will the FAFA agreement be overlooked in Somalia?

[burahadeer]

"""Is Somalia going to be revived through loans from the Bank, and if so, will Somalia be in debt before it is on its feet?"""

 

Peace is utmost importance but sure that's the case ,you already in debt 100s of billions siphoned off by time oil pops.

[Carafaat]

Rudy diiriye, your absolutely right. there alterior economic motives. Burahadheer, absolutely right. Somalia has little debt compared to other countries. we risk becoming highly indepted before Somalia gets back on its feet. But we can prevent that by working along to reconstruction in the aid/development fase and returning our souvereignity before the goverment takes any loans.

 

we make this a win/win situation for Somali's.