State of the World's Minorities and Indigenous Peoples 2011 - Somalia

Title State of the World's Minorities and Indigenous Peoples 2011 - Somalia
Publisher Minority Rights Group International
Country Somalia
Publication Date 6 July 2011
Cite as Minority Rights Group International, State of the World's Minorities and Indigenous Peoples 2011 - Somalia, 6 July 2011, available at: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/4e16d362c.html [accessed 23 July 2011]
DisclaimerThis is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher.

Many Somalis regularly experience serious human rights violations, regardless of their ethnicity, religion or clan affiliation. These violations become more severe for both women and members of minority groups, resulting in the multiple discrimination that has come to characterize the lives of Somali minority women.

In September 2010, Prime Minister Omar Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke of the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) resigned and was replaced by Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed. The year 2010 also saw the TFG lose more territory to insurgent groups, dominated by Islamist group al-Shabaab, who now control most of south-central Somalia. In mid August, the TFG's Constitutional Commission (IFCC) submitted a new draft Constitution to the Somali parliament and the cabinet for scrutiny. This was followed by a wider consultation process, with official launches in Galkayo, Galmudug, Garowe, Mogadishu and Puntland. However, by the end of the year minority communities remained largely unaware and excluded from the consultation process.

The '4.5' formula – designed to include minorities in political participation by allowing half a seat for all minorities for every four seats granted to members of the 'majority' clans – further limited the scope for the political participation of minorities in 2010. Although the exact size of the minority population in Somalia is unknown, population estimates are far greater than the proportion reflected in the 4.5 formula. And even with this system in place, the government is disproportionately dominated by members of 'majority' clans.

Having been postponed for two years, Somaliland's second presidential election took place on 26 June 2010, resulting in the victory of opposition candidate Ahmed Mohamud Silanyo. HRW reported that the election was 'reasonably free and fair' with the exception of one incident in the Sool region, where an individual was killed.

Large areas of both south-central Somalia and Puntland were affected by droughts in both early and late 2010. In March, the UN Security Council reported that over half of UN aid was not reaching civilians, due to it being diverted en route, although this was denied by the UN World Food Programme. According to news reports, al-Shabaab has banned more than 20 aid agencies from working in south-central Somalia. Taken in the context of Somalia's brutal and ongoing civil war, it is unsurprising that the UN Independent Expert on Somalia, Shamsul Bari, concluded from his visit that in 2010 that: 'Somalia continued to slide deeper and deeper into humanitarian crisis'.

South-central Somalia

South-central Somalia is populated by a number of different minority groups, who face considerable discrimination. These include Bantu, Benadiri and Bajuni fishing people. All these minority groups are diminishing in size, as thousands move to camps for internally displaced people's (IDPs) camps in Somaliland and Puntland and refugee camps in Kenya, where they face renewed discrimination.

Victims of multiple discrimination, minority women across south-central Somalia encounter barriers in every aspect of life, including access to education, health care and employment. One Bantu woman living in south-central Somalia told MRG:

'Ethnic minority women don't play a significant role on the social, [economic] and political platforms in mainstream communities. Most are illiterate and have no capability to improve their quality of livelihoods; most do household chores and other domestic errands mainly in the major clans' homes. Due to high poverty [levels] and discrimination against ethnic minority women, they do not have access to quality health care as compared to women from major clans who usurp all relief or other medical facilities.'

Fighting between militant Islamist groups and the TFG's forces, the African Union Mission for Somalia (AMISOM), gave rise to gross human rights violations and discrimination in Mogadishu in 2010. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reported an average of at least 20 weapon-related casualties per day in Mogadishu, with intensified fighting during Ramadan, marking 2010 as the worst year for fighting in over a decade.

The version of Shari'a law that al-Shabaab enforces severely breaches international standards and includes a number of 'morality laws', such as dress codes for women, the systematic closure of cinemas, and bans on smoking, khat, music, television and sport. Both Amnesty International and HRW reported that girls in Mogadishu and other al-Shabaab-controlled regions, as well as in IDP camps and refugee camps in Kenya, were being forced to cook and clean for al-Shabaab soldiers, and were also forced to marry them in some instances. MRG and Al Arabiya also reported that al-Shabaab conscripted Bantu and Madhiban children into their militia.

Several minority groups, including Bantu, Benadiri and Christians, have been targeted by al-Shabaab for practising their own religions. MRG's 2010 report on Somalia revealed that Bantu women have been forced to wear the hijab, and that some have faced attacks from al-Shabaab members. In January, Compass Direct News (CDN) reported the murder of Christian community leader Mohammed Ahmed Ali, whose wife was subsequently forced to flee the country following death threats. CDN also reported the murder of 17-year-old Christian convert Nurta Farah in the Galgadud region. The teenager was shot dead after fleeing her family, who had beaten her and shackled her to a tree when they discovered she had converted from Islam to Christianity.

A 2010 HRW report also revealed severe restrictions placed upon women by al-Shabaab, including the continued obligation to wear the abaya, a garment supplied by al-Shabaab, which covers the entire body. Due to its expense, families can often only afford one per household, which in turn limits freedom of movement, as only one woman can leave the house at a time.

As in Somaliland and Puntland, minority women experience sexual violence in IDP camps in south-central Somalia. In one camp, three to five cases of rape were being reported every one to two weeks. However the actual number is likely to be higher, as many women do not report attacks due to stigma and fear.

Somaliland

Despite the relative success of the 2010 Somaliland election, tensions remain high in the Sool, Sanag and Cayn regions claimed by both Somaliland and Puntland administrations. June 2010 saw increasing tension between clans and competition over resources, leading to the displacement of thousands of civilians from these regions.

The maltreatment of minorities in Somaliland remains a significant problem. Somaliland's Gaboye minority held protests in Burao, Somaliland and London, UK in 2010, in order to 'raise awareness [of] the continual suffering of Somaliland, and the minority tribes in Somalia'. In particular, the protests focused on the unwarranted detention and abuse of two Gaboye men and a Gaboye woman in the Aynabo district of Somaliland. According to the protesters, Gaboye lack legal representation and access to justice, and also face violence in the Somaliland courts. Most notably, the Gaboye Minority Organization Europe highlighted an incident involving the abuse and kidnapping of two Gaboye women during a trial, in the presence of a judge and police officers.

In a July 2010 article published by the African Press International, Gaboye clan elder Ahmed Shide Jama identified some of the problems facing Gaboye, including discrimination in the labour market, and lack of political representation and access to healthcare. Moreover, he identified inter-marriage between clans as something treated as a problem, 'despite the fact that [Gaboye] are Somalis and Muslims' as well.

Puntland

According to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Puntland is home to about 35,000 IDPs, many of whom belong to minorities from south-central Somalia, displaced by civil war. These minorities face further and renewed discrimination in IDP camps. A UN database cites '409 incidents of rape, attempted rape/sexual assault, forced prostitution and domestic violence' between January and June 2010, with much of this sexual violence occurring in IDP settlements. The women who experience sexual violence in these camps 'are generally of minority clan origin, bereft of clan protection and often forced to engage in risky coping mechanisms', according to UN Independent Expert Bari. A Somali researcher who interviewed women in the Puntland camps for MRG reiterated the dangers facing minority women: '[M]inority women said they seemed to be more vulnerable because there will be no revenge for [sexual violence], or there will be no justice at the end.' Indeed, the researcher suggested that these women are seen as 'easy prey'. As a result, there is a demand for a more robust legal system 'that is accessible to women of all groups' and that recognizes the specific needs of minority women and girls. This is particularly important considering that most cases go undocumented, either because minority women's rights are often neglected by the legal system or because of the stigma associated with sexual violence.

Human trafficking remains a serious issue for IDPs in Somalia. The International Organization for Migration (IOM) emphasizes the susceptibility of IDPs and other vulnerable groups to trafficking, with the Middle East, Sudan and South Africa identified as some of the destinations for human trafficking.

Copyright notice: © Minority Rights Group International. All rights reserved.

Gacan ku dhiigle Yousuf 'Tuke' oo badhtamaha magaalada Gabiley ku gubaya nin nool oo ka tirsan dadwaynaha reer Gabiley

Gacan ku dhiigle Yousuf 'Tuke' oo badhtamaha magaalada Gabiley ku gubaya nin nool oo ka tirsan dadwaynaha reer Gabiley 

 

Opportunities and Challenges for the Republic of South Sudan

Thu, 21 Jul 2011

Remarks
Johnnie Carson
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of African Affairs
United States Institute of Peace
Washington, DC
July 14, 2011

I would like to thank Richard Solomon and the United States Institute for Peace for inviting me to speak today. It’s an honor to be here. My colleagues and I are avid readers of your reports and policy papers, and we greatly appreciate the regular opportunities to participate in the Institute’s many enriching seminars and conferences. You play a vital role in shaping the public’s interest in foreign policy and in keeping the international community focused on the most critical and important global issues. In Africa, the work the Institute has done on Sudan in recent years has complemented our efforts to support the negotiations, promote local conflict resolution, and bolster civil society. We hope you will continue your work on Sudan and South Sudan in the years ahead.

This afternoon I’d like to make some brief remarks about the opportunities and challenges facing the world’s newest nation, South Sudan. Today’s event comes at a critical time as we look ahead to the opportunities and challenges for Sudan and South Sudan. Independence presents a new opportunity for the people of South Sudan, an opportunity to build a new nation that embodies their values and aspirations. It also presents an opportunity for the people of Sudan to redefine their relationship with the international community and pursue a more prosperous future.

We want to see the people of Sudan and South Sudan seize those opportunities and succeed. But to do that, they must establish a stable and durable peace between their two states, and they must work to promote stability and development within their borders. This will not be easy and it will not happen overnight, but it is doable. The Sudanese have demonstrated their capacity over the last year to work together and overcome great odds. The United States is committed to being a steadfast partner as they continue to work out their remaining differences and build the peace and stability that all Sudanese people desire.

This past Saturday, I joined leaders from around the world in recognizing and celebrating South Sudan’s independence. It was one of the most moving occasions of my time as Assistant Secretary. In Juba, tens of thousands of southern Sudanese endured sweltering heat for hours to celebrate the birth of their new nation. The Government of South Sudan organized a day of pageantry and substance. The proclamation of independence was read. President Salva Kiir took the oath of office and unveiled a statue of John Garang. President Kiir spoke eloquently of the sacrifices endured by millions of Sudanese and the challenges South Sudan faces as the newest and one of the poorest states in the world. Sudanese President Bashir was in attendance and congratulated his hosts, and Sudan followed through on its pledge to be the first country to recognize South Sudan’s independence.

It truly was a historic day for the people of South Sudan.

Just a year ago, last Saturday’s celebration appeared impossible. The peace process between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement had stalled. A return to open conflict seemed possible. Many analysts warned the Southern Sudan referendum was at high risk of delay or would be mired in bitter controversy. Little if any preparation was underway, and many observers doubted northern leaders would allow the referendum to proceed or would accept its results.

Recognizing that the CPA and the Southern Referendum were in serious peril, President Obama committed last year to reenergize the peace effort to make sure that the North and South Sudan did not return to a state of conflict. We intensified our diplomatic engagement with the parties to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), as well as our partners in the African Union, IGAD, the United Nations, the EU, and others. The President, the Vice President and the entire national security team were involved in this effort around the clock. The U.S. Special Envoys for Sudan, first Ambassador Scott Gration and then Ambassador Princeton Lyman, shuttled back and forth to the region, working with the parties to move the process forward. A number of Americans – acting individually and through civil society groups – also deserve a vote of thanks for keeping a spotlight on the situation in Sudan.

Against the odds, the people of Sudan and their leaders came together and organized an on-time referendum in January that was peaceful, credibly and reflected the will of the people. And despite moments of tension and crisis, they have worked together over the past months to enable a peaceful separation. For those of you that have followed Sudan’s history over the years, you know the significance of this achievement. But you also know that the situation remains fragile. Serious threats to peace and security remain, and great challenges lie ahead. The leaders of Sudan and South Sudan must continue to foster a spirit of cooperation as they work to resolve these threats and challenges. This is essential. Because even though they are now two separate countries, their peoples share historic, geographic, and economic ties. And they share common interests. The fate of Sudan and South Sudan are intertwined.

Challenges in the Relationship between South Sudan and Sudan

The challenges are formidable. South Sudan has achieved its independence, but it has not secured its future. First and foremost, Sudan and South Sudan must resolve outstanding issues between them. Over recent months, with the support of the African Union High-Level Implementation Panel, chaired by former South African President Thabo Mbeki, the CPA parties have made progress in their negotiations. However, they failed to reach final resolution on several key issues before July 9. The recent fighting in Abyei and in the border state of Southern Kordofan has added additional complexities to the unresolved issues. President Bashir and President Kiir committed at the IGAD Summit on July 4 that they would continue negotiations on the outstanding issues after July 9. They must now turn those commitments into action. Both the parties must return to the negotiating table. They must work to resolve these issues in the shortest possible timeframe. Allowing these issues to linger without resolution for too long could destabilize the future relationship between Sudan and South Sudan and lead to tensions and potentially renewed conflict.

Abyei: Abyei remains a crucial issue for resolution. On May 20 the Sudanese Armed Forces invaded and occupied Abyei, following an unprovoked attack by the Sudan People’s Liberation Army on a UN convoy escorting Sudanese armed forces. The North’s takeover of Abyei brought widespread looting and caused the displacement of an estimated 100,000 people.

The Obama Administration strongly condemned Khartoum’s actions in Abyei and worked with President Mbeki and his team and the UN Security Council to persuade the parties to reach an agreement on new security arrangements for Abyei that would lead to the withdrawal of Sudanese troops and the protection of Abyei by a neutral force. The parties agreed that a new UN peacekeeping force, consisting of roughly 4,200 Ethiopian peacekeepers, would be established to maintain security in Abyei, and that all Sudanese military forces would redeploy from the area. It is critical that the parties fully implement this agreement. The violence that flared in Abyei cannot be allowed to return and jeopardize the larger peace. The parties must work with the AU Panel to reach agreement on the area’s future and final status. They also need to resolve the status of five other disputed areas along the border.

Oil: In addition to Abyei, the parties have not sorted out how they will handle oil assets and other financial transition arrangements. Oil and the revenue it generates are indispensable to the prosperity and welfare of all Sudanese – both North and South. Negotiations on oil are of particular urgency. By the end of July, there must be an understanding on how oil in the South will be marketed and sold and to what extent payments will be made to the North. The parties must reach an interim agreement to keep the oil flowing. We have strongly encouraged both parties to refrain from any unilateral actions that could destabilize the oil sector and cause severe economic shocks.

Citizenship: Another crucial issue is citizenship. There continue to be hundreds of thousands of southerners living and working in the North, and a smaller but significant number of northerners in the South. The parties have agreed to work to ensure that no one is left stateless, and they have agreed in principle on a nine-month transition period in which people can adjust their citizenship status. It is critical that both states follow through on this commitment. We have also called on Sudan and South Sudan to guarantee the rights of work, property, residency, and movement for all former and current Sudanese citizens. We continue to discourage any action that might cause people suddenly to become aliens in areas where they have resided and raised their families for decades.

Internal Challenges and Opportunities for South Sudan

Beyond resolving the outstanding issues of its separation from the North, South Sudan also must address its own internal challenges as a newly independent state. The continued activity of armed militia groups and the proliferation of weapons pose an ongoing security threat. South Sudan needs to make substantially more progress on security sector reform and the demobilization and social reintegration of former fighters over the next year. The United States and South Sudan’s other international partners are actively supporting these efforts.

Without question, South Sudan has some of the worst human development indicators in the world. Much of the country has little transportation infrastructure, no formal educational system, limited health services, and no judicial system. There is very little industry or economic infrastructure outside of Juba.

To build a new nation, South Sudan will need coherent and realistic development plans that build local capacity so that the South Sudanese people can, over the long term, do the building themselves rather than become dependent on outsiders and the donor community. USAID along with South Sudan’s other international development partners have been providing technical expertise aimed at increasing the capacity of the new South Sudanese Government. We have worked closely with the Government of South Sudan from the local to the national levels and will continue to do so.

Transparent and democratic processes need to be put into place so that the Southern Sudanese people can hold their government accountable and have adequate input into decision-making. This is also critical if the Government of South Sudan is to sustain international support. The eyes of the world will indeed be on South Sudan in the weeks and months ahead. It must demonstrate its commitment to avoiding the pitfalls that have befallen many other oil-producing nations. President Kiir said the right things in his inauguration speech, and now his Government must deliver. The United States is committed to helping his Government do so.

Internal Challenges and Opportunities for Sudan

Sudan too must address its own internal problems in the months and years ahead. First and foremost, the Government of Sudan must bring an end to the ongoing conflicts in Southern Kordofan and Darfur.

Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile: At the same time that crisis was unfolding in Abyei, fighting broke out in the northern border state of Southern Kordofan, an area that is home to tens of thousands of SPLA fighters. Some 73,000 people have been displaced by the fighting, which continues. Humanitarian access has been severely restricted, and UN peacekeepers have been harassed and blocked from patrolling. On June 28, with the help of the African Union Panel, the parties signed a framework agreement on political and security arrangements for Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile states, but they have not agreed on a cessation of hostilities. And unfortunately, President Bashir has since raised problems with the framework agreement, which puts negotiations at risk. We are continuing to press the parties to bring an end to the fighting, allow unfettered access to humanitarian agencies and to accept a continued UN presence.

Darfur: The Government of Sudan must also finally bring an end to the ongoing conflict and humanitarian crisis in Darfur. A just, inclusive and durable settlement in Darfur is critical for a viable and prosperous Sudan in the future. To achieve such a settlement, the Sudanese Government should find ways to improve the economic situation of the Darfuri people while addressing their political concerns. The government must also seek to bring an end to the culture of impunity that has taken hold in Darfur.

One of Darfur’s rebel groups, the Liberation and Justice Movement may sign a peace agreement with the Government of Sudan this week; however one other major group is still on the fence while other rebel movements have refused to take part in the Doha process. We have emphasized to the Government of Sudan that this agreement would be a positive step toward peace, but that it must continue to negotiate with the other armed movements.

The armed rebel movements in Darfur have contributed to the continuation of this conflict and they must take responsibility for working toward its end. During the days ahead, these groups must choose peace over war and recognize that long-term stability and recovery cannot be gained through additional conflict. We believe the non-negotiating movements must return to the peace talks and seek to conclude an agreement with the Sudanese Government.

Economic situation: In addition to resolving the conflicts in Southern Kordofan and Darfur, the Government of Sudan faces considerable economic challenges. With the loss of oil revenues from the south and a crippling debt estimated at $38 billion, the Government of Sudan needs debt relief, access to the International Financial Institutions and a new infusion of foreign investment. It also needs to revitalize its once promising agriculture sector.

The Government of Sudan showed an encouraging commitment to peace in signing the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, allowing the referendum to take place, and being the first nation in the world to recognize the independence of the South.

The United States has told the Sudanese Government that we are prepared to improve our bilateral relations if they continue down this path of peace. We have presented them with a roadmap toward normalized relations and taken initial steps in that direction. In February, the President initiated the process of reviewing Sudan’s designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, and in June the President’s Deputy National Security Advisor John Brennan traveled to Khartoum to discuss this review and to demonstrate our commitment to this process. We have also approved licenses for several American companies wishing to participate in agricultural development in Sudan.

The United States has told the Government of Sudan that we are prepared to help with the country’s challenges, and we have already taken initial steps to that end. However, in line with our roadmap, we can only implement this support if Sudan lives up to its CPA obligations and demonstrates its commitment to peace within its borders. This is not just the position of the United States; it is also the position of many other members of the international community and key international creditors.

The Government of Sudan now has a historic opportunity to end its isolation and redefine its relationship with the international community. We hope that Khartoum will seize this opportunity to secure a more prosperous future for its people.

Opportunities for a Shared Future of Partnership

The challenges ahead are daunting, and a great deal of hard work remains to be done. But in closing, I recall the scene I witnessed in Juba on Saturday. The spirit of hope that permeated the air can be built upon for a better future.

As President Obama noted in his statement, South Sudan’s successful independence is “a reminder that after the darkness of war, the light of a new dawn is possible. A proud flag flies over Juba and the map of the world has been redrawn. These symbols speak to the blood that has been spilled, the tears that have been shed, the ballots that have been cast, and the hopes that have been realized by so many millions of people.”

Indeed, the light of a new dawn is possible. The people of Sudan and South Sudan have a historic opportunity today to chart a new future based on partnership, cooperation and shared prosperity. We are committed to working with Sudan and South Sudan toward the goal of two viable states at peace with another. The two nations cannot prosper unless the other is stable and economically viable. While they may be two nations, their fates are linked together by their shared history, people, and economics.

The Obama Administration will work with both countries in the weeks and months ahead to realize this promise of a better future for the people in both the South and the North.

Thank you.

U.S. Response to Declaration of Famine in Somalia and Drought in the Horn of Africa

Press Statement
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
July 20, 2011



The United States is deeply concerned by the humanitarian emergency in the Horn of Africa and today’s announcement by the United Nations that a famine is underway in parts of Somalia. The United States is the largest bilateral donor of emergency assistance to the eastern Horn of Africa. We have already responded with over $431 million in food and non-food emergency assistance this year alone.

But it is not enough -- the need is only expected to increase and more must be done by the United States and the international community. That is why today the United States government is providing an additional $28 million in aid for people in Somalia and for Somali refugees in Kenya.

The eastern Horn of Africa is prone to chronic food insecurity which has been exacerbated by a two-year drought. Crops have dried up, livestock have died, and food prices have been skyrocketing. In Somalia, twenty years without a central government and the relentless terrorism by al-Shabaab against its own people has turned an already severe situation into a dire one that is only expected to get worse. Even so, we remain cautiously optimistic that al-Shabaab will permit unimpeded international assistance in famine struck areas.

The United States -- in close coordination with the international community -- is working to assist more than 11 million people in Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, and Somalia, who are in dire need of assistance. To anticipate growing needs, the United States government has worked with our partners over the last year to pre-position food in the region, increase funding for early warning systems, and strengthen non-food assistance in the feeding, health, water and sanitation sectors. In addition to emergency assistance, this administration’s Feed the Future program is working to break the cycle of hunger once and for all by addressing the root causes of hunger and food insecurity through innovative agricultural advances.

But the United States cannot solve the crisis in the Horn alone. All donors in the international community must commit to taking additional steps to tackle both immediate assistance needs and strengthen capacity in the region to respond to future crises.

Protecting Somaliland's endangered cave paintings

Young archeologist works to save prehistoric rock paintings in war-torn Horn of Africa.

Haley Sweetland EdwardsJuly 19, 2011 07:08

PrintEmail

0digg

1 / 5

A primitive rock painting, of a galaxy of colorful animal and human sketches to adorn the caves in the rocky hills of this arid wilderness in northern Somalia, in Laas Gee.

PHOTO BY: Tony Karumba

HARGEISA, Somaliland — Follow an unmarked dirt road to a dry riverbed in the scrubby, northwestern Somali plains and in the shadows, beneath the sandstone outcroppings, are remarkably well-preserved paintings.  They date back between five and 11,000 years and cover the rock walls in streaks of white and black and barbeque sauce red.
White stripes  highlight a warrior's clothing, the point of his spear and the curve of an ancient cow’s udder.
This is Somaliland's Laas Geel. Anywhere else in the world such cave paintings would undoubtedly be a UNESCO World Heritage Site, but here — in the unstable Horn of Africa — it’s in danger of being swallowed up by decades of war, political unrest, drought, poverty and neglect in a region that most of the Western world has left for dead.
And that’s where Sada Mire, a young London-educated Somali archeologist, enters the scene. As the only Somali archeologist working on the ground in greater Somalia, and one of only a handful of academics worldwide focusing on the region, she is trying to almost single-handedly identify and protect what’s left of Somali heritage. And she’s doing it without adequate funding, resources or a qualified staff.
Although Mire is originally from Mogadishu, the young archeologist now heads up the Department of Antiquities for the unrecognized republic of Somaliland, a breakaway region in northern Somalia. While visitors to Somaliland are still required to travel with guards armed with AK-47s, the breakaway republic’s de facto government has been able to maintain a relative peace for nearly 17 years, creating a platform from which the preservation of Somali cultural heritage may begin — if it’s not too late.

“Protecting these cave paintings is very, very important to us. This is our history. It’s who we are.”

~Abdirisaq Wabre Roble, Somaliland’s former Minister of Tourism and Culture

“A whole country’s history is almost gone already,” said Mire, who received her doctorate from the University College London last year. “So much has been destroyed already. Boxes of documents, Bibles, scrolls, coins, swords, knives, traditional art, jewelry, beads — all of it is gone forever.” The entirety of the former Somali National Museum in Mogadishu was looted in the period before 1979, and no museums or archival spaces exist today, she said.

“We don’t even have complete records of what we once had,” Mire said. “The only thing we can do is try to protect what’s left.”
Mire has been able to survey sites from the Ethiopian border to Berbera, a port on the Gulf of Aden — all of which is under the auspices of the de facto Somaliland government — but it’s still too dangerous, even for her, to work in Somalia itself.
In the last half-century, troves of archeological artifacts have been removed from Somalia, first by the Italians and British who colonized the region in the first half of the twentieth century and then, after independence, by impoverished Somalis themselves, driven to sell artifacts for a handful of U.S. dollars to feed their families.

Askariyad ka tirsanayd Booliiska Somaliland ee Laascaanood oo Toogasho lagu Dilay

From Opposition to Government

 

During the last two months, a very disturbing tendency within the current Silanyo administration has come to impact negatively upon Somaliland’s achievements in establishing a functioning, representative democracy in the Horn of Africa, arguably the toughest political neighbourhood in the world. This tendency is tarnishing the image of the country and detracting from its legitimate and long overdue claim to diplomatic recognition. In view of this fact, it is necessary to bring it out into the open in order to mobilise public support for its immediate eradication and cessation.

This tendency is the petty, small minded and counter-productive mindset within the current administration, particularly within some in the Presidency itself, which misses no opportunity to belittle, malign and demean the previous UDUB government, and President Rayalle personally. The refusal to permit the crowds that had gathered at Hargeisa Airport to meet President Rayalle on the tarmac, when this courtesy is routinely extended to other political dignitaries (including current Cabinet Ministers) and was extended to then Kulmiye Party leader Silanyo during the time of the UDUB government, has been widely noted and commented upon. The exclusion of President Rayalle and other UDUB party leaders from the recent Independence Day celebrations for 18 May and 26 June have also been widely noted and commented upon.
However, perhaps the most egregious of these small minded slights relates to the organisation of the delegation that went to Juba for the independence celebrations of South Sudan. Here was a wonderful opportunity for Somaliland to put its best foot forward and use this superb occasion to show the world the maturity of our democracy, the openness of our creed and the wisdom of our leadership by sending one delegation comprising members of the current administration and that of its predecessor, as well other dignitaries. Imagine the impact of having President Silanyo standing next to his predecessor, President Rayalle, who had gracefully handed over the reigns of government as required by the constitution last June when the election results were announced. This would have sent an incredibly powerful message to Africa and the world about who we are and what we believe and live by.

Instead, the government chose petty party politics over the interests of the nation, it chose slighting President Rayalle over its duty to advance the interests of the people of Somaliland, and in short the government chose its petty self vindication over the big picture encompassing the national interest. It refused for President Rayalle to accompany the governmental delegation, despite concerted intervention by many seasoned politicians, including some its most senior supporters – this is both crazy and unacceptable. The government has to grow up and make the transition from opposition party to government. My dear brothers of the Silanyo administration, you are now the government of the country, indeed you have been in office for a year now. Please stop this silly and unbecoming vindictiveness towards President Rayalle and act like the government. Stop this mindless campaign of petty slights as if you are a wife who’s husband has married a second wife – it both demeans and belittles you while coarsening our national politics.

President Rayalle was President of Somaliland for some eight years and, despite whatever your opinion of him may be, is entitled to the respect and courtesy of one who has held that office and trust. My brothers, you won the election and are now in power – focus upon what you are going to do for Somaliland, not how to settle past scores. The people voted for the change you promised them – get on with that and forget the past. In short, please grow up and get on with the serious business of government, we have many challenges facing us which need close attention and creative answers – ficiiltan with the previous administration is not one of these challenges.

Ahmed M.I. Egal

CONGRATULATIONS TO THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH SUDAN AND ITS PEOPLE ON DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

 

Somaliland Societies in Europe (SSE) and its member organisations in Europe congratulate the government of South Sudan and its people on their achievement of independence to become the 193rd state in the world. You deserve to join the ranks of the independent nations and become one of the youngest nations in the world.

We are delighted to see that our brothers and sisters in South Sudan are celebrating the birth of their new nation, the beginning of a new era and an end to a bitter and long struggle for self-determination.

We hope that your declaration of independence will open a new era towards peace and stability between the two sister nation of Republic of South Sudan and the Republic of Sudan and wish to see the leadership of both countries working together for the mutual prosperity of their respective people.

The SSE feels honoured that The Republic of Somaliland, represented by His Excellency President Ahmed Mohamed Mohamoud and his delegation, joined you for the declaration of your Independence. During the last 20 years Somaliland has achieved what many independent nations have not achieved. With very limited foreign assistance, Somaliland has established effective and working institutions. Despite being unrecognised by the international community and being surrounded by violence, terrorism and piracy, it has maintained peace and stability for the past 20 years. The latest presidential election held on 26th June 2010, described by independent international observers as free and fair and the subsequent smooth transfer of power was a testimony to the maturity of the democratisation process in Somaliland.

The Republic of Somaliland has implemented one of the most successful experiments of democratisation, conflict resolution and peace building processes in Sub-Saharan Africa. These are remarkable achievements which the Republic of South Sudan can learn from. Likewise, our nation has important lessons to learn from your achievements to accomplish your mission and your dream to become a free nation and join the independent nations of the world.

Our two nations share similar struggle for sovereignty. We are happy yours has come to a fruitful end: the raising of your flag. We hope you will assist us realise of our dream. Your deserved declaration of independence will indeed serve us a unique opportunity to continue with our struggle to gain a similarly deserved international recognition for the Republic of Somaliland and expect your assistance in our endeavour to join the ranks of independent and sovereign nations.

Enjoy your newly gained precious sovereignty.

After South Sudan: The Case to Keep Dividing Africa

Jul 11 2011, 7:01 AM ET 6

Sudan has been successfully split into two independent countries. Here's why more African nations should divide, secede, splinter, or otherwise scramble the old colonial borders.

Officials look at the newly unveiled map of Sudan after separation / Reuters

On Saturday, South Sudan was finally born. Rather than a moment of existential peril, or an invitation to sub-regional instability, the birth of this new African nation offers a moment of celebration for the persistence of African commitment to self-determination and dignity. This is a moment to consider an alternative reading of African affairs, one that has for some 50 years co-existed alongside the conventional narrative. That long-accepted narrative says that political violence in Africa is always a tragedy and that outsiders invariably must try to reduce this violence no matter the cost in the realization of legitimate political aspirations of Africans. It also says that Africans and their ancestors have for centuries only known feudal dominance, colonial exploitation at European hands, and then finally abuse and abandonment on the part of their own elites. These Africans inherited the borders and machinery of a colonial African states, but South Sudan proves that they do not have to inherit this outdated, post-colonial narrative.

The birth of South Sudan is a momentous invitation not to despair over the travails that the people of this new landlocked and impoverished nation surely will experience, but to celebrate another step toward closing what Pierre Englebert, a professor of African politics at Claremont College, has called "Africa's secessionist deficit." And the deficit in question refers to living standards and development generally. Englebert found, in one of the most exciting recent academic projects in academic African studies, that the unwillingness to cut African nations down in size (in other words, to let new nations form) has "contributed to its underdevelopment."

The idea that Africa suffers from too few secessionist campaigns, too few attempts to carve a few large nations into many smaller ones, flies in the face of conventional wisdom. One of the truisms of African politics is that traditional borders, even when bequeathed by colonizers without the least sympathy for African political justice, ought to be respected. The cult of colonial borders has been a cornerstone not only of diplomacy between African nations but of the assistance programs of foreign governments and multinational non-governmental organizations. This is especially true for the U.S. and Europe, which spend billions on reconstructing failed states such as the Congo. But letting these countries reform into smaller nations might actually reduce conflict, increase economic growth, and cost less in foreign aid. That, by the way, is Englebert's argument in a nutshell in his paper, "Let's Stick Together: Understanding Africa's Secessionist Deficit," published in African Affairs in July 2005.

To be sure, successful breaches have occurred before in the defense of colonial borders. Eritrea managed to escape from Ethiopia after a brutal war of independence waged from 1961 to 1991, though revealingly this new country's borders were coincident with a short-lived Italian colonial enclave. More typically, secessionist campaigns have failed miserably, and proved costly in human life. The desperate attempt by Nigeria's Igbo ethnic group to form a nation-state in "south south" Nigeria in the late 1960s costs the lives of many, including, in 1970, my wife's older brother, one of many infants to die soon after birth in the chaos and deprivation of the Biafran war. In the Congo, Cameroon, and elsewhere, breakaway movements have petered out, exhausted by a lack of international support and, most cruelly, a failure of African imagination.

In the birth of South Sudan, this postmodern idea has finally taken root on African soil. Here is a new nation, without precedent, either in colonial times or traditional pre-colonial times. South Sudan is a geographically determined nation that shares borders with two nations, Congo and Uganda, who stand ready to become natural trading partners. Whether South Sudan becomes an anomaly or a harbinger remains to be seen. In the global conversation about Africa, there are few greater taboos than to cheer for political fragmentation and the rise of new nations. The sub-Saharan, of course, is cursed by the entrenched belief that its nation-states are weak and failing (Alex Perry of Time magazine rudely greeted South Sudan, calling it a "pre-failed" state). Yet many observers, such as Jeffrey Herbst, author of the classic 2000 study, "States and Power in Africa," have argued that African nations are too large and would benefit, in some strategic cases, from break-up.

The logic of division has worked in Europe. Who really considers Belgium for example, to be too small? (If anything, that country's political problems come from being too big, and it is many ways already divided in two.) Or Finland, which is home to far fewer Finnish speakers than there are Igbo speakers living in an area of Nigeria my wife sometimes calls "Igboland." And, besides, why should size be any objection in a world that cheered the birth of Slovenia and Slovakia? Did not the independence of tiny Kosovo receive the full measure of support from the very Western nations who worry that Africa might someday fracture into a hundred nations or more?

In a world where this is a Finland, cannot Sudan's region of Darfur, which is as large France, be a nation? Or the perilous region of Sudan that sits above the South and is home to the much-aggrieved Nubian people? Or could not northern Nigerian, with its 60 million Muslims and its vast farm lands, not be in its own nation? Or Casamance, a part of Senegal split from its mother ship by the Gambia? And might even the continual crisis in Somalia become somehow more understandable, more tolerable, if the international community would recognize as nation-states the two breakaway Somali states (Somaliland and Puntland), which, unlike the region dominated by Mogadishu, are performing relatively well economically and socially?

These are not musings of the foolish or irresponsible. Africans are hungry for new political arrangements -- in the Congo, Nigeria, in Somalia, and what remains of Sudan. But there's a major barrier preventing Africans from creating political arrangements that might better serve them socially, economically, and culturally: Western nations. What Jeffrey Herbst, the president of Colgate and an important scholar on African politics, wrote ten years ago, in a paper on "rethinking African sovereignty," is even truer today. "It is likely that if the United States and other powers were to finally cast aside the old practices [of treating a sovereign African nation-state as sovereign forever] they would find many African countries eager to explore political arrangements that were not so directly tied to the boundaries established by the colonialists."

Secession might not always be the best form for these new arrangements. Perhaps some kind of association between areas bordering one another would do. Consider Eastern Congo, which is today one of the poorest, worst-run places in the world. How could independence make things better in a country dominated by war-lords, pillaging soldiers, awful governance, and relentless poverty? Well, to find the silver lining just look at a map. Eastern Congo, which is terribly distant from the Congolese capital of Kinshasa, covers a vast area with a favorable climate, rich natural resources, and motivated trading partners (albeit located to the east). The chief partner could well be Rwanda -- a relatively rapidly growing, resource-poor country -- which the people of Eastern Congo can easily reach through the border city of Goma. Rwanda, under President Paul Kagame, has turned Anglophone and forged extensive trade networks with Tanzania and Kenya, both with seaports, and with Uganda, which has a large domestic market. Rwanda also has joined the East African trade community (EAC), which generally means no duties or restrictions on movements of goods or people between these countries. By integrating economically with neighboring Rwanda, the vast resources and human initiative of Eastern Congo would be linked physically, socially, economically, and legally with East Africa, perhaps the most thriving, rapidly-growing economic block in sub-Saharan Africa.

And what of Somalia, a benighted nation stitched together out of three pieces -- bequeathed by two European powers -- only in 1960? Somalia is today effectively three nations anyway, two of which, Somaliland and Puntland, cannot receive international recognition. International recognition would open a flow of assistance to these countries, but more crucially, independence would remove the greatest risk of investing in or returning to Somaliland or Puntland: the possibility that somehow the U.S. or a misguided Europe will stitch a single Somalia back together no matter the cost in living standards to its people.

The best proof that the international community must revise its views on secession in Africa comes from a story of the birth of South Sudan. Of course, credit goes to the Southerners themselves, who first persisted in their decades-long war against the North and who then, after achieving a seemingly miraculous peace deal, lost their charismatic leader, John Garang, in a still-mysterious helicopter crash in Uganda in 2005.

Garang was South Sudan's Nelson Mandela. His death robbed his country-in-waiting of its leading political statesman. His successor, Salva Kiir, is a more conventional leader, with roots in South Sudan's long military struggle against Khartoum. Kiir never tried to fill Garang's shoes on the international stage, but showed admirable restraint in refusing to accept the flawed logic of the "humanitarian-interventionist" wing of the international community, which at times called for some kind of international force, or suspending the process leading to independence. Kiir never bough into the idea -- repeatedly floated by U.S. National Security Council staff and the International Crisis Group, that Bashir would use pre-emptive war to halt the process. While the Khartoum government of Omar Bashir repeatedly violated the South's borders and brutalized ethnic compatriots there, Kiir never accepted that any of these outrages should jeopardize the process of the South Sudan achieving independence.

For Kiir's wise restraint, the U.S. deserves considerable credit for brokering the peace deal that resulted in this new nation. Under President George W. Bush, the U.S. negotiated a remarkable deal with Bashir: an end to the civil war and the chance for southerners to have their own nation. In January, southerners voted near-unanimously for independence. Ever since, groups who follow the various conflicts in Sudan -- Darfur especially -- have predicted the worst. To be sure, there's been violence in the run up to South Sudan's birth, but the magnitude has been very small relative to Sudan's bloody past. And the Obama administration wisely did nothing to alter the terms of the North-South settlement, even after Bashir's indictment by the International Criminal Court.

The conventional wisdom states that South Sudan marks the birth of a new nation. But, in real sense, two new nations were born Saturday: South Sudan and what is left of Sudan. The most important question of the moment may well be, What does the birth of South Sudan mean for the rest of Sudan? Khartoum is not a capital of a nation, but the imperial seat of crumbling empire. The country's remaining regions are restive, to put it politely. Is Darfur, the scene of one of the bloodiest civil wars in memory, a nation in the making? Could not the Nubians, in what is now the southern part of Sudan, seek their own nation as well?

To be sure, some aggrieved Africans would prefer to have their grievances met within current political frameworks. "From my experience," Pierre Englebert wrote me a year ago, "the majority of Kivutiens [in eastern Congo] do not seem to want an independent state. But I do agree with the idea that current borders and current states are tragic mistakes and the result of the embrace of colonial domination by some African elites. My guess is that new states must come from some internal political process. This process can only be set in motion by withdrawing the current recognition (and thus sovereignty) of African states."

With the birth of South Sudan, the process of Africans inventing and discovering their own political boundaries has finally begun, after some 50 years of waiting. I for one do not expect many years to pass before South Sudan becomes an invitation to independence for others.

Statement Congratulating the Republic of South Sudan on its Independence

Press Statement

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Washington, DC

July 9, 2011

---

I am delighted to join President Obama in congratulating the Republic of South Sudan on its independence today. The realization of this historic day is a testament to the tireless efforts of the people of South Sudan in their search for peace. We commend South Sudan’s current leaders, including President Salva Kiir Mayardit, for helping guide Southern Sudan to this moment. And we recognize the determination and courage of the many southern Sudanese who never abandoned their hope that peace was possible and who stood in long lines on January 9 to cast their votes.
Independence presents a new beginning for the people of South Sudan; an opportunity to build a nation that embodies the values and aspirations of its people. The challenges are many, but the South Sudanese people have demonstrated their capacity to overcome great odds. The United States will remain a steadfast partner as South Sudan seeks to peacefully meet these challenges and build a free, democratic and inclusive society. The strong ties between our peoples go back many decades, and we are committed to continuing to build on the partnership we have already established in the years ahead.

This historic day not only offers opportunity for the people of South Sudan, but also for the people of Sudan and all of Africa. We commend the Government of Sudan on its decision to be the first to recognize South Sudan’s independence. By continuing on the path of peace, the Government of Sudan can redefine its relationship with the international community and secure a more prosperous future for its people. The United States recognizes the important roles played by the United Nations, African Union, European Union, Arab League, Intergovernmental Authority on Development, and Sudan’s neighbors in supporting the CPA and its implementation, and we look forward to working with them and other international partners toward supporting Sudan and South Sudan as two viable states at peace with one another.