Search This Blog

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

UN report, unemployment rate for youths in Somalia is one of the highest in the world



According to a UN report, unemployment rate for youths in Somalia is one of the highest in the world at 67% among all 14 to 29-year-olds -- 61% among men and 74% among women.

The Somalia Human Development Report 2012, issued by the UN Development Programme considers 82% of Somalis to be poor, with 73% living on less than $2 a day.

It also said that 40% of youths are actively looking for work, while 21% are neither working nor in school with unemployment becoming among the biggest threats facing the Somali society.

Unemployment among youths in Somalia has also prompted many to leave the war-torn nation.

Majority of the young people relocated to neighbouring countries in search of better opportunities. Some went as far as to cross the Mediterranean Sea into Europe due to deteriorating economic conditions back home.

The report surveyed 3,300 households to calculate a Youth Frustration Index. The most common reason young people gave for their frustration was the lack of employment opportunities. The highest levels of frustration were found in south-central Somalia, the epicenter of the war, where a score of 4.3 out of 5 was recorded.

Experts however say that the only solution is for the Somali government to create job opportunities rather than rely on private sectors to employ the country’s youth.

The report warned that the underlying problems faced by Somalia's youngsters threaten peace efforts with youths aged 14 to 29 making up the bulk of militia fighters and criminal gangs.

The report called on donors to focus more on the root causes of conflict and longer-term development assistance to Somalia.

With a permanent government in place for the first time in two decades, the youth in Somalia hope that president Hassan Sheikh’s administration will address unemployment among the youth and create better working condition for the war and famine ravaged Somali people.

The Last Stand of Somalia's Jihad - Can Kenya's invasion of Kismayo put an end to al-Shabab for good?

BY JAMES VERINI | DECEMBER 17, 2012

KISMAYO, Somalia — Incredibly, this small port city, a study in ruin in a country that is a parable of ruin, boasts two airports. There is the new airport, as it's known, laughably to all who touch down there, which lies 10 miles inland and consists of a couple of mostly tarmacked runways and the carcass of a terminal. Kismayo International Airport, in blue block letters, is just barely visible above the building's sun-bleached cornice. Stencil-painted on the wall below that, and more legible, is the flag of the Islamist insurgent movement that until recently controlled Kismayo, Harakat al-Shabab al-Mujahideen, or al-Shabab -- a black rectangle over white classical Somali script that reads "There Is No God But God."

A half-hour drive away, hidden among the sand dunes just outside Kismayo, is the long-dormant "old" airport. It offers one dirt runway and, in the place of a terminal, a half-century-old army personnel carrier, rusted to the color of primeval toast, left over from the days when Kismayo was part of Italian Somaliland. What it lacks in infrastructure the old airport makes up for in exclusive coastal access. The beach nearby was once popular with European sunbathers, but after two decades of civil war, it's so deserted one could walk along the Indian Ocean for days without encountering another person.

Both airports now belong to the Kenya Defense Forces (KDF), which swept into Kismayo in early October with three mechanized battalions, backed up by soldiers from the Somali National Army and a local militia called Ras Kamboni; they are the poles in the southern axis of Sector 2, as the KDF calls its new domain in Somalia, which spans the country's Lower Juba and Gedo provinces. The southern axis is one of the more cinematic war zones Africa has to offer at the moment; aside from the airports, it includes an encampment overlooking the ocean and the Kismayo port, which on most days calls to mind a Turner painting, with carved-wood barges tethered two deep to its dock.

Operation Linda Nchi is the first combat deployment ever undertaken by the KDF; until now it has been confined to supporting U.N. peacekeeping missions. The original aim of Linda Nchi, which means "Protect the Nation" in Kiswahili, was to keep the al Qaeda-affiliated al-Shabab out of Kenya. But the KDF has now been in Somalia for over a year. It has 2,500 troops here and plans to deploy 2,000 more by next year. According to commanders, the new mission is to "mop up" what is left of al-Shabab -- that is, to end the Islamist insurgency for good.

The KDF soldiers have made a convincing show of going to war. At headquarters, at the new airport, they've dug hundreds of bunkers into the red earth and undergrowth and have set up tarp-roofed tents and makeshift showers. Artillery guns and tanks sit among them in a manner that suggests imminent battle; but the troops here haven't seen action in months. Lots of green plastic sandbags are everywhere, as well as trucks and armored personnel carriers with AU, for African Union, printed on their doors. A surveillance drone sits in the hangar.

Nearby is the officers' lounge, a thatched hut outfitted with thermoses of lemon tea and a television with satellite-dish service. In early December, Col. Adan Hassan, commander of the 3rd Battalion, who oversees the airport, greeted me and three other reporters there. A tall, stoop-shouldered man, Hassan wore well-pressed fatigues and wire-rim glasses. By way of introduction, he told us that the area around us was still alive with al-Shabab holdouts. "They usually start firing in the evening. When they fire, don't move; just look there," he said, pointing vaguely toward the desert. He looked at the female reporters. "For the ladies, you can sleep in the armored personnel carriers if you want."

At the far end of the hut a bedsheet was draped on the wall. A projector sat before it. A soldier at a laptop, his helmet strapped on tightly, a semiautomatic rifle leaning against his chair, brought up a PowerPoint presentation. A series of slides outlined the obstacles facing Kenya in Somalia. Hassan read them off. Commenting on a slide titled "Demography," he pointed out that, in Somalia, "Loyalty revolves around clan" and "Clan is unifying and divisive factor." Under "Challenges in Local Areas," he listed "nonexistent government structures" and "vastness of sector."

I asked Hassan how many al-Shabab fighters Kenya had killed or captured on its march to Kismayo. "I don't have the number at my fingertips, but I assure you we degraded them," he said. "When we entered this town, it was deserted. Many people had fled. But now, you wouldn't believe it. They are welcoming us. It's because of the confidence we've given them, the security we've given them."

All the officers in the hut, I noticed, including Hassan, wore new white-and-green AU armbands with gold trim. They were clearly fresh out of the box, meant to emphasize to us that the Kenyan troops are part of the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM). I asked Hassan how Kenya's and AMISOM's objectives coincide, or don't. They are one and the same, he assured me. "We're not an occupational force," he said. "If the Somali people are secure, we're secure."

Kenya's particular security interests kept creeping back into his answers, however. When another reporter asked how a spate of recent bombings in Kenya, believed to be al-Shabab-related, influenced the operation, Hassan made clear that "what is happening in Kenya has nothing to do with what we're doing here." But then, he added, "We'll finish them here in Somalia; then we'll look for them in Kenya." Asked about Kismayo, he said it "was not an objective of the KDF. It was an AMISOM objective."

This both is and isn't true. Since AMISOM decided to assemble a multinational force to go after al-Shabab in 2010, taking Kismayo has been viewed as the endgame, at least of the military phase of the mission. The city was al-Shabab's base and the port its economic engine, providing an estimated $35 million to $50 million a year to the group. And as the interests of the United States and European Union, Somalia's largest bilateral and multilateral donors, respectively, have shifted in the last few years from targeting high-value al Qaeda in East Africa figures to degrading al-Shabab and shoring up Somalia, Kismayo began to be viewed as a priority by them too. In the West, the capture of the city is now seen not just as a win against Islamist political extremism, but a symbolic victory in the battle for what may be the world's most dysfunctional country. The United Nations covers AMISOM's budget, and most of that outlay is covered by Europe. Washington has put at least $500 million into AMISOM and the Somali army since 2007. The Pentagon and CIA, which have hugely increased operations in Somalia since the 9/11 attacks, provide intelligence support to AMISOM, along with the British, French, and Israelis. Despite all this help, Kenya's victory in Kismayo was greeted with surprised joy. No one expected the KDF to prevail so quickly.

But it is also the case that Kenya was never interested in pitching into the bloody battle for the capital, Mogadishu, which has killed over 500 AMISOM troops. Kenya has always wanted to get in and out of Somalia as quickly as possible, and it has known all along that taking Kismayo, just 180 miles from the Kenya-Somalia border and the nearest city, with a massive show of force could be the way to do that. Capturing Kismayo was "significant for Kenya because there were serious questions about its willingness to fight," a Western diplomat told me.

More of a mystery is why Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki chose to launch Linda Nchi to begin with. The question is still a matter of gossip among Kenya's political class over a year after the operation began. Theories abound. There are the strange politics of the African Union, which has few of the dictates for cooperation that bind EU countries and at least as much fractiousness. Some think AU members, particularly Ethiopia, browbeat Kibaki into providing troops. Some think he has been watching with growing anxiety the rise of Rwanda and Uganda (the latter has contributed and lost the most troops in Somalia), whose soldiers-turned-presidents have turned their small countries into economic performers and darlings of the West, while the poverty and corruption in Kenya, once East Africa's leader, have worsened. Still others think Kibaki was so humiliated by the election violence that overtook Kenya in 2007 -- official estimates are that 1,400 people were killed -- and by the International Criminal Court indictments that followed, that he jumped at the chance to edit his legacy with a patriotic war against Islamists in the run-up to an election year. (The Kenyan elections have since been postponed to 2013.) Some believe it all. "Kenya's very vulnerable right now," a U.N. employee who works on Somali issues told me. When I asked in what way, this person said, "In every way."

Then there are the usual noises about murky monetary interests. Kenyan businessmen want to wrap up the black market that flows through Kismayo, it is said, or energy companies want Kenya to control disputed coastal waters so they can tap unproven hydrocarbon reserves offshore. One certainty is that Kenya is trying to attract investment to a new port on the island of Lamu; the more trade it can siphon off from Kismayo, the better for Kenya.

But "Protect the Nation" can be taken at face value too. The mess of security and humanitarian problems caused by Somalia has become a national obsession in Kenya. A half-century ago, the tribal domains that span the two countries were ineptly split, resulting in a long-running border dispute. Today, roughly 2.5 million Somalis live in Kenya, many in dire poverty. Half a million of them inhabit camps around the town of Dadaab, just across the border with Somalia, in what may be the world's largest permanent refugee crisis. Since al-Shabab came to power in southern Somalia in 2009, it has taken advantage of a 400-mile-long porous border to sow a campaign of terror in Kenya. According to a report by the U.N. Monitoring Group on Somalia and Eritrea, al-Shabab recruits disaffected youth from refugee camps and Somali slums in Nairobi, Mombasa, and other cities (along with Muslim and Christian Kenyans) to carry out bombings and shootings in Kenya. Churches, police stations, and city buses have been targeted. The last month has seen a series of grenade attacks in Nairobi's Somali-dominated Eastleigh neighborhood, including one on the night of Dec. 7, at a mosque, that killed five people and maimed a member of parliament.

Kenya had a real and pressing need to pursue al-Shabab, in other words, and particularly to target Kismayo. And walking around the KDF camp at the airport, talking to soldiers, I found they all repeated the same mantra: We're defending our home. Contrary to what Hassan had said, the attacks in Kenya had everything to do with the mission, as they saw it. (The similarities to the arguments one heard in the run-up to the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq -- "we'll fight them there so we don't have to fight them here" -- were striking.)
Personal pride was involved too. I spoke with soldiers who'd been in the KDF for 20 and 30 years. They had watched their army progress from a barely trained, ill-provisioned afterthought to one of the most professional fighting forces on the continent. They wanted the world to know about it. "We're ready to fight a real war now," one longtime enlisted man told me.

Even with that advantage, though, President Kibaki could hardly have arrived at the decision to invade Somalia more awkwardly. Certain members of his government had encouraged him to respond to al-Shabab by annexing part of Somalia's southern borderland, in an effort to create a kind of Kenyan protectorate that would be known as Jubaland. The United States and the European Union, however, discouraged the plan. Still, beginning in 2008, Kenya trained and equipped the Ras Kamboni militia, which is believed to have several hundred men around Kismayo. In a scenario that invited visions of the Bay of Pigs invasion, the KDF drew up plans to assemble an army made up of Ras Kamboni militiamen and (taking a cue from its enemy, apparently) Somalis from refugee camps to launch a proxy war against al-Shabab. Kenya's Western allies refused to sign off on that scheme. "We saw it as very risky and potentially illegal," one Western diplomat told me.

Kenya had good reasons for staying out of Somalia, and one very good reason in particular -- Ethiopia. In 2006, Ethiopian troops invaded, with U.S. military support, after years of cross-border incursions by Somali militias. They fought their way impressively to Mogadishu, where they joined up with Somali national troops in an attempt to pacify the city. It was a disaster. Thousands of civilians were killed; several hundred thousand were displaced. Attacks on Ethiopian troops increased, as did attacks in Ethiopia. Troop morale plummeted, and by 2009, al-Shabab had the Ethiopians on their heels. Somalia was turning into another graveyard for empires, it appeared to Kibaki. If Ethiopia, with its soldiers hardened by years of civil war and with its American helicopters, could find itself in such a quagmire, he worried, what fate awaited Kenya?
Then something unexpected happened: Somalia began to turn around. The populace began turning on al-Shabab. The African Union stood up its army, and slowly but steadily it cleared the Islamists from Mogadishu. The Ethiopians regained their composure and took control in the fractious southwest border region. Thanks to international maritime patrols, piracy off the coast abated. And the United States and European Union poured funds into the effort. For the first time in 20 years, people started talking about Somalia showing promise. After decades of default cynicism toward Somalia, "There's now a fresh look being taken," the U.S. special representative for Somalia, James Swan, told me.

By the fall of 2011, the African Union had 12,000 troops in Somalia, most in Mogadishu, and Kibaki faced a choice: Either he could play it safe and disappoint his regional partners and the growing chorus of Kenyans calling for a war with al-Shabab, or he could get involved and risk a campaign of reactionary attacks in Kenya, along with television news scenes of Kenyan soldiers dying in the Somali desert -- all of it in the run-up to an election. After a spate of al-Shabab-sponsored kidnappings of European tourists and aid workers in Kenya, the choice was all but made for him.

Kibaki announced the invasion in October 2011 -- two days after it had started. Kenya's neighbors were taken aback; few of them had been consulted, it seems. No one was as surprised as the Transitional Federal Government in Mogadishu, which publicly questioned Linda Nchi. Only after a round of frenzied post-facto shuttle diplomacy with Nairobi did it voice approval. Even the African Union had its doubts. The KDF force wasn't formally admitted to AMISOM until four months later, in February of this year.

Linda Nchi's opening went as badly as its planning. For reasons that escape comprehension, the KDF moved in as the fall rainy season began. Vehicles got bogged down in rain and mud. When Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga traveled to Israel to ask for help, al-Shabab had a public relations field day. Not only was Kenya a stooge of the West; it was now engaged in a war against Islam. Before a shot had been fired, the Somali populace was turning on Kenya.

But, after a series of false starts, the Kenyan forces found their rhythm. Thanks to a special agreement with AMISOM, they were allowed to bring in bombers and warships. They pounded al-Shabab positions across Lower Juba, Middle Juba, and Gedo, and then moved north, taking town after town. After a stiff 10-day fight at the village of Miido, the KDF turned east and raced for the coast. In the early-morning hours of Sept. 28, special-operations forces units landed on the beach and parachuted into the interior. They were followed later that day by two mechanized columns, including Ras Kamboni and the Somali National Army, which converged on Kismayo from the west and south, while an amphibious detachment landed on the beach. They quickly overtook a contingent of al-Shabab fighters holed up in caves in a lime quarry on Kismayo's northern outskirts.

The assault on the city was well choreographed -- and, as it turned out, overkill. A field commander told me, "The opposition was not what we expected." When I asked why that was, a faint smile overtook his lips, and he said, "Maybe they knew they were up against a better force." The truth, however, is more complicated. Al-Shabab had no intention of defending Kismayo.
* * *
Mogadishu is famous for its destroyed infrastructure. By contrast, Kismayo, home to about 180,000 people, is striking for its lack of infrastructure. Locals will tell you this is because Kismayo, a medieval fishing settlement that evolved into a spur of the Swahili-coast livestock trade during the colonial era, has changed hands so often. In the 1890s, the sultan of Muscat ceded Kismayo to Britain, which in turn gave it to Italy. After Somalia won its independence in 1960, Kismayo's business elite turned its port into a regional trade hub, but when the civil war began in 1991, the city was flung between warlords. U.S. Marines occupied it, with little effect. It was fought over for more than a decade by local militias, the Transitional Federal Government, the Ethiopians, Ras Kamboni, and al-Shabab's predecessor, the Islamic Courts Union, which shifted its base from Mogadishu to Kismayo in 2006. Al-Shabab, the extremist wing of the Islamic Courts Union, took full control of the city in late 2009.

The day after arriving at the airport camp, we piled into an armored personnel carrier in a military convoy. At the front of the line of vehicles was a SUV containing a machine that jams radio frequencies used to detonate improvised explosive devices. The KDF soldiers wore body armor and helmets. Riding heedlessly alongside us in a "technical" -- the battlewagon of choice in Somalia, a stripped-down pickup truck mounted with a Russian-made DShK anti-aircraft gun -- was their Ras Kamboni escort. The only thing the gunner had on for protection was a pair of earphones.

We passed by an open-air dump where garbage smoldered, by encampments of domed huts made from tree branches and cloth, and then into Kismayo's dirt streets, which are lined with one-story stucco buildings. Al-Shabab insignias were still prominent on walls, a reminder of the suffering inflicted. When al-Shabab came into southern Somalia, it helped decimate what had been the country's breadbasket by taxing and harassing farmers and pastoralists, and it then forced out aid agencies that were trying to feed the population. Kismayo's nameless main road, the only paved one, runs through Liberty Square, where a toppled monumental column erected after independence now lies on the ground in blocks. Under al-Shabab, Liberty Square became a stage for public floggings, dismemberments, and executions. When its police wanted to bury people up to their necks and then stone them to death, as they did to a young woman accused of adultery in 2008, they used the softer ground of the nearby soccer stadium.

At the Kismayo port, freighters from India, Pakistan, and Syria were docked, unloading shipments of fruit juice, chewing gum, milk, and sugar. Al-Shabab derived most of its revenue from taxing the goods that went in and out of it. No great fans of al-Shabab, the merchants nonetheless allowed it to rule Kismayo because it was good for business -- al-Shabab simplified the bribery system and did away with competing militia roadblocks set up to extort trade. Now the KDF occupies the port's warehouses and inspects every ship.
A delegation of merchants and community leaders met us in one of the warehouses. One by one, they came before us to list their grievances. "We ask for things from the central government, but they don't give us anything," one man complained. "The world is doing nothing for us."

A port administrator I met, Abduli, said that though al-Shabab was good for business in certain ways, it wasn't worth the toll the group exacted on Kismayo. "In the port, in the market, Shabab always, 'Give money, give money, give money.' Shabab tax hundred dollars per shipment!" he said. "Shabab kill everyone. Kill mothers, kill babies, kill everything." When I asked whether he was affiliated with a particular militia or other group, Abduli admitted he was a member of Ras Kamboni. But, he said, "Now clan is over. Tribe, over."

"What comes next?" I asked.

"Is come tourism!" he said. "Is come tourism to Kismayo. Kismayo beautiful. Every culture, black and white, come. I want life, you know? I want the government. I want the administration. Shabab attacking is problem only."

Al-Shabab is still attacking. The week before we arrived, gunmen shot up the home of a local security official. Three days later, grenades were thrown into a crowd. The victims were brought to Kismayo General Hospital. They lay in beds in the hospital's courtyard, under a tree, surrounded by refuse. I spoke with a woman whose head and leg were bandaged. A grenade hit her near the temple, she told me, and then landed in the lap of a man sitting near her. It killed him, but she somehow survived. "I was very lucky," she said. An even worse wound was caused by a bullet to her leg, which didn't come from the attackers. After the grenades were thrown, Ras Kamboni troops present at the scene shot indiscriminately into the crowd and the air. Two other casualties I met at the hospital were uninjured by the explosions but were shot afterward by the militiamen.

After returning from the hospital, I walked out to the wire at the new airport camp. A line of small bunkers with machine gun nests faced an expanse of sand and shrubs. I spoke to a pair of Kenyan soldiers who were playing checkers with soda bottle caps. I asked what they thought of their counterparts in Ras Kamboni and the Somali National Army. Their feelings were mixed, they said. All the Somalis were ill-equipped, badly trained, and badly paid (if paid at all), but some were more disciplined than others and some knew how to fight al-Shabab.

"In guerrilla warfare you don't need training," one of the soldiers told me. "You just need to know how to shoot and duck."

I asked whether he trusted the Somalis. "We have no choice," he said. It's well-known to the troops here that Ras Kamboni's leader, Sheikh Ahmed Madobe, was a high-ranking administrator in al-Shabab before turning against them. Indeed, Ras Kamboni was an Islamist insurgency before al-Shabab was even created. Many families in the area have members in al-Shabab and others in Ras Kamboni or the Somali army. The Kenyans suspect they tip one another off about operations. But there's little he can do about it, the Kenyan soldier said. "Now we are brothers."

Some Ras Kamboni fighters have been tasked with guarding the villages around Kismayo, where they live among the population. Others man the airport terminal. They stand out starkly from the KDF troops. They wear tattered solid-green fatigues and have no body armor, helmets, or, often, boots -- they've grown used to facing al-Shabab head-on in sandals, with old single-shot rifles. In the terminal, whose halls smell of urine and excrement, they sleep on blankets on the floor beside walls decorated with graffiti left by al-Shabab. One picture shows an al-Shabab technical shooting at a helicopter. It looks like a child's rendering of a scene from Black Hawk Down, and indeed it may be. Al-Shabab reportedly recruited children from Kismayo to put on the front line. (And the 1993 episode has become part of the national mythos.)

Ras Kamboni and the Somali national troops have been accused of mistreating Somalis. So has the KDF. So far, Kenya has refused to allow human rights investigators into the places under its control; nonetheless, Human Rights Watch has advised Somali refugees in Kenya who fled the fighting to not return yet, because they may face abuse by the KDF.

This is precisely what President Kibaki wanted to avoid. Perhaps for that reason, after taking Kismayo, Kenya has cooled its heels. Hassan spends most of his time these days sitting in a hut near his tent sipping tea and speaking on a cell phone. The KDF soldiers appear to be mostly concerned with keeping a neat camp. One day, I watched a group of them sweep a runway -- for two hours. I asked how they liked life during wartime. "I've been here for six months," one soldier said. "Can you find me an American wife?"

It's generally assumed that success in Somalia, particularly in the south, depends on the ability of the African Union and the new Somali president, Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, to help the country's desperate population as quickly as possible. They're already behind. Despite a budget that will approach $800 million this year, AMISOM has only just begun to think about planning for the peace -- in part because it thought the fighting would drag on much longer. "They never expected to win this fast. They thought they'd have time to figure out the civilian component," says Alex Rondos, the EU special representative to the Horn of Africa. "They're victims of their own success."

When Linda Nchi began last year, an editorial in the Daily Nation, Kenya's leading newspaper, pointed out that after troops captured territory, "Kenya's biggest challenge is to prosecute an effective counter-insurgency campaign to degrade Al-Shabaab." Everyone I spoke with, from AMISOM officials to diplomats, agreed with that analysis. They also agreed that al-Shabab is probably not in retreat from southern Somalia so much as it's in retrenchment. With contributions from the Somali diaspora drying up thanks to its growing unpopularity, al-Shabab knew, long before the KDF reached Kismayo, that it didn't have the manpower or money to face a conventional army. So its fighters have blended into the population, where they are recruiting young freelance assassins and waiting to see what AMISOM does next. Al-Shabab fighters have studied the Taliban and Iraqi insurgencies, and in some cases contributed to them. "Shabab has been preparing for this onslaught for a long time. They've been preparing to sink in, to make the leadership mobile," an intelligence analyst involved in operations against al-Shabab told me. "Time is not on our side."

Yet neither AMISOM nor the KDF appears to have a long-term counterinsurgency strategy. One possible reason for this is that senior officials in the new Somali administration and AMISOM are involved in negotiations with al-Shabab to disarm. Another, more obvious, reason is that Kenya has no experience in counterinsurgency (its Anti-Terrorism Police Unit investigates al-Shabab affiliates in Kenya). But probably the most important reason is that Kenya doesn't want to get embroiled in a guerrilla war like the one in Mogadishu. "We're seeing a caution about going beyond areas they can control," one diplomat said.
At the same time, Kenya is attempting to demonstrate, with a pitiable lack of subtlety, its allegiance to Ras Kamboni and other powerful elements in the south that are suspicious of Mogadishu and President Mohamud's centralizing tendencies. Last week, Mohamud and a Somali delegation were supposed to have met with Kenyan officials in Nairobi. The day of their flight, Kenya informed them they'd be denied entrance.

At the airport camp, Hassan said that his mission now is to "mop up" al-Shabab holdouts. But when I asked whether he had men collecting intelligence among the population, he said that was being left to Ras Kamboni. I asked on two occasions whether he was conducting regular patrols. The first time he said no. The second time he said yes, but admitted that they were mostly meant to secure the airport. Asked whether he was conducting systematic house raids or attempting any other standard counterinsurgency measures, Hassan offered: "We've cordoned villages." I asked how many. "Two," he said.

When I asked why, in the two months since the KDF took Kismayo, no local al-Shabab higher-ups had been captured, even though they are all personally known to Sheikh Madobe and others in the area, he said, "I don't know. That's a question for the international community." He added, "I'm only doing what I've been told to do."

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Russian vessels en route to Horn of Africa

Dec 18, 2012 14:08 Moscow



A group of Russian Northern Fleet ships is sailing to the Horn of Africa to take part in an anti-piracy mission in the region.

The large submarine hunter Severomorsk, a rescue tug, a tanker and other vessels left their homeport of Severomorsk on Tuesday for the Barents Sea.

The group will then sail by way of the Atlantic, the Mediterranean and the Suez Canal to the Gulf of Aden.

In the course of the expedition, the Russian vessels will call at a number of foreign ports, the Russian Navy’s press service reports.

The Severomorsk is taking part in escort operations in the Gulf of Aden for the second time.

All in all, vessels of the Russian Northern Fleet have escorted more than 40 international convoys in this pirate-infested area.

Voice of Russia, RIA

AFRICOM headquarters to stay in Germany,U.S. Army Gen. Martin Dempsey says


By John Vandiver Stars and Stripes
Published: December 17, 2012


U.S. Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, answers questions at a Monday town hall with members of U.S. Africa Command on Kelley Barracks in Stuttgart, Germany. Dempsey visited as part of a holiday tour that also took him to bases in Bahrain and Afghanistan.
David Rogers/Stars and Stripes
STUTTGART, Germany — U.S. Africa Command isn’t going anywhere, at least for now, according to the U.S. military’s top officer.

Since it became fully operational four  source of more controversy than its location. From the outset, numerous African countries pushed back against the idea of an AFRICOM headquarters on the continent while political leaders in the U.S. have steadily lobbied for the command to be relocated to their home districts.

However, Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint chiefs of Staff, during a town hall meeting with servicemembers and civilians at AFRICOM’s Kelley barracks headquarters Monday, said he thinks the command should stay right where it is, in Stuttgart.

“We think for operational reasons — unless there is a huge (cost) disparity — operational reasons should dominate” the debate about location, Dempsey said.

While a congressionally mandated cost analysis is still being conducted that compares the expense of doing business in Stuttgart versus the U.S., Dempsey said he believes the command will remain in Germany, where AFRICOM officials are closer to their African partners. “The answer I can give you with confidence today is, yes,” Dempsey said in response to a question from the audience on whether the command would remain.

Dempsey, whose stop in Stuttgart was part of a holiday season tour to bases stretching from Bahrain and Afghanistan to Germany, answered questions from AFRICOM staffers on a range of subjects.

Dempsey discussed the implications of the so-called “fiscal cliff,” which would force an extra $500 billion in cuts over 10 years on the Defense Department. While military manpower would be exempt from those cuts, its ability to properly train the force for operations would be hard hit, Dempsey said.

“It’s called the fiscal cliff for a reason,” Dempsey said. “The impact is severe.”

Even if politicians in the U.S. reach a deal, the Defense Department faces a new fiscal reality after a decade of war. Dempsey said military leaders are looking at ways to become more efficient, and that includes reforms to the military retirement system. However, Dempsey told troops any changes would be grandfathered, and would not impact troops already serving.

Meanwhile, manpower costs, which account for about 45 percent of the budget, could “throw the system out of balance” if they were to climb to 50 percent, he said.

Dempsey, talking about the U.S.’s deeper strategic focus on the Pacific, said he and other commanders continue to develop plans for how best to position troops around the globe.

The military hasn’t yet found the right balance between forward deployment, rotational forces and stationing troops in the U.S., Dempsey said. However, Dempsey indicated that in the future, more troops would be based in the States.

“Because it is the homeland forces that generally provide a surge capability, so that when (we get) things wrong and something happens that we didn’t expect, you can surge,” Dempsey said. “I don’t think we have it balanced yet.”

Meanwhile, when it comes to operating in hot spots in Africa such as Mali, which in the past year has become a haven for terrorist groups, the U.S. will work with partners in the region on security concerns, he said.

While there are times where threats to U.S. interests are so great that the U.S. must act on its own, “Mali is probably not one of them,” he said.

vandiverj@estripes.osd.mil

http://www.stripes.com/news/africom-headquarters-to-stay-in-germany-dempsey-says-1.201048

Somalia militant group publicly rebukes American member for obstinacy, ‘pursuit of fame’


By Associated PressPublished: December 17

Abu Mansur al-Amriki,

NAIROBI, Kenya — Militants in Somalia are publicly rebuking their best known American fighter.
Al-Shabab posted a statement Monday scolding Omar Shafik Hammami, formerly of Daphne, Alabama.
Hammami, who is also known as Abu Mansur al-Amriki, said publicly earlier this year that he fears members of al-Shabab may kill him over differences of opinion.
The new al-Shabab statement says Hammami’s video releases are the result of personal grievances that stem from a “narcissistic pursuit of fame.” The statement said al-Shabab has been speaking to Hammami in private but that those efforts have been “fruitless.” The statement said al-Shabab was morally obligated to out his “obstinacy.”
The statement was posted on a Twitter feed used by a member of al-Shabab.
The FBI placed Hammami on its most wanted terrorist list last month.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Munaasibad La Isku Arkay oo Lagu Maamuusay Abwaanka Wayn ee Cali Banfas


|

Abwaanka caanka ah ee Ali Banfas ayaa loogu sameeyey munaasabad Magaalada London

Ali banfasn ( waaheen )
Abwaan Cali Banfas oo ka hadlaya Munaasibada isaga lagu maamuusay

Munaasabad si heer sare ah loo agaasimay oo ay ka soo qayb galeen shacab fara badan oo reer Somaliland ah ayaa xalay 16/12/2012 ka dhacday Copland High School in Wembley, London.

Munaasabadan oo loo sameeyey Abwaanka caanka ah ee Ali Banfas.ayaa ahayd mid aad u qurux badan isla markaana aanay ka maqnayn fanaaniintii reer Somaliland ee ku nool caasimada dalka Ingiriiska ee London sida Canab Jamac, Nimco Degen iyo sayigeeda Abdikarim Raas, Ali Seenyo,Nuur Daalacay iyo qaar kale oo badan oo ka muujiyey goobtaasi wacdaro.waxa sidoo kale joogay uruka West London Somaliland Community, Ilays, Aqoonyahano iyo Mujaahidiin.


Ali Banfas ayaa ku sugnaa London ilaa sanadkii hore dabayaaqadiisii,isagoo ka soo qayb galay barnaamijkii Somali week, hase ahaatee ay u suurtoobi wayday arrimo caafimaad awgeed hadase caafimaadkiisu aad ayuu u wacan yahay waxan u soo jeedaa  wadankiisii hooyo ee Somaliland.


Waaheen Media Group
London

Mudaharaad ay is-rasaasayni weheliso oo caawa xaafada jidka 150 ka ku dhex maray Booliiska iyo Kooxo Gadoodsan

 | 
Hargeysa(Waaheen) salaadii cishaa kadib waxa ay xaafadda jidka 150-ka is-rasaasayn iyo Mudaharaado Rabsahada wataa ku dhex mareen Ciidamadda Booliiska iyo Dadweyne Gadoodsanaa oo saacadaasi soo istaadhay.

Waxa lagu war-helay mar kaliya iyadoo uu is qabsaday Ololka Taayiro lagu gubayay badhtamaha Jidka 150-ka, kuwaasoo ay shideen dadweyne Gadoodsan kuwaasoo ku dhawaaqayay erayo ay kaga soo horjeedaan Natiijadda Doorashadii lagu dhawaaqay ee Hargeysa ee ay Komishanku is weydaariyeen Afar Musharax oo ay sheegeen Natiijadoodii lagu dhawaaqay inay qaldantay.
Kooxahan waxa markiiba soo gaadhay Booliis hubaysan kuwaasoo ay isweydaarsadeen rasaas, kadib markii ay isku dayeen inay ka bakhtiiyaan taayiradii ay gubayeen, iyagoo Booliisku markiiba bilaabay rasaasta.
Qof goob-jooge ahaa oo Waaheen u waramay ayaa sheegay dadweynaha laftoodu inay Rasaas iyo shied ugu jawaabeen, isla markaana ay Booliiska Goobtii ka eryadeen, iyagoo sii watay rabshadihii ay dib u istaadheen.
Lama sheegin wax khasaare ah oo labada dhinac dhex maray, hase yeeshee waxa ay dad goob joog ahi sheegeen xaaladda xalay inay ka cuslayd tii ay doraad dadweynaha iyo Booliisku isku baacsanayeen shaaracyada Hargeysa.
Short URL: http://waaheen.com/?p=55690

Monday, December 17, 2012

The 2013 Top Ten List of Business and Human Rights Issues was published by the Institute for Human Rights and Business (IHRB) on International Human Rights Day, 10 December 2012.


Growing awareness of the human rights impacts of business relationship activities will command greater attention on the corporate responsibility agenda over the coming year. Images of children stitching footballs and women bent over sewing machines for long hours have previously spurred attention to the question of the responsibility of businesses for what happens in their value chains
Efforts to combat human trafficking and forced labour will continue to play a growing role on the agenda for responsible business during 2013. The California Transparency Act and a new US executive order strengthening protections against trafficking in US public procurement will further focus attention on exploitation and abuse in company supply chains
In the past year, international scrutiny of companies in the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) sector has increased in part because of revelations that several companies had provided surveillance technology to governments which undermined the rights of privacy and freedom of expression. While some companies actively marketed such technologies, others have struggled with the dilemma of supplying technology, which can have ‘dual-‘ and ‘multiple-use’... 
The past year saw growing awareness of the instrumental nature of key business sectors in ensuring respect for human rights. Best understood is the role project finance plays in this area – whether in the form of publicly provided finance (such as through the International Finance Corporation) or private provided finance... 
Creating coherence between human rights policy commitments and procurement is a well-recognised challenge for companies around the world. As the new joint report by IHRB and GBI on respect for human rights in business relationships points out, procurement departments are often incentivised to select business partners who offer the lowest price, and do not necessarily take account of their company’s own sustainability requirements, including its human rights policies... 
Factory fires over recent months in Pakistan (with at least 262 deaths in a much publicized Karachi incident) and Bangladesh (with at least 124 deaths in the November Dhaka fire) – are painful reminders that workplace rights continue to be violated on a massive scale, including in factories supplying international brands... 
How can countries blessed by nature but too often cursed by human nature, best ensure that exploitation of oil, gas, minerals and other resources benefit all their people and not just a few? One answer involves greater focus on potential human rights impacts, starting with the earliest stages of the resource cycle: those of pre-exploration and exploration... 
Lobbying has long been recognised as a legitimate tool for companies and other societal actors who seek to have their voices heard in public policy debates. In recent years, debates have grown around the extent to which ethical principles and greater transparency in lobbying are necessary for the purpose of protecting the broader public interest and safeguarding corporate reputations and legitimacy... 
The partial lifting of sanctions on Myanmar, the emergence of South Sudan as the world’s newest nation, and political transformations in northern Africa have made these emerging economies potentially attractive destinations for foreign investment... 
Global concern over sustaining food supplies and maintaining access to water resources has led many businesses to increase investments in land and agriculture. Companies investing in infrastructure such as roads or airports, or developing extractive industries, or building tourism projects, also need access to land... 

Somaliland: Kidnapping and Disappearance – An HRLHA Appeal and Urgent Action



Wednesday, 05 December 2012 14:36

Statement is from the Human Rights League of the Horn of Africa (HRLHA).

To: President of the Republic of Somaliland

Your Excellency President Ahmed M. Mohamoud Silanyo - Somaliland1991@gmail.com


TEL/FAX: 252-225-3871

Your Excellency,
The Human Rights League of the Horn of Africa (HRLHA) is highly concerned about the safety and whereabouts of Mrs. Riyan Abdurahman Yusuf, an Oromo national refuge – who was kidnapped from her residence in Hargiesa, Somaliland, on the 23rd of November, 2012, at around 6:00PM.

Mrs. Riyan Abdurahman Yusuf, with UNHCR Case Number: 758:08C00303, was kidnapped at the time and date mentioned above by what were said to have been members of Somaliland security forces. Apart from refugee life, Mrs. Riyan Abdurahman was engaged in teaching kids, most of whom were refugees, along with her brother named Mr. Bahar Abdurahman at a school called Sh. Madar in Hargiesa.

There has been no any official or confirmed report as to where Mrs. Riyan Abdurahman could have been ever since she was kidnapped. But, according to some rumours, Mrs. Riyan is being held at a jail in Jigjiga, in the Ogaden Reginal State in Ethiopia. As it has been the case in the past, the implication is that Mrs. Riyan is also handed over to the Ethiopian Government by the government of the Somaliland against refugee protections convention 1951 – put in place in various relevant international documents.

Mrs. Riyan's father, Mr. Abdurahman Yusuf, was himself one of the victims of such actions that violate international agreements jointly committed by the governments of Ethiopia and Somaliland.

Under Article 33 (1) of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (189 U.N.T.S. 150), "[n]o contracting state shall expel or forcibly return a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his ... political opinion."
In case Mrs. Riyan Abdurahman is to be deported to Ethiopia, the Ethiopian government has a well-documented record of gross and flagrant violations of human rights, including the torturing of its own citizens, who were involuntarily returned to the country. The government of Ethiopia routinely imprisons such persons. There have been credible reports of physical and psychological abuses committed against individuals in Ethiopian prisons and other secret places of detention. This obligation, which is also a principle of customary international law, applies to both asylum seekers and refugees, as affirmed by UNHCR's Executive Committee and the United Nations General Assembly.

By deporting Mrs. Riyan and others, the Somaliland government will be breaching its obligations under international treaties as well as customary law.

Under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1465 U.N.T.S. 185), Somaliland has an obligation not to return a person to a place where they face torture or ill-treatment. Article 3 of the Convention against Torture provides:

1. No state party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another state where there are substantial grounds to believe that they would be in danger of being subjected to torture.

2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the state concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.

We strongly urge the Government of Somaliland to respect these international treaties and obligations.
Therefore, the Human Rights League of the Horn of Africa (HRLHA) strongly demands the unconditional release of Mrs. Riyan Abdurahman from wherever she is currently being held at, and calls up on both the Ethiopian and the Somaliland governments to ensure Mrs. Riyan's freedom from detention. HRLHA also calls up on all local, regional and international human rights, refugee as well as diplomatic agencies to put pressure on the two governments to first disclose Mrs. Riyan's whereabouts and then immediately release her from detention.

Recommendation:

RECOMMENDED ACTION: 

Please send appeals to the Somaliland Government using the above address, concerned Somaliland officials and to diplomatic representatives of Somaliland – who are accredited to your country as swiftly as possible, in English, Somali language, or your own language expressing:

To disclose whereabouts of Mrs. Riyan Abdurrahman Yusuf;

Your concern regarding the apprehension and fear of torture of Mrs. Riyan Abdurahman Yusuf, who is being held in unknown detention centers, and calling for her immediate and unconditional release;

Urging the Somaliland authorities to ensure that she would be treated in accordance with the regional and international standards on the treatment of prisoners;

Abide to the International Conventions of the refugees and asylum seekers not to return a person to a place where they face torture or ill-treatment.

Copied To

Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
United Nations Office at Geneva
1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland
Fax: + 41 22 917 9022 (particularly for urgent matters) E-mail: tb-petitions@ohchr.org
Office of the UNHCR
Telephone: 41 22 739 8111
Fax: 41 22 739 7377
Po Box: 2500
Geneva, Switzerland

African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR)
48 Kairaba Avenue, P.O.Box 673, Banjul, The Gambia.
Tel: (220) 4392 962 , 4372070, 4377721 – 23 Fax: (220) 4390 764
E-mail: achpr@achpr.org

Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights
Council of Europe
F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex, FRANCE
+ 33 (0)3 88 41 34 21
+ 33 (0)3 90 21 50 53

U.S. Department of State
Tom Fcansky – Foreign Affairs Officer
Email: TOfcansky@aol.com
Washington, D.C. 20037
Tel: +1-202-261-8009
Fax: +1-202-261-8197

Amnesty International – London
Telephone: 44-20-74135500
Fax: 44-20-79561157
Twitter account: @Amnestyonline
1Easton Street
London, WC1X0DW, UK
Human Rights Watch – New York
Leslie Lefkow
lefkowl@hrw.org; rawlenb@hrw.org
Tel: +1-212-290-4700
Fax:+1-212-736-1300 Email: hrwnyc@hrw.org

Foreign Official Immunity in U.S. Courts Since Samantar

By Curtis Bradley
Monday, December 17, 2012 at 6:51 AM 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently issued a decision that has the effect of both limiting political branch control over human rights suits against foreign officials while at the same time arguably increasing the need for such control.  In doing so, the decision highlights increasing tensions and uncertainties in the law about the extent to which U.S. courts should be adjudicating alleged human rights abuses that occur in other countries.

International law recognizes two types of immunity for individual officials who are sued or prosecuted in foreign courts:  status immunity, and conduct immunity.  Status immunity protects certain officials while they are in office.  In the case of heads of state—a category that includes not only presidents and prime ministers but also certain other high-level officials such as foreign ministers—this status immunity is essentially absolute and thus applies even to unofficial acts.  By contrast, conduct immunity is narrower in some respects and broader in others, in that it applies only to the official acts of foreign officials, but it can be invoked even after the officials have left office and it applies even to lower-level officials.

Suits against foreign governments in the United States are regulated by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), which requires that courts grant immunity unless one of the statute’s specified exceptions is satisfied.  In its 2010 decision in Samantar v. Yousuf, the Supreme Court held that the FSIA does not ordinarily apply to suits against individual foreign officials and that any immunity enjoyed by such officials stems instead from the common law.  Since that decision, two central issues have emerged in the lower courts:  First, how much deference should the courts give to the views of the Executive Branch about whether a particular individual official should receive common law immunity?  Second, when courts make their own determination of immunity, should they allow conduct immunity for alleged breaches of human rights that qualify as jus cogens violations (such as torture, summary execution, genocide, war crimes, and the like)?

On the first issue, the Executive Branch has perhaps not surprisingly argued that courts should give absolute deference to its views about whether to grant immunity in particular cases.  A number of lower courts have accepted this proposition in cases involving suits against sitting heads of state, and at least one court has accepted it in a case involving a former head of state.  In the remand decision in Samantar, however, the Fourth Circuit held that this absolute deference applies only to status immunity, not to conduct immunity, and thus is inapplicable in suits against former officials.  In such suits, the court reasoned, “[t]hese immunity decisions turn upon principles of customary international law and foreign policy, areas in which the courts respect, but do not automatically follow, the views of the Executive Branch.”

There is some tension between the Fourth Circuit’s conclusion and the observation by the Supreme Court in Samantar that it did not believe that Congress in the FSIA “saw as a problem,  or  wanted to eliminate, the State Department’s role  in determinations regarding individual official immunity.”  The distinction drawn by the Fourth Circuit nevertheless strikes me as reasonable.  It has long been assumed that the Executive Branch has an implied power of recognizing foreign governments, based in part on its role in sending and receiving ambassadors.  That recognition power arguably encompasses the ability to determine whether a particular foreign governmental official is entitled to status immunity—for example, whether the official is the head of state of a government recognized by the United States.  Conduct immunity, however, is less directly tied to the Executive Branch’s recognition power, since it turns not on whether the official holds a particular position in a foreign government but rather on the nature of the conduct in question.  Moreover, because conduct immunity is not absolute, it involves legal judgments that are normally considered matters for the courts.  As a result, allowing the Executive Branch to determine for the judiciary on a case by case basis whether conduct immunity is available poses potential separation of powers concerns.  Ingrid Wuerth makes additional arguments along these lines in an article published last year in the Virginia Journal of International Law.


The second issue that has emerged since the Supreme Court’s decision in Samantar concerns the scope of conduct immunity, and in particular the extent to which it applies to alleged jus cogens violations.  As with the question of deference, there is already conflicting authority on this issue.  In Giraldo v. Drummond Co., for example, the federal district court in D.C. concluded that conduct immunity applied even when there are allegations of jus cogens violations.  The court reasoned that a jus cogens exception to immunity would “place a strain upon our courts and our diplomatic relations” and “would also eviscerate any protection that foreign official immunity affords.”  The court also noted that, in applying the FSIA, courts have consistently declined to imply a jus cogens exception to immunity.

By contrast, in its remand decision in Samantar, the Fourth Circuit held that there is no conduct immunity for alleged jus cogens violations.  The court cited an article that Larry Helfer and I wrote in support of the proposition that “[t]here has been an increasing trend in international law to abrogate foreign official immunity for individuals who commit acts, otherwise attributable to the State, that violate jus cogens norms.”  It is worth pointing out, however, that Professor Helfer and I noted that this trend primarily existed in the criminal area and that “in civil suits for damages . . . there has been less recognition of such an exception [for jus cogens violations].”  Moreover, after studying the relevant European cases, Ingrid Wuerth has concluded (in an article that is about to appear in the American Journal of International Law) that even in the criminal area there is relatively little direct support in state practice for a jus cogens exception to immunity.

To be sure, as Bill Dodge has noted, one could argue that jus cogens violations can never constitute official conduct, in which case there would be no need for a jus cogens “exception” to conduct immunity.  The Supreme Court’s decision in Samantar is unclear about how the line is to be drawn between official and unofficial acts, although commentators have naturally read the tea leaves of the decision in various ways.  It must be the case that official acts can encompass at least some acts that are alleged to be illegal, because otherwise the immunity would be meaningless.  But whether there are certain types of illegality that by their nature render conduct unofficial for these purposes is an open question.  Furthermore, it is not even clear whether this issue should be determined by reference to domestic law, international law, or some combination of both.  In any event, shifting from an analysis of whether there is a jus cogens exception to immunity to whether jus cogens violations are categorically ineligible for such immunity may have semantic appeal but does little to resolve the underlying question.

Regardless of the theory for denying immunity, Samantar is a relatively easy case, in that  it involves a former official from Somalia, a government that is not currently even recognized by the United States.  If conduct immunity does not apply as a general matter to alleged jus cogens violations, however, it will mean that former officials from close allies of the United States, such as Israel, can potentially be sued for such violations.  It is almost certain, however, that such an outcome would be contrary to the wishes of the political branches of the U.S. government.  The Fourth Circuit’s reasoning could also create problematic reciprocity implications for U.S. officials sued or prosecuted in foreign courts, as former State Department Legal Adviser John Bellinger has pointed out.  These concerns in turn reveal that the Fourth Circuit’s two holdings may be working at cross purposes:  by holding that the Executive Branch’s suggestions of conduct immunity are not binding on the courts and also that conduct immunity does not apply to alleged jus cogens violations, the Fourth Circuit has reduced political branch control over immunity while at the same time arguably increasing the need for such control.

The Fourth Circuit would have been on somewhat stronger ground, in my view, if it had limited itself to the proposition that claims under the Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA), which covers acts of torture and “extrajudicial killing,” are not subject to conduct immunity.  The TVPA does not mention immunity, but its causes of action require that the defendant have acted “under actual or apparent authority, or color of law, of any foreign nation.”  By expressly imposing liability for such governmental conduct, the TVPA could plausibly be read as disallowing conduct immunity for such conduct, as Helfer and I noted in our article.  (It is much less likely that the TVPA was intended to override status immunity, and some courts have specifically held that it does not do so.)

Both of these issues—the extent to which courts should defer to the Executive Branch, and the availability of conduct immunity for alleged jus cogens violations—are likely to merit Supreme Court review at some point.  The case law is still developing, however, so it is quite possible that the Court will allow the issues to percolate further until sharper conflicts of authority develop.  I discuss these and related immunity issues in a chapter of my forthcoming book, International Law in the U.S. Legal System.

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2012/12/foreign-official-immunity-in-u-s-courts-since-samantar/