Human Rights Watch (Washington) Somalia: UN Human Rights Council - General Debate On Somalia

PRESS RELEASE

In Somalia, the recent arbitrary arrest, detention and politically motivated prosecution of an alleged rape victim and a freelance journalist, Abdiaziz Abdinur Ibrahim, has raised serious concerns about the new Somali government's commitment to basic rights, including protecting citizens from government abuses, ensuring due process, and upholding freedom of the media. We urge the government to promptly and fully resolve this case in accordance with its international human rights obligations.

On 10 January 2013, the authorities arrested and detained Abdiaziz Abdinur two days after he interviewed a woman who alleged she was raped by government security forces in August 2012. He was held for over two weeks before being charged, and repeatedly interrogated.

The alleged rape victim was taken into custody and retracted her claim after being interrogated for two days by the police without legal counsel. She then refused to recant her allegations. She was released, but her husband was detained in her place. A man and woman who helped her meet with the journalist were also arrested.

On 5 February a court convicted the woman and the journalist of falsely accusing a government body of committing a crime that damages state security and sentenced each to one year in prison. The woman's sentence was deferred until she has completed breastfeeding her baby. The trial was marred serious due process violations, including arguments that the woman had not been raped on the basis of a "finger test," an unscientific, inhuman, and degrading "test" without forensic value. The lower court did not allow the defense to present its case or introduce witnesses.The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights said the trial "risks seriously undermining the fight against sexual violence" and was also "a terrible blow to freedom of expression in a country where independent journalists have also been regularly targeted and killed."

An appeals court on 3 March acquitted the woman but upheld the journalist's conviction, reducing his sentence to six months.

While the Somali president has expressed a commitment to making justice a pillar of his presidency, the numerous due process violations and injustices of this case raise serious questions about the political resolve to turn these commitments into concrete action.

In the absence of a prompt resolution of this case, including the release of Abdiaziz Abdinur, we expect the matter will be taken up by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, as well as the Special Rapporteurs on Freedom of Expression and on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers.

Ahmadinejad under fire for hugging Chavez's mother

Associated Press/Miraflores Press Office, File - FILE --In this Friday, March 8, 2013 file photo released by the Miraflores Press Office, Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad comforts Elena Frias

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI - Associated Press


TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Senior Iranian clerics have scolded President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for consoling Hugo Chavez's mother with a hug — a physical contact considered a sin under Iran's strict Islamic codes.

The rebuke follows a widely published photo showing Ahmadinejad embracing Chavez's mother at the funeral of the late Venezuelan president in what is seen as taboo-breaking behavior in Iran.

Iranian papers on Tuesday cited clerics from the religious center of Qom who described the hug as "forbidden," inappropriate behavior and "clowning around."

Iran's strict Islamic codes prohibit physical contact between unrelated members of the opposite sex.

The clerics did not spare Ahmadinejad.

"Touching a non-mahram (a woman who is not a close relative) is forbidden under any circumstances, whether shaking hands or touching by the cheek," said one of the clerics, Mohammad Taqi Rahbar, adding that such a contact, even with "an older woman is not allowed ... and contrary to the dignity of the president of the Islamic Republic of Iran."

Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi, Iran's former judiciary chief and a religious leader in Qom, said Ahmadinejad was "clowning around" and his hug shows he failed to "protect the dignity of his nation and his position."

The clerics were also outraged by Ahmadinejad's letter of condolence to Venezuelans and their interim leader Nicolas Maduro because the Iranian president had described Chavez as a "martyr" who will be resurrected and who will return to Earth along with Jesus Christ and Imam Mahdi, a 9th century saint revered by Shiite Muslims.

"Your knowledge of religious issues is limited and no intervention could be made in this matter," said Yazdi, addressing Ahmadinejad directly.

Iranian Vice President Mohammad Reza Mirtajeddini, a cleric who accompanied Ahmadinejad to Venezuela and stood by as the Iranian president hugged Chavez's mother at the funeral last week in Caracas had initially tried to deny the story, saying the photo was a fake.

Yazdi also scolded Mirtajeddini: "You are a cleric and you wear the clerical robe ... you should not deny what happened."

The uproar surrounding the hug has given Ahmadinejad's conservative opponents fodder to criticize him, three months ahead of the June presidential elections.

Ahmadinejad can't run in the elections due to term limits under Iran's constitution but is seeking to get a protege into the race.

For their part, Iranian reformists ridiculed Ahmadinejad for weeping at Chavez's funeral.

"I burst into laughter when I saw Ahmadinejad weeping on the arm of Chavez mother, said Abbas Abdi, activist and columnist with the independent website Aftabnews.ir.

"If he needed to cry, he should have done so for his countrymen who died" in clashes with security forces during the mass protests that followed Ahmadinejad's disputed 2009 re-election, said Abdi.

Africa and AFRICOM: Neo-Imperialism and the Arrogance of Ignorance

by FRANKLIN C. SPINNEY


Most Americans do not realize the extent to which the U.S. is becoming involved militarily in the welter of conflicts throughout Saharan and sub-Saharan Africa (check out the chaos as mapped here).

Although recent reports have tended to focus on the French effort to kick Al Qaeda in Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) out of Mali — an effort that may now be devolving into a far more complex guerrilla war, that French operation is just one operation in what may be shaping up to be a 21st Century version of the 19th Century Scramble for the resources of Africa. It’s a policy that, from the U.S. point of view, may not be unrelated to the pivot to China, given China's growing market and aid presence in Africa. Together, the scramble and the pivot will be sufficient to offset the near term effect of an sequester in the Pentagon with a torrent of money flows in the future.

Last year, Craig Whitlock of the Washington Post provided a mosaic of glimpses into the widespread U.S. involvement in Africa. He authored a series of excellent reports, including here, here and here. The map below is my rendering of the basing information in Whitlock’s report (and others), as well as the relationship between that basing information to distribution of Muslim populations in central Africa. Consider the distances involved in this swath of bases loosely portrayed by the red dots: the distance between these bases along the axis from northwest to southwest on the African continent alone is greater that the distance from New York to Los Angeles. Think of the ethnic and tribal differences between Burkina Faso and Kenya, not to mention the differences within those countries! And remember, virtually all of North Africa, from Morocco to Egypt is over 90% Muslim.

While the correlation between Muslim populations and our intervention activities in this variety of cultural mosaics will suggest a welter of differing messages to different audiences, one generalization is certain, given our recent history of intervention: Africom’s continuing presence and involvement will further inflame our relationship with militant Islam and perhaps the far larger number of moderate Muslims.

But think of the other possibilities for one’s imagination to run wild. For example: In view of the recent Libyan adventure, conspiratorially-minded North African Islamic radicals (and moderates?) with a penchant for seeing visions in cloud formations may well interpret the swath of Africom’s bases structure in Sub-Saharan Africa as early bricks in the construction an anvil, against which, they will be smashed by a new generation of European neocolonialists, attacking from the north in obedience with the new "leading from behind" doctrine of President Obama. Of course, given the distances involved and the porosity those distances imply, such divagations of the paranoid mind are silly from a military point of view. But given the US’s murderous track record of lies in Iraq, incompetence in Afghanistan, and our blatant disregard for the Palestinians by constructing a peace processes that facilitated the growth of settlements in a forty-year land grab by Israel, that kind of characterization nevertheless will be grist for the propaganda mill as well as the fulminations of a paranoid mind. And remember, just because you are paranoid doesn’t mean someone isn’t out to get you.

Another sense of the metastasizing nature of our involvement in Africa can be teased out of the leaden, terrorist-centric, albeit carefully-constructed verbiage in the prepared answers submitted by Army General David M. Rodriguez to Senate Armed Services Committee in support of his 13 February 2013 confirmation to be the new commander of the U. S. Africa Command or Africom. I urge readers to at least skim this very revealing document.

The terrorist "threats" in sub-Saharan Africa that are evidently so tempting to the neo-imperialists at Africom do not exist in isolation. They are intimately connected to the ethnic/tribal discontent in Africa, a subject alluded to but not really analyzed by Rodriquez or his senatorial questioners in their carefully choreographed Q&A.

Many of these tensions, for example, are in part a legacy of artificial borders created by the European interventionists of the 19th century. These interventionists deliberately designed borders to mix up tribal, ethnic, and religious groups to facilitate "divide and rule" colonial policies. The 19th Century colonialists often deliberately exacerbated local animosities by placing minorities in politically and economically advantageous positions, thereby creating incentives for seething discontent and payback in the future. Stalin, incidentally, used the same strategy in the 1920s and 1930s to control the Muslim soviet republics in what was formerly known as the Turkestan region of Central Asia. In the USSR, the positioning of the artificial borders among these new "Stans" were widely known as Stalin’s "poison pills."

The hostage crisis at the gas plant in eastern Algeria last January illustrates some of the deeply-rooted cultural complexities at the heart of many of these conflicts. Akbar Ahmed recently argued this point in one of his fascinating series of essays published by Aljazeera. This series, which I believe is very important, is based on his forthcoming book, The Thistle and the Drone: How America’s War on Terror Became a War on Tribal Islam, to be published in March by Brookings Institution Press.

Ambassador Akbar Ahmed is the former Pakistani high commissioner to the UK, and he now holds the the appropriately named Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic Studies at American University in Washington, D.C. Considered to be one of fathers of modern historiography and the social sciences, Ibn Khaldun is also one of history’s most influential scholars of spontaneous nature of tribalism and its role in establishing social cohesion. The central thrust of Professor Ahmed’s work is in that spirit. He aims to explain why discontent is so widespread throughout the former colonial world and how it is partially rooted in a complex history of oppressions of ethnic groups and in tribal rivalries throughout the region. This has created a welter of tensions between the weak central governments of the ex-colonial countries and their peripheral minority groups and tribes. Ahmed argues that these tensions have been exacerbated by our militaristic response to 9/11. He explains why military interventions by the U.S. and former European colonial powers will worsen the growing tension between central governments and these oppressed groups.

Among other things, Ahmed, perhaps inadvertently, has laid out a devastating critique of US failure to abide by the criteria of a sensible grand strategy in its reaction to 9/11. By confusing a horrendous crime with an act of war, declaring an open ended global war on terror, and then conducting that war according to a classically flawed grand strategy that assumed "You are either with us or against us," the US has not only created enemies faster than it can kill them, but in so doing, it has mindlessly exacerbated highly-volatile, incredibly-complex, deeply-rooted local conflicts and thereby helped to destabilize huge swathes of Asia and Africa.

Mindless? Consider please the following: Most readers of this essay will have heard of AQIM and probably the the Tuaregs as well. But how many of you have heard of the Kabyle Berbers and their history in Algeria? (I had not.) Yet according to Professor Ahmed, a Kabyle Berber founded AQIM, and that founding is deeply-rooted in their historical grievances. So, there is more to AQIM than that of simply being an al Qaeda copycat. You will not learn about any of this from Rodriquez’s answers, notwithstanding his repeated references to AQIM and Algeria; nor will you learn anything about this issue from the senators’ questions.
You can prove this to yourself.

Do a word search of General Rodriquez’s Q&A package for any hint of an appreciation of the kind of complex history described by Ahmed in his Aljazeera essay, The Kabyle Berbers, AQIM, and the search for peace in Algeria. (You could try using search words like these, for example: AQIM, Kabyle, Berber, history, Tuareg, tribe, tribal conflict, culture, etc — or use your imagination). In addition to noting what is not discussed, note also how Rodriquez’s threat-centric context surrounding the words always pops up. Compare the sterility his construction to the richness of Ahmed’s analysis, and draw your own conclusions. Bear in mind AQIM is just one entry in Africom’s threat portfolio. What do we not know about the other entries?

As Robert Asprey showed in his classic 2000 year history of guerrilla wars, War in the Shadows, the most common error made by outside interveners in a guerrilla war is succumbing to the temptation to allow their "arrogance of ignorance" to shape their military and political efforts.

Notwithstanding the arrogance of ignorance being reaffirmed in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, it is beginning to look like Asprey’s timeless conclusion will be reaffirmed Africa.


Franklin "Chuck" Spinney is a former military analyst for the Pentagon and a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, published by AK Press. He be reached at chuck_spinney@mac.com

International negotiator: Without a political solution, Somalia may grow become than Somalia’

By Associated Press
BRUSSELS — The European Union will soon have to consider allowing munitions to be funneled to the outgunned Syrian rebels fighting to overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad, the French foreign minister said Monday.

But an international diplomat trying to achieve peace in Syria countered that, without a political solution, the country risks descending to a state “worse than Somalia.”

Both men made their comments at the end of a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels, at which no apparent move was made to alter the blanket EU embargo against shipping arms to Syria.


That did not sit well with the French foreign minister, Laurent Fabius.

“There is a lack of balance between the Assad regime, which has weapons coming from Iran and Russia — powerful weapons — and the (rebel) National Coalition, which doesn’t have the same weapons,” Fabius said.

“This question of the arms embargo, which was raised a couple of weeks ago, will have to be raised again very soon, because we cannot accept such an unbalanced state, which leads to the slaughter of the population.”

So far, 70,000 people are estimated to have died in Syria’s civil war, which erupted as a popular uprising almost exactly two years ago.

Gen. Salim Idris, head of the rebel army, travelled to Brussels last week to plead for arms from the international community, saying more heavy weaponry would enable the rebels to protect civilians.

But diplomats from some EU countries have said they believe that more guns is the last thing Syria needs.

“In the end, it’s going to have to be a political solution,” EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said after the meeting ended.

The foreign ministers met Monday with Lakhdar Brahimi, the special representative for Syria of the United Nations and the Arab League, who is trying to effect a political settlement. On his way out of the meeting, Brahimi said the EU foreign ministers were deeply concerned about Syria.

“They agree it is one of the most dangerous crises in the world today,” he said. “I came to ask them to use whatever means they have to reach a peaceful solution for this case. ... As I said before, it is either peaceful, consensual, political solution, or the situation will be similar to or even worse than Somalia.”

British Foreign Secretary William Hague said the U.K. supported Brahimi’s work, although he said more aid to the rebels might be needed to show the Assad regime what could happen in the absence of a diplomatic solution.

In February, Britain pushed successfully for changes to the embargo that would allow EU countries to provide nonlethal aid to the rebels. Hague said Tuesday that Britain was taking full advantage of the change, sending equipment such as armored four-wheel-drive vehicles, body armor and other protective gear.

The United States and other countries have been reluctant to send weapons partly because of fears they may fall into the hands of extremists who have been gaining influence among the rebels. The Obama administration, however, announced this month that it would, for the first time, provide nonlethal aid directly to the rebels.

Ashton said the foreign ministers also discussed the EU’s relationship with Russia. While trade between the EU and Russia is very important, Ashton said she hoped for greater cooperation from Russia as regards Syria.
Russia and China have continued to back Assad’s regime.

source: Washingtonpost.

It's Still a Bad Idea to Sell Arms to Somalia

 A recent UN resolution assumes that the country has made serious progress. Here's why it may be wrong.


A Somali government soldier stands guard at the scene of a deadly suicide attack on a restaurant at the Lido beach in Somalia's capital Mogadishu March 1, 2013. (Ismail Taxta/Reuters)

For twenty years, and until the middle of last week, Somalia was subject to a stringent UN arms embargo. And with good reason: during that time, Somalia became a byword for state failure, subjected to practically every dysfunction and misfortune a country can experience. Multiple U.S.-backed foreign invasions and the deployment of an African Union counter-insurgency force seem to have broken the cycle of militancy and state collapse that kicked off with long-tenured military ruler Mohamed Siad Barre's violent overthrow in 1991. For all their flaws, AMISOM, as well as the Ethiopian and Kenyan militaries, have at least bought a crucial window of stability for the country's fledgling government, which didn't even earn U.S. recognition until early last month. Somalia has supposedly turned into something of a success story: a place where intense international engagement, as well as the Somali people's gradually-building resentment of the country's once-powerful al Qaeda-affiliated insurgency, has brought a measure of normalcy to the world's emblematic failed state.

It's simply difficult to justify sending more weaponry to Somalia, especially when stories of government armories and warehouses without roofs or significant protection are so common.

There's plenty of reason to call this narrative into question. Though still dangerous, al Shabaab is no longer capable of ruling large swaths for the country, and there's been an astounding drop in Somalia-based piracy as the security situation improves. But a country isn't fixed simply because the pirates and terrorists who utilize its territory are in retreat. The Somali federal government is badly lacking in capacity; by all accounts, its reach is little felt outside of Mogadishu, and even there it's having difficulty providing basic services for a population that is still widely-militarized and poor. The state security sector largely consists of regional militias incorporated into the national army -- hardly a firm foundation on which to build a legitimate, professional military. And the government has proven worryingly illiberal in its decision-making in the few areas of life it actually can control: witness the widely-publicized prosecution of a woman who accused members of the state security forces of raping her (as if this weren't bad enough, a journalist was subsequently jailed for interviewing her). The mere existence of a Somali government, as well as the relative calm that has allowed any government to exist at all, are incredible developments that shouldn't be taken for granted. But the process of rebuilding the country's vital institutions is still in its infancy.

Nevertheless, the UN pushed forward with lifting the 1992 arms embargo last week, partially fulfilling one of the new government's top foreign policy goals. Under the earlier embargo, a committee of UN Security Council members had the ability to veto any declared state arms shipment to the Somali government (any undeclared shipment would be -- and in fact still is -- a violation of international law). Under the resolution, for the next year, states can sell or donate small arms to the Somali government with no obligation other than warning the Security Council's sanctions committee. And there are notable exceptions to the ongoing ban on the importation of heavier or more sophisticated equipment. Things like surface-to-air missiles and night-vision goggles are still covered under the embargo. But according to the resolution's annex, the list of proscribed weapons "does not include shoulder fired anti-tank rocket launchers such as RPGs or LAWs, rifle grenades, or grenade launchers." These are considered small arms by traditional standards, stock armament for light infantry forces around the world. Still, it's possible to do quite a bit of damage with a grenade or small rocket launcher, and in Somalia, there's little guarantee that these weapons won't fall into the wrong hands.

The Somali government certainly needs small arms in its continuing fight against al Shabaab. Even so, the government's weapons management leaves much to be desired. "Fears the government won't be able to control those stockpiles are warranted," says E.J. Hogendoorn, Africa deputy program director with the International Crisis Group. He says it's possible the lifting of the embargo will bring "a greater proliferation of light weapons and ammunition in particular...making conflict more likely and easier."

It's simply difficult to justify sending more weaponry to Somalia, especially when stories of government armories and warehouses without roofs or significant protection are so common. Of course, effective stockpile management is a function of other factors: a government with a trained military, direct lines of authority and developed logistical capabilities is far more likely to be able to keep track of its arms supplies, or prevent its military personnel from transferring weapons to terrorists.

A government that has only existed for a few months can hardly be blamed for lacking the capacity or the ability to look after large weapons stocks, especially in an environment as challenging as post-conflict Somalia (a label which can be easily disputed). But that doesn't alleviate the danger of giving the Somali government grenade launchers. Renzo Pomi, Amnesty International's representative at the UN, was straightforward in his assessment of the consequences of lifting the embargo: "The government has not proven that they will be able to control the new influx of weapons to the country."

The decision to weaken the embargo raises a couple of even more basic issues: why this, and why now? There are ways to reward the Somali government for its progress without potentially deepening the country's misery, perhaps through even more rigorous multilateral institution-building initiatives, or greater training for the Somali military. The U.S. could even help Somalia while expending almost no resources whatsoever -- namely, by loosening domestic restrictions on international money transfers.

Under the current regulatory regime, Somali-Americans are limited to a surprisingly small number of American banks willing to transact with Somalia-based money transfer agencies -- usually no more than three or four at a given time. Fears of violating terror financing laws have made wiring money to Somalia more time consuming and expensive than it needs to be, while nearly regulating the entire market out of existence. This was enough of a hardship to inspire Democratic congressman Keith Elision, who represents a Minnesota district with a large Somali community, to make an awareness-raising visit to Mogadishu last month. Considering the global Somali diaspora sends nearly $1.6 billion a year back to its country of origin, a less restrictive money transfer system might actually do more to bolster the new government's independence and credibility than the lifting of the arms embargo.

And yet according to multiple sources with knowledge of the Security Council negotiations, the U.S. mission advocated an even greater rollback of the arms ban than what was eventually passed. During negotiations that one UN source described as "pretty intense," U.S. diplomats argued for something approaching a total lift of the embargo. Eventually, the U.S. endorsed a resolution that another UN-based source described as "a compromise:" a lift on the light weapons ban, along with various U.S.-backed changes to the organization of the UN mission in Somalia.

The considerations were more political than anything else. The resolution is a symbolic vote of confidence in a fragile yet regionally-important government that is still facing a significant threat from al Shabaab. But it's the kind of action that could even further destabilize Somalia, while rewarding a government still at an embryonic stage of development. "The Security Council was short-sighted," said Pomi. "They decided to give a reward to the government for their progress, without looking into the consequences."

There are certainly some benefits attached to lifting the embargo: it might make the government more capable of holding territory and fighting rival militants, and it removes a major point of contention between the Somali government and its international partners, including the United States. It's just unclear if those benefits are actually worth it. "It is a signal that the international community respects the Somali national government much more than it did previous versions of the Somali central government," says Hogendoorn. And it's possible that last week's decision will change little on the ground: several countries, including the United States, provided military support to Somalia's Transitional Federal Government in the late 2000s even while the embargo was in place. The country is one of the most arms-saturated on earth (a point recently raised by no less an authority than a Twitter account claiming to represent al Shaabab).

Yet this still exposes how the U.S.'s expectations for Somalia are outstripping current realities, and how easy fixes can shoulder out more difficult yet more substantive ones -- while unintentionally making things worse. The resolution assumes that serious progress has already been made in Somalia. It could just as easily reveal how far off the country's greater and more important accomplishments might lie.

MUCJISO: Nin Xaasaskiisa u Taga In ka badan 15 jeer Maalin kasta !!! – Halkan ka Daawo Isaga oo Arintan ka waramaya adiguba waad yaabiye !!!

Nin ilaahay siiyey awood mucjiso ah oo aysan lahayn Dadka bini’aadanka iyo Ninkaas oo Xaasaskiisa u Taga In ka badan 15 jeer Maalinkasta!!!

Ninkn ayaa waxaa la sheegay inuu ilaahay siiyey awood mucjiso ah oo aysan lahayn dadka bini’aadanka ka dib markii uu ninkaas awood u leeyahay waxyaabo badan oo aad la yaabayso oo aysana awoodi karin dadka caadiga ah ee ku nool aduunku.

Ninkaan oo lagu magacaabo Sayid Maxamed Axmed Cabdala oo ah nin u dhashay dalka Masar ayaa waxaa uu ilaahay siiyey oo uu ku maneystay awood xad dhaaf ah, ninkaan ayaa waxaa uu awoodaa inuu lacagta birta ah uu indhihiisa ku laalaabo, ka dibna uu si fudud u kala jabiyo, ninkaan oo ay dhaqaatiirtu ku sheegeen inuu leeyahay awood u dhiganta ilaa 260 faras taas oo u dhiganta awooda ay leeyihiin ilaa iyo 30,000 oo rag ah ayaa waxay taasi tahay arin mucjiso ah oo aysan dadka bini’aadanku yeelan karin, ninkaan ayaa waxaa uu qabaa afar xaas waxuuna soo guursaday ilaa iyo 28 jeer oo hore asagoona dhalay ilaa iyo 35 caruur ah.

Arinta kale ee la yaabka leh ee uu ilaahay ninkaas siiyey ayaa waxay tahay inuu awoodo inuu maalin kasta 15 jeer uu u tago ama uu la raaxaysto xaasaskiis ugu dambeyntiina iyadoo ninkaan mucjisada ah uu ilaahay siiyey awoodaas xaddhaafka ah ayaa waxaa kale oo uu ninkaan sheegay inuu awoodo inuu qaado ama uu qaadi karo baabuurta waaweyn iyo kuwa yar yarba, ninkaan oo laga mamnuucay inuu wax shaqo ah qabto sidoo kalena laga mamnuucay in la xiro ama xabsiga la dhigo iyadoo sidaas loo sameeyey arimo la xiriira nabad galyada maadaama laga baqaayo inuu ninkaan dad waxyeelo ayaa ninkaan waxaa la sheegay inuu awoodaas uu ILAAHAY siiyey uu u isticmaalo hab wanaag iyo ixtiraam ah asagoona aan cidna waxba ku yeelin awoodaas uu eebe ku maneystay ninkaas.

Somaliland: Turkish Airlines Adds Berbera Airport to its Routes Roster

Bozdag escorts President to the meetinhg in ankara

 ANKARA – Turkey is set to increase its development intervention in the country.

This was revealed by the Turkish Prime Minister Bekir Bozdag during talks with a Somaliland delegation led by President Ahmed Mahmud Silanyo in Ankara.

The meeting follows the arrival in Ankara upon invitation of prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to president Silanyo whose entourage includes first lady Amina Weris, Dr. Mohamed A Omar, Minister of the presidency Hon Hirsi Haji Ali and the youthful minister for Resettlement, Rehabilitation and National Reconstruction Dr Suleiman Isse Ahmed "Hagaltosie", minister of energy Eng. Hussein A Duale and Education Minister Hon Zamzam Abdi Aden respectively.


Turkish team at the Bozdag and President Silaanyo meeting

According to foreign minister Dir. Mohamed Abdilahi Omar the two countries who concurred on the existing and conducive bilateral relations agreed to not only sustainability but enhancement as well.
Following a warm reception by the Turkish authorities in Ankara president Silanyo took upon his meeting with deputy premiere Bozdag to thank the people and government of that country for believing in thus supporting Somaliland.

The foreign minister informed that the state owned air carrier Turkish Airways will initiate regular flights to the country where it shall utilize the Berbera international airport as its home in the horn region in June 2013.

Berbera International Airport

"Discussions which ensued between president Silanyo and premiere Bozdag related to enhancement of bilateral relations, increment of Turkish direct support to the government in Hargeisa and development at large" said Dr Omar while briefing the press on meeting outcomes in Ankara

Other issues agreed upon included increased Turkish support to its already ongoing projects in the education and health sectors and more specifically the construction of a fully funded Turkish hospital in one of the six regions of the country asDr Omar briefs the onboard SLNTV in Ankara well expertise in the development of technical skills related trainings.

Other developments from the meeting with the deputy Turkey prime minister pertain to the implementation of a standing plan for senior Turkish government officials to undertake an assessment visit to Somaliland.

After the Bozdag meeting president Silanyo and his entourage held discussions with the Turkish minister of energy where a number of lucrative deals were made as pertains to already ongoing multi-million dollar investments by the Anglo-Turkish company Genel energy.

The Somaliland is expected to conduct several other meetings before their flight back to Somaliland most likely on the 14th of this month.

US expels 2 Venezuelan diplomats in retaliation

Associated Press


The Obama administration has expelled two Venezuelan diplomats, U.S. officials said Monday, in retaliation for Venezuela's expulsion of two U.S. military attaches.

Washington wants to repair ties with Venezuela after President Hugo Chavez's death but has made little headway so far. Shortly before Chavez died last week, Venezuela expelled two U.S. Air Force attaches in Caracas for alleged espionage. The Obama administration waited until after Chavez's funeral on Friday to announce any reciprocal action.

Monday's move comes as Venezuela prepares for an April election to choose a new leader.

The U.S. and Venezuela have not had ambassadors posted in each other's capitals since 2010. Chavez rejected the U.S. nominee at the time, accusing him of making disrespectful remarks about the Venezuelan government. Washington then revoked the visa of Venezuela's ambassador to the U.S.

On Saturday, U.S. officials said junior Venezuelan diplomats Orlando Jose Montanez Olivares and Victor Camacaro Mata were ordered to return home. Montanez, an official at the embassy in Washington, and Camacaro, who served in Venezuela's New York consulate, left the United States on Sunday.

The U.S. officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to speak publicly about the expulsions.

Beyond the diplomatic tit-for-tat, Venezuelan officials have accused the U.S. of being responsible for Chavez's cancer and sought to rally anti-U.S. sentiment ahead of an April election for a new leader.

Administration officials declared themselves highly disappointed with Nicolas Maduro, the interim president and Chavez's desired successor, for a news conference he gave last week as the Venezuelan's health worsened. Comparing Chavez to Palestinian leader Yassir Arafat, Maduro suggested that Chavez had been poisoned.

In recent months, as Chavez's health deteriorated, the administration sounded out Maduro in an attempt to improve relations that became badly strained during Chavez's 14 years in power.

Despite some positive feedback from a November telephone call with Roberta Jacobson, the top U.S. diplomat for Latin America, American officials see little possibility of a sudden improvement in relations with Venezuela given its upcoming election. Maduro is running against opposition leader Henrique Capriles.

Officially, Washington has not taken sides. It has focused its calls on the need for free and fair elections.

Falkland Islanders vote overwhelmingly to keep British rule

By MARCOS BRINDICCI and JUAN BUSTAMANTE, REUTERS


STANLEY, Falkland Islands - Residents of the Falkland Islands voted almost unanimously to stay under British rule in a referendum aimed at winning global sympathy as Argentina intensifies its sovereignty claim.

The official count on Monday showed 99.8 percent of islanders voted in favor of remaining a British Overseas Territory in the two-day poll, which was rejected by Argentina as a meaningless publicity stunt. There only three "no" votes out of about 1,500 cast.

"Surely this must be the strongest message we can get out to the world," said Roger Edwards, one of the Falklands' assembly's eight elected members.

"That we are content, that we wish to retain the status quo ... with the right to determine our own future and not become a colony of Argentina."

Pro-British feeling is running high in the barren and blustery islands that lie off the tip of Patagonia, at the southern end of South America. Turnout was 92 percent among the 1,649 Falklands-born and long-term residents registered to vote.

Three decades after hundreds died when Argentina and Britain went to war over the far-flung South Atlantic archipelago, islanders have been perturbed by Argentina's increasingly vocal claim over the Malvinas - as the islands are called in Spanish.

Local politicians hope the resounding "yes" vote will help them lobby support abroad, for example in the United States, which has a neutral position on the sovereignty issue.

"We're never going to change Argentina's claim and point of view, but I believe there are an awful lot of countries out there that are sitting on the fence ... this is going to show them quite clearly what the people think," Edwards said.

The mood was festive as islanders lined up in the cold to vote in the low-key island capital of Stanley, some wearing novelty outfits made from the red, white and blue British Union Jack flag.

"We are British and that's the way we want to stay," said Barry Nielsen, who wore a Union Jack hat to cast his ballot at the town hall polling station in Stanley, where most of the roughly 2,500 islanders live.
Pressure on Britain
Argentina's fiery left-leaning president, Cristina Fernandez, has piled pressure on Britain to negotiate the sovereignty of the islands, something London refuses to do unless the islanders request talks.
Most Latin American countries and many other developing nations have voiced support for Argentina, which has stepped up its demands since London-listed companies started drilling for oil and natural gas off the Falklands' craggy coastline.
British Foreign Secretary William Hague said the referendum clearly showed the islanders wanted to remain a British overseas territory.
"All countries should accept the results of this referendum and support the Falkland Islanders as they continue to develop their home and their economy," he said in a statement.
"We have always been clear that we believe in the rights of the Falklands people to determine their own futures and to decide on the path they wish to take. It is only right that, in the 21st century, these rights are respected."
However, officials in Buenos Aires questioned the referendum's legitimacy. They say the sovereignty dispute must be resolved between Britain and Argentina and cite U.N. resolutions calling on London to sit down for talks.

"This (referendum) is a ploy that has no legal value," said Alicia Castro, Argentina's ambassador to London.
"Negotiations are in the islanders' best interest. We don't want to deny them their identity. They're British, we respect their identity and their way of life and that they want to continue to be British. But the territory they occupy is not British," she told an Argentine radio station.

Argentina has claimed the islands since 1833, saying it inherited them from the Spanish on independence and that Britain expelled an Argentine population.

The 1982 war, which killed about 650 Argentines and 255 Britons and ended when Argentina surrendered, is widely remembered in Argentina as a humiliating mistake by the discredited and brutal dictatorship in power at the time.

But most Argentines think the islands rightfully belong to the South American country and they remain a potent national symbol that unites political foes.

Falkland islanders, who are enjoying an economic boom thanks partly to the sale of oil and natural gas exploration licenses, say they do not expect Monday's result to sway Argentina.

"Argentina's stance on the Falklands will stay the same," said Stanley resident Craig Paice, wearing a T-shirt bearing the slogan "Our Islands, Our Decision" as he waited to vote on Monday.

"But hopefully the world will now listen and know the people of the Falkland Islands have a voice." — Reuters

Boobe As King Solomon Says: “Don’t Be Quick To Respond.”

Boobe Yuusuf Duaale

We all have ups and downs, good days and bad days. Hasty reactions are a defense mechanism, and usually not the most effective one. If we’re not on guard, we can act impulsively.

Criticism has a way of getting under our skin and making us attack the source of the criticism. So before you react, give yourself a chance to consider the comment, what it really means, and if perhaps there’s some validity to it. As King Solomon says: “Don’t be quick to respond.”

Similarly, when someone asks you a question, think before you answer. Don’t be afraid to say “I don’t know.” When asked for your point of view, learn to say, “I’m not sure,” or “It seems to me…” In the long run, you’ll gain respect.

When you hear or read something, train yourself to sum up the central point in a few words. If you don’t take the time to think over what you’ve learned, you’re viewing the world blindly through someone else’s eyes.

We all want to achieve great things with minimum effort. A great sage said: “A person wants to become great overnight, and get a good night’s sleep, too!” Realize that true growth is a long process. That’s why deliberation is an important tool, because it forces you to slow down, exercise patience, and stretch the limits of your powers.

When someone hurts or insults you, wait before you react. You’re naturally on the defensive. Be careful not to say anything you’ll later regret. Before you start shouting, pause. Catch a hold of yourself and count to 10.

I took this wise long inspirational, motivational lines from “Rabbi Noah Weinberg” to say that Boobe Youssouf Du’ale has lost all his credibility by first blindly praising, flattering Sillanyo government first then after couple of months giving us a conspiratorial stories which raises so many questions with in the society which is; where was he before? Because we all know that there were always been corruption and mal-governance which wasn’t something new.

Which leads to the big question.

Was he right before or wrong right now? In my opinion I would say it is in our nature as Somalian’s to Praise and Insult at once! Am not trying to degrade any one’s personality here but as we are all aware off our politician’s the biggest figures of our country are well known to always start to criticize as soon as they loose a position which always amazes me because it shows that if i may say, because I don’t wanna offense any one by speaking my mind that ” our leaders lack to hold dear, valuable, or satisfactory, approve of, believe in anything”. And, this leads that we have the responsibility to say: WE ARE TIRED OF YOUR CRABS! Because you all short sighted to not even remember were you where standing yesterday so, don’t drag us into your NONESENSES.

ADEN ABDI DAHER

aden-day@hotmail.com

source: http://somalilandpress.com/boobe-as-king-solomon-says-dont-be-quick-to-respond-36907