Search This Blog

Thursday, July 25, 2013

Somaliland: AL QAEDA'S SOMALIA CELL IS FRACTURED AND DANGEROUS


Members of the ubiquitous security force that keeps everything so oppressively quiet. Photos courtesy of the author.
By Mark Hay

Qawdhan slouches on the floor of the wicker-frame hut across from me, his back to the old UNHCR banners serving as a wall. He sits in silence, calmly chewing a bundle of khat while stealing the occasional glance at a TV on the other side of the dim and sparse room. My eyes dart back and forth from the TV as well—a gaggle of children cluster around it to watch English-language cartoons with Arabic subtitles, even though they all speak only Somali. But whereas Qawdhan just seems calm, my eyes are everywhere because I’m nervous. I’m about to start a sensitive conversation, and I can’t shake the thought that it could go very badly.

“Are you connected to Al-Shabaab?”

“Yes, I am affiliated with Al-Shabaab.”

Qawdhan and I sit in awkward silence for a moment.

A friend introduced me to Qawdhan a couple of weeks ago, saying that he’d be a good person to meet. It was the sort of connection that gets made all the time here in Hargeisa, the capital of the de facto independent but unrecognized nation of Somaliland. You sit at a café, shaking hands as your friends shoehorn new contacts into your network. But when that same friend claimed that Qawdhan was linked to Al-Shabaab, the terrorist group that’s been periodically ravaging and ruling parts of Somalia for the past six years and, in 2012, officially became a subsidiary of al Qaeda, my interest was piqued. After asking around several other acquaintances backed up the claim, and so my friend and I invited him to break the Ramadan fast with us so that I could ask him about this accusation. To my surprise, he agreed to join us.

I expected him to deny his involvement with Shabaab; it’s a dangerous affiliation for a Somalilander. Eager to differentiate itself from the violence of south-central Somalia and earn enough international credit to gain recognition of its independence, the nation has amassed a formidable security force and promoted public hostility toward groups, like Shabaab, associated with the notion of a violent Somalia.

The name Al-Shabaab literally means “the Youth” in Arabic, representing its origins as the militant youth wing of the Islamic Courts Union, a coalition of Islamically inspired entities of diverse ideologies and functions, which wrested power away from south-central Somalia’s warlords in 2006. But Qawdhan is an old man, somewhere in his 50s, with a droopy face and a skittish gaze.


“What was the nature of your affiliation with Al-Shabaab?” I ask, thinking he might just be a supporter or a funder, or maybe the father of a fighter.

“I was a soldier with Al-Shabaab,” He tells me. “I served in 2006 when the Court Union broke up, because I was in the Court Union. The Court Union and Shabaab are the same thing, their ideologies match.”

This makes some sense. The name Al-Shabaab is more reflective of a pre-2007 reality, when the group was a specialized wing of a diverse whole. But since the movement broke away, it’s sucked up fighters of any age wherever it could find them. The leadership even considered changing the name in 2011 to Imaarah Islamiya (Islamic Authority) to better reflect both a localized, nationalist mission of Somali liberation and the true demographics of the group (the name change was opposed by leaders who wanted to keep the movement explicitly tied to international jihad).

Qawdhan’s choice to join Shabaab seems to have been as much about clan as ideology. Qawdhan explains that one of the members of his clan (the Arab sub-clan of the Isaaq, the dominant kin group in Somaliland), Moktar Ali Zubeyr (AKA Godane), a former leader of the Courts Union, had become the leader of Shabaab, and many of his clansmen in the Union followed him over. By Qawdhan’s count, 90 members of his clan are still alive and fighting with Godane in the south.

It’s hard to square the kinship bond Qawdhan’s talking about with the fact that his clan hails from Somaliland, which vehemently denies that Shabaab or its sympathizers exist therein. But it’s clear that the government just means there is no official, public Shabaab presence. When one pushes the question with citizens and government officials, they will admit that perhaps individuals in Somaliland harbor pro-Shabaab sympathies, and that perhaps isolated, minor Shabaab foot soldiers live amongst them. But, stresses Haji Mohamed Haashim, the head of the avowedly apolitical religious organization blatantly named the Committee for the Preservation of Good Deeds and the Deterrence of Bad Deeds, these are mostly naïve, misled peoples. And besides, the fact that no one publically supports Shabaab is what matters.

Qawdhan eventually left the ranks of Shabaab and denounces elements of the current organization. But he still supports it as an abstract entity and ideology—the platonic Shabaab of his memories before its devolution.


The Committee for the Promotion of Good Deeds and Prevention of Bad Deeds, the anti-Shabaab group run by the religious elite.
I ask him how many people in Somaliland he thinks share his belief in Shabaab.

“Three-fourths of the adult population,” he says, matter-of-factly and without missing a beat.

My Somalilander friends vehemently dispute that number. The refrain here is simple: there is no Shabaab here; we are anti-Shabaab.

But when one takes the name away and tries to express the ideology Qawdhan ascribes to Shabaab, things change.

I ask Qawdhan what he believes Shabaab, as he knows it and sees it, wants:

“We want to take power and rule according to Islamic tenants. These people [the rulers of the country] have given out [Somalia] to Western powers and when the Courts Union broke they took our leader and made him their own [Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, the former commander-in-chief of the Courts Union who later became the president of the internationally created and backed Transitional Federal Government].”

My friends Liibaan and Yusuf currently both dismiss Shabaab categorically, but their thoughts still resonate with Qawdhan’s. Yusuf expresses distaste for violently implemented Islamic rule, but fondness for it when properly administered; to him, Shabaab started out as just another set of freedom fighters against international interlopers. Liibaan admits to having supported Shabaab in its early days—before the al Qaeda influence, suicide bombings, and infighting—as did many people, because he believed the youths would revive the world of the Courts Union.

Liibaan is not alone in his disapproval of al Qaeda’s involvement in Shabaab. When I ask Qawdhan when and why he left the group, he tells me, “I left when they joined al Qaeda. I do not support al Qaeda and their principles. They have caused a lot of fractures in Shabaab. So I surrendered to my government.”

I push Qawdhan to tell me what these principles were.

“We had foreigners working with us—a lot of foreigners. But al Qaeda was against the white people [meaning Arabs as well as Americans and Europeans] and the outsiders. People I worked with and ate with started getting killed. There were many foreigners in general—Arabs, Asians, then Europeans—who were being killed.”

The infighting, mostly between those with nationalist goals and those with international jihadist goals, was inevitable. In its pragmatic quest for manpower, the group sucked in ideologies. As early as 2010, Godane promoted ties to al Qaeda. And in October of 2011, anecdotal reports suggest Shabaab solicited support from pirates—not a logical ally for a group whose hardliners violently oppose thieving. By the time that Qawdhan left, supposedly around 2012, tensions ran so high that a high-ranking jihadist from America, Abu Mansur Al-Amriki (nee Omar Hammami) expressed public fear that his fellow Shabaab members might kill him for his differing opinions. More recently, the infighting and danger has grown so severe that Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys, a former Shabaab leader (of a more nationalist bent) fled the group, surrendering to arrest by the TFG.

Those who’ve lived in Mogadishu say there are people like Qawdhan still in Shabaab, trapped among ideologies hostile to their own by the threat of retribution for defection. But leaving the group—at least for residents of Somaliland like Qawdhan—isn’t as difficult as it once was. Somaliland’s Minister of the Interior, Mohamed Nur Arale Duur, offered an amnesty last year to members of Shabaab originally hailing from Somaliland. If they turned in their guns and renounced their ties to the group, they could live quietly, anonymously, and securely.

Yet when I ask Qawdhan about the 2008 attacks on the presidential compound, Ethiopian consulate, and UN offices in Hargeisa, which killed 28 and wounded more—the kind of violence against locals which disquieted him and alienated people like Liibaan—he tells me, “2008 just proved to me and to the world that we [Shabaab] are very strong here [in Somaliland],” blurring differentiation between his loyalty to the idealized Shabaab he joined and his disloyalty to the factional, violent Shabaab.

“So do you think that Al-Shabaab, the organization, still has agents in Somaliland?”

“Why would it [Shabaab] be absent?” Qawdhan laughs, for the first time in our conversation, at my naiveté. “Seventy-five percent of the senior command is from here. The people who facilitated the 2008 bombings are still around. The government can shout from the rooftops all it wants, but they’re still here.”


The entrance to the Presidential Palace, one of the places Shabaab bombed in 2008. The barriers are a poor attempt to mimic the anti-suicide-bombing barriers in Baghdad and outside new US embassies.
It’s unclear whether Qawdhan is referring to active agents of the current incarnation of Shabaab or remnants of the idealized group of his memories. I try to tease out a fuller picture.

“If that is true, why do you think there have been no major attacks since? There have been attacks in Puntland [the neighboring quasi-independent federal state of Somalia to the east], but not in Somaliland. Why is that?”

“Because there must be no strategic message to be sent by another attack in Somaliland for now.”

Shabaab actually threatened in February to carry out suicide attacks in Somaliland from bases in the Sanaag highlands in the east, but has yet to do so. I hoped that Qawdhan’s response might shed light on his knowledge of Shabaab’s operations or his differentiation between the activities of modern Shabaab and his idealized Shabaab. Instead, it just seemed that Qawdhan was unaware of these threats.

I try a different tact.

“But does Shabaab really need to be active here? This country is Islamic. The government claims to be inspired by sharia and Islamic studies are taught in schools.”

“No, there is nothing like sharia law here. It is just in the books. In reality, they are using colonial penal laws and courts. It’s like how Arabic is the second language in Somaliland and English is the third, but in truth English is the second language and they don’t even really teach Arabic in the schools.”

“Then do you think you would be able to establish an Islamic government, if people do not receive adequate training?” I ask. “Could you have qualified qadis [Sharia judges]?”

“Despite everything, people still have the knowledge, so it will not be hard to establish a government. We will take the good from English law and sharia. Most of the laws, they rhyme.”

I’d hoped this might prompt Qawdhan to talk more about his beliefs and his grievances, to see how his interpretation of sharia holds up to statements of current and past Shabaab spokesmen. But, as my friend reminds me, Qawdhan was a foot soldier, not a qadi.

When he speaks of Shabaab’s presence, power, and popularity in Somaliland, I want to believe he’s talking about the sentiments and concept of the old-school Shabaab he joined. I suspect he’s projecting the potency of his beliefs into his reality and denying the ownership of the term Shabaab to the factions he fled, downplaying their relevance. But you never know with foot soldiers. I push forward.

“Would you be willing to negotiate with the government here? If they were to agree to pay more attention to Islamic education and governance, would you work with them?”

“There is no way to negotiate with Somalia, but in Somaliland we can enter into a deal. We have tried, but we have received nothing. Al-Shabaab’s existence is a sign of the failure to work together.


The flag of Somaliland
“But at least we have a common history, and common enemies in Mogadishu [the Transitional Federal Government, which periodically asserts its sovereignty over Somaliland as nothing but a federal state of Somalia]. We can work with Somaliland.”

I suspect the appreciation of Somaliland is based on Isaaq clan affiliation and its origins in solely Somali activism, versus the TFG, which is a wholly international construction. There’s a clear nationalist bent to this image of Shabaab.

“What about the foreigners? What about my people? Could you work with America?”

“Yes, government to government, we could work with them. We have the same principles, but they see us in the wrong way. It’s the British and the Americans who have the problems.

“The Turks and the Egyptians [often used here as a collective term for all Arabs] are big here now, but we prefer the USA to those people. We know each other and we can sit down and negotiate. These Egyptians are newcomers and they have their own intentions that are unknown to us. But American intentions are known. The first thing we would do in an Islamic government is establish good relations with the USA and keep the Egyptians at bay.

“Our organization is forced to be violent with the world. But I would urge the Americans to talk as we have talked tonight. Right now, whenever we make something good, they spoil it, but when they leave us alone we will make our own good government.”

This condemnation of international Islamic powers and predilection to negotiate with familiar actors smacks of a nationalist agenda. Qawdhan seems to live with two simultaneous conceptions of Shabaab: One that accords with the Somalilander reality of a factional, socially cannibalistic, and irredeemable entity; and one that inspired the loyalty of people like Liibaan and Yusuf, and which most believe is dead, but which Qawdhan appears to believe still has acolytes and power.


Of course, this might just be me projecting.

A stock photo of responders following the 2008 bombings.
Throughout our conversation, Qawdhan periodically turns to my friend, who acts as an interpreter, and asks why I am so interested in Shabaab. He gets wary and leery-eyed.

He asks if I have any affiliations with intelligence agencies, and why I want to know so much.

At first I laugh the question off with a simple “no.” But he remains anxious, and I find myself going to great lengths to explain that I am no threat: Look at me. I’m a tiny, weak man. No intelligence agency would hire me. I’d be incredibly incompetent. Apparently, though, protestations couched in self-deprecating humor are of no avail here.

Suddenly, an hour and a half into our conversation, Qawdhan just leaves. My friend and I sit for a moment. Then, only half in jest, he turns to me and says, “Maybe we should be going now. I don’t know that I trust this. He just gets up and puts on his boots and leaves without a word. I don’t want to be picking up your pieces later today.”

So we leave. And I’m still a little unsure of just how Qawdhan walks the line between two Shabaabs—if it’s possible to maintain a devotion to the ghost of Shabaab past without falling into the gravitational pull of the current Shabaab. I suspect that the Shabaab Qawdhan joined is dead. People like him are probably trapped within Shabaab by decaying bonds of fear and inertia, but even if they were to wrest control from the competing ideologies that dominate them, the name Shabaab is too sullied to be revived. Qawdhan’s nationalist-Islamist sentiments, in abstract, still have potency and popularity. But a man like Qawdhan, who frames these ideas in terms of Shabaab, is only a memory of a recent yet antique phase of Somalia’s ever murky history, desperately trying to impose the orders, terms, and ideas he knows onto a reality he split from long ago.

WAR DEGDEG AH: Sheekh Xasan Daahir Aways Oo caawa la sii daayey + Warbixin


Sheekh Xasan Daahir Aweys

Muqdisho - Muddo saacado ah oo ay ciidamada Sirdoonka dawlada federaalka ee soomaaliya su,aalo ku waydinayeen Xarunta Dambi baarista ayaa suuro gashay inay caawa dawladu fasaxdo Sheekh Xasan Daahir Aways oo ahaa masuul ka tirsan Xarakada Alshabaab,waxaana la sheegaya in dawladu saacadaha ay gacanta ku haysay su,aalo waydiineysay.

Sidoo kale wararka qaar ayaa sheegaya in saraakil cadaan ah iyagun waqti dheer la qaateen Sheekh Xasan Daahir Aways kuwaasi oo ka waramaysanay xaalada Faalagada Alshabaab,waxaana la sheegay in mudada uu xayirnaa Sheekh Xasan Daahir su,aalo la waydiinayey balse aysan dawladu xabsi gayn.

Dhinaca kale wararka qaarkooda yaa sheegaya in dawladu u sheegtey  Xasan Daahir hadii uu u baahdo ilaalo inay siinayaan isla markaasna ka biixinayaan kharashaadka degaanka uu rabo inuu dego,lama oga inuu Shiikh Xasan Daahir arrintaasi aqbalay iyo inkale,waxaana la sheegayaa inuu diiday.

Arintaan ayaa waxaa ay ka dambeeysay kadib markii beesha Habar Gidir ee uu ka soo jeedo ay soo saareen bayaan ay dowlada uga dalbanayaan in la sii daayo Sheekh Xasan Daahir Aweys

Somalia: UNHCR Somalia Hosts Movie Premiere


By Dickson Soire,

The much-anticipated movie, A hijacking premiered on Friday at the Planet Cinema in Westgate, Westlands, Nairobi. It was meant to be screened earlier on June 19 to commemorate the World Refugee Day but an attack by Al Shabaab militants on the UN embassy in Mogadishu on the same day saw it postponed to the later date.

Based on a true story, the movie follows the story of seven crew members of a Danish Cargo Ship MV Rozen that was hijacked in 2007 in the Indian Ocean. They went through four months of terror waiting for the negotiators to strike a deal with the pirates.

Andy Needham, from UNHCR said the movie is intended to show the plight of hostages and how everything can change for a family in under one minute. He pointed out that the Somali pirates are just young boys who are looking for their daily bread but are pushed by lack of education and property to become pirates.

Security Council extends mandate of monitoring group for Somalia and Eritrea





24 July 2013 – The Security Council today extended for 16 months the mandate of the United Nations expert panel monitoring compliance with sanctions against Somalia and Eritrea, while further easing funding and equipment restrictions on the UN and European Union missions in the region.

In a resolution adopted this morning, the Council asked Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to re-establish the eight-member Monitoring Group on Eritrea and Somalia until 25 November 2014. The panel, which monitors compliance with the embargoes on the delivery of weapons and military equipment to Somalia and Eritrea, also investigates any seaport operations in Somalia that could generate revenue for the Islamist militant group known as Al-Shabaab that controls some Somali territory.

The Security Council in 1992 imposed an embargo on all deliveries of weapons and military equipment to Somalia. This past March, the Council partially lifted the weapons ban for one year to boost the Government’s capacity to protect areas recovered from the militant group Al-Shabaab and defend against fresh attempts by such groups to destabilize the country.

It decided that the arms embargo would not apply to arms or equipment sold or supplied solely for the development of the Government’s security forces, but it kept its restrictions in place on heavy weapons, such as surface-to-air missiles.

Today’s resolution reminds the Federal Government of Somalia that it is required to notify the Council’s sanctions committee at least five days in advance of any such deliveries and provide details of the transactions. Alternately, Member States delivering assistance could make the notification after informing the Government of its intentions in that regard.

The text decides that until 6 March 2014, the arms embargo on Somalia would not apply to weapons, military equipment, training or advice intended to develop Somalia’s security forces.  Nor would it apply to military supplies and aid to the UN Assistance Mission in Somalia (UNISOM), African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) and its strategic partners, the EU Training Mission in Somalia (EUTM) or to Member States and organizations working to combat piracy off the coast of Somalia.

The 15-member Council also expresses its “deep concern” at reports of continuing violations of the charcoal ban by Member States and stresses that it is willing to take action against those violate the ban.

It also reiterates that a charcoal export ban applies to all charcoal from Somalia, whether or not it originated in the country, and requested AMISOM to support and assist Somali authorities in preventing the export of charcoal from the country.

In addition, the resolution includes language renewing a humanitarian exemption until 25 October 2014. The exemption is for “payment of funds, other financial assets or economic resources necessary to ensure the timely deliver of urgently needed humanitarian assistance in Somalia” by the UN and its implementing partners.

The text also encourages the Federal Government to mitigate the risk of the petroleum sector becoming a “source of increased tension”.

The Council also “expresses its serious concern” at reports of misappropriation so Somalia’s public resources given President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s commitment to improve public financial management.
Council members encouraged the Government “to address corruption and hold perpetrators accountable,” and reiterated their willingness to take action against individuals involved in misappropriation of public resources.

Source: UN News Centre

Norway rejects U.N. experts claims on Somalia assistance





(Reuters) - Norway has complained to the U.N. Security Council that accusations by U.N. experts that Oslo's assistance to Somalia was a cover to promote the commercial interests of Norwegian oil companies were "completely unfounded and simply wrong."

The U.N. Monitoring Group's annual report to the Security Council's sanctions committee on Somalia and Eritrea suggested Norway's development assistance to Somalia could be used "as a cover for its commercial interests there."

In a letter to the Security Council, dated Monday, Charge d'Affaires of Norway's U.N. mission Knut Langeland rejected those allegations.

"Let me reassure you that these allegations are completely unfounded and simply wrong," he wrote. "To imply that the Norwegian government's assistance to Somalia may be 'a cover for commercial interests' is therefore totally unfounded."

Somalia is struggling to rebuild after decades of conflict and a U.N.-backed African Union peacekeeping force is trying to drive out al Qaeda-linked Islamist rebel group al Shabaab. Piracy off the Somali coast is also a problem.

(Reporting by Michelle Nichols)

Is the U.S. Ramping Up a Secret War in Somalia?

Islamists in East Africa were supposed to be on the run. But the raids and spy flights keep increasing.
A rigid-hull inflatable boat from the guided-missile destroyer USS Bulkeley (DDG 84) approaches the Japanese-owned commercial oil tanker M/V Guanabara (L) in the Arabian Sea off the Coast of Somalia on March 6, 2011 in this picture released to Reuters March 7, 2011. Credit: Reuters/Seaman Anna Wade/U.S. Navy photo/Handout
BY COLUM LYNCH

Is the U.S. Ramping Up a Secret War in Somalia?

The Obama administration earlier this year expanded its secret war in Somalia, stepping up assistance for federal and regional Somali intelligence agencies that are allied against the country's Islamist insurgency. It's a move that's not only violating the terms of an international arms embargo, according to U.N. investigators. The escalation also could be a signal that Washington's signature victory against al-Qaeda's most powerful African ally may be in danger of unraveling.

Just last year, Obama's team was touting Somalia as unqualified success. "Somalia is a good news story for the region, for the international community, but most especially for the people of Somalia itself," Johnnie Carson, the U.S. assistant secretary of state for African affairs, told reporters last October at the New York Foreign Press Center. Carson praised African forces, principally Uganda and Kenya, for driving the terror group al-Shabab out of the Somalia's main cities, Mogadishu and Kismayo. "The U.S.," he boasted, "has been a significant and major contributor to this effort." Indeed, the United States has emerged as a major force in the region, running training camps for Ugandan peacekeepers destined for battle with Somalia's militants, and hosting eight Predator drones, eight more F-15E fighter jets, and nearly 2,000 U.S. troops and military civilians at a base in neighboring Djibouti.

But despite the array of forces aligned against it, Al-Shabab is demonstrating renewed vigor. "The military strength of al-Shabaab, with an approximately 5,000-strong force, remains arguably intact in terms of operational readiness, chain of command, discipline and communications ability," according to a report by the U.N. Monitoring Group for Somalia and Eritrea. "By avoiding direct military confrontation, it has preserved the core of its fighting force and resources."

"At present, al-Shabaab remains the principal threat to peace and security in Somalia," the report adds. "The organization has claimed responsibility for hundreds of assassinations and attacks involving improvised explosive devices, ambushes, mortar shelling grenades and hit and run tactics."

Not coincidentally, perhaps, American involvement in the region is again on the rise, as well. Last year, according to the U.N. group, the United States violated the international arms embargo on Somalia by dispatching American special operations forces in Russian M-17 helicopters to northern Somalia in support of operations by the intelligence service of Puntland, a breakaway Somali province.

(The U.N. Security Council in 1992 imposed an embargo "on all deliveries of weapons and military equipment to Somalia" The embargo was eased in March, 2013, allowing for the transfer of weapons, equipment or military advisors for the development of the federal government's security forces. But the Somali government is required to inform the U.N. Security Council sanctions committee when it receives foreign military assistance.)

Two U.S. air-charter companies linked to American intelligence activities in Somalia have increased the number of clandestine flights to Mogadishu and the breakaway province of Puntland by as much as 25 percent last year.

Florida-based Prescott Support Co. and RAM Air Services, flew at least 84 civilian flights between August 2012 and March 2013. During the previous year, the two companies flew only 65 flights, "indicating an increase in United States support," the U.N. report notes.

The flights -- which have not been reported to the U.N. Security Council -- suggest a further strengthening of American cooperation with Somalia's National Intelligence Agency in Mogadishu and the Puntland Intelligence Service, which has been cooperating with U.S. counterterrorism operations for more than a decade.

Several flights last November by Prescott have been linked by the U.N. group with the construction of two buildings at the Puntland Intelligence Service compound, north of the town of Galkayo. "The construction of these two buildings during the month of November 2012 coincides with four Prescott Support Co. L-100-30 flights that landed at Galkayo airport between 3 and 9 November 2012 and constituted a load capacity of up to 80 tons of cargo," according to the report.

It's one of many ways that Western intelligence agencies -- including those of the United States, Britain and France -- have been secretly and "directly supporting intelligence services" in Mogadishu, Puntland and Somaliland, another breakaway Somali province, according to the U.N. investigators. At times, this assistance has been in violation of U.N. resolutions, claims their latest report, which runs nearly five hundred pages -- not counting several classified annexes.

Since the report was finalized, al-Shabab has been riven by internal fighting that has splintered the movement, left one of its leaders dead, and sent several others fleeing from the group's southern stronghold. But the insurgents's well-financed secret service - Amniyat - remains intact, capable of carrying out terror operations at will. And al-Shabab's leader, Ahmed Godane, remains firmly in charge of the movement's terror apparatus, according to experts on Somali politics.

The survival of al-Shabab's terror infrastructure has dealt a blow to what had appeared to be a signature achievement of the Obama administration: backing an African led effort to deny an al-Qaeda affiliated insurgency a strategic toehold in the heart of East Africa.

In August, 2011, a U.S.-backed African peacekeeping mission wrested control of the capital of Mogadishu, helping to deliver a rare respite of calm. It set the stage for the September 2012, election of a new, Western-backed President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud. Another key American ally, Kenya, last year joined forces with a Somali clan and seized control of al-Shabab's principle stronghold, Kismayo.

But those gains are being threatened by rampant corruption within the U.S. backed government's weak institutions, al-Shabab's infiltration in the "highest levels" of the Somali government, and continued attacks against targets inside Somali, including a recent deadly strike on a U.N. humanitarian aid compound in Mogadishu.

Even worse, Kenyan forces in Kismayo have clashed with clans loyal to the U.S.-backed federal government while colluding with financial backers of al-Shabab in the lucrative and illicit charcoal trade, enabling the Islamist movement to refill its war chest. "The revenue that al-Shabaab currently derives from its Kismayo shareholding, its ... exports and the taxation of ground transportation likely exceeds the estimated U.S. $25 million it generated in charcoal revenue when it controlled Kismayo," the report stated.

Somalia: Not Just Islam - How Somalia's Union of Islamic Courts Used Local Customs

Perceptions of Somalia's Union of Islamic Courts have often exaggerated the role of Islam and its radicalization

ANALYSIS
.
By Hanno Brankamp,
In July 2006, Ethiopian armed forces crossed the border into western Somalia's Gedo region, seeking to curb an alleged terrorist threat posed by the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC). According to Ethiopian and US intelligence, the UIC was a uniform, militant Islamist movement posing an imminent risk to regional and international security.

The beginnings of influence: UIC's early years

The Union had developed from a judicial system that once concentrated on petty crime into a loosely Islam-based counter-administration to the pro-Western Transitional Federal Government (TFG) that was established in Somalia in September 2004.

After gaining considerable ground against the warlords of the pro-Ethiopian proxy force Alliance for the Restoration of Peace and Counter-Terrorism (ARPCT), the Courts eventually seized control over the capital Mogadishu and the Middle Shabelle region in June 2006.

Converging narratives and the formation of a militant Islamist discourse

Despite being little more than an amalgam of various Islamic factions, local clan elders and financially supportive businessmen, the Islamic Courts were portrayed as the hotbed of Islamic fundamentalism in the region - a perception curiously shaped by two diametrically-opposed groups.

On the one hand, decision-makers in both the international and regional arenas readily depicted the Courts Union as an outpost of al-Qaeda. This was directly connected to the strategic counter-terrorism interests of the US on the African continent, particularly in the Horn of Africa. With the backdrop of the "War on Terror", the US led the bulk of Western governments to quickly adopt a hard-line stance towards the UIC.

Regional allies - most notably Ethiopia - supporting this parochial ideological outlook encouraged the prospect of a long-term US commitment in the region, with substantial material and financial support for the Meles regime. Notably, before January 2007 the Bush administration supported the Ethiopian invasion that led to the Courts' complete dismantlement.

On the other hand, "radical" Islamists saw a chance to showcase their relative strength within the Courts Union and to increase their leverage on other, more "pragmatist" factions. Due to their internal heterogeneity, the Islamic Courts had to grapple with constant disunity which prevented a stable, consistent programme for the group.

Initially the UIC favoured a "moderate" agenda with regard to law enforcement and avoided the excessive use of severe corporal and capital punishments. Later, however, the imbalance within the group turned against "moderate" forces and facilitated an increasing radicalisation of the Courts in late 2006.

In the end, instead of promoting the real form of the Islamic Courts as a network of local "marriages of convenience", both sides interacted to reinforce a depiction of the Islamic Courts as an intransigent, uniform Islamist movement. At the core of this narrative was the idea that Islamic law was the key constituent of law enforcement under the UIC.

Between Xeer and Islamic law

However, when examining the justice systems that evolved with the expansion of the UIC in Southern Somalia, it is important to note that Islamic law (sharia) was not the only relevant legal codex. Despite explicitly referring to sharia, the Courts' rulings were substantially guided by Somali customary law, xeer.

Indeed, Somalia's lineage system - the micro-networks of Somalia's major clans - had determined the society's socio-legal order for centuries. As a means of settling inter- and intra-clan disputes, a set of uncodified customary clan laws (xeer) took primacy in traditional adjudication.

These laws are localised and comprise rules for the treatment of day-to-day criminal matters, social interactions, civil affairs and disputes among clans - commonly known as xeer guud. Another sub-set of rules, regulating economic production relations between agricultural and pastoral communities, is referred to as xeer gaar.

Through interaction between clans and sub-clans, Somali customary law - xeer soomaali - developed into a generic term for overarching codes of conduct embracing all Somali communities.

Despite this paramount importance of xeer, Islamic law traditionally retained jurisdiction over civil family matters such as marriage, divorce and death.

Shaping the jurisprudence of the Islamic Courts

Contrary to popular assumption and terminological intuition, the Islamic Courts were not able to establish a system under which sharia was systematically, or even exclusively, applied.

Instead, the importance of clan law ensured that the legal force of Islamic law remained limited. The mixing (barax) of sharia and xeer, and the compliance of sub-clan communities - namely the Hawiye- became necessary for maintaining communal peace and security.

Additionally, in order to strengthen local ownership of the Courts, judges and other legal personnel had been recruited from groups of respected elders and local public figures.

These were not necessarily ʿulamāʾ or wadaaddo (religious scholars) and their formal education in Islamic jurisprudence - fiqh - was basic, further obstructing a knowledgeable implementation of sharia.

Lastly, comparatively "moderate" Sufi traditions - often referred to as "heterodox" by Salafi movements - limited the leverage of more "radical" factions and could circumvent the systematic application of harsh hudud-penalties on a larger scale. Of course, with Ethiopian troops approaching, and the proliferation of nationalist and Islamist ideas, the position of "moderates" within the UIC did weaken with time. But that should not obscure their original influence.

Combining these factors demonstrates why a systematic implementation of severe Islamic capital punishments, such as beheading or lapidation, could thus not be realised in practice.

Even if sharia were an important aspect of the UIC's judicial process, it was rarely applied in criminal law. Instead, the UIC's legal procedures combined certain characteristics of both Islamic law and xeer, with local courts often resorting to "mediation" - masalaxo.

It was these reconciliatory mechanisms of Somali customary law, decisive for the creation of "win-win" solutions, which marked the limits of the UIC's memorable successes and their social inclusiveness.

Putting the "Islamic Courts" into perspective

As much as recent political developments concerning Islamist militancy in Somalia retrospectively affect the narrow lense through which the Islamic Courts are viewed, a more contextual assessment is needed to avoid generalistions about Islamic radicalisation.

Observing the UIC through the prism of xeer reveals a nuanced picture of a loose network of Islamic courts with a plurality of factions. Incidents such as those of December 2006 in Bulo Burto - when local residents were admonished to perform the obligatory daily prayers on pain of death - show the fragility of the Courts inter-factional consensus.

Nonetheless, the diverse groups within the UIC were able to find common ground within the three pillars of Islam, clan tradition and the prospect of communal security.

In this regard, xeer was a vital ingredient for the establishment of a socio-legal order, that mirrored the multidimensional form of Somali society itself.

Hanno Brankamp is studying Area Studies Asia/Africa at Humboldt University in Berlin, with a focus on East Africa and the Horn.

Unidentified gunmen shot dead Abdinasir Mohamed Elmi, the finance head of Puntland Development Research Center's (PDRC) … see more »

Read the original of this report on the ThinkAfricaPress site.


Obama’s Other Secret War…in Somalia


By John Glaser

The Obama administration is violating international law and United Nations resolutions in conducting its largely secret war in Somalia.

At Foreign Policy, Colum Lynch writes that, “the Obama administration earlier this year expanded its secret war in Somalia, stepping up assistance for federal and regional Somali intelligence agencies that are allied against the country’s Islamist insurgency” in “a move that’s not only violating the terms of an international arms embargo,” but may also be emboldening al-Shabab.

This is not exactly news. In a number of articles in 2011, The Nation‘s Jeremy Scahill uncovered Obama’s secret war, which included secret prisons run by CIA proxies, harsh interrogations, and directing funding and training of unscrupulous militants, many of whom were former (and current?) warlords. The “counter-terrorism” effort in Somalia also included “targeted strikes by U.S. Special Operations forces, drone attacks and expanded surveillance operations.

Scahill noted “U.S. policy on Somalia [since "Black Hawk Down"] has been marked by neglect, miscalculation and failed attempts to use warlords to build indigenous counterterrorism capacity, many of which have backfired dramatically.”

At times, largely because of abuses committed by Somali militias the CIA has supported, U.S. policy has strengthened the hand of the very groups it purports to oppose and inadvertently aided the rise of militant groups, including the Shabab. Many Somalis viewed the Islamic movement known as the Islamic Courts Union, which defeated the CIA’s warlords in Mogadishu in 2006, as a stabilizing, albeit ruthless, force. The ICU was dismantled in a US-backed Ethiopian invasion in 2007. Over the years, a series of weak Somali administrations have been recognized by the United States and other powers as Somalia’s legitimate government. Ironically, its current president is a former leader of the ICU.

Emphasis mine. The fact that U.S. policy in the past has demonstrably strengthened the supposed militant threat is incredibly important, especially in today’s scenario where we are repeating those same mistakes.

Al-Shabab “poses no direct threat to the security of the United States,” Malou Innocent, Foreign Policy Analyst at the Cato Institute wrote last year. “However, exaggerated claims about the specter of al Qaeda could produce policy decisions that exacerbate a localized, regional problem into a global one.”

Even the Obama administration has quietly acknowledged the fact that military involvement in Somalia may create more problems than it solves, with one administration official telling the Washington Post back in 2011 there is a “concern that a broader campaign could turn al-Shabab from a regional menace into an adversary determined to carry out attacks on U.S. soil.”

Al-Shabab was nothing until the U.S. decided to flood Somalia with drones, special operations forces, proxy warriors and CIA foot soldiers. Then al-Qaeda’s number 1, Ayman al-Zawahiri, saw the attention they were paid and decided to formally welcome them into the al-Qaeda club. A sign of weak desperation no doubt, but also a sign of getting exactly the opposite set of consequences intended.

But the reality blowback still fails to render the appropriate consideration in the halls of power in Washington. Beyond the backwards strategy in Somalia, the ongoing secret war there should – but doesn’t – bring up other questions about the ability of President Obama to wage covert wars without the consent of the people or Congress and to knowingly flout international law with impunity.