A Confluence of Interests in the Search for Peace in Somalia
Somalia’s increasingly fragile government declared a state of emergency on June 12, 2009 and issued calls for external assistance to stem attacks from insurgents.
Leandro Oduor, intern – Mifugo Programme, ISS Nairobi Office
Somalia’s increasingly fragile government declared a state of
emergency on June 12, 2009 and issued calls for external assistance to
stem attacks from insurgents. This happened at the height of the
deteriorating situation in Somalia and fighting between the resurgent
Islamist alliance and government forces that has left scores dead in
clashes across the south and central regions. At least 122 000
civilians have been displaced in Mogadishu alone since fighting
escalated in early May, while scores of others have fled to
neighbouring states as refugees.
The call for external assistance seems to be bearing fruit: the
African Union (AU) despite protest from the renegade forces and
Eritrea, resolved to bolster the African Union Peace-keeping Mission on
Somalia force (AMISON) during the AU summit held in Libya, 24th June
-3rd July. Also, according to an Amnesty International Media briefing
on 11 August 2009, the United States has delivered a consignment of
weapons to the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) to help sustain its
affront on the Al Shaabab Militia. Increasingly, Eritrea has
been accused of supporting the Al Shaabab. Meanwhile Eritrea has
argued emphatically that the TFG lacks legitimacy and it was imposed by
Ethiopia.
The international community, and especially the Inter Governmental
Authority on Development (IGAD), needs to take on the spoilers more
assertively and openly. Diplomacy applied by IGAD should be backed by a
strong attempt to end impunity. If this approach of stern measures is
not taken collectively by African governments, with the support of the
international community, there is real risk not only of escalating
violence but the war could also spread across the Somali borders. This
stems from AL Shaabab threats of creating a ‘greater Somalia’
and the escalated refugee crisis that could emerge out of a total
collapse of the TFG.
According to the Sudan Tribune of 03rd September 2009 Eritrea
suspended its membership of IGAD over the AU, United Nations and IGAD
stance on Somalia. However, the issues raised by Eritrea, such as the
notion that external forces are manipulating IGAD and that Ethiopia’s
intervention in Somalia needs a different approach, deserve attention,
if sustainable peace is to be achieved in Somalia in the long term.
The geo-political location of Somalia depicts a region whose
international significance lies largely in securing the sea routes for
merchant and oil ships. The upsurge in piracy has focused international
attention on the peace process in Somalia. Previously Somalia might
have been ignored since it was of little relevance to the international
political economy.
Indeed, the evil hand of piracy has also been a blessing in
disguise as it is providing actors keen on peace and security in
Somalia with the necessary international focus to bring the instability
and direct consequences on innocent civilians into the limelight. The
national, regional and international actors must prioritize Somalia’s
national interests while a middle ground is sought for other political,
social, economic and religious concerns.
In view of effectively addressing the complex Somali political
quagmire, it is necessary to understand the economic dimension of the
crisis - ‘to follow the money’ as it were. The political impasse and
violent confrontation is exceptionally lucrative for the warlords,
militia and those is power positions. This category of people,
including major government figures and the elite, have been rightly
accused of smuggling goods from the ports of Somalia into Kenya and
Sudan. Ransoms paid to ocean pirates have also been traced to banks in
some of the neighbouring capitals. There are also increasing
allegations that the proceeds from illegal trade have been used for
personal enrichment, purchasing weapons, and hiring mercenaries.
Further, members of the Al Shaababhave been accused of monopolising
lucrative economic activity, including the import /export trade. Some
observers have gone so far as to state that Al Shaabab’sthreat to
invade Kenya stems from the high security along the border that is
preventing smuggled goods from reaching the country’s lucrative market.
According to a 11th June 2009 report of the Jihad and Terrorism
Threat Monitor, a senior official in the Somali jihad movement Harakat Al-Shabab Al-Islamiyya
which has for long controlled large areas in southern Somalia,
threatened to invade Kenya if the military activities in the region were
not stopped. Suffice to note that only a week into operation; the
Kenyan army netted a truckload carrying illegal sugar smuggled from the
Somalia ports.
It is not just leading politicians and warlords who are gaining from
the current situation of anarchy. Many others benefit through business
interests that are frequently protected or expanded by militias of
otherwise unemployed youths. It is possible that their ill-gotten gains
enable them to recruit and arm sizeable groups of young men and use
them for their security operations.
The TFG is a product of political compromise and thus contain
elements displeasing to every party. However, calls to dissolve the
regime on legitimacy grounds miss an important point. The key issues
being addressed in the election of President Sheikh Sharif Ahmed are as
pressing as ever, i.e. establishing law and order in Somalia. The
problem however lies in reconciling various interests, mostly business,
and the sophisticated strategies of the two sides that range from the
legalistic, pitting the TFG against the Al Shaabab, to the demagogic- nascent issues of sharia law/Islamic State.
Diplomacy built upon the assumption that the political actors aim
to address these issues in good faith is doomed to fail. The political
‘ping pong’ will continue even with the triumph of the Al Shaabab.
Unfortunately, none of the warring groups have the capacity to
establish law and order in Somalia due to the crisis of legitimacy that
might haunt the parties involved. Furthermore Ethiopian and Eritrean
national interests are threatened by Al Shaabab and TFG hegemony
respectively. The US has already branded Al Shaabab a terrorist
organisation with links to Al Qaeda.
The viable option out of this political situation would be having a
national consensus on who should rightfully govern Somalia or calling
on the warring parties to dialogue and establish a coalition
government. If this fails, then reviewing the mandate of AMISON so as to
engage actively in combat with the rebels will be the only option.
Further, revising the laws preventing bordering states from interfering
would be needed, although this might lead to another challenge that of
disputed territorial integrity. However, what is clear for now is that
her neighbouring states, the continent and the international community
must prioritize a peaceful Somalia.