Somalia: New Team, Old Hurdles
A reflection on the challenges ahead for the new crop of leaders in post-transition Somalia
Andrews Atta-Asamoah, Senior Researcher, Conflict Prevention and Risk Analysis Division, ISS Pretoria
Barring any significant opposition
in parliament, Prime Minister Abdi Farah
Shirdon’s ten nominees for Somalia’s post-transition cabinet could be the ones
to promote and sustain the achievements of the just-ended transition in the
country. Their nomination has already been greeted with optimism in certain
circles, amid public relief that the post-transition government, despite
delays, is gradually taking shape. Others regard the inadequacies of the
nominees and the imbalances in the proposed cabinet as indicative of the
character of the new leadership and of the concessions they will be ready to
make in the interests of peace and the development of the country.
Whether
the list passes as is or with modifications, reflecting emerging political
intrigues, the entire process clearly communicates the thinking of the new crop
of leaders in Villa Somalia in steering the country in a direction that breaks
with certain aspects of the past and looks to a future sensitive to the
political and identity nuances of their constituency. This thinking towards
breaking with the past, on one side, and the entrenched realities and
challenges on the other, portray a typical case of a new team facing old
hurdles. The team in Villa Somalia may be changing but the odds are daunting.
The
first of the hurdles is the management of the existing stakeholders’ interests.
In politics there are always vested interests, and Somalia is no exception.
These interests are entrenched in the many identity poles that have been key to
the conflict history of the country, as well as the many stakeholders who have
characterised both the push for and sabotage of the quest for peace. The
composition of the political leadership is thus a delicate balancing act
difficult to master if only ten positions are available. This is even more so
if there is no reserve bench to calm the expectations of all the interest
groups. Crafting an acceptable cabinet is critical to the task ahead. A failure
to map out the various power bases and their associated interest groups will be
a ticking time bomb against sustaining recent achievements.
Already,
a number of concerns are emerging around the proposed cabinet, centred on its
inability to fully satisfy all of the political, regional and identity
interests. As a result, notable imbalances are expected to be a bone of
contention in parliament in the coming days. Closely related to that is the fact
that the proposed cabinet does not reflect the interests of the northern parts
of the country, as it is dominated by people from the south-central areas. This
could be a recipe for failure in resolving the issues surrounding the secession
of Somaliland.
After
having scuttled the hurdle of balancing interests, the cabinet has yet to face the
hurdle of a depleted bureaucracy and institutional base. The years of
uncertainty and insecurity have forced the majority of Somalia’s most valuable human
resources to leave the country. Worse of all is the lack of equipment and
incentive for the few remaining to fully contribute towards sustaining state
structures. Government ministries therefore exist without the capacity to
operationalise efforts towards delivering on state functions. Consequently,
while the expectations of the masses are high, the delivery base is weak. This
leaves the new crop of leaders with a will
without means and ultimately no deliverables. Without these, relevance and
legitimacy will be difficult to create and sustain after more than a year in office. This thus calls for balancing capacity and
interests. As much as accommodating stakeholder interests are important for
sustaining peace in Somalia, the capacity of the nominees to deliver is also
crucial for viability.
Given
the context, no Somali leaders can afford the cost of an erosion of legitimacy
resulting from the inability to deliver on the expectations of their
constituency, whether due to incapacity or to inherited realities. An erosion
of delivery capacity invariably undermines relevance and will legitimise forces
like al-Shabaab that are waiting to cash in on the weaknesses and inabilities
of the new team.
Al-Shabaab
may be down but it is certainly not out and, apart from piracy, is the nucleus
of the security hurdle that stares the new crop of leaders in the face. As
improvised explosive devises (IEDs) and suicide attacks continue to claim lives
in the country, it is clear that extending security beyond Mogadishu cannot be
over-emphasised. In the midst of the shaky mandate of the African Union Mission
in Somalia (AMISOM), a dwindling funding base and the threat by Uganda to
withdraw its troops amid allegations of support for the M23 rebels in the
Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), the pressure for Somalis to take ownership
of efforts to extend security beyond Mogadishu is considerable. Yet that will
take time. Until enough local capacity is built and adequately resourced, an
untimely withdrawal of AMISOM forces will be an open invitation for the return
of al-Shabaab and lead to the deterioration of the achievements made during the
transition period.
The
other issue that should be under discussion is whether it is time to make friends
with the enemy. Al-Shabaab has lost bargaining power as a result of its combat losses.
An outright victory in these circumstances could bring peace, but a negotiated
settlement does so as well. In a situation where the driving force behind the
mobilisation of saboteurs of the peace is jihadism, talking peace is important since the logic of deterrence through
defeat may not wholly apply. Keeping the peace in post-transition Somalia
through making friends with the enemy should not be completely discounted.
Another
important issue that will have to be dealt with circumspectly involves the
management of the Somali pull and the international push. In the past, the
inability of some leaders to balance Somali expectations for independence in
decision making and local ownership with the role of the international
community led to perceptions that certain leaders were the puppets of the
international community. The current crop of leaders cannot afford to allow
such a perception, since it will erode their legitimacy and create citizen
disengagement from existing processes. It is one area that past leaders were
not adept at managing and it is one hurdle that the new leaders will have to
swiftly confront and surmount.
In
the midst of these hurdles and high expectations, what is on the minds of many
is whether Somalia’s saviours have finally arrived and whether the proposed
team (or the modified version) is a winning squad. The answer is the sum of all
the above factors and the resolve of the Somali people to make it work this
time. While the hurdles are many, resolve could make all the difference.
