Reject the Fake-Ethiopian Myth of Somalia’s Failure!

In five consecutive articles, I refuted Mr. Ahmed Ali Sabeyse’s criticism of my earlier article ‘Kosovo and Somaliland: The Impossible Equation’, in which I had analyzed the impossibility to establish a possible parallel between the rightfully recognized Kosova and the duly unrecognized Somaliland. The last of the five articles was entitled ‘4000 Years of Illustrious History of Somalia and a Somali Renegade’ (http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/58344) and there one can find links to all the previous parts of the series, as well as to the first article, and Mr. Sabeyse’s criticism. My lengthy answer apparently disturbed the unremorseful Mr. Sabeyse, who published a third article under the title ‘Kosovo and Somaliland: The Impossible Equation III’.

As large part of it evolved around a picture published in one of my articles, I dedicated an entire article to discuss the issue (‘Pseudo-state Somaliland: Embodiment of Treason, Obscurantism and Tyranny’ - http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/59212). In the present article, I will comment on Mr. Sabeyse’s last article’s main part, refuting his inconsistencies. I publish first the part of Mr. Sabeyse’s article, and I will subsequently comment; numbers encrusted in the text refer to my comments.

Kosovo and Somaliland: The Impossible Equation III – Excerpt on Picture Selection
(published amongst others in: http://www.waridaad.blogspot.com/)

By Ahmed Ali Sabeyse

(Waridaad) - At any given time, people take sides on the vital political or social issues that affect their lives. The differences in our opinions and the diversity of the views exchanged is the essence of the political discourse. 1 If and when the dialogue turns into name calling, those who rake the muck will sure get a shovel full of the sod on their faces and this is where this Greek professor has taken the issue of Somaliland's legitimate claim to sovereignty. 2 He opined in his first article that Somaliland's claim is unsubstantiated. In his second article he states that, " "There is no legitimate right of the Somaliland gang to reclaim sovereignty; there is no nation called Somaliland; the breakaway state controls part of the national Somali territory without any particular reason other than the preservation of peace at a moment of strife in the Somali South. This does not consist in any right to sovereignty". 3 Only an expert on international law can make such an unequivocal statement on the subject. 4 The issue is beyond the qualification and the competence of this professor. 5

……………………………………………….. (part dedicated to the picture issue)

The professor went to that extreme to respond to two articles I wrote under the title: " Kosovo and Somaliland: The Impossible Equation."

1. The professor's response begins with: "What went wrong in Somalia was not the subject of my article." Certainly, the subject of discussion here 6 is Somalia, and for some reason or the other, that nation ceased to exist as of January 29, 1991. We are dealing 7 with a completely disintegrated society. 8 Therefore, it is natural to ask the cause of this fragmentation: 9 What went wrong? It is that simple. The Republic of Somaliland came out of the ashes of the turmoil associated with the inevitable collapse of Somalia. 10 If the distinguished professor is not aware of what went wrong, then he should not be so passionate in defending the non-existent state of Somalia. 11

2. The professor's second point of defense states the subject merits the writing of a book. However, he "personally believes that the current division and strife in Somalia is preponderantly an external affair, a matter of multi-faceted foreign involvement, mainly American, Abyssinian, British and Chinese". The weakness of the professor's argument is self-evident- he deliberately left out the internal players that really exacerbated the misery and the agony inflicted on the people of southern Somalia. The governments of the regional organization, IGAD, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development are the number one spoilers. I do not understand how Mr. Megalommatis also left out the governments of Egypt, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and Italy. 12

The dichotomy between the two preceding segments is obvious; the stark contradiction is: what went wrong in Somalia was not the subject of his article 13 while at the same time the professor is stating the external factors that contributed to the problem. 14

3. Yes indeed, 'a nation that does not meet its full potential is an evolutionary failure'. A nation that can not maintain the cohesiveness of the fabric of its people is an evolutionary; a nation that can not provide the minimum necessities of modern life to its citizens is an evolutionary failure; 15 and so is any nation that goes to war of annihilation against its citizens. 16

4. The evaluation of Somalia's failure or otherwise on a time scale is truly immaterial and irrelevant at this time. Whether professor. Megalommatis likes it or not, Somalia has failed and history will record it as such. 17 The fabric of the Somali nation has flaked beyond recognition. 18 For the past seventeen years, the warlords of Southern Somalia held that society hostage and put through it a perpetual state of war, anarchy, chaos, and desperation. These are the true perverts, traitors, and human savages that should be brought to the International War Crimes Tribunal at The Hague.

5. Between 1988 and 1991 the Somali Air force with the help of former Rhodesian mercenary pilots, pulverized the Somaliland cities of Hargeisa, Burao, and Berbera. The coordinated aerial bombardment and the indiscriminate artillery shelling of these cities terrorized the non-combatants civil population. The death toll among the civilian population was estimated at one hundred thousand; 19 material destruction inflicted on the major cities stood at tens of billions of dollars. Who is liable to pay for all this? These are the memories of the survivors of the scorched earth policies of the Nazi-government of Siyad Barre. For the benefit 20 of the professor, 99.999% of Ethiopia's export/import trade goes through the port of Djibouti 21 1and by the way, who are you, to dictate Somaliland what goes through its ports 22 and how to handle its borders? 23

6. The professor's disdain for the African Union is unmistakable "Quite unfortunately, the African Union is not a respectable authority and an international body able to inspire high esteem; it’s the realm of tyrants, postcolonial gangsters kept at the helm through Anglo-French interference and preserved in their unelected positions in order to perpetuate Africa’s underdevelopment. This is not a credible source therefore, to say the least." 24 How does the Arab League fair in the scheme of the professor Megalommatis' judgmental evaluation of international organizations? I hope he has a better score card for the nations of the Arab League. 25

7. "Irrelevant; so he was told to say, and so he said. His Master’s Voice – nothing more." I am the master of my own voice and my personal response to you is: And so you are hired hand and a paid lobbyist. The government of Embagathi Swine Stock Exchange bankrolls you to spew vitriolic politics of the spleen in cyberspace. Keep up the good work Mr. Professor. For your information, I am not a hired mercenary; 26 I am defending the existence of my beloved country of Somaliland and if need be, Somali Landers will sacrifice their blood for it. 27

To be continued..

Ahmed Ali Ibrahim Sabeyse

Comments

1. I would agree with this statement; I simply wonder why Mr. Sabeyse’s boss, the loathed dictator Riyale, fails to implement these ideas of his subordinates. Most probably, this is due to the fact that they don’t much bother about the ‘political discourse’.

2. Mr. Sabeyse is gravely uneducated and dramatically unqualified. He tries to reject any dialogue turned ‘name calling’, but his answer to my refutation is exclusively characterized by this attitude. I stated (and Mr. Sabeyse quoted me) that "there is no nation called Somaliland". Dialogue means that Mr. Sabeyse is able to oppose this truth and reveal the reasons for which this statement of mine may be untrue. However, Mr. Sabeyse does nothing of the kind. Why? Because he is not apt to it. He then turns the dialogue into mere ‘name calling’, by saying that I am not an expert in International Law to make a statement like that! I would tell him that all the experts would agree with me in this regard, but this does not change the reality in anything: Mr. Sabeyse is totally unable to engage in a dialogue, and he knows that. Failing to challenge me and prove that Somaliland is a separate nation (which would consist in real dialogue), he demonstrates his dramatic inconsistency. The easiest comment for me to make is the following:

- Mr. Sabeyse is not an expert in History, whereas I am a Historian. Mr. Sabeyse should accept my approach and analysis because the "issue is beyond the qualification and the competence" of a non expert.

3. Is there any Historian in the world who would dare say that Somaliland is a nation different from Somalia? Is there any expert in International Law who would admit that the simple (and rightful) willingness to preserve the peace in the Somali Northwest entitles the Hargeysa regime to sovereignty? Certainly not!

4. All this is the implementation of Mr. Sabeyse’s plan to turn the discourse into a monologue of the specialists; I would have no objection with that under two conditions:
a. Mr. Sabeyse should cease to speak as he is not specialist on anything, and
b. All the specialists would abide by worldwide commonly accepted moral standards, criteria and approaches.

5. Certainly, I don’t claim to be a legal expert, but I reproduce in this regard scholarly bibliography internationally accepted. The issue is simple: only nations are entitled to autonomy and suzerainty. Not the inhabitants of a city or province apart who belong to the same nation which is already formally recognized.

6. Mr. Sabeyse is not only uneducated but also pathetic. He is a common liar; I wrote an article that he tried to refute. The article’s title was (comically repeated by Mr. Sabeyse) ‘Kosovo and Somaliland: The Impossible Equation’. For any person of good intentions, with the aforementioned title, it becomes clear to all that the subject is other than ‘Somalia’.

Sulfurous in his inane method, Mr. Sabeyse insists: "the subject of discussion here is Somalia". The answer to such an idiotic statement is simple: "it is not; the subject is Kosova and Somaliland". This was my subject that he tried to rebut. Commenting on that article, Mr. Sabeyse mistakenly said that I did not analyze what happened in Somalia. In fact, I should not; if did so, I would be out of subject. As he never studied properly in a university, Mr. Sabeyse reveals how ignorant he is when it comes to Written Composition. And he is unable to refute my point, namely the critical point that Somaliland, contrarily to Kosova, has no right to independence.

7. This is out of context.

8. Not only Somalia is not a disintegrated society, but Mr. Sabeyse should be considered as high traitor, enemy of his own fatherland, and taken to a Court of Justice by any Somali patriot. The elimination of criminals like Riyale and Sabeyse will produce great dynamics that will enable Somalia, united and peaceful, to go fast ahead.

Many will ask for Justice in a United Somalia; at the moment innocent children were butchered at Mogadishu by the inhuman and cruel Abyssinian invaders, few traitors made money by defaming Somalia and by describing the embattled but noble Somali society as ‘disintegrated’. No one goes unpunished in this world…

More precisely, on the basis of his own texts, Mr. Sabeyse stands accused for: high treason, incitation to civil war, sedition, conspiracy against the national integrity of his fatherland, insurrection, mutiny, insubordination, agitation, outbreak, flare-up, affray, ferment, fracas, tumult, convulsion, commotion, misrule, ruckus, agitation, incitement, fomentation, felony, perpetual disorder and mischief, defection, and misprision of treason.

It is high time for Mr. Sabeyse to ask himself where his acts are leading him.

9. Again, no, it is not ‘normal to ask the cause of this fragmentation’, when writing an article to examine whether there are parallels between Kosova and Somaliland. The ceaseless effort of Mr. Sabeyse to transfer the epicenter of the discussion from what I analyzed to what he is paid by his illegitimate boss to propagate highlights his perverse character.

10. Again wrong; Somalia’s collapse was not inevitable; it was carefully planned by the Neo-Nazi colonial regime of Abyssinia (fallaciously renamed as ‘Ethiopia’); certainly, Somali statesmen and diplomats, businessmen and military made in the process and are still making many mistakes, but this does not imply any inevitability. And there is nothing to make sure that the current division and strife will continue for long.

11. This only shows how blind and how hysterical Mr. Sabeyse is; I never defended the past or the currently non-existent state of Somalia. Seldom I defend states however! I defend ideas, values, concepts, and thoughts; I support fighters, peoples, societies, oppressed and tyrannized nations that live under conditions of undeserved misery and exploitation, but I do not care much about states.

More specifically in the case of Somalia, I do support all the Somalis who love their most ancient and most venerable country which fascinated so many kings, scholars, intellectuals, erudite travelers, merchants, captains and laymen for no less than 4000 years, all those who are energetically engaged in Somalia’s liberation and unification – two most noble ideals –, and all those who suffer because of the present situation, the strife and the division.

Finally, I do encourage all the Somalis, who feel that their country is the victim of the most inhuman hatred and enmity, and the prey of the most evil plan of the racist, Neo-Nazi Abyssinian elites (under any mask, pseudo-monarchical, pro-Communist, and bogus-republican), to fight – coordinating with other oppressed nations (notably the Afars, the Ogadeni Somalis, the Sidamas, and the Oromos) – in order to eradicate the Neo—Nazi regime of Abyssinia from the surface of the Earth.

The state that caused the Somali Drama cannot be allowed to exist.

12. Mr. Sabeyse quotes me correctly, but his poor English linguistic skills are not enough to make him understand two quoted words: ‘preponderantly’ and ‘mainly’.

13. The dichotomy is only in the useless mind of the blind Mr. Sabeyse; certainly, ‘what went wrong in Somalia was not the subject’ of my first article – for which he attacked me, being unable to understand where the focus was.

14. And unquestionably, I mentioned (not analyzed or described) some of the external factors in my quinti-partite answer to him. The ‘stark contradiction’ seen by the blind Mr. Sabeyse is the result of his confusion of two different texts, my original text, and my response! Epitome of mental disorder!

15. The only failure is that of Mr. Sabeyse who does not understand that he is not a Historian and/or Political Scientist to possibly evaluate what state is a failure and what state is not. Mr. Sabeyse is not entitled to elaborate historical or political analyses, and even worse, his ideas are not ideas. They are sickness put in verbal clothes, in words.

16. Somalia – despite the filthy lies of the criminal Mr. Sabeyse – did not go "to war of annihilation against its citizens". The state seized to exist, and fratricide conflicts were instigated by the evil, Neo-Nazi regime of Abyssinia. This is a "war of annihilation against" the Somalis – but it is not undertaken by the inexistent Somali state (in vain accused by Mr. Sabeyse) but by the Abyssinian masters of Mr. Sabeyse’s boss, the pseudo-president Riyale.

17. Pathetic! What is Mr. Sabeyse trying to say? Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, China, India, Rome, the Islamic Caliphate, France, England, Russia, Germany, Spain and Italy were engulfed in different moments of their history in far longer periods of civil war. And we will forget all this in order to shamefully and idiotically believe that Somalia ‘failed’? Only at the end of the existence of a historical nation we can say whether it failed or not. And even this is highly questionable. History is full of ups and downs. All the aforementioned nations crossed far worse moments in their history than the Somali Civil Conflict which is a brief period indeed compared with the 4 millennia long Somali History.

Somalia’s failure exists only in the imagination of the high traitor Mr. Sabeyse, who should be met with a paradigmatic and unequivocal punishment for the other Somalis to learn that they are not allowed to pocket filthy Abyssinian money in order to defame their country’s most venerable past.

18. The only flaked Somalis – certainly beyond recognition – are the traitors of Hargeysa, the likes of Riyale and Sabeyse.

19. This is not a real number; it’s the Riyale hot air balloon! Nice enough for the pseudo-festivities organized there.

20. That’s ridiculous; without Hargeysa, the Neo-Nazi regime of Meles Zenawi would have collapsed through asphyxiation. More than 50% of Abyssinia’s officially recorded transportation is effectuated illegally through Somali territory (shamelessly called Somaliland). And the quasi-totality of Abyssinia’s illegal commercial activities are channeled – thoughtfully but momentarily – through Hargeysa. That’s why the pseudo-Ethiopian pseudo-embassy at Hargeysa is larger than that at Djibouti; or is it not?

21. Who believes that the gangsters of the Zenawi administration have money to pay Djibouti the authorities of which, protected by both the US and France, look down on the miserable and uncivilized Amhara and Tigray pseudo-diplomats, who represent ca. 18% of their country’s entire population.

22. Wonderful question! Who are you to dare utter that Somaliland, an illegal creation of Somalia’s worst enemy, exists?

23. Bear in mind, you and your Riyale will be drowned in blood, if you don’t repent and realize that you have no borders at all. The borders you are talking about are not yours.

24. If I spoke openly about the African Union sometimes, I expanded repeatedly against the existence of the colonial relic of Arab League. I published many links to articles of mine concerning the fallacy of Pan-Arabism, in one of the five articles I wrote as response to Mr. Sabeyse. But the blind servant of Riyale did not even notice……

25. Certainly the Arab League is a colonial tool geared for political, educational and cultural oppression, national and cultural disfigurement, alienation from and loss of the true national historical identity (for all the nations engulfed therein), and permanent underdevelopment. One can find the links to several articles here: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/58173 (and more specifically in comment no 1).

26. Your text, attitude and mentality clearly prove your words false; the advanced process of amharization that you have undergone has gradually transformed you into an un-Somali and anti-Somali traitor.

27. You don’t love your country because your country is Somalia, and there is no country called Somaliland. Even worse for you, there are no Somalilanders; there are Somalis living in Riyale’s territory, and they will certainly sacrifice their blood – here you are right – for their country, Somalia.

Note
Picture: Oppressed and distressed Somalis who have been engulfed in the territory of Riyale, the shameful puppet of Somalia’s worst enemy, the Neo-Nazi Abyssinians.