Why Tanzania will never recognize Somaliland

A famous Tanzanian journalist, Mr. Makwaia wa Kuhenga, suggested in a widely re-published article that Tanzania should "move" to recognize Somaliland.

It is more probable for the sun to rise from the West than for Tanzania to recognize the breakaway pseudo-state of tribal conflict and gangster criminality.

Why then a famous journalist, with more than three decades of journalistic experience, tries to suggest to his country’s government something that he beforehand knows very well that not a single Tanzanian diplomat would ever imagine – let alone consider?

The answer is simple; the Abyssinian embassies in Eastern Africa, notably in Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Kenya and Tanzania, have always been very active in promoting their false versions of History and their criminal political interests, without any other country truly opposing this evildoing.

While Eritrea’s diplomatic activities are limited in a few influential countries of the Middle East and Europe, and with Sudan engulfed in civil wars and genocides, only Egypt could be a sort of counter-weight to the Abyssinian activities in East Africa.

Unfortunately, Egypt’s foreign policy is uselessly absorbed in the Palestinian problem where the country has to deploy an effort not o become part of. With Cairo idiotically pursuing the chimera of Pan-Arabist fallacy, and with the Egyptian Foreign Ministry situating its policy around the Arab League and the Mediterranean, the field is left open to the Amhara and Tigray controlled, unrepresentative, Abyssinian embassies.

Mr. Makwaia wa Kuhenga’s text is mostly inaccurate, either in the sense of misrepresenting the reality in Somaliland or by being oblivious to many related issues. I will therefore re-publish his article and then comment. Figures inserted in Mr. Makwaia wa Kuhenga’s text relate to my points of comments.

Tanzania Should Move to Recognize Somaliland
http://dailynews.habarileo.co.tz/columnist/?id=5815

"Ours is a sad tale. We are caught in the middle of powerful conflicting interests. It is hope against hope. Some powers are dangling our hope 1 for national recognition like a sinker and bait into the sea but nothing happening!"

The above words, spoken coolly and softly yet tinged with bitter disappointment sums up the frustrations of most citizens of Somaliland -- a country which has been standing out alone in the world -- quite a viable state 2 yet internationally unrecognised.

For the last seventeen years from May 18, 1991 to be precise, Somaliland has reasserted itself as an independent state in exactly the same geographical boundaries as at independence from Great Britain on June 26, 1960. 3

It fulfills all the criteria for statehood as laid down by the Montevideo Convention of 1933 inter alia: it has a permanent population and defined territory. 4 Secondly, it has a government and, furthermore, it has the capacity to enter into relations with other states. 5

Indeed, Somaliland, the country I was on a visit the other day, fulfils all these conditions required as a criteria for statehood. 6 The most puzzling aspect however is that very few people are aware of the existence of this state other than fratricidal Somalia with Mogadishu as the capital.

The reason is rooted into history -- colonial history and subsequent events after the decolonization process. 7 Here, we see "two" countries with almost the same name in pre-colonial days -- British Somaliland and Italy ruled Somalia to the South in the Horn of Africa. 8 Furthermore, we see both countries, Somaliland and Somalia gaining independence in the same year, 1960. 9 But by July, 1960 both countries had entered into a "Union", based, in the words of an African Union (AU) fact finding mission to Somaliland in 2005 "on a shared ambition among Somalis to build a ‘Greater Somalia’ which were to incorporate all the Somali communities in the Horn of Africa. In the course of time, the Union malfunctioned." 10

But the collapse of the Union between the two Somali countries in the South and North, hastily declared, as it would seem, is not unique in African history. We see the collapse of similar unions: United Arab Republic -- the Union between Egypt and Syria in 1958; the Mali Federation between Mali and Senegal in 1960 and Senegambia -- between Senegal and Gambia which lasted between 1982 to 1989. 11

But the short-lived ‘unions’ in Africa as we have seen above had not meant the denial of recognition and membership of the international community of nations such as the AU and the UN. Egypt and Syria still retain their respective sovereignty and international recognition as is Mali and Senegal. 12

As the report of the AU fact-finding mission 13 to Somaliland has observed, Somaliland has been made a pariah country by "default". Says the report: "The Union established in 1960 brought enormous injustice and suffering to the people of that country. The fact that the Union between Somaliland and Somalia was never ratified and also malfunctioned makes Somaliland’s search for recognition historically unique and self justified in African political history. 14

"Objectively viewed, the case should not be linked to the notion of opening a Pandora Box. 15 Lack of recognition ties the hands of the authorities and people of Somaliland as they cannot effectively and sustainably transact with the outside world to pursue development goals." But with all these facts, and very clear facts indeed, there are countries, which seem to be interested in the sustenance of the status quo. A status quo to let the courageous people of Somaliland go unnoticed -- a people who have been soldiering on for the last 17 years as an independent country having broken loose from a malfunctioning union under military dictatorships.

This brings us to the quotation at the beginning of this perspective attributed to a Somaliland businessman, Mr Abdelkader Hashi Elmi.

Actually, Mr Elmi is the owner of a very posh hotel which could easily qualify to a five-star hotel anywhere had his country been enjoying to operate normally like all other independent countries enjoying membership of the United Nations and African Union.

"You see my brother," said Abdulkader, owner of Mansoor Hotel in down-town Hargeisa: "We are victims of powerful interests here each wishing to keep us the way we are to serve own ends". 16

"The United States will not recognize us because it does not want to offend Egypt, its ally. But it is keeping us in a manner of hoping against hope -- dangling a bait -- leaving our mouths agape -- chasing in the wilderness," he told me to my considerable interest tinged in amusement. 17

"Why is Egypt in your way?" I asked him.

"The Egyptians are, as usual obsessed with the protection of the Nile 18 in their geo-political considerations. 19 Actually it was former UN Secretary-General, Egyptian Dr Boutros Ghali who initiated our isolation not to assume membership of the United Nations arguing that Somalia must remain one," he responded.

My good friend told me of other forces in the way of the recognition of Somaliland and its assumption of membership of the African Union and the United Nations, which I consider unhelpful to reveal them here. 20

But as the AU fact-finding mission to Somaliland observed in its report in 2005, the AU should be disposed to "judge the case of Somaliland from an objective historical view point and a moral angle". That moral angle, in my best considered opinion, is that here is a people who are at peace with themselves, 21 meeting all the requirements of an independent state, a democratically elected government 22 in a multi-party governance 23 and who are giving a practical example to their fratricidal brethren 24 in Somalia’s Mogadishu 25 of how invaluable peace can make the difference.

How much one really wishes that Tanzania could take the lead to break the ice -- re-asserting its erstwhile prestige as in the old good days -- when it was hailed as the "moral voice and conscience of Africa". 26

An announcement that Tanzania has recognised the 17-year old Republic of Somaliland will certainly become an inspiration to the rest in Africa and elsewhere and it will, certainly, translate as an important contribution to Africa’s quest for peace and stability. 27

Makwaia wa Kuhenga is a Senior Journalist & Author. Email: makwaia@bol.co.tz , makwaia@makwaia.com
Cell: +255 754 366520

Comments

1. The miserable self-victimization truly cannot work; the first country that dangles Somaliland’s hopes is Abyssinia (fallaciously re-baptized ‘Ethiopia’) that intends to perpetuate its evil and illegal involvement in Somalia and to eternalize its control over Somaliland by turning tribes against tribes. In fact the sadness should be due only to the unfortunate fact of Somalis contacting and being contacted by Abyssinian diplomats, military and agents. Peace for Somalia presupposes complete elimination of any Abyssinian from Somalia, and irrevocable termination of any contacts- even among average Somalis (Ogadenis included) and Amhara and Tigray Abyssinians.

2. An array of tribes in conflict does not make a viable state; the promises for democracy cannot be materialized under the Abyssinian control and supervision because Abyssinia had developed evil plans to destroy Somalia and has ever since attempted to implement them. As Abyssinia has been a historical enemy of Somalia for 700 years, the recent developments constitute a very small period in the relationship of the two nations, the Muslim Somalis and the Monophysitic Amhara and Tigray Abyssinians, and they must be viewed as such.

3. This sentence is a shame for a native African to make because it gives validity to colonial era developments. What matters is not how Somalia was in the aftermath of the colonial era (1960) but how Somalia was before the arrival of the Italian, British and Abyssinian colonials (so before 1870). The colonial division of Somalia cannot be possibly accepted as a factor of shaping Somali politics by an African journalist. Shall we recall the German "geographical boundaries" in Tanganyika? In fact, there was nothing as Somaliland before 1870 – under any possible name.

4. Permanent population and defined territory are characteristics of all the provinces of all the countries of the world. The logic would make of the UN an irrational international body with 5000 member states!

5. Cities like Lisbon and islands like Sardinia have better capacity "to enter into relations with other states"; this does not mean that every part, province or major city of a country has the right to secede.

6. This is completely irrelevant, and no one can provide a single criterion for statehood as regards Somaliland as long as Somalia exists. And Somalia may be divided and submerged in fratricidal conflicts, but Somalia is present in all international bodies. The TFG may not be a representative government, but the Djibouti agreement opens a certain way out of the crisis. We could actually be very close to pacification in the Somali South. Maakhir would immediately join, and Puntland would undoubtedly disintegrate and join. In case of pacification of the south, the majority of the Somalis in the North would desire to merge with the rest; even their interests would be better promoted and defended if they joined. Somaliland has no chance.

7. If the author is firm in his rejection of colonialism, he should be so in every case. Impartial stance matters in journalism; partiality damages the power of persuasion. You cannot refute colonialism in Senegal and accept colonial measures and developments in Somalia.

8. This is wrong; Somalia was divided among three colonial powers, namely England, Italy and Abyssinia. Ogaden is part of Somalia too; and an entire part of Kenya is inhabited by Somalis. Plus, Djibouti - for almost half of its size. The most critical mistake of the famous Tanzanian journalist who knows so little of Somalia is this: "in pre-colonial days" there was no such name as Somaliland for any part, province, region, sultanate or authority of Somalia. So, we don’t see "two" countries in Somalia, except as a shameful result of colonialism. Just forget it!

9. This is true, but it is meaningless. After having been colonized by European countries, the two parts of Somalia became independent in 1960. But three other parts of Somalia (Ogaden, and territories of Djibouti and Kenya) did not become independent. It’s all related to colonialism and cannot be taken as foundation for any consideration. It is a shame.

10. Again, this is wrong; it’s not the union that malfunctioned. Somalia malfunctioned as country. The malfunction itself had nothing to do with the colonial past, and it was not the reason of prejudices separately inflicted on one of the two former colonial regions. The political leadership pursued options that were disastrous, and turned out to be a dictatorship that oppressed most of the population in various parts of Somalia. The malfunction was not a matter that exclusively ensued from discrimination against one part or region.

11. These unions are totally unrelated, and they consist in unions of different nations. In 1960 Somalia, and the same is valid today, there was no ‘union’ between two nations but a merge between two colonized territories that have for millennia been inhabited by absolutely the same nation, the Somalis.

12. Again, Mali and Senegal are different countries, each inhabited by many different nations. The same is also valid for Egypt and Syria. Somalis in Jijiga, Hargeisa, Djibouti, Mogadishu or Kenya are all Somalis.

13. AU is a shameful and absolutely unrepresentative body made out of colonial, dictatorial establishments. They failed to react in Darfur; they did not bother to issue a Press Release when the criminal racist state of Abyssinia, controlled by the Monophysitic Amhara and Tigray Abyssinians, organized the Anuak Genocide, the Sidama Genocide, and the Ogaden Genocide – all after 2000! AU has therefore no moral and no political authority to command. The petty representatives of dictators, who are puppets of the colonial powers, are a shame for the African nations and peoples who in their outright majority deeply despise and loath them. AU is not therefore a possible point of reference.

14. The AU text is all rubbish; how could it be otherwise, since AU failed to produce a single acceptable text as regards Darfur? In fact, the union between the two former colonial territories of Somalia did not bring "enormous injustice and suffering to the people of that country"; this is utter falsification of Modern History, and it is due to special demand from the part of the disreputable, unrepresentative and racist Abyssinian ambassador at the AU. There is no proof that the Somalis who lived in the 60s and the early 70s in the former territory of British Somaliland believed or expressed the slightest point of the aforementioned forgery.

15. The Pandora Box will not open, if Tanzania formally recognizes Somaliland. On the contrary, it will close! All the other Somalis will immediately make peace and attack the weak, ailing, collapsing – and much loathed – regime of Huda Barkhad at Hargeisa, and the Somaliland shame will thus take a dead end. The soldiers – gangsters of Huda Barkhad, the president’s mistress, will all be killed by the rebellious Somalis of the North, and all the Somalis will shape a United Somalia again.

16. In fact, the tyrannical regime of Hargeisa are the victims of their own choice to depend and rely on Somalia’s most loathsome and vicious enemy, Abyssinia. Anyone among them who opts for this solution in order to survive as part of the regime is a high traitor and will be dealt with accordingly.

It is also noteworthy that if the butchers of Hargeisa are the victims of invisible powers, the outright majority of the country’s population are already victims of the Hargeisa butchers and their Huda, the cetaceous.

17. Egypt has not involvement in the issue of Somaliland’s impossibility to exist. This is the Abyssinian lie that the disreputable Abyssinian pseudo-diplomats say to the desperate administrators of Hargeisa in order to hide their opposition to Somaliland’s formal recognition, and to express their anti-Egyptian hysteria which is due to their fear of Egypt.

18. They are not; it’s just a matter of an international agreement.

19. The geo-political considerations of Egypt do not include the Horn of Africa.

20. This is science fiction; it’s ridiculous for a respectable journalist. By the way, how much did Somaliland’s administration pay for the nice, wonderful, exquisite trip of the Tanzanian journalist to Portofino – oh, I am sorry to Berbera I mean?

21. Silence about History is commonplace for AU. "Moral angle"? Who? Those who had nothing to say for Darfur? This is farcical! They are the most excruciatingly immoral beings of the African continent. Such they are that one can feel safe to claim that the best among them has killed his mother….

22. ‘Democratically elected government’? Well, compare them with Pakistan! Probably Tanzanian journalists never understood what happened in Somaliland, and how the 2008 presidential elections have been lawlessly cancelled by the illegitimate ‘president’ of that illegal country. The darkness of their ignorance is proverbial.

23. Multi-party? Yes, of course, why not? If you mean that they organize many …… evening parties for Huda Berkhad, the phenomenal cetaceous, to dance - like a belly dance orca! If you mean political parties, you rather read more! There is no freedom in Somaliland to establish a new party.

24. Poor thing! If the Somalis of Mogadishu are ‘brethren’ of those at Hargeisa, why would then the latter like to separate themselves from their "brethren"?

25. Well, more recently, with the advanced deterioration of the socio-economic and political situation in the tiny, breakaway failure of Somaliland, Hargeisa turned out to be far more unsafe a place than Mogadishu.

26. If Tanzania wants to re-assert its erstwhile prestige, they must invite representatives of the Alliance for the Re-liberation of Somalia (ARS), the leading democratic political personality from Somaliland, Ahmed Mahamud Silanyo, and the TFG, and help them set up a road map - up to the forthcoming general elections for Constituent Assembly.

27. It is so sure that this announcement will not come to existence that I truly feel the need to say to Mr. Makwaia wa Kuhenga simply this: ‘Goodnight! Next time you travel to Hargeisa, manage to arrange an interview with Huda Barkhad and get some pictures! Many pictures! A lot of pictures’!