gurey25 wrote:AbdiWahab252 wrote:5 reasons why Issaq leadership failed their Issaq:
1. Lack of Unity - The issaq came running to Xamar in 1960 and were begging for the union. Even when a very senior SYL person warned them to think twice about coming into a Union because indepedence is a hard thing to win and it would be better for them to try being a state for a few years. Nope, the Issaq leadership at the time were at each other's throats and could not get along. They agreed to forming a union to allow someone else to lead rather than foment the first SOmali civil war.
2. Greed - The Issaq held key government positions and profited well. However their leadership were opportunitists who were more concerned about their individual welfare than that of their tol or region. They built and invested in Xamar leaving Hargeisa to languish. With their arrival in 1960, they occupied senior government positions and were very corrupt and lived off the barwaqo of Wanlaweyn. The Issaq had more perks for their region than other parts of Somalia: Berbera and Hargeisa had lower taxes, business incentives, generous aid programs while vast regions like Mudug, Galgaduud, Gedo etc languished.
3. Indecisive Leadership - The Issaq PM, Ina Egal, FAILED to stop the 1969 coup by spending his energies to find a Majeerten candidate to replace the the Marxum Abdirashid ALi Sharmarke who was assasinated. When warned of the coup, Egal dismissed it and was contemplating making Muse Boqor the new President. He could have simply ordered loyalist officers like Aidid, Abdullahi Yusuf etc to squash the coup or to form a counter coup using loyalist units in Central, Northern and Southwestern Somalia. INstead Egal failed to take action and thus we got MSB.
4. Strategic "Secession" Blunder - Without thinking it through, the Issaq pushed secessionism which put them on an isolationist course. Even when Aidid finished off MSB, and neutred Ali Mahdi, the Issaq did not assist their ally and continued on their path. The Issaq had the golden opportunity to take a more assertive role and even temporarily taken custody of the Government as the other partner in the Union. If they had gone down this path instead, Issaq would have been the most powerful force and Hargeisa would have out eclipsed Xamar. Yet, for some odd knee jerk reaction, they gave up their rights as the other half of the Union and chose to isolate themselves which worked until the Issaq civil war forcing the founder of Somaliland to renounce secessionism and to join Aidid's government. Tur died in exile never seeing his homeland again.
5. Lying to their people - The Issaq leadership have lied to their people and reinvented history:
i) The first lie spun was that the war against Siyaad Barre was one between Northerners and Southerners when in reality it was MSB loyalists vs. rebels (Northern, Southern, Central etc).The second lie was that SNM fought for indepedence from the Somali Republic when its constitution stated that it wanted a regime change but spoke nothing of indepedence.
II) The second lie is that all the clans of Somaliland support independence while a majority of nonIssaq support Unionism but due to either political intimidation or military intimidation they remain silent fearing reprisals. The SL authority has cracked down on anyone suspected of being proUNion by jailing them for even waving the blue flag.
So in summary, most nonIssaq SOmali clans are not against the idea of a Issaq nation with in its tribal lands but to fib about the past and to hold Unionists hostage will not lead the Issaq to their promise land. I think with 5 years of independence, the Issaq will come clamouring back to be part of the Somali Republic because after the propaganda of "Us vs. Them" wears off, they will fight amongst themselves.
1, 2 ,3 and 4 are true and more or less accurate.
but 5 is false completly false, you made this assumption because of your ignorance of isaaq.
The SNM leadership never did those things it was the people who became fed up of the south and wanted no business with them, ali mahdi was the spark that set it off. It proved that the USC/SPM were unreliable.
The
SNM leadership were in the majority unionists , none of them wanted secession or dreamed of it, they were forced into it by the people,
the same way egaal was forced into hasty union by mass public demonstrations.
Isaaq are anarchists to the core and have little respect for leadership they dont approve of and the SNM was the most democratic liberation movement in history. This was because they were answerable to the people and depended on donations from its people instead of foriegn aid.