SomaliNet Forums

And the Ethiopians officially agreed to end the Tigray War.

Waa la bararugay.

Balanbale has a new airport; is growing so fast it probably doubled in size the past 10 years, and most importantly has established competitive advantage in the ability to have authority over the previously sprawling no man's land in her periphery. The town has retaken the countryside from anarchy and is even now successfully turning former violent no-go zones like Gaxandhaale into successful garrisons to provide internal connected security both for the benefit of Balanbale town and the nomadic setttlements (including those within the district but not necessarily of the same clan like Xirsi Lugeey).

Balanbale is a town whose story has never been told and even whatsoever mentioned has rarely been told with integrity or fidelity to truth. Almost all the animating references implicating her storyline has been expressed through really aggrieved activism during flare-ups in the long conflict.

So if there would be a good time to reassess the state of conflict by belligerents , this would be the time.

There is no more strategic reason out there, for example, for Rer Guriceel to continue aggression or belligerence toward Balanbale that has any strategic military or even political goal. If the goal was to capture or even establish substantial claim or equities---today, Balanbale Town, for example, is oddly even more homogenous than it was in 1986. Ego has kept the conflict past its due date. Ego has reached final expiration date.

Rer Balanbale have been in prepetual state of conflict at practically every considerable settled landscape in their perimeter. The town is no longer an existing carcass. They are not pouring community and diaspora money into the many impressive social investment programs anywhere in the country in Balanbale for no reason. They crave end of conflict and finally tasting the luxury of peace. They don't want to continue fighting a perpetual, aimless conflict with their neighbors; they would rather want to be forming trade link.

And so...


Our brothers of Hawiye/Habar Gidir/Cayr/Rer Ayaanle have approached their brothers of Darod/Marehan/Rer Dini/Bah-Hawiye with a historic proposition that has been embraced. They have executed the first initial understanding and public remonstrations preparing for the exchange of concurrence to start exploring, drafting, and producing an agreement that would offically end 80 years state of hostility.

From enemies in conflict, to partners in prosperity.

God Speed.

Mashallah really good news. Mudug and Galgaduud deserve peace.

Sbashi,

When my father was born, the season was nicknamed "Madax Shub," because in a particularly ugly clash in Spring of that year between these two communities, some of the belligerents in one of those communities cut the heads of some of the deceased in the opposing camp and then made it into a "pyramid."

Ugly history.

For reference,

Ayr/Rer Ayaanle = Sh Hassan Dahir Aweys, Gen Galaal, Cali Yare, Mahad Salaad, Cabdi Waal, etc

Marehan bah-Hawiye is uterine group of Rer Diini bah-Hawadle and bah-Darandoole, together per the Hawiye origins of their mothers shortened "bah-Hawiye" in contrast to Bah-Ogaden of maternal Darod origins.

Within bah-Hawiye on this issue, it almost entirely refers to the 3 Rer Diini juffos of Rer Siyaad (bah-Hawadle), Rer Warsame (bah-Hawadle) and Rer Kooshin (bah-Darandoole) who directly neighbor Cayr. Although others will certainly join any hostilities engaged by those 3 with Caye. In particular Rer Nuur (bah-Darandoole) as well as members from general Balanbale town constituency like Marehan/Uurmidig and Marehan/Ali Dheere both of the last 2 groups the bulk of which are in Gedo. Which takes all of that into consideration by saying "Bah Hawiye"

So little interesting presentation of this is saying this is Kulane Jiis vs Mahad Salaad.

Interesting. So this is me generally having a conversation with observers. No negativity involved; there is none on my end.

1. I am honored to see that my writing on these things solicits interest. The reason why I put some relative effort if I chose to present is precisely because they are so weighty and have tremendously impacted people---close people, neighbors, extended kin, associates---that I would consider it a moral and ethical failure if I were to have a transactional relationship. This is why I almost never refer to or include social media expressions of profound or misunderstood, intentional or subconscious projection of harm utilized irresponsibly by the people who produce it. The video posted was simply verbal example of what I identified as the "vicious" historicity of these grievances. It was used exactly as an example of its documentation of just the level of extreme and deeply felt grievances that were being displayed. That's clarification.

2. I am not a neutral, 3 party observer to these issues. For example, I am rer Siyaad Diini of Balanbale stock. I wrote above how my father's birth over 60 years ago the same conflict was being waged with just as much extreme projection of this deeply destructive history. So I carry a 'point of view." That is the academic definition of partisanship. However, my motivation is not to "engage" as a participant to this hostility from my interaction with the subject. My interaction with the subject is understanding, clarification, and impact towards its settlement. But I carry a point of view, which I freely disclose and do not attempt to deny as a manipulation or bad faith attempt at trying to argue "objectivity" while expressing activism. The point is even when I try to be as factual and evidence based as possible, it would be natural to presume my point of view has significant affect on how I present or make relevant some important point I wish go showcase.

3. To that end, you do not need to go to Facebook or the source of something I utilized as a prop or aid to better explain something. How about joining and partaking in the discussion? I encourage it. It would contribute to both me as well as any audience.

P.S. I erased and edited out even the part making the point the video was used as supporting prop. That was quite fast though. Don't lurk, engage me. After all if you care about any of the communities mentioned in this topic, anything that could be done to end conflict---the first of which starts with discussion ---should be done.

To peace and life:

Looks like it was a short lived heshiis between Wagardhac and Saleeban.

Walaal, the point of a peace settlement is not the absence of conflict. A settlement is about "keeping" the peace.

Men signing papers is not going to wave a wand and end 40 years of tit for tat.

A settlement is about how to "keep" the peace both as a proactive measure and a REACTIVE measure.

Proactive to prevent auch occurrences that lead to a reimposition of conflict.

And REACTIVE as in how to "respond" to occurrences that come at the expense of the peace settlement.

A man has been allegedly killed by 1 party.

The other party has allegedly exacted reprisal and killed in revenge.

The immediate thing is implementing protocols established in the settlement for "arresting" the violence and preventing it from getting bigger.

The second thing would be adjudicating the the matter.

The 3rd thing would be taking stock of the failure to prevent the occurrences and whether the settlement should be reformed or updated to reflect new insight.

I already know typical of the moments following grand ceremonies, there was less caution and more feel good and strict boundaries were relaxed.

In my opinion there is going to be an understanding of implementing strict boundaries this time.