SSC Regions: "If Somalia is Divisible So is Somaliland"

[EastAfrica]

A Message from The SSC regions: If Somalia is Divisible So is Somaliland


Opinion:- Somaliland is a beacon of stability, a peaceful and democratic state in Africa. It is Africa’s best-kept secret and therefore it deserves to be recognised internationally.

Or so frequently spread the proponents of Somaliland. These misleading persons are either some hired pen-mercenaries who for pecuniary reasons propagate loads of baloney or others who take a secessionist’s propaganda at face value. But certainly much of the mantra comes from people who hail from a pretend and clannish enclave that calls itself Somaliland. A case in point is Mr Adan Ismail (Liban) whose article has recently appeared in the Somali websites. Mr Adan has attempted to rebut an open letter, stirring hornets nest in Somaliland, written by Mr Osman Hassan to the USA assistant undersecretary for African Affairs, Jonnie Carson. In this open letter Mr Osman has brilliantly highlighted the fallacy of Somaliland and further put forward how best the USA policy would help the Somalis. Unfortunately, the letter must have been pretty galling for Mr Adan and obviously it prompted him to respond with a familiar rehash of hackneyed collection of claims and distorted historical facts. Additionally he has also tried to disparage the existence of Sool, Sanaag and Ayn(SSC) regions and depict these regions as parts that identify themselves with a so-called Somaliland.
Before discussing the issue of SSC regions and where its people stand in today’s prevalent situation of Somalia, I prefer to debunk some points, raised in the aforesaid article which are either baseless or of wishful thinking


The undeniable entity of Somaliland

Mr Adan has passionately tried to make us believe that there had been a country, called Somaliland from 1884 and up to 1960, the date the British had left what was once known as British Somaliland Protectorate.
Well, to be fair enough to some of his points, it was Europe’s scramble for Africa in 1884, which resulted in Britain, France and Italy to curve up Somali populated regions or a common Somali homeland in the Horn of Africa. It is also true that Britain took control of the territories of northern part of this Somali homeland and named the occupied territories as British Somaliland Protectorate. It is clear that, to Mr Adan and like-minded secessionists the term “Somaliland Protectorate” connotes a special closeness and consanguinity to the British occupiers and in fact it is for this reason the name “Somaliland” has been picked for their cause.

A historical fact, though ignored in the article, is before the British government took the control of the Somali territories, the British had signed a treaty with all the traditional elders except those who were the forefathers of the SSC people. The SSC forefathers did not only reject the British colonisation but they also fought the British forces. It is in the record that Major Frederick Mercer Hunter, Assistant Political Resident at Aden and the elders of the respective” territories” signed on treaties between 11 December 1884 and 27 January 1886. The essence of these treaties was that the British government would provide protection to the tribes whose elders had entered into an agreement with the British government. Hence, traditional elders of the present SSC regions had never recognised a British Somaliland Protectorate or any treaty nor accepted and certainly the same applies to today’s SSC people.

On the question of boundaries and the relevant provision of the OAU (AU) charter of 1964, which is mentioned in the article, it is true that “Somaliland” inherited colonial boundaries in 26 June 1960 but it is equally true that these artificial boundaries had disappeared in 1st July 1960 when the Somali republic was declared as the inheritor of the colonised territories. It is a pity that a sane person is legitimising colonial boundaries while de-legitimising the boundaries recognised by the OAU (AU) and other international bodies. It is also a self-defeating act to misinterpret the OAU charter and twist the provision of the charter as it is applicable to Somaliland’s colonial borders, while in fact, and as per the available record the relevant provision of the Charter applies to the borders of independent states that are members of the OAU, and not to borders of a breakaway region, that is still in a member state like Somalia.

In addition to the above facts, if anyone thinks that Somaliland had been independent recognised state during the four days between 26 June 1960 and the date of its union with Southern Somalia, or that “Somaliland” is different from Somalia or somewhat a sui generis as often claimed by the secessionists then one must be reminded what the British Government secretary of State for colonies, Ian Macleod had stated in front of the then visiting Somaliland delegation in London. For the record, in a conference(1) held in London on 24th of May 1960, the secretary had confirmed to the visiting Somaliland delegation, that once the “territory” was united with the southern territory the protection treaty and all its attributes would be abrogated.

Putting these historical facts into objective judgement surely there had been neither an internationally recognised state called “Somaliland” nor distinct people known as” Somalilanders” from 1984 up to 1960. There had been solely an occupied territory, which was British Somaliland Protectorate, which ceased to exist from on 1 July 1960 when two colonised territories of the common Somali homeland were united to become an independent state of the Somali republic.

Unequal union and its failure

The secessionists very often say the union was disaster or failure and heap all the blames to the south. But what they do not realise is that there had not been anything wrong with the union itself as this had been a desirous aspiration of all Somalis. It is true that initially and in particular during the first years of the first Somali government, there were administrative problems as anticipated given the two territories were under colonial powers with two different administrative systems for a century or so. But mendacious claims that the south had inequitably all the main ministerial posts after the union of north and south is nothing more than one of the propaganda tactics the secessionists had to stir their clan to rebellion and put the hoi polloi in a high dudgeon. The fact of the matter is that the northerners had almost, all the time in all the successive civilian Somali governments, the premiership and significant numbers of ministerial portfolios. One can recall the government of Mr Abdirazak Haji Hussein, a southern prime minister of the second civilian government of Somalia during 1964 – 1967 where half of the cabinet were from the north including the key portfolios of foreign; defence, information and finance. Similarly almost half of senior civil service and most of the ambassadorial posts were given to the northerners. Northerner’s wishing to have had more than with a population of one-third of that of the south simply unmasks politically corrupt leaders who always wanted to be the top dog and who had finally masterminded Somalia’s present quagmire.

Just for the sake of the argument and in order to expose the travesty of the facts, often spread by some let us hark back the government that succeeded Mr Abdirazak Haji Hussein´s government.

Mr Mohamed Ibrahim Egal, a northerner held the post of premiership of the first government and became for the second time the prime minister during 1967-1969. Deplorably an axiomatic fact is that Mr. Egal´s government was marred by rampant corruption, which ultimately wrecked Somalia’s 9 years of civilian rule. The ill governance, injustices and corruption brought by this last civilian government had finally culminated in a military coup d’état headed by Mohamed Siyad Bare who presided over a brutal regime for twenty one years.
So if anything went wrong, it was not the union itself, but the blame squarely rested on the shoulders of all political leaders who were from north and South.


Repression and Alienation

We all know that the military takeover that followed the civilian government of Somalia and headed by Mohamed Siyad Bare was very repressive and brutal. No honest Somali would deny or dispute that atrocities were committed against the northerners by the dictatorial regime. But what is morally wrong is to assume that only northerners were alienated, oppressed and killed. It seems the secessionists disregard the crimes inflicted on other Somalis and consider them unworthy. It is a known fact that the first victims of the dictatorial regime were those from the central/Mudug regions. In these regions hundreds of civilians were killed. Water wells and entire villages were also raised to the ground and all these were carried out by the regime’s soldiers, belonged not only to the south but also to all regions of Somalia including from Hargeisa and Buroa. Of course the secessionists like to keep under wraps these crimes in which northerners took part as well as atrocities committed by the SNM against the innocent civilians of SSC and Awdal regions.

Fabrications such as that oppression and other crimes were committed only against the northerners or Siyad Bare killed more than 80 000 northerners, a figure exceedingly goes over the top, are some of the flimsy justifications, which the secessionists often publicise to win the foreign hearts and minds to sell their invented cause.

In fact if one had to secede from Somalia because of atrocities; SSC regions would have had every right to reject the union with southern Somalia or British Somaliland in 1960. Thousands of men, women and children were killed during Dervish struggle by the British forces with collaborators whose forefathers were the so-called Somalilanders.

SNM and its Armed Struggle

How or when SNM became into being is no longer a relevant issue. A more crucial question is why NSM was formed and its ultimate achievements. It is the right of every individual, group or movement to fight against injustices and oppression provided that would not contravene the nation’s interest. Unfortunately SNM like SSDF, USC and SPM was a clan-based militia driven by disgruntled men without any viable political vision except a myopic one of seizing the power. Additionally if all the movements had common denominators, the SNM had one hidden agenda that differed it from others. The leaders of SNM dreamed of having their own entity where they would be the masters and at present we witness the true colours or to where such clan-motivated policy heads. The power is now concentrated in the hands of these SNM leaders and their clan members from the central regions of “Somaliland”.

Reconciliation between Clans and Declaration of Independence

The secessionists and their cohorts keenly talk about a declaration which claims all traditional leaders of northern Somalia endorsed the secession at a conference, held in Buroa in 1991. In reality this was far from a genuine endorsement. If anything what happened was, during the collapse of the central government, the traditional leaders of different clans from the north of Somalia as well as the political wing of the SNM came together in Buroa in 1991. The objective of the gathering was to have a conference where the attendees would discuss ways of restoring peace and stability in their respective regions. Unfortunately on the last day of the conference, and in contrary to the good faith of the participants of the conference, an armed clannish mob of the SNM who was in a state of rage surrounded the conference venue and demanded that SNM politicians and the clan elders in attendance, declare the northern regions as a separate and independent state. Having had the top echelon of the political wing of SNM frightened to their supporter’s perturbations due to the lack of any viable political vision, the armed mob at the conference compelled the conference to adopt this unilateral declaration. So, one can verily conclude that this unilateral declaration had no legal basis and had nothing to do with all other clans. As nothing is further from the truth, all the SSC traditional leaders had more than once and without any duress unequivocally declared that SSC regions would not accept a secession but would join their kith and kin to form the regional state of Puntland, which is part and parcel of united Somalia.

Peace and Stability in Somaliland

Another catchword wildly spread by the secessionists’ camp is that Somaliland is peaceful, stable and democratic entity. This is again another ploy to mislead the international community and get a recognition that has been as elusive as a moose in a hunting season.
There is no doubt that there is a realtive peace in Somaliland when one compares with the south of Somalia but stability and peace have been shaky all along and are not standing on solid base. As long as the factor of clan dominanace is what drives the Somaliland leaders, the beginning of a civil war is only a matter of time and the signs of this are already visible in SSC and Awdal regions.
Again, the international community is very much privy to the “democracy” of Somaliland as it is confined to one clan and naturally that won´t give the secessionists a ticket for recognition The so-called refrundum or elections had never been democratic and never been monitored or approved by any credible world organisations. It is naïve to assume that some hired foreigners and retired Europeans that have been entertained few days in Hargeisa during the so-called elections would render the results of these elections fair and transparent. Moreover, it is well documented that these elections or refrendum had never taken place in the SSC regions.

Coming now to the question of SSC people and how Mr Adan is trying in his article to belittle condescendingly and portray them as insignificant or terrorists supported by the TFG, I suggest Adan and his followers to realise the following.

The SSC people will not succumb to be dominated by one clan and become a minority exactly as Somaliland clan rejected to be a minority in Somalia and certainly if one thinks that Somalia is divisible so is “Somaliland”. No matter how one taints the will and struggle of the SSC people or its leaders, SSC forces are already becoming ants in the secessionist´s pants by the hour and juggernaut to liberate all SSC regions from the clannish militia of Somaliland.

Finally, it is very regrettable to see a learned brother who lives with delusions, such as Somaliland shall be recognised because it had democratic elections or it is stable and peaceful as these alone are perquisites for an international recognition. Or Somaliland’s case can be equated with that of Eritrea, South Sudan, former countries of Yugoslavia and USSR, (analogies, which are totally false) and therefore it has the right to be recognised.

It is high time for our brothers and sisters from NW of Somalia to understand that the international community can not recognise a clannish enclave and if it does, and that is with big if, it would definitely let the genie out of the bottle. The whole region and even “Somaliland” will not be saved from an apocalyptic situation.
Therefore, the only indespensible and inescapeable solution for us as Somalis is very clear.We have to come to our senses, abandon secessioist and chauvnistic tendencies and instead work for the delivery of a peaceful demeocratic federal state of Somalia.

Mohamed Ali Mirreh
-------------------------------

(1) Report of the Somaliland Protectorate Constitutional Conference, May 1960 .

[Knight of Wisdom]

Thanks EA...I also posted the same post at the General Section yesterday !

[udun]

If you like Mohamed Ali Mire's article, then you gotta support his entity and his political stands. Why hide behind the fake SSC Hogaanka trick and then post here the article of Mohamed Ali Mire? I mean how some want to have both ways

Fyi, Mohamed Ali Mire was the 1st who warned us about the tricks and falsehood in the bogus entity named SSC Hogaanka trick.

[Executive]

Good article, Thanks for sharing it.

[samatar133]

dadkani waa funny walahi kulahaa 'the British had signed a treaty with all the traditional elders except those who were the forefathers of the SSC people'.
have you ever asked yourself why british empire didn't signed a treaty with dulbahante?

[samadoon-waaxid]

dadkani waa funny walahi kulahaa 'the British had signed a treaty with all the traditional elders except those who were the forefathers of the SSC people'.
have you ever asked yourself why british empire didn't signed a treaty with dulbahante?

havent u heard how the british officer came to the dhulbahante Garaad and the graad refused to meet him until the gaal took a shower first?