Help Wanted

Now is no time for the world to go wobbly on Somalia.

BY OMAR ABDIRASHID ALI SHARMARKE | JUNE 21, 2010

In recent months, many in the United States seem to have given up on Somalia. In March, for example, the Council on Foreign Relations issued a special report calling for a "new" policy of "constructive disengagement" from our country -- in other words, the withdrawal of international support for the Somali government. That idea is undoubtedly tempting to many in Washington, as well as in London and other Western capitals, given the difficulty of the problems we face as a government working to restore order across a hostile land. But this supposedly new approach would be as disastrous today as it has been in the past, both for Somalia and the international community.

In fact, "constructive disengagement" is a nice euphemism for the same very old and thoroughly failed policies that Western countries have used for years to wrongly argue that Somalia's problems can remain in Somalia. This was the prevailing attitude of much of the international community during most of the past two decades -- until rampant piracy drew navies from around the world toward Somali waters. The presence offshore of a flotilla of warships from the navies of more than two dozen countries illustrates vividly how our country's internal problems are a pressing international issue.

The global nature of Somalia's troubles is also visible on the ground, where an influx of foreign fighters is swelling the ranks of militant oppositionists who are openly aligned with al Qaeda. Hundreds of foreign militants are currently in Somalia, ostensibly to fight the Somali government alongside al-Shabab and Hizbul Islam, extremist groups that draw inspiration from some of the world's most radical Islamist groups. Indeed, a recent Human Rights Watch report looking at life for Somalis in Shabab territory reads as if it could have come from the organization's old file on Afghanistan's Taliban. Extremists desecrate the graves of Somalis seen as somehow un-Islamic under their warped interpretation of Islam. Shabab authorities regularly issue edicts banning everything from flying our Somali flag to watching the World Cup, from ringing school bells to using tractors for farming. Shabab enforcers flog women for failing to wear head-to-toe garments, even though many families simply cannot afford them. These same extremists blew up medical students and professors at a graduation ceremony last year, and they are undoubtedly responsible for the five headless corpses found in April in Mogadishu. The victims had been working to construct a new Somali parliament building.

MUSTAFA ABDI/AFP/Getty Images

 

Omar Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke is prime minister of Somalia.

GRANT

4:25 AM ET

June 23, 2010

Financial support is all well

Financial support is all well and good, except for the fact that very little of it could be expected to actual serve it's intended purpose. The options for the West are these. We can put more money and logistical support into Somalia and expect that at least a significant proportion, if not the majority, will be squandered or find their way into hostile hands. We can appeal to the African Union to militarily intervene which will probably do about as much good as Ethiopia did in 2006, albeit not definitely. The U.N can dispatch it's own peacekeeping force which will probably do even worse. The West can stop wasting money and abandon Somalia to it's fate, and hope that after victory Al-Shabab will be too busy trying to hold their country together to threaten anyone else. We don't have a single good option right now.

 

ROVINGMADNESS

6:00 AM ET

June 25, 2010

Not quite true

Your assertions were valid couple years back when the public perception was entirely pro-Al Shabab and the Islamic Courts and a unified opposition against Ethiopian interference in Somalia existed throughout the country. Come 2010, the opposite is quite true and there is a litany of evidence to suggest that the Somali people have finally woken up to the menace of religious extremism and the true dangers the religious zealots pose not simply to Somalia and to the Somali people in their struggle to close the almost 20 years painful episode of civil war but also to regional peace and stability. Today, an overwhelming majority of the Somali people oppose extremism and terrorism and they are in a desperate need to confront the menace of Al Qaida in Somalia with whatever little resources they have. Already people are organizing themselves in Central Somalia and in other parts of the country to take on Al Shabab and its Al Qaida allies and the creation of the newly created Ahlu Sunnah Wal Jameeca shows that the Somali people are ready to defeat Al Qaida's plan of turning Somalia into what Afghanistan was to Al Qaida in the 90s. However, the Somali people are not enough to defeat the dangers posed by Al Qaida all on their own and the continuous simplification of the Somali conflict into a "Somali conflict/problem" both misses the point and underscores the gross intelligence failure to understand the true dimension of the conflict.

Regrettably, the options are really between choosing between a bad and worse one, and the current Somali government is both weak and incompetent and unable to fulfill the basic duties expected of it such as defending and protecting the Somali people. However, this admission is not what most people take it for- an invitation to pack bags and run away. The shortcoming of the Somali government should be seen as what needs to be improved and worked on in winning the war against terrorism in Somalia and the world

 

JJACKSON

7:53 AM ET

June 23, 2010

Additional support is a very

Additional support is a very bad idea. The situation in Somalia makes me furious as it is a humanitarian disaster for which we are largely responsible. There was a window of opportunity to engage with the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC) when it bought the only measure of stability the country has had in generation. Unfortunately the moment fell while the Bush administration was in full Jihad against any organisation that had Islamic in its name so they reverted to type and armed and financed some horrendous warlords who had a vested interest in preserving their fiefdoms. As the country’s population began to invite in the UIC, as a stabilising influence, American paranoia lead to the US backing the horrendous Ethiopian regime and its disastrous Somali invasion. Ethiopia is ‘the old enemy’ and if anything was designed to unite the Somalis in fighting the invaders – and their backers (that’s us) – then it is stationing Ethiopian troops in Somalia.
The current government, that this article is asking us to help, was imposed by the Ethiopian invasion has no mandate, controls nothing and has no legitimacy. There is no realistic amount of military of financial aid that could ever change this. The very best we could achieve is a repressive military dictatorship.
Sadly, for the Somalis, the best we can do now is let things run their course and try and deal with whoever, or whatever, ends up with some measure of control. This is likely to be a an Islamic state under Sharia law, and yes they will hate us and will probably be a source of terrorism for some years to come but that is the price we will pay for some stupid policies. It is a very small price – even if it leads to dozens of 9/11s – compared to the price the civilian Somalis have already paid for our hubris in destroying their improving security situation. The best course of action is to let Somali sort it out as best they can, do not arm their enemies or any internal factions, try to prevent anyone else taking over this role, get aid to the internally displaced when ever we can and wait and hope they forgive us one day. One always hopes that the US will learn that this kind of meddling in the affairs of other countries usually has dire unforeseen consequence – at least unforeseen by the US.
The saddest part of all this is we are only at the beginning, I think the Horn of Africa will be to the 21st century what the Middle East has been to the late 20th. Somali is just one part of a conflagration that will involve Chad, Sudan, Somalia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, and both Congos – this list already reads like the bottom of FP’s failed states list. The fallout form the Sudanese 2011 elections will determine where we go from here and, regretfully, how and where the US, and other powerful outsiders, decides to fiddle with the internal politics of each of these countries will play a large part in determining how bad it gets and how long it lasts.

 

ROVINGMADNESS

6:12 AM ET

June 25, 2010

Totally false claims

The conflict in Somalia is not a Somali conflict and any effort to see it as such is both deluded and simplistic. Somalia is a key battleground for Al Qaida and its supporters see it as an important base for Al Qaida's encroachment into Africa. Left unchecked, this will have some severe and direct ramifications for America and the West. Just to illustrate this point, some of Al Shabab's main commanders are American Born, men like Abu Mansur Al-Amriki and Troy Kastigar and dozens of Somali-Americans who have left this country to fight on behalf of Al Shabab shows the reach of Al Qaida and its ability to recruit, indoctrinate and plan within the West. Some of Al Qaida's American recruits have stuck targets for Al Shabab in Somalia and the tragic December 3rd, 2009 suicide bombing at the Banadir University Graduation that killed both Students, faculty members and other members of the public was carried out by a Danish citizen. Some of the key suspects that are believed to be responsible for the attacks of our embessies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 are believed to be in Somalia and some have even been killed in Somalia such as Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan.

These points show that the war is not simply a "Somali War" and that any claims is both unfounded and a dangerous simplification. It took a tragedy in 9/11 to realize the true dangers of Al Qaida in Afghanistan. Heaven forbid, if it would take another tragedy to understand the true dangers of Al Qaida in Somalia.

 

JJACKSON

8:09 AM ET

June 25, 2010

Rovingmadness, firstly thank

Rovingmadness, firstly thank you for reading my comment and replying.
I agree this is not a purely Somali conflict. Somalia is an overwhelming Muslim country and as such has the full range of Islamic cultural thought and Islamic interpretation. It has not, historically, been in the very strict observance camp, like the Saudis. The struggle was predominantly Somali - with some more radical elements - prior to the US backed Ethiopian invasion after which the broad church UIC split into faction. The military invasion has acted as a source of radicalisation and a beacon for all would be Jihadists.
I will try and avoid the use of Al Qaida because to me this is a small radical organisation, which probably has some presence in Somalia. Post 9/11, and President Bush's GWOT response, it is now a banner under which a vast array of Muslims have taken up arms in opposition to US wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Somalia (by proxy) also US support for regimes like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and of course Israel. The US government, and media, have called all these Al Qaida but AQ Central has less control over them than the US has over Norway, although Norway would probably lumped in with 'The West' in much the same way, as viewed from the other side. The point I was making is there are now far more - and far more radical - militants in Somalia than would have been the case if we had tried to engage with the UIC and further its efforts at stabalising the country. Truthfully I am more concerned about how many Somali civilians have died, or are starving, due to our actions than if a few Westerners are killed in retaliation. My preferred optionwould have be to not cause the Somali deaths and so not endangered the Westerners.
You write about some of the individuals involved but our actions splintered a relatively unified UIC. We a backed one of the moderate splinters to lead the TFG - and in so doing killed his credibility. The splinter(s) most likely to come to the top of the pile (al-Shabab and Hizb-ul Islam) include all the most radical aspects of the UIC plus the new batch of foreign recruits to the cause. Once the TFG are disposed of these two groups will then probably fight it out for ultimate control but either way there will be more misery and death for the civilians and the resultant power will be much worse than the UIC or, better still, a UIC which had been shown the west's humanitarian rather than military face.
If we continue attacking any Muslim country that wants to live under their interpretation of Islamic law which includes a unified view of State, Religion and Culture, alien to us since the Reformation and Enlightenment, we are in for a very long low intensity war.

 

JJACKSON

9:17 AM ET

June 23, 2010

Read the linked report

When I posted above I had not read Bronwyn Bruton's report. I had expected it to be the usual US BS but it is not. She is exactly right on most points but it explains it much better than I and in more detail. This is an area that anyone interested in FP should become familiar with and her report is an excellent way to start. An expansion of the model she outlines to cover all of the countries involved in the policy formally known as the GWOT would be an enormous step forward towards the reduction of terrorism globally and the security of all Americans. It would also save the US tax payer a fortune in the medium/long term.

 

ABU TALXAH AL-AMRIKII

12:53 PM ET

June 23, 2010

These Suggestions Are Unrealistic

The notion that the TFG is a solution in Somalia is honestly ridiculous. They do a better job of killing themselves than the mujaahidiin. Perhaps the "Somali President Held Hostage by Own Soldiers" headlines did not grab much attention this past week. There is far more popular support for the mujaahid groups in Somalia than there is for the TFG or the Sufi group in the north. Additionally, 500,000 people were officially declared "no longer in need of aid" after the ban of the WFP in the south.

Also, the piracy problem would be solved by an Islamist takeover of the northern regions. When Hizbul Islam took over a pirate town recently they were all fleeing for fear of arrest and reprisal.

Rather than listen to people like Mr. Sharmarke who agree with America, policy makers should observe what is popular in Somalia and figure out ways to deal with it. American intervention in this beleaguered nation has cost tens of thousands of lives. It is hard to imagine a scenario where an Islamist Somalia costs America an equal toll. Policy needs to reflect understanding of both reality and morality. Often people lose sight of one or the other and that is what causes terrorist attacks and other catastrophes.

 

ROVINGMADNESS

6:16 AM ET

June 25, 2010

Sad

Sadly this poster is most likely in the comforts of his American home, while calling Al Shabab and Al Qaida as "Mujahideen" (Holy warriors)

Who says indoctrination and extremism doesn't happen in America? I pray that people would wake up from their dangerous slumber and appreciate the dangers of religious extremism.

 

MAIGARI

4:39 PM ET

June 23, 2010

SOMALIA

It is sad that the situation in Somalia has come to the point of no return. As JJackson rightly pointed out, the UIC has succeeded in bringing stability to the Horn. The US administration would have none of that and the AU sheepishly followed the foreign interest.
Without doubt, the UIC stopped the budding piracy nad brought about sanity in Mogadishu. The AU at US prompting passed a resolution recognising a none functional government as the "only legitimate" representative of the Somali people. Thereafter, Ethiopia was finances to invade Somalia and bring down the UIC government. Since then, Somalia has totterred from onr crisis to another; with the government confined to a corner of Mogadishu.
It is still not too late to have a rethink and accept that Somalia cannot be run without the Islamist one way or another. The Obama administration has to re-strategise and face the fact that force can only exert a finite influence over human affairs. That is the reality; peace is not just for the US citizens alone, everyone needs peace to develop.

 

TALJOUSAF

3:14 PM ET

July 12, 2010

you are right

Rovingmadness you are correct with your assessment of abu talxah. He is an armchair wannabe. Having meet him unfortunately, I found him to be quite impressionable. Any offer to help him was meet with refusal and paranoid rants about government plants and plots.

 

GREGCART08

8:04 PM ET

July 21, 2010

So sad to see people who need

So sad to see people who need to fight for their rights in this way. It seems like this guy is not yet a full grown men! Hopefully, their government do something about their situation.Greg Cart