Dogs of War: Meles Zinawi’s Wild Hegemonic Ambitions 

By Heikal Kenneded

December 28, 2006    

                        

The heavy fighting that is simmering throughout the Southern region of Somalia sheds a light on the true color of the Ethiopian Premier, Meles Zenawi – a wicked tyrant.

Meles is as cunning as they come in the despotic and dictatorial politics of Africa.  According to the World Bank, Ethiopia is one of the world’s poorest countries, a poverty which has been exacerbated by natural disasters and internal political tensions.  Since the early 1990s, when Meles Zinawi’s rugged Tigrinya militia forces toppled the Derg regime of Mengistu Haile Mariam with great success and some cunning rhetoric, he has duped the Western aid donor countries.  He convinced these donor countries that he was the democratically elected Premier of Ethiopia and that he supported sustainable development and was firmly committed to eradicating poverty and disease from his country.  However, as soon as aid from donor countries poured in Ethiopia, Meles was quick to build his military might, while the majority of the masses in his country starved to death.  When Ethiopia was supposedly on the road to recovery from decades’ long of protracted war and poverty, Meles perpetrated a border dispute with Eritrea, which eventually thrust the two-sister countries into a long catastrophic war that resulted in high number of deaths, as well as destruction, in both countries.

Meles Zinawi demonstrated his callous and brazen autocratic tactics once again, in last year's Ethiopian parliamentary elections.  According to human rights monitors, hundreds of civilian and student demonstrators were ruthlessly shot in the middle of the city, while thousands of other dissident intellectuals were sent to jail en masse for their political believes, during non-violent political demonstrations in Addis Ababa.  The opposition parties who were forecasted to win the parliamentarian elections by a landslide did not gain a majority, except few seats in several major cities.  International election monitors, as a result, accused Zinawi’s government of rigging the elections. 

The cobwebs of lies were finally catching up with Meles as he constantly found himself having to explain his actions.  Meles, thus, immediately knew that he was running out cards and he was unable to disentangle himself from the convoluted web of lies and charade he has cleverly concocted to the rest of the world.  Most donor countries began withdrawing their generous aid from Meles’s oppressive government. However, he boldly dared to play his last card of invading the vulnerable neighboring country Somalia, which had no effective government for the last 16 years, in the name of terrorism.  Meles was quick to seize this opportunity as he prepared to challenge the rising Islamic Union Courts (IUC) authority in the region. 

The Union of Islamic Courts (IUC) who six months ago gained control most of the Southern region of Somalia, have brought an unprecedented stability and of peace to the country, and naturally became “enemy” number one of Meles’s authoritarian regime, simply because they were incorruptible.  Despite the IUC’s success in getting rid of Somalia the warlords that “sucked the blood” of their society in rebuilding the country from scratch, the rest of the world, especially the West became wary of their covert actions.  Instead of supporting their progressive actions, Western governments, especially the Bush administration extended its unfettered support to Meles Zinawi’s campaign to root out the supposed Islamic “terrorists” from the Horn of Africa.

Meles’s government in Addis Ababa is well known throughout the Horn of African region as a repressive Tigrinya regime that long lost its public support and was soon to lose the international one.  In an effort to distract both domestic and international attentions from his autocratic rule and draw out his regime, on late last November, following the modus operandi of his Western allies, Meles convened his spurious parliament to sanction a “declaration of war” on Somalia.  In an overtly provocative way, Meles was quick to denounce Somali’s Union of Islamic Courts (IUC) and immediately declared war against Somalia in effort to defend the Ethiopian “sovereignty,” as he boasted to “crash them” in a matter of weeks. 

In other words, Meles Zinawi’s recent aggression against Somalia by sending his forces in support of the TFG's fledgling interim government, he single handedly escalated the stakes of chaos, poverty, and death in the Horn of Africa.  As the first “phase” of the war comes to an end, the whole region of Horn of Africa is bracing for a full blown-out war that will only compound the suffering of the people in the region. However, military hubris has never proved to be an effective approach to winning a war – maybe few skirmishes.  In fact, Ethiopia by recapturing several stronghold cities from the IUC by deploying copious weapons and warplanes, with the reckless backing of both the African Union (AU) and Western countries, in order to thwart “Taliban-like” regime that is taking root in the Horn of Africa, does not prove that it is winning the war.  Israeli comes to mind, for instance, when last summer its military forces deployed its army “first-class” forces into Lebanon, in order to destroy the relatively weak army of the Hezbollah militia.  Israel found otherwise when Hezbollah militia inflicted enormous casualties on the highly trained and well equipped Israeli forces.  This war has put to rest the “old” theory that military might based on sophisticated technology is the only means to win wars.  Another example is the American involvement in Iraq.  Both conflicts have demonstrated that public support is the means to military success in guerrilla wars, not conventional military muscle alone.

While there might have been some misgivings among the Somali people in the country and in the Diasporas, with regards to the future plans of the UIC, as most people have feared about the Islamic Courts’ public executions as an omen of ruling the country in a Taliban-style.  Nevertheless, in general, in all of the regions in Somalia under their control, people were consensus that the UICs have restored the basic rule of law and brought back order and civility for the people since the Siad Barre era.  In the contrary, neither Meles’s “Dogs of War” nor the feeble government of President Yusuf have enough public support to restore peace and security in the country.  The UIC, on the other hand, still retains enough support from the grassroots to support their struggle against what they regard of a puppet government Meles Zinawi and his wild hegemonic ambitions in the region. Finally, the interim Somali government led by President Abdullahi Yusuf and his Prime Minister Ali Mohamed Ghedi will be committing a historical blunder if they believe that they will rule, let alone unite the country through the barrel of the gun, while relying the aid of foreign forces, instead of creating a consensus among the various groups who have a stake in the country.

Heikal I. Kenneded

Washington, D.C.

heikalk@yahoo.com

“What's in it for me?”

 By Heikal Kenneded

Friday, July 20, 2012

In 2011, President, Speaker of Parliament and PM offices spent more than US$12.6 million, representing almost quarter of total TFG expenditure

With barely a month to go before Somalia exits the transitional federal government system, set to expire on August 20^th is plagued by embarrassment and uncertainty due to the recently leaked report by the UN Monitoring Group. The report alleges that funds allocated for development and reconstruction are unaccounted for and most likely disappeared into the deep pockets of the highest echelons of the government officials in which “out of every US$10 received by the TFG in 2009-10, US$7 never made it into state coffers.  In 2011, almost one quarter of total TFG expenditure (over US$12 million) was absorbed by the offices of the three top leaders -- the President, Prime Minister and Speaker of Parliament.”  This is really a startling report that further complicates things, not to mention dampening the morale of many Somalis who finally thought the country was turning a corner and better days were ahead. For Somalia, the main challenges can be broken down into security, poverty alleviation and governance. Though some headways have been made on the security front lately, but the last two interlinked challenges have proven to be so intractable that they threaten the very existence of the country.

This damning UN report follows on the heels of last year’s World Bank report that also alleged President Sheikh Sharif Ahmed and the Parliamentary Speaker, Sharif Hassan Sheikh Aden “misplaced $120m in aid money from 2009 to 2010.” The pattern is eerily familiar, abundant cash money donated by Middle Eastern Gulf States are diverted into personal accounts, while unscrupulous business deals are cut with shady characters. To illustrate the pervasiveness of the corruption in the country, the UN Monitoring Group’s report coins a new phrase “What's in it for me?” This rare slip quoted from a senior Somali government official involved in the transitional government's finances who was describing the blatant corruptive attitude of most of these fraudulent officials by saying, “Nothing gets done in this government without someone asking the question: “What's in it for me?” As usual, the TFG leadership tried to counteract the damaging report as "unsubstantiated allegations"and full of conspiracy concocted by Matt Bryden, coordinator of the Monitoring Group, whose sole intention is to “divide the country.” Despite the categorical repudiation of the alleged corruption charges detailed in the UN report by the President, the Prime Minister and the PM Speaker, however, it is no longer enough to claim innocence but necessary to prove themselves above suspicion with “robust rebuttal,” as counseled them by the UN's special representative to Somalia, Mr. AugustineMahiga.

Further, the report alleges, “The principal impediments to security and stabilization in southern Somalia are the Transitional Federal Government leadership’s lack of vision or cohesion, its endemic corruption and its failure to advance the political process.” The striking thing about this report is how widespread is the corruption in all government levels. It is particularly unfortunate that the most educated and enlightened Somalis from the Diaspora who promised transparency and good governance, but their legacy now turns out anything but. Reading the report makes one cringe and lose all hope on future Somali leadership. In some ways, the timing of this report is crucial for the ongoingcomplex process of adopting a new constitution and electing a new government in Somalia. In other words, all parties involved in electing a new parliament and a new president may very well need to treat the MP and eventually presidential selection very differently from the past elections. Since the solution to the problem of corruption is closely tied to bad leadership could only be resolved through conscious efforts in regards of the government and the governed. Thus, the upcoming MP and presidential elections should not be guided as much by nepotism as by bribery but rather qualifications and clear vision that entail a genuine presidential job description. It is important for instance, that the bubbling number of presidential candidates is cut down to no more than ten candidates worthy of the country’s colossal challenges. In fact, most of these candidates lack a clear agenda to lead the country out of the current quagmire. Despite much boasting of higher education qualifications, most of these candidates lack the necessary skills for presidential caliber. Each candidate should be required to provide unequivocal vision for the top job.

More strikingly is how the UN Monitoring Group’s report shines a light on the lack of trust between Somalia’s war weary populace and the alleged lords of corruption whose debauchery defies all morals of leadership especially in the feeble economy of the country. Fixing that slipping trust will require genuine efforts of confidence building in the next government. But this does not mean it is unfeasible.

---

Heikal I. Kennededheikalk@yahoo.com
Washington D.C.

The Music Stops

By Heikal I. Kenneded
Wednesday, November 20, 2013

The troubling revelations about the recent disagreement brewing between the Somali President and the Prime Minister provide further evidence, if any were needed, that political stability is as far from a reality in Villa Somalia, as many supporters professed in the recent past. This latest political discord between the President and his Prime minister comes against the backdrop of increasing attacks of Al-Shabab forces in the capital and around the country. Not to mention new allegations of corruption by the recently resigned Central Bank Governor, Ms. Yusur Abrar who resigned only after seven weeks in the job because she was overwhelmed with the amount of corruption that’s still going on in the country, and “feared for her life” ensuing threats from businessmen associated with the President. This has demoralized the minds of every Somali who had hoped this time around the country was turning a corner and the blaming-game politics were no longer the norm. Now that the music has stopped and much of the innuendo has been debunked that all’s well and dandy in the working relations among the highest echelons of government, they need to come clean and show some contrite for their failures, instead of censuring each other like schoolchildren.

President Hassan Sheikh’s first months in office were a time of vaulting grandiose, laden with high hopes that he might heal the country as he captured the hearts and minds of the rest of the world with his wide smile. They were soon dashed, however, with the debacle of mishandling the affairs of the Jubaland state, where the President squandered much needed political capital to rebuild and reunite the country. In his first year, President Hassan Sheikh made two inept blunders vis-à-vis of forming his new government. Despite of choosing the most experienced man for the Prime Minister position - acritical job in a country suffering from all sorts of malaise, the President instead selected the least likely experienced candidate for the job from a pool of over-qualified Somali professionals from all over the world. Apparently, he made this choice in his scheme to undermine the Prime Ministerial position so that he could run the country willy-nilly, without any interference from neither his prime minister nor from the parliament. Second, the President squandered his political capital by forming a ministerial government based on the notorious 4.5 system, a complete disregard to a rigorous meritocratic system.

Ever since Prime Minister Said Shirdon was nominated by President Hassan Sheikh, things have not gone right for him and his role seemed suspicious, not to mention few accomplishments. Having afforded little leverage to deal with the myriad of problems facing his new federal government, he comfortably took a backseat and peaked the chips fall where they may from the reading glasses anchored on the bridge of his nose. Nonetheless, the Prime Minister should have taken the opportunity to get all the leverage the constitution allowed him to serve in his capacity to move the country in the right direction, instead of kowtowing to every whim of the President, as though he was his secretary. In an effort to quell a swelling tide of alarming pessimism, Prime Minister Said last week commented on his disagreement with the President was not a “political” one but rather a “constitutional” one. As if that weren’t enough, the media revealed that both these heads of government were competing to court as many MPs as possible to side with either one of them in the hope that things will eventually be settled in front of the parliament.

Most Somalis have long worried that this new administration might end up like its predecessors and soon enough become dominated by personal disagreements, resentments and political paralysis among its top leaders, which might ruin the chances for the country to put its house in order. Nonetheless, the parliament has a huge role to play in this latest disagreement between the government’s two highest states and not wait until things get out of hand that might imperil the sheer existence of this government. Apparently, the Constitution has not clearly delineated when it comes to crisis-management of this type for who has the last-say of sacking the government. In my opinion, it only makes sense that if the Constitution in the first place empowered the President to freely elect the Prime Minister, he should have the supreme power to dismiss him, at will.

Going forward

In truth, the President might have felt compelled to replace his Prime Minister only after one year in the job, but in the first place he should have given him a free reign to run his administration, instead of overshadowing him and acting as the “One-Man” government like most African dictators. And then he could have had legitimately blamed him for insufficient performance that warranted his removal. Apart from allowing him to pay visit to some of the inconsequential posts as though he was his vice-President because all along the Prime Minister looked like the odd man out. Maybe, the coupling of these two heads of state was doomed from the get go because it was based on assumed friendship and mutual backing of each other against all calamities.  This is because the President seemed to relish the job of the Prime Minster and vice versa. But, the shocking reaction to their political disagreement by all sides should give the President an impetus to bring about a speedy resolution without risking any remaining political capital, if any is left.

In the short run, the President faces two stark choices, he could either make a deal with the current Prime Minister in which he gives him a face-saving limited time to improve his performance to regain of his confidence, otherwise resign, or insist on his first decision that the Prime Minister resigns immediately and submit his new candidate to the parliament pending to form a new government. In fact, the first choice would be unappealing to the President because of the possibility of coming out as a weak leader who couldn’t stand on his ground when it came to house cleaning, while the second choice would be as well a risky one by selecting another Prime Minister who could stir things up for the President and might not remain as docile as the current one, which at the end could back fire.

History’s verdict is quite often hard to predict when it comes to those who dropped the ball and failed the nation in its most critical moment. The most fundamental is that President Hassan Sheikh and Prime Minister Said must put their differences aside and put the country’s welfare first and foremost. However, if these leaders fail to resolve their differences for the sake of saving the nation, history will judge them both harshly and will never forgive them for botching the best opportunity the nation received for the last two decades. In other words, both critics of President Hassan Sheikh and many of his admirers would like to see greater political engagement and resolve in handling this latest rift between him and his Prime Minister in order to save the country from the perils of political chaos. Finally, there are duties, often stemming from promises the President made when he initially came to the office a year ago, including smooth governing, fighting corruption to the bone and enduring peace. These have been shirked until now. 

---

Heikal I. KennededWashington D.C.heikalk@yahoo.com

The Miseducation of Edna Adan

By Heikal Kenneded

June 22, 2012

For the first time in over two decades highest level of political envoys from Somalia and its breakaway republic of Somaliland have met in London, UK to discuss some of the most substantive and politically nettlesome issues facing the two states, in the hope of forging a new vision of coexistence and peace. Though this latest round of talks failed to produce any tangible results that could be hailed as groundbreaking, but the return to the table of both parties apparently marks a sharp change of events on both sides. Progressive meetings like this one in the future, however, could be hijacked by hardcore secessionist advocates, such as the firebrand speeches of Edna Adan who at last month’s Somaliland Conference in Brussels, Belgium reiterated some of the most divisive discourse that could drive a further wedge between the southern and northern Somalis.

Ms. Edna Adan who’s lionized by many human rights advocates around the world could have pointed out several of her personal achievements in the north of Somalia, such as her various profit charities, including her celebrated
Maternity and Teaching Hospital in Hargeisa that provides quality medical services for women in the north. Instead, in her self-serving speech in Brussels, she portrayed Somaliland as the only “true” nation-state of Somalia worthy of a self-rule, while the Somalia proper is no more than a dangerous pond full of “pirates, warlords and terrorists.” Parading Somaliland as a beacon of democracy and intolerance, Edna further resorted to using a mix of victimization and scary tactics catered to bamboozle and miseducate her uninformed young audience and the few Western diplomats present in the conference.

In her fiery speech, Ms. Edna Adan indulged in the melodrama about a whole generation of young Somali Northerners is on the edge of being recruited as pirates and as suicide bombers by Al-Shabab, unless the International community recognized Somaliland’s independence from the rest of Somalia proper. Courting the International community this way, however, would be a grave mistake due to the different reality on the ground. In addition, to resolve terrorism and piracy problems in the Horn of Africa do not lie in the recognition of secessionist states like the so called Somaliland but rather empowering and supporting all civic societies in different regions and clans who are working towards good governance and democracy.

Contrary to the way Ms. Edna Adan portrayed Somalia in her recent invective speech to demonize her brethren in the South; Somalia is not a nation that can be solely defined by pirates, terrorism and warlords. Somalia, like many other African nations in the continent has gone through a severe postcolonial identification crisis that went deep in the heart of its very existence. Indeed, Somali’s current rigorous reconciliation process speaks volumes about its incremental evolution towards peace, especially to some of these complexities -- particularly the parallel challenge of adopting a new constitution and electing a new government.  In contrast, the key to understanding Ms. Edna Adan’s illusions about Somalia’s fledgling status quo lies with her colonial mentality of being stuck in a political and territorial demarcations concocted by the Western colonizers in Africa. No wonder she still prefers to call the north and south of Somalia respectively – British Somaliland and Somalia-Italiana. In fact, the so called “Somaliland” was nothing but the unfortunate product of Europe's imperial expansion into Africa during the nineteenth century, also known as the “Scramble for Africa.”

In her tirade, Edna complained, “who in their right mind would want to unite with Al-Shabab, pirates or terrorists?!’ In other words, it’s easier to gloat and deride your brothers when they are downtroden and misfortune has collapsed on them, instead of working to find a common ground of understanding. But we shouldn’t be surprised to hear such cheap shots from the likes of Edna Adan who made a career out of playing the victimization card to her international sympathizers while tirelessly working to hoist flame between the peoples of the north and south of Somalia. The irony in all of this is that northern Somalia’s relative peace could be argued was achieved at the cost of neglecting and destroying southern Somalia.

Sadly, the merits of Edna’s argument are not even worth disentangling them here since they’re preposterously obvious to the elementary grade level. Thanks to the information age, it’s impossible to lie about history and fabricate baseless allegations against those people that you do not like. On all accounts, Ms. Edna Adan assumes by discrediting the unstable status quo in Somalia and by denigrating the rest of the Somali people as a bunch of uncivilized terrorists scrambling in a failed state will win her the hearts and minds of the West. Yet taking a compassionate stance towards southern Somalia’s current destabilized state due to the logical consequence of toppling the dictatorship regime might bring the required affect.

Finally, there’s no question that the Isaq clans in the north of Somalia, as well as most other clans in the south suffered terribly under the Siyad Barre dictatorship regime. But strangely, Ms. Edna Adan would have preferred to be recolonized by the “Old” British Empire than to remain united with the rest of Somalia proper. This sort of outdated colonial thinking is what exactly perplexes most Somalis who are more or less warmed up to the reality or fantasy of Northern Somalia seceding from the rest of Somalia.  Most question whether it’s so debasing to be Somali that one would wish to be rather “enslaved” by White colonists who look down on all Africans as uncivilized savages. In fact, Edna Adan and those who think alike must still live in another era and another century that none of us would wish to visit for one day.

Heikal I. Kenneded

heikalk@yahoo.com

Washington D.C.

Government of Laws not Men

By Heikal I. Kenneded

November 23, 2004

The great maxim goes on to say “the truth that is suppressed by friends is the deadliest weapon of the enemy.”  A just country can support only a just society; therefore, the rule of law must come before anything else that comes out of the peace process. Much lip service has been paid to the "rule of law" early in the Mbagathi peace process, spearheaded primarily by Professor Abdi Samatar and like-minded civic society with the intent to instill some civility in the dark minds of the warlords.  However, the rule of law should be the very core of any new government formed in the process.  Its principle should dictate that we have a government of laws, not men.  This means that no man is above the law and that the law restrains government itself.  The law is not an end in itself, but a necessary means to preserve our liberties.  For instance, if the president happens to be a man of lesser virtue, then the rule of law has to restrain him so that he has no authority to wield his executive power arbitrarily and capriciously.  However, laws don't work, “unless they merely codify generally accepted behavior,” in which case they are probably unnecessary.  Thus experience should teach us the rule of law alone could save our society from any decree by utter brute power however disguised.  Unless we wish to prolong our notorious “failed state” status that we have been depicted all around the world, we need to start governing by the rule of law. 

The current Somali peace process underway in Mbagathi, Nairobi, is finally moving ahead with some tangible developments.  Despite the expectations brought by this long-overdue peace process, the warlords are trying to undermine every chance of a successful outcome.  Equipped with their plundered wealth and with the backing of over-drugged gangster soldiers, they are dedicated to the persistence of the anarchy and the lack of the rule of law in Somalia.  In effect, throughout our country, human rights violations remain endemic, including murder, looting, destruction of property, child soldiering, kidnapping, oppression of minorities, and denial of due process by local authorities.  The only solution to such dire and rampant violations of human rights and the hope of restoring law and order to our country, where the AK-47 remains the ultimate authority, is the implementation of the rule of law.

The basic idea of the rule of law is rather multifaceted and comprehensive.  First, the rule of law is the course by which human activities can be governed and is indispensable to a secular and democratic society like ours.  Second, under the rule of law, the principal driving force of the legal system is to direct and restrict the actions of government officials. There must be laws regulating the authority of the government, and its officials’ behavior must comply with legal rules.  Moreover, these laws should clearly outline the constitutional functions of the government.  Third, the rule of law inevitably assumes the existence of rights.  The law should sustain the diverse rights that modern concepts of citizenship demand.  When the government violates its power, citizens should have the right to bring suit against the government.  Since the standing of the individual citizen is weak in comparison to the power of the state, citizens require legal protection against government infringement and disenfranchisement.  Fourth, judicial independence is critical to the rule of law.  Under the rule of law, judges should recognize that the courts are the forums of last remedy to which the citizens turn to resolve their disagreements with each other or with the government.  Judges are the final guardians of the rights of citizens.  If this final remedy of judicial recourse fails to execute its task, or if these forums of last remedy are abused, the country deteriorates into anarchy.  Because of their enormous significance, society should not uncomplainingly bear the blunders or indiscretion of its judges.  In other words, the rule of law is actually the rule of the courts.

Gangster State

Because of our ethnic, religious and cultural homogeneity, Somalia is the only political entity on the African continent that is a “nation” in the real sense of the word.  Yet we are “atomized across the fault line of clan.” Contrary to this situation, throughout the world Somalia has been depicted as a textbook example of a “Gangster State.” There is no doubt that the political and social failures of our state stem mainly from the lack of a proper constitution that maintains the responsibilities of civic duty among all men.  Since our country’s independence, our governments were mainly made up of men, virtually at every level; in effect, we have collectively witnessed the dreads of tyranny and various degrees of chaos.  Since the overthrow of the brutal regime of Siad Barre by the USC militia, our country has been in turmoil due to civil war, chaos, anarchy, bloodshed, horror, barbarism and devastation in the highest degree.  All of these have proven to the rest of the world that in Somalia the rule of law is not worth the paper that it is printed on because tribalism and warlordism prevails over all else. 

It is understandable that our tribal society has never instituted or implemented any governing constitution relevant throughout the country because we could never protest our leaders' subversion of the law. We have lived all along not under the rule of legitimate authority, but under the rule of clans.  The habit we have fallen into of allowing some tribal leaders to single-handedly create chaos, in deliberate violation of international human rights, undermines the rule of law, which is the fundamental keystone of any civilized society.  The intriguing question that anyone in his/her right mind might ask is: why would anyone put up with machine guns and roadblocks laid by unrepresentative warlords supported by a bunch of gangsters?  The fact of the matter is the shameless motives of these warlords for obstructing the peace process, simply stem from the fact that they do not wish to see their rampant acquisition of wealth and power be proscribed by a Somali government presiding over the rule of law.  Because in the presence of a firm rule of law, these warlords will no longer be allowed to dictate to our country, to regional authorities, and to the majority of peace-loving Somalis.  And if so clearly understood by all, then peace and restoration of nationhood to Somalia is not that far off.  But can we never do anything of the status quo? That which we have done for decades is also inaction.  Once we realize that the status quo is stagnant, we can then compare its discernable advantages and disadvantages with the predicted outcome of inaction.  On the basis of such analysis, we can then make the rational decision of choosing the path for a just and democratic society. 

Instituting the rule of law will entail a two-step process, regarding: (1) bringing to justice those implicated in human rights abuses throughout the country and (2) reestablishing the justice system to institute law and order and protect the rights of all citizens.  It will first be crucial to dismantle and disband the various warlord territorial systems that have been used to control the country, while dissolving or otherwise administering their forces to ensure they do not become "spoilers" to the transition.  The Islamic courts should also be immediately abolished.  Implementing an effective rule of law strategy will also require close collaboration with the local authorities, religious leaders and citizens. It is has been argued in some circles that any clan-based societies like ours are "incapable of enforcing its laws;" therefore, they claim, "the state is no longer adequate to all, and therefore ceases to exist."  Nevertheless, while this theory appeals to some, legally or otherwise, it holds no water.  Under the law, lack of proper enforcement of existing laws does not constitute that they shouldn't be followed; it doesn't mean that anyone or any entity, which neither likes nor cares about the existing laws, can randomly enact new laws.  In fact and in spirit, it is given and negotiated among law-abiding citizens that laws will always be on the books, until they are properly appealed or amended by the proper authorities with the proper jurisdiction. All reasonable men empathize that the rule of law is what distinguishes civilized men from the uncivilized, law-abiding citizens from criminals.

Unfortunately, the course of action that is being pursued in the current Mbagathi peace process is mainly focused on choosing the right number of seats for every tribe, instead of trying to install a concrete rule of law, which is impregnable to corruption and chaos.  It may be true that we need more honest men in the seat of the presidency and the parliament, but it may also be true that we need stricter laws and additional enforcement of all civic duties.  It is now obvious the solution of our dilemma is rooted in the implementation of the rule of law.  It is essential that the civic society desist from the obstructionist attitude of the warlords of undermining the efforts to achieve peace.  It would be absolutely unacceptable to allow the success of reconciliation to depend on the caprices of these warlords. The first step for the new government should be to break the cycle of impunity for those who commit criminal acts of violence.  Thus, it must provide our long suffering society with security, stability, personal safety, and the undertaking that transparent law enforcement and judicial processes present the same protections and penalties for all citizens.  Such new government will need the help of the international community in undertaking this task. The international community has to make instant advancement in this area; without it, the success of any new government will be endangered by a loss of credibility and an entrenchment of wanton crimes, extra-judicial processes, and terrorist activities.

It is evident in the recent dramatic arrest of faction leader Hussein Aideed in Nairobi on charges of reneging on a business deal with a Kenyan businessman how perishable is the bubble power of these warlords against an effective rule of law.  Hussein Aideed who never stood before a court of law for the crimes committed by his militia’s wanton human rights abuses of deliberately and arbitrarily killing women and children throughout the Bay regions, seemed very vulnerable and panicky during his arraignment.  He has been under the illusion of being above the rule of law, but this recent incident was a major blow to his grand delusion of being immune to future criminal charges committed against humanity.

Separation of Religion from State

By the fall of the Siad Barre regime, no civil courts were functioning in Somalia because the three-tier national judicial system based on the 1962 Criminal Code could not be implemented in effect of the pervasive chaos throughout the country. Although local authorities have attempted to oversee some type of justice, few Somalis felt secure from retaliation based on clan loyalties.  Thus the void created by the lack of a functioning government aided the development of the role of Islamic courts. In the past, many of these Islamic courts were used to settle property disputes; however, they are now increasingly adjudicating criminal cases.  Currently, the Islamic courts are applying a very strict interpretation of the Shari'a law and rendering verdicts.  In fact, these unceremonious courts are not uniform and do not provide for procedural safeguards, which comply with accepted international standards for a fair trial.  For instance, the right to appeal the verdict of the Islamic courts does not exist and defendants often do not get proper legal counsel.

As a result, both national and international human rights organizations have observed serious violations of human rights principles and international law during the implementation of the extension of Sharia law to specific criminal cases. Thus, it is imperative that our constitution should be based in the separation of the State from Religion. Many religious people will argue that such an idea is anathema to our Islamic religion, but I tend to differ and believe that religion has no place in the circles of politics.  In a democratic and secular society, it is crucial to break away from domination by religion and religious leaders.  The fact that a practical separation of politics and religion in Islam is reasonable is based on the idea that no human being can rightly judge another as being a "sinner."  Such judgement is made exclusive to God, because only God has the knowledge of what lies in the deepest of one’s soul.  Since society has no place on judging a person like that, this means that they also cannot judge a political leader like that, thus leading to the principle that the community of believers should accept the authority of any leader, even if he appears unjust.

The values of our religion should definitely be included in making the rules of law.  Certain restrictions, however, should be made to the Sharia law, such as the stoning of adulterers and the amputation of the limbs of those who steal.  These laws should be regarded as sheer laws of the society at a certain time, so that there would be no reason to institute by such dated laws today because of their inherent cruelty.  In fact, by allowing such strict Sharia laws to coexist within our secular constitutional framework, we will be shortchanging our basic human rights and marching self-crippled into the 21st century.  Thus, a separation of State and Religion should be a prerequisite for ending the pervasive human rights violations in our country.

While there have been numerous debates on the issue of the separation of the State and Islam, there has never been a comprehensive case-by-case critique of the Somali State.  Hence, all of the gritty details must be exposed and articulated in a way that is accessible and intelligible to the average citizen before the religious fanatics impose their will on society.  If at the end we cannot succeed in determining what role religion should play in our constitution, at least we can attempt to deter any future abuses of interpretation of religion by the religious leaders. State laws from Hammurabi’s Code to contemporary international establishments have all been designed for the governing of nations and the decentralization of power among institutions. Distraction from the rule of law will only perpetuate social failures, tyranny, and a failed state such as ours.  Finally, the international community has the important role of supporting the peace process, and fostering the establishment of the rule of law and the creation of independent national, political and judicial institutions in Somalia.

Godspeed to form a viable, legitimate and representative Somali government.

Heikal I. Kenneded

Washington, D.C.

KennededH@state.gov

I Know What You Did Last Summer 

By Heikal I. Kenneded
October 27, 2007

One chokingly hot and humid evening early last summer, June 25, 2007, to be precise, Prime Minister Ali Mohamed Gedi was in Washington D.C. He was on his way to New York City to address the UN Security Council. This globe-trotting trip was part of the PM’s diplomatic efforts to rally the international community to deliver much required political support and humanitarian aid for our collapsed nation-state — Somalia. During his short sojourn in Washington D.C., hundreds of Somalis in the Diaspora poured into the capital – from all the corners of the Northern America continent. They enthusiastically cheered the arrival of the vivacious, eloquent, and relatively young Prime Minister in the U.S. Everyone showed up dressed in their best suits, as they waved his photo alongside our downtrodden sky blue Somali flag to rekindle our waning patriotism.

That evening, the emotional nostalgia among the Diaspora in North America was palpable. After all, we all thought our spoiled dream of returning to our homeland was finally within reach. Some of my friends expressed a great respite that finally, one of our generation was at the helm of the Somali government, unlike the previous geriatric corrupt old men who were a product of their former colonial masters. It was love at first sight. In fact, we all had a George W. Bush “moment” when he first met President Putin of Russia, and childishly declared: “I had looked into his eyes and saw his soul and knew he was trustworthy.” Likewise, we gaped at Gedi’s front gap-toothed wide smile and thought he was a saint. Boy, did we set up ourselves for another miserable failure the moment we allowed to put our hopes and dreams on a man like PM Gedi who turned out to have the conscience of an insolent despot.

The Somali community in the greater Washington D.C. metropolitan area worked itself into an unprecedented patriotic spirit and energy in welcoming the PM. He stayed at a Four-Star Sheraton hotel, where people waited for hours on a workday, Monday night, just to get a glimpse of our nation’s newest hero. Equally, the U.S. government honored the PM in providing him the necessary security details that are only reserved for respected delegates from friendly allied countries. As the main event of that memorable evening commenced, there was a high level of exhilaration in all attendees’ eyes. It began with orchestrated speeches, poetry and buraanbur of some of the audience that went on into the wee hours of the night. One of the most ardent followers of PM Gedi’s was the genius Somali poet, Professor Mahamud SiadTogane, who that evening for close to an hour sang and chanted the praises and idolatry elevations of Gedi, like a deranged idol worshipper. It was a déjà vu all over again of another era, when all Somalis used to march to the wicked drumbeat of Siyad Barre’s tyrannical regime back in the 1970s. Afterwards, Gedi took to the podium and spoke for only few minutes that were paused with deafening applauses and patriotic chants. In his speech, he clearly outlined the daunting task that faces the TFG, and reiterated his personal commitment to see to it that he delivers the agenda of his government: political stability based on broad reconciliation, and an expedited reconstruction of the country’s infrastructure.

Later that evening, I ran into several acquaintances who came in tow with their long, embellished resumes, as they networked to pass them to the PM’s confidants. They hoped to realize their longtime dream of going back in their country in order to participate in its long overdue reconstruction and reconciliation process. Unfortunately, whenever people hinge their hopes and dreams on shady characters like that of PM Gedi, they are bound for a devastating disappointment. Thus, this parable (morale della storia) should serve as a cautionary tale for all Somalis to be wary of all cult-like following support of untested leaders. How naïve and gullible we were when we all jumped on the bandwagon of the PM and rallied around him, as we called our US Congressmen and Senators to encourage their unwavering backing of the Somali PM and his fledgling government. We assured everyone, including the media and other local sympathizers that PM Gedi was the “one” and deserved our staunch support. We advocated for strong U.S. engagement in Somalia’s affairs, in order to help address the deteriorating security situation, political instability, and staggering economic challenges on the ground. If you attended that fateful evening’s main event, you’d have been captivated by Gedi’s charisma and devotion to his country’s plight. He displayed all the signs of a driven, honest, and modest leader of the people.

So, what did Gedi do after he departed from the US? He maliciously capitalized our steadfast support of him and he reciprocated our emotionally blind trust in him, by elevating his stature to that of a powerful despot, as he quickly consolidated his power, and then alienated many other members of his government, including his own Ministers and other parliamentarians. As soon as the PM left Washington, he also visited the oil rich kingdom of Saudi Arabia whose King conferred on Gedi a large sum of cash, in order to facilitate his resolving the TFG’s disputes with other opposition groups. Instead it is alleged that the PM pocketed every penny that he collected from foreign donors. Suddenly, PM Gedi felt so powerful and contemptuous that he shut the doors in the faces of his own ministers, thanks to the unfettered support that he continually received from his equally corrupt counterpart, PM Meles of Ethiopia. In other words, Gedi’s moral downfall stems from having too much power – absolute power that eventually corrupted him.

I hate to be a bit too melodramatic, but it’s almost as creepy as the Halloween scary movie, the namesake of this article implies, about PM Gedi’s frightening change of personality. It is incredibly sad that a man like Gedi who had such a modest background in Somalia like many of us, as a humble, struggling young student at Gaheyr University, where he later served as an associate professor of Veterinary medicine before the war; then when he finally becomes someone important transforms himself into a ruthless tyrant that everyone resents. In fact, I was recently shocked to listen to Gedi’s latest speech that he made shortly after he returned from Ethiopia, where his support from his friend, Meles and that of the rest of the International community is waning like that of winter daylight. Word has it that he was advised to step down and give peace a chance. But as a fallen, desperate man, Gedi desperately tried in his speech to drive a wedge between the Somali people, lashing out those who vehemently denounced his draconian rule and inciting other hateful venoms.

Gedi is now desperately trying to play the clan politics card, as he invokes and incites new civil-strife innuendos that he intends to bamboozle a new alliance among his clanships. It is despicable that now Gedi should resort to such degrading means after he failed to reconcile his differences with the President and other MPs in order to reach a common ground with the rest of the TFG government. Mr. Gedi as a PM since 2004 has a solid dismal record of disappointment after disappointment. Despite promises he made to perform at the speed of light to improve the security situation in the capital. He miserably failed to perform his duties because of his executive managerial incompetence and destructive self-importance. In addition, there’s a record displacement of the capital’s residents because the insurgency is thriving and killing record number of people, while there’s no sight of ending it.

I hope you don’t think that I am cherry-picking bad examples to stack the decks against PM Gedi, in favor of President Yusuf and other parliamentarians. In reality the onus is now on the President and the parliament to prove themselves that they are worthy of our vote of confidence. First, President Yusuf and the Parliament should stand by their decision to sack PM Gedi. Then, they should set the example of good governance by amending the constitution in order to allow government ministers to come from outside of the Parliament. So the next PM could choose his Ministers from a pool of fresh faces. The courageous parliamentarians who didn’t hesitate to express their frustration with the PM’s performance should allow this amendment to pass.

Eventually, whether PM Gedi will redeem himself by either resigning honorably, or setting the record straight in order to do the right thing, remains to be seen. Nevertheless, he faces a daunting opposition in the parliament that is determined to oust him by any means necessary, so it is unlikely that he will succeed in remaining as a viable PM for long enough. I am of the opinion that Gedi lacks the necessary diplomatic competency level to carry the day and the Somali people to the next level. Because it is bad enough when a PM doesn’t get along with his President, but it is almost impossible to work against your own ministers and remain relevant. Instead of rallying around the Somali people and seeking their confidence in his administration, Gedi seems to be lost like a wandering gypsy by going back and forth to Ethiopia for “consultations.” Che peccato!

Finally, Gedi can boast in jest of all the loot that he secretly pocketed during his notorious tenure as our poor country’s Prime Minister, but he will go down in history as one of the worst premiers who came into power during our country’s relatively young independent history. In addition, I can assure you that Gedi’s name will never be mentioned in the same breath as that of Joachim Chissano, the former Mozambique president who last Monday won the new coveted $5-million prize of Mo Ibrahim for African leadership.

Heikal I. Kenneded
Washington D.C.
E-mail:heikalk@yahoo.com

Speaking Truth to Power

By Heikal I. Kenneded

---

The bitter dispute between President Yusuf and Prime Minister Ghedi that came into a full blow last week, underscores the fragile state of the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) of Somalia. It is also a grim reminder that the TFG leadership is sadly mired in personal greed and a despotic agenda that threaten to our dream for a viable nation-state in the Horn of Africa. After almost two decades of political squabble and anarchic living, Somali politics have taken a new turn towards further devastation and eradication of our history as we all know it. We all hoped that the Mbagathi peace conference in Kenya that brought to fruition the current TFG would give a new lease on life to the reconciliation and healing process of our society. Following the successful ousting of the callous and incorrigible warlords out of Mogadishu by the Islamic Courts Union (ICU), the TFG leadership failed to seize the moment to rally around the different parties that were vying to run the show, including the ICU. Instead, the "perfect storm," started afterwards, brewed from the perspective of destruction and displacement of the people and perfect in the worst sense of that word.

What inspired the current rift between the TFG’s highest heads of state? This latest rift has been catapulted into the vortex of political turmoil when Prime Minister Ghedi gave the axe the TFG’s attorney general, Mr. Abdullahi Dahir for “illegally” ordering the arrest of the Supreme Court’s chairman Mr. Yusuf Ali Harun and one of his close judges. Attorney General Dahir, who has the full backing of President Yusuf, however, has declined to give up his job as the highest law enforcement in the country; instead, he alleged that the other two judges should face corruption charges. This latest political wrangle has disaster written all over it. There seems to be a constitutional calamity within the TFG in regards to good governance and constitutional transparency. But I also detect the “old” African despotic and corruption phenomenon is at play here.

According to reports the recent dispute between the TFG heads of state stems from oil deals that have gone sour, after PM Ghedi vetoed a lucrative, sweet oil deal that the Puntland state was secretly making with foreign Oil companies to explore and produce oil in their state. President Yusuf, who hails from that part of the country, was reportedly flabbergasted and was quick to condemn his PM, for stepping on the wrong toes. While Ghedi who considers President Yusuf a thorn in his side, brushed off the censure and derisively rejected any unilateral oil deals for Puntland without the full endorsement of his cabinet.

This depressing picture is brought into even sharper focus as there is another, deeper reason that the clash between the two premiers intensified, the Prime Minister has allegedly misappropriated donor aid money from Saudi Arabia in the amount of $35 million. President Yusuf was so enraged at his PM that he charged him with contempt and did not communicate with PM Ghedi until very recently, when finally things came to a head out fear of the government disintegrating. Of course, there is no way to confirm the authenticity of these latter charges against the PM, but they do paint the dismal picture of the inner workings of the TFG leadership and the credibility challenges that they face. On the other hand, President Yusuf is accused of contemptuously manipulating the fears and susceptibilities of his government by using clan politics as a way of building and systematizing a following among his clanship or kinfolks.

What should we make out of this bleak picture? Indeed, under the current stewardship of both President Yusuf and PM Ghedi, Somalia’s reconciliation and reconstruction process has fallen into a deep disrepair: everyday life has become beleaguered, general security has deteriorated, hyperinflation that threaten food security (linked to massive counterfeiting of the Somali shilling), crime and corruption have increased, much-needed donor aid funds have mysteriously flowed into hidden bank accounts, and officially sanctioned nepotism and favoritism have become widespread. The problem is not just relative failure, that is, the TFG leadership’s inability to resolve its internal “differences” as fast as possible so that they can concentrate on the paramount national crisis on the ground. Most shocking is the fact that both heads of the TFG leadership have fallen into the old African dictatorship trap of stealing every penny they receive from foreign donors and nepotism favoring their henchmen and relatives in government posts. In fact, this is now very relevant in regards to the latest 2007 corruption index report released by the Transparency Internationals that ranked Somalia as the most corrupt country in the world with a score of 1.4 out of 10.

http://www.transparency.org/news_room/in_focus/2007/cpi2007/cpi_2007_table/ This is a good indication of how little the TFG government has accomplished for the last three years and now miserably it has failed with its mandate.

The Way Forward

In an imperfect world, the TFG represents the best we could hope for as a viable government body. Unfortunately, the course of action that is currently being pursued by the TFG leadership in Mogadiscio seems determined in every way you look at it to undermine the long sought out reconciliation and reconstruction of our country. It seems that they are bent only on defeating the insurgency forces, instead of finding a common ground to reconcile their differences with the opposing forces, which will eventually benefit the very people and country they are determined to run. Though it might be true that we need to give the TFG government a chance to stand on its feet and institute its plan of action but it may also be true that they need to purge their circles of influence from the corrupted warlords and other opportunist foreign elements who may be thwarting their good wills to establish a concrete rule of law, impregnable to corruption and chaos.

In other words, the TFG needs to lead by example and govern the country by consensus, not by the muzzle of the gun. By now, it should be obvious to them the solution to our country’s conflict is not rooted in playing deftly clan politics, but in honest and peaceful discussion with the grass roots and all other willing civil society groups, including the ICU. We are inherently a clannish society who can only see things through the elusive prism of clan politics. But the Somali people have a choice to make, whether they desire to be used as scapegoats and consequently see our country being occupied by foreign forces or they wish to see things as they are and hold accountable their leaders for their failures to lead and to recognize their mistakes early before it would lead to catastrophic ends. In addition, it is a crucial time for all Somalis to see beyond the proxy wars between Ethiopia and Eritreain our country, in order to advance and support only peaceful negotiations the various parties hurdling over power. This will eventually pressure among the fighting powers to reach a healthy consensus and bring forth much needed reconciliation, instead of going empty motions with these mock conferences.

It is equally unconscionable to allow the success of a comprehensive national reconciliation to depend on the caprices of the ICU’s Islamic fundamentalists, militating to install Sharia law in the country, in order to advance their other hidden political agenda – a police state. The first step for the ICU and their political allies, primarily the disgruntled parliamentarians of the TFG, the so called “The Free Parliament” who are currently hunkered down in Asmara, Eritrea, is to break the cycle of impunity for the intractable insurgencies in the capital and cease all acts of violence. They must sit down with the TFG leaders and work towards a peaceful resolution that will ultimately alleviate the fear of displacement from our long-suffering society. Then and only then can they discuss other relevant issues, including security, stability, personal safety, and the undertaking of the Islamic Sharia laws in regards to the judicial processes. Until then they are no different than the warlords they had driven away from the capital or, much worse, should be labeled as terrorists.

It’s my honest believe that there is a way out of this irrational political gridlock, and that it lies in the attempt to give realistic demonstration to the effectiveness of speaking truth to power, without fear of any consequences. In other words, the staunch supporters of the TFG need to realize that the motives of Ethiopia’s Meles Zenawi run much deeper than a desire to stabilize Somalia and realize a lasting peace.  The mere presence of Ethiopian troops in our country renders Ethiopia an important ally of the U.S.  In effect, this affords Meles’s government unfettered diplomatic support and much needed economic aid from the West. On the other hand, other dissidents who recently met in Asmara, Eritrea, need to understand that the true motives of President Isaias Afworki ofEritrea are as opportunistic and reckless in nature as those of his counterpart, Meles, in Ethiopia.Regardless of whether one chooses to support either of these two countries’ agendas in order to destabilize our country, ultimately it will be Somalia’s demise at the end of this mess.  As such, we all need to see where things are headed and what we all can do to curtail the ongoing deadly violence in our country.

I believe reasonable people, including both pro-TFG and dissident alike, need to understand this initial insight, to comprehend what is at stake here and work towards peace. In view of this, it is strange that almost no one has made a serious attempt to explore the implications of such proxy wars in the Horn of Africa in regards to regional affairs. Anyone who has taken Conflict Resolution 101 understands that most conflict resolution paradigms dictate that conflicts can best be tackled at the earliest stages, before they come full circle, to the extent that large numbers of people are being killed. Unfortunately, our beloved capital city, Mogadiscio has become a hotbed for violence and destruction spawned by the callous insurgent fighters of the ICU waging battle against the TFG forces backed by the Ethiopian army. By virtually all accounts, the insurgents are atrocious: stage a hit-and-run attack on government and foreign troops, fire mortar rounds at schools and office buildings, markets and residential neighborhoods. The time is still ripe to put a stop to the deadly conflict between government forces and the insurgents, which has already caused a catastrophic death and destruction.

New conditions on the ground demand a new thinking paradigm that fosters peace and objectivity for all to overcome their past prejudices and hatred. It’s my great hope that we all should prevail over our negligible differences and think about the great suffering of our people both at home and in the Diaspora. Sadly, clan politics, despotism, dependency, and religious extremism have handicapped the Somali people for so long that they now represent what’s known as The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse in Somalia. I believe I speak for the great majority of Somalis who categorically oppose the senseless bloodshed in Somalia and reject the divisive nature of these politicians and religious men who are vying to run our country for their personal greed and secret political agendas. Our unified reluctance to support neither conflicted party will bring the necessary negotiations without which the constructive work that builds peace cannot be undertaken. The alternative is only further catastrophic downfall of our society collectively.

The TFG leaders have only as much legitimacy as they are bestowed upon them by those whom they intend to govern – the Somali people. Their sole platform should be to alleviate the dismal shame of violence, anarchy, and human suffering in our country. Nevertheless, the behavior of the TFG leaders, and that of its supporters, is easier to match with that of its predecessor – the corrupted, authoritarian regime of Siyad Barre who mastered the “rule or ruin” philosophy. I am of the opinion that the TFG leadership suffers from the severe kleptocratic syndrome that plagues many African countries today. But you would assume that President Yusuf should have learned one or two things from his old adversary, Siyad Barre, who dismally hung on to power until he dragged the whole country with him. Enabling the TFG leadership to switch its current destructive course and fulfill its potential will not be easy, simply because it seems the premise of their initial creation was fraught with severe inadequacies and dishonesty in regards to the overwhelming participation of the warlords in the national reconciliation process, and not the least, the notorious 4.5 system that was concocted in the Mbgathi peace conference in Nairobi three years ago. This was the genesis of the current political calamity that we are witnessing within the TFG.

Despite the spiraling violence and chaos around the country, the average Somalis are demanding change and they cannot wait any longer. If the TFG wishes to maintain its credibility with the Somali people, they need to come clean and practice good governance, accountability and transparency in their government. Otherwise, the TFG risks being linked to or even labeled like many of the corrupt warlords that are predominant in their ranks. In effect, they will eventually take the same destructive path of those who came before them. At first, it might be essential to halt the vicious spiral of worsening violence in the capital, but it is also paramount that good governance and transparency dominate in every step that is taken towards nation building. That is, the highest pinnacles of the TFG leadership should themselves be involved in and contribute to the practice of good governance in order to create a viable nation state.  If they however veer from the right path, it will lead them to catastrophic ends that will dwarf the current political turmoil in the country.

Finally, given the crucial role that the Horn of Africa plays in the continent, and in regards to terrorism and counter-terrorism, the United States and other international donors should support long-term regional peace building initiatives in the region, instead of focusing on their short term security goals and taking such destructive sides with some of the opportunist leaders in the region who are bent on exploiting the volatile situation. In the end, building democratic institutions in the region will benefit both the region itself and the rest of the world, in general.

Heikal I. Kenneded

Washington, D.C.

heikalk@yahoo.com