While
international crisis group reporting with
knowledge and analysis over the dire
consequences if armed African forces sent to
Somalia. Americans were engaged to pass a
motion lifting and allowing armed forces
deployed in Somalia. Ignoring to the hazards
and repeated warnings by the think tank,
Security Council approved partially to lift
Arms embargo to allow Africa’s forces access
into the country.
Though the resolution came lately, African
forces were already in Somalia. Breaking
14-year-old embargo; neighboring Africans
states have conspicuously defiled
international arms ban and sent, roughly;
eight to ten thousand troops and army
logistics into Somalia.
Anyway, following the council’s decision
this week, a fresh cycle of war has erupted
with prompt human and material loses;
traffic movement and general commuting have
completely halted. The route linking
Mogadishu to the beleaguered southwestern
region is cut off. The renewed fighting has
aggravated more to the perplexed
humanitarian situation in the south; the
area has suffered in devastating floods and
heavy downpour of torrential rains that
turned many parts of the region to a
riverbed. Basics; including foods, drugs and
other essential amenities got scarce.
Contagious diseases as malaria and watery
diarrhea were reportedly menacing the life
of displaced people.
As I believe, the new flare up will be the
precursor of greater all out war, engaged
in, not only Somalis, but similarly, rival
African states, it will be first regional
war on the impoverished sub Saharan Africa
which renowned in a record history of
famine, droughts and ethnic conflicts. There
are also fears to turn the region into a
breeding ground for terrorism after Iraq. If
Islamists overpowered, they may seek to
emulate like that insurmountable insurgency
of Iraqi sectarian groups.
The daunting question is, who is the sure
loser of this kind of war? Do Africans
certain that the road to Mogadishu is wide
open with roses laying abundantly on it,
what ideological and security impact could
it have to their home-countries, where
nearly half of societies are Muslims, is
this conflict bringing eternal peace and
strength to the fledgling government in
Baidao? Also, can Islamists militias resist
incoming African troops?
Sadly, the divided federal government lost
its temper to invite foreign interventions,
of course they are not those steering the
oath, some of them are firmly connected to
the external power for the help to
consolidate their dynasty, these members
provided their allegiance fully to foreign
actors, just to safeguard themselves from
the chase of roaring Islamists, more others
in the government appear nationalistic
liberals but seeing radical Islamism
outsourcing their role in the society.
Actually the politics of entertaining
foreign troops did not just frenzied
Islamists but divided the government itself,
such politics augmented the support of
Islamists across the country and has driven
the Government to invite a full-scale war
with its people who believe with strong
sense that the government is purely
hand-picked marionette formed to preserve
foreign interests in the account of its
people.
With the grip of irresistible wars brewing
to the doorsteps, the government is getting
weak by the day as Islamists seem to have
overcome not only militarily but also
gaining momentum in the minds and hearts of
ordinary folks, whatever allegations baked
on them, now they enjoy loyalty and
political representation from mainstream
Somalis, because neither the helpless
government in Baidao nor ousted warlords had
done or ever came closer to what Islamists
succeeded.
Dear readers, we all understand how
negatively the international community is
managing global crisis, since power
equilibrium lost and our planet turned into
single unipolar with direct influence by
right-wing neocons; All imposed political
repression by the UN or allied forces, as in
Afghanistan today, did not serve or had
little effect to the world peace.
Interventionism or preemptive wars become
futile; the case in Iraq is the most
instructive exemplar. Political
suppressions, poverty and abuses in the
world had only radicalized mainstream
populations and dealt a heavy price to the
nationalists and religious people, because
they see it as an imperial intrusion ruining
their values and sovereignty, but as UN
outgoing secretary stated in his farewell
address at Truman Center. He repeated the
widely endorsed “momentous doctrine” which
means in essence, ‘that respect for national
sovereignty can no longer be used as an
excuse for inaction in the face of genocide,
war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes
against humanity’, referring to Darfur, he
criticized world community in their
inactiveness in that region. Thus world body
has clearly different views in settling
conflict crisis, especially with sensitive
world, where Muslim societies have no trust
with Non-Muslim supremacy, for these
insights, it got difficult to bridge that
widening gulf between nations.
In Somalia, when president Bush (senior)
sent American marines into Mogadishu coasts
to reach humanitarian aid to the needy, the
outcome was a disastrous collision between
US armed rangers and Somali armed militias,
that has finally precipitated the speedy
departure of multinational forces with out
any achievement, though that intervention
has really reduced the scale of famine in
the country, but failed to address political
challenges on the ground.
Therefore, UN resolution will not add any
meaningful outcome to Somalia’s crisis,
contrarily; it bonds Somali people in their
war against African armies. In the past few
months, from northern regions to far
southern parts, a new bang of Islamism
strike local administrations, as the people
tired from corruptive and the vicious
political rules, they seem embraced to
Islamists call.
So UN approach seems irrational and only
exasperating current situations. The onset
of wars in southwestern region will be a
prelude of wider regional unrest, Africans
will pay heaviest price, Because, Somalis
have been in a state of war during the last
fifteen years, they became endemic with
casualties and war effects, even youngsters
who able to carry rifles believe resistance
as a bravery act, when it’s based on
religion and land, the case will be
spiritually deeper. They have already tired
of hanger, pullet wounds and displacement,
they know wars more than peace and have
ability to endure hardships, in their
culture, surrender is shame and profane,
this time, martyrdom and holy war is their
slogan.
So I would say African states should study
meticulously the sticky situation in
Somalia, they should learn the collective
imagination of Somalis’ mentality and
sensibility with foreign forces whose
culture and beliefs are alien among them.
Peace can be reached only by frank dialogue
and fair-mindedness by all concerned. Of
course every group, either the government or
Islamists accuse each other of entertaining
foreign armies, sadly, all these alleged
armies are from Africa. Even US advanced
resolution is regarded as biased and widely
politicized agenda backing by some
neighboring Africans.
In conclusion, Africa should resolve its
crisis within the interest of its persecuted
societies, but not to serve as pawns or
untamed animals used to play one another.
Somalia needs Africa only to appease among
them. If Africa fails to do so, then let and
standby Arabs to pacify them, Arabs appear
more sincere and sympathetic with their
pain. With the brethren bond of Islam that
most Somalis of today accept and the
geo-proximity of the horn to that Arabian
Peninsula, Arabs seem to have less
politicized agenda that could stick efforts
into a historic pacification for all
Somalis.
Mohamed O. Eyow
Mosman263@hotmail.com
Dec 16, 2006 |