Sharing a personal history; Offering a Future for all to challenge norms?
Presently, Somalia is entering a new phase of belligerence with similarities to the situation of the 1980s where Siad Barre’s manipulations of the delicate balances holding a secular state in awe of the dictator were about to knocked completely out of the false equilibrium.
This is not a piece of history set out with facts researched; please refer to far more erudite works by Professor Lewis and John Drysdale. Or read recent work by M Bradbury or Dr Bulhan. This piece is written by a person who’s knowledge is based on management and experience is that of a practitioner working in various settings throughout Somalia and Somaliland during the last quarter of a century.
Morgan, the Butcher of Hargeisa, has seemingly been allowed to reappear in official positions without answering the questions as to why he gained the nickname; he certainly was not handing out free camel chops and goat legs to the poor and needy. He received an open invitation to come to Somaliland in 2002. He would receive a welcome befitting someone who could shed light on why the people in the mass grave on the edge of the city had been denied more days seeing the sun come up on this planet. The grave was opened in 2002 but the international community never went beyond paying lip service to prosecuting justice for the crimes obviously undertaken to place people in this grave.
Now we have more weapons flowing in to Mogadishu and a person in power seeking to deflect from the real issues and serve the clannic issues required to support his fellow doyens of state capture. Such approaches further the narcissistic tendencies we are all guilty of as we look at these powerful men manipulating the thinking along the lines:- This could be good for me, he is saying things to show he is representing me, picking me within the wider population.
It will not be good for any of us beyond the very small cliques of power brokers. It could serve to undermine what gains have been made as actions breed reactions committing people with few choices to exercise bad decisions. Quite possibly, exhorted to fight for this cause or that blood tie, young men will kill or die as a result of these actions of men far removed from the realities of running through acacia scrub with bombs exploding and bullets buzzing past.
Somaliland’s border with Somalia is being contested. The global war on terrorism seems to have been side-lined as troops and armaments are sent to fight in a battle contrived by personalities and not serving people. If Puntland is exercising claims over territory because of clan, why are they not seeking to annex land in Ethiopia? Here, as across the region, fellow clansmen stumble between disasters caused by drought, flash flood and the inability to manage water. Now these people contend, again, with the idiocies of leaders seemingly devoid of answers as to why we still appeal to base instincts in an age where reason had appeared to be rising. The weather knows no blood affiliation and the water runs according to gravity not clan.
We are all part of history; sometimes some of us are offered a walk on part where we just may make a difference. When I had first come to Somaliland (following six months working in southern Somalia to grant me a crash course in the etiquettes of bargaining in these patrimonial settings) I had arrived with two colleagues in the town of Burao. Burao, as virtually all towns are in these semi-arid landscapes, is an important meeting point where urban does not mean urbane people all the time. It had been the centre of fighting as Barre manipulated people with false promises appealing to egos of men, the big men able to control local resources. The town would be the centre of further fighting as people found it easier to believe the small minded appeals to clan triumphalism over the pastoralist democracy requiring leaders to exercise responsibility and be accountable for their actions. To ensure there would be water and pasture for the well being of all people.
In a blundering piece of ego on my part I stated I would not meet any elders if I could not meet all of the elders. Unknowingly, I had arrived at the time when such animated behaviour was to be rewarded with a movement toward solidifying dialogue just commenced. We had our meeting, elders came from all the clan groupings and spoke openly about what was needed for people. It was a tremendously positive showing, highlighting how leaders, given opportunity, reinforced their enlightened ways of working knowing they had to go back to people and explain what was forthcoming from meetings.
The meeting came with tension as every elder came not only with his walking stick but one or two men, or boys, toting some piece of firepower, the seemingly ubiquitous Kalashnikov AK 47 or some ancient Soviet carbine rifle. I am not a gun expert and certainly have no interest so cannot refer you toward an authority. Bugger the guns. I did not mind the setting, the guns were not pointed at people and the roof had holes already. It was almost a new badge of admission — just in case of the just in casemoment. Honesty and openness bred openness and an integrity to learn how equality had to be addressed otherwise the manipulation of clan would appear as resource deficits drove schisms and power to grasp what was available.
Burao became my grounding point in Somaliland. We had been greeted by openness as we were offered a lift from the airstrip into town by a car bearing all the signage of UNICEF. When we arrived, the driver promptly demanded $200 for the ride. I politely pointed out he was on contract to UNICEF and had taken some of his clients to pick up the flight leaving as we arrived — it cost him little or nothing to be hospitable and give us a ride into town (rather than take us for a ride metaphorically by asking for two hundred bucks). He pulled his negotiating tool out, slipped the safety off, pointed the AK47 at me while telling me if he wanted to rob us he would have demanded our money and that would be that. Took something to stay calm and gently talk him down. The British-ness in our team met Somali habits and sweet tea saw everyone happy. The gentleman was to come to our assistance a few days later in organising a car to get us back to Burao from Berbera at four in the morning to pick a flight back to Hargeisa. In 1993, Somaliland was still riven through with a lawlessness making road travel between Berbera and Hargeisa very hazardous. Berbera to Burao was a little better and negotiation with some cigarettes for boys ‘mending’ the road would smooth the passage passed the guns and potholes.
Leaping forward, swing districts around Berbera, Burao and Oud Weyne were instrumental in the 2002 presidential election. Who could mobilise the most voters? Who could mobilise the most votes? Two statements with implications; we struggled to ensure one vote one person and the one person met the requirements of the election criteria. There were tensions after the elections but Somalilanders came to the fore and calmed the flames of conflict rather than ignite a destructive process benefiting few. Maybe the fruits of engagement were few and inequitably spread but people saw the positives. The elected president, Riyale, and the defeated candidates saw the benefit of honouring the system they had all agreed to. All had sought to drive through the gaps but once done, all agreed to move forward. To the benefit of the next two personality and clan based presidential elections of Somaliland moving toward greater engagement on issues. To the benefit of Somalilanders.
Having not achieved all they would like; they continue to move in the right direction and with the right attitude. There are issues but not destructive problems manipulated by outsiders. Lineage is important. Anyone who says otherwise, ask this Americans and their Kennedy, Bush, Clinton fixes of the last two generations.
To the point where Riyale inherited the case for recognition of Somaliland and drove it forward fighting off the hawks in his administration. As the USofA administrations found themselves sucked into conflicts as lies had to be told to cover the inept thinking, some sought for Somaliland to go fighting in Somalia countering the clan claims of Puntland. Much as with the USA on seeking to win wars from Vietnam through Afghanistan to Iraq where analysis soon became justification for wrong decisions, there were those in Somaliland who wanted to meet Puntland head on and prosecute the fighting in Puntland itself. Wiser heads prevailed as Riyale asked people their opinions, plenty of them, and justifications for saying what courses of action to be taken. During 2002 and 2003, I was a monthly visitor to the Presidential residence. An outsider who gave a different feelto things where Somaliland reputation was concerned. The new Foreign Minister had become my guide in Somaliland from previous times and he magnified my role. Having read and listened to people, knowing I did not understand aspects of anthropological relationships. When asked what I thought of the situation, it was simple for a geographer and organisational person to speak based on knowledge while having enough wit, if not wisdom, to challenge staid ideas. Stick to the recognised borders and reinforce Somaliland’s integrity as a colonially set state with defined geographic borders.
As I fly toward Europe, I watch a film about pirates, or are they thieves? Or are they concerned citizens protecting Somalia’s marine resources? Whatever the situation, Jay Bahadur’s film about holding ships on the high seas tells a little story and hints towards how people have made a living out of interpreting Somali situations. Invariably outsiders doing the interpretation, the translation to interpretation becomes interpolation and selectivity as to what we want rather than what is needed by people beyond those able to dominate the communications. I have been part of humanitarian crises partly caused by endless interpretation. So many wannabe analysts looking at linear processes to meet conformity taught in Western universities and so to conclude by not concluding; instead, questions to stimulate some different dialogue.
Do people need a state as set out by the teachings based on the Westphalian principles?
What is a nation nowadays given new relationships and innovative ways to manipulate old relationships of nation separate from state?
What is loyalty and respect in an age where capitalism is being challenged as to how it is to address inequity? Or even grant opportunity for people being left behind by the third industrial revolution, new forms of globalisation and a growing protectionism based on clever manipulation of prejudices and poor assumptions?
In the case of the Horn of Africa (and elsewhere): construal without real understanding? How to understand, more importantly use and challenge, dichotomies and dynamics inside business and changing social constructs well beyond, but always aware of, borders drawn on maps?
We come, we report, we move on — to what? Leaving what?
Many powerful people profit, few poor can build a better future? A question. Or is it a statement?
States. Nations. Nation States. What a state.
