Accepting Somaliland may help stabilize Africa's Horn
By Charles Tannock
After almost two decades as a failed state torn by civil war,
perhaps the world should begin to admit that Somalia – as it is
currently constructed – is beyond repair. Some of the country,
however, can meet at least a basic standard of governance. The
northernmost region, Somaliland, situated strategically at the
opening to the Red Sea and home to roughly 3.5 million of Somalia’s
10 million people, is more or less autonomous and stable. But this
stability fuels fears that Somaliland’s people will activate the
declaration of independence they adopted in 1991.
At the end of September, Somaliland will hold its third presidential
election, the previous two having been open and competitive. Unlike
many developing countries, it will welcome foreign observers to
oversee the elections, though, unfortunately, most Western countries
and agencies will stay away, lest their presence be seen as
legitimizing Somaliland’s de facto government.
But Somaliland’s strategic position near the world’s major
oil-transport routes, now plagued by piracy, and chaos in the
country’s south, mean that independence should no longer be
dismissed out of hand. Indeed, following a fact-finding mission in
2007, a consensus is emerging within the European Union that an
African Union country should be the first to recognize Somaliland’s
independence. A 2005 report by Patrick Mazimhaka, a former AU deputy
chairman, provides some leeway for this, as Mazimhaka pointed out
that the union in 1960 between Somaliland and Somalia, following the
withdrawal of the colonial powers (Britain and Italy), was never
formally ratified.
Ethiopia is the obvious candidate to spearhead recognition, given
its worries about jihadist unrest within Somalia. Moreover,
landlocked Ethiopia uses Somaliland’s port of Berbera extensively.
Yet Ethiopia may hesitate, owing to its fears that formally
recognizing Somaliland’s independence could undermine Somalia’s
fragile Western-backed Transitional Federal Government (TGF). But,
as Somalia’s new president, Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, is a former
head of the Islamic Courts, Ethiopia may choose the current status
quo in Somaliland over the dream of stabilizing Somalia.
The key regional obstacle to recognition is Saudi Arabia, which not
only objects to the secular, democratic model promoted by
Somaliland, but is a strong ally of Somalia, which is a member of
the Arab League (despite not being Arab) and the Organization of the
Islamic Conference. Saudi Arabia supports the TFG financially and
politically. Saudi pressure on Somaliland has ranged from banning
livestock imports between 1996 and 2006, to threatening to reject
the Somaliland passports of Hajj pilgrims.
When Somaliland’s people vote at the end of September, they will not
be deciding explicitly on secession, but their steady effort at
state building does amplify their claims to independence. So, two
years after Kosovo’s independence, and a year after Russian troops
wrenched Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Georgia, it is high time
for diplomats and statesmen to provide some guidelines as to when
and in what circumstances secession is likely to be acceptable.
Does any self-selected group anywhere have the right to declare
independence? If so, the richest parts of any country could decide
to go it alone, thus impoverishing their fellow citizens. Even if
greed is ruled out as an acceptable motive, in favor of traditional
ethno-cultural nationalism, a profusion of tiny tribal states might
make the world far more unstable.
Moreoverdoes anyone, for example, want to see China return to the
years of bloody warlordism of the early 20th century? Not likely.
Thus clear principles are needed, as neither self-determination nor
the inviolability of national borders can be treated as sacrosanct
in every case.
So let me attempt to outline some basic principles: First, no
outside forces should either encourage or discourage secession, and
the barriers for recognizing secession should be set high. Secession
is in itself neither good nor bad: like divorce, it may make people
more or less content.
Second, a declaration of independence should be recognized only if a
clear majority (well over 50 percent-plus-one of the voters) have
freely chosen it, ideally in an unbiased referendum.
Third, the new state must guarantee that any minorities it drags
along – say, Russians in the Baltic States, or Serbs in Kosovo –
will be decently treated.
And fourth, secessionists should have a reasonable claim to being a
national group that, preferably, enjoyed stable self-government in
the past on the territory they claim. Nations need not be ethnically
based; few are entirely. But most nations are unified by language, a
shared history of oppression, or some other force of history On
this, admittedly subjective, measure, Somaliland qualifies as a
nation. It was briefly independent (for five days) in 1960 after the
British withdrawal, before throwing in its lot with the formerly
Italian south, a decision which its people have regretted ever
since. In this brief period, 35 countries, including Egypt, Israel,
and the five permanent members of the Security Council, recognized
Somaliland diplomatically (interestingly, Israel was the first to do
so).
If Somaliland’s imminent multiparty elections are reasonably fair
and open, the outside world, including the AU and the United
Nations, will need to reconsider its status, which has been fudged
since the collapse of Siad Barre’s regime in 1991. All three of
Somaliland’s parties contesting the forthcoming election are adamant
about wanting recognition of the region’s independence, which was
confirmed overwhelmingly by a referendum in 2001. So there is no
question of one clan or faction imposing independence on the others.
Given the interests of all the world’s great powers in stabilizing
the Horn of Africa, there does seem to be movement toward accepting
Somaliland’s claims. An independent Somaliland could be a force for
stability and good governance in an otherwise hopeless region. So
the world may soon need to test whether the controversial principles
it brought to bear in Kosovo have the same meaning in Africa.
Source: THE DAILY
STAR
|