By Abdukadir Osman Farah, PhD

In a recent Aljazeera English documentary, the editors of the program sketch the history of the legendry Sayyid Maxamed Cabdille Xasan. A leader who resisted the British Empire for over two decades (the longest anti-colonial war in Africa). The program profiles him as “the father of Somali nationalism”[i]. In a daring political vision, the Sayyid insisted on Somali dignity and sovereignty. Similarly, President Aadan Cabdulle Cusmaan, another freedom seeker with an alternative political vision, became “the father of Somali republic.” Though the political visions of the two leaders differ in terms of contents and strategy, they both promoted the dignified existence of the collective society. They did this by firstly letting Somalis learning and recognizing the privileged human and material resources within the society and the country. Secondly, they cautioned the public about the risks of aggressive external actors infringing their combined assets. Thirdly, they highlighted the indispensability of Somali unity in forestalling and overcoming actual and potential internal and external challenges.  

The Sayyid guided and mentored committed Dervish followers. Then, British military campaign in 1920 prevented adherents in succeeding and maintaining the movement. Similarly, the President and his SYL (Somali Youth League) organization recruited younger cadres but did not fully transmit their political conceptions. Their successors, mostly trained in Egypt, Italy, and the Soviet Union, preferred autocratic military rule of the society.

Eventually, the two leaders left the world in despair. The Sayyid as the victim of British air-campaign. The first President of independent Somalia, in his last days, also grieved over the decline of the society he envisioned as most dignified. The President witnessed the cruelties of intense Somali conflict- resulting collective failure. Among others, warlords, sponsored by traditional adversaries of the Somalis, terrorized and divided the society into unrecognizable clan-fiefdoms.

Frustrating the British 

The Aljazeera documentary portrays the Sayyid and the Dervish movement as people fighting for the dignity and sovereignty of their society. The Sayyid “advocated for the Somali nation’s right to have a functioning state ruled by Somalis.” The public responded the call considering him as “a fierce resistance leader, poet and champion of a nationalist cause.” With such mainstream support, the Dervishes justified the long-term struggle against the British, the Italians, and the Ethiopians. In response, the British designated the Sayyid and the movement as “the implacable enemy of the British Empire”– subsequently deploying an overwhelming transnational power (British, Indians, Africans and even Somalis joined such assault).

Nonetheless, in numerous confrontations, the Dervishes defeated the British. Such unexpected events attracted British and American newspapers reporting the losses in these battles. For instance, the New York Times archive contains more than 50 articles of the conflict in the early 1900s. In addition to the armed resistance, the Sayyid also engaged in international diplomacy, signing treaties with the British and the Italians[ii]. He also formed alliances with friendly countries. Forty years after the suppression of the Dervishes, a witness at the 1960 independence festivities recalls “I liked the British frustrated as they were leaving”.

Politician with poetic talents   

Sayyid Maxamed Cabdille Xasan was a Somali political leader fostered and shaped within the dynamics of traditional nomadic pastoral Somali culture. A culture that stresses dignity, courage, and self-reliance. As a young man, the Sayyid travelled across the Arabian Peninsula for education. On returning to the homeland, the immediate experiences of colonial incidents and imposition transformed his life. Apart from personal development, he was also a leader who promoted a new political vision. A prospect seeking a dignified form of Somali self-conception. He questioned the legitimacy of the British governing and dictating the actions of the Somalis:

“The Sayyid came into conflict with the British on his arrival from Yemen in Berbera in 1895. When asked by a British colonial tax collector on his merchandise, the Sayyid responded “who collected tax from you when you arrived? Does this land belong to you? Why are you asking tax from me?”[iii]    

 Eventually, he led and waged a vigorous resistance. An opposition resting on the idea of a nationalist struggle grounded in the tradition of tariqah movement. With such collective, and in periods inclusive social and political mobilization, the Sayyid and his supporters acted against colonial rule and subordination. By insisting on freedom and liberation from external subjugation, their efforts also included the transformation of the wider society. The Dervish movement succeeded in creating and framing a new form of Somali political paradigm. A political vision reflecting and acting upon the possibilities of concerted reawakening of the people. They combined it with some form of pan-Somali nationalism. Externally, they stressed the preservation of Somali dignity and sovereignty.

The tariqah movement was not just a method of achieving secluded goals of freedom and liberation. It was also a way of life and a medium uniting otherwise fragmented communities belonging to different often rivaling constituencies. With the subsequent formation of qusuusi consultative leadership (consisting of about 60 traditional intellectuals) the Sayyid highlighted the significance of deliberative and idea exchanging approach to community formation. The approach aggregated a reasonable collective reflection and resolve.

Eventually, the British waged intense air campaign (reports suggest with the deployment of chemical weapons). The assault temporarily brought an end to the politics of the Sayyid who died in despair- disappointedly warning the consequences of colonial subjugation:

Marka hore dabkuu idinka dhigi, dumar sidiisiiye
Marka xigana daabaqadda yuu, idin dareensiine
Marka xiga dalkuu idinku oran, duunya dhaafsada e
Marka xiga dushuu idinka rari, sida dameeraaye
Mar haddaan dushii Adari iyo limey dacal dhaafay
Maxaad igaga digataan berruu, siin la soo degiye”

“First he will rob you from your firearms, as if you are women
Then he will brand you like cattle
Next he will order you to sell the country [to him].
Then he will put loads on your backs as on donkeys
However, once I passed beyond Harar and limey,
How will you benefit from my warning, when he will be laying his telegraph line?”[iv]

The surviving Dervishes dispersed into the wider Somali society, potentially returning to their constituents. Survivors reframed new forms of resistance- eventually providing spaces for liberal movements such as SYL (Somali Youth League) and others to emerge.

Politician with civic capacities   

The inheritors of the legacy of Somali quest for dignity and sovereignty include President Aadan Cabdulle Cusmaan. As a politician, President Aadan operated within a modernist frame of political mobilization. A process embedded in the formation of civic bureaucratic institutions. He was an active member and part of a collective SYL (Somali Youth League) framework. Under such political platforms, SYL members constructed ideas, distributed roles, and designed strategies against colonial rule. While the Sayyid drew on top-down religious authority and traditional Somali culture, President Aadan Cabdulle Cusmaan relied on traditional horizontal Somali culture, administrative capabilities of participatory governance.

In addition, The President and his fellow SYL members considered Somali independence as an integrated part of a wider network of political system. They negotiated and aligned with diverse national and international constituents to undermine colonial infrastructures. In the end, the President and SYL movement succeeded in co-establishing an independent internationally respected Somali Republic. As an elder statesman, in 1991, the President- despite relieved on the demise of Somali dictatorship- alerted the public to the looming consequences of disorganized, visionless rebel-factions:

“It seems that people are happy with the fact that authoritarianism finally ended. But people who engineered this and those behind them should not bring chaos to society. Somalis, you cannot live and survive on clannism. It will only divide you. It will not bring you together. There are people who seek salvage on clannism. During my time in politics, there was the idea of “Soomaliyeey toosoo, toosoo isku tiirsada, hadba kiina taag daran taagera weligiin.” We need to return to that. To strengthen our relations. We should abandon clannism. I don’t seek the support of a clan. All Somalis are my relatives. All Somalis, regardless of constituent, respect me. Some even call me to return to politics. I told them, I am with you and among you, ready to assist- but I don’t want to rule again, I am not seeking the presidency. I was President in 7 years. Back then, I told Somalis to learn who is competent to lead them and then choose other leaders” (Part of an interview given by the President the BBC in early 1990s).  

Overcoming humiliation

Both the Sayyid and the President, though differently positioned, engaged with processes of transnational encounters and connections. The Sayyid, through his journeys in the Arabian Peninsula, understood the broader movements of international colonial resistance. In addition, his exposure to British arrogance when he travelled through Aden, Yemen and when he returned to the Homeland triggered not just resentment towards the British- but also an awakening to the illegitimacy of colonial rule.

For the President, humiliation occurred through concrete personal experience of the systemic racialized subordination administered and executed by the Italian fascists against the Somali public:  

“As a teenager, Osman keenly felt for the Somali plantation workers and the humiliation they faced under Italian rule. He and one of his Somali friends quit working on a plantation as a result of a conflict they had with white workers and their unfairness. The employer accused the two Somalis of stealing money, claiming that their salaries could not support the boys’ standard of living. The police rounded up the two in Merka without investigating the employer’s accusation. The white man’s justice was such that the two boys were kept in prison for fifteen days without trial. When the resident commissioner, De Rege, saw them, Osman vigorously contested the accusation. The officer slapped Osman for being too talkative in his self-defense and for challenging colonial superiority. The accepted norm among the Italians was that any one of them could attack the perpetrator of such a “crime”[v].

However, unlike the Sayyid’s resolute warrior approach against colonial intruders, the President’s generation remained ambivalent toward Europeans. While rejecting the colonial subjugation, they understood the ideals of fostering civic-oriented consciousness and co-existence. Strategically, they followed a system of bureaucratic rationality, where public discourse and negotiation replaced the immediacy of armed confrontation.

Though the political visions of the Sayyid and the President remain distinct in form and structure, their efforts expose certain commonalities. They both stress the idea of organized political leadership. Efforts that include education, inspiration, and mobilization of the wider society- in the pursuit of lasting dignity, liberation, and sovereignty. For the Sayyid, society consists of people collectivity organizing and forming tariqah and armed resistance. For the President, society represented a collection of a civic body and a living dynamic transformative culture. People who jointly highlight empowerment and self-empowerment. A society consciously and rationally mobilizing through modern institutions and inclusive discourse. This also includes the process of strategically strengthening internal cohesion, trust, and solidarity, while simultaneously dealing and collaborating with the outside world- and humanity at large.

Finally, the Sayyid and the President—though separated by time, form, and method- remain admired as national, transnational and historically situated political figures. Leaders that, on their own terms, rejected the subordination of Somalis and insisted on the politics of dignified society.

Dr. Abdulkadir Osman Farah
Email: osmanfaraha@gmail.com
——-

Dr. Abdulkadir Osman Farah teaches at Copenhagen University and is associate of Urban Sanctuary, Migrant Solidarity and Hospitality in Global Perspective with Aalborg and Ryerson Universities. Dr. Farah is also currently associate researcher of Tswane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa.

—- —–
[i] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auzi8tGZfLg [ii]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dervish_movement_(Somali)#:~:text=Hasan%20and%20his%20loyalist%20Dervishes%20moved%20into,an%20Italian%20subsidy%20and%20autonomous%20protected%20status.&text=Hasan%20retreated%20into%20the%20Italian%20Somaliland%20and,control%20of%20Eyl%20port%20by%20the%20Dervishes.
[iii] Cited in Affi, L. 2014. Guests in our own houses: Somaliland and British colonialism. In Self-Determination and Secession in Africa (pp. 95-103). Routledge
[iv] Kapteijns, L. 1996. ‘PROCLAIM TO THE PEOPLE’: FIVE POEMS BY SAYYID MUḤAMMAD ʿABDALLĀH ḤASAN OF SOMALIA (1856-1921). Sudanic Africa, 7, 25-34.
[v] Samatar, A. I. 2016.  Africa’s First Democrats: Somalia’s Aden A. Osman and Abdirazak H. Hussen. Indiana University Press.