By Osman Hassan
A Kenya journalist by the name of Gitau Warigi wrote an article in the Daily Nation of Kenya on 22 November 2015 entitled “Somalia is taking Kenya too much for granted for her own good “. In making his points, Mr Warigi has pulled no punches to be disdainful towards Somalia, its government and people. His opening shot is to put Somalis in their place as he sees it. With Somalia in mind, he says that “some failed States reach a point where they become a joke”. As if that is not an affront below the belt, he continues to pile on more: Somalia’s behaviour as a neighbour, he adds, has became “increasingly loony” to “understand her position in the scheme of things”. Even if we have to concede, with our hands on our hearts, that there is an element of truth in Somalia becoming a “joke” among nations for remaining dysfunctional for over quarter of a century, all the same, his gratuitous derisive antics will not win him his bones of contention with Somalia if that is his intention.

Withdrawal of Kenya forces from Somalia
One of the issues that has clearly enraged the journalist is the demand of the Somali Parliament for the withdrawal of Kenya’s AMISOM contingent from Somalia, an action he refers to as ” more comical than serious”. Why? Because Somalia as a failed State is not sovereign as he sees it, and secondly it has no say in the matter as Kenya’s defence forces (KDF) in Somalia are answerable only to AMISOM and not to Somalia. AMISOM, he claims, is a creation of the UN and AU and as such cannot be disbanded without a resolution from the UN Security Council. So, love it or loathe it, Somalia has to put up with the KDF on its soil.
While he is right that Kenya’s KDF are not directly answerable to the Somali Government, that does not mean it cannot get them out of its territory. Needless to say, it was subject to the concurrence of Somalia, as an independent member country of the AU, that AMISOM peacekeeping forces from contributing countries came to Somalia. Kenya’s KDF entered Somalia, not as part of AMISOM, but through prior invasion to capture and occupy part of Somalia under the pretext of fighting al Shabaab. And it was with a view to legitimising its occupation and saving money that its forces simply changed hats and put on that of the African Union’s AMISONM peace-keeping forces – this time with the consent of the Somali government.
As such, the current internationally recognized government of Somalia, could demand from the AU, if it so wished and in line with its sovereignty, the withdrawal of any specific AMISOM contingent if it considers their presence in the country incompatible with their mandate, or not conducive to the interest of Somalia. The AU would have no choice but to oblige, for how else can peacekeeping forces remain in a hosting AU member country against the will of its government?.
There is nationwide objection to the presence of KDF in Somalia given their illicit trade in charcoal in Jubaland in collusion with al Shabaab. This is not “loony” fabricated accusations by Somalia but the independent report from the UN Monitoring Group on Somalia and Eritrea and now corroborated by the recent report ( Black and White – Kenya’s Criminal Racket in Somalia) by Kenya’s own Journalists For Justice (JFJ). Not only that, but as the JFJ report confirms what we in Somalia already know, Kenya’s land and air forces have committed atrocities and widespread human rights abuses on numerous occasions against the civilian Somali population in Jubaland. Either the journalist is ignorant of these facts, but more likely expects Somalia to be meekly passive in the face of KDF’s crimes.
The Land Boarder Wall
Another issue which the journalist finds it difficult to understand is why Somalia should question “Kenya’s sovereign right” to erect a 700 km-long wall along the boarder between the two countries. Clearly, he fails to understand the underlying problems with the wall. The first is that Kenya, taking advantage of Somalia’s relative weakness and preoccupation with its internal problems, is creating unacceptable facts on the ground. In this case, they are using security needs as a pretext to establish a new border, shifting it further inside Somalia. This amounts to territorial aggrandisement in all but name.
But even Kenya if wall is along the border demarcated by the colonial powers of Britain and Italy, it still poses unacceptable consequences. For one thing, it would keep apart the same people on both sides of the border often belonging to the same sub-clans. When other countries, similarly exercising their sovereignty, erected similar abominable walls, all justified in the name of security, as was the case with the Berlin Wall erected by the defunct East German Government thereby dividing the German people, or Israel’s Apartheid wall (as the Palestinians call it), separating the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, each action led to widespread international outrage. The Kenya wall should be no exception.
But the third problem with the wall is much more serious than the first two. The people in the North East Region of Kenya and those across the boarder in Somalia are mainly pastoralists who belong to the same clans artificially divided by colonial conquest. In this arid region, sometimes with frequent draughts, the nomads in the NE Region of Kenya had been able to survive until now by moving unhindered to the Somali side in search of grazing and water. The erection of the wall, and preventing these people access to their traditional grazing and watering areas in Somalia in times of draught would mean condemning them to certain famines.
Kenya may not care about their fate, and indeed that is manifest from its history of massacres and oppression of Somalis in the NE Region. But no country can remain indifferent to the suffering inflicted on their kith and kin in another country even if the perpetrator is technically exercising its sovereignty. Parallels can be drawn from elsewhere. For Ethiopia to starve the Egyptian nation by unilaterally denying them the free flow of the waters of the Nile, invoking its sovereignty, or for Egypt to close the Suez Canal to other countries, would both represent existentialist actions for one country or others and could lead to justifiable war. Somalia should not be expected to turn a blind eye when its maritime and territorial integrities are being violated and crimes against humanity committed against their own kith and kin across the boarder.
The Maritime border
The third issue which irked the journalist is Somalia’s action to defend its maritime rights and, in the face of Kenya’s predatory claims, take its case to the International Court of Justice in The Hague – an action which he finds “absurd”. If it is so absurd, and Kenya is sure of its case, what was the need to bribe corrupt Somali officials to secure a secret hurriedly-drawn Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that would make the maritime border favourable to Kenya but a sell-out to Somalia?, Since Somalia lodged its case with the ICJ, why all the desperate efforts by Kenya’s Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Ms. Amina Mohamed, to cajole her Somalia counterparts to withdraw their case from the ICJ and accept direct negotiations between the two countries? Or the need for their Attorney General to wade into the fray and give his judgement in favour of Kenya as if he was the judge on the matter? There is undignified panic and hysteria on the Kenya side, indicative of losers. There is nothing “absurd” about Somalia to exercise its sovereignty and demand the withdrawal of Kenya’s KDF from its territory, or to defend its territorial and maritime rights.
Who is taking who for granted?
If there is one thing Somalia is grateful to Kenya, it is for hosting Somali refugees in its territory since 1991. And here, Somali leaders never miss an opportunity to express their gratitude to Kenya and pledge their commitment to have the refugees back home once the situation in Somalia is conducive to their return, rehabilitation and sustainable livelihoods. Otherwise, what else has Kenya done for Somalia that it takes “for granted for her own good” to merit ridicule and threats as implicit in the journalist’s headline? He got it wrong and it is Kenya that takes Somalia “for granted for her own good”.
Start with the economic relations between Somalia and Kenya and it is almost all in one direction in Kenya’s favour. In terms of trade, Kenya earns millions of dollars a year from exporting its lucrative destructive drug (Qat) and other goods to Somalia with no imports worth mentioning from Somalia. Inside Kenya, the hard-working Somali business community, bringing in their own money, play a key role in Kenya’s commercial sector, in particular Nairobi, generating thousands of jobs and paying millions of dollars in taxes to public finances. Somali residents, mainly North American and European citizens, bring much needed capital to the country contributing also to the economy and employment.
Apart from the undeniable environmental degradation impact of hosting refugees, the Somali refugees are not a financial burden on Kenya but indeed contributors to the economy. Whether they receive support from UNHCR or not, most receive remittances from their relatives in the diaspora. Their expenditures needless to say nourishes the economy. The Dhadhaab refugee camp, much maligned by Kenya, contributes much to the economy of the NE Region which has been left in abject underdevelopment by successive Kenya Governments since independence.
Apart from hosting refugees, Kenya’s treatment of ethnic Somalis in its territory since its independence irrespective of their citizenship has been worse than what Kenyans themselves experienced under the cruel British colonial rule that led to the Mau Mau uprising. Worst treated are Somalis in the NE Region who have known nothing else but massacres, oppression and abysmal underdevelopment and marginalisation since independence. As for foreign passport-holding Somali residents, refugees or business community in Nairobi, they are on the one hand milked both by the State and police but otherwise subjected to daily persecution, arbitrary detention and deportation even when they are Kenyan citizens. Eastleigh, known as little Mogadishu, typifies the status of Somalis as second class people. Despite its considerable contributions to the treasury and employment, it gets little in return in terms of services. Squalor, open sewages and uncollected refuse pile up in the streets representing great health hazard. These grim realities do not represent hospitality meriting gratitude unless one is talking in Orwellian double talk.
There is much that unites Kenya and Somalia. And if both countries would focus on this, but more so Kenya as the present dominant party (given Somalia present struggle with its own internal problems), it would be to their mutual benefits. Unfortunately, Kenya is engrossed in its current temporary political and military advantages as if it will last for ever and unscrupulously taking advantage of Somalia when it is defenceless and leaderless. It has yet to dawn on Kenya’s political elite that the emergence of a strong united Somalia is inevitable and only a matter of time which make any temporary gains at Somalia’s expense in the meantime unsustainable in the future.
For now, almost all the negative actions poisoning the relations between the two peoples are coming from the Kenya side, and Somalis, whether in Kenya or Somalia, have been on the receiving end. That is a sure recipe for future conflict which is in no one’s interest. Neither country should take the other for granted for their own good.
Osman Hassan
email: osman.hassan2 @gmail.com
————–
Osman Hassan is a seasoned journalist and a former UN staff member. Mr Hassan is also a regular contributor to WardheerNews.