By Dr Aweys O. Mohamoud
The context for this debate was, wittingly or unwittingly, set by Dr. C. Kani Torun @torunkani’s tweet on ‘Somaliland independence’ a few days ago. Dr. Torun was a former Turkish Ambassador to Somalia and would, no doubt, have had firsthand experience of Somaliland secessionist claims and counterclaims.
The way I want to do this is to start with @torunkani’s tweet to be followed by the Somaliland independence protagonist @SaeedDhegarog’s response to @torunkani to be followed by my response to @SaeedDhegarog. @torunkani has one tweet, the first tweet. @SaeedDhegarog has four tweets and a table about history in response to @torunkani and to myself @AweysOMohamoud, and I have four tweets, all in response to @SaeedDhegarog. Each tweet (X-post) will start with the twitter handle of the tweeter.
Somaliland’s independence is not realistic in terms of ethnicity, religion sect and language. There is no difference between Somaliland and other parts of Somalia on above criteria. There is only one difference which is clan and federalism would perfectly suit. If every clan gets an independent state, Africa would have more than 500 states. However, main problem with Somalia-Somaliland issue is Mogadishu. If Mogadishu solve political and security problems for other parts of Somalia, Somaliland would not have strong case for independence. So blaming Somaliland doesn’t help, let’s make Mogadishu works.
Somalis in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Djibouti should also be part of Somalia for they share with us “ethnicity, religion sect, and language.” This question was decided by OAU in Cairo in 1964 when it “SOLEMNLY DECLARES that all Member States pledge themselves to respect the borders existing on their achievement of national independence.” SL achieved its national independence on 26 June, 1960 as the State of Somaliland with an internationally recognised borders, days before the State of Somalia was even independent, let alone sovereign. You are 61 years late with this post.
You seem not to be familiar with the opposite argument which is as follows: the claim that Somaliland regained its sovereignty and independence from Somalia on May 18th, 1991 would have been straightforward 1) if there are no large or disgruntled minority groups within the former British Somaliland and 2) if the territory claimed by the former British Somaliland as a whole was occupied by the great majority of those who wish to leave. Unfortunately, it is difficult to see these optimum conditions applying to Somaliland, anytime soon.
Simply put, you ought to know that in a democracy issues are voted on and the majority vote is what ultimately counts as long as it doesn’t infringe on the civil and human rights of the minority. Keeping the majority hostage isn’t one of the rights of the minority. In 1961 when the constitution of the Somali Republic was voted in a referendum, the majority in Somaliland rejected it. However, the constitution was ultimately ratified for the majority in the Somali Republic so wanted. This is no different. The majority in Somaliland decided to withdraw from the failed de facto union and regain its sovereignty. In every referendum on any issue, some endorse it while others reject. Majority vote is what matters.
Here’s what you said: “Simply put, you ought to know that in a democracy issues are voted on and the majority vote is what ultimately counts…” If only it was that simple! The key problem here is ‘the principle of self-determination’ you asserted. I don’t know how much you know about it, but this problem has given rise to multiple civil wars across history and geography. You have the example of what happened (still unresolved) in more recent times between yourselves and northern Harti Daarood. You claim ‘the majority vote is what ultimately counts’! Really? Did you know that the claim of ‘a majority for self-determination’ begs the question of a majority in what region? We’re not talking here about different groups of people (clans) mixed together in the same region. Somali people (north, central or south) live by clan geography. And here’s the nub of the argument: we’re talking here about land-mass and who occupies where? So the question is ‘what is the relevant territorial unit in which you should exercise self-determination?’ And, related to this is the issue of ‘domino effect’!
The more you insist on asserting ‘self-determination’ for yourselves, the more domino effect it produces whereby the other groups in the same land you’re claiming will also seek self-determination for themselves (mainly in the form of reunion with Somalia). And, finally, imisa ayay idinku qaadaneysaa inaad daaroodka woqooyi tirisaan (oo marka hore ay idinka aqbalaan inaad adinku tirisaan, idiinna aqoonsadaan inaad tihiin awoodda kaliya ee xaqa iyo sharciga u haysata tirintooda iyo jaan-goyntooda – you count them), halkaasna aad ku xaqiijisaan, dunida oo dhanna tustaan, inay yihiin dad laga tira badan yahay (minority), sidaas darteedna ay u hoggaansamaan go’aanka mustaqbalkooda siyaasadeed, dhaqaale iyo nololeed jaangooynaya ee aad idinku usoo gaarteen? 20 sanoo kale? 30? 50? 100? Imisa ayay idinku qaadanee? I’d say this is a very hard case to sell but, at the point where you’re now, you can’t dispose of it without being prepared to face extreme psychological and emotional difficulties. Yet the huge cost of it, particularly that of maintaining the lie, is out of proportion to its usefulness. Have a nice evening.
Somaliland’s case is not solely based on self-determination but also on history, legality and African principles establishing statehood, especially as it pertains to the inviolability of colonial borders. As per OAU border resolution AHG/Res. 16(I), the OAU “SOLEMNLY DECLARES that all Member States pledge themselves to respect the borders existing on their achievement of national independence.” The State of Somaliland had its own distinct, internationally recognised borders in 1960 when it gained its independence. This necessarily distinguishes Somaliland from breakaway or secessionist cases as its statehood is rooted in history & African foundational laws, unlike separatist movements breaking away from countries they have historically been part of.
Somaliland has never been part of Somalia. Rather, the independent States of Somaliland and Somalia attempted to create the Somali Republic, a new Sate different from both. However, that union was never “ratified and malfunctioned when it went into action” as per AU’s fact finding mission in 2005, making Somaliland’s case “unique and self-justified.” Now regarding the size of the Dhulbahante & Warsangeli, the Somaliland population estimate by Britain in 1944-1951 puts them 19 % of Somaliland at that time. Absent a new reliable estimate or census, it’s fair to assume they are also now 19% of the modern Somaliland. Given this, do you suggest that a tiny minority should dictate the majority’s fate? That would of course be irrational. In a democracy, the majority rules while respecting minority rights. I’d suggest a minority threatening bloodshed if it doesn’t get its way is utterly misguided. Regarding regions and territories, neither the Dhulbahante nor Warsangeli are a majority in any region in Somaliland. Sool is divided, and so is Sanaag. If a referendum becomes necessary, I am sure reliable international organisations & third parties like UN, EU, US, and the like can conduct it to preserve its integrity. Fear-mongering has no place in this discourse.
Sorry, I’m slightly late with this one! You claim that “Somaliland’s case is not solely based on self-determination but also on history, legality (etc.) …” Well, about self-determination, first. I presume you’ll accept that your view of self-determination is not shared by the rest of the Somali people in the region (non-separatist clans) who see their right to self-determination as part of the larger Somali people’s right to freedom based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination among all nations (as per Article 1(2) of the UN Charter). History is in the past and the past, as the saying goes, is ‘no man’s land’. But the history you’re talking about here is the history of British imperialism and colonialism who (in the view of non-separatist clans) perpetrated acts of oppression, violence, and divide and rule against the Somali people in the region. Finally, you talk about the legality of your case (Somaliland’s case) but the rest of the people in the north see secession and separatism as illegitimate. Legitimacy refers as to whether something is perceived as fair, just and appropriate. The rest of the Somali people don’t see your campaign for secession as fair, just and appropriate. Here’s the nub of the problem.
While legality or law may provide structure and guidance for society, they can’t directly influence emotions, beliefs, or personal convictions of people. The human heart is a realm of its own, shaped by experiences, culture, and individual perspectives. It’s where compassion, empathy, and love reside—things that go beyond legality or history. I’m afraid focusing on winning the hearts and minds of the people is the only game in town in Somaliland as elsewhere, wherever you need a transformational change. The question of course is which argument (unity vs. separation) can persuade a majority of people in Somaliland so that you have their minds, and which argument (unity vs. separation) can inspire a majority of them so that you win their hearts. But argument and reason can only function in a context where appealing to the intellect and emotions of the people is the only legitimate political course of action accepted by everyone and no group can resort to prevailing through force of arms or superior force.
Perhaps this is my final response as I think the debate is going nowhere at this point. You say “But the history you’re talking about here is the history of British imperialism and colonialism who (in the view of non-separatist clans) perpetrated acts of oppression, violence, and divide and rule against the Somali people in the region.” Unfortunately, every colonial master has perpetrated unspeakable atrocities not only against Somalis but other Africans in the continent too. I do not dispute this. However, how does this change the fact that the OAU decided to stick with colonial borders at independence? At best this is an emotional argument. It doesn’t change AHG/Res. 16 (I) which was freely endorsed by more than 2/3 of the African Heads of States in 1964 in which they committed to colonial borders at independence. They could have decided otherwise, but they haven’t. This is the law. It’s not a colonial law imposed on the Africans, but one they freely decided to stick with. Fairly or unfairly, this is law that the two of us can’t change even if we don’t like it.
Regarding legitimacy, the ultimate decision again lies with the majority. Every state has a disgruntled minority, but this is why democracy is majoritarian, not minoritarian. As of today, the most legitimate form of government is democracy. Look at the Scotttish referendum of 2014. More than 44 percent voted to leave the UK—that’s a big percentage. Why is Scotland still part of the UK? Because 55% decided to stay. This is why a democratic vote is the most legitimate. Hence why I suggested another referendum can be had in Somaliland by reliable third party organisations. What solutions do you suggest other than that the minority keeps the marjoty [sic] hostage in your imagined dictatorship or your impossible 100% unanimity is reached?
Finally, what I found most interesting in the discourse I had with @SaeedDhegarog and other secessionists in the past is that their arguments, what they think are their strongest claims, their best myths and symbols all point to the past – British Somaliland, and there is little confidence or appetite for looking at the present or embracing a future that includes the people they want to take with them, the non-separatist Somali clans, to their never-never land. The British Empire was, and remained until the 1960s, part of a global system, but that system lost its political and moral force, and is gone forever. The minute the separatists realize and accept this, the better it will be for the Somali people in the region and beyond.
Dr. Aweys Omar Mohamoud
Email: aweys6@aol.com
Leave a Reply