|
A formal recognition of
the self-declared independent state of Somaliland in the Horn of
Africa would be just in principle and a boon to the region and the
continent, says Jawahir Adam.
The news from Somalia is dominated by gloomy reports of war and
refugees, guns and suffering. Few, if any, discuss the remarkable
self-declared independent state of Somaliland. As the Union of
Islamic Courts seeks Somaliland's unification with Somalia,
international recognition of the territory's claim to independence
is needed more than ever, to secure a rare African success story.
Somaliland was once an independent state: the former British
protectorate achieved independence on 26 June 1960 and was
immediately recognised by thirty-three countries including the
United Kingdom and the United States. After five days, on 1 July
1960, Somaliland voluntarily joined Somalia, a United Nations Trust
Territory under Italian administration, which itself had achieved
independence that same day, and together they formed the Somali
Republic.
At that time there was support in Somaliland to create a "greater
Somalia" that would include a number of distinct territories with
varying histories: the then British Somaliland; French Somaliland
(now Djibouti); the former Italian-dominated Somalia (most of
today's Somalia), the Ogaden (Ethiopian-controlled, the spark of war
between the two countries in 1997, and now the fifth region of
Ethiopia); and what came to be called the Northern Frontier District
(NFD) of Kenya. These had all been created by the European colonial
powers during the Berlin conference which partitioned much of Africa
in 1884-85.
Somaliland and Somalia formed a union of the two independent
territories through their elected representatives. Interestingly,
however, the legal formalities were not fully completed, and the Act
of Union, prepared by the legislative assembly of Somalia, was not
sufficient to make the union legally binding. This means it remains
without legal validity today. Furthermore, since the two territories
had been individual colonial states for over sixty years, they had
already grown independently, with distinct institutions, history and
even culture.
Once partial unification was achieved, the territories'
dissimilarities gradually became clear, though peace and stability
continued until 1969, when a military junta led by Siad Barre, took
over. His twenty-one-year rule was punctuated by crimes against
humanity and massacres in Somaliland - which some observers say
amounted to genocide - helping to provoke the collapse of the merger
in 1991.
An overwhelming majority of the people of Somaliland voted, in free
and fair elections, to withdraw from the union with Somalia, and
declared an independent state on 18 May 1991. Somaliland has since
implemented democracy with a multi-party system. It has also been
stable and peaceful. Yet its request for independence has just about
been ignored by the international community. Today, it is
complicated further by the struggle for power between the Union of
Islamic Courts (based in Mogadishu, and controlling much of the
south of Somalia) and the transitional government (based in Baidoa).
Will Somaliland have to be threatened by full-scale war for anything
to happen?
The case for recognition
The case for recognition is strong. There are three main
justifications. First, Somaliland was recognised as an independent,
sovereign state within the colonial borders that existed on 26 June
1960. (Though the issue of the border with Sool and East Sanag
region, which is disputed with Puntland, has yet to be resolved and
requires negotiation. It is certainly hurting Somaliland's quest for
recognition.)
Second, Somaliland's case is not a cessation of a land area
incorporated in a sovereign state, but a voluntary withdrawal from
the union between two countries that were once separate sovereign
states.
Third, there are international legal instruments that support
Somaliland's quest for recognition. In particular, Somaliland
satisfies the two critical elements of statehood:
Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of
States (1933) defines qualifications for statehood as follows: (1) a
permanent population; (2) a defined territory; (3) government and
(4), capacity to enter into relations with other states
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN general
assembly in 1948, specifically declares rights of citizens to resist
human-rights violations. This underpins the legitimacy of citizens'
rebellion against oppression, such as the opposition which caused
the collapse of the state of Somalia in 1991.
Unfortunately, the key players refuse to admit the possibility of
statehood. One of them is the African Union (AU) - the successor to
the Organisation of African Union (OAU) - based in Addis Ababa. The
AU position is to respect the territorial boundaries that existed on
independence from the European colonial powers: soon after the AU
was formed, one of its first resolutions was to put a freeze on any
kind of border alternations, declaring them "sacrosanct".
Ironically, that is exactly what Somaliland is seeking - respect for
its borders that existed on its independence from the European
colonial powers. Its pursuit of sovereignty is perfectly consistent
with the African Union's position. Yet the AU's position with regard
to Somaliland is contradicted by its consent to the separation of
other African nations that were once united - Gambia and Senegal
(joined in a "Senegambian Confederation", 1982-89), and Ethiopia and
Eritrea (joined 1952-93).
The issue is one of practicality as well as principle. As the
conflict between the Islamic Courts and the transitional government
has developed in 2006, concern about the future of Somaliland has
grown. In May, the International Crisis Group urged the African
Union to examine Somaliland's situation. Its report, "Time for
African Union Leadership", pointed out the urgent need for the AU's
intervention in the dispute between Somaliland and Somalia and
warned of the consequences of inaction. The ICG recommended, inter
alia, that - pending a final resolution of the dispute - Somaliland
should be granted interim observer status at the AU.
Africa's challenge
Somaliland has taken a number of steps that demonstrate all the
attributes of an independent state. It has a functioning
constitutional democracy where the president, the parliament and the
local councils are elected through a process of fair and free
elections. On 31 May 2001, 97% of Somalilanders voted for
independence. It also has its own currency, passports, a vibrant
private sector, functioning and profitable airlines, and excellent
relationships with its neighbours.
The continuing denial of Somaliland's recognition by the
international community could result in yet another catastrophe on
the African continent. There are four possible scenarios:
civil war with the Islamists. If the latter advance north as far as
Somaliland, this may result in an exodus of refugees, millions of
internally-displaced people and the further destabilisation of the
entire Horn of Africa. (At the same time, Somalilanders would
fiercely resist an attempt to end their independence, as they did
when they defeated Siad Barre's strong army)
continuing non-recognition of Somaliland's sovereignty. This would
demonstrate the international community's denial of economic
empowerment and development, and give an impetus to poor governance,
corruption and instability in Somaliland. The current lack of
recognition acts as an impediment to receiving international
reconstruction and development aid, as well as to bilateral
agreements with governments and the international financial
institutions such as the World Bank and IMF
a combination of civil war and non-recognition that leads to a
collapse in democratic government
recognition of Somaliland as a peaceful corner of Africa with one of
the continent's few democratically elected governments.
The fourth, and my preferred, scenario would bring stability,
prosperity and a vibrant state with much to offer. Its continuing
progress on developing the private sector, democracy and human
rights (particularly those of women) makes it a model for other
African states.
The window of opportunity for recognition remains small. The dangers
of a wider conflagration that would consume Somalia are being
fuelled as the revolutionary Islamists receive support from Eritrea,
Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other states, while the Somali government is
aided by Ethiopia, Yemen, Uganda, and others. This is increasingly
becoming a regional as well as a "domestic" issue.
Yet the core principle remains: Somaliland fulfils all the criteria
that international law stipulates for the attainment of statehood.
The international community, particularly the African Union, should
no longer ignore Somaliland's quest for recognition. It is in the
interest of Africa, as well as the rest of the world, to have an
independent state that is stable and free of anarchy, with a viable
economy and a functioning constitutional democracy.
By: Jawahir Adam
Jawahir Adam is a public-relations and conflict-resolution
specialist who now works for MHC International, Geneva
|
11:00 GMT
