11–16 of 16 posts
For those planning a trip there, Wikivoyage has good information, as usual: https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Somaliland
yikes
found on marginal revolution: https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/31/opinion/31iht-edmyers.1.1... an opinion piece by Pete Butigieg on Somaliland from 2008. Gives you an interesting perspective on his past experiences and foreign policy stance. (Also is a bit shorter than the guardian article but still gets the point across about Somaliland) My take on the situation: when you're a small country you're just a pawn for the…
From the article : >"Every member of Parliament in Mogadishu gets a salary paid mostly by U.S. and EU funds," one Somaliland official told us. "And every one of them is a killer. If you kill enough people, you are called a warlord and you get invited to conferences. Meanwhile, I was elected by thousands of votes in a free election, but the international community does not consider us a country. They should be rewardi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the article : >"Every member of Parliament in Mogadishu gets a salary paid mostly by U.S. and EU funds," one Somaliland official told us. "And every one of them is a killer. If you kill enough people, you are called a warlord and you get invited to conferences. Meanwhile, I was elected by thousands of votes in a free election, but the international community does not consider us a country. They should be rewardi…
What possible benefit does the US and EU get from paying these people’s salaries? I understand the real Politik aspect - they’re now “owned”, to be perhaps a little crude, by the powers paying them - but what does the arrangement get the US and EU? Asked a different way, what would happen if we stopped paying them?
"“The US Department of State warns US citizens to avoid travel to Somalia because of continuous threats by the al-Qaida affiliated terrorist group, al-Shabaab.” But once you’re there, you quickly realise that such warnings are unnecessary. Hargeisa is one of the safest large cities in Africa, and, aside from the pollution and the traffic, there’s not too much to be concerned about when you’re walking around, although foreigners travelling outside the capital have been required to hire an armed guard since the killing of four foreign aid workers by bandits in 2004. "
Oh, it's totally unnecessary for those ridiculous US Consulate warnings! Just make sure to hire armed escort when you're outside of town, that's all! Just like Vermont?
Editorialism aside, it's unfortunate that the author doesn't really get unto the weeds on they kinds of problems that ensue from these kinds of issues.
Africa is, in almost it's entirety, made up of quasi colonial borders, power is tenuous everywhere, populism entails AK's and Machetes, and there are serious consequences.
The 'rest of the world' is mostly 'dammed if they do, dammed if they don't' because in many cases recognition of independent states would be more direct 'colonial intervention' than anything.
What do the 'other Somalis' think of Europeans taking away the richest 1/2 of their country?
Will the 'other half' immediately invade and start a civil war?
How will other African leaders react?
The 'rest of the world' has probably done the right thing here in deferring to African nations themselves to make that decision. In the interim, it seems pragmatically they are recognised in many ways in their statehood at least to the extent they are left alone and not antagonised. In another 20 years if the situation is the same, they just might have more legitimacy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What possible benefit does the US and EU get from paying these people’s salaries? I understand the real Politik aspect - they’re now “owned”, to be perhaps a little crude, by the powers paying them - but what does the arrangement get the US and EU? Asked a different way, what would happen if we stopped paying them?
We pay them money so they stay in power and don't get usurped by other killers, namely the Islamic groups that want to kill Americans. Right now the warlords just kill other Africans, which the U.S. government considers a win, sadly. Its a foreign policy based on the idea if we didn't support these warlords, other groups that kill Africans AND Europeans will take power.
The Islamic killers kill more Africans too. Boko Haram are killing far more Somalis than they are Americans or Europeans. It is cynical, but it's probably not (on balance) morally wrong to support the opposition, god knows BH and friends get plenty of foreign support from our favourite Islamic customer in the middle east and others, so it's not as though the Americans are the only ones corrupting the failed state there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the article : >"Every member of Parliament in Mogadishu gets a salary paid mostly by U.S. and EU funds," one Somaliland official told us. "And every one of them is a killer. If you kill enough people, you are called a warlord and you get invited to conferences. Meanwhile, I was elected by thousands of votes in a free election, but the international community does not consider us a country. They should be rewardi…
What possible benefit does the US and EU get from paying these people’s salaries? I understand the real Politik aspect - they’re now “owned”, to be perhaps a little crude, by the powers paying them - but what does the arrangement get the US and EU? Asked a different way, what would happen if we stopped paying them?
In the end, maybe they came to the conclusion that it's better to buy peace with money than to deploy US/EU troops ( now there are African Union troops in Somalia assisted by US units).