 |
 |
 |
 |
| |
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
I read an article named, “Is Puntland sabotaging and blackmailing Sheikh Sheriff Government?” (authored by Aden Mohamed Ismail and published on Hiiraan on 17 November, 2009) Well the author chooses to put his view on the title in a question form. In addition he used two negative verbs projecting the subject as a horrible criminal, where as the term used is a name of a territory, which defines particular social group. In a universal sense these two verbs are recognised as criminal acts. So they are well chosen words, intended to have a long term negative political effect. On the other hand the object is personalised and even specifically named and portrayed as a victim. In my point of view it is an intentional move to create a political split between the territories and their institutions, which are nominally still recognised and interconnected as the Federal Republic of Somalia. Furthermore the concept is to portray Puntland as an entity working towards the fall of the Federal government because it is headed by Sheikh Sheriff. What an absurd thinking? We are all aware that the only regional administration that fully stands behind this present administration is the Puntland State of Somalia. Not agreeing on some issues in principal does not mean that Puntland administration turned its back on this Federal administration led by Mr. Shermarke the prime minister. On the other side another author writes over the same topic. But let us see his title, “Somalia – Why Somali government and Puntland state of Somalia fail to agree?” (authored by Omar M. Farah (Dhollawaa) and published on Allpuntland on 22 November, 2009) I do believe analysing these two titles could show and enable the broader public not to fall into the trap of the very few pouring flammable ingredients into the already deteriorated social, economical and political environment of the Republic. Literally this title allows the reader to see the matter objectively and discover where the two actors fail to agree without becoming judgemental. It gives the two parties find a common ground to enquire what unites them rather than what divides them. Let’s now go beyond the first title and see some of the thoughts mentioned in the article as well as the terms used. We are aware that Puntland developed a regional constitution, in which they did underline that their administration is fully part and parcel of the Federal Republic of Somalia. In addition they chose a parliamentarian system and gave the title to their head of regional state “president”. In that aspect it goes without saying that anyone speaking about the head of that administration to use the specific term giving to that position. I find it strange that the author of the named article uses the term “governor”. I do assume that it is not a lack of knowledge to do so but an intentional step to devalue the head of the regional state of Puntland. Mr Aden should know better because any federal state has its own way of naming the heads of the different territories co-opted into the federal system. A good example is the Federal Republic of Germany. Each state has it’s own parliament and they name their head of state the “Minister President”. I am sure Mr. Aden will not call the head of a “Nordrhein-Westfalen Bundesland” (one of the states within the Federal State) the governor. Well furthermore the United States of America is composed of over 50 states and they call the head of each state a governor and not a minister-president. Therefore it was the decision of the Puntland state of Somalia to call the head of their administration the “President”. It seems as was mentioned in the other article, I quote, ..So far, unblushingly and publicly, the Transitional Federal Government’s Minister of Information Mr. Dahir Geelle has told to VOA Somali program that the Puntland leader has claimed to be a ‘President... It seems that there is some sort of commonality between the minister and Aden, when he avoids using the right title for the President of the Puntland State of Somalia and the Federal minister negating the title giving to Mr.Abdirahman M. Mohamud Faroole. If we leave that point aside and go into the way the walk out has been outlined and described by Mr. Aden then it will be clear for every reader what his intentions are? Mr. Aden informed us that the head of Puntland State of Somalia was escorted into the meeting by non-Somali Bodyguards. He did not mention who escorted the president of the Federal Republic of Somalia into the meeting. The reason is simple. Mr. Aden wants to paint a picture that the poor president of the Republic is a victim and his subordinate the head of a regional “governor” (to use Aden’s term) hired foreign Body-guards underlining his superiority over the President of the Republic. Furthermore the picture is completed when he mentions the content of the discussion and the cause of the walk out. According to Mr. Aden the cause of the walk out is that the president of Puntland State of Somalia demanded material support meaning money, while he the President of Puntland State of Somalia is in a position of hiring foreign Bodyguards. Mr. Aden is either ignoring the fact or he is intentionally misleading the public. The question is not whether The Federal Administration has fund or not to support the regional administration. But it is the principal of the Federal Body to share what comes in whether it is material or non-material foreign assistance intended for the whole republic. In addition to that the two bodies namely the Puntland State of Somalia and the Federal Republic of Somalia agreed and signed upon others that the Transitional Federal Republic of Somalia should enhance the development of the already peaceful regions in the country. (see Omar M. Farah) I am not surprised that some members of the Transitional Federal Administration are not yet ready to accept due to their personal interest the idea of federalism within the country. In conclusion I would like to appeal to all Somali people when writing over issues concerning the well being of our beloved country not to be polemic and destructive, but be courageous and bring a value-free - to use Max Weber’s term - thoughts that could enhance the social, economical and political development of our people and country. Ahmed Mohamed We welcome the submission of all articles for possible publication on WardheerNews.com |
