 |
 |
 |
 |
| |
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
A little over a year ago, I published an article entitled “Peace in Somaliland is at the Fork of Ephemerality and Endurance”. In that article I discussed how the government, opposition parties and the Guurti are contributing in their own way to the collapse of peace in Somaliland. It is my belief that the political malaise forewarned in that article came to plague Somaliland, reaching a critical mass with the current face-off between the political parties. There are also new twists to the old parable of political decadence in Somaliland. While the Structure of governance – the parliament, the Guurti and the House of Representatives – and their respective roles, responsibilities and sphere of power has a lot to do with it, the standoff is also in large part a result of tribal politicization and opposition parties whose only aim is to attain power at any cost. As I stated in the aforementioned article, when people have peace, the natural conclusion is that development follows. Yet, Somaliland has accomplished nothing in the last 18 years. Neither the government nor the opposition parties have any plans to develop the economy, education, health care, infrastructure, agriculture and so forth. Yet, the average Somalilander is oblivious to the causes of their problem and their role in it. Tribalism and Democracy are awkward bedfellows. Democracy is normally defined as a system of government where power is vested in the people, who rule either directly or through freely elected representatives. This definition assumes a degree of rationality in the people with whom “power is vested” that they will earnestly look after the best interest of their affairs. Such rationality requires individuals to look at the issues that concern their life in an unbiased manner gauging the position of the various parties jostling for their votes based on their understanding of what is better for the interest of the individuals, their locality and the country in general. The loyalties of a person must lie with his/her interest, that of the locality and the nation. When loyalties are primarily tribal, democracy becomes a tool to brandish for the benefit of International donors and the Western powers. Tribalism is the deliberate organization and manipulation of the potent and oft intoxicating feeling of identity and loyalty to a tribe into a political front. Whereas democracy is a proponent of individual independence, tribalism confiscates it. National concerns are important only as far as they are valid to the interest of the tribe. Within the context of these competing ideologies – tribe and democracy – Somaliland lack three ingredients that are crucial to the implementation of democracy. 1. A fair composition and structure that could allow the existence of credible opposition parties. Despite the existence of laws enacting the existence of freedom parties, they are always at a disadvantage in terms of not only resources but also, most importantly, in terms of favors granted to the tribally inclined electorate. The opposition parties themselves are organized tribally and, thus, they usually exhibit the emotion, rhetoric and behavior of a tribe, literally pushing them into a corner but always on the look out for an opportunity to make a mountain out of a molehill. 2. A degree of uncertainty. Competing platforms of the government and the opposition and the voters’ rationality are the elements that will bring about such uncertainty. A charged tribal schism presents a predictable voter pattern. In spite of tribalism’s “shifting sand” syndrome where tribes can be persuaded, at the right price, to switch voting pattern, the outcome is very often predictable. Moreover, where the right price or prices of one tribe or more has been achieved, the competition turns ugly and dangerous as is happening in Somaliland now. 3. An electorate interested in what the government does for them and not who governs them. Rational voters, who are free and fair, bring governments into and out of office based on what it does for them. In a tribal society, the electorate is neither fair nor free. Blind allegiance to tribalism always overrides the interest of the individual, that of the locality and the country. Tribalism is not altruistic; it thrives on the zero sum game. The one tribe holding the aces at any given times takes all. That is where the problem comes in; the other tribes aim at reducing the “all” to an even “zero”. Notwithstanding the obvious dichotomy of tribalism, Somaliland willing chose to make it part of its governance structure. So did Somalia with the 4.5 formula and it will follow the same path travelled by Somaliland once peace in Somalia is realized. In Somaliland, however, the institutionalization of tribalism is dodgier owing to lesser tribal variety and thus, a monopoly of the political process by one tribe namely the Isaq. The claim to majority by the Isaq, though real in the overall numbers, paints a skewed picture. Any given tribe is a majority in its own region or locality, a fact that stands in stark contrast to the sense of majority known anywhere else in the world where a majority is a majority everywhere, compels Somalis to come up with an avant-garde system to share the political arena. Since the majority is not a majority everywhere, then there should be an alternative way of tribal representation in the various branches of the government. Not withstanding the uncertain numbers of the tribes, having witnessed the disastrous result of the past census in which regions (or read it also as tribes) ballooned their numbers beyond reason, it begs to wonder whether an alternative method of competition that may satisfy both tribalism and democracy has to be sought. One such unconventional method could be a regional (or tribal) rotation of the head of state. And because the perceived interests of tribes are seemingly antagonistic, a more balanced representation may buffer most of the current problems experienced by Somaliland. Not only that, the constitution of Somaliland also has glaring holes that need to be tidied up to avoid any future controversy. Such clauses include the definition of National Emergency, change to the powers of extension to the Presidential term of the Upper House (Guurti), and so forth. In addition to the representation disorder, there is also another more subtle but equally powerful tribal anomaly. The Somali word “tol” or “tolnimo” describes a more logical arrangement of human association where neighboring clans from different tribes group themselves into a political front. In this particular case, the West vs. the East in the politics of Somaliland has also a paramount impact on the politics. It might be argued that the West is reluctant to transfer power peacefully to the East and that the East is bent in getting it at any cost. It can also be argued with enough evidence that President Riyale is a barricade against imminent fallout between the Eastern Isaq clans and those on the West. On top of all of these onion-like tribal layers, sit the various government branches which themselves are a manifestation of all the incarnate qualities of tribalism and individual wants. The greatest impediment to development in African countries and especially Somaliland, happens here. Through tribal lobby, individual aspirations, friendship aggrouping , partiality to ‘tolnimo’ etc, etc Somaliland’s business of political abortions are conceived by the Upper House, the Lower House and the opposition parties. It is not surprising, if at this point, one feels or sees the Somaliland government as an informal entity struggling to wield its power through the same means that is pulling it down – tribalism. One of the principle characters of a state or a nation is the government’s ability to have a monopoly on the use of violence (this phrase can be misleading. It means the government is the only entity that can have the ability to use force). Nevertheless, the recent outbreak of hostilities and the sub-human murders of the travelers by the residents of Gabiley clearly points to the fact that tribes are competing with the government in that respect. To make matters even worse, the mediation by the Upper House seemed to add fuel to the fire when it struck a totally lob-sided mediation committee from which one of the feuding clans was excluded. The Ceel Bardaale episode has precipitated the current malfeasance and will continue to play a tune that may have repercussions beyond any government’s ability to deal with it. If one looks at the list of the Guurti mediation members, they are the same ones that voted against the last Presidential extension. Despite its seemingly innocent outlook, it speaks volumes about the politicization of tribal sentiments through land claims and the intentional creation of an atmosphere of “Emergency”. Now, whether this particular issue is fomented by the government or by the Opposition is any body’s guess but it is clear that Somaliland is tinkering with fire. Checks and balances in government are essential not only to the legitimacy of a government but also to the perception of the people that fairness is being accomplished. Yet, in the face of ardent tribalism, the concept of fairness itself becomes hard to define. The result is confusion in which the only prevailing power is the tribal deck of cards and he who holds the aces wins the game. It does not really matter how you get the aces as long as you have them. Incidentally, peace is the usual casualty and the victim, in this unfortunate saga, is the society – the same society that allows the politicians to use them as an ace willingly martyring themselves for the arrogance of a clan and the ignorance of a politician. Nur H. Bahal We welcome the submission of all articles for possible publication on WardheerNews.com |
