Don’t drink the Kool-Aid: Resist Ethiopia’s new assault on Somalia’s sovereignty

By The Editorial Board

On January 22, 2014, at a ceremony in the western Somali city of Baidoa, Lt. Gen. Silas Ntigurirwa placed the African Union’s green berets and marching armbands on the heads and arms of the Ethiopian officers to confirm their inclusion in the continental body’s peace mission in the country.

Given the ages-old animosities between Somalia and Ethiopia, the AU decision outraged Somalis, forcing Former President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s administration to publicly defend it. From now on, its argument went, the Ethiopian forces — who illegally and continuously crossed into the Somali territory and killed and maimed civilians with complete abandon — would be held accountable for any abuses they commit inside the country.

That tactic, however, turned out to be a bunch of malarkey and pure fantasy because Ethiopian forces continued to roll into the country whenever they wished, killed civilians and overlorded Somalis on their own soil. Ethiopia, it turned out, has used the AU insignia to legitimate its hitherto illegal presence in the country. Since that decision, Addis Ababa brought in thousands of soldiers that are not part of the AU mission or accountable to anyone.

On Saturday, President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed Farmajo repeated the same blunder of his predecessor when he and Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed went overboard and disclosed a tectonic shift in the relationship between Mogadishu and Addis Ababa. The leaders agreed to, as a stepping stone, “fully” unite the economies of the two nations before finally merging them into a one state.

Ethiopian Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff Fitsum Arega called the agreement “a new chapter” and “ a vision of a single market.”

Under the deal, Ethiopia will take shares in four Somali ports, Mogadishu and Addis Ababa will remove economic and trade barriers, each country will open consular offices in major cities of the other and the two nations will jointly build key roads to link their people.

As usual, Somali leaders were quick to spin lies to vigorously defend a dud deal that – if implemented – could leave Somalia’s sovereignty in tatters, blow its territorial integrity to smithereens and disadvantage its people in the long-run because poor Ethiopians will flood the virgin Somalia.

“There is no country better positioned than Ethiopia to benefit from peaceful and stable Somalia,” Farmajo said gleefully in a press conference with Ethiopian Prime Minister Ahmed in the Blue House.

Farmajo ticked off a long list of things that connect the two nations: Long borders, blood, ethnicity, culture, security, politics and economy.

“There is a need for a visionary leadership in our two countries to harness such strong bonds that already exist for the interest of the people of our two countries,” Farmajo said, ignoring the deal’s dicey content that disregards the heroism of thousands of Somali soldiers and ordinary citizens who lost their lives to resist Ethiopia’s occupation of their lands in 1977 and 2006-2009.

Ethiopia couldn’t wish for a better deal. In deed, Addis Ababa, whose leaders have never made a secret of their desire to annex Somalia, got what it always wanted to have: A legally sanctioned presence in Somalia that would make it easier for it to pour in thousands of soldiers to take over the country. The text of the deal — at least the copy released by Farmajo and Ahmed — is so broad that it lacked caveats that can stop Ethiopia from doing anything it wishes in Somalia. In its current version, the deal gives Addis Ababa the liberty to send its army to Somalia, post soldiers at Somali ports or set up coastal guards and navy along the country’s coastlines — all without violating the deal.

Giving landlocked Ethiopia access to Somali ports will emasculate the country’s strategic national security interest, which is to have an edge over Addis Ababa, at all times. Somalia’s seas shouldn’t be bartered for anything. They’re the nation’s trump cards. Somalia is dooming its people if it provides a lifeline to a country that still occupies its land.

The joint communique by the two nations offered little specifics, which in itself demonstrates Somali officials’ unwillingness to come clean on the granular details of the deal. Its wording illustrated our decision-makers’ lack of vision and far-sight and how really far-removed they’re from the public’s concerns and the nation’s core interests.

The only benefit of the deal, though, is that it has exposed the true color of President Farmajo, the erstwhile nationalist who before coming to power pledged to restore the country’s pride and glory, but now has done a 180 on the very Somali self-government. His unpatriotic behavior and submissive leadership have already made him the target of ridicule among the public that once celebrated his victory.

In his public statements, President Farmajo, much to Somalis’ annoyance, heaped praise on Ethiopia and arrogantly skewered the critics of the deal. His insensitive visit to Ethiopia just days after the announcement and Premier Khayre’s possible tour to the UAE, another nemesis, have further aggravated the public.

President Farmajo has time and again proved incapable of diving into the psyche of his citizens who have been plumbing the depths of indignation and indignity since the deal was revealed. Somalis are gobsmacked. They can’t believe that their arch foe, Ethiopia, is going to rule the roost.

During his one-year and four-month-old reign, President Farmajo has disappointed many who bought his initial pledges of putting the nation’s interest first. His biggest letdown came when he authorized the handover of a Somali national, Abdikarim Muse Qalbi-dhagah, to Ethiopia. Somalis, who at one time applauded him, are now very critical of his stewardship and second-guessing his patriotism and fidelity to the country’s constitution.

Farmajo’s agreement with Ethiopia was not only morally repulsive, it was a political suicide, and one doesn’t need to look into a crystal ball to know that. Somalis who once saw him as a kindred spirit now feel betrayed. They thought those days of meeting with foreign officials in secret locations to cut dubious deals were long gone.

Somalis habitually loathe two things: Foreign occupation and self-doubting leader. Because they treat their wonderful country — as they say in UK — like gold dust that the whole world wants a piece of it, but is hard, very hard, to get it.

Farmajo lied to the public when he passionately talked of a “blood” relationship between the two countries. Yes, Ethiopia is a neighbor, but a hostile one for that matter. Somalis share no ethnicity or culture or religion with Amharas, Tigrayans and many other ethnic groups in Ethiopia. Unlike Ethiopians, Somalis – even those living under the Ethiopian occupation — don’t eat raw meat or tattoo their gums black. Nor do they sport scarification on their body or practice lip plating.

Unless President Farmajo is conniving with Ethiopia, which is a part of many nations that are wishing Somalia harm, it’s hard to understand why a man who was once seen as the hope of the country could approve such a deal. What is even much harder to understand is how did the Somalia government, with all its legal brains and resources, fail to detect and confront Ethiopia’s malevolent intentions buried inside the text of the deal. Who has given the president such a bum advice to serve up the country on a plate? President Farmajo owes the public a proper explanation.

If Farmajo, a fool’s gold, thinks that Somalis will accept an Ethiopian subjugation on their lands, he is in for a rude shock. If he drank the Ethiopian Kool-Aid, he shouldn’t try to gaslight the public into acquiescing to his out-and-out monkey business.

Somalis are not ready to throw up their hands in despair and remain silent. They’re determined to force this fantasizing downer to face a taste of their never-say-die mentality. To Somalis’ minds, it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for Ethiopia to conquer their proud and unpredictable nation. And history proves the validity of this argument. Didn’t Ethiopia turn tail when it invaded Somalia in 2006.

The Farmajo-Ahmed agreement has shown our leaders’ disrespect for the views and concerns of the public. It’s past time that we, Somalis, took Ethiopia’s existential threat to our nation seriously and declared Addis Ababa a hostile neighbor till it changes its bitchy policies toward us.

Ethiopian forces massacred thousands of civilians and displaced hundreds of thousands of others during their occupation of Mogadishu between 2006 and 2009.

In 2007, the U.N. Monitoring Group accused Ethiopian forces of using phosphorous bombs that killed about 35 civilians as well as 15 al Shabab fighters.

The attack that took place during a battle between al Shabab and Ethiopian forces on April 13, at Shalan Sharaf, in the Shirkole area of Mogadishu, “lightened the whole of Mogadishu” and “melted” its victims, while turning the areas’ soil white, witnesses told the UN, which said that “the use of this type of weapon was not an isolated incident.”

A year later, in 2008, Amnesty International said Ethiopian troops committed war crimes in Mogadishu, including slaughtering people like goats, gouging out eyes and gang-raping women. Ethiopian soldiers raped a 17-year-old girl, and when the girl’s brothers tried to defend her, the soldiers gouged their eyes out with a bayonet, said Amnesty International, citing Haboon, a witness who was the raped girl’s neighbor. Ethiopian soldiers also slit the throat of a young Somali child in front of his mother, said the rights group, decrying that no one was held accountable for those crimes.

If President Farmajo doesn’t seem to care about the pain of the Somalis brutalized by Ethiopian soldiers or the bereaved families or the suffering of those maimed during the struggle to liberate Mogadishu, we, Somalis, should care and never forget Ethiopian atrocities against Somalis.

Despite Farmajo-Ahmed’s dog and pony show, Ethiopia and Somalia are enemies and have never fully reconciled after years of enmity and several wars. There is little trust between the populations of the two nations. For eons, each country dinned endless messages of hatred into its population.

Any deal with Addis Ababa should, as a start, focus on addressing Somalis’ grievances. The two nations must build trust first and put their painful past behind them second before they rush into untenable economic and security deals.

Somalis are particularly angry at Ethiopia’s never-ending interferences in their country. They see Addis Ababa’s Embassy in Hargeisa, the main city in the northwestern region of the country, as violation of their sovereignty. They chafe at the 19 percent stake Ethiopia took in the port of Berbera without the knowledge or consent of the central government. They are bitter about Ethiopian Airways’ regular flights to Hargeisa when the carrier has no similar flights to the nation’s capital. Addis Ababa’s continuous hospitality to the warlords who call themselves as the presidents of regional states infuriates many. And above all, Ethiopia’s occupation of the Ogaden region and oppression of its inhabitants incenses Somalis.

Instead of raising these key sticking points with Ethiopia, the Farmajo-Khayre administration ceded more grounds to Addis Ababa. President Farmajo also glossed over the fluid political and security situations in the country, perhaps, to project strength when Ahmed’s bespectacled eyes could easily see Somalia’s debility.

There is no hiding the reality that Somalia is in the middle of vicious wars that stunted its recovery efforts. The country is grappling with rogue politicians who turned the nation into clan-based fiefdoms that are backed by Addis Ababa. Mogadishu is dangerous for everyone, including government officials. Al Qaida-linked militants of al Shabab control most parts of the southern and central regions. Worse still, the lifeblood of the central government is the African Union force whose presence means the difference between a state of utter chaos and relative peace and law and order.

In this dystopian Somalia, it’s meaningless to reach an economic deal with another suffering country that is already selling off shares of its most successful companies to raise cash to pay its massive debt. The deal couldn’t have come at a more propitious time for Ethiopia.

But the best antidote to Farmajo’s turncoat conduct is the public to remain vigilant. By rejecting policies that are deleterious to the nation’s well being, Somalis can foil any attempt by Farmajo and others of his ilk to auction off the country.

It is now patently clear that our leaders are not psychologically, politically and intellectually fit to defend the nation’s interests. Somalis, being always the last line of defense, should reject President Farmajo’s capitulation to Ethiopia under the guise of economic integration and thwart Addis Ababa’s new assault on the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Somalis have to keep in mind that the Farmajo-Khayre administration had already signed reckless deals, such as the African Continental Free Trade Area agreement and the Protocol on Free Movement of Persons and the African Passport. Nigeria and South Africa, the biggest economies in the continent, opted to stay out of the two accords. Why Somalia did sign off on them is mind-boggling.

Somalia should, in effect, stop signing any future common market or military deals up until it stamps out the terrorists and takes full control of every inch of its land. It shouldn’t accept the Intergovernmental Authority on Development’s new push to open borders of member states. Quit the IGAD bloc if that serves the nation’s interest.

At The Star, we’re not against foreign investments. No, we’re not. But we’re against any investment that inhibits Somalis from realizing their full potential. The country is yet to fully recuperate from decades of civil war. It doesn’t have the manpower and resources necessary to compete with ruthless foreign countries and mighty companies whose only interest is to suck our resources dry.

We won’t rule out speculations that Addis Ababa is a mere front for a big power and the United Arab Emirates, whose insatiable interest in ports around the world is well-documented, is just playing the role of facilitator. (Abu Dhabi’s Crown Prince, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed, was in Ethiopia a day before Ahmed came to Mogadishu. Zayed announced a $3 billion of aid and investment to Ethiopia, one billion of which will deposited in the National Bank of Ethiopia to fix that country’s foreign exchange crisis. )

Whether Ethiopia is the UAE’s face or not, it’s clear that Somalia is a victim of a geopolitical competition over the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea. The whole deal has the hallmarks of a typical trade war between the world’s major powers – and circumstantial evidence abound.

Ethiopia was never known for entrepreneurship and soft power to begin with. It’s a poor, military state of about 100 million people that doesn’t have the financial muscle to invest in four ports in Somalia, much less other ports in Sudan, Kenya and Djibouti. The International Monetary Fund said in May that Addis Ababa is at “high risk of debt distress.”

According to the Financial Times, Ethiopia’s nearly $25 billion debt (at 59 per cent of its GDP) and the increasing shortage of foreign currency have forced China to scale back its investment in the country, already a member of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries, which are qualified for debt relief by the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and other multilateral, bilateral and commercial creditors.

Ethiopia’s own sovereignty will be at a major risk in the near future: If it fails to repay its debts when they mature, it has to ask for bailout or sell off its family silver or lose assets to its lenders, mainly China, India and other international financial institutions, as happened to Sri Lanka. This country took a $1.5 billion loan from China to build a strategic port on the Indian Ocean, but when it failed to repay it, it handed over the port to China on a 99-year lease.

Currently, Ethiopia spends $1.2 billion each year to pay its debt, and many of its debt-financed projects that were expected to generate revenue are under-performing, further raising the risk of default.

“Unless Ethiopia remains aware of the actual state of external loans and shores up the ailing export sector,” said The Addis Fortune, an Ethiopian weekly, in 2006, “it risks becoming what Greek became to Europe – mismanaged and unable to meet the basic social needs of its vulnerable citizens let alone become the respected voice within the region.” The title of the Editorial was “Ethiopia mortgaging future with external debt.”

Despite that warning, Addis Ababa continued to borrow more, digging itself into a bigger hole. Saturday’s grenade attack at a rally in the capital that killed two people and injured dozens will only worsen the country’s economic instability because jittery investors will be much leerier of putting their money in a nation fraught with tensions.

President Farmajo has admitted that both Somalia and Ethiopia didn’t have the gobs of cash required to jointly invest in four Somali ports. In their agreement too, Farmajo and Ahmed talked of retaining and attracting foreign investments to the two countries.

The million-dollar question, then, is: Why can’t Somalia itself seek fund from donors to invest in its ports or attract a moneyed country instead of bringing debt-ridden Ethiopia onboard?

Countries that are interested in Somalia should first help it establish itself before burdening it with agreements that can’t realistically be implemented on the ground. It’s dismaying that the world’s major powers are yet to learn lessons from their previous boners.

In 2006, the US supported Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia, but the upshot is now a weakened   Ethiopia that is on the cusp of chaos and disintegration. If history is any guide, Ethiopia won’t survive any new invasion of Somalia this time around. But Somalis will, as they did for more than two decades of lawlessness — Somalia has been the graveyard of invaders.

The fancy words of “peace” and “prosperous future” ring hollow in Somalia, which is neither peaceful nor prosperous.

The Ethiopian Premier Ahmed was right when he said: “I believe Somalis will build a strong and purposeful country. After all, Somalia is one of the world’s most homogeneous nation state. You share the same language, the same religion, the same culture and the same ethnicity. You’re brothers and sisters.”

But his call for “full regional integration” only deserves contempt because it’s unrealistic in the current Somalia context. Somalia is a nation of 12 million people that is abundant with natural and human resources. It can’t countenance an exodus of foreigners to its land.

With all the ills bedeviling Somalia, it can’t afford to introduce new problems. Somalia shouldn’t fling its doors open to foreigners, especially at a time when nationalism and protectionism are rising in the world. Tanzania is a member of the East African Community, but bars citizens of member states from buying its lands.

The Somali parliament should play its watchdog role and interrogate officials who are involved in this disgraceful deal, which, for all intents and purposes, is a cover for unthinkable Ethiopian occupation. Lawmakers should demand that details of the Somalia-Ethiopia deal be made public for scrutiny. The Blue House should know that the swelling public anger toward the deal can’t be cured through cover-ups.

The new speaker, Mohamed Mursal Abdirahman, should prove to the public that he is not a stooge of the Executive and get to the bottom of this agreement. Lawmakers, who’re known for feathering their own nests, should, this once, carefully study the agreement and go further and dig up past agreements signed by previous governments to make sure that there are not inimical to our nation’s interests. They should also introduce an immediate moratorium on all new agreements until Somalia’s political and security situations stabilize.

Somali leaders should always safeguard the nation’s interests, at all costs. For, each nation cares more about its future and interests. Why not us?