A tale of two cities: Peaceful Hargeysa, violent Mogadishu

By ABDULKADIR KHALIF

Special Correspondent

One inescapable fact about the Horn of Africa is that Hargeysa, the capital of the self-declared Republic of Somaliland, is peaceful, while its sister city Mogadishu, the constitutional capital of Somalia, is in a state of permanent anarchy.

It is no surprise then that lately, American academicians and political writers have taken to writing endless analyses as to why such a reality prevails in the Horn of Africa region, expressing their opinions as to what they would like to see happen.

Dr Michael A. Weinstein, who writes eloquently for PINR, reported: “ Somalia completes its devolutionary cycle.” He came to the above conclusion upon realizing that the great revolution realized by the Islamic Courts Council (ICC) in Somalia was destroyed by the Ethiopian intervention. In December 2006, when the ICC fighters were overpowered and chased out of Mogadishu.

According to Dr Weinstein, the ICC revolution has been succeeded by devolution. This means Somalia is heading towards further fragmentation, marking the end of what was once the Somali Republic.

Another commentator Dr J.Peter Pham, who holds various titles at universities and higher learning institutions in the United States, expresses his dissatisfaction with US policy towards Somalia. He says he has been before the US Congress several times to explain the futility associated with trying to help Somalia regain its lost statehood.

Dr Pham says advantages linked with recognizing the breakaway Republic of Somaliland (it declared independence from the rest of Somalia in May 1991).

Dr Pham laments the lack of action by the US Congress and the Bush administration, despite his repeated call for Somaliland’s recognition. He calls for America’s elected leaders to have the “vision and fortitude to recognize Somaliland.” Such writings may cause excitement in Hargeysa, but not in Mogadishu.

Mogadishu is the constitutional capital of Somalia and the power centre of an entire nation. That is why when the city was ruled by unruly warlords, the whole world spared no energy in trying to offer them a series of opportunities to talk and to sort out their differences.

Energy and resources have not spared to reconcile the differences between the Mogadishu groups in the 13 years since the collapse of the dictatorial regime of Siyad Barre in 1991. An average of one major reconciliation conference per year was held either in Djibouti, Addis Ababa, Nairobi, and Cairo or even in New York in the presence of top UN diplomats and then UN Secretary General Dr Boutros Boutros Ghali.

Little attention was paid to Hargeysa all this time, despite the authorities there appealing for recognition. Drs Weinstein and Pham have not explained why successive US administrations under George Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush followed similar policies towards Hargeysa.

According to Aidarous Hassan, a Mogadishu based academician, the greatest failure Somalis relates to power sharing. “That power — to hold Somalia together — is not in Hargeysa (Somaliland) or in Garowe (the capital of the self-declared autonomous state of Puntland) or anywhere else in Somalia,” he said, “By virtue of being the capital, it is in Mogadishu.”

Ahmed Ali, an engineer and resident of Yakshid district in Mogadishu. “When the warlords were chased from Mogadishu by the fighters of the Islamic Courts, the clergymen that led the movement became world renowned overnight,” said Ali.

“The bearded men, some of whom engaged in petty trade, selling oil and honey in the open air Bakara market, suddenly assumed statesmanship with a galaxy of foreign diplomats wanting to talk to them over the phone, and expressing the wish to meet them.”

All of a sudden, the whole world started begging the ICC leaders to reconcile their differences with the internationally recognized but weak Transitional Federal Government (TFG). Their leverage was that they were based in the capital, Mogadishu.

When the religious men turned down the power sharing suggestions, they paid for their insolence, especially when they provoked powerful neighbor, Ethiopia by proclaiming Jihad (holy war). They were hounded out of Mogadishu.

Now the world is clearly dividing the various political actors in Somalia as the TFG on one side and its opponents, on the other. The opposition is in turn divided into the non-violent and radical groups, making the game very clear.

For the international community — read the US and its cronies — to be considered pro-TFG, individuals and groups have to comply with a number of set conditions. First, recognize the Transitional Federal Charter, renounce or condemn violence, and then become either a part of the TFG or stay independent as genuine opposition.

Therefore the Transitional Federal Charter with its 71 articles is primarily endorsed by Somalis who believe that a federal system will protest against repetition of abuses by the central authority that were so frequent during the dictatorial rule in the 1970s and 1980s.