.Et-SL MoU: Threat to .So sovereignty & regional stability

Historical context: Which way to the sea?
Ethiopia has been landlocked and has sought a sea outlet intermittently for most of her history, at least since the Middle Ages. In 1776, Edward Gibbon, a renowned English historian, wrote: β€œEncompassed on all sides by the enemies of their religion, the Ethiopians slept near thousand years, forgetful of the world by whom they were forgotten.”6 Moreover, encouraged by the scramble for Africa among rival European powers in the nineteenth century, Emperor Menelik II of Ethiopia intensified his search for access to the sea. In 1878, in a letter to the heads of the governments of Italy, France, Germany, and England, he stated, β€œMy road to the coast, to Zeila, Tojura, and Aden is at present closed by the Muslims.”7

Before 1952, when Eritrea (a former Italian colony on the Red Sea) was federated with Ethiopia, the eyes of Ethiopia’s leaders were fixated on the Eritrean port of Assab and the Somali port of Zeila, both on the Red Sea.8 Menelik’s efforts ended in failure. However, Emperor Haile Selassie, who ruled Ethiopia from 1930 to 1974, relentlessly sought to gain sea access. In a letter to the United Nations in 1948, he wrote: β€œPrior to the race of European powers to divide up Africa, Ethiopia included an extensive coastline along the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.”9 Haile Selassie tried to annex Zeila, a historical Somali port town, to Ethiopia between the late 1920s and early 1950s. To secure Zeila, he initiated a radical strategy of negotiating colonial power to exchange the Haud region for Zeila, which the current MoU is said to be centered
on, and which is adjacent to Djibouti. Haud is a large swath of Somali territory and has been part of present-day Ethiopia since the Anglo-Ethiopian treaty of 1897 when Britain ceded it to Ethiopia for the latter’s support in suppressing Somali clans.10 That attempt failed, primarily because, based on strategic interests, the colonial powersβ€” particularly Britain and Ethiopiaβ€”failed to reach an agreement. There was also fear of repercussions from Somalis in those areas.11


Recommendations
For Somalia:
  • It is imperative that Somalia actively assert its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Enhanced engagement with Somaliland is necessary, acknowledging the deep-seated aspirations for secession among some segments while aiming for a resolution that respects the collective will of all Somali people. Discussions should be approached with a vision for unity that accommodates diverse aspirations through inclusive governance, potentially offering broad autonomy to Somaliland. This approach would address fears of marginalization while preserving national unity and promoting cooperation.

For Somaliland:
  • Somaliland needs to recognize that not all communities within its territory support secession. Negotiations should be guided by realism and pragmatism, aiming for an agreement that addresses Somaliland’s legitimate concerns while acknowledging the benefits of a united Somalia. This requires moving beyond the zero-sum mentality that has prevailed over the last thirty years.

For Ethiopia:
  • Ethiopia’s demand for β€œsea access” does not justify infringing upon the sovereignty of another nation. Ethiopia is a landlocked country, and demanding territorial waters, a naval base, and a commercial port that belong to another country is an act of aggression. This could result in a prolonged conflict with Somalis both within Somalia and in the diaspora, as well as within Ethiopia itself. History has shown that Somalis have defended their territory against Ethiopian advances, notably forcing a retreat in 2006. Further, any attempt by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed to cross into Somalia could significantly bolster al-Shabaab in a manner reminiscent of the group’s emergence following Ethiopia’s previous military ventures, which ended in failure.

For the International Community:
  • The international community must extend beyond mere affirmations of Somalia’s territorial integrity to actively discourage any actions that threaten Somalia’s sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity. A firmer stance against Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s aggression is required, one that emphasizes the need to respect international laws and norms. Diplomatic pressure, along with offers of mediation and support for dialogue, should be pursued vigorously, as heightened nationalism and fear have created a conducive environment for conflict.

For All Parties:
  • International organizations such as the United Nations, African Union, Arab League, and Intergovernmental Authority on Development must recognize that the Memorandum of Understanding, as it stands, risks igniting an avoidable and unnecessary war. Such a conflict would likely result in the exponential and overnight metastasis of al-Shabaab, the largest and most resourceful Al-Qaeda affiliate in the Horn of Africa, and in the growth of ISIS, which has a foothold in Somalia. A cloud of war is hovering over the Horn, presenting a clear and present danger that necessitates action, not mere affirmation.

 
Recommendations
For Somalia:
  • It is imperative that Somalia actively assert its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Enhanced engagement with Somaliland is necessary, acknowledging the deep-seated aspirations for secession among some segments while aiming for a resolution that respects the collective will of all Somali people. Discussions should be approached with a vision for unity that accommodates diverse aspirations through inclusive governance, potentially offering broad autonomy to Somaliland. This approach would address fears of marginalization while preserving national unity and promoting cooperation.

Somalia will offer Somaliland broad autonomy in a deal that will be reneged the moment Somalia feels strong enough to muscle the situation. Thanks but no thanks.

Southerners don't do powersharing or good governance.

That's the reason the independence movement exists.
 
Last edited:
In a nutshell, there is a shifting regional balance:
  • Somali Republic is slowly rising from the ashes, subsequently
    • SL is losing its footing with more than 60% of its claimed territories out of its control.
  • .Et is disintegrating with its three core States (Tigray almost destroyed, Amhara on fire, and Oromo on the brink) in conflict with the Federal government.
    • The longer the conflict progresses, the more diminished its regional influence, the weaker its political currency, the greater the threat it poses.
Said shift is vexing respective corrupt leaders, which gives way to their being unhinged, and thereby destabilising the entire region.
 

attash

Amaan Duule
Somalia will offer Somaliland broad autonomy in a deal that will be reneged the moment Somalia feels strong enough to muscle the situation. Thanks but no thanks.

Southerners don't do powersharing or good governance.

That's the reason the independence movement exists.
This isn't a new concept. If Puntland and Khaatumo are comfortable having this sort of deal with the federal government, I don't see why you shouldn't be.
 

Garaad Awal

Former African
In a nutshell, there is a shifting regional balance:
  • Somali Republic is slowly rising from the ashes, subsequently
Absolutely delusional, there is no rising occurring.
    • SL is losing its footing with more than 60% of its claimed territories out of its control.
I didn’t know Eastern Sool & Eastern Sanaag is 60% of SL landmass. Again nonsensical delusional statements from you
  • .Et is disintegrating with its three core States (Tigray almost destroyed, Amhara on fire, and Oromo on the brink) in conflict with the Federal government.
The same state occupies two provinces in Somalia and you are nowhere near capable to remove them while their salaries are being paid by the EU under the ATMIS project which will continue to self-renew every few years
    • The longer the conflict progresses, the more diminished its regional influence, the weaker its political currency, the greater the threat it poses.
Said shift is vexing respective corrupt leaders, which gives way to their being unhinged, and thereby destabilising the entire region.
Ethiopia has gone through many cycles of civil war to once again rise back to a powerful centralized state, they have a long history of centralized rule.

Xamar though collapsed in the late 80s/early 90s and has never recovered since.Somalia also has never had a history of being a centralized state. It’s an Italian colonial project gone wrong and isn’t a natural state.
 
I didn’t know Eastern Sool & Eastern Sanaag is 60% of SL landmass.

Ethiopia has gone through many cycles of civil war to once again rise back to a powerful centralized state, they have a long history of centralized rule.
Trouble is you are trying to engage in a conversation with which you are not privy to its inner workings, sadly for you though to be remotely in the circle, you must witness in close proximity as to the rising, as if an aspiring sous chef hovering over his nightly dough. See, the SSC-Khatumo Admin, Makhir, Awdal, and G36 territories, once claimed by SL, are well beyond its reach or influence, but then again, a bogan squatting in Ayeeyo's dingy cellar would be non the wiser as to the said reality.

Oh de facto pamphleteer of the Habashas, eh? Your forefathers would be so proud of you.
 
Ethiopia has gone through many cycles of civil war to once again rise back to a powerful centralized state,
What? Ethiopia was never centralized though. It was a feudal empire for the longest time that often vassalized its holdings. Its been trying to centralize since Haile Selassie's era which ended in failure every time. Ethnic federalism is just the natural end point since thanks to the rise of nationalism, there is no way everyone will allow themselves to be ruled by a single group.
 
In a nutshell, there is a shifting regional balance:
  • Somali Republic is slowly rising from the ashes, subsequently
    • SL is losing its footing with more than 60% of its claimed territories out of its control.
  • .Et is disintegrating with its three core States (Tigray almost destroyed, Amhara on fire, and Oromo on the brink) in conflict with the Federal government.
    • The longer the conflict progresses, the more diminished its regional influence, the weaker its political currency, the greater the threat it poses.
Said shift is vexing respective corrupt leaders, which gives way to their being unhinged, and thereby destabilising the entire region.

This is you lol.

 

Trending

Latest posts

Top