The crisis resulting from the signing of a memorandum of understanding between Abiy Ahmed, the Prime Minister of Ethiopia, and Muse Bihi, the President of the separatist Somaliland, has sent shockwaves throughout the Horn of Africa. The memorandum was signed on January 1st, 2024, through which Ethiopia will obtain a strategic corridor of 20 kilometers in the waters of the Gulf of Aden, a commercial port, and a naval base for its maritime forces. In return, Ethiopia commits to recognizing Somaliland as an independent state and giving it a share of Ethiopian Airlines.
The roots of the memorandum of understanding lie in the populist and personal approach adopted by the Prime Minister of Ethiopia, Abiy Ahmed, in domestic politics and foreign relations; in response to the challenging internal issues facing Ethiopia. Similarly, the President of Somaliland, Muse Bihi, is navigating through complex political waters, aspiring to prolong his stay in power amidst growing opposition and his failure in the war with the Khatumo region located in the eastern part of historic Somaliland.
Deep political, economic, and social crises plaguing the people of these leaders have driven them to seek unconventional solutions to their complex internal crises. For Ethiopia, the quest to establish a passage in the Gulf of Aden represents a strategic move to secure safe maritime access, reduce reliance on Djibouti and Eritrea for maritime trade, a dream Ethiopia, a landlocked country, has harbored for some time.
At the same time, Somaliland has long sought international recognition as an independent state. The failure of Somaliland, which separated from Somalia in 1991, to achieve international recognition, and the lack of tangible results from negotiations with the federal Somali state have led to Muse Bihi viewing the memorandum of understanding as an opportunity for Somaliland to achieve this goal through Ethiopia. Bihi’s readiness to engage in such an agreement reflects the severity of the internal challenges facing Somaliland, including political instability, economic difficulties, and social tensions.
The desperation of the leaders of Ethiopia and Somaliland in finding political solutions to their internal problems has driven them to explore non-traditional tactics and ventures that align with the aspirations of their electorates and divert attention from internal crises.
It is undeniable that Ethiopia has violated the unity and sovereignty of Somaliland by signing this memorandum of understanding, and the strained Ethiopian-Somaliland relations necessitate shedding light on six points indicating the negative effects of the memorandum of understanding. Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed needs to reevaluate and restrain his intentions regarding annexing parts of Somaliland’s territories, enhancing cooperation and mutual prosperity in the Horn of Africa region instead.
- Fomenting Oromo Nationalism Against Somali Nationalism
Somalis have undergone a transformation in their vision of Greater Somalia, intending to unify the five parts of the Somali population divided by colonial powers: (Britain, France, Italy, Ethiopia) during the nineteenth-century scramble for Africa.
Rather than continuing the pursuit of unifying all Somali-inhabited regions in the Horn of Africa, they have adopted a new perspective on regional integration to preserve their current gains. This shift has allowed Somali residents in Ethiopia, Kenya, and diaspora communities to actively integrate into the societies and nations they find themselves in.
However, redefining Somali nationalism does not mean ignoring the unity of the mother state, Somalia, especially when faced with external threats or challenges imposed by neighboring countries.
Complex Interactions
In times of such risks, Somalis, regardless of their geographic locations, can unite and take collective action to safeguard Somalia’s territorial integrity and sovereignty. Therefore, it is essential to note that while the new approach emphasizes global integration and interconnectivity, there remains a sense of Somali identity and solidarity in times of crises.
On the other hand, Oromo nationalism relies on the prevalent discourse among Oromo elites and nationalists who portray the Oromo people as systematically oppressed under Ethiopian rule.
In expressing Oromo nationalism, these elites and nationalists assert that the Oromo people have long suffered from suppression and marginalization under Ethiopian rule. Their perspective is rooted in the belief that the relationship between Oromia and Ethiopia is irreconcilable, prompting them to advocate for radical solutions such as establishing an independent Oromia state.
As Oromo nationalism continues to evolve and influence political dynamics within Ethiopia, the complex interaction between self-determination, regional security, and the broader issue of national identity remains at the heart of their political discourse.
Both the Oromo and Somali communities belong to the Cushitic cultural group, with the Somali state traditionally supporting the Oromo liberation movement in its struggle against the oppression of the highland residents in Ethiopia. Instead of strengthening this deep-rooted relationship, Abiy Ahmed has incited Oromo nationalism against sympathetic Somali nationalism related to the historical Oromo cause.
Therefore, strong opposition is strongly recommended to this disastrous policy led by Abiy Ahmed, despite the opposition of the Oromo Liberation Front to the Somali cause. A peculiar aspect of Ethiopian politics is that the opposition in Amhara, Oromo, and Tigray decried Abiy Ahmed’s signing of the memorandum of understanding and supported Somali regional unity and statehood.
- Inciting Religious War in the Horn of Africa
The Somali people in the Horn of Africa are predominantly Muslim and have embraced Islamic values and principles since the 1960s, expanding their influence over Muslims in Ethiopia, including the predominantly Muslim Oromo population in the country.
Commitment to Democratic Pathway
The common bonds among Muslims in the region are strong, and many Islamic movements have opted for peaceful methods to effect change within their societies. Notably, the integration of the Islamic movement in the Somali region and others has become an integral part of Ethiopian society.
Similarly, the impact of Islamic ideology within the Somali Republic is evident in social, economic, and political realms. Interestingly, despite their significant influence, many of these Islamic groups have chosen democratic means to bring about societal changes and refrained from resorting to violence.
This shift towards non-violent approaches is manifested in these groups’ commitment to the democratic process. However, it is essential to acknowledge an exception to this trend, as seen in Al-Shabaab and ISIS, which deviated from the broader non-violent path. These groups opted for armed conflict and actively engaged in war against the Somali state and the greater Horn of Africa region.
This deviation from the predominant peaceful approach highlights the complexity within the Islamic sphere of the area and reveals differences in strategies and ideologies among various groups seeking to preserve the Islamic identity of the Somali society.
Abiy Ahmed, rooted in Islamic culture, born to a Muslim father and a Christian mother, practices Christianity in his fifties, and his inner circle belongs to the Christian Oromo elite. The Somali expectation was that he would be more friendly with Somalis due to their ethnic background and his hybrid religious and cultural upbringing.
The Ethiopian modern ruling elite has always been Christian, and Somalis have viewed any war with Ethiopia as a conflict between Muslims and Christians, a concept rooted in the medieval wars of attrition between Muslims and Christians in the Horn of Africa. Therefore, Abiy Ahmed must avoid inciting religious war that energizes extremist groups like Al-Shabaab and ISIS, giving them a fresh recruitment opportunity and new justifications to remain in the region, especially as they face defeat against Somali government forces supported by friendly nations.
- Reviving Somali-Ethiopian Historical Sensitivities
Studying contemporary historical conflicts between Somalia and Ethiopia reveals a consistent pattern where Ethiopia emerged victorious in both diplomatic and military arenas, despite the gallant efforts of Somalis in battlefields, benefiting from support extended by allied foreign nations.
This success can be attributed to portraying Somalis as violators of entrenched international norms and laws, especially in their quest for a Greater Somalia. As a result, the aspiration for unity did not gain global momentum, as the international community viewed Somalia as opposing established international norms.
Shifting Power Balance
A compelling example of this dynamic appeared in the 1977-1978 war between Somalia and Ethiopia when Somalis initially secured control of a significant portion of the contested territories. Nevertheless, Ethiopia ultimately triumphed through a massive and direct military intervention supported by the Soviet Union, East Germany, Cuba, South Yemen, and other socialist regimes. Other nations viewed Somalis as violators of Ethiopian sovereign territories.
This foreign support shifted the balance of power in favor of Ethiopia, emphasizing the strategic importance of international alliances in shaping the outcomes of regional conflicts. Currently, the perception is reversed, with Ethiopia being seen as the aggressor violating established international standards regarding the sanctity of sovereign regional unity.
This perspective has received widespread support for Somalia in various regional, sub-regional, and international forums, with all united against what is viewed as Abiy Ahmed’s annexation veiled under the guise of leasing a piece of land and a seaport within Somali territories.
The global consensus underscores a collective commitment to supporting regional peace principles, representing a significant departure from historical narratives that favored Ethiopia. This shift sheds light on the evolving dynamics of international relations, intricate geopolitical positions shaping political stances. Therefore, Abiy Ahmed must step back from his destabilizing memorandum of understanding and discard his ambitions towards Somalia.
- Attempting to Humiliate the Somali People and Underestimating Their Strength
It is imperative not to underestimate the resilience of the Somali state. The state has persevered for over three decades through strenuous efforts to rebuild its institutions amid the longest civil war. Despite challenges, Somalis demonstrate remarkable economic and political strength and formidable military capability.
Strong communal bonds among Somalis reinforce a sense of unity and collective strength surpassing external perceptions. Economically, politically, and militarily, Somalis are more robust than commonly perceived. Somali clans are well-equipped and highly trained, capable of forming a massive force of clan militias when necessary.
State Collapse
This lesson from the Somali-Ethiopian war between 1977-1978 accentuates the importance of accurate assessments and potential ramifications of downplaying people’s strength and their quick resolution of internal crises when they sense a collective threat to their existence. This especially holds true for regions characterized by complex geopolitical dynamics.
The Somali experience serves as a testament to the continual steadfastness of its people and the multifaceted nature of challenges facing states striving to rebuild and assert their presence on the global stage.
Hence, Abiy Ahmed and the Prosperity Party he leads must learn from the contemporary and lasting Somali-Ethiopian wars, addressing the deep-rooted and reverberating effects.
- Inciting Clan Conflict in Somalia
The recent memorandum of understanding signed by Muse Bihi has stirred divisions and disturbances within Somaliland. One prominent point of contention revolves around the eastern part of Somaliland, where a distinct entity known as the Khatumo Transitional Administration has emerged. This administration rejects being part of historic Somaliland, demanding integration into the federal Somali government and charting a separate course from the administration of Somaliland.
Clan Divisions
Conversely, a similar sentiment is brewing in the Odul region in the northwest, home to the Goodabursi and Isaa clan, seeking an independent state named Odul State, aspiring to follow in the footsteps of the Khatumo region administration and aiming to join the Federal Somali state.
Exacerbating the situation is the internal schism within the Isaa clan to which Muse Bihi belongs. This division within the clan is particularly evident in diverging viewpoints on the land concession issue to Ethiopia in exchange for recognizing Somaliland.
Such internal discord is likely to destabilize the historic stability of the Somaliland region and may even lead to inflaming clan conflicts, creating a volatile environment within the separatist system. The potential disruption of stability in Somaliland underscores the delicate balance that must be maintained when handling complex issues such as regional negotiations and international recognition. Therefore, Abiy Ahmed must realize that his signing of this memorandum of understanding is likely to spark clan conflict in Somaliland, inevitably leading to failure.
- Encouraging Foreign Interventions in the Horn of Africa
During the Cold War, the Horn of Africa emerged as a strategic global focal point, attracting great power competition and dominance. To this day, the region remains a hotbed of geopolitical significance, with various nations, including China, the United States, and France, establishing military bases in Djibouti.
Additionally, emerging medium powers such as Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt have showcased their military and economic influence in the region. Turkey established a military training base in Mogadishu and Turkish companies operate Mogadishu’s airport and seaport.
The complex dynamics in the Horn of Africa have led to alliances between countries, including Somalia and Ethiopia. This intricate network of geopolitical relations raises concerns about the potential eruption of proxy wars in the region. Such a conflict could jeopardize the peace and development aspirations of the diverse populations in the Horn of Africa.
Necessary Fire Extinguishing
Given these challenges, leaders, including Abiy Ahmed, must exercise caution and refrain from advocating foreign intervention. Foreign power interference could escalate tensions and lead to significant harm to the peoples of the Horn of Africa. Instead of that, priority should be given to a diplomatic approach guided by local stakeholders to address conflicts and enhance regional stability.
It is of utmost importance to support the collective vision of the peoples and work towards creating a conducive environment for peace, development, and prosperity for the diverse populations of the Horn of Africa.
In summary, the signing of the memorandum of understanding between Abiy Ahmed and Muse Bihi has deep repercussions on the stability and prosperity of the region’s populations. The potential negative consequences extend beyond the highlighted six points, emphasizing the immediate need to prevent the escalation of problems that could have far-reaching long-term implications. The fire must be extinguished before engulfing the people and the Horn of Africa, along with potential repercussions threatening vital trade routes.
In light of these multifaceted challenges, urgent measures are necessary to address the root issues and foster a conducive environment for diplomacy and conflict resolution. Proactive efforts are required to douse the flames of contention and emphasize the importance of dialogue, cooperation, and collective commitment to regional stability. The welfare of communities in the Horn of Africa, the security of vital trade routes, and the broader geopolitical landscape all hinge on responsible and wise management of the current situation.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial stance of Al Jazeera.
