Somalia, a country plagued by conflict and instability for decades, is once again in the spotlight for its murky politics, rampant corruption, and foreign interventions.
Recently, the Somali government’s controversial decision to hand over command of its army to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in line with a recent security pact that the two countries signed has raised concerns about the country’s sovereignty, sparking widespread debate and criticism both within Somalia and beyond.
This move highlights the challenges and complexities of Somalia’s political landscape as it strives to rebuild institutions and establish a functional government.
The decision to entrust the UAE with the command of Somalia’s army has been met with criticism for lack of proper consultation with key stakeholders, including the Somali people and parliament, leaving Somalis concerned about their country’s democratic principles.
Critics argue that this move undermines Somalia’s sovereignty and compromises its ability to independently address its security challenges.
The involvement of foreign countries in Somalia’s affairs has been a contentious issue, with Somalia being a battleground for regional and international powers vying for influence in the region.
The UAE’s increasing presence in Somalia, particularly in the semi-autonomous region of Somaliland, has raised suspicions about its intentions and potential impact on Somalia’s internal affairs.
Some experts suggest that the UAE’s interest in Somalia is driven by its strategic geopolitical interests in the Red Sea region, which serves as a crucial maritime route for global trade.
The Emirates government has earlier established a military base in the port of Berbera in Somaliland and has signed various economic agreements with the region, including the management of the strategic Berbera port, raising concerns about the UAE’s intentions and potential for exerting undue influence over Somalia’s political and economic decisions.
The decision to hand over the army command to the UAE by the Somali government has also raised worries about the potential exacerbation of corruption in Somalia.
Many Somalis point to the lack of transparency in the UAE’s involvement in Somalia’s security sector and the potential for the UAE to use the army to further its own interests, potentially against those perceived as threats to its interests and strategic rivals.
This has fueled suspicions about the motives behind the decision and its potential impact on Somalia’s governance.
Moreover, tensions among different clans will likely be sparked by the decision, with some perceiving it as favoritism towards certain clans, further deepening existing divisions.
YEMEN LESSONS
There are concerns that the UAE’s history of utilizing mercenaries and private military contractors in other conflicts, such as in Yemen, may pose risks to Somalia’s sovereignty.
In Yemen, the UAE’s use of mercenaries and private military contractors has been associated with assassinations, political crises, and civil unrest, exacerbating the already dire humanitarian situation in the war-torn ccountry.
Somalia’s long-standing issue of political corruption, with allegations of embezzlement, bribery, and nepotism being rampant, has also raised fears that the UAE’s involvement could worsen this problem, leading to further corruption and misuse of power.
Additionally, Somalia’s weak governance and lack of effective oversight mechanisms may provide an opportunity for the UAE to exert undue influence over the country’s political landscape.
Foreign interference has been a persistent issue in Somalia’s history, with the country often seen as a battleground for proxy wars between regional and international powers.
The UAE’s involvement in Somalia’s military command could be viewed as another example of foreign interference, raising concerns about the erosion of Somalia’s sovereignty and its ability to independently pursue stability and development.
Furthermore, the lack of transparency and accountability in the process of handing over the army command to the UAE has raised questions, with many arguing that the decision was made without proper consultation and oversight, potentially having far-reaching consequences for Somalia’s long- term stability and security.
SUDAN’S RSF COMPARISON
The recent security pact between Somalia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has also raised concerns about the potential implications for Somalia’s sovereignty and internal dynamics.
Drawing lessons from Sudan’s UAE-backed Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary force that the UAE is currently using to challenge and overthrow the Sudanese government, there are concerns that a similar situation could arise in Somalia if the UAE’s involvement in its security forces is not carefully managed.
The RSF in Sudan was originally established as a paramilitary force to counter insurgency, but it has been accused of operating with impunity and working to advance UAE interests at the expense of the Sudanese government.
The UAE has been providing significant funding and support to the RSF, and this has fueled the ongoing power struggles in Sudan, with clashes between the Sudanese military and the RSF resulting in deadly conflicts.
There are fears that the UAE could be trying to establish its own paramilitary proxy force in Somalia through the security pact, which could potentially undermine the authority of the Somali government and compromise the country’s sovereignty.
The involvement of external actors in a country’s security affairs can often lead to tensions and conflicts, especially in a country like Somalia with a complex political landscape, where various clans and factions vie for power and influence.
One of the key concerns is the potential exacerbation of existing internal divisions and conflicts in Somalia.
The country has a history of clan-based politics, and any external involvement in its security affairs must be carefully managed to avoid fueling tensions between different groups. Inclusive decisionmaking processes that involve all relevant stakeholders, including the Somali government, clans, and factions, are necessary to ensure that the security pact does not contribute to further instability and conflict within the country.
The lessons from Sudan’s RSF also highlight the need for accountability and oversight in any paramilitary forces that may be established in Somalia as a result of the security pact with the UAE.
Reports of human rights abuses and impunity by the RSF in Sudan have raised concerns about the potential for similar violations in Somalia if proper checks and balances are not in place.
We, at the Horn Examiner, are continuously striving to improve our reporting, and we genuinely appreciate your feedback.
We invite you to share your thoughts on what you enjoyed and any areas where we can further enhance our work.
Please feel free to send your tips to: [email protected].
Your feedback will be highly appreciated!
Facebook Comments