[Issues Of
Principle]
Ethiopia's Meles
Zenawi--will
have to answer
for Somali war
crimes by his
forces
The chilling
facts about the
humanitarian
crises of
Biblical
proportions
unfolding in
Somalia as a
result of the
proxy war in
that country are
numbing.
Yet despite the
facts about
violations of
important
principles of
international,
humanitarian and
human rights
laws, there has
scarcely been
unequivocal
outrage and
robust action
taken by
individuals and
organizations,
which
traditionally
are regarded as
being in the
vanguard of
raising and
mobilizing
public awareness
about egregious
violations of
human rights and
principles of
the United
Nations.
This is not to
say there have
not been some
humanitarian or
human rights
organizations
and individuals,
who have nobly
performed heroic
work to save
lives in
otherwise
objectively
appalling
conditions and
tried to bring
attention to
obscene violence
in Somalia.
Outstanding
examples of such
organizations
are United
Nations Children
Fund (UNICEF),
Doctors Without
Borders, Oxfam,
Amnesty
International
and Human Rights
Watch.
On balance,
however, there
has been at best
anemic attention
paid to the
multifaceted
tragedies in
Somalia. This
calls to
question the
criteria used by
various
organizations to
put a spotlight
on issues of
human rights and
humanitarian
crises in Africa
and elsewhere.
But before we
pose some
questions, it is
necessary first
to review the
relevant known
facts leading to
and about the
catastrophic
humanitarian
crises in
Somalia.
On December 6,
2006, the United
Nations Security
Council passed
resolution 1724
(S/Res/1725
(2006)) on
Somalia that
calls for the
respect of the
sovereignty,
territorial
integrity,
political
independence and
unity of
Somalia. The
resolution
expressly
prohibited the
deployment of
troops from
neighboring
countries, as
peacekeepers in
Somalia.
It specifically
reiterates “its
insistence that
all Members
States [of the
UN], in
particular those
in the region,
should refrain
from any action
in contravention
of the arms
embargo and
related
measures, and
should take all
actions
necessary to
prevent such
contraventions.”
In addition, it
“calls upon all
parties inside
Somalia and all
other States
from action that
could provoke or
perpetuate
violence and
violations of
human rights,
contribute to
unnecessary
tension and
mistrust,
endanger the
ceasefire and
political
process, or
further damage
the humanitarian
situation.”
But within the
month, at the
end of December,
the neighboring
country of
Ethiopia,
traditionally a
perennial threat
to the
territorial
integrity of
Somalia, sent an
estimated 15,000
troops into
Somalia. This
was in direct
contravention of
important
principles of
the UN Charter,
as well as in
violation of the
UN Security
Council’s
resolution 1725,
which amplifies
an earlier UN
Security Council
resolution on
Somalia, S/Res/1724
(2006).
Paradoxically
and tragically,
none of the
powers on the
Security Council
stood up for the
principles of
the UN Charter
and/or for the
Security
Council’s own
resolutions.
What has
transpired since
the Ethiopian
invasion of
Somalia? Here
are some of the
notable facts:
By April 2007,
there were
credible reports
that the
Ethiopian
invasion of
Somalia had set
into motion
unprecedented
violations of
human rights, on
a scale that
would qualify as
war crimes. This
occurred during
a four-day
offensive to
eliminate
insurgents in
the Somalian
capital,
Mogadishu, at
the end of
March, by joint
Somali-Ethiopian
troops.
During the
offensive the
troops engaged
in
indiscriminate
flattening of
pro-insurgent
neighborhoods
with tanks,
helicopters and
artillery. It
was reported
that these were
the heaviest
onslaughts on
civilian
population in 15
years in a city
notorious for
bloodshed. The
offensive
triggered a
massive exodus
of people from
Mogadishu. The
U.N. estimated
that in the
month of March
2007, about
124,000 people
fled the capital
city.
The military
atrocities
committed by
Ethiopian-Somalia’s
transitional
government
troops did not
go unnoticed. A
European Union
security expert
who visited the
country
indicated that
the joint
Ethiopian and
Somali troops
may have
committed war
crimes during
the offensive.
The European
expert is
reported by
Reuters to have
said, "There are
strong grounds
to believe that
the Ethiopian
government and
the transitional
federal
government of
Somalia and the
African Union
force commander
... have through
commission or
omission
violated the
Rome Statute of
the
International
Criminal Court."
Human rights
scholars and
observers
believe that at
the very least,
Ethiopian-Somali
government
troops have a
case to answer
for potential
complicity in
the commission
of war crimes.
However, to
date, no clear
public
pronouncements
have been made
by the
International
Criminal Court (ICC),
which in
accordance with
the Rome Statue
has a duty to
investigate and
prosecute war
crimes.
Five months
later in
September 2007,
the UN human
rights envoy to
Somalia, Ghanim
Alnajar, after
visiting the
country on a
fact-finding
mission,
indicated that
he was going to
recommend a full
investigation
into alleged war
crimes in
Somalia.
By November
2007, the
calamitous
humanitarian
crisis in
Somalia had
reached Biblical
proportions. The
intensity of the
crisis in
Somalia might be
illustrated by
highlighting the
fact that,
within a space
of two weeks in
November, for
example, it was
reported that an
estimated
173,000 people
fled Mogadishu,
brining the
total of
displaced people
by mid-November
to more than
850,000.
Without the
crisis abating
and with
hundreds of
thousands of
Somali on the
verge of dying
of starvation
and lack of
medical
treatment and
sanitation, the
UN confirmed
that the
humanitarian
catastrophe in
Somalia was the
worst in Africa.
It was deemed
far worse than
the much rightly
publicized
humanitarian
crisis in Darfur
region of Sudan.
In the words of
Ahmedou
Oud-Abdallah,
the top United
Nations official
for Somalia,
“The situation
in Somalia is
the worst on the
continent.”
The general data
on the scale of
human suffering
may not
sufficiently
capture and
convey the
plight of
individual
Somali. Yet in
the figures, are
thousands of
human lives
devastated for
no good reason
except that they
were born Somali
and grounded in
the country.
We can get a
glimpse of the
type of personal
suffering
experienced by
summarizing the
individual
stories of a
couple of people
that have been
reported.
Natheefa Ali,
who escaped a
bloodbath in
Mogadishu to a
market town of
Afgooye, said
that her
10-month-old
baby was so
malnourished she
could not
swallow.
“Look,” Ms.
Natheefa said,
pointing to her
daughter’s
splotchy legs,
“her skin is
falling off,
too.” In Afgooye
where Natheefa
Ali escaped to,
the United
Nations report
shows that the
malnutrition
rate is 19
percent, as
compared with
about 13 percent
in Darfur.
Malnutrition of
15 percent is
considered the
emergency
threshold.
Another
individual,
Fadumo Abdullahi,
aged 30, fled
fighting in
Somalia's
capital,
Mogadishu, and
trekked to a
makeshift camp
for the
displaced on the
outskirts of
Bosasso, the
commercial
capital of the
self-declared
autonomous
region of
Puntland, in
northeastern
Somalia, which
is nearly 1,000
miles northeast
of Mogadishu.
She fled leaving
her four
children with
her mother, in
the hope to
undertake the
arduous journey
to Yemen and
then Saudi
Arabia. The trip
to Bosasso took
her 10 days,
navigating
around bandits
checkpoints
where people
were shot
routinely.
Interviewed in
Bosasso, she
said, "I have no
relatives here,
so I stay at the
camp [for
internally
displaced
people] during
the night and
during the day I
go out to
people's homes
to take away
their rubbish.
They pay me
5,000 shillings
[about 25 US
cents] for every
load of garbage
I remove. On a
good day I make
about 25,000
[$1.25] but some
days I get
nothing. I know
the danger I
face going to
Yemen, but what
is the
alternative? In
Mogadishu, you
don’t know from
day to day
whether you will
see another
sunset. You hear
about women
robbed or raped
every day. My
neighbor was
raped and then
beaten badly
with a gun by
soldiers. She
was in hospital,
not dead but not
alive.
That is when we
moved and my
mother and I
decided that I
should take the
risk of going to
Saudi. I know
going to Yemen I
may die but only
once. There are
worse things
than that kind
of dying, and
that was staying
in Mogadishu."
By mid December,
it was estimated
that that 60
percent of
Mogadishu's
residents had
fled their
homes.
The humanitarian
situation had
deteriorated so
much that by
mid-December
2007, children
in particular
were in
exceptionally
precarious
conditions that
UNICEF called
for the creation
of safe zones in
Somalia for
about 1.5m
children whose
lives have been
blighted by the
conflict. In a
statement, the
head of UNICEF,
Ann Veneman,
pointed out that
not only were
the children
malnourished and
at a high risk
of disease, but
they were also
suffering from
exhaustion and
emotional
trauma.
Ironically but
not
surprisingly, in
December, United
Nations
officials
conceded that
the country was
in better shape
during the brief
reign of
Somalia’s
Islamist
movement before
the Ethiopian
invasion.
Laroche, head of
the U.N.
humanitarian
operations said,
“It was more
peaceful, and
much easier for
us to work.” He
concluded, “The
Islamists didn’t
cause us any
problems.”
Ould-Abdallah
called those six
months, when the
Islamic Courts
Union were in
control of most
of the country,
Somalia’s
“golden era”; it
was, he said,
“essentially the
only epoch of
peace most
Somalis have
tasted for
years.”
It should be
mentioned to
avoid
misunderstanding
that Somali
suffering and
being used as
pawns in
geo-political
power games did
not begin with
the invasion of
Ethiopian
troops,
apparently
sponsored by the
U.S.
Administration
in December
2006. A review
of Somali
history shows
that the Somali
people have more
often than not
been sliced into
pieces like a
cake and divided
up among various
powers, without
any regard for
their interests
and welfare. For
instance, at the
end of the
nineteenth
century, the
Somali were
partitioned into
four colonies
against their
will.
The “share-out”
of the Somalis
during the
high-tide of the
new European
colonial
imperialism was
among the
following
powers: Italy
got one portion,
which they named
Italian
Somaliland; the
British grabbed
another portion;
and the French
claimed
Djibouti.
The African
empire of
Ethiopia also
got a slice: it
was allowed to
enclose the
Ogaden within
its territory.
Although it lost
the Ogaden to
Italy during the
invasion of
Ethiopia in the
1930s, it
renewed its
control of
Ogaden in 1941,
with the
sanction of
Britain. In
fact, it was the
partitioning of
the Somali and
the mistreatment
of the people in
Ogaden by
Ethiopia, which
provided the
impetus for the
first pan-Somali
resistance
movement led by
the charismatic
and puritanical
religious
leader, Mohammad
Abdille Hassan.
For his
unflinching
nationalist
fervor the
British
derogatorily
referred to
Hassan as the
“Mad Mullah.”
Much later
during the Cold
War, in the
1970s, both the
Soviet Union and
U.S.A. jostled
for
geo-strategic
position of
advantage over
Somalia, by
changing sides
whenever
expedient. The
latest Ethiopian
invasion of
Somalia with the
connivance of
external powers
simply falls in
a long
established
pattern of using
the country and
people as pawns
in larger
geo-strategic
calculations.
It should also
be noted that
since the demise
of the Said
Barre regime in
1991, civilians
in Somalia have
been subjected
to various
cycles of
violence and
displacements.
In fact, more
than 800,000
people fled
Somalia in 1991
and 1992, during
the heat of the
crisis in the
post-Barre
period. It was
this, in effect,
which set in
train the
nation's
downward spiral.
By the time of
the Ethiopian
invasion, close
to 450,000
Somali remained
internally
displaced, and
with about
150,000 people
lived as
refugees in
other countries.
In fact there
was no semblance
of effective
central
government,
until Islamic
Courts Union
asserted
authority in
most parts of
the country in
mid-2006.
Nonetheless,
despite the
history of
foreign powers
and elites using
Somali people as
pawns and the
continual
nightmares to
which they have
continually been
subjected to in
the quicksand of
clan politics,
the current
situation and
context in the
country is
different. The
fact that
foreign powers
can intervene
and hemorrhage
the people and
country to
virtual death in
the context of
the twenty-first
century puts to
pain the
rhetoric of
human rights and
claims about
human progress.
Although it must
be regarded as a
triumph for
cynical
power-politics
of geo-strategic
calculations, it
is also a severe
indictment of
the
international
community.
In terms of
comparative
analysis and
without
diminishing the
enormity of the
humanitarian
crisis in Darfur,
it should be
noted that,
unlike Darfur
where the
suffering is
being attended
to by a
billion-dollar
aid operation
and more than
10,000 aid
workers, the UN
estimates that
the total
emergency aid
for Somalia to
date has been
less than
$250,000. In
effect, the
Somalis caught
up in the
inferno of
violence have
more or less
been left to
fend for
themselves, with
the world barely
noticing, leave
alone caring
about the
magnitude of the
humanitarian
crises in this
region of the
Horn of Africa.
The difference
in approach to,
and of providing
funds for,
Somali and
Darfur cannot be
explained simply
by reference to
the insecurity
in the former. A
major factor
might be the
lack of interest
in the very
humanity of the
Somalis.
Eric Laroche,
head of United
Nations
humanitarian
operation gave
voice to the
view of many
fair-minded
people with
human hearts,
regarding the
attitude if not
approach of the
international
community to
Somalis, when he
said: “If this
were happening
in Darfur, there
would be a big
fuss. But
Somalia has been
a forgotten
emergency for
years.”
In view of the
calamitous
humanitarian
crisis in
Somalia, we are
entitled to ask
a few probing
questions, even
if we cannot
hazard or obtain
answers. For in
most cases, all
that the
powerless are
entitled to is
the right to ask
questions.
The following
are some of the
pertinent
questions: What
is the purpose
of the UN
Charter, if its
principles can
be violated
recklessly
without
consequence? Why
should the world
take seriously
UN Security
resolutions if
they cannot be
enforced; or if
those violate
such resolutions
are not even
simply
condemned? Is it
a case of
selective
morality, that
some UN Security
resolutions are
enforced while
others are
conveniently
ignored?
Or could the
lack of robust
response to the
humanitarian
crisis in
Somalia be
attributable to
the particulars
of the
perpetrators and
victims? Why is
the
international
community not
requiring both
the occupying
Ethiopian troops
and its allies
in the
Transitional
Federal
government to
fulfill their
respective
duties? Why is
the ICC not
approaching with
vigor the
allegations of
war crimes in
Somalia? And why
is the African
Union standing
impotently while
the great
majority of the
people of
Somalia are
being violated
in broad day
light?
Whatever our
views, the human
tragedies in
Somalia, which
has reduced a
resilient people
almost to
despair and
hopelessness,
should prompt
people with
human hearts but
who do not make
fetish of naked
power, to
reflect
seriously about
the functions
and relevance of
the United
Nations Security
Council. It
should also be a
cause for
concern about
the virtual
impotence of the
African Union
and the state of
Pan-African
solidarity.
Although we
might not have
military
materiel with
which to defend
the great
majority of
Somalis, at the
very least, we
should speak out
and up against
the abominations
being committed
in that country.
It is imperative
that we speak up
out of human
solidarity,
because the
lives of the
people of
Somalia have
been placed in
purgatory for
far too long by
forces that have
arrogated to
themselves the
power to
determine the
fate of an
African people.
If we are not to
repeat the grave
error of
history, we
should remember
the logic of the
poem by Rev.
Martin Niemoller,
the German
Protestant
theologian, who
after the Jewish
Holocaust and
the elimination
of a great many
innocent people
by the Nazi
military and
scientific
machines penned
these lines in
1945: “First
they came for
the communists,
and I didn’t
speak up,
because I wasn’t
a communist.
Then they came
for the Jews,
and I didn’t
speak up,
because I wasn’t
a Jew. Then they
came for the
Catholics, and I
didn’t speak up,
because I was a
protestant. Then
they came for
me, and by that
time there was
no one left to
speak up for
me”.
As we see the
human debris and
blood pile up in
Somalia, we
should not act
with
indifference
like the British
Prime Minister,
Neville
Chamberlain,
who, when faced
with the menace
of Hitler in the
1930s, played
the
power-politics
of
self-interests.
He was reluctant
to challenge
Hitler so long
as British
interests were
not directly
threatened: he
issued but
anemic formal
protests only
when he saw the
malign influence
of the Nazis
extended from
area to area. He
was compelled
belatedly to
condemn Hitler
only when
British spheres
of influence
were under
threat of
conquest.
With the
unfolding human
calamities in
Somalia, we
should not wait
until it is too
late to plead
that it was a
mistake not to
have identified
with the people
in their hours
of need, even if
the powers that
be might not
care about the
violations of
principles of
international,
humanitarian,
and human rights
laws in Somalia.
The time is now
for people of
goodwill to be
counted and to
speak up against
what is going on
in Somalia and
to demonstrate
solidarity with
the people,
whose have for a
whole generation
lived in hellish
nightmares.
Black Star News
columnist
Professor Amii
Omara-Otunnu is
UNESCO Chair in
Human Rights,
Executive-Director
of the UConn-ANC
Partnership and
Professor of
History at the
University of
Connecticut,
Storrs. His
column appears
bi-weekly online
and in the
newspaper.
To comment or to
subscribe to or
advertise in New
York’s leading
Pan African
weekly
investigative
newspaper, or to
send us a news
tip, please call
(212) 481-7745
or send a note
to
Milton@blackstarnews.com
Also visit out
sister
publications
Harlem Business
News
www.harlembusinessnews.com
and The Groove
music magazine
at
www.thegroovemag.com
"Speaking Truth
To Empower."
