[XXPANTHAXX]

Abukar Arman
December 19, 2007

As the US Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, was recently visiting
American forces in Djibouti, the Washington Post was reporting how the
Pentagon has been spearheading a seemingly dicey initiative to pressure
Washington into recognizing the secessionist northwestern region of
Somalia known as “Somaliland” as an independent state.

In an article titled ‘U.S. Debating Shift of Support in Somali Conflict’
that appeared on December 4, 2007 issue, the Post highlights how some
Pentagon officials are convinced it is time “to forge ties with
Somaliland, as the U.S. military has with Kenya and other countries
bordering Somalia.”

The article quotes a senior defense official who asserts that
"Somaliland is an entity that works." And another unnamed official who
confirms the Pentagon’s view is that "Somaliland should be independent,"
and that the US should “build up the parts that are functional and box
in Somalia's unstable regions, particularly around Mogadishu.”

This initiative clearly contradicts the State Department’s wait-and-see
approach to this diplomatically sensitive issue. And, handled
haphazardly, this could set ablaze the volatile inter-tribal tensions
looming in northern Somalia, and, according to the article, “set a
precedent for other secession movements seeking to change colonial-era
borders,” therefore, “opening a Pandora's box in the region.

That said, it is worth noting that aside from the on again, off again,
clan-driven skirmishes that make headlines every now and then,
throughout the Somali civil war, the northwestern region has enjoyed
relative peace and stability.

Naturally, this unprecedented aggressive approach by the Department of
Defense raises questions worth pondering: When did the Pentagon become
the engine propelling the US foreign policy? Why would the Pentagon care
whether or not Somaliland becomes an independent state or not? And, more
importantly, how prudent is it to take this kind of an approach?

In answering the first question, remember how the events of 9/11 have
“changed the world” and how as a result the notoriously Islamophobic
Neocons ascended to (absolute) power; remember that moment in history
when in certain circles it was fashionable to declare diplomacy dead and
to claim militarization of the American foreign policy is imperative to
the survival of the nation.

It is then when the rules of the game have profoundly changed. Today,
while the icons of that political machine have disappeared for one
reason or another, the policy imprint they left behind would probably
take generations to undo.

Last summer, US Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of African
Affairs, Jendayi Frazer, addressed an audience of several hundred,
mostly Somali scholars, activists, students, and professionals at a
Somali studies conference held in Columbus, Ohio. In her speech, Dr.
Frazer said “we were against the Ethiopian invasion”.

This, of course, contradicted what the Somali people and the world
already knew- that in January 2007 Washington switched hats from a
“tacit supporter” of Ethiopia’s aggression to an active partner in the
illegal invasion. US Air Force AC-130 gunship has launched aerial
attacks against "suspected Islamist terrorists" based in Somalia.

So, was Dr. Frazer not being entirely honest? Perhaps not, though her
statement was cleverly inserted in a context which could only give the
impression that Ethiopia has invaded Somalia in spite of Washington’s
objections. After all her statement was consistent with the State
Department’s position; alas, that was superseded by the hawkish wishes
of the Pentagon. And this brings me to the latter of the two original
questions. And the simple answer is the establishment of the Africa
Command or AFRICOM as it is commonly known.

AFRICOM is a US command center completely devoted to Africa. The primary
objective of the command center is to promote US national security by
“working with African states and regional organizations to help
strengthen stability and security…” and creating an environment in which
sustainable economic growth is possible. The command center is supposed
to focus on “war prevention rather than war-fighting”.

It is no secret that many in the Pentagon consider the Somali port city
of Berbera as the ideal location for AFRICOM. However, considering the
site-selection criteria jointly developed by the Pentagon and the State
Department that include “political stability; security factors; access
to regional and intercontinental transportation; availability of
acceptable infrastructure; qualify of life; proximity to the African
Union and regional organizations; proximity to U.S. government hubs;
adequate Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA),” Somalia might not look as a
prime candidate.

However, detaching the secessionist northwestern region from the rest of
chaotic Somalia gives a different picture. This explains why the
Pentagon's view is that "Somaliland should be independent."

The Pentagon is pressed against time. October 2008 is the deadline when
AFRICOM is supposed to be fully operational. In the mean time, Somalia’s
situation is worsening by the day. The situation there is now considered
the worst humanitarian crisis in Africa. According to the UN,
approximately one million civilians fleeing Mogadishu have become
internally displaced persons (IDP) threatened by severe food shortage.

Oblivious to the scale of this humanitarian catastrophe and how their
approach could potentially add another layer of complexity, the Pentagon
is eager to accelerate the establishment of AFRICOM, especially now that
China is making profound stride in Africa and the European Union is
following suit. However, the real set back to Washington is its own
self-defeating foreign policy that is treated as suspect everywhere.

According to Congressman Donald Payne, the Chairman of the House
Subcommittee on Africa, Washington should expect “a lot of skepticism,
because there has been so little attention given to Africa…All of a
sudden to have a special military command, I think the typical person
would wonder why now and really what is the end game?"

The neocons’ legacy, the DADD syndrome, or the Diplomatic Attention
Deficit Disorder, is still propelling Washington’s foreign policy and
continues to project America negatively throughout the world, especially
in the Muslim world and Africa.

The US foreign policy regarding Somalia ought to focus on ending the
Ethiopian occupation and therefore ending their widely condemned human
rights abuses, as well as facilitating an all inclusive reconciliation
conference before the 2009 general elections.

This is congruent, at least in part, with a nine point recommendation
articulated in a communiqué issued by the Somali Cause upon the
conclusion of its two day conference on December 1, 2007.

Somali Cause is a nine member coalition, Eight US based organizations
and one Canada based- the Somali Canadian Diaspora Alliance.
------------------------------------------------------
Abukar Arman is a freelance writer who lives in Ohio.