New Somali President calls for an end to the long standing conflict & invites Al Shabaab to help rebuild their country. Parallels with the Colombian conflict.

In September 2016 Rodrigo Londono (also known as Timoshenko) signed a peace deal that following on the back of a ceasefire that had stood since April 2016, effectively ended 40 years of conflict in Colombia. A week later the Colombian people rejected that deal in a referendum that shook the fragile peace process between the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (or FARC).  To get to that point had been a fraught and no doubt, delicate process that had begun back in 2012 but had ultimately gripped both sides with a strong desire for peace.

The ceasefire held whilst re-negotiations continued and in December 2016 a new deal was agreed (without recourse to a 2nd referendum) that was centred around 5 basic principles (pdf):

• Future political participation of FARC members
• rebels reintegration into civilian life
•  illegal crop eradication 
• transitional justice and reparations (by FARC)
• rebel disarmament and implementation of the peace deal

And in simple terms it seems to be working.  We have all seen the amazing pictures on TV of the rebels handing over their weapons, something I thought I would never see, but am very happy that I have.

This long lived conflict began back in the 1960's when FARC and the National Liberation Army (ELN) took up arms against the government after being excluded from a power-sharing agreement that followed a decade of political violence (known as la violencia - 1948-58).  FARC's basic ideology is that of militant communism, whilst the ELN were left-wing political radicals who yearned for a Castro style communist revolution in Colombia.  Without going into too much detail here it's enough to say that the aims of both groups were fundamentally political in nature with both using violence, kidnapping and extortion as the major tools of their trade and funding their illicit trade with vast quantities of drug money, supplying up to 90% of the worlds cocaine in the early years of this century.

FARC rebels (from TIME magazine)

The peace process was ultimately kick-started in 2000 through a controversial US aid package, imaginatively called 'Plan Colombia,' worth in excess of $10bn that was directed towards limiting drug production and trafficking, strengthening Colombian institutions and helping to combat guerrilla violence, as well as helping promote bilateral trade between the two countries.  The plan however, had its' critics who condemned it for increasing both death rates and the (internal) displacement of huge numbers of people, but on the other hand it also had its' proponents, who said Plan Colombia had been 'instrumental in paving the way' for the onset of peace talks in 2016. 

The road to peace has been a dangerous, but delicate one that at times was rife with pot-holes but has, in the end, reached its' destination.  Colombia now for the first time in living memory can look forward to a more rosy future, free of violence that can work for everyone. (For anyone interested in the peace process see this (pdf) for more details).

The above is an extremely potted version of recent Colombian history.  And what inspired me to pass on these snippets was (oddly?) a BBC Africa podcast (22nd Feb - still available for download) which told how Somalia's new President, Mohamed Abdullahi Farmajo, has invited members of Al Shabaab to renounce violence and help rebuild their war torn country.

I listen to the Africa Today podcast every day.  I love Africa and Africans.  My wife is African and since I was a little boy I've been telling people I was born in the wrong country!  But that's neither here nor there - the point is that despite my huge affinity for Africa and all things African, when I listen to the podcast I'm quite often struck by how ridiculous and (quite frankly) dumb some of the things I hear seem to be.  And my first thought on hearing President Farmajo's words was incredulity!

Peace with Al Shabaab!?  It'll never happen and what's more it'll never work!  Yet another outlandish and ridiculous example of the rank stupidity of African politics and diplomacy!

But that evening I watched a news report on Al Jazeera that showed the FARC rebels handing their weapons over and I suddenly thought 'well maybe this guy's not so dumb after all!  In fact maybe he's a visionary!'  After all, if it can work in Colombia, why not in Somalia?

The conflict in Somalia has been ongoing since 1991 when the dictator Mohamed Said Barre was ousted and the country fell into disarray with the disintegration of any central authority and infighting between rival clan warlords.  I spent quite a bit of time in Kenya in 1992 and remember even then being conscious of the instability the conflict had already brought to the region, witnessed in the faces of many Kenyans as they issued warnings to tourists to stay well clear of the Somali border regions.

As rival warlords battled across Somalia two relatively peaceful
areas in the north, Somaliland & Puntland broke away.

Al Shabaab is the militant wing of the Somali Council of Islamic Courts which in 2006 overran most of southern Somalia.  Since then the conflict has seesawed back and forth with Al Shabaab using terrorist tactics and guerrilla warfare against Somalian armed forces, the African Union peacekeeping force (AMISON) and the various NGO's operating in the region.  However, since 2011 the Somali and AMISON forces have gained some traction and have significantly degraded Al Shabaab's control and military capabilities over many regions of Somalia including the capital, Mogadishu.

Beset by infighting among its' leaders, Al Shabaab does not have a centralised structure or a unified set of goals.  It's stated primary objective is the establishment of an Islamic State in Somalia based on Islamic (Sharia) Law and the elimination of foreign (infidel) influence, but despite this clan politics and shifting alliances (between clans) have all worked to limit their effectiveness.  The group maintains a fluctuating affiliation with Al Queada and has claimed responsibility for many terrorist bombings and suicide attacks in Somalia as well as the Westgate mall attack in Nairobi (in 2013), and further attacks in Djibouti and Kenya.

New President Mohamed Farmajo

Recent military gains by Somalian forces and AMISON have led to greater efforts to restore a central authority and in 2012 resulted in the swearing in of a formal parliament, the first in more than 20 years.  And then in February 2017 parliament elected (in closed voting due to security threats from Al Shabaab) Mohmaned Abdullahi Farmajo, a dual US-Somali citizen as the new President.  Despite some (inevitable?) corruption allegations during the election process there remains great hope that Farmajo may be the man to turn things around pledging during his campaign to work towards improving security, education and the economy, as well as to build towards full democratic elections.

Parallels between the Colombian and Somali conflicts may not seem immediately apparent.  The FARC rebels were political ideologists whilst Al Shabaab are religious extremists, but both groups employed similar tactics to achieve their aims and both have caused extreme strife, hardship and sorrow right across their respective nations.  

In Somalia the ongoing conflict has certainly exacerbated the current drought situation turning it into a national disaster that has the potential to affect millions across the country.  Just last week the President announced that 110 people had died from hunger in one day alone and warned that the drought may escalate into a full blown famine.

Somalia and its' impoverished, war ravaged people need hope right now, not just that the drought will end, but also that the conflict that has torn this country apart for far too long may also come to an end.  Al Shabaab are on the back foot and losing territory.  The President's appeal for peace will hopefully not go unheeded. The nations many wounds, the years of fear and hate may take a long time to begin to heal, but it is surely something that must be a priority now for all to share in.  

In Colombia the peace process took years to bear fruit.  And it will be an ongoing process as the people and the rebels learn to live with one another once more in a shared peace, with a common desire to put the past behind themselves and to look forwards to a brighter future together.

If Al Shabaab and the people of Somalia, led by their new President, can at least begin to talk about putting their arms aside, then perhaps they can start to rediscover that they actually have more in common with each other than they might think and then, hopefully, some sort of peace can grow, reconciliation can begin and eventually Somalia and its' people can start to heal their wounds just as the people of Colombia are now doing.

Trump's softer tone fudges the truth & pulls the wool over his supporters eyes!

Donald Trump's inaugural congressional address last night showed a different, more upbeat, more Presidential Trump.  He spoke of a "new chapter of American greatness" and called for Republicans and Democrats to unite to solve the nations problems.  He was more conciliatory, more measured and less controversial with (according to a CNN poll) 57% of those watching having a positive reaction to his messages.  But is it just more Trump slight of hand or are we really seeing a man growing into the job?

To be honest I think the jury is still out.  This was, at the end of the day, just one speech.  There were no press questions to rattle his cage.  He was able to read it from an autocue and for once, he seemed prepared and was not speaking extemporaneously.  However, for me it was more of a campaign speech, he promised much, but as in every speech before the detail on the mechanics of his policies, how they will work, how they will be paid for, was all but absent.

He spoke of a $1trillion infrastructure expenditure plan with "new roads, bridges, tunnels, airports and railways gleaming across our very, very beautiful land, " which he said would provide millions of new jobs and would be financed through a partnership between public and private funds.  This all sounds wonderful but where's the reality check?  Private companies need to turn a profit to yield suitable dividends for their shareholders.  Where is the profit in building a road?  Or a bridge?  Or a tunnel?  Unless of course all of these are to come with a toll payable by all who use them!  And given the tax cuts he proposes where is the public money to come from?  America has, as of today, a national debt of very nearly $20trillion, that's over $61,000 per capita!!!  The truth is that it is simply unsustainable and unrealistic.

Trump listed many companies (e.g. Fiat-Chrysler, GM, Lockheed, Intel, etc) that will invest billions and create thousands of new jobs.  Whilst this is true and not more of  his 'alternative facts', it is misleading and far from the real truth.  His supporters don't want to hear it, but actually a Bloomberg analysis showed that the vast majority of these 'deals' pre-date Trump and were in place before the election, and what's more many of them do not create any 'new' employment at all!

Then there's the proposed $54bn increase in defence spending.  The cost of the 'wall' which seems to be going up on a daily basis but is perhaps conservatively estimated at $21bn, and will be paid for by US tax payers, not by the Mexicans as promised.  It just doesn't add up mathematically despite the cuts that are proposed in order to pay for much of it!

Then there was his claims that the "vast majority of individuals convicted of terrorism-related offences since 9/11 came here from outside our country" which was just plain NOT true.  He quoted figures that don't exist, and those that do were flawed and biased because they were merely (terror) tips that didn't add up to anything and did not result in any prosecutions or attacks.  And of those 'attacks' that did actually exist, 50% were committed by US born citizens, far from the majority of foreign attackers he said!  Again this sort of rhetoric sounds great and looks great but is based on lies and distorted facts that Trump twists to suit his purpose because he knows that most people do not scratch beneath the surface to find the truth of what he saying.  These lies then become the alternative facts on which he bases his policies, but foundations built upon untruths are going to come tumbling down at some point and when they do, watch out!

In summary whilst it was refreshing to see a less belligerent President Trump it was still a speech that preached to the converted; a speech that rang all the right bells provided you don't look too closely at the structure of the bell tower.  I'm not convinced by Trump's rhetoric and I'm not convinced that this is the start of a more presidential phase.  Trump is a master manipulator who skillfully blends facts, half-truths and out right lies together in such a way that it masks reality, blurring the lines between the possible and the impossible, the facts and the so-called alternative facts.  If he can cut out the bullshit, the constant meltdowns in press conferences, the ridiculously, childish attacks against the media that may express a differing point of view (from his), the rabid anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant rhetoric and maintain a much calmer tone over an extended period then he would be much more likely to dampen down the storms of protest against him and may actually get a few more on board.

But don't hold your breath!