Somalia’s federal system was conceived as a solution to the decades of conflict and fragmentation that had ravaged the country. By decentralizing power and giving regional states a voice in national governance, federalism was seen as the key to fostering unity, stability, and progress. However, recent developments, including the collapse of the National Consultative Council meeting in Mogadishu, reveal that federalism in Somalia is not just faltering—it has failed. The reasons are rooted in political manipulation, corruption, and a central government more focused on consolidating power than building a functional, equitable system.

Prime Minister Hamse Abdi Barre’s candid acknowledgment of the Council’s failure points to a deeper crisis. The repeated breakdown of federal meetings, coupled with the absence of key regional leaders like Jubbaland’s Ahmed Madobe and Puntland’s Saeed Deni, underscores the growing divisions between Mogadishu and Somalia’s federal states. Barre’s admission that the Council’s meetings have done little but expose the federal government’s weaknesses is a damning indictment of the current leadership, especially under President Hassan Sheikh Mohamoud.

The Corruption at the Heart of the Crisis

At the center of Somalia’s federalism crisis is President Mohamoud’s autocratic approach to governance. Reports have repeatedly surfaced about how he uses international development aid as a tool for political manipulation. As highlighted in various analyses, including those found in sources like Warya TV, Mohamoud has weaponized aid to pressure regional leaders into supporting his political agenda—particularly his efforts to secure reelection. Regional states that refuse to fall in line are cut off from crucial funding, leaving their populations without access to essential services like healthcare, education, and infrastructure.

In an article titled “Hassan Sheikh Mohamud: Somalia’s Ultimate Betrayer,” Mohamoud is accused of betraying the very principles of federalism that he is supposed to uphold. Instead of promoting cooperation and unity, he has deepened divisions by using development funds as leverage to silence dissent. This is not merely a power struggle between politicians; it is a betrayal of the Somali people, who depend on international aid for their survival. The article further highlights how the president’s tactics have alienated regional leaders and reduced the federal system to a high-stakes political game, rather than a functional framework for governance.

A System That Stifles Regional Autonomy

One of the fundamental promises of federalism is that it allows regional states to govern themselves, addressing local needs while maintaining a unified national identity. Yet, under Mohamoud’s leadership, federalism has become a hollow shell. The president’s strategy, as detailed in “How President Hassan’s Corruption and Power Games are Crushing Somalia’s Federal States,” is to stifle regional autonomy and centralize power in Mogadishu. Leaders like Madobe and Deni have been systematically excluded from national decision-making processes, with Madobe even walking out of the latest Consultative Council meeting.

By sidelining these key regional figures, Mohamoud has effectively abandoned the principles of federalism. Rather than engaging with regional leaders to build consensus, his administration has resorted to coercion and blackmail. The result is a federal system in name only—one that does not respect the autonomy of the states or the voices of their people.

The absence of these regional leaders from critical talks illustrates how disconnected the federal government has become from the regions it is supposed to represent. In Puntland, Jubbaland, and beyond, leaders are increasingly disillusioned with Mogadishu’s refusal to engage in meaningful dialogue. This growing estrangement raises the prospect of regional fragmentation, further weakening Somalia’s already fragile state.

The Weaponization of Aid

International development assistance, which is intended to support Somalia’s recovery and development, has instead become a weapon wielded by Mogadishu against dissenting regions. The accusations against Mohamoud—that he has used aid to blackmail regional states into supporting his reelection—are not just troubling; they are dangerous. This kind of manipulation undermines trust between the federal government and its regional counterparts and risks turning aid distribution into a political tool rather than a humanitarian lifeline.

This approach is particularly egregious given Somalia’s history. After decades of civil war, international donors have poured billions of dollars into the country, hoping to stabilize it and rebuild its infrastructure. That this aid is being used as a bargaining chip in political battles is an insult to the international community and, more importantly, to the Somali people, who suffer the consequences.

International donors are already becoming increasingly wary of how their funds are being used. If this misuse continues, it could lead to a decrease in aid or stricter oversight, which would have devastating effects on Somalia’s regions. Puntland, Jubbaland, and other federal states rely on this assistance to build roads, provide healthcare, and educate their populations. Without it, the already precarious situation in these areas could become even more dire.

A Crisis of Leadership and Trust

The failure of federalism in Somalia is, at its core, a crisis of leadership. President Mohamoud’s tactics have eroded the trust that is essential for a functioning federal system. By turning aid into a political weapon and sidelining regional leaders, he has undermined the very foundations of federalism. His leadership style has alienated key stakeholders and deepened the divisions that federalism was meant to heal.

Prime Minister Barre’s remarks that Somalia lacks the “unity and nationalism we wished for” reflect a harsh reality: the country is more divided than ever. Federalism, rather than bringing the nation together, is now exacerbating these divisions, as regional leaders feel increasingly marginalized and ignored.

Somalia’s federal experiment was built on the idea that regional autonomy, paired with national unity, could stabilize the country. But under Mohamoud’s leadership, that balance has been lost. Instead of fostering cooperation, the federal government has turned to coercion. Instead of building trust, it has sowed distrust. And instead of empowering regions, it has weakened them.

Learning from Somaliland

In his remarks, Prime Minister Barre made an unexpected but telling suggestion: Somalia should look to Somaliland for lessons on unity and governance. Somaliland, which declared independence from Somalia in 1991, remains unrecognized by the international community, yet it has maintained a relatively stable and functional governance system. Its ability to preserve unity and avoid internal division is in stark contrast to Somalia’s fractured federal system.

Barre’s suggestion is significant. Somaliland, despite its challenges, has managed to build a governance system that respects local autonomy while maintaining a strong sense of national identity. Somalia, on the other hand, is struggling to balance regional autonomy with centralized power. Perhaps there are lessons to be learned from Somaliland’s approach to governance—a model that emphasizes consensus-building and local ownership over top-down control.

A Federal System in Crisis

Somalia’s federal system is failing, and the reasons are clear: political manipulation, corruption, and a lack of leadership have turned federalism into a farce. President Mohamoud’s tactics of using aid as leverage and excluding regional leaders from decision-making processes have deepened the country’s divisions. The failure of the National Consultative Council is not just a diplomatic setback—it is a sign that federalism in Somalia is on life support.

If Somalia is to salvage its federal system, it will need a leader who can unite, not divide; who can engage in meaningful dialogue with regional leaders, not blackmail them; and who can prioritize the well-being of all Somalis, not just those who support him politically. Until that happens, Somalia’s federal experiment will continue to crumble, and its people will pay the price.

With allegations of blackmail and misuse of international funds, Somalia’s leader is accused of sacrificing national stability and democracy for personal political gain.

Imagine a country already grappling with poverty, instability, and conflict. Now, add to that a leader accused of playing political games that further entrench divisions and deprive citizens of desperately needed development resources. This is the reality facing Somalia, where President Hassan Sheikh Mohamoud is facing mounting accusations of using international development funds as leverage to blackmail federal states into supporting his political agenda.

In a country where survival often depends on international aid, these allegations feel like a betrayal on the grandest scale—one that jeopardizes not only Somalia’s fragile democracy but also the well-being of millions.

Blackmail and Political Machinations

President Mohamoud’s alleged strategy is both simple and insidious: withhold international development funds from regional member states that refuse to back his election plans. This tactic is not just about political survival—it’s about consolidating power by crushing dissent. But the real cost of this power play is borne by ordinary Somali citizens in regions where these funds are crucial for education, healthcare, infrastructure, and even basic survival.

The president’s move has drawn the ire of local leaders, who say that Mohamoud is deliberately stoking divisions, transforming what should be collaborative governance into a high-stakes chess game. The message from the presidency is clear: get in line or get cut off.

One regional leader, who requested anonymity for fear of retribution, described the situation in stark terms: “It’s not about governance anymore—it’s about obedience. If you don’t bow down to Mogadishu, you’re out.”

The idea that a nation’s leader would gamble with development aid—funds that are meant to lift Somalia out of its cycle of poverty and instability—is not only shocking, it is infuriating. While the federal government continues to point to security and governance improvements in the capital, Mogadishu, the rest of the country is left to fight over scraps.

Regional States Held Hostage

Somalia’s federal states, each with their own pressing needs, rely heavily on international development assistance to address basic public services—everything from road construction to healthcare programs. Yet, under Mohamoud’s leadership, these funds have reportedly become a tool for blackmail. Any regional government that dares to question his policies or refuses to fall in line with his reelection strategy risks losing critical funding.

And it’s not just a matter of political preference. Withholding these funds exacerbates the already entrenched inequalities between Mogadishu and the regions, fanning the flames of resentment and further destabilizing the country’s fragile political landscape.

Consider a region like Jubaland, which has long been at odds with Mogadishu over autonomy and governance. Under Mohamoud’s alleged strategy, withholding funds could cripple the local government’s ability to provide basic services, deepening the divide and pushing citizens further into poverty and instability. These power dynamics leave regional leaders with an impossible choice: betray their constituents or risk losing the resources they need to govern.

International Donors in the Crosshairs

International development aid is supposed to be a lifeline, especially in a nation like Somalia, where decades of civil war and extremism have devastated infrastructure and public services. But if the allegations against President Mohamoud are true, then that lifeline is being weaponized for political gain.

For international donors—who often operate under the assumption that their aid will be distributed equitably—the accusations against Mohamoud are deeply troubling. Aid agencies and governments have long preached the importance of transparency and good governance. If development funds are being manipulated for political leverage, it could prompt international donors to rethink their support for Somalia altogether.

This scenario is a nightmare not only for the federal states but for the entire country. Somalia’s economy is fragile, and its reliance on international assistance is well-documented. A collapse in donor trust could result in aid cuts, driving Somalia into deeper economic despair and possibly igniting new waves of conflict.

As one Western diplomat put it, “We need assurances that our funds are being used to help people, not to serve one man’s political ambitions.”

The Death of Democratic Process?

Perhaps the most dangerous consequence of these alleged actions is the erosion of Somalia’s fragile democratic system. By holding development funds hostage, Mohamoud is not just undermining the autonomy of regional governments—he’s undermining the democratic processes that are essential to Somalia’s future.

Elections in Somalia are already precarious affairs, often marred by violence, corruption, and accusations of fraud. If regional governments are forced to support Mohamoud out of fear of losing essential funding, then democracy in Somalia becomes nothing more than a puppet show, with the strings pulled by Mogadishu.

This tactic reeks of authoritarianism, and it raises the question: How long before Somalia’s federal states fight back?

The seeds of discontent are already growing. Regional leaders are increasingly vocal in their opposition to the president’s tactics, and some are even considering pushing back more aggressively against Mogadishu. This internal conflict risks tearing the country apart at a time when unity is desperately needed to combat both economic challenges and the persistent threat of extremist groups like al-Shabaab.

The Human Cost

Amid these political power plays, it is easy to forget the real victims: the people of Somalia. For many, international aid is the only lifeline in a country where poverty, conflict, and instability are daily realities. With regional governments stripped of funding, the services that citizens rely on—healthcare, education, clean water—are at risk of vanishing.

Imagine being a mother in Puntland, watching your children suffer from malnutrition because the local government can’t secure the funds needed for food programs. Or imagine being a father in Galmudug, unable to access basic medical care because your regional hospital is shut down due to lack of resources.

These are not abstract concepts. These are the real, tangible consequences of President Mohamoud’s alleged blackmail of federal states. And as long as this political game continues, it is the Somali people who will pay the price.

A Ticking Time Bomb

The situation in Somalia is a ticking time bomb. President Mohamoud’s alleged use of international funds to blackmail regional states is not just a breach of trust—it’s a dangerous move that risks unraveling the entire fabric of the country.

Somalia needs a leader who can unite its people, not divide them for personal gain. As long as Mohamoud continues to play this high-stakes political game, the future of Somalia remains uncertain, and its people continue to suffer the consequences.

International donors and regional leaders must come together to demand transparency, accountability, and fairness in the distribution of development funds. The alternative is too grim to consider—a Somalia where corruption reigns, democracy is a farce, and its people are left to fend for themselves.

Somaliland’s Unstoppable Rise: A Beacon of Progress While Somalia Stumbles in Chaos.

In an era where democracy is both revered and challenged, the contrast between Somaliland and Somalia stands as a poignant example of governance, stability, and the conflicting narratives that have defined the Horn of Africa for over three decades. As Afghanistan’s fall to the Taliban and the ongoing chaos in Ukraine dominate headlines, Somaliland quietly prepares for its upcoming presidential elections on November 13, 2024—a testament to its commitment to democracy amidst a backdrop of turmoil in neighboring Somalia.

Recently, Somalia’s Foreign Minister Ahmed Macalin Fiqi asserted the government’s commitment to ensuring fair elections in Somaliland during an address at the United Nations General Assembly. This declaration has drawn sharp rebuke from Somaliland’s government, which branded the remarks as “baseless” and emblematic of an illegitimate administration’s attempts to undermine the sovereignty and democratic aspirations of the Somaliland people. This exchange reveals more than mere political posturing; it shines a spotlight on the broader implications of external perceptions and interventions in the region.

The Republic of Somaliland, which declared its independence from Somalia in 1991, has emerged as a beacon of stability and democratic governance in a region often plagued by conflict and despair. Unlike Somalia, where governance is often synonymous with chaos, clan rivalries, and the ominous specter of Al-Shabaab, Somaliland has cultivated a political culture characterized by inclusivity and accountability. Its government, founded on democratic principles, has conducted multiple free and fair elections over the years, reflecting a maturity that starkly contrasts with the political landscape in Mogadishu.

At the heart of Somaliland’s success is a commitment to creating a society built on the rule of law and respect for human rights. The region has nurtured burgeoning democratic institutions that have provided a platform for civic engagement and political expression. Healthcare, education, and infrastructure have flourished, allowing its citizens to enjoy a quality of life that many in Somalia can only dream of. The recent elections will be yet another opportunity for Somaliland to reaffirm its identity and autonomy, free from external interference.

In sharp juxtaposition, Somalia’s political landscape continues to be marred by violence, corruption, and an entrenched culture of clan-based power struggles. The current administration in Mogadishu, which has been unable to exert authority over vast swathes of territory, struggles with systemic issues that inhibit progress. Al-Shabaab militants continue to exploit the chaos, stifling any genuine attempts at governance. The confluence of terrorism and state failure presents a paradox where the government, represented by figures such as Fiqi—whose own past affiliations with Al-Shabaab raise serious questions about legitimacy—embodies an unsettling link between authority and insurgency.

Ku Klux Klan of the Somali National Army (SNA) and its failures in combating Al-Shabaab only compound the dilemma. The Somali military remains underfunded and ill-equipped, often resorting to external forces to maintain a semblance of stability. In this context, Fiqi’s statements regarding supporting rebels in Ethiopia resonate as a desperate attempt to assert authority over a fractured state while simultaneously deepening alliances with entities that threaten the region’s stability.

The international community’s approach to Somalia has focused heavily on humanitarian aid and military support. However, this dependency has stymied efforts towards true governance reform and accountability, effectively enabling a corrosive relationship with endemic corruption that sidelines the very citizens it seeks to help. Somalia’s reliance on foreign assistance paints a grim picture, revealing how external intervention can often perpetuate dysfunction rather than facilitate genuine change.

Somaliland, in contrast, has taken a markedly different route. By prioritizing self-reliance and fostering strategic partnerships, Somaliland has been able to develop a sense of international identity and recognition that Somalia can only aspire to. It has transcended the habitual cycles of devastation that plague its southern counterpart, displaying resilience that showcases the aspirations of a people determined to forge their own destiny.

As the international community contemplates its role in the Horn of Africa, the question emerges: why does Somalia continue to receive preferential treatment over Somaliland, despite the latter’s demonstrable commitment to democratic governance and stability? The UN and other institutional bodies must recognize that supporting the illegitimate government in Mogadishu does not translate into a legitimate pathway to peace and democracy in the region. Instead, there is a pressing need for a reevaluation of these allegiances to honor the self-determination of the Somaliland people.

The interplay of power in this region emphasizes the importance of contextual understanding in foreign policy decisions. While the crisis in Somalia may command the attention of international actors due to its complexity and volatility, it is the steady progress of Somaliland—its dedication to freedom, democracy, and human rights—that should warrant strategic partnerships and recognition.

How Somaliland’s Progress Highlights Somalia’s Struggles with Corruption and Terrorism

Foreign Minister Faces Explosive Allegations of Corruption and Mismanagement

Edna Adan: A Visionary Leader and Advocate for Somaliland’s Path Forward

In the rugged terrain of the Horn of Africa, few individuals have left a lasting mark quite like Dr. Edna Adan. A pioneering figure in Somaliland, Dr. Adan’s legacy extends beyond her humanitarian work in healthcare to her enduring contributions to diplomacy and regional development. Most recently, her unwavering support for the evolving partnership between Somaliland and Ethiopia has positioned her as one of the most prominent advocates for peaceful cooperation and prosperity in the region.

In a recent interview, Dr. Adan eloquently discussed the historical and contemporary significance of the relationship between Somaliland and Ethiopia, emphasizing how this partnership can serve as a beacon of stability in the Horn of Africa. For Edna Adan, Somaliland’s progress is personal, rooted in her deep connection to the land and people she has devoted her life to serving.

A Historical Context: Somaliland’s Quest for Sovereignty

Somaliland’s history is one of resilience. After gaining independence from British colonial rule in 1960, the nation briefly united with Somalia, a partnership that would eventually dissolve into a protracted and brutal civil war. By 1991, Somaliland declared its independence, carving out a unique space of self-governance and relative stability in a region often marred by conflict. Yet, despite its achievements, Somaliland has remained unrecognized by the international community.

Dr. Adan, a former foreign minister of Somaliland and a passionate advocate for her homeland, has long argued that Somaliland’s journey toward recognition should not define its future. Instead, the focus should be on fostering regional partnerships and enhancing the lives of Somaliland’s citizens. Her forward-thinking perspective is embodied in the recent Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Somaliland and Ethiopia, which she views as a critical step in building economic and diplomatic bridges in the Horn of Africa.

Historical Ties and a New Era of Cooperation

The relationship between Somaliland and Ethiopia is not a recent development, nor is it born solely of necessity. For centuries, trade routes, cultural exchanges, and shared ethnic ties have connected the two regions. These historical connections have laid the groundwork for today’s burgeoning partnership, which is formalized in the January signing of an MOU focused on trade, infrastructure development, and security cooperation.

For Dr. Adan, this agreement is both a continuation and a strengthening of these deep-rooted ties. “We share more than just a border with Ethiopia; we share a vision for stability and prosperity,” she remarked during her interview. She praised the MOU for addressing key areas of mutual benefit, including improving transportation links, enhancing trade access, and working together to ensure regional security.

In particular, the MOU’s focus on economic cooperation stands out as a potential game-changer for Somaliland. With its strategic location along the Red Sea, Somaliland’s ports are poised to become vital gateways for landlocked Ethiopia, offering critical access to global markets. This infrastructure development, bolstered by the MOU, can transform the economies of both regions and ensure long-term growth.

Dr. Adan’s Vision for the Horn of Africa

What sets Dr. Adan apart is not just her advocacy for Somaliland’s interests but her broader vision for the Horn of Africa. The region, long associated with instability, can benefit from the kind of collaborative efforts that the Somaliland-Ethiopia partnership represents. “Our relationship with Ethiopia is not about one side benefiting over the other,” she stated. “It is about building a future where the people of the Horn of Africa can thrive together.”

Her perspective is clear: Somaliland’s self-determination should not be viewed as a threat to its neighbors. Instead, its partnerships, such as the one with Ethiopia, should be seen as a testament to its commitment to regional stability and economic progress. Dr. Adan, always the diplomat, emphasizes that cooperation—rather than conflict—must guide the region’s future.

Challenges and Opportunities Ahead

Despite the optimism surrounding the MOU, Dr. Adan is realistic about the challenges that lie ahead. The lack of international recognition for Somaliland remains a significant barrier, limiting its ability to engage fully in global diplomacy and economic agreements. Additionally, internal political dynamics within both Somaliland and Ethiopia could influence the implementation of the MOU, potentially slowing progress.

External forces also loom large. The region is rife with geopolitical tensions, from Egypt’s military involvement in neighboring countries to Somalia’s vocal objections to Somaliland’s autonomy. These dynamics make it imperative for Somaliland and Ethiopia to navigate their relationship with caution and a shared commitment to peace.

However, for Dr. Adan, these challenges only underscore the importance of the partnership. “We must look to what unites us, not what divides us,” she stated, calling for continued dialogue and collaboration across the Horn of Africa.

A Legacy of Leadership

Dr. Edna Adan’s role in shaping Somaliland’s future cannot be overstated. From her groundbreaking work in maternal healthcare to her time as a diplomat and foreign minister, her influence is felt in every facet of Somaliland’s development. Her advocacy for regional cooperation, particularly through the recent MOU with Ethiopia, is just one more example of her enduring commitment to her people and her country.

Her message is simple but profound: Somaliland’s future lies not in isolation but in partnership. As Dr. Adan champions Somaliland’s potential on the global stage, she remains a steadfast voice for peace, collaboration, and progress in the Horn of Africa.

Conclusion: The Road Ahead

The evolving relationship between Somaliland and Ethiopia, as seen through the lens of Dr. Edna Adan’s vision, offers a glimpse of what is possible for the Horn of Africa. As these two regions continue to deepen their ties, the potential for lasting peace and prosperity becomes more tangible.

In the words of Dr. Adan, “We are writing a new chapter for the Horn of Africa—one of hope, cooperation, and shared success.” It is a chapter that holds promise not only for Somaliland and Ethiopia but for the entire region. Through strong leadership, visionary partnerships, and a commitment to mutual respect, Somaliland’s path forward is one that the world will be watching closely.

As the Horn of Africa faces unprecedented challenges, figures like Dr. Edna Adan remind us that leadership, vision, and cooperation are the keys to a brighter, more stable future.

Dr. Edna Adan: The Heartbeat of Healthcare and Hope in Somaliland

Edna Adan: A Beacon of Brilliance and Humanity

Interview With Edna Adan, The Official Somaliland Recognition

The winds of change are sweeping across the Horn of Africa, and at the center of this shift is the audacious partnership between Somaliland and Ethiopia. In a region riddled with instability, Somalia continues to cling to diplomatic overtures, desperately pleading with global organizations while holding onto fantasies of dominion over Somaliland. Yet, in reality, it’s Somaliland and Ethiopia forging ahead with a groundbreaking agreement that is not only reshaping regional geopolitics but also standing as a testament to the triumph of vision over stagnation.

For far too long, Somalia has hidden behind a web of lies and international propaganda, selling the narrative that Somaliland remains part of its territory. But the truth, deeply etched in the sands of history, tells a different story. Somaliland earned its independence on June 26, 1960, while Somalia was still grappling with the chains of Italian colonization. Somalia’s denial of Somaliland’s sovereignty and their contemptuous treatment of the region during years of injustice cannot be erased. Today, the Somali government’s wild claims are unraveling, exposing the deep-rooted hatred and corruption that has long driven their agenda.

A Game-Changer for the Horn of Africa Amid Somalia’s Desperate Diplomacy

Berbera Port – Somaliland

As Somalia futilely attempts to win favor from international organizations, Somaliland and Ethiopia are delivering results. The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between these two neighbors, signed in January, is nothing short of a game-changer. It marks a pivotal step toward regional growth and security, cutting right through the noise of Somalia’s diplomatic scrambling.

This agreement is not just a piece of paper – it’s a full-blown blueprint for the future. Somaliland and Ethiopia are looking beyond borders and bureaucracy, focusing on what truly matters: economic integration, infrastructure development, and robust security cooperation. The Berbera port and the Berbera Corridor, set to link Berbera to Ethiopia’s Dire Dawa, symbolize a bold new era of trade, innovation, and job creation in the Horn of Africa. It’s a logistical lifeline that Somalia can only dream of, especially given the inefficiency and internal chaos that has paralyzed Mogadishu for years.

Ethiopia, a powerhouse of the region, sees the potential in this collaboration, choosing partnership with Somaliland over the constant instability and terrorist threats seeping out of Somalia. Addis Ababa’s decision to invest in Somaliland isn’t just economic – it’s a strategic decision to back stability over dysfunction, to choose vision over empty promises. This is what progress looks like, and Somalia simply can’t keep up.

Somalia’s Desperation: Clutching at Straws in Global Diplomacy

Meanwhile, Somalia’s President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud is racing against the clock, pulling every diplomatic string he can find. The urgency in his voice is palpable as he calls on everyone from the European Union to the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation to bail his country out of its self-made quagmire. Somalia is banking on international alliances, hoping to end the maritime dispute with Ethiopia, all while harboring dreams of reclaiming Somaliland. But Somalia’s problem runs far deeper than territorial disputes. It’s a nation riddled with corruption, political interference, and a leadership system broken beyond repair.

This is a government that turns a blind eye to the daily terrorist attacks ravaging its land while claiming moral authority over Somaliland. Just this week, Arab League ambassadors gathered in Mogadishu to declare support for Somalia’s sovereignty. Yet, behind those hollow statements lies a crumbling state that has failed time and time again to provide security or economic hope for its people. As Egyptian soldiers pour into Somalia under the guise of support, Ethiopia’s frustration is boiling over, and rightly so. Somalia’s alliances with external players like Egypt are seen as preparation for conflict, sparking concerns throughout the region. Ethiopia will not sit idly by as its neighbor drums up support for war.

Somaliland: The Beacon of Stability and Vision in a Chaotic Region

DP World and Somaliland open new terminal at Berbera Port

In contrast, Somaliland stands tall, a beacon of stability and forward-thinking leadership. The Ethiopian-Somaliland MoU is a landmark moment that transcends politics. It represents a future where regional stability isn’t dictated by external forces, but by countries willing to take bold steps toward mutual prosperity. Security is at the core of this MoU, with commitments to combat terrorism, piracy, and human trafficking – issues that Somalia has consistently failed to address. Somaliland and Ethiopia’s collaboration on intelligence-sharing and military capacity-building is a direct response to the security vacuum left by Somalia’s incompetence.

Let’s not forget the human aspect of this story. While Somalia’s leaders bicker and posture on the global stage, Somaliland’s people are seeing real change. Jobs are being created, infrastructure is being built, and communities are thriving under a leadership that prioritizes their well-being. The Berbera Corridor alone promises to transform lives, turning the once-sleepy port into a vibrant logistics hub that links Ethiopia’s bustling economy with global markets.

Ethiopia’s Growing Power: Partnering with Global Giants

On the international front, Ethiopia is proving its mettle as a force to be reckoned with. As top Ethiopian military officials, including Field Marshal Birhanu Jula, meet with Chinese counterparts at the 11th Beijing Xiangshan Forum, the message is clear: Ethiopia is playing the long game. Its focus on fifth-generation warfare (5GW), military technology, and strategic partnerships is setting the stage for Ethiopia to become a regional military heavyweight. The collaboration with China underscores Ethiopia’s ambition to dominate not just economically but also militarily in the Horn of Africa.

In stark contrast, Somalia remains woefully behind, stuck in a cycle of dependency on foreign troops and aid, unable to secure its own borders or maintain peace within its fractured political landscape.

The Horn of Africa’s Future Is Being Decided Now

Hargeisa, Somaliland

The writing is on the wall. Somaliland and Ethiopia are charting a new course for the Horn of Africa, one that is built on stability, innovation, and cooperation. Meanwhile, Somalia, entangled in its own internal strife and broken governance, is left clutching at diplomatic lifelines that may soon snap under the weight of its failures.

It’s time for the world to recognize Somaliland for what it truly is: a sovereign, progressive nation that is ready to lead the Horn of Africa into a prosperous future. Somalia’s attempts to rewrite history and drag the region into chaos must be rejected. The time has come for bold action, for partnerships that matter, and for a future that Somaliland and Ethiopia are already building – with or without the world’s recognition.

The question now is, which side of history will the international community choose?

Somaliland’s Ascendance: A Stark Contrast to Somalia’s Descent into Chaos

In the Horn of Africa, a tale of two destinies unfolds. On one hand, Somaliland boasts 34 years of steady progress and self-governance, showcasing resilience and effective state-building. On the other, Somalia spirals into an abyss defined by corruption, clan warfare, and terrorism under the dark shadow of Al-Shabab. As Somaliland seeks recognition and cooperation, Somalia plays its last card in a futile attempt to stifle Somaliland’s burgeoning relationships, particularly the recent Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Ethiopia.

The current Somali government, often overshadowed by the omnipresent threat of Al-Shabab, presents itself as a paradox—one that bridges traditional governance with the tactics of terrorism. Ahmed Moalim Fiqi, the foreign minister who once served as a high officer of Al-Shabab, exemplifies this anomaly. His remarks on the possibility of supporting rebels in Ethiopia reveal a dangerous alliance between a government that claims legitimacy and a terror outfit that thrives on chaos. This fusion of state and terrorism perpetuates the narrative that Somalia remains an unstable entity, ruled by the whims of clannism and extremist ideologies.

Contrast this with Somaliland, which has made remarkable strides in governance and social development. While Somalia’s cities remain battlegrounds rife with violence and fear, Somaliland has cultivated an environment of relative peace and innovation. The Republic has established its institutions, developed a currency, and created a functional infrastructure—achievements that starkly differentiate it from its neighbor. Somaliland has cultivated partnerships with countries like Ethiopia and beyond, showcasing a willingness to engage constructively on the global stage.

Somaliland’s Progress and Somalia’s Perpetual Struggles

Somaliland’s independence aspirations have not gone unnoticed. The MOU with Ethiopia, which promises both recognition and economic benefits, symbolizes a pivotal moment—one that threatens to upend the status quo Somalia has maintained through decades of instability. The reaction from Somalia is telling; resorting to threats and empty promises of support for Ethiopian rebels reflects a desperation born from a fear of losing influence. The Somali government views this MOU not only as a betrayal but as an infringement on its sovereignty. Yet, the reality is that Somalia has consistently failed to maintain order within its own borders, leaving it vulnerable to external challenges.

The threat of Al-Shabab and the persistent violence it inflicts on Somali society are manifestations of an ineffective governance model. Clannism runs rampant, leading to a feeble governance structure that fails to represent all its citizens. With leaders such as Fiqi promoting instability and furthering ties with armed insurgents, it’s clear that Somalia’s leadership is more interested in wielding power than cultivating unity or development. The U.S. Special Envoy’s insistence on Somalia’s territorial integrity does little to address the crux of the issue: a government entangled with terrorism undermines its very legitimacy.

On the international stage, Somalia’s reliance on foreign aid has buoyed a system rife with corruption, further impeding any chances of foundational change. In stark contrast, Somaliland has managed to chart a course through self-reliance and strategic partnerships, earning respect and recognition that Somalia can only dream of achieving.

Moreover, the influence of regional players like Turkey, Egypt, and Eritrea highlights the geopolitical tensions surrounding Somalia’s struggles. While Somalia desperately seeks external validation and alliances, Somaliland quietly solidifies its position as a reliable partner, drawing international attention to its cause. Despite efforts to destabilize this burgeoning relationship with rhetoric of unity, the reality is that Ethiopia will prioritize genuine partnerships over hollow alliances with a government fraught with instability.

The past decades have illustrated the folly of ignoring Somaliland’s progress. The international community must recognize this reality, as failing to do so not only neglects the successes of Somaliland but perpetuates Somalia’s cycle of violence and instability. As the west fears a shift in allegiance should Somaliland receive recognition, it must weigh the extensive repercussions of supporting a regime that thrives on chaos against the benefits of endorsing a self-stabilizing entity searching for legitimacy.

In conclusion, the juxtaposition of Somaliland’s progress against Somalia’s decay presents a compelling narrative for the Horn of Africa. With an eye toward the future, it is imperative to support Somaliland in its quest for recognition and collaboration. Acknowledging its achievements is key to fostering stability, growth, and ultimately a peaceful region, while Somalia must confront the systemic issues plaguing its governance before it can ever hope to achieve comparable success. As Somaliland moves forward, the world must reconsider its persistent misalignment, recognizing that the path to peace lies in supporting those who have demonstrated the capacity for good governance and development.

Somaliland’s closure of the Egyptian library and the successful MOU with Ethiopia signal a pivotal moment for regional politics.

Somaliland has made headlines with its bold actions that signal a transformative shift in regional dynamics. The closure of the Egyptian-owned library in Hargeisa and the successful conclusion of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Ethiopia have set the stage for a new era of diplomacy and recognition for Somaliland.

On September 11, 2024, Somaliland’s Foreign Minister Dr. Essa Kayd stood at the forefront of a press conference in Hargeisa, delivering news that has ignited national pride and international intrigue. The Egyptian library, long a symbol of Cairo’s influence in Somaliland, has been shuttered, marking a decisive break from the past. This move comes amid ongoing tensions and strategic maneuvers that underscore Somaliland’s growing assertiveness on the global stage.

Dr. Kayd’s announcement was more than just a diplomatic update; it was a declaration of Somaliland’s strategic realignment. “The government of the Republic of Somaliland has announced the permanent closure of the Egyptian library in Hargeisa. This action, coupled with the successful completion of the MOU with Ethiopia, marks a significant milestone in our quest for international recognition,” Dr. Kayd declared.

The closure of the Egyptian library, which has been a contentious issue, reflects deeper geopolitical currents. The Egyptian government, known for its recent attempts to influence the region through military and diplomatic channels, has had its ambitions thwarted by Somaliland’s decisive action. This move is seen as a direct rebuff to Cairo’s efforts and a step towards reclaiming Somaliland’s sovereignty and narrative.

Simultaneously, the MOU with Ethiopia, which has recently been finalized, represents a pivotal achievement for Somaliland. The agreement, aimed at enhancing economic and strategic cooperation, has been a long-standing goal for both nations. The successful conclusion of this MOU is not merely a bureaucratic victory; it signifies a strategic partnership that could reshape regional power dynamics.

The significance of this development extends beyond Somaliland’s borders. The relationship between Somaliland and Ethiopia is seen as a counterbalance to the growing influence of Somalia and its external backers. Tensions between Ethiopia and Somalia have been exacerbated by recent events, including Ethiopia’s military maneuvers in Somalia’s Gedo region. Ethiopian forces have seized key airports in the Gedo region to disrupt the flow of Egyptian military equipment intended for Somali troops. This move underscores the high stakes involved and Ethiopia’s commitment to securing its interests in the face of regional challenges.

The geopolitical chess game is further complicated by the ongoing disputes over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). The dam, a contentious project between Ethiopia and Egypt, has strained relations and highlighted the broader regional rivalries that impact Somaliland’s position. By aligning more closely with Ethiopia, Somaliland is positioning itself strategically in a context of competing regional interests.

Dr. Kayd’s leadership is also noteworthy in this unfolding drama. His firm stance against Egyptian influence and his successful negotiation of the MOU with Ethiopia have elevated him as a key figure in Somaliland’s diplomatic efforts. His actions reflect a broader strategy to enhance Somaliland’s standing and secure its place in the international arena.

The closure of the Egyptian library and the MOU with Ethiopia are not isolated events but part of a broader trend of regional realignments. Somaliland’s assertive actions signal a departure from past dependencies and a new focus on forging strategic partnerships that align with its national interests.

Meanwhile, the response from Somalia, Egypt, and Turkey has been marked by a mix of frustration and diplomatic maneuvering. Somalia’s federal government, already strained by internal conflicts and external pressures, finds itself in a precarious position as Ethiopia consolidates its influence. Egypt’s attempts to project power through military and diplomatic means have been undermined by Somaliland’s decisive actions. Turkey, with its own regional ambitions, is also watching closely as the balance of power shifts.

In this high-stakes environment, Somaliland’s recent actions are a testament to its growing confidence and strategic acumen. The closure of the Egyptian library and the successful MOU with Ethiopia are more than symbolic gestures; they represent a significant stride towards international recognition and regional stability.

As Somaliland navigates these complex dynamics, it is clear that the nation is not merely reacting to external pressures but actively shaping its future. Dr. Essa Kayd’s leadership is central to this narrative, and his recent announcements have set the stage for a new chapter in Somaliland’s quest for global recognition and influence.

The unfolding events in the Red Sea region and beyond are a reminder of the shifting geopolitical landscape and the critical role that emerging actors like Somaliland play in this evolving narrative. The international community would do well to pay close attention to Somaliland’s strategic moves, as they herald a new era of regional diplomacy and power realignment.

As Egypt’s Bluster Intensifies, Its Mismanagement of Water Resources and Overreaching Ambitions Are Exposed

As the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) nears completion, the Nile River has become a flashpoint of tension between Egypt and Ethiopia. Recent headlines scream of impending conflict: “New war looms over Nile water,” with Egypt’s military mobilizing troops and issuing stark warnings against Ethiopia. Yet, beneath this charged rhetoric lies a troubling truth: Egypt’s furious outcry against Ethiopia’s dam is more a smokescreen for its own failings and ambitions than a legitimate concern for the Nile’s future.

On September 1, Egyptian officials issued a veiled threat in response to Ethiopia’s dam activities, a move that seemed to foreshadow a series of military maneuvers including the dispatch of 1,000 soldiers to the troubled Somalia. This aggressive stance aligns with the recent, provocative statements from Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, who vowed to “humiliate” any nation threatening his country’s sovereignty. Ahmed’s fiery declaration at the Sovereignty Day ceremony in Addis Ababa underscores the high stakes in this regional standoff.

The crux of the conflict lies in the Nile itself—a lifeline for Egypt, which relies almost entirely on the river for its water needs due to the country’s minimal rainfall. Egypt’s concerns about Ethiopia’s GERD focus on the fear that the dam could diminish their water supply, potentially jeopardizing up to 200,000 acres of irrigated land. Additionally, Egypt is wary of the dam’s impact during droughts, fearing that Ethiopia might prioritize electricity generation over water flow, exacerbating their water scarcity.

Yet, this narrative presents only a partial view of the issue. Egypt’s criticism of Ethiopia overlooks its own broader ambitions and management failures. Cairo’s expansive agricultural schemes, particularly in the desert and Sinai regions, highlight a complex and perhaps less palatable side of the story. The Aswan High Dam, a monumental engineering feat, has already transformed vast desert areas into productive farmland. Further plans to irrigate the Sinai Peninsula and other arid regions reveal Egypt’s unrelenting drive to expand its agricultural footprint, utilizing Nile water to fuel these ambitions.

In 2019, reports detailed how tens of thousands of cubic meters of Nile water were being redirected to Northern Sinai, aiming to create new agricultural hubs and attract investment. This ambitious plan, dating back to the late 1970s and ramped up under President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, represents a significant expansion of Egypt’s agricultural base, fueled by the very river that is now the subject of heated dispute.

Such aggressive expansion raises critical questions: Should Ethiopia halt its development projects to accommodate Egypt’s increasing agricultural needs? Is it fair to demand that Ethiopia’s dam, which serves to electrify a nation with a significant portion of its population lacking reliable power, be restricted to preserve Egypt’s extensive irrigation plans?

Ethiopia’s rationale for the GERD is clear and pragmatic. The dam aims to address the needs of 60% of its population currently without electricity and to boost its economic development through enhanced power generation. The dam, located near the Sudanese border, is designed to serve Ethiopia’s burgeoning energy requirements and to provide potential benefits to neighboring countries, including Sudan and South Sudan.

Egypt’s vehement opposition, therefore, seems to mask a deeper issue: a failure to manage its own water resources effectively while pursuing increasingly ambitious agricultural projects that strain regional resources. By framing the GERD as a threat to its survival, Egypt deflects attention from its own strategic and management shortcomings.

Prez: Abdel Fattah el-Sisi Abdel Fattah el-Sisi

As tensions continue to escalate, it is imperative to scrutinize the broader implications of this dispute. Egypt’s outcry may well be a desperate attempt to salvage a position of power and control over the Nile, but it also underscores the pressing need for a more balanced and cooperative approach to managing this vital resource. The reality is that both nations are pursuing their legitimate interests, but the clash of these interests could have far-reaching consequences for the entire region.

In the quest for regional stability, the challenge remains to address these contentious issues through diplomacy and cooperation, rather than through military threats or unilateral actions. The Nile is a shared resource, and its management demands a nuanced understanding of both historical grievances and contemporary needs. As Egypt’s frustrations and Ethiopia’s resolve collide, the world watches to see if a path to mutual understanding and sustainable management can emerge from the shadows of conflict.