Opinion
Somaliland Is Not Somalia
Somaliland, located in the Horn of Africa, has declared its independence from United Kingdom on 26 Jun 1960, Somaliland is a neighbor of Somalia, a state often marred by political instability and conflict. This article seeks to articulate the historical context surrounding Somaliland’s quest for independence, highlighting the differences between Somaliland and Somalia, and arguing for the recognition of Somaliland as a sovereign state.
Historical Context of Somaliland and Somalia
Somalia’s journey to independence is often celebrated on July 1, 1960, the day it emerged as a unified republic from colonial rule. However, a critical examination reveals that this independence was not a unilateral achievement but rather a culmination of earlier political developments. On 26 June 1960, Somaliland became an independent and sovereign stat and Restoration of sovereignty 18 May 1991. Just five days later, on July 1, that newly independent Somaliland was merged with the southern regions, formerly under Italian administration.
This transition from being a British protectorate to joining Southern Somalia was not the seamless union often portrayed. The political machinations of the time obscured the distinct identities and aspirations of the regions involved. In fact, Somaliland’s independence predates Somalia’s by five days, raising essential questions about the legitimacy of Somalia’s claim to ownership over the notion of Somali unity.
UN Membership and the Legitimacy Debate
Upon gaining independence on July 1, Somalia quickly sought membership in the United Nations, with its application formally submitted under the name “Republic of Somalia.” This was supported by resolutions from the United Nations General Assembly, notably Resolution A/RES/1479(XV) on September 20, 1960, granting Somalia full UN membership.
However, the legitimacy of this membership is contested by proponents of Somaliland’s independence. They argue that Somalia’s claims to independence and UN membership do not include or reflect Somaliland’s status. The foundational documents and international resolutions reveal that while Somalia was granted independence, it did not obtain it in a manner that negated Somaliland’s prior sovereignty.
The Distinct Identity of Somaliland
Somaliland has established a governmental structure, a distinct identity, and a functioning economy since declaring back its independence from Somalia in 1991, following the collapse of the Somali central government. Unlike Somalia, which has struggled with civil war, terrorism, and political disarray, Somaliland enjoys relative peace and stability. This reality has fostered a sense of national identity among Somalilanders that stands apart from the chaos in Somalia.
The Modern Reality of Somaliland
While Somaliland operates as a independent state, it lacks formal recognition from the international community. This absence of recognition stifles its political and economic potential, limiting access to international financial institutions and aid. Nevertheless, Somaliland continues to build its institutions and develop its economy, striving for the legitimacy that comes with international recognition.
The argument for recognizing Somaliland is bolstered by its peaceful governance, structured legal system, and commitment to democratic principles, as evidenced by its regular elections. These characteristics starkly contrast with the ongoing turmoil in Somalia, reinforcing the notion that Somaliland functions effectively as a separate country.
The Legal Perspective on Celibacy and Recognition
The debate surrounding Somaliland’s status hinges on legal perceptions of statehood and independence. While Somalia claims a historical union based on post-independence transitions, it is crucial to recognize that Somaliland’s prior independence on June 26, 1960, creates a different narrative. The argument for shared independence lacks legal validity, as these regions were two distinct political entities before their temporary union.
Moreover, Somaliland maintains that its struggle for recognition is not a call to irrevocably sever ties with Somalia, but rather a quest for acknowledgment of its unique sovereignty. This perspective aligns with international norms regarding self-determination and the rights of peoples to govern themselves.
Conclusion
The case for Somaliland’s independence rests on historical context, legal arguments, and the contrasting realities of governance compared to Somalia. Recognizing Somaliland as an independent state is not merely an act of political support; it is an acknowledgment of historical truths and the assertion of the rights of its people to self-determination. As the international community reassesses its stance on Somaliland, it must consider the historical injustices and the current realities that distinguish Somaliland from Somalia.
The world must recognize that Somaliland is not Somalia, and it deserves its rightful place on the global stage.
BY; Abdullahi Ahmed Heef
How Somaliland’s Quest for International Status Challenges Existing Norms and Agreements
Advice to the Government of Somaliland Regarding International Relations and Security
Opinion
Djibouti: The Small Nation Carrying Global Weight
Djibouti: A Global Public Good for Regional Stability and Development.
Economists call a public good something that benefits everyone, without exclusion or rivalry. Diplomats know that some nations—by virtue of geography, history, and posture—embody this principle far beyond their borders or population size. Djibouti is one of them.
Our republic is not only a sovereign state serving its own citizens. From the moment of independence, Djibouti has stood as a regional and global public good: a place of anchorage, solidarity, and stability in one of the world’s most turbulent neighborhoods.
A legacy of solidarity
From the beginning, Djibouti has carried the burdens of its region. We twice received waves of Ethiopian refugees during their darkest crises. We opened our borders to Somalis fleeing civil war. We sheltered Yemenis crossing the Red Sea to escape violence, and we welcomed Eritrean families driven out by conflict. Each time, Djibouti paid the human and financial cost of solidarity—never as a matter of choice, but of duty.
This tradition continues. In 2023–24, when Sudan’s crisis escalated, Djibouti became the main hub for humanitarian evacuation, hosting, protecting, and relocating thousands of civilians, diplomats, and aid workers.
A humanitarian lifeline
Djibouti is not only a platform for trade. It is the beating heart of humanitarian logistics on the East African coast. If food and aid continue to reach millions of Yemenis today despite a devastated warzone, it is because Djibouti’s ports serve as the UN’s inspection and distribution base. Quietly, but indispensably, Djibouti has become a lifeline in the global humanitarian chain.
Today, that lifeline is under unprecedented strain. Following a recent and deeply regrettable decision by one of the largest contributors to UN agencies, the UNHCR has scaled back its role in providing basic life services to refugees. The consequences fall directly on Djibouti. With our limited national resources, we are now left to feed and sustain more than 50,000 refugees within our borders. These numbers do not even account for the additional 100,000-plus migrants who cross our territory illegally each year on their way to the Gulf states and Europe. These migrants figures are much more in reality and the main reason of migration is related to climate change consequences as well as lack of opportunities in their respective countries For a nation of barely one million people, this burden is staggering—and it is being carried in silence.
An investor in its neighbors’ future
Djibouti has never been content to be a passive aid recipient. Together with Ethiopia, we co-invested nearly 10 Billions over two decades—in infrastructure that connects not only us but our neighbors. Since the late 1990s, our port capacity has grown fourteen-fold. These facilities are not simply Djiboutian assets; they are regional arteries.
Without them, Ethiopia’s transformation would have been impossible. Over 100 million Ethiopians depend on Djibouti for food imports, energy supplies, and access to world markets.
Some outsiders mistakenly or purposely claim that Djibouti’s Ports & logistics services costs amount two billion dollars per year to Ethiopia. The truth is far more modest: the direct financial flow does not exceed 500 million dollars per year. But numbers miss the point. What matters is the strategic impact: without Djibouti, Ethiopia’s economy would be throttled, and the Horn of Africa’s development trajectory would look radically different.
Why I write today
These facts are not unknown to our partners. So why underline them now?
First, because 15 years of experience in development policy have shown me what Djibouti has contributed—and still contributes—to its region and the wider world. Second, because I am frustrated by the mechanistic formulas too often applied to us. To reduce Djibouti to a million citizens or a modest GDP is to erase its true role: a global public good whose stability and solidarity benefit hundreds of millions.
Towards a fair partnership
Supporting Djibouti is not charity. It is a collective investment in global security.
Investing in Djibouti’s infrastructure secures the flow of maritime trade that powers the global economy.
Strengthening Djibouti’s social resilience contains destabilizing spillovers from fragile neighbors.
Supporting Djibouti’s diplomatic and humanitarian role provides the Horn of Africa with a credible platform for mediation and relief.
As the traditional Allocations formula from IDA, ADF, IDB etc. is good for large or sized states.
This requires new formulas, innovative financing tools, and—above all—a fair partnership. Not despite Djibouti’s size, but because of its unique function.
An undeniable truth
Djibouti is small on the map but immense in purpose. It is a strategic crossroads, a humanitarian lifeline, a security anchor, and a vital node of world commerce.
My intention is not to provoke polemics, but to restate a truth that can no longer be ignored: without Djibouti, the Horn of Africa would not have experienced the progress it has achieved.
It is time to move beyond arithmetic models and face reality. Djibouti is a global public good. Supporting it is not supporting a small country—it is securing regional resilience, the Horn’s cohesion, the stability of world trade, and ultimately, global peace.
Ilyas M. Dawaleh
Minister Of Economy & Finance,in Charge of Industry, Republic of Djibouti.
Brotherhood at the Palace: Irro and Guelleh Forge New Horn Alliance
In the Horn of Africa, Unity Offers Power, Division Risks Peril
From Vision to Victory: Djibouti’s Political Mastery as Youssouf Assumes AU Chair
Djibouti and Somaliland Reignite Historic Brotherhood with President Irro’s Landmark Visit
Djibouti’s Mahamoud Secures Historic AU Commission Chairmanship
Why Djibouti’s Mahamoud Ali Youssouf Will Win the AU Chairmanship
Opinion
In the Horn of Africa, Unity Offers Power, Division Risks Peril
More than 3.4 billion people worldwide now live in countries that spend more on interest payments than on health. For the Horn of Africa, the arithmetic of survival tilts heavily toward integration over isolation. The deficit of trust across the region often suffocates collective action. Young people, unconvinced that tomorrow will be better, vote with their feet, crossing borders or seas in search of opportunities that home economies cannot yet provide.
The Horn of Africa has reached a hinge moment in a turbulent century. Pandemics, climate shocks, financial tremors, and geopolitical rivalries are rearranging global power, forcing countries to decide whether to hunker down behind borders or ride out the storm together.
For the Horn, the question is haunting. The refrain, whether to retreat behind borders while each country fends for itself, echoes from highlands to coasts. Isolation can soothe short-term fears; however, partnership is now the objective measure of strength. Regional integration is no longer a lofty dream. It is the complex calculus of survival.
Alarmingly, the costs of fragmentation are already visible. Border frictions delay trucks and convoys, adding days to delivery times and scaring off investors. Regulatory mismatches snarl digital start-ups and block power grids from linking. A deficit of trust suffocates collective action, while young people, unconvinced that tomorrow will be better than today, leave to seek opportunities abroad.
Nonetheless, most damaging is the disunity that turns the Horn of Africa into a strategic chessboard on which outside powers manoeuvre, each move widening the region’s fault lines. No state, however large or resource-rich, can flourish for long in such an environment.
Djibouti has chosen a different path. Its leaders insist on openness, dialogue, and connection. More than a logistics platform, Djibouti aspires to be a catalyst for cooperation, hosting peace talks, laying fibre-optic cables, and keeping its ports open to all.
If the geography of the Red Sea lanes, shared watersheds, and cross-border pastoral routes ties the Horn of Africa together, then political will can turn geography from a curse into a blessing.
The Horn of Africa is not condemned to crisis. It possesses the raw materials to become a laboratory of African solutions to Africa’s problems and a driver of shared prosperity. Ports can serve entire corridors, not just one flag. Peace can rest on dialogue, not fear. National pride can bind people together instead of driving them apart.
The region is not a powder keg. It can be a collective powerhouse if we choose unity.
Imagine a region powered by pooled energy grids, stitched together by seamless roads and rail, and wired through interoperable digital platforms. Envision supply chains that shrug off climate shocks because farmers, traders, and relief agencies coordinate forecasts, seeds, and storage. Imagine a workforce of young women and men who swap ideas instead of arms.
Indeed, such a future is attainable, but only if firm foundations are laid. There should be leadership that breaks cycles of grievance and institutions trusted to mediate disputes. Regular forums, such as councils, joint commissions, and early-warning systems, that replace rumour with facts should be encouraged. While joint investment in public goods, such as infrastructure, innovation, and climate resilience, needs to be reinforced, the most elusive aspect, a culture of trust, should be built patiently, transaction by transaction, election by election, and deal by deal.
Sovereignty and solidarity need not collide. When interdependence is managed, bridges guard national interests better than walls can.
Djibouti’s claim to neutrality should be viewed as a responsibility, not an indifference. Three pillars support it.
It originates from an exceptional geography, serving as a gateway that links Africa, the Middle East, Europe, and Asia. Its diplomatic credibility is earned by outreach to every camp without surrendering judgment. It has an enduring stability, upheld by institutions that facilitate political dialogue and provide predictable governance.
The African Union (AU), IGAD, the Arab League, the United Nations (UN), and global partners acknowledge these endowments. Djibouti, however, recognises that credibility erodes if it rests on inertia. Djibouti wants, and can go further, not on the ways of competition, but contribution and cooperation.
Its leaders outline three initiatives to match these pillars with action. The Arta Centre for Regional Mediation & Peace would train mediators, advance strategic research, and weave elders, youth, and women into peacemaking. An Annual Forum on Security, Peace, & Cooperation in the Horn of Africa, a Davos for Peace, so to say, would gather leaders, businesses, civil society, scholars, and mediators to compare notes before crises mature.
Lastly, a set of neutral trilateral diplomacy mechanisms would provide off-ramps from binary confrontations, thereby lowering the temperature of regional disputes before they escalate.
This agenda is based on the principles of neutrality as a duty, stability as a regional public good, and African solutions to African challenges. As global multilateralism wanes, principled regional leadership becomes increasingly vital. Djibouti’s vocation is to connect, convene, and integrate, never to dominate.
There is no concealed agenda here, only a sincere desire to build a community of shared destiny.
Much of this outlook bears the imprint of President Ismail Omar Guelleh, hailed at home and abroad as a charismatic statesman whose lifelong dedication blends wisdom, foresight, and an unwavering commitment to regional peace. For more than two decades, he has steered Djibouti through the Horn of Africa’s minefields, betting consistently on dialogue over discord and integration over isolation.
Neighbours in search of mediators often arrive in Djibouti City first, confident they will find a steady hand and a discreet ear.
The moment, though, belongs not to any single leader but to the region’s citizens. They should offer a clear wager. Those who invest in peace, dialogue, and shared prosperity are most welcome. Profiteers from mistrust should not be.
Unity should no longer be a slogan but the only viable security policy. The Horn of Africa’s future will be decided by those willing to trade suspicion for cooperation. The choice, therefore, is urgent, and still ours to make.
Ilyas M. Dawaleh
Minister Of Economy & Finance,in Charge of Industry, Republic of Djibouti. Secretary General of RPP
@Ilyasdawaleh
Opinion
Somaliland could be a powerful friend: It’s time for Britain to recognise that
Opinion
Should Trump Administration Formally Recognize Somaliland?
By Arthur C. Schaper
President Trump ran for office to Make America Great Again. He wanted our borders respected, our language restored, and our culture reinvigorated. He is accomplishing all three at breakneck speed. Even his foreign policy forays are working in the United States’ best interests.
Peace in the Middle East, fighting for every chance to bring peace to the Russia-Ukraine war, and weakening China’s globalism are big wins for America. Speaking of borders, language, and culture, President Trump has another chance to make history: eliminate pirate forces, undermine Islamic fundamentalism, and establish his bona fides as a peace-maker, a deal-maker, and a nation-builder who doesn’t send young American men to die in pointless wars. This potential diplomatic measure wouldn’t cost him anything but a simple declaration.
President Trump, it’s time to recognize Somaliland as a separate, sovereign country from Somalia.
Somaliland, judging by the name, has close kinship with Somalia. The failed state, home to vile modern-day pirates who have waged war on tourists and shipping lanes alike, has stifled efforts for their northern neighbors to break away officially and obtain the rights reserved among all other nations in the world. And yet, Somaliland, for all intents and purposes, is its own country.
First, some background.
Somaliland existed as a British protectorate until 1960, when it was granted freedom from the mother country. The French Somali region also won independence and became Djibouti. The Italians controlled the southern section of the Eastern Horn of Africa, which became a free Somalia following caretaker status under the United Nations.
The former British and Italian dominions joined together in 1960, but Somaliland (in the northwestern section) was getting the short end of an already short stick under the dictatorship of Mohamed Siad Barre. Civil war broke out (and hasn’t ended!), and Somaliland broke away in 1991.
For over thirty years, Somaliland has existed as a quasi-independent state. They have their own government, currency, and military. Unlike their failed state neighbors, Somaliland has retained considerable order and stability. The country has enjoyed ethical elections and peaceful transitions of power. They have forged strong relationships with the United States and the United Kingdom. They are growing their relationships with other African states, including Ethiopia.
They just don’t have official status … yet.
President Trump needs to take the lead on this and recognize Somaliland as an official country.
This move has a number of benefits for the United States, somewhat mirroring the wins for the United States following the brokerage of peace agreements with Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo:
President Trump would assert American influence and dominance in the region. Global power players insist on playing timid, despite the great power and authority granted to them by their voters or the power structures in their respective countries.
Trump has not been afraid to think big, ask bigger, and get the biggest deal possible to benefit the United States. Stepping in and asserting the will and interest of a local people group to their own nation will bolster America’s resurgence on the world stage. Supporting a stable region by offering it official recognition will help stem the migrant crisis overwhelming Europe and the United States.
Instead of dishonoring failed states or pushing away the rising tides of teeming masses, why not provide support to breakaway regions which can run their affairs without too much trouble, and provide those regions as alternative refugee destinations? President Trump is deporting illegal aliens to South Sudan. He could work out a deal with Somaliland to receive them, too.
Supporting the creation of an independent Somaliland would press the rest of the Eastern Horn of Africa to get its act together. If Somalia won’t take the hint to get its act together, the United States could abandon its dubious military standing in Somalia and invest its military operations in the new country.
Trump’s move would further destabilize Islamic militancy in the region. Rebel groups are still frustrating.
As an added bonus, recognizing Somaliland would irritate Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Somalia) and her fellow progressive “anti-colonialist” adherents, who has pledged to stop further independence efforts from the breakaway region.
There are some concerns from national leaders and power brokers in Africa and throughout the rest of the world. If President Trump recognizes this separated region, how will the other separatist groups in Africa, Europe, and elsewhere respond? They will start clamoring for recognition, fire up their military operations, and engage in more subversive tactics to undermine their home countries. Recognizing one stable region could lead to more instability?
Trump and other nations can navigate these concerns fairly easily. Somaliland has already established much of the key infrastructure needed for any country to stand on its own.
Somaliland is an independent state, in contrast to the relentless dysfunction and destruction of the Republic of Somalia. Many breakaway militias and separatist groups in other regions around the world do not have similar infrastructures in place. Aside from diligent partisans who hold meetings dreaming of their own separate country, the widespread separatist groups don’t have anything else in place.
Trump could ally all fears by saying to other regions clamoring for independent recognition (Catalonia, Eastern Ukraine, Gaza, and Judea and Samaria): “When you can build yourself up to be an independent state like Somaliland (with currency, military, and stable elections) in all but official recognition, give us a call.” If Trump makes the Somaliland announcement this year, thirty-four years will have passed since the region broke away from Somalia as a whole.
Trump could joke that other budding nations should take the same length of time!
Nation-building can work in our favor if it doesn’t cost us anything. This opportunity is too good to pass up, and President Biden refused to take advantage of something so easy to accomplish. Of course, no one respected him (not even his own staff, who did most of the governing). President Trump needs to step out and help establish the self-rule of this region.
Arthur C. Schaper is a blogger, writer, and commentator on topics both timeless and timely; political, cultural, and eternal. A life-long Southern California resident, Arthur currently lives in Torrance.
Opinion
When Envy Becomes a Disease: Somalia’s Sick Obsession with Somaliland
If you ever wondered why Somalia remains arguably the worst-governed country on Earth after 30 years of turmoil, look no further than the leaders who have run the show for the past two decades. It’s no secret—Somalia’s political class is suffering from a mental disorder that might best be called the “Somaliland Syndrome.”
This affliction manifests as an obsessive, pathological envy of Somaliland’s success, coupled with an absolute inability to replicate any of it.
While Somaliland quietly builds peace, stable governance, and economic progress, Somalia’s leaders appear trapped in a delusional loop, fixated on erasing Somaliland rather than improving their own failed system. Their diagnosis? “Somaliland is the disease. If only we could destroy it, everything would be fine.” Reality? Somaliland’s stability is the cure Somalia desperately needs.
This sickness explains a lot: rampant corruption, terrorist infiltration, foreign puppeteering, and endless power struggles are just symptoms.
The Somali state’s leadership—most glaringly the Himilo Qaran political party led by former President Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed—is the textbook case.
Here you have a man once tied to the Islamic Courts Union and arguably the spiritual father of Al-Shabaab, now championing national unity and elections. The irony could not be thicker.
How can a leader with “Somaliland Syndrome”—who spends more time fixating on Somaliland republic that has nothing to do with him—preside over a system so thoroughly entwined with terrorist groups and corruption? It’s like a sick man lecturing the healthy on how to run a marathon.
The recent clashes in Gedo—where the federal government’s forces face off with Jubbaland militias—highlight this dysfunction.
Himilo Qaran shamelessly blames Mogadishu for “escalating” violence, yet fails to acknowledge that the very government it opposes is the only entity attempting to assert order over a fractured state. Instead, it warns of “enemies approaching Mogadishu,” as if Somalia’s greatest enemy isn’t internal chaos and kleptocracy.
And who is behind these “enemies”? The party’s leadership has long been entangled with forces that either flirt with or actively support militant Islamism. It’s no surprise they decry federal military deployments as “political,” while using rhetoric that fans division.
Somalia’s government, meanwhile, accuses Jubbaland leader Ahmed Madobe of launching “criminal attacks” to resist federal authority. This tit-for-tat violence reflects a failed system where regional warlords operate as de facto rulers, and central governance is a fragile illusion.
So while Somaliland invests in governance, infrastructure, and diplomacy, Somalia remains mired in “Somaliland Syndrome,” a deadly cocktail of denial, envy, and self-destruction. The rest of the world watches, bemused and horrified, as Somalia’s political class preaches about elections while their country falls apart.
The bitter truth is that Somalia’s political sickness will only be cured by acknowledging Somaliland’s success—not by vilifying it. Until then, expect more chaos, more terrorism, and more tragic irony from a leadership too sick to heal their own nation.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect WARYATV’s editorial stance.
Maritime Security
Somaliland’s Maritime Awakening in the Gulf of Aden
Securing the Gulf of Aden: Somaliland’s Strategic Maritime Role.
As global maritime chokepoints grow increasingly volatile, Somaliland—a quiet but stable actor along the Gulf of Aden—stands at the threshold of regional leadership in maritime security. With piracy, illicit trafficking, and sabotage returning to regional waters, the time for Somaliland to rise as a maritime guardian is now.
Somaliland controls a critical stretch of the Gulf, where over 20,000 commercial vessels pass annually. Unlike neighboring states mired in instability, Somaliland’s democratic governance and functional institutions position it uniquely to lead on security. But leadership requires strategy.
A Somaliland Maritime Security Strategy would focus on four pillars: regional coordination, advanced surveillance, a national maritime policy, and international engagement. Satellite tracking, drone monitoring, legal reform, and multinational exercises are no longer optional—they’re essential.
The world cannot afford to overlook this under-recognized actor. Somaliland’s role in securing sea lanes can deliver ripple effects far beyond its shores—from reducing insurance costs for global shippers to deterring terrorist threats along the Horn of Africa.
In the era of asymmetric threats, Somaliland’s emergence as a maritime power may be the stabilizing force the region urgently needs.
By Mahad Ahmed
Independent Maritime Security Advisor, Hargeisa, Somaliland
📧 mahaddayr@gmail.com
Opinion
Experts Are Fleeing Irro’s Government — Somaliland’s Reform Dream Is Dying
Inside the quiet collapse of meritocracy in Somaliland: why top talent is rejecting the Irro administration and what it means for the country’s future.
In the first months of President Abdirahman Irro’s administration, hope ran high. But now, beneath the polished speeches and reform promises, a quieter crisis is brewing — and it’s happening where it hurts most: the government’s ability to attract capable, trusted professionals.
Insiders and analysts point to a troubling trend: highly educated, internationally experienced Somalilanders are refusing offers to join Irro’s team. Not because they oppose reform — but because they no longer believe this government can deliver it. As one source bluntly put it, “The people working in the Somaliland government are not those who can be integrated at this time.”
At the heart of the problem lies a decades-old flaw: tribal favoritism, wrapped in the illusion of power-sharing. For years, politicians have appointed friends, cousins, and loyalists over experts. Now, it’s catching up to them. Irro — elected in part as a technocrat and reformer — has reportedly reached out to multiple qualified figures to inject credibility into his administration. But one by one, they’ve said no.
And the refusals aren’t silent. Whispers are growing louder: that Irro’s administration is “unsalvageable” unless a total overhaul is done. Some say a reshuffle is coming. Others argue it’s already too late.
This resistance reflects a broader disillusionment with how power is used in Somaliland — not to build a future, but to enrich the connected few. The result? A growing gap between Somaliland’s deep talent pool abroad and a stagnant government at home.
Critics warn that if Irro doesn’t move fast — and radically — to bring in people of skill rather than clan, he may go down not as a reformer, but as a missed opportunity. A president surrounded by yes-men while his country drifts.
The risk isn’t just political. It’s existential. Without competence, there’s no economic policy, no international lobbying, no real progress toward recognition. A government built on tribal currency can’t buy global legitimacy. And it certainly can’t build roads, schools, or credibility.
If Irro wants to be remembered as more than a transitional figure, the time for soft talk is over. He must confront the system that threatens to swallow his legacy — or be buried by it.
Isir Warsame
isir.warsame@gmail.com
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect WARYATV’s editorial stance
Opinion
The West Fears It’s Losing Somaliland – OpEd
By: Saleban Omar –
For over three decades, Somaliland has stood as one of Africa’s most stable, democratic, and self-governed nations. Since reasserting its 1960 independence in 1991, it has maintained peace, held multiple elections, and functioned with more transparency and order than many internationally recognized states. And yet, it remains unrecognized. Not because it lacks legitimacy. But because the West – the very powers that claim to champion democracy and self-determination – have chosen to keep Somaliland chained in a neocolonial limbo.
Somalilanders must now ask the uncomfortable but necessary question: Why has the West done everything but reward our success? Why do the so-called champions of democracy ignore the African country that most closely reflects their values? The answer is harsh but clear: because an independent Somaliland governed by its own interests does not serve Western strategic control.
In the name of “development assistance,” the West has propped up leaders who sabotage the will of the people. In the name of “stability,” it has kept Somaliland tethered to failed institutions in Mogadishu. In the name of “partnership,” it has refused to recognize Somaliland while exploiting its geostrategic location for military and intelligence operations. And in the name of “democracy,” it has empowered elites who serve foreign agendas, not Somalilanders.
Across the continent, Africa is waking up. Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger have rejected the chains of Western-backed ECOWAS. Ethiopia is asserting its sovereign interest. And BRICS is rising as a force of multipolarity, offering African nations new options — investment without strings, trade without coercion, and partnership without puppet strings. Somaliland must look east.
China, India, and Russia offer Somaliland the very thing the West has refused for 30 years: respect. They do not demand we surrender our sovereignty in exchange for aid. They do not treat us like passive recipients of charity. They recognize the right of every nation to pursue its own path. Somaliland’s partnership with Taiwan was brave and symbolic — but it has come at a cost. China’s retaliation is real. And Taiwan, diplomatically isolated itself, lacks the power to shield us from Beijing’s pressure.
So what has the West given us? Broken promises. Media narratives that frame us as a disputed region rather than the democratic state we are. And a silent veto on any leader who dares to challenge their monopoly.
The irony is brutal: the smartest, most resilient people in the Horn of Africa are denied their future by the very powers that once protectorate them. Somalilanders have built a country from nothing. But our greatest resource – our independence of thought – has become a threat to the global order.
It’s time for a new doctrine. Let us stop begging for Western acceptance. Let us stop letting clandestine networks pick leaders who don’t serve the people. Let us embrace multipolarity and pivot toward the East, toward allies who will treat us as equals.
Somaliland must chart its own future — not through Western favor, but through strategic autonomy. The world is changing. The age of one superpower is over. And Somaliland must not be the last to realize it.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect WARYATV’s editorial stance
-
Analysis10 months agoSaudi Arabia’s Billion-Dollar Bid for Eritrea’s Assab Port
-
Opinion17 years agoSomaliland Needs a Paradigm Change: Now or Never!
-
Interagency Assessment4 days agoTOP SECRET SHIFT: U.S. MILITARY ORDERED INTO SOMALILAND BY LAW
-
ASSESSMENTS9 months agoOperation Geel Exposes the Truth: International Community’s Reluctance to Embrace Somaliland as a Strategic Ally
-
Somaliland11 months agoSomaliland and UAE Elevate Ties to Comprehensive Strategic Partnership
-
EDITORIAL1 year agoDr. Edna Adan Champions the Evolving Partnership Between Somaliland and Ethiopia
-
ASSESSMENTS6 months agoA Critique of the Hassan Sheikh Mohamud Administration and the Halane Enigma
-
Africa2 years agoHow Somaliland Could Lead the Global Camel Milk Industry
