In recent commentary, esteemed South African journalist Izak Khomo has fearlessly convened a dialogue that brings to light the often-ignored historical atrocities faced by the people of Somaliland under the brutal regime of dictator Siyad Barre in the late 20th century. His reflections are particularly timely as they illustrate the intricate relationship between historical injustices, contemporary political realities, and overarching humanitarian imperatives.

A Historical Context: The Hidden Currents of the Siad Barre Regime

Khomo’s assertions resonate deeply, particularly when he recalls how the Barre regime forged alliances with the Apartheid government of South Africa. The disturbing truth about South Africa’s engagement in the conflict against the Isaaq people of Somaliland is a dark chapter that has been overshadowed, often lost in the larger narrative of Somali history. By hiring South African air force pilots, who indiscriminately bombed residential areas of Hargeisa, Barre’s government committed acts of violence that led to what many now refer to as the Isaaq genocide.

This partnership between Somalia and South African leaders was born out of a shared interest in suppressing dissent, but the casualties were borne by innocent civilians. The strategic military alliance between Barre and the Apartheid regime exemplifies the lengths to which despots will go to maintain power, revealing a grotesque underbelly of political opportunism wrapped in the guise of national security.

The Weight of Forgotten Histories

Khomo’s framing of Somalia politicians as “opportunists and liars” challenges the status quo, forcing a reckoning with the narratives surrounding Somalia and Somaliland. According to Khomo, the mentality that fueled Barre’s atrocities is far from extinct; it has morphed into contemporary governance that continues to sidestep the urgent need for accountability. As the current Somali government seeks recognition through various international avenues, including recent letters to Western powers, the ghosts of the past—particularly those of the Isaaq genocide—continue to haunt Somaliland.

For those unfamiliar with this dark legacy, Khomo’s commentary serves as an introduction to the complex and painful history of Somaliland and its people—a history that cannot simply be swept under the carpet.

The Resurgence of Ignored Atrocities

In exposing these dynamics, Khomo deftly links the historical reality of Barre’s regime to present-day political instability and conflict in the Horn of Africa. He warns of the impending dangers associated with the hypothetical military alliances being formed today—such as Somalia’s supposed collaboration with Egypt. The idea of Egyptian forces entering the fray under the pretense of peacekeeping raises alarm bells that echo the past; it suggests a cycle of violence that has yet to be fully resolved. The rise of terrorist groups, ongoing struggles with regional adversaries, and territorial ambitions signal potential flashpoints that could ignite further conflict.

Moreover, Khomo draws an intriguing parallel between the response of the international community and the silence surrounding Somaliland’s cries for recognition and support. The historical amnesia surrounding Somaliland’s plight—as highlighted by Khomo—inevitably impacts its ability to forge a path toward international support and recognition. If historical narratives remain truncated, how can the suffering endured by the Isaaq people ever be adequately recognized?

The Moral Imperative for Acknowledgment and Action

Khomo’s powerful expositions compel all of us—especially Somalilanders—to confront a past that may still define our current challenges. For those living in the shadow of these historical events, there lies a profound moral impetus to confront and articulate the narrative of survival and resilience.

Somaliland’s government and its elite must embrace this reckoning, acknowledging the past to build a more robust future. The call to reflect on the Isaaq genocide is not merely to revive painful memories; it is to affirm that such atrocities should never be repeated in the modern context.

Somaliland’s leadership must be vigilant and proactive—it must work to cultivate international alliances that not only recognize the rights of Somalilanders but also demand an end to the violence and historical injustice. The forgotten genocide of the past cannot remain a hallmark of silence; it must become a catalyst for change, empowerment, and justice.

Bridging the Past to Build a Better Future

Izak Khomo’s insights offer a crucial opportunity for reflection and activism among those who care about the narrative of Somaliland. Addressing the historical injustices faced by the Isaaq people is intrinsic to shaping a future for Somaliland that reflects its values of integrity, justice, and sovereignty. Only by recognizing the injustices of the past can Somaliland truly lead itself towards a brighter and more equitable tomorrow.

To move forward effectively, it is essential to weave these historical fabrics into the nation’s identity and advocate for the rightful acknowledgment of past sufferings. Only then can Somaliland emerge not merely as a historical narrative of survival but as a vibrant and sovereign entity ready to confront the challenges of the future with confidence and strength.

A Looming Catastrophe in the Red Sea and the Somaliland Government’s Silence

As events unfold across the globe, the stage is being set for a turbulent conflict that threatens to engulf the Red Sea region and, by extension, Somaliland. The convergence of various geopolitical tensions has ignited speculation of a major conflict involving the Houthis in Yemen, Israel, and the United States on one side, with Iran, Turkey and China as opposing forces. It raises an alarming question: why is the Somaliland government remaining silent while significant threats loom at its doorstep?

Are We Sleepwalking into Destitution? The Looming Catastrophe in the Red Sea and Somaliland’s Dangerous Complacency
As global powers position for conflict, Somaliland’s leadership must confront the realities they cannot afford to ignore.

The Middle East is bracing for unprecedented upheaval. The United States has amassed a staggering military presence in the region, signaling preparations for a confrontation that could ripple across the globe. With Iran issuing aggressive threats against Israel, the potential for conflict escalates daily. Various factions, including the Houthis and terrorist groups aligned with regional powers, are poised to exploit the chaos that could arise from any military misstep. As the international community braces itself, the European Union is proactive, advising its citizens to prepare for emergencies, recommending that every household stock up on essential supplies, as the winds of war approach.

So, amid this frenzy, what is Somaliland’s government doing? Are they aware of the precarious situation they face given their geographical proximity to this brewing storm? The evidence suggests a concerning void in the government’s communication strategies. Citizens are left in the dark about impending dangers while the Somaliland elite seem to be decidedly detached or, perhaps, complicit in orchestrating a narrative that sidelines the urgency of the situation.

Somaliland has long enjoyed friendships with Western powers and the UAE, yet the shifting alliances in the region pose inherent risks. The involvement of Iran, with its support for groups like the Houthis, could have dire consequences for Somaliland should conflict spill over in the absence of a solid government response. Instead of rallying citizens behind a robust plan for preparedness, the government is failing to leverage critical intelligence about the situation, leaving many to speculate on whether they possess any actionable strategy should the situation deteriorate further.

The geopolitical chess game surrounding the Horn of Africa is intensely complex. On one side, you have nations such as the U.S., Israel, and UAE, eager to protect their interests in the face of hostile threats. However, on the other hand, Iran, China and Turkey both view the Red Sea as a strategic gateway crucial for their own ambitions. They have cultivated relationships with local factions, demonstrating a willingness to promote instability as a means of advancing their geopolitical game plans.

EU Prepares for War: Why is Somaliland Left in the Dark About an Imminent Red Sea Conflict?
While Europe issues survival kits and preparations, Somaliland faces silence from its leaders during a time of impending crisis.

And yet, the Somaliland government, which should be at the forefront of these discussions, appears to be oblivious or too complacent. They risk leaving Somaliland’s sovereignty vulnerable as they neglect to disseminate critical information regarding the implications of global conflicts for their constituents. The EU, with its advanced planning for potential disruptions, hinges upon the principle of transparency with its citizens. The knowledge that 450 million Europeans are taking government advice seriously to prepare for emergencies starkly contrasts with the silence coming from Hargeisa.

Silent Threats: Is Somaliland’s Government Ignoring an Impending War at Its Doorstep?
The evidence is mounting, yet the Somaliland government remains silent as chaos looms in the Red Sea region.

Somaliland faces potentially cataclysmic scenarios if the Red Sea descends into chaos. The port of Berbera, a vital artery for trade and economic activity, could become embroiled in the aftermath of regional conflict. The potential influx of refugees, instability, and economic disintegration due to catastrophic military actions could wreak havoc on our society.

If the evidence of escalating tensions across the region was not enough, the patterns of discord that have afflicted Somalia and other neighboring states—Al-Shabaab in the south, ISIS in Puntland, and Ethiopia’s own unresolved conflicts—paint a grim picture of the precarious environment we inhabit.

It is time for Somaliland to wake up and turn its gaze to the darker corners of reality. The government must acknowledge the looming specter of war and inform its citizens of the risks they face. Silence in the face of danger is complicity. The people of Somaliland deserve to hear the truth and be equipped to handle the oncoming storm.

The increasing debate over European defense, particularly regarding the potential development of nuclear capabilities, represents a significant pivot from post-World War II priorities that focused primarily on economic and social development. The shift is largely a response to heightened geopolitical tensions, notably the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, which has exposed vulnerabilities in Europe’s security architecture and heightened fears of Russian aggression.

European nations are increasingly considering enhancing their military prowess, including nuclear options, as a deterrent against potential threats. France, under President Emmanuel Macron, is taking notable steps by modernizing its nuclear arsenal, including a significant investment in airbases and hypersonic missiles. Macron’s proposition to extend France’s nuclear umbrella over other European countries could significantly shift the continent’s defense landscape.

This militaristic pivot could have profound economic implications. Redirecting funds towards defense spending may strain budgets and shift focus from vital social programs, which could affect public welfare. The economic impact, however, isn’t solely negative; increased defense spending could spur advancements in technology and create jobs in defense and related sectors.

The prospect of European nations developing nuclear weapons introduces risks of a regional arms race, which could undermine global non-proliferation treaties and escalate tensions further. While the technology and capability to develop such weapons exist, their proliferation would likely exacerbate global security threats rather than mitigate them.

Focusing on strengthening conventional military capabilities could offer a viable alternative to nuclear armament. Collaborative defense efforts, such as joint military exercises and shared intelligence, could bolster security without the risks associated with nuclear weapons.

Europe must find a balance between defense spending and maintaining robust social welfare systems. This balance is crucial to ensure that the enhancement of security measures does not undermine the quality of life and economic stability that characterize European societies.

Upholding international non-proliferation treaties is essential. Europe should take a leadership role in promoting nuclear disarmament and encouraging global efforts to reduce reliance on nuclear arsenals as security tools.

Diplomatic efforts remain crucial in addressing the underlying causes of security tensions. Europe should lead in advocating for diplomatic resolutions to conflicts, particularly in Eastern Europe and the broader region, to reduce the perceived need for nuclear deterrence.

Maintaining public trust through transparency about defense strategies and their implications is vital. Engaging the public in these discussions can foster broader understanding and support for the paths chosen by their leaders.

In summary, while the pressures of an evolving security landscape are prompting a reassessment of defense strategies across Europe, the path forward should prioritize stability, peace, and the continued prosperity of the region. The focus should be on strengthening conventional capabilities and reinforcing international norms against nuclear proliferation, ensuring that Europe remains a strong, stable, and peaceful actor on the global stage.

EU Summit Focuses on Military Might Amid Ukrainian Conflict

Al-Shabaab militants intensified their operations in the Lower Shabelle region of Somalia with a targeted attack on Somali military bases near Afgoye, specifically in the Sabiib and Anole areas, early on a Thursday morning. The assault began explosively, marked by a sudden detonation, which was rapidly followed by a fierce exchange of heavy gunfire between the attacking militants and Somali government forces. Despite the chaos and reported casualties among both the militants and government troops, precise casualty numbers have yet to be clarified.

In the aftermath of the assault, stability in the attacked areas, Sabiib and Anole, was reportedly restored, with the Somali National Army reasserting control over its positions. This attack is part of a broader pattern of increased hostilities by Al-Shabaab, particularly noted during the Ramadan period, underscoring a tactical escalation against military installations in the Middle and Lower Shabelle regions.

This latest confrontation follows closely on the heels of another significant incident where Al-Shabaab targeted a convoy in Mogadishu carrying Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, resulting in at least eight fatalities, including civilians. The surge in attacks continued with Al-Shabaab launching a mortar attack on the Halane compound, a heavily fortified area near Aden Adde International Airport, which serves as a hub for UN operations. This attack resulted in at least two projectiles landing within the compound, adding to the series of aggressive maneuvers by the group aimed at undermining the Somali government’s authority and destabilizing the region.

Somaliland faces an existential threat not just from external foes but from within its very core, where the Islamist group Al Ictisaam has quietly entrenched itself in key sectors of society. This detailed analysis unveils the silent siege that could potentially transform Somaliland into an Islamist-controlled state, mirroring the disastrous takeover seen in Egypt by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Somaliland, a region striving for recognition and stability, now confronts a dire scenario. Al Ictisaam, initially a peripheral Islamist movement, has expanded its influence stealthily yet aggressively. It has strategically positioned its adherents within vital government roles and key economic sectors including banking, telecommunications, and healthcare. This infiltration strategy is not merely about gaining power but monopolizing it, ensuring that every economic lever and policy directive bends to their radical ideology.

The situation in Somaliland is reminiscent of Egypt under the Muslim Brotherhood, where rapid and comprehensive infiltration into state mechanisms led to significant socio-political upheaval. The Brotherhood’s control ended only through military intervention, a stark reminder of the potential future awaiting Somaliland if similar interventions are delayed or ineffective. This historical parallel serves as a cautionary tale, emphasizing the urgency for Somaliland’s military and its allies to prepare and possibly intervene.

Recognizing the severe implications of Al Ictisaam’s rise, it is crucial for Somaliland’s military to not only strengthen its internal capabilities but also to forge robust international alliances. Partnerships with countries like the USA, UK, and Taiwan could be vital in enhancing Somaliland’s defense mechanisms through advanced training and intelligence sharing. Such alliances could also help in establishing a more pronounced international presence that supports Somaliland’s fight against radical threats and aids in its quest for international recognition.

Further complicating the security landscape is Ethiopia’s military involvement in the neighboring Somali regions under the African Union mission. While this cooperation aims to stabilize the region by curtailing Al-Shabaab’s reach, it inadvertently impacts Somaliland by altering the regional power dynamics and potentially limiting Somaliland’s maneuverability in its own territories. This external military action, though primarily against Al-Shabaab, underscores the intricate balance Somaliland must navigate between cooperation and sovereignty.

The detailed analysis reveals an alarming scenario where Somaliland could potentially fall under the rule of an Islamist economic dictatorship if current trends continue unchecked. The parallel with Egypt’s past Islamist rule serves as a critical warning: without decisive action, the consequences could be irreversible. The military, backed by international support, must remain vigilant and ready to act against any further expansion of Al Ictisaam’s influence. This situation is not merely a regional concern but a stark illustration of the broader global challenges posed by radical ideologies seeking to exploit governance vacuums.

This comprehensive narrative not only informs but also serves as a clarion call for those committed to preserving democracy and secular governance in regions vulnerable to ideological takeover. Somaliland stands at a crossroads, and the path it chooses now will determine its future sovereignty and democratic integrity.

Since assuming office on December 12, 2024, Somaliland’s President Abdirahman Mohamed Abdullahi Irro has been a puzzle to many. His silence, his measured approach, and his refusal to engage in the theatrics of politics have left critics scrambling for attention. But here’s the truth: President Irro is not just another leader. He is a man of profound intellect, a seasoned diplomat, and a strategist who operates in the shadows of silence, far removed from the cacophony of social media pundits and armchair critics.

Let’s be blunt: Somaliland has never seen a leader like Irro. With years of diplomatic service in Moscow under the former Somali government and 12 years as Speaker of the Somaliland Parliament, his resume is unmatched. His experience is not just a footnote; it’s a masterclass in governance and diplomacy. Yet, instead of celebrating this rare asset, some Somalilanders—particularly the loud, uninformed voices on social media—are busy criticizing him for not oversharing his every move.

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: society fears deep thinkers. From Socrates to Galileo, history is littered with examples of brilliant minds ostracized for seeing what others couldn’t—or wouldn’t. Somaliland’s own poetic legend, Hadrawi, once said that intelligence is a curse, isolating those who see the world too clearly. President Irro embodies this truth. His intellectual superiority is not just a gift; it’s a mirror that reflects the limitations of those around him. And people don’t like what they see.

Psychologists call this the “mirror effect.” When someone stands next to a physically strong person, they admire their strength. When they meet someone wealthy, they might envy their success. But when they encounter someone intellectually superior, something primal kicks in. Intelligence challenges our core identity—our beliefs, our understanding of the world, and our sense of self. It forces us to confront our limitations, and human beings, by nature, will do almost anything to avoid that discomfort.

This is why President Irro’s quiet, deliberate approach unnerves so many. He doesn’t need to shout from the rooftops or flood social media with updates. He doesn’t need to prove himself to anyone. His actions speak louder than words. While critics scream for transparency, Irro is busy laying the groundwork for Somaliland’s recognition on the global stage. His diplomatic finesse, honed over decades, is a weapon that no other African leader can match.

But let’s not kid ourselves: the backlash against Irro isn’t about his policies or his vision. It’s about ego. Deep thinkers like him don’t just challenge ideas; they challenge egos. And in a world where confidence is often valued more than intelligence, his silence is mistaken for weakness. Charismatic but shallow leaders thrive because they tell people what they want to hear. Irro, on the other hand, forces us to think critically—and that’s a discomfort many would rather avoid.

The irony is that Somaliland needs a leader like Irro now more than ever. His intellectual depth, his diplomatic acumen, and his ability to see beyond the noise are precisely what the nation requires to navigate the complexities of international recognition. Yet, instead of rallying behind him, some are content to drown in their own ignorance, mistaking his silence for inaction.

To those critics, here’s a reality check: President Irro is not here to entertain you. He’s not here to feed your need for constant updates or validation. He’s here to lead—quietly, strategically, and effectively. And if that makes you uncomfortable, perhaps it’s time to look in the mirror and ask yourself why.

Somaliland has a rare gem in President Irro. It’s time we stop fearing his brilliance and start embracing it. After all, history doesn’t remember the noise-makers. It remembers the thinkers, the visionaries, and the silent strategists who changed the course of nations. Irro is one of them. The question is: are we ready to follow?

Thirty years of striving for recognition, of building a nation against all odds. Yet, within Somaliland’s heart, an uncured disease festers, silently eroding the very foundations of our hard-won stability. Clanism, that insidious force, has become the shadow self we refuse to confront, a darkness that threatens to consume our collective future.

Like a chronic illness left untreated, clanism manifests in myriad ways. Nepotism corrodes our institutions, corruption saps our resources, and political gridlock paralyzes our progress. We see it in the uneducated officials appointed solely on tribal merit, their incompetence a stark testament to a system gone awry. We see it in the whispers of favoritism, the quiet resentments that divide communities and fracture trust.

We look to Rwanda, a nation that stared into the abyss of tribal genocide and emerged with a resolute commitment to unity. They understood that tribalism was not an identity to celebrate, but a cancer to eradicate. Can we, Somaliland, learn from their harrowing experience? Can we summon the courage to confront our own demons?

The time for half-measures is over. We cannot simply pay lip service to national unity while allowing clan-based patronage to thrive. We need radical treatment. We need laws that criminalize the use of clan as a weapon, that make it a punishable offense to manipulate tribal sentiment for political gain. We need educational reforms that instill a sense of shared national identity in our youth. We need open and honest dialogues that confront the uncomfortable truths of our past and present.

Consider the alternative: a Somaliland Balkanized, fractured into tribal fiefdoms, where progress is sacrificed at the altar of clan loyalty. This is not a dystopian fantasy; it is a chillingly real possibility. The very recognition we so desperately seek will remain forever out of reach if we cannot first unite ourselves.

Our young people, the inheritors of our nation, are bearing the brunt of this tribal divide. They see opportunities denied, dreams shattered, and a future clouded by prejudice. They are the lost generation, victims of a system that prioritizes tribal affiliation over individual merit. We owe them a better future, a Somaliland where their potential is not limited by the circumstances of their birth.

For 30 years, we have been building a nation, but we have also been inadvertently nurturing the seeds of its destruction. Now, it is time to unlearn. To unlearn the ingrained behaviors that perpetuate division. To unlearn the tribal narratives that poison our minds. To unlearn the complacency that allows injustice to thrive.

This unlearning will not be easy. It will require courage, honesty, and a willingness to confront uncomfortable truths. But it is the only way to break the unseen chains that bind us. It is the only way to reclaim the promise of Somaliland, a nation united, prosperous, and finally, truly recognized.

Let us choose the path of unity over division, merit over tribalism, and progress over stagnation. Let us build a Somaliland that is worthy of its people, a beacon of hope in a troubled region. Let us, together, cast off the darkness and step into the light of a brighter future.

In January 2024, the Ethiopia-Somaliland memorandum of understanding (MoU) ostensibly finalized the sharing of naval bases and formal recognition of statehood between the two entities. This agreement not only represented a strategic victory for both sides but also introduced significant geopolitical and security dynamics in the Horn of Africa.

Ethiopia’s acquisition of a naval base on the Somaliland coast under the MoU significantly enhances its strategic footprint in the Red Sea, a critical artery for global trade. This move aligns with Ethiopia’s longstanding goal of accessing the sea, which it lost following Eritrea’s secession in 1993.

For Somaliland, the MoU presents a pathway to achieving international recognition, leveraging its strategic geography against Ethiopia’s need for maritime access. Despite not being internationally recognized as an independent nation, Somaliland has managed to establish a stable and democratic governance structure, distinct from Somalia’s federal government.

The MoU has heightened tensions within Somaliland and between Somaliland and Somalia. Key stakeholders, including certain clan factions within Somaliland and the Somali federal government, perceive the agreement as a threat to territorial integrity and political sovereignty.

The agreement has also influenced regional security dynamics, particularly concerning the activities of terrorist organizations such as al-Shabaab and ISIS’s Somali branch. These groups may exploit perceived or real grievances stemming from the MoU to bolster recruitment and enhance their operational capacity.

Beyond the strategic and security implications, the MoU offers substantial economic benefits for both Ethiopia and Somaliland. For Ethiopia, access to the sea through Somaliland’s ports could significantly reduce logistics costs and boost trade. For Somaliland, closer economic ties with Ethiopia provide opportunities for economic growth and development, potentially increasing its political leverage on the international stage.

However, the economic advantages envisaged by the MoU are contingent on the stable implementation of its terms amidst fluctuating regional political dynamics. Both parties must navigate internal dissent and regional rivalries, particularly with Somalia and potentially with other regional powers like Djibouti and Eritrea, who may view this agreement as a strategic encroachment.

Moving forward, both Ethiopia and Somaliland will need to engage in careful diplomatic maneuvering with regional actors to mitigate backlash and integrate the MoU into a broader strategy that promotes regional stability and economic integration.

Additionally, fostering an inclusive dialogue that addresses the concerns of all stakeholders within Somaliland and Somalia will be crucial. This approach not only helps in reducing internal conflicts but also enhances the legitimacy and sustainability of the MoU.

The role of international actors and organizations will be pivotal in supporting the implementation of the MoU. Strategic partnerships that focus on economic development, infrastructural investments, and security cooperation could reinforce the benefits of the MoU, making it a model for similar agreements in politically complex regions.

In conclusion, the Ethiopia-Somaliland MoU stands as a testament to the complex interplay of geopolitics, regional security, and economic ambitions in the Horn of Africa. Its success or failure will largely depend on the involved parties’ ability to navigate these multifaceted challenges in a rapidly evolving regional landscape.