John Rookard (Second Blog Post)
The following blog post will be my response to this short
video about Somalia
The video
talks about how Somali troops and African Union Peacekeeping Forces have taken
back urban towns from the terrorist group Al-Shabaab. Al-Shabaab is known for being associated with
Al-Queda. The news anchor in the video
speaks with Former Advisor to the UN Mission in Somalia, Ken Menkhaus. This video relates to the topic of failed
states. Somalia is the number one failed
state in the world. Many critics would
even go far enough and say that Somalia should not be considered a state. I would argue that Somalia and other failed
states should be considered states.
Also, I believe that Somalia deserves the intervention of the United
Kingdom because the United Kingdom colonized Somalia.
Somalia is a
state that has been failed through colonialism and neo-colonialism. Britain used Somalia for its location and
exported goods from the coast throughout the early twentieth century. Somalia shows much evidence of failure because
of low literacy rates, lack of political control, human rights abuses, and
civil war. Many pessimists believe that Somalia
is a failed state and it will never return to a state of economic and social
prosperity. However, there are only a
few certain things that are needed for this to happen.
The first
thing needed to fix the situation in Somalia is momentum. The retaking of key towns by Somalian
soldiers has done this. Ken Menkhaus
warns us that small victories will not equate to direct change. To a certain degree I agree with Menkhaus,
however, if the small victories are constantly happening change will
happen.
The next
thing needed to happen to help Somalia out of its condition of being a failed
state is the establishment of order in the towns that have been retaken by the
Somali troops. Menkhaus says in the
interview that governments that follow in these retaken towns usually run
amuck. More needs to be done when
discussing how stability will be implemented in these towns. It is too easy for Al-Shabaab to come back to
these towns and commit human rights violations against the citizens if there is
no form of government or security in the town.
This government does not have to be a formal democracy. A trusted local leader who will not rule
improperly should rule these towns and be watched over by an African Union
Peacekeeping worker. Doing this ensures
no corruption.
Finally, to
go along with the setting up of government in recaptured towns, a developed
nation like the United Kingdom should help Somalia. Ken Menkhaus said that the recapturing of key
towns was a “concerted” effort between both the Somali troops and African Union
Peacekeeping Forces. These two groups do
not have enough power to keep up this momentum without the assistance of a
developed nation. The United Kingdom is
obligated to help Somalia since it once benefited from colonization. A critic may say that the United States is a
more suitable nation to help Somalia, however, I believe the United States will
not help Somalia since the failed military mission in the early 1990s was a
huge embarrassment to the United States government.
In
conclusion, this issue is nowhere near being finished. Somalia will continue to be a failed state
for many years but the change starts now if certain tasks are accomplished. Al-Shabaab has been in control of some towns
for over twenty years but I have hope for Somalia. Somalia is a failed state but it is still a
state that the United Kingdom has a responsibility to protect.
Hi John, Great Post! I never really thought of Somalia like this. Usually, when I think of Somalia as a failed state, I think of its piracy as a key example. I agree with you that the UK has a moral obligation to the people of Somalia as they once exploited Somalia for its economic resources. However, I do not know enough about this issue to suggest a viable solution. Should they commit ground troops to fight the terrorists or should they use airstrikes? To what extent does the UK need to build up Somalia as a state? If it does not do enough, then the power vacuum would only continue. If the UK does too much, then Somalia would not have internal sovereignty and the state will be dependent on the UK.
ReplyDeleteRyan:
ReplyDeleteThanks. I do not know how densely populated Somali cities are. I would guess that air strikes would not work because Al-Shabaab's terror tactics of using human shields. In the video, I learned that Al-Shabaab still controls a vast range of rural communities in Somalia. Maybe those could be subject to air strikes but the control of the country begins near the coast.
You quote Menkhaus as saying that "small victories will not equate to direct change", but you go on to say that consistent small victories will lead to change. I agree, and this quote, and your use of it, reminded me of the book The Ugly American. In it, US policy in a small Southeast Asian country is based on achieving a series of small victories to fight Communism. Good read!
ReplyDeleteCould you expand a bit on the failed mission in the early 90's? What happened and how has it impacted US action in Somalia?
ReplyDelete