Editor's Column on the Eye of the Horn of African Affairs

HAN Note: IGAD Breaking News (HAN) March 3 rd, 2007.

Somaliland

Ethiopia

Eritrea

Djibouti

Kenya

Somalia

Sudan

Uganda

HAN Editors: The Geeska Afrika Editorial Board and HAN Regional Reporters would like to appeal to our readers and observers to Facilitate regional commentary amicably   to act as an independent, objective and impartial body so the remaining days can bear the long awaited fruits. This is a self syndicated column.   If you wish to publish this column in your newspaper, magazine, journal or on your websites please ask HAN & Geeska Afrika Editor or click here: Syndicate

by Iqbal Jhazbhay The South Africa professor & writer said "why is Somalia so important to the US".   The Horn of African Journalist Association (HAJA):  han@geeskaafrika.com

The South Africa professor &  writer said "why is Somalia so important to the US". US Ambassador Eric Bost, admitted that, in helping Africa, "we are most certainly helping ourselves". He failed, however, to elaborate about what motivates the concerted attention to the Horn of Africa. Officially, the US has been concerned about al-Qaeda's presence in Africa, China's developing relations with the continent and the fact that, until recently, Mogadishu was ruled by Islamists.

South Africa has shown caution about becoming involved in Somalia within the context of the US war on terrorism. Its approach to "the war on terror" emphasises dialogue and painstaking engagement, as opposed to forceful military interventions, which can only further inflame the region.

Against this backdrop, South African Defence Minister Mosiuoa Lekota did not hesitate this week to say it would be better for the US not to involve itself in Somalia. He did not consider it helpful to bring into Somalia countries "with historical baggage" and "whose motives may be questioned".

What Ambassador Bost fails to acknowledge is that the Union of Islamic Courts, which ran most of southern Somalia from July to December last year, disbanded its structures and gave way to the external armed forces. It retreated, and is not defeated.

The US, and its allies' stress on "celebrating" the demise of genuine and perceived adversaries is not a good political approach. Best practices in many parts of the world, including South Africa, show that "adversaries" are better engaged above ground. Underground, in ways similar to Baghdad, they are a genuine threat to world security. Some good signs have emerged: the US ambassador to Kenya has been in dialogue with the former head of the Islamic Courts' executive council.

Unless the international community, including the US, exhibits the political will to invest positively, via the African Union and the United Nations, in the stabilisation of Somalia, any suggestions that South Africa should take the lead in stabilising Somalia cannot be taken seriously. Dabbling should not be an option, and serious efforts are required via the UN Security Council to affirm the importance of respecting the northern home-grown stability of Somaliland and of making progress towards a solution of the unresolved issue of Somaliland's international status .

While there is no doubt that the US response to Somalia fits into its overall view of the threat of terrorism influencing so much of its present foreign policy, this does not tell the whole story.

It is an open secret that US oil giants are sitting on concessions, expecting to reap huge windfalls from massive resources of both oil and gas in southern Somalia and the peaceful northern Somaliland.

Oil companies Conoco, Chevron, Amoco and Phillips have concessions in nearly two-thirds of Somalia. These contracts were granted during the final days of Somalia's deposed dictator, Siad Barre. The US's 1992 military engagement in Somalia was fully supported by Conoco.

South Africa is also not without its own complications. Mvelaphanda, led by businessman Tokyo Sexwale, has also obtained an oil concession in Somaliland.

As with Iraq in 2003, the US has cast this war as a war to curtail terrorism, but its real goal is to obtain a direct foothold in the region by establishing a client state there.

The Horn of Africa is newly oil-rich, and is of great interest since it lies just kilometres from Saudi Arabia, overlooking the daily passage of large numbers of oil tankers and warships through the Red Sea.

The US gets 10% of its oil from Africa and may need to rely on the continent for as much as 25% by 2010.

The recent establishment of a US military command, Africom, has to be considered against this background and should be of real concern to Africans committed to constructing a different kind of future for our continent. Our approach on this is both a matter of profound self-interest and an issue about the humanity of our own outlook.

Opinion:  Contributed by Iqbal Jhazbhay

HAN Note: This writing does not necessarily reflect the views of Geeska Afrika Magazine or HAN. The author may be contacted at: by Iqbal Jhazbhay The South Africa professor & writer
 

The Note Sources expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views of Geeska Afrika Online, HAN, Editorial Board, www.geeskaafrika.com or our global writers and reporters. The views are solely that of the source and you can reach at:

The copyrights of reprint, comments and distribution reserved. All information displayed on this page (dispatches, photographs, logos) are protected by intellectual property rights owned by Geeska Afrika Online & HAN. As a consequence, you may not copy, reproduce, modify, transmit, publish, display or in any way commercially exploit any of the contents of this section without the prior written consent of Geeska Afrika Online at: news@geeskaafrika.com or han@geeskaafrika.com