|
|
NEWS
|
|
|
KOSOVO AND SOMALILAND: THE IMPOSSIBLE EQUATION
THE EGYPTIAN POSITION:
March 13, 2008
The impetus of the Greek professor’s analysis is anchored on “Somaliland’s
insubstantial demand for international recognition.” The complexity of issue
requires a more holistic and objective approach addressing the dynamics of the
creation of the Somali Republic in 1960 as well as the immediate and the latent
causes of the failure of the state. At a minimum, the professor should have
asked: What went wrong and why? What would have been done differently to avert
the failure of the Somali state? A nation that does not meet its full potential
is an evolutionary failure, and by any stretch of the imagination, Somaliland’s
withdrawal from a disastrous union should not and can not be portrayed as the
nucleus of all things that went wrong in Somalia.
The subject of recognition of Somaliland is solidly based on indubitable legal
and constitutional ground according to international law [law of international
treaties, succession of states etc.]. For example, from April 29th to May 5th
2005, a fact finding mission of the African Union, headed by the Right
Honourable Mr. Patrick Mazimhaka, Deputy-Chairperson of the Commission of the
African Union, visited Somaliland, and among its findings and conclusions is the
following excerpt:
“The fact that the union between Somaliland and Somalia was never ratified and
also malfunctioned when it went into action from 1960 to 1990, makes
Somaliland’s search for recognition historically unique and self-justified in
African political history. Objectively viewed, the case should not be linked to
the notion of ‘opening a Pandora’s Box’. As such, the AU should find a special
method of dealing with this outstanding case.”
Having said that, the histrionics of professor Muhammad shamsaddin megalommatis
is an extension of the cloak-and-dagger politics of the Egyptian government.
From Butrous-Butrous Ghali to Amar Mousa and in between, the Egyptian Foreign
Ministry has been the standard bearer of a futile unholy crusade against
Somaliland's quest for recognition. This diplomatic offensive is aimed at
forestalling Somaliland's efforts to present to the international community its
legitimate right to reclaim its sovereignty. This diplomacy has ended in utter
fiasco. For example, during his heydays at the helm of the United Nations
Organisation, Mr. Butrous-Butrous Ghali made one of the most embarrassing and
undiplomatic statements during a live interview with the Arabic Service of the
British Broadcasting Corporation. This career Diplomat said, "Doul mush Bani
Adam" in response to a question about the Somali crisis. Roughly translated,
this short statement means: "They are not human beings." Imagine the bigotry of
the Secretary-General of the United Nations! This is the same Butrous Ghali who
engineered the United Nations' disastrous intervention in Somalia- a mission
without a clear mandate and objectives.
The common thread between the professor Megalommatis and the Egyptian diplomatic
corps is intolerance towards any real or perceived threats towards the national
interest of Egypt: The River Nile is Egypt and Egypt is the Nile. The livelihood
of 100 million Egyptians takes precedence over the very existence of over 180
million inhabitants in the River Nile Basin. The population of the riparian
states is expected to double in the coming twenty years. The imbalance between a
diminishing natural resource coupled with the consumption demands of exploding
populations, is a sure recipe for an armed conflict in the region.
The Nile Water Agreement of 1929 guarantees Egypt about 56 Billion cubic meters
out of about 74 Billion cubic meters of the total water flow- that is roughly
76% of the total water volume. This outdated formula gives the Egyptian
government almost exclusive monopoly and right of usage of the River Nile
waters. For example, one of the clauses of the agreement states:
"Without the consent of the Egyptian Government, no irrigation or hydroelectric
works can be established on the tributaries of the Nile or their lakes if such
works can cause a drop in water level harmful to Egypt."
Times have changed and the littoral states [Kenya, Uganda, Sudan, Tanzania,
Rwanda, Burundi, Congo, and Ethiopia are under tremendous pressure to
renegotiate the terms of water allocation and usage. The Egyptian demands on the
waters of the River Nile are simply unsustainable. Sooner or later, the needs of
other nations should addressed. However, the Egyptian regime is not even
prepared to address the issue, let alone renegotiate the terms of the old
agreement. The Egyptian foreign ministry views any diversion of the Nile water
as an act of war. With exploding populations of their own, the countries at the
source of the Nile are vying to tap this resource within their boundaries for
their domestic agricultural and industrial development needs. Ignoring the
belligerent stand of Egypt, the Tanzanian government embarked on 170 mile long
pipe-line to deliver water to about 400,000 people at an estimated total cost of
US$85.10 million. The rest of the East African nations question the legitimacy
of this eighty year old agreement and it is a matter of time before they follow
the Tanzanian example.
To be continued
Ahmed Ali Ibrahim Sabeyse
Printer Version
| |
|
|