Britain and the Laascaanood Conflict in Somalia

By Saeed A. Mowlid

President Muse Bihi Abdi of Somaliland Administration authorised indiscriminate shelling of Laascaanood by Somaliland forces, a move supported by the tribal political parties in Hargeisa.

Hargeisa (Comment ) — Laascaanood conflict has entered its fourth week. It is a conflict driven in part by the claim of Somaliland that it is a sovereign country based on pre-1960 colonial borders, and 1991 declaration of the unilateral secession and the 2001 unilateral referendum.

British support for Somaliland administration is premised on political institutions based in Hargeisa. In the United Kingdom when a person applies for asylum, he/she must answer the question if the applicant had ever undermined a democratically elected government or committed human rights violation. If elections are a measure of democratic governance, Somaliland is a democracy whose forces shelled Laascaanood, a district Somaliland administration once controlled. Can the leaders of an administration that claims a sovereign state in a country whose territorial and political unity is emphasised in the UN Security Council resolutions defend their decision to authorise the bombardment of a district and the kidnapping of the citizens in Sool villages?

How can one make sense of the shelling of a district whose residents are voters in the eyes of Somaliland administration? Does a democracy bombard a district, kidnap citizens or disinform the world opinion about the nature of a conflict raging in territories over which it claims to have jurisdiction?

Somalia-Somaliland talks that began in 2012 partly contributed to the self-image of Somaliland as a de facto state that can displace Somali citizens (it did in 2021 in Laascaanood) and can shell a district of more 500,000 inhabitants most of whom are now internally displaced people. The talks allowed Somaliland Administration to negotiate with Mogadishu on a North-South basis in disregard of the interests of Puntland, a Federal Member State with a federal jurisdiction over Laascaanood.

Britain organised the first Somalia-Somaliland talks in 2012, and funded security forces of the break-away administration. How can one reconcile the one-Somalia policy of the British government and its continued support for forces prosecuting a secession war in a part of Somalia under the pretext that Somaliland forces are enforcing colonial borders?

Somalia is ruled under Chapter 7 Article of the United Nations Charter applied to countries that cannot prevent threats from their countries to other countries (e.g. aggression). Why is the International Community turning a blind eye to decisions by Somaliland leaders (both the government and the leaders of tribal political parties) to declare a civil war in Northern Somalia? Why is the British taxpayers’ money being used to kill and maim Somali citizens by forces claiming to have seceded from Somalia? It is time Britain took an active role in harmonising its official policy on Somalia and its assistance for sub-national entities such as the Somaliland Administration.