“Elections have always been complicated in Somalia”

The urgency of the situation prompted the UN Security Council to hold a closed meeting on Tuesday. “There is still space for the Somali leaders to come together and find a political solution that preserves the institutions,” said UN spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric on Monday. What is it really ? Does the current crisis illustrate the failure of a system? In this context, what prospects can Somalia expect? Omar Mahmood, Somalia specialist within the International Crisis Group, responds to Africa Point.

The day before the election, Sunday evening, the opposition judged the president to be “illegitimate” and “will not accept any form of extension of his mandate under pressure,” we learned in a statement. What motivated this decision and what are its consequences on the vote?

Omar Mahmood: LThe opposition took the liberty of doing so, because, for them, no agreement had been reached between the parties on the vote itself. And the presidential term ended on Monday. Therefore, constitutionally, the head of state is no longer entitled to govern. A consensus around the electoral process had however been found last September. The latter provided for indirect elections, where special delegates chosen by clan leaders elect parliamentarians, who in turn vote for the president.

But some details had not been accepted by all. Disagreements persisted between the federal government and some leaders of regional states, such as Puntland and Jubaland. The situation dragged on for several months, until the presidential term expired. What is happening now is worrying, because although past elections have always been complicated in Somalia, there was always a solution. The terms of office were, for example, extended. This time, the level of mistrust is such that the prospects for resolving the crisis are slim.

The alliance of opposition candidates calls in particular for the formation of a national transitional council to lead the country to the next elections. Is the president obliged to give in to this demand?

If we stick to what the Constitution stipulates, the presidential mandate has expired, so it must be replaced. But based on what Parliament approved in September, then Farmaajo is under no obligation to hand over to a transition. The rules are a bit contradictory. There, the opposition refers strictly to the expiration of the presidential mandate. This is a message that its members have been disseminating in the regions for several weeks. In Somalia, elections are all about who is in charge of whom. Because these are indirect elections, a lot of people are involved in the process. It is a system that I think the opposition no longer accepts.

Do you think this process is suitable for the Somali context? Some observers denounce a system that promotes corruption and favoritism.

The fact that the ballot is carried out indirectly predisposes everyone to defend their own interests. The fate of the country is therefore in the hands of a few people. Which, it is true, can lead to corruption. As long as the electoral process is as it is today, that it does not involve more people, there will be excesses.

Does this crisis sign the failure of the Somali electoral system? Should he be reformed?

This return to indirect elections is disappointing for everyone. It will take a “one person one vote” ballot, which the government had also considered in 2019. But the context did not allow it. Security in the country is still not assured and the institutions are too few to support a vote by universal suffrage. The reality of the Somali state came up against this ideal of indirect elections. But by organizing earlier, allowing more people to participate, the vote could have taken place. The major problem is that there is no political will on this matter. The lack of trust between the opposition and the government is also very problematic. Because, instead of agreeing on the electoral process, we have to deal with the details. The result of all this is that there aren’t even any more elections at all.

Anti-government protests took place in December, including calling for Farmaajo’s resignation. Can the protest grow? What influence can civil society have on the political crisis the country is going through?

I think the protest may intensify, because this time it has won the capital, Mogadishu, traditionally acquired by the central government. The situation must be watched. Elsewhere, in Jubaland, mistrust of power is very strong. All the more so as civil society has gained in influence in recent years. The expiration of the presidential mandate could be an opportunity for her to make herself heard. By integrating the Somali political landscape, it could well influence future decisions.

Somalia cut off diplomatic relations with neighboring Kenya in mid-December, accusing it of “interference”. What are the reasons for this decision behind the official justifications?

This decision was precipitated by two factors. The first is a border dispute between the two countries, a maritime border, which must also be studied very soon by the International Court of Justice. It is a long standing problem. But the most recent factor in this conflict, and especially the one which had a direct impact on the electoral process, is the displayed support of Kenya to Ahmed Madobe, president of Jubaland, hostile to the central power. This rapprochement greatly disappointed Farmaajo, who ultimately cut off all diplomatic relations with his neighbor. Kenya then went further by announcing the opening of a consulate in Somaliland next March, whose autonomy Somalia does not recognize.

For what consequences? Will Somalia be the loser? Kenya is providing 3,600 troops to the African Union peacekeeping force, Amisom.

Somalia has tried to exclude Kenyan soldiers from Amisom, without success. In my opinion, the more he rejects international aid, the more the country isolates itself. So the room for maneuver is limited. The government cannot really afford to do what it wants. Somalia and Kenya are, anyway, linked. Whether through the security context or through economic exchanges, transport routes. The conflict between the two countries is a small rupture, which certainly plays on the political level, but which will not radically change the links which they maintain.

Could the crisis that Ethiopia has been going through for a few months harm Somalia?

I don’t think what is happening in Ethiopia right now has direct consequences for Somalia. On the other hand, the conflict in Tigray led the Somali troops to leave Amisom. This can pose a threat to the security of the country, which certain groups, like the Shebabs, can take advantage of. But Ethiopia has good relations with Eritrea and Mogadishu, which can therefore count on its support. The previous Somali prime minister did not really have the same position, but he was replaced a few months ago. Ethiopia then asked for more support on the ground, which Somalia accepted.

Their relationship was also built on ideological similarities shared by the two countries. The conflict in Tigray, which calls into question central power and the legitimacy of the government, resonates in Somalia, where the power is struggling to establish its authority in regions, such as Jubaland and Puntland. The populations of these territories are also watching closely what is happening in Tigray.

The United States has been involved in Somalia since 2007. For what results? The American strikes, correlated with the support of the Amisom troops, did they weaken Al Shabab?

The United States has many interests in Somalia, most of which relate to the actions of the Shebabs. For them, the group is now more than just a threat to Somalia. He is a danger for the whole sub-region. No other group is qualified as such on the continent. This proves the strong harmful power of Al Shabab. The drone strikes, which began in 2011, have had some impact. They eliminated many of its members, and put pressure on the group. But they did not make it possible to eliminate them completely. The attacks continued, and illustrated the great adaptability of their elements.

What will the election of Joe Biden change? Can diplomacy be privileged?

It’s hard to say. The Trump administration recently rethought the engagement of its troops in Somalia. The return of American soldiers to the country was a campaign argument of the former president. This is a subject that Joe Biden and his team will have to tackle quickly. But a rapid withdrawal would have serious consequences for Somalia. Because, if the United States provides troops, their officers also train Somali soldiers.

Could other powers take over? In recent years, Turkey, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates have made commitments.

These countries have so far prioritized the economic interest they could derive from Somalia. The country is located in a strategic region of the Red Sea, it has many ports and coasts, which must be secured. It is also surrounded by neighbors, like Ethiopia, with strong growth potential. If Somalia were more stable, more foreign powers would take an interest in it. Today, some take the risk. They see Somalia as a stepping stone in the middle of the Horn of Africa, which is very useful to their interests. Some Gulf countries even include it in their territory. But these new relations can also prove to be damaging for Somalia. Some Gulf countries could, for example, push Somalia to choose a side, as during the crisis between Saudi Arabia and Qatar.