In a bid to swiftly turn the page and perhaps to distract from their repeated failures, political elites were quick to congratulate themselves on the election agreement minimizing a deadlock that lasted for more than six months and took a toll on the fragile Somali state. This article analyses how Somalia was able to overcome the election impasse and the implications of this contentious national process on Somalia’s stability, cohesion and development.
Meetings and Mistrust
After February’s election violence in Mogadishu, the alliance of presidential candidates, known as the Opposition Council, staged a protest in an area with heavy government presence and with that, any remaining vestige of goodwill between the two sides had withered. The protagonists are the Puntland and Jubaland presidents alongside the Opposition Council in conflict against an alliance of President Mohamed Abdullahi Farmajo, the presidents of Galmudug, Hirshabelle and Southwest State. After the violence, it proved extremely difficult to get the principals to meet to resolve the standoff. Meanwhile, despite the hostilities, technical committees from all Federal Member States (FMS) were meeting to identify solutions for the three major election issues. This meeting was scheduled to end on the day of the Opposition Council’s February protest in Mogadishu but the agreement outcomes were never shared publicly until a month later. Thus, the debate shifted from specific election disagreements to one of trust in the executive. The lack of trust lay at the heart of the standoff into March and April. Calls for Farmajo’s resignation by the Opposition Council and a list of demands from the Puntland government before it would engage in any meetings with the FGS on elections served to inflame the FGS. Several meetings stalled as the international community continued to call for compromise despite a series of escalations and provocations by the opposing sides. UN Ambassador to Somalia James Swan speaking to Voice of America (VOA) stated: “Indeed the level of mistrust, the lack of confidence, even anger and emotion among these leaders is troubling.”
Time will tell if the 27 May election agreement has in fact resolved the election impasse. However, this turbulent episode has brought to light the serious fissures that exist in governance and civil society in #Somalia.
Tweet
The international community’s repeated calls for dialogue and negotiations fell on deaf ears. Puntland and Jubaland were adamant that members of the Opposition Council be included in the process as well as several preconditions that included the sacking of all major security officials, due to their alleged involvement in the Mogadishu protest violence. The FGS ignored the demands and five successive meetings called by the FGS were not attended by Puntland and Jubaland. As pressure mounted, and March was coming to an end, the US Ambassador to Somalia Donald Yamamoto, released a statement urging leaders to “participate without preconditions”. Rumours swirled that the FGS would be seeking a term extension due to multiple meetings organised by the FGS not being attended by Puntland and Jubaland. A last ditch effort was made with only FMS leaders participating without the presence of the FGS. This meeting had the backing of the international community. The talks, despite hiccups, resulted in an outcome that member states were content with and was widely reported in the media. But as the FMS were reaching a consensus, the lower house of the Federal Parliament of Somalia was gearing up for an emergency session which was ostensibly scheduled to discuss COVID-19 but presumed to camouflage a vote on a term extension for the legislative and executive branch. As rumours swirled the night before the parliamentary session, the political climate grew tense. On 27 March, the Federal Parliament convened a chaotic parliamentary session that was eventually halted as MPs would not allow each other to speak. In a bid to stop what some MPs called the tabling of an illegal term extension, chaos was deliberately instigated to ensure that there would be no debate. Yet, the rumours of extension were eclipsed by the progress made by the FMS leaders who all agreed to an FGS-FMS ‘ice breaking meeting’ which would set the agenda for the discussions on the electoral deadlock. As leaders convened for the ice breaking meeting, there was hope that the country would move forward. But that was quickly dashed after leaders met for three days and could not agree on the agenda of meetings. After the failed talks, Puntland President Deni stated that Farmajo had refused to include the political stakeholders and civil society in the meetings. In response, the FGS asserted that Puntland and Jubaland were unwilling to proceed on the basis of the original agreement of 17 September and the Baidoa technical agreement and had conflated the discussion on elections with other issues. Whatever the case, leaders could not even agree on the agenda of the meeting, underlying the high level of mistrust, raw emotion and unwillingness to offer any concession.
High Drama
As the Somali public and international stakeholders were digesting the failed meetings, an emergency parliamentary session was announced for 12 April. On the day of the parliamentary session, a heavy security presence blanketed the city. The decision to break ranks by the Commander of the Mogadishu Police, General Sadik John, would have a dramatic impact on the political crisis. In a televised statement General John told Universal TV that he had suspended the day’s parliamentary session as MPs were gearing up for an illegal term extension. General John was subsequently fired for impeding the parliamentary process by his superior General Abdi Hassan Hijar. Nevertheless, the Lower House went on to vote to extend the term of the government for two more years at the conclusion of which democratic elections would be held. The decision by the Federal Parliament gained widespread condemnation from the international community and many stakeholders in the country. The EU and the United States were quick to register strong disapproval for the term extension citing its threat to the fragile stability of Somalia. A chorus of opposition came from the UN Security Council, IGAD and other actors. Threats of “concrete measures” were voiced by EU Foreign Policy Chief Josep Borrell. Clearly, the FGS badly miscalculated the reaction from the international community. The Federal Minister of Finance called for Somalis to make donations to the government as it was facing budgetary limitations and as a show of support for the FGS. The risk of sanctions and the loss of international support was compounded by a growing fragmentation among the security forces.
As Mogadishu’s security situation worsened, opposition leaders began to hunker down with supporters in the city as calls grew from those opposed to the term extension for armed forces to break rank from the federal government. The calls would grow louder and two days after the Security Council convened, large numbers of military deployed in districts close to the capital returned to Mogadishu under the command of officers who opposed the FGS term extension. They clashed with other armed forces in Mogadishu which led to over 100,000 people being displaced.
The election agreement in #Somalia is indeed a cause for hope in the future and a valuable lesson of the risks that emerge when national leaders fail to resolve their political disagreements peacefully
Tweet
Return from the Brink
After the mutiny of large numbers of the military and the widespread condemnation of the term extension, even from within Farmajo’s administration, the government unilaterally withdrew the extension and called for a return by all parties to the negotiating table. Given that President Farmajo was the architect of and prime mover behind the term extension and largely bore the responsibility for the ensuing chaos, his call rang particularly hollow. There was widespread consensus that the President simply did not have any political capital left to affect any kind of agreement with the FMS and other stakeholders. The international community had also lost patience and was not interested in President Farmajo playing a meaningful role in any agreement. By default then, Prime Minister Roble took the lead on the process to achieve an elections breakthrough in the country. After invitations were issued to the FMS and the Opposition Council and were accepted by all, discussions began in Mogadishu. This meeting by the principals was palpably different from those that came before. The lightening rod of President Farmajo’s presence was absent and the mood was more positive. In addition, the series of catastrophic events unleashed by the term extension served to chasten all the parties and seemingly engendered an attitude of compromise and cooperation. The meetings concluded with a preliminary election agreement based on the 17 September model with a few mutually acceptable modifications. One political pundit remarked that not much was added to the agreement, but the lack of Farmajo’s presence and the need for calm spurred a general agreement based on the Baidoa technical agreement. Much like the September agreement, the precise details have not been made public but FMS leaders and the FGS have publicly pronounced themselves satisfied. Moreover, observers from the international community have given their blessing to the outcome. Time will tell if this agreement has in fact resolved the election impasse. However, this turbulent episode has brought to light the serious fissures that exist in governance and civil society in the country.
Impact
The silver lining to this chaotic episode in Somalia’s history is the realization that a federal system based on consensus and involvement of all stakeholders is the only way to govern the country. Paradoxically, a failed show of force by the executive on the pretext of saving the country from obstructionism and disarray served only to highlight that no one actor can unilaterally control the levers of power. For a state in recovery from a long period of civil war and lack of effective government, this development is indeed a cause for hope in the future and a valuable lesson of the risks that emerge when national leaders fail to resolve their political disagreements peacefully.
Yusuf Mussa is the Executive Director of New Access International (NAI) Somalia.
