Why do the remnants of the Faqash Kacaan regime seem to disregard the lessons of history? The collapse of Somalia under Siyad Barre's rule, notably when he targeted Somaliland as an adversary, stands as a stark reminder of the consequences of such actions.
It's worth pondering how different the situation in Somalia might be today if Barre had chosen a path of dialogue with the Somali National Movement (SNM), had held fair elections, and had granted a degree of autonomy to Somaliland. These actions could have potentially laid the groundwork for a more unified and prosperous nation.
Yet, it appears that current leadership under Hasan Sheikh is treading a similar path, potentially undermining the progress achieved in recent years. Instead of resorting to war action against Somaliland, a more visionary approach could have been considered. For instance, focusing on strengthening Somalia's internal structure and governance could have set the stage for a future voluntary union with Somaliland, reminiscent of the unity in 1960.
By mirroring Barre's strategy, Hasan Sheikh risks diminishing his stature on the global stage, increasingly seen as an ineffective leader in international forums. This perception overshadows his notable achievements, such as the relief of national debt and the lifting of the arms embargo last year.
Moreover, the responsibility of combating Alshabab and ensuring national security lies primarily with Somalia's leadership. It is a misstep to engage in conflict with Somaliland, a nation that has chosen to prioritize the welfare and aspirations of its people. This choice diverts attention and resources away from the crucial fight against Al-Shabaab, reflecting a misalignment in Somalia's strategic priorities for which no one but Hasan Sheikh is to blame.