Ethiopian News, Current Affairs and Opinion Forum
Zmeselo
Senior Member+
Posts: 37344
Joined: 30 Jul 2010, 20:43

Trump’s Plan to Withdraw From Somalia Couldn’t Come at a Worse Time

Post by Zmeselo » 04 Nov 2020, 14:59



ARGUMENT
Trump’s Plan to Withdraw From Somalia Couldn’t Come at a Worse Time

Whether political theater or not, calls to leave could exacerbate violence and increase the influence of Russia and China.

BY SAMUEL RAMANI

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/11/02/tr ... orse-time/

NOVEMBER 2, 2020


A Somali police officer patrols as bystanders gather at the site of a suicide car bomb explosion in Mogadishu on Sept. 30, 2019. ABDIRAZAK HUSSEIN FARAH/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

Earlier this month, reports emerged that U.S. President Donald Trump had asked https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... om-somalia his senior advisors to devise a plan for the withdrawal of the 650 to 800 U.S. forces stationed in Somalia. This directive cast a striking contrast with Trump’s prior track record of supporting the expansion of U.S. military involvement in Somalia. For example, in March 2017, Trump approved https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-46612542 a Pentagon proposal to expand the scope of U.S. airstrikes against al-Shabab in central and southern Somalia. In 2019, the United States carried out https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/06/16/som ... f%25202020. 63 airstrikes on al-Shabab targets. Between January and May this year, it conducted 40. That’s a drastic increase from the 14 strikes that U.S. President Barack Obama authorized https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/s ... -than-bush in 2016.

Trump’s about-face might well be electoral theater, not an indication of real policy shift. After all, the president announced the drawdown https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-54085129 of 2,200 U.S. troops from Iraq in September and recently pledged to withdraw https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... ps-taliban all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by Christmas. Nevertheless, senior Somali and Kenyan officials immediately expressed alarm at Trump’s willingness to even entertain the idea of U.S. withdrawal. Shortly after the directive was made public, Somali President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed emphasized https://menafn.com/1100989295/Trump-Pla ... es-Farmajo the central role the U.S.-Somalia partnership plays in stabilizing the Horn of Africa. On Oct. 18, Kamau Macharia, Kenya’s former ambassador to the United Nations and current foreign-affairs principal secretary, opined https://www.garoweonline.com/en/news/so ... om-somalia that a U.S. exit
will worsen the already fragile situation in the country.
These expressions of concern are well founded. A U.S. withdrawal from Somalia could strengthen al-Shabab and leave the Somali Armed Forces without a reliable external partner on counterterrorism. The abdication of U.S. leadership could also create opportunities for China and Russia, and increase Somalia’s vulnerability to the destabilizing ambitions of regional powers in the Middle East.

In spite of frequent U.S. counterterrorism strikes in Somalia, al-Shabab’s capacity for destruction has steadily grown. The group’s terrorist activities have resulted in at least 4,000 civilian deaths in the country since 2010, and more than 3,000 of those deaths have come https://www.voanews.com/africa/al-shaba ... ring-group since 2015. As Somalia’s presidential elections, which are scheduled for early 2021, draw nearer, al-Shabab has carried out more frequent strikes on civilians. On Aug. 16, for example, it took control https://www.dw.com/en/somalia-forces-en ... a-54588952 of the beachside Elite Hotel in Mogadishu, killing at least 10 civilians. In the week from Sept. 11 to Sept. 18, al-Shabab carried out https://www.dw.com/en/somalia-al-shabab ... a-54980396 more than a dozen attacks. The terrorist organization has also crowded out rival groups in Somalia, and it is aligned with al Qaeda.

An abrupt U.S. withdrawal from Somalia could help al-Shabab achieve its goals of territorial expansion in Somalia and spreading its reach across borders. So far, the U.S. military presence has prevented al-Shabab from capitalizing on Somalia’s intraregional divisions, which caused the Somali Armed Forces to divert scarce resources https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-somal ... KKCN20M261 towards fighting regional militias. U.S. training has also helped the Somali special forces achieve https://allafrica.com/stories/202010010168.html notable military successes against al-Shabab, such as the liberation of towns in the Lower Shabelle region over the past month.

Meanwhile, there is the rest of the region to consider. On Jan. 5, al-Shabab attacked https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/22/worl ... orism.html a U.S. base in Manda Bay, Kenya, killing three Americans. The severity of al-Shabab’s threat to Kenya’s security reportedly motivated the U.S. Department of Defense to consider carrying out drone strikes in there, but the idea was rebuffed https://www.france24.com/en/africa/2020 ... atta-warns by the country’s president, Uhuru Kenyatta. Al-Shabab also poses a long-term risk to the security of Uganda and Tanzania, and it has even deployed mercenaries to train Ansar al-Sunna militants in northern Mozambique. Given al-Shabab’s transnational reach, a U.S. withdrawal from Somalia could precipitate a broader collective security crisis in eastern Africa.

The risks of al-Shabab’s expansion are compounded further by the probability that the Somali Armed Forces could find themselves without an external partner that can fill the shoes of the United States. Although France backed https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15446110 Kenya’s efforts to combat al-Shabab in Somalia in 2011, it remains overwhelmingly focused on stemming the rising tide of political violence in the Sahel. Britain trains https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the- ... -in-baidoa Somali National Army personnel in the southwestern Somali city of Baidoa. However, Britain lacks experience carrying out U.S.-style drone strikes against al-Shabab.

As France and the United Kingdom are unlikely to fill the void, the Somali National Army could appeal for increased support from the African Union (AU), which has 21,000 troops in Somalia. However, the AU’s commitment to military intervention in Somalia is uncertain. Since 2017, the union has called https://apnews.com/article/0eb32d5173df ... 72af95e72c for the handover of counterterrorism responsibilities to the military, and in October, the AU reiterated its plan to withdraw militarily from Somalia in 2021. That means Somalia could face a double shock of a U.S. and AU military drawdown at a time when al-Shabab is ascendant.

____________________

A U.S. withdrawal from Somalia could also have far-reaching geopolitical implications. China, Russia, and Middle Eastern regional powers are likely beneficiaries from a U.S. departure. China has close relations with Somalia and is concerned about rising instability in the Horn of Africa. In February, al-Shabab attacked https://chinaafricaproject.com/2020/02/ ... -in-kenya/ a Chinese construction crew on Kenya’s Lamu-Garsen road, and a U.S. withdrawal from Somalia could increase the frequency of these attacks.

Chinese state-aligned private security companies are exploring commercial opportunities in Ethiopia and Djibouti, and Beijing could deploy private security contractors https://static1.squarespace.com/static/ ... panies.pdf to defend its infrastructure investments from al-Shabab. Via its naval base in Djibouti, China could also deepen https://www.arabnews.com/node/1594821/saudi-arabia its maritime security cooperation with U.S. partners, such as Saudi Arabia, who are concerned about al-Shabab’s threat to Red Sea commercial activity. These actions could give China an advantage in its competition with the U.S. for hegemony over the Red Sea. Unlike the United States, China has not devised a counterterrorism strategy for Somalia and has focused exclusively on protecting its own commercial interests. China’s narrow interests could force the Somali Armed Forces to fight alone in tracts of central and southern Somalia where the Belt and Road Initiative does not cross.

Russia could also see its influence expand in the event of a U.S. withdrawal from Somalia. Since 2016, Somalia has asked http://mogadishucenter.com/English/2016 ... g-economy/ Russia for counterterrorism assistance against al-Shabab, and would likely renew these requests if the United States departs. Although Russia does not wish to send its military there, it could view a U.S. exit as a window of opportunity to establish a naval base in the Horn of Africa. In January, U.S. Department of Defense officials stated that Russia had designated https://upnewsinfo.com/2020/01/28/russi ... -the-west/ the port of Berbera in Somaliland, a self-declared state within Somalia, as the ideal location for such a base. The United States previously thwarted https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/3217935 Moscow’s ambitions of establishing one in Djibouti, so Russian officials could view a U.S. withdrawal from Somalia as an opportunity to enter the international competition for Red Sea facilities.

A U.S. withdrawal from Somalia would also remove a vital check on the destabilizing conduct of the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Iran in Africa. The UAE has backed https://english.alaraby.co.uk/english/c ... in-somalia separatist movements in Somaliland and Puntland, as it seeks to expand its leverage over critical ports in both regions and counter Turkey’s rising influence in Somalia. Iran has allegedly provided https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/07/17/ir ... ed-states/ assistance to al-Shabab, while Qatar’s interference in Somalia’s internal politics https://nationalinterest.org/feature/so ... tar-163233 has exacerbated corruption and poor governance in the country. Given a U.S. departure, Somalia could become, like Yemen or Libya, a battleground for influence between all four countries.

_________________

Although the many risks associated with an immediate U.S. withdrawal from Somalia make Trump’s proposal ill-advised, the alternative of a U.S. “forever war” in Somalia is equally problematic. Even though the United States was expected to hand over security responsibilities to the Somali National Army in 2021, Africom stated https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your ... ntil-2027/ in March that U.S. training efforts for Somalia’s Danab (Lightning) Brigade would last until 2027. In order to eventually complete a safe withdrawal, the United States needs to strike a middle ground between Trump’s and the Pentagon’s preferred policies on Somalia by incrementally shifting burdens to the African countries that are most acutely threatened by al-Shabab.

The recent improvement in U.S.-Kenyan relations, which resulted in the announcement of free trade negotiations https://www.brookings.edu/blog/africa-i ... y-succeed/ in early July, should facilitate Nairobi’s expanded participation in U.S. counterterrorism operations in Somalia. The United States should revive the cooperation https://www.cfr.org/blog/lessons-tanzan ... arian-turn with Tanzania seen during the Obama and George W. Bush administrations, and endorse ad hoc regional security initiatives, such as the Somalia-Ethiopia-Eritrea trilateral summits https://africa.cgtn.com/2020/01/27/soma ... error-war/ on counterterrorism which began in January. If African countries are better equipped to fight al-Shabab, the United States will be able to orchestrate a phased withdrawal from Somalia at the appropriate time and avoid the security crises that would accompany Trump’s plan.

Although it is uncertain whether Trump will follow through on his plans to end U.S. counterterrorism operations in Somalia, the risks associated with an abrupt U.S. withdrawal doing so unwise. As Somalia prepares for presidential elections in 2021, the U.S. needs to devise a new strategy to counter al-Shabab which extends beyond the binary of forever war or immediate withdrawal that polarizes Washington. Regardless of whether Trump or former Vice President Joe Biden prevails on Nov. 3, terrorism and instability in Somalia will present major challenges for U.S. officials in the months ahead.

Somaliman
Member+
Posts: 7167
Joined: 09 Nov 2007, 20:12
Location: Heaven

Re: Trump’s Plan to Withdraw From Somalia Couldn’t Come at a Worse Time

Post by Somaliman » 04 Nov 2020, 19:20

"Trump’s Plan to Withdraw From Somalia Couldn’t Come at a Worse Time."

Totally wrong!

Although this was just a cheap election publicity stunt for Trump to show Americans that he was determined to bring American soldiers in conflict zones back to the country, Somalis would be more than happier to see the American soldiers in question leaving Somalia. These American soldiers, who are in Somalia, are there for the American interests and not for the Somali people.

They're part of AFRICOM. They're stationed in a former airbase, and no one exactly knows what they're doing there, other than training a small handful units of commandos once in a while as a cover-up for their covert military operations. And there's no point of training units of commandos for a country that's not even allowed to buy AK-47 due to the arms embargo that Somalia has been imposed on.

The US has never been serious about fighting Al-shabaab, and its soldiers in Somalia have never raised a finger to fight Al-shabaab; all they've been doing, in this regard, was flying useless drones that intentionally killed only goats and camels rather than targeting Al-shabaab figures. This is a fact.

These friggin American soldiers in Somalia are neither fighting Al-shabaab nor helping Somalis to fight them - and anyway they're not in Somalia to do so.

Make no mistake, we Somalis would be more than happier to see them leaving the country, as our name is used and we don't get anything positive in return.

Zmeselo
Senior Member+
Posts: 37344
Joined: 30 Jul 2010, 20:43

Re: Trump’s Plan to Withdraw From Somalia Couldn’t Come at a Worse Time

Post by Zmeselo » 04 Nov 2020, 22:43

Somaliman wrote:
04 Nov 2020, 19:20
"Trump’s Plan to Withdraw From Somalia Couldn’t Come at a Worse Time."

Totally wrong!

Although this was just a cheap election publicity stunt for Trump to show Americans that he was determined to bring American soldiers in conflict zones back to the country, Somalis would be more than happier to see the American soldiers in question leaving Somalia. These American soldiers, who are in Somalia, are there for the American interests and not for the Somali people.

They're part of AFRICOM. They're stationed in a former airbase, and no one exactly knows what they're doing there, other than training a small handful units of commandos once in a while as a cover-up for their covert military operations. And there's no point of training units of commandos for a country that's not even allowed to buy AK-47 due to the arms embargo that Somalia has been imposed on.

The US has never been serious about fighting Al-shabaab, and its soldiers in Somalia have never raised a finger to fight Al-shabaab; all they've been doing, in this regard, was flying useless drones that intentionally killed only goats and camels rather than targeting Al-shabaab figures. This is a fact.

These friggin American soldiers in Somalia are neither fighting Al-shabaab nor helping Somalis to fight them - and anyway they're not in Somalia to do so.

Make no mistake, we Somalis would be more than happier to see them leaving the country, as our name is used and we don't get anything positive in return.
I'm sure it's the view of most Somalis too, but I have 2 questions for you:

1. How do you see the US's fear that Russia & China will, somehow, replace it and

2. What to do about the shabaab, allegedly, gaining strength?

Somaliman
Member+
Posts: 7167
Joined: 09 Nov 2007, 20:12
Location: Heaven

Re: Trump’s Plan to Withdraw From Somalia Couldn’t Come at a Worse Time

Post by Somaliman » 06 Nov 2020, 18:47

Zmeselo,

Despite Putin’s aspirations for Russia to become the world’s second superpower again, currently none of the Russia’s 21 military bases abroad is equivalent to the size and capacity of the more than 200 bases the United States maintains around the world. Russia's military does not match the U.S. It can compete with regard to volume but not their qualitative presence.

Whether Russia needs or can afford new military bases on foreign soil to counter US power has been an on-going debate in the Kremlin for the past two decades or so – the cost being the paramount obstacle for the realization and sustainability of such military bases. Russia is no longer the Soviet Union; thus, cannot afford financially and logistically to have the kind of military base infrastructure that the US has globally.

In practice Russia is not in competition with the US on military bases on foreign soil, and the US knows this perfectly well.

Therefore, there’s no fear of Russians gaining influence in needy countries like Somalia, as they wouldn’t afford not only the cost of such bases but also the price to pay to the host country, such as Somalia.

On the other hand, China, which has a massive appetite for raw materials due to its mind-boggling amount of raw material consumption, presents a real concern for the US, even though China’s interaction with most countries is purely a give-and-take basis business and does not interfere in internal politics.

American oil companies undertook extensive oil explorations throughout Somalia in mid 60s, and the US has been keeping an eye on Somalia since. Siad Barre, who was not a pro-western, poured cold water on the aspirations for the materialization of such undertakings, and since he vacated power in 1991, Somalia descended into an anarchy and later a never-ending chaos to date.

One of the possible reasons why the US has never been serious of fighting Al-shabaab is to scare off the Chinese from digging in Somalia.

Therefore, Americans will be always around in Somalia, even though their presence doesn’t necessarily need to be always militarily. The US has been the back-bone of all interventions in Somalia, including humanitarian ones, and has been supporting the successive governments in Somalia.

With regard to Al-shabaab, there are only two solutions:

Either fight them, and this can be achieved within a very short period of time with the right commitment. Al-shabaab is mainly composed of a ragtag army of about 3000 die-hards, equipped with basic arms, but their main and most deadly weapon is a religious conviction.

We all know the American War on Terror was nothing more than a money-making business project, and to keep feeding on this business project, Al-shabaab, Al-qaida, etc., should continue to exist. The US has been the hindrance in the fight against Al-shabaab. They don’t want to fight Al-shabaab, neither do they want to lift the arms embargo on Somalia, so Somalia alone would be more than enough to defeat Al-shabaab.

Or as the old saying, “If you can't beat them, join them”, goes, begin direct negotiations and reach a political settlement with Al-shabaab. Again, the US has been dissuading every Somali government from doing so under the pretext that no one should be negotiating with any terrorist group.

Somalia needs a strong and visionary leader who can transcend clan politics, corruption, and foreign puppetry, to focus on the pressing issues in the country. All the successive governments since the collapse of Siad Barre have been fraudulent, self-centered, corrupt, and very weak, including the current one.
Last edited by Somaliman on 06 Nov 2020, 21:12, edited 1 time in total.

Zmeselo
Senior Member+
Posts: 37344
Joined: 30 Jul 2010, 20:43

Re: Trump’s Plan to Withdraw From Somalia Couldn’t Come at a Worse Time

Post by Zmeselo » 06 Nov 2020, 21:04

Somaliman wrote:
06 Nov 2020, 18:47
Zmeselo,

Despite Putin’s aspirations for Russia to become the world’s second superpower again, currently none of the Russia’s 21 military bases abroad is equivalent to the size and capacity of the more than 200 bases the United States maintains around the world. Russia's military does not match the U.S. It can compete with regard to volume but not their qualitative presence.

Whether Russia needs or can afford new military bases on foreign soil to counter US power has been an on-going debate in the Kremlin for the past two decades or so – the cost being the paramount obstacle for the realization and sustainability of such military bases. Russia is no longer the Soviet Union; thus, cannot afford financially and logistically to have the kind of military base infrastructure that the US has globally.

In practice Russia is not in competition with the US on military bases on foreign soil, and the US knows this perfectly well.

Therefore, there’s no fear of Russians gaining influence in needy countries like Somalia, as they wouldn’t afford not only the cost of such bases but also the price to pay to the host country, such as Somalia.

On the other hand, China, which has a massive appetite for raw materials due to its mind-boggling amount of raw material consumption, presents a real concern for the US, even though China’s interaction with most countries is purely a give-and-take basis business and does not interfere in internal politics.

American oil companies undertook extensive oil explorations throughout Somalia in mid 60s, and the US has been keeping an eye on Somalia since. Siad Barre, who was not a pro-western, poured cold water on the aspirations for the materialization of such undertakings, and since he vacated power in 1991, Somalia descended into an anarchy and later a never-ending chaos to date.

One of the possible reasons why the US has never been serious of fighting Al-shabaab is to scare off the Chinese from digging in Somalia.

Therefore, Americans will be always around in Somalia, even though their presence doesn’t necessarily need to be always militarily. The US has been the back-bone of all interventions in Somalia, including humanitarian ones, and has been supporting the successive governments in Somalia.

With regard to Al-shabaab, there are only two solutions:

Either fight them, and this can be achieved within a very short period of time with the right commitment. Al-shabaab is mainly composed of a ragtag army of about 3000 die-hards, equipped with basic arms, but their main and most deadly weapon is a religious conviction.

We all know the American War on Terror was nothing more than a money-making business project, and to keep feeding on this business project, Al-shabaab, Al-qaida, etc., should continue to exist. The US has been the hindrance in the fight against Al-shabaab. They don’t want to fight Al-shabaab, neither do they want to lift the arms embargo on Somalia, so Somalia alone would be more than enough to defeat Al-shabaab.

Or as the old saying, “If you can't beat them, join them”, goes, begin direct negotiations and reach a political settlement. Again, the US has been dissuading every Somali government to do so under the pretext that no one should be negotiating with any terrorist group.

Somalia needs a strong and visionary leader who can transcend clan politics, corruption, and foreign puppetry, to focus on the pressing issues in the country. All the successive governments since the collapse of Siad Barre have been fraudulent, self-centered, corrupt, and very weak, including the current one.
Thanx for this in depth explanation, somali-brother! I wish your country the ultimate peace, & the prosperity it deserves!

Somaliman
Member+
Posts: 7167
Joined: 09 Nov 2007, 20:12
Location: Heaven

Re: Trump’s Plan to Withdraw From Somalia Couldn’t Come at a Worse Time

Post by Somaliman » 06 Nov 2020, 21:18

Thanks, bro.

The same to Eritrea and its people.

Somaliman
Member+
Posts: 7167
Joined: 09 Nov 2007, 20:12
Location: Heaven

Re: Trump’s Plan to Withdraw From Somalia Couldn’t Come at a Worse Time

Post by Somaliman » 14 Nov 2020, 22:00

Zmeselo,

Remember that I said that the US didn't want to fight Al-Shabab or reach any political settlement with them, and that they dismissed any idea or plan in this regard!

https://www.hiiraan.com/news4/2020/Nov/ ... pdateFront

By the same token, although under the Trump administration, the deal signed between the US and Taliban (Doha peace accord) paved the way for intra-Afghan peace talks in Doha between the Kabul government and the Taliban, no tangible progress has been made at these talks in the Qatari capital since its launch on Sep.12, as this was nothing more than a lip service!

Zmeselo
Senior Member+
Posts: 37344
Joined: 30 Jul 2010, 20:43

Re: Trump’s Plan to Withdraw From Somalia Couldn’t Come at a Worse Time

Post by Zmeselo » 14 Nov 2020, 22:11

Somaliman wrote:
14 Nov 2020, 22:00
Zmeselo,

Remember that I said that the US didn't want to fight Al-Shabab or reach any political settlement with them, and that they dismissed any idea or plan in this regard!

https://www.hiiraan.com/news4/2020/Nov/ ... pdateFront

By the same token, although under the Trump administration, the deal signed between the US and Taliban (Doha peace accord) paved the way for intra-Afghan peace talks in Doha between the Kabul government and the Taliban, no tangible progress has been made at these talks in the Qatari capital since its launch on Sep.12, as this was nothing more than a lip service!
Smh!

Politics is dirtier than dirt, & it sickens me!

Ultimately tho, the solution is in somalis' hands. A foreigner, is always a foreigner.

In that hiiraan article, a name popped up at me and I was wondering where it was that I heard it (Kash Patel).

Then, it came to me. I think, you'll find this doc. quite interesting; where he plays centre stage.


Post Reply