The African Union (AU) itself is, in many respects, a farcical organisation, and I would caution against placing too much stock and hope in its actions. The AU once recognised an entity that is currently in exile in Algeria, namely the Western Sahara Liberation Movement, acknowledging it as a separate country. This, quite understandably, incensed Morocco, leading to its withdrawal from the AU for precisely this reason.
That being said, I believe the United States will not recognise Somaliland for several clear reasons. The U.S. has invested billions of dollars in Somalia since 2012, with the primary aim of stabilising the country, combating al-Shabaab, and ensuring its security. Any move to recognise Somaliland would render these efforts redundant, which runs contrary to American interests. While I am not suggesting that U.S. policy is immutable, a shift in this stance seems highly unlikely—unless, of course, the Somali government in Mogadishu aligns itself with Russia, China, and other elements of the Axis, which I find improbable. In the foreseeable future, I do not see the U.S. altering its position to divide Somalia and Somaliland.
However, what I wish to emphasise is that the U.S. recognises countries when it aligns with its broader geopolitical interests. A clear example of this is Kosovo. The U.S. recognised Kosovo primarily to counter Russian influence, given Russia’s close ties with Serbia. In this case, the secession of Kosovo from Serbia was, from a legal standpoint, no less illegitimate than Somaliland's secession from Somalia. Yet, Kosovo's recognition by the West is a consequence of its geopolitical utility, while Somaliland remains an unrecognised territory in Africa, a developing nation.
Similarly, in conflicts such as the Bangladesh-Pakistan war, the West supported Bangladesh's independence from Pakistan, motivated by geopolitical considerations. Despite Pakistan being a Muslim majority country, the West sought to weaken it in that context, with Bangladesh receiving substantial backing from India and Britain. thought the west said they were doing it to protect Human rights but we know that is Bull. Because if it was about Human lives they would do the same for the Falastini people.
Thus, there are instances where unilateral secession is endorsed by the West, particularly the U.S., but these instances are shaped by strategic interests. It is not the prevailing norm. In practice, the international community tends to require the consent of the parent state for secession to be recognised. If, tomorrow, Somalia were to recognise Somaliland's independence, the rest of the world would follow suit within 24 hours, just as Ethiopia's recognition of Eritrea preceded global recognition. This is the way the world operates: unilateral secession is seldom welcomed unless exceptional circumstances prevail. And, frankly, Somaliland's case does not fall within such an exception indeed .
Dr Zackovich
