The Horn of Africa, together with the Red Sea, stands as a crucial nexus in global trade. Unfortunately, it has morphed into a hotbed of geopolitical tension. In recent years, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has emerged as a pivotal, though often enigmatic, player in this arena. Its ambitions for economic growth, regional influence, and a desire to assert its power have made it a compelling, if contentious, force—especially in Somalia, where its impact is felt profoundly amidst the ongoing turmoil.
Yet, it’s essential to recognize that the UAE’s presence is not isolated. It operates within a complex web of international competition, contending with the interests of other influential nations, such as Qatar, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. Each of these players brings its unique motivations and allegiances to the table, complicating the already fragile political landscape of Somalia and raising pressing questions about sovereignty and security.
The UAE’s stakes in the region are varied, fueled by ambitions that transcend mere economics. The importance of strategic waterways like the Bab al-Mandab Strait and the Red Sea shipping lanes cannot be overstated. As the UAE positions itself as a global trade hub, its investments in Somali ports, notably the significant ones in Berbera and Bosaso, have further cemented its foothold. Control over these vital maritime chokepoints not only enhances trade potential but also offers a venue for containing perceived threats. For the UAE, this is about securing its influence while bolstering its economic interests in a volatile region.
Mixed Blessings and Burdens
For Somalia, the relationship with the UAE has been a double-edged sword. On one hand, Emirati investment has catalyzed infrastructure development, created jobs, and brought in much-needed capital. Initiatives like the training of the Northeastern State Maritime Police Force (PMPF) have made strides against piracy and other emerging threats. Yet, these benefits come draped in layers of concerns over Somali sovereignty and national unity.
The UAE’s method of engaging with local governments—often sidestepping the Federal Government in Mogadishu—sparks accusations of a divide-and-rule strategy. By cultivating relationships with various regional administrations, including North Western State of Somalia and Northeastern State, the UAE risks undermining the authority of the central government, which is already straining under the pressures of state consolidation. One could wonder, at what cost does this “assistance” come?
Moreover, the UAE’s dual approach raises eyebrows among keen observers. Many argue that Emirati investments seem skewed toward benefiting their interests, often at the expense of genuine Somali development. Critics assert that without transparency, agreements between local governments and foreign investors foster a culture of suspicion—an exploitation of Somalia’s precarious position. It’s not unlike the substantial influence wielded by Turkey in Mogadishu, creating an uneven playing field filled with lurking uncertainties.
The pitfalls of this international engagement are stark. Somalia’s internal divisions, particularly between the Federal Government and regional states, are intensifying, fueled by external actors each championing their preferred administration. The potential for societal fragmentation looms larger, complicating progress toward reconciliation and national sovereignty.
Whose Security Matters the Most?
In this tangled web, the question of security takes center stage. Recently, as highlighted by The Economist, the UAE’s actions in the region have drawn scrutiny. The deployment of the ELM-2084 radar system in Northeastern State, ostensibly aimed at monitoring threats from the Houthis, exemplifies the potential for exacerbating internal divisions. This unilateral action, bypassing Mogadishu’s authority, raises a critical question: whose security is prioritized here?
The implications extend beyond mere optics. The introduction of sophisticated military technology hints at the possibility of Somalia becoming an unwilling battleground in proxy conflicts. For a nation already battered by decades of instability, this is a bitter pill to swallow. What happens to the Somali citizens, who have borne the brunt of this chaos, as their future hangs precariously in the balance?
When examining the radar system’s placement, particularly in the economically vital city of Bosaso, one can’t help but feel a sense of foreboding. If validated, this deployment could transform Somalia into a conflict zone without the awareness or consent of its populace. Furthermore, the palpable silence from Somali authorities only serves to heighten concerns. Are they truly equipped to navigate these foreign entanglements, or are they merely pawns in a larger game?
A Circle of Despair and Disappointment
The broader context is equally troubling. In a country consistently listed near the bottom of Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index, rampant rent-seeking behavior among its leaders presents significant hurdles. The involvement of foreign powers with vested interests adds layers of risk, nurturing an environment ripe for corruption and undermining governance. Rather than uplifting Somalia, these influences seem to deepen its turmoil, leading to a cycle of insecurity and isolation.
This despair is compounded by the glaring inadequacy of Somali governance structures. Parliaments that are supposed to provide oversight are often ineffective, lacking both capacity and will to challenge external meddling. The erosion of trust in these institutions paves the way for unchecked foreign influence, further straining the delicate fabric of Somali society.
Bashir Hussein, a former Northeastern State presidential candidate and senior advisor, poignantly encapsulates this landscape: amidst the chaos of competing foreign interests, the Somali people often remain on the periphery, their voices silenced. Will Somalia find its way back to stability, or will it remain ensnared in a cycle of external manipulation and internal discord?
Edited By Ali Musa
Axadle Times International – Monitoring.
