Unilateralism Vs. multilateralism a case on Ethiopia’s involvement in Somalia

The incidents of the last few weeks in regards to Ethiopia’s involvement in Somalia shows us that unilateral actions though criticized initially, does in the end warrant praise. Ethiopia’s move to go about fighting the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC) despite muted criticism and criticisms from other parts have initially cast doubts on Ethiopia’s true intentions in regards to Somalia. But in fact Ethiopia did go into Somalia under the request of the Transitional federal government of Somalia (TFG) which had had problems in fighting the onslaught of the Islamic Courts threatening to bring Somalia back into conflict. The international community including the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) had understood that the TFG should not fail in its task in establishing a government- a void that had existed ever since the ousting of Siad Barre in the early 1990s. Somalia is a nation that has been gutted by continued violence the international community cannot afford to go back to the drawing board and start Somalia’s nation building from scratch.
The involvement of various players in terms of arming both the TFG and the UIC has shown indications of national interests of nations overriding those of Somalia. Even IGAD members have attempted at pushing for proxy wars over collective security. What one cannot understand is how members of IGAD which had been at the forefront in Somalia’s reconciliation could stoop to being part of the conflict themselves. Ethiopia’s military intervention though a gamble initially did eventually win over critics and has in fact prompted others to act as well. Kenya has closed its borders to tighten the noose on terrorists, Uganda and Nigeria are moving towards sending peace keeping forces and the US is now bombing suspected terrorist hideouts.

The UN has also started doing constructive works towards resolving the issue of Somalia and is on the way towards implementing the UN Security Council resolution 1725, which authorizes the creation of a protection force and training mission in Somalia to help protect the country’s transitional federal institutions. The new force is to be set up by the African Union (AU) and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD). Calls are now being made from different capitals around the world for a need to engage in an all-inclusive dialogue in Somalia as well as a speedy deployment of peace keepers into the country.

Although Somalia is not yet out of the woods yet one has to feel optimistic that finally the nation is getting the international attention it needs. Somalia is in no way like Afghanistan and Iraq the government has not been overthrown in fact the TFG asked for outside help. Understandably no foreign force is welcome in any nation whatever the reasoning behind the deployment might be. Ethiopia’s bold move is something that Africa really needs more of – more action and a little less rhetoric. We have all been tired of seeing chaos in Somalia where a nation is literally self destructing and the involvement of foreign powers in this conflict has in fact aggravated the conditions on the ground. We should also think about the thousands of Somali refugees that are languishing in refugee camps scattered across the region or the thousands of Somalia children dying from easily preventable diseases. Normalcy can only occur when factional fighting stop in Somalia. The UIC admittedly did bring about a semblance of stability there ,one would have hoped that the UIC and the TFG worked together in nation building. But the problem is Africa suffers from a political deficiency- compromise. Holding talks means nothing if no progress is being made and in some cases someone has to step to he platter and make hard decisions so that the situation does not worsen. Ethiopia in this case made a hard choice and if it did not bring Somalia back on its feet it has at least prompted others to act. Unilateralism is not a bad thing after all.•

January 12, 2007