Lessons learned from state-building in Somaliland
While insights from Somaliland’s state-building should not be directly applied to post-conflict interventions, it is imperative to highlight those factors that strongly influenced the stability in northern Somalia. Moving forward, policymakers can look for similar trends and practices within other contexts to best design post-conflict peacebuilding and state-building strategies.
Importance of a locally-driven, bottom-up state-building process
Somaliland’s recent history epitomizes an authentic locally driven and bottom-up state-building process. Marginalized by south-central Somalia’s dysfunction and isolated from the international community, Somalilanders engaged in endogenous and inclusive societal negotiations over the composition, structure, and influence of a new national government, which in turn facilitated ownership of and respect for the new institutions. As this government was born from a lengthy political negotiation between the region’s different parties and interests, the new leaders of Somaliland were held strictly accountable to their constituencies. Without this widespread support, it is unlikely that the emerging government would have survived the inter-clan conflicts that arose during the mid-1990s.
Align formal institutions with societal values, culture, and systems
Many of Somaliland’s successes should be attributed to its unique government structure that combines Western democratic institutions with traditional Somali laws and customs. Peacebuilding conferences during the 1990s were formalized shir, while many of the formal and informal agreements between rival interests were rooted in the same conditions of peace, cooperation and compromise that form the traditional xeer social contracts. The incorporation of Somaliland’s elders into the formal governance mechanisms recognizes their inherent social value as conflict negotiators, while simultaneously isolating clan politics within one institution. The flexibility with which Somaliland’s elders and political leaders operated should neither be understated nor undervalued. In stark contrast to Western-led peace initiatives that prescribe certain institutions and mechanisms in exchange for financial assistance, these actors engaged in the state-building process with the relative freedom to design a system that would best suit the country’s distinct cultural traditions.
Develop local mechanisms for accountability
Ironically, Somaliland’s lackluster natural resource base and ineligibility for foreign aid and bilateral assistance has facilitated the creation of strong institutional checks and balances on the government. Instead of heavy reliance on donor aid, a majority of the country’s capital emerges from an effective export tax and a committed Diaspora. Cultivated during the 1990s state-building era, both revenue streams have endured to become integral components of Somaliland’s society. As the country’s economy primarily consists of livestock exports, the government relies on taxation at major commercial centers. This heavy reliance on tax receipts subsequently increased the government’s culpability to its citizens and created a working relationship in which political officials could not design and implement policy decisions without the broad support of its tax base. Further dependence on the country’s Diaspora heavily influenced the peace conferences’ agenda and created a constituency to which the government was held accountable. The subsequent negotiations between Somaliland’s donor communities and the government created a widely acceptable government that could not breach its power without aggravating its primary revenue base.
Commit to peace before policy negotiations
Perhaps one of the most unique aspects of Somaliland is its leaders’ universal and unwavering commitment to non-violence. From 1991 through to today, Somaliland’s political discourse (from legal documents to public statements) have either started or concluded with an explicit commitment to peace and stability. These declarations often minimized tensions between competing parties and created an environment suitable for educated and honest debate on critical policy issues. Clan leaders and politicians consistently reiterate their desires to maintain a peaceful and stable environment regardless of policy conflicts or antagonisms. Deliberate calls for non-violence foster political goodwill amongst stakeholders and reduce tensions that may otherwise boil over during negotiations. It is important to note that this mechanism originates from Somali cultural systems and may not translate as effectively within other cultures.
Value of deliberate and lengthy negotiations
Somaliland’s state-building process during the 1990s was unique for, among other reasons, its length and inclusiveness, especially within the numerous peace conferences. All decisions were made by consensus and thus required significant deliberations at every juncture; clan elders regularly convened to debate particular policies only to return to their respective constituencies to hear recommendations and mobilize popular support. As a result, Somaliland engaged in an inclusive and thorough state-building process that resulted in widespread approval of the emerging government. These conditions were exemplified by the 1993 Borama Conference that lasted over four months and involved 850 Somalilanders and gave birth to the political structure that exists today.
[su_button url=”https://saxafimedia.com/a-pocket-of-stability-understanding-somaliland/11/” style=”soft” size=”12″ wide=”yes” center=”yes” text_shadow=”0px 0px 0px #FFFFFF” rel=”lightbox”]CONTINUE READING ON THE NEXT PAGE >[/su_button]
