This article, “Trump’s Quick Wins in Africa: Protecting Farmers, Defending Christians, Recognizing Democracies,” argues that recognizing Somaliland would be a quick and impactful win for a hypothetical second Trump administration, creating a positive legacy in Africa.
Here’s a breakdown:
-
Trump’s Focus: The author, Abdi Daud, posits that Trump prioritizes clear narratives and quick wins over complex, long-term solutions in foreign policy to build a lasting legacy.
-
Examples: The article contrasts Trump’s alleged focus on protecting white farmers in South Africa and Christians in Nigeria with the Sudan crisis, arguing the former offer simpler, more resonant narratives.
-
Somaliland as a Solution: The author, Abdi Daud, argues that recognizing Somaliland aligns with Trump’s desire for quick wins and offers several benefits:
-
Clear Narrative: Somaliland’s history of independence, self-governance, and stability presents a straightforward story of rewarding democracy.
-
Decisive Impact: Recognition would immediately transform Somaliland’s international standing.
-
Low Complexity: Recognition is a simple executive decision.
-
Genuine Benefit: Recognition would stabilize the Horn of Africa, counter Chinese influence, enable development, and reduce terrorism.
-
Minimal Downside: The author dismisses potential objections from the African Union and others.
-
-
Conclusion: The author believes recognizing Somaliland is a compelling opportunity for Trump to create a positive legacy in Africa with minimal effort and significant impact.
The complete piece is as follows:
Trump’s Quick Wins in Africa: Protecting Farmers, Defending Christians, Recognizing Democracies
Recognizing Somaliland requires no unwilling coalition, no UN Security Council resolutions, or no complex aid programs needing congressional approval. It’s a bilateral executive decision within presidential authority.
By Abdirahman Mohamed Abdi Daud
Donald Trump isn’t just focused on being a successful president. He’s focused on being a historic one. At this stage in his political career, legacy matters more than process. He’s looking for defining moments and clear narratives that will be remembered decades from now, not incremental policy achievements that require patience and long-term commitment.
This isn’t merely about ego or vanity. Trump understands something fundamental about presidential history: the actions that endure are those that tell clear, powerful stories. He doesn’t have time for evolutionary policymaking with trial and error and long-term strategy. That’s risky. Whoever comes after Trump might not continue his path, rendering years of careful diplomacy moot.
In other words, Trump is after quick wins, low-hanging fruit, and powerful optics. This reality shapes his entire approach to foreign policy, particularly towards Africa.
The Pattern: Decisive Narratives Over Complex Solutions
Consider the priorities emerging from Trump’s approach to Africa. Protecting white farmers in South Africa and Christians in Nigeria receive more attention than the Sudan crisis, despite Sudan’s humanitarian catastrophe being objectively larger in scale. Why?
These are decisive measures that create clear stories for future generations. Trump stood up for persecuted communities. Trump defended religious minorities. Trump protected vulnerable farmers. These narratives are simple, emotionally resonant to his base, and require relatively straightforward policy interventions.
The Sudan crisis, by contrast, is a quagmire of competing militias, regional power dynamics, ethnic tensions, and no clear “good guys” to support. It demands patient diplomacy, coalition building, and acceptance that solutions will be messy and incomplete. It’s the antithesis of legacy-building.
Trump might take performative actions on complex issues, but he won’t necessarily invest in the intricate, long-term conflict resolution that places like Sudan require. This creates a challenging environment for leaders in nations like Nigeria and South Africa, who may find themselves subject to American pressure without commensurate American engagement in solving their underlying challenges.
Beyond Zero-Sum: The Win-Win Legacy
But here’s the crucial insight: legacy-building doesn’t need to be win-lose. There are win-win situations that create a powerful legacy for Trump whilst making Africa genuinely better. These are the opportunities that should excite both American policymakers and African partners.
The criteria are straightforward:
- Clear narrative: The action must tell a simple, compelling story
- Decisive impact: The intervention must create visible, immediate change
- Low complexity: The policy must be implementable without years of bureaucratic negotiation
- Genuine benefit: The outcome must create real, sustainable improvement
- Minimal downside: The risks must be manageable and the costs reasonable
You’ve guessed it: Somaliland recognition.
Why Somaliland Checks Every Box
The Clear Narrative
Somaliland’s story is remarkably straightforward. A territory that achieved independence in 1960, voluntarily explored union with Somalia, endured decades of oppression including genocide, withdrew from that unratified and illegal union in 1991, and has maintained peace, democracy, and stability for over three decades whilst surrounded by chaos. This is a case of state continuity, not secession.
Trump recognizing Somaliland writes itself as a legacy story: “The president who rewarded democracy and peace in Africa whilst others looked away.” It’s the kind of clear, morally uncomplicated narrative that resonates across political divides and stands the test of time.
The Decisive Impact
Recognition would be immediate and irreversible. Unlike development programs that take years to show results, or conflict mediation that ebbs and flows, recognition happens with a single announcement. One day Somaliland is unrecognized; the next day it isn’t. The before-and-after is stark and undeniable.
For Somaliland, recognition transforms everything overnight: access to international finance, bilateral agreements, development partnerships, and most critically, the psychological shift from perpetual supplicant to sovereign equal. The impact would be visible within months.
The Low Complexity
Unlike most African policy challenges, Somaliland recognition requires no coalition of unwilling partners, no UN Security Council resolutions, no complex aid programs requiring Congressional appropriations. It’s fundamentally an executive decision about diplomatic recognition, well within presidential authority. State recognition is, by definition, a bilateral act (US and Somaliland), not the unilateral intervention ill-informed analysts claim.
The legal groundwork has been laid by decades of Somaliland’s state-building. In fact, the United States was among the first nations to recognize Somaliland’s independence in 1960, before its legally incomplete union with Somalia. The strategic rationale has been articulated by multiple think tanks and former officials. The mechanics are simple: recognize, establish diplomatic relations, and facilitate others following America’s lead. The entire process could unfold in months rather than years.
The Genuine Benefit
This isn’t merely symbolic. Somaliland recognition would:
- Stabilize the Horn of Africaby acknowledging reality rather than pretending Somalia controls territory it hasn’t governed in 34 years
- Reward democracyin a region dominated by autocrats, sending a powerful message about what America values
- Counter Chinese influenceby strengthening ties with a strategic partner controlling access to the Red Sea
- Enable developmentby allowing Somaliland to access international financial institutions and sovereign lending
- Reduce terrorismby supporting a proven partner in counter-terrorism that has kept al-Shabaab and other extremists out of its territory
These aren’t theoretical benefits. They’re immediate, measurable outcomes that make both America and the Horn of Africa more secure and prosperous.
The Minimal Downside
The objections to recognition are telling in their weakness. The African Union will grumble, but the AU has no enforcement mechanism and many African states quietly support Somaliland. In fact, a 2005 AU fact-finding mission recommended that the international community consider recognizing Somaliland, acknowledging its unique case of state continuity. Some in the international community will invoke “territorial integrity”, ignoring that Somaliland’s borders are the same colonial boundaries that defined nearly every African state’s claim to self-determination.
Whilst US think-tanks strongly recommend Somaliland recognition based on strategic analysis and regional expertise, there will be a few voices from Qatar-funded think-tanks that falsely claim Somaliland recognition helps al-Shabaab. These are the same institutions that have failed to find solutions for Somalia for decades. We see the results of blindly trusting their unfounded speculation: Somalia remains a failed state whilst al-Shabaab controls vast territories. Hillary Clinton’s Single Somalia Policy didn’t help Somalia – it only blocked Somaliland. The policy’s failure is self-evident: Somalia is no closer to functioning governance, whilst Somaliland’s success goes unrewarded.
Arguably, recognition of Somaliland by the US will actually make Somalia focus on al-Shabaab rather than maintaining this expansionist obsession with a nation they haven’t ruled since the 1980s. When Somalia is forced to accept reality, it can finally concentrate its limited resources on the actual terrorist threat rather than fantasizing about reconquering a functioning democracy.
Somalia nationalists have already accepted Somali territories being under Kenya and Ethiopia. When they see the reality of Somaliland recognition, they will adapt to a much better outcome: another Somali-speaking nation which can inspire them to achieve better governance.
Overall, the risks are manageable because Somaliland has already done the hard work. It has functioning democratic institutions, peaceful transitions of power, effective security forces, and 34 years of stability. America wouldn’t be nation-building; it would be recognizing a nation that has already built itself.
Conclusion
Trump wants legacy, not process. He wants South Africa’s farms and Nigeria’s Christians – clear stories, quick wins, and powerful optics.
Somaliland recognition delivers all three whilst actually improving Africa. It’s the anti-Clinton. It’s the anti-Sudan. Clear rather than murky. A quick win that actually works.
One announcement. One legacy moment. Democracy rewarded. Stability recognized. History made.
The window is open. The case is compelling. The time is now.
