Q&A: Somalia's conflict

Medeshi May 17, 2009

Q&A: Somalia's conflict
Somalia has experienced almost constant conflict since the collapse of its central government in 1991.
It was hoped the election of moderate Islamist Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmad as president of a transitional government in January and the departure of Ethiopian troops would stop the violence, but Islamist insurgents are keeping up their almost daily attacks.
Who are the insurgents?
The main fighters are from al-Shabab, a radical faction that emerged from the remnants of the Union of Islamic Courts, routed by the Ethiopian forces that invaded Somalia in 2006.
AU's MOGADISHU QUAGMIRE
AU force in Somalia (Amisom) was mandated in January 2007
Supposed to be 8,000-strong but currently has only 4,300 troops
Comprised of soldiers from Uganda and Burundi
Sierra Leone has offered battalion, which would take force over 5,000
Restricted by security situation to operations in Mogadishu
The group, which is on the US terror list and is said to have links with al-Qaeda, now controls much of southern and central Somalia and has imposed strict Sharia law in those areas.
They see President Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, a former UIC leader, as having sold out for agreeing to head a government backed by the international community.
This view is shared by another group of Islamist fighters - Hisbul-Islam - formed after Mr Ahmed become president in January.
One of its main leaders is Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys, who together with Mr Ahmed headed the UIC in 2006.
Unlike previous divisions in Somalia, these groups are not based on the clan system.
So what do they want?
Power - so that Somalia is ruled by Sharia.
President Ahmed's recent introduction of Islamic law has not appeased them.
They are followers of the Wahhabi school of Islam, which is based on a more rigid and literal interpretation of Islamic texts, rather than mainstream Sunni faith practised by most Somalis.
The Islamists also want the African Union peacekeepers, based in Mogadishu, to leave.
Mr Aweys, who recently returned from exile, says he will not enter peace talks with the government and his former ally until these "invaders" have gone.
Will the government survive?
Not necessarily. Military and intelligence sources say many government troops have defected to the insurgents.
One assessment reckons the government can only rely on some 4,000 fighters against 6,000 from al-Shabab.
Meanwhile, the AU peacekeepers, in the capital to bolster the government, do not have the mandate to pursue the insurgents.
Only 4,300 troops of a planned 8,000 strong force have deployed.
What is the international response?
There is little appetite for international intervention given Ethiopia's recent experience, which gave rise to the current insurgency.
Ethiopia initially intervened in late 2006 to save the interim government and to prevent the spread of fundamentalist Islam in Africa, a concern shared by America.
But they suffered daily attacks - and at the worst of the fighting the bodies of dead Ethiopian soldiers were dragged through Mogadishu, bringing to mind similar events when the US intervened in the 1990s - made famous by the film Black Hawk Down.
The UN backed the peace process which led to the election of Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed as president.
In April, the international community pledged more than $200m to Somalia to beef up its security.
Most of this is for the embattled AU to help them with equipment and the training of Somali forces.
They are intended to oversee the creation of 10,000-strong police force and the training of 6,000 soldiers.
How are ordinary people coping?
The latest fighting is said to have forced about 20,000 people from residential areas of the capital, where the battles are being played out by pro-government forces and insurgent groups.
And over the years hundreds of thousands of Somalis have fled to neighbouring countries.
More than one million people, in a nation the UN estimates to be of nine million, are internally displaced.
Drought is further exacerbating the situation, with more than one third of the population reliant on food aid.
Many Somalis depend for their survival on money sent home by their relatives abroad.
Story from BBC NEWS:

Militants take key Somali town, warlord defects

Medeshi
Militants take key Somali town, warlord defects
By Abdi Sheikh and Ibrahim Mohamed
Sunday, May 17, 2009
MOGADISHU (Reuters) - Militant Islamist fighters captured a strategic town north of Mogadishu on Sunday, leaving government forces isolated in pockets of the country's capital and central region after two weeks of heavy clashes.
In a sign of some disarray among militant ranks however, a former warlord and powerful opposition leader defected to the government side over the weekend.
President Sheikh Sharif Ahmed's United Nations-backed government -- the 15th attempt to establish central rule -- is struggling like predecessors to contain powerful insurgents, currently led by hardline militant al Shabaab.
"Al Shabaab captured Jowhar after serious fighting on Sunday morning," resident Ismail Farah told Reuters. "At least seven people including four civilians died."
Jowhar, Ahmed's hometown, is 90 km (56 miles) from Mogadishu and links it to the volatile central region where local sources say 68 people have been killed in clashes between al Shabaab and a moderate Islamist group since Friday.
Over the past two weeks, fighting in southern Somalia has killed at least 172 civilians and wounded 528 others, according to a local rights group.
Somali Security Minister Omar Hashi Aden said the militants were being supported from outside. He has previously accused Eritrea of arming the insurgents, a charge Asmara denies.
"They are fighting in Mogadishu, and central Somalia. They have also started a war in Jowhar. They are economically and militarily supported ... it is not cheap to sustain fighting."
Eighteen years of conflict have destabilised the region, sent tens of thousands across the border, and drawn foreign militants and a flood of arms to the Horn of Africa nation.
Pirates have taken advantage of the anarchy with ever bolder attacks on international shipping. Nearly 30 hijackings so far this year have set it on course to be the worst ever.
DEFECTION
In a much-needed boost for the government, former warlord and powerful opposition leader Sheikh Yusuf Mohamed Siad, also known as "Inda'ade", defected to its side over the weekend.
"The opposition are bandits," Inda'ade told reporters. "We shall defend the Islamic government. They (opposition) do irreligious acts, and they kill innocent people."
Inda'ade's former group, Hizbul Islam, confirmed the defection but said it would not change anything. "(Inda'ade) and his troops have left us and joined the government ... but that will not affect us," said Hassan Mahdi, spokesman for the group.
Hizbul Islam is an umbrella opposition group including militant leader Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys, seen as a powerful figure among insurgents. Aweys said Inda'ade had given most of his weapons to him before defecting.
The International Crisis Group think tank said Somalia's opposition groups had become deeply divided. "There is now a battle shaping up between reportedly moderate Muslims and the extremists, such as Al-Shabaab," it said.
On Friday and Saturday, fighting between Shabaab and a moderate Islamist group in two central towns killed some 68 people and sent 3,300 others fleeing from their homes, pro-government forces and a rights group said.
"We have killed 47 al Shabaab fighters including a white man in Mahas and Wabho," Sheikh Abdullahi Sheikh Abu Yusuf, spokesman of the moderate Ahlu Sunna Waljamaca, told Reuters, adding that three of their fighters had been killed.
The Mogadishu-based Elman Peace and Human Rights group said 18 civilians were killed in those clashes, and that 3,300 people had fled their homes. "Fighting continues non-stop in those areas," said Yasin Ali Gedi, vice chairman of the group. (Additional reporting by Mohamed Ahmed and Abdi Guled; writing by Jack Kimball; editing by Philippa Fletcher).
Source: Reuters, May 17, 2009

New Legislation and the Return of an Old Argument

Medeshi May 17, 2009
By Scott Morgan
Medeshi
New Legislation and the Return of an Old Argument
There is a specific reason why I chose this title. There are two distinct actions that have been taken this week in Washington regarding Issues in Africa.
The First Part is New Legislation was Introduced in the US Senate that Deals with an Important but Highly Underreported Root of the Crisis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
The Second Part is a Statement by the New Undersecretary of State For African Affairs Johnny Carson. Lets say it appears that it is once Again 2006 in Somalia.
First of All is the Congo Conflict Minerals Act.
This is a Bi-Partisan Introduced Legislation that seeks to Address One of the Root Causes for All that ills the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
The Sponsors Include Sam Brownback Republican from Kansas, Russ Feingold a Democrat from Wisconsin and who is the Chairman of the African Subcommitee on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Charles Schumer a Democrat from New York.
What is the reason why this Legislation is currently needed? Key Components for Electronic Devices are made from Raw Materials Extracted from the Conflict Prone Eastern Part of the DRC. In Essence it is alledged that Multi-National Coporations are Profitting from the Suffering of their Fellow Human Beings.
What Materials will be Covered? According to the Legislation the Origin of the Country where purchases of Gold, Coltan, Casserite (Tin Ore) and Wolframite are Made From. The Legislation will require such information be disclosed to the Securities and Exchange Commission.
It is believed that the sales of these Minerals are funding various Warlords and Militia Groups that literally Run Affairs in the Eastern DRC.
At this time the Consumer Electronics Industry has had a tepid response to this Legislation but have indicated that they will work on this issue.
US Officals will have a Lot on their Agenda in the Near Future when it Comes to Crisis Spots in Africa!!!
Now to the Return of the Old Argument:
In 2006 Ethiopian Forces entered Somalia to Prop up a Weak Western-Backed Government against an Islamic Insurgency. As Much as anything this may have been a key factor in the spike in the Acts of Piracy that Began in 2008.
When the Incursion began in December 2006 the US State Department reported that it had Evidence that Eritrea had been providing Logisitical Support and even Ground Forces to the UIC (Union of Islamic Courts.)
Fast Forward to 2009. Ethiopian Forces have left Somalia but a number of them remain along the Border in case that they have to return. A small contingent of AU Peacekeepers are in Mogadishu under a limited Mandate. A New Islamist Militia Al-Shabbab which some People maintain has close links to Al-Qaida has Power in the Southern Part of the Country. They have also threatened to Invade Kenya as well.
Recently in an Interview with the BBC US Undersecretary of State for African Affairs Johnny Carson reiterated the Claim that Eritrea has been supporting the Islamist Militias in Somalia. He stated that the US and the UN have "credible" Evidence of Eritrean Involvement in Somalia.
This is one of the reason for the Tensions between the United States and Eritrea. Other Reasons are the Situation along the Border with Ethiopia and the Human Rights Record within Eritrea.
There has been an increase in the Fighting In and Around Mogadishu and an Offer by the Government for a Ceasefire was rejected by the Islamists.
For its part the Eritrean Government has denied any involvement in Somalia once Again
This situation can best be described as TO BE CONTINUED......

Change is coming to Ethiopia

Medeshi May 17, 2009

Change is coming to Ethiopia

After 18 years in power, serious moves are afoot to renew the leadership of the ruling EPRDF
Change is coming to Ethiopia, says Prime Minister Meles Zenawi. It was time the country's political old guard stepped down, he told Africa Confidential in an interview on 3 May. Meles has submitted his resignation and the ruling party discussed it in February - but that does not make it inevitable. If there is a change, it would be more of personnel than policy, he suggested. The issue was not that the Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front had ruled for 18 years but that 'the same people have been in positions of leadership throughout the period'. He included himself in 'the old leadership which was leading the EPRDF during the armed struggle and up to now'.
When asked if he was expecting 'a collective transition', Meles replied, 'Yes, I think that the next crucial step needs to be taken,' implying that the older generation faced retirement. Meles has recently repeated that he would like to step down by the next elections. This statement has been greeted with scepticism. He had been less forthright about renewing the leadership - a message that many of his colleagues will not welcome. The EPRDF has ruled since 1991 and many leaders of the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF), the main party in its four-party coalition, have been in positions of power since they took up arms in 1975. No names have officially been named.
Any changes on this scale require an EPRDF congress. Several options would open up regarding Meles' successor (see Box). 'The generation that moved the mountains', as the war veterans that defeated Colonel Mengistu Haile Mariam's regime are known, may be growing tired. It seems unlikely that a collective transition could pass unopposed: some in the EPRDF might feel they should take over if Meles left office.
Opposition could also come from closer to home: the Premier's wife, Azeb Mesfin, is now in a controlling position at the Endowment Fund for the Rehabilitation of Tigray. She might not relish a diminution of her growing political role, even for the sake of the ruling party's political health.
Leading potential candidates include Seyoum Mesfin, Abay Tsehaye, Addisu Legesse, Tewodros Adhanom and Arkebe Oqubay. All are Tigrayan: ethnicity is an important bargaining chip in this diverse society and despite representing the major nationalities, the EPRDF is dominated by Tigrayans, even though they are nationally outnumbered by both Amharas and Oromo. There are those who think a Tigrayan successor to Meles could widen ethnic divisions that the EPRDF has never been able fully to close.
No consensusThe question of succession may be largely academic. Leaving the final decision on Meles's resignation to the party offers plenty of room for a change of face. The issue was raised at the quarterly EPRDF Executive Committee meeting in February, attended by an equal number of representatives from each member party: the TPLF, Amhara National Democratic Movement (both EPRDF founding members), Oromo People's Democratic Organisation and Southern Ethiopian Peoples' Democratic Movement.
There was heated discussion but no consensus. Meles's recognition of the need to rejuvenate the EPRDF as a whole demonstrates that he understands the need for a show of democratic change. A new party leader would set an important precedent and mark the first-ever peaceful and voluntary handover of power in Ethiopia.
However, a change of age group might not trigger a change of attitude. Tewodros would ostensibly constitute a departure from the traditional leadership; he was not involved in the student movement and played no part in the liberation struggle, yet he is very close to Meles and would provide no real change of direction. Arkebe took part in the liberation struggle, albeit for less time than others of the old guard, yet he retains more political independence than might be expected.
In any event, the EPRDF has begun to prepare actively for the elections. The government has organised talks on procedure: it is keen to avoid the violence and other problems of 2005, when an impressive pre-electoral process was marred by post-poll violence, followed by the refusal of some elected opposition members to take their seats in Parliament. The opposition has already said that it does not expect a fair deal but although still much divided, some elements have begun organising.
The major challenge may come from the Forum (Medrek) for Democratic Dialogue in Ethiopia (FDDE), an alliance of parties established by former Defence Minister Siye Abraha and former President Negasso Gidada. A central element in the Forum is the Arena Tigray for Democracy and Sovereignty, under Gebru Asrat, an opposition party in Tigray Region which threatens the TPLF in its own heartland.
The other parties in Forum include: Ethiopian Democratic Unity Movement; Oromo Federalist Democratic Movement, led by member of parliament Bulcha Demeksa; Somali Democratic Alliance Forces; the United Ethiopian Democratic Forces, which consists of the Ethiopian Social Democratic Party and Southern Ethiopian Peoples' Democratic Congress (both chaired by Beyene Petros, MP), plus the Oromo People's Congress of MP Merara Gudina; and Union for Democracy and Justice (UDJ), chaired by Birtukan Mideksa.
These parties have all agreed to contest the elections under the Medrek banner while maintaining their own structures and leaders. They thus hope to avoid a collapse like that of the opposition Coalition for Unity and Democracy in 2005. The CUD had never been much more than a veil covering major policy disagreements and competing ambitions; its leaders' inability to put aside these ambitions lost it many supporters. The need for an effective coalition is pressing.
A group of former CUD members led by Birtukan set up the UDJ, which is now in the Forum. Former CUD Chairman Hailu Shawel, who refuses to have anything to do with his former colleagues, has formed the All Ethiopia Unity Party. Yet another splinter, led by Ayele Chamiso, has kept the CUD name. The United Ethiopian Democratic Party-Medhin is renamed the Ethiopian Democratic Party. It is still led by Lidetu Ayelew, who caused its split with the CUD after a confrontation with Hailu Shawel.
Ginbot 7 was founded last year in the diaspora and is not registered in Ethiopia. It is led by Berhanu Nega, the only opposition leader to leave Ethiopia after oppositionists were pardoned in 2007. The 24 April arrests have raised its profile (AC Vol 50 No 9). Most ex-CUD parties suffer from the widespread disenchantment about their infighting; it is uncertain how much support they will get.
Opposition fractures are visible, despite the fledgling alliances. Where power is fiercely contested, this is dangerous. Many oppositionists have little faith that the government will really address their concerns: expanding political freedom; freeing all political prisoners; press freedom and equal media access; neutrality for the National Electoral Board; full and independent judiciary; and freedom of expression. Yet without a concerted attempt at organisation, none of the opposition parties can hope for a favourable outcome to the 2010 elections.
In 2005, the EPRDF made the telling point that the opposition criticised the government but never came up with any serious alternative policies. However, Meles' government has done little to address opposition concerns, then or since. The government has stressed that it is keen to avoid any of the violence that haunted the 2005 elections. This requires dialogue with the opposition and addressing the issues involved in building a democratic system.

Not all Somalias are created equal

Medeshi May 17, 2009
Not all Somalias are created equal
By McClatchy
When I've gone to Somalia, the first question I've had to grapple with, as a foreigner and therefore ransom bait, is how many armed bodyguards to hire.
Not so in Somaliland. The first serious question asked of me after I landed recently came from the helpful young clerk at the cell phone company.
“Do you want to get Internet on your phone?” he asked.
Somaliland was almost a pleasure to work in -- not as hot and pirate-infested as Puntland, not as likely to be fatal as Mogadishu. Walking through the main market there, I didn't get that heavy pulse-pounding you usually feel in Somalia, like someone could be after you or the car in front of you could explode. And yet Somaliland is still, technically, Somalia.
The regional government has been trying to get African and Western countries to recognize its independence, but so far in vain. While this irks experts and aid workers, African countries are still trying to maintain the rhetoric of a unified Somalia -- and the U.S. and other Western countries aren't going to take the lead in recognizing Somaliland.
This is unfortunate. Somaliland has earned the right to decide its own fate by doing an admirable job governing itself, creating relatively robust economic and political systems in the midst of chaos. This hasn't exactly sat well with the extremists in the south, who staged coordinated suicide bombings in the capital, Hargeisa, last October -- the most shocking violence here since the civil war of the early 1990s.
The government swiftly instituted security measures, and now buildings frequented by foreigners and top officials are barricaded and most expatriates don't venture outside after dark.
The economy is stable but sluggish, which is what you get when foreign banks aren't free to open branches, and officials insist they need access to direct foreign investment to decouple it from the rest of Somalia. Shipments are regularly delayed because the main port, Berbera, still registers for insurance companies as part of Somalia. When I was there, the main cell phone company, Telesom, had run out of SIM cards.
But, they assured me, they could put Internet on my phone. I sat in the airy second-story customer service center, surrounded by a whirring bank of computers, while the guy worked on my phone. He fiddled with it for 10 minutes before I realized he had no idea what he was doing. When I walked over he was staring at the keypad blankly.
“Have you ever programmed one of these before?” I asked.
“No,” he said finally, and handed the phone back apologetically. So the BlackBerry has yet to reach Somaliland. But it will.

Political crisis in Kuwait

Medeshi May 16, 2009

Political crisis in Kuwait
By Hashem Ahelbarra
(Photo: Salwa Al Jassar pays her registration fee to stand in the Kuwaiti election on May 16, 2009 [EPA]
The political standoff between Kuwait's royal family and some members of parliament has delayed health, education, investment and infrastructure projects.
Al Jazeera correspondent Hashem Ahelbarra explains the issues fuelling the feud.
Q: Why has the Kuwaiti parliament been dissolved three times in as many years?
Kuwait faces the challenge of maintaining a relatively democratic system while preserving quasi-absolute powers of the ruling family.
In video

Political infighting disrupts Kuwait's markets
More videos...The media is very outspoken, MPs have more latitude to file no-confidence votes, sanction the government and fire ministers. However, criticising Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad Al-Sabah, the emir, or ruler, of Kuwait, is a red line.
Attempts by independent and Islamist members of parliament to oust the prime minister and the defence minister - both of whom are members of the royal family - were rebuffed by the emir, who simply dissolved the legislature to put an end to the political standoff that has crippled life in the oil-rich Gulf state.
MPs who openly said that some members of the royal family are unfit to hold key cabinet posts, were also arrested and accused of disparaging the powers of the emir.
Mutual distrust between the national assembly and the ruling family has deepened over the past few years, with both sides trading accusations.
The royal family alleges some MPs have abused their constitutional powers for personal gain. On the other hand, parliamentarians say the government is not up to the task of ruling the country.
Is the political crisis rooted in a standoff between what some describe as 'Islamist deputies' and a pro-Western government?
Not exactly. There is a misconception here. Unlike in Egypt, the "Islamists" of the Gulf in general, and of Kuwait in particular, have on many occasions sided with the government and approved legislation and budgets.
Rather, the standoff is between conservative Islamic, independent, liberal and tribal MPs who think the powers given to the ruling family - particularly the emir and the prime minister - should be diminished.
The row that prompted the emir to dissolve the parliament came after the latter accused the royal family of squandering public funds and doing less to bail out the economy.
However, it is important to remember the crisis is not just rooted in dissatisfaction with a government. It is more about a parliament asking to have a bigger say in the decision-making process - something that the conservative Gulf state is not ready for just yet.
Why won't the prime minister - a relative of Sheikh Sabah - stand down?
The crisis started when some MPs tried to question Sheikh Nasser Mohammed al-Ahmad Al-Sabah - nephew of the emir - for allegedly misusing public funds and mismanaging the country.
But the spat was not only about his personal performance; it was more about the role of the prime minister and the powers he exercises.
In 2003, in a departure from long-established tradition, Jaber al-Ahmad Al-Sabah, the then emir, removed the title of prime minister from the crown prince.
Separating the two positions was a key demand of political reformers in the country.
But just a few years on, securing the premiership is the dream of many ambitious members of the ruling family because the prime minister will most likely become a crown prince if the emir dies.
This is the reason why prime ministers now desperately fight to remain in position and the importance of the role has created tensions within the royal family.
Observers suspect some sheikhs may be using their allies in parliament to topple the prime minister for their own interests.
What sort of political system is in operation in Kuwait?
Kuwait is a constitutional monarchy with the oldest parliament in the region. The emir still holds huge powers, but the parliament has the means to influence many decisions.
The constitution gives the assembly the right to dismiss the prime minister or any other cabinet member - although it must follow a series of procedures. The nomination of the emir and the crown prince has to be approved by the legislature.
However, relations between the royal family and parliament have been constantly tumultuous. The Kuwaiti sheikhs blame MPs for trying to win rights that have been royal perogatives for decades, while independent MPs want parliament to have a bigger say in political life.
Parliament has been suspended entirely on three occasions in the past - from 1976 to 1981, from 1986 to 1991 and from May to July 1999 - when the dispute reached absolute deadlock.
Women can stand for election so why aren't there any female MPs?
Despite the fact Kuwait has more political freedoms, a social context that allows women more opportunities compared to, for example, Saudi Arabia, women only won the right to vote and run for public office in 2005.
Women have been trying hard to secure a seat in parliament, but gender barriers are still deeply rooted in Kuwaiti society. The chances of a woman being elected to the legislative body remain slim because of the lack of political support.
Ironically, even though polls suggest women make up more than 50 per cent of the electorate, female candidates received more votes from men than women. For women to successfully stand for election, they need to win the female vote.
What are the financial implications for Kuwait given the current political impass is holding up legislation - including passing a financial stimulus package?
The political stagnation is claiming victims in the country - projects have been postponed and many social development programmes have been delayed. Although it enjoys massive oil reserves, Kuwait is lagging far behind neighbouring countries in terms of healthcare, education and infrastructure - again, largely because of the bickering between the cabinet and parliamentarians.
Have companies began to pull out of Kuwait?
The cancellation of the $17.4bn joint venture between Kuwait and the US company Dow Chemical was obviously related to political infighting, although MPs publicly argued the project was not economically viable and also opposed building a new $1.5bn refinery
However, the oil-rich nation will continue to attract more companies vying for lucrative contracts.

Ethiopia : Big dam, bigger problems

Medeshi

From the Los Angeles Times
Opinion
Big dam, bigger problems
By Lori PottingerMay 14, 2009
Right now, the Obama administration is participating in its first annual meeting of the African Development Bank, which is mandated to fund critical infrastructure for poor African nations. On the agenda is financing one of the biggest projects ever considered by the bank, the $2.1-billion Gilgel Gibe III dam in Ethiopia.
The U.S. government has contributed more than $400 million in the last three years to the African Development Bank. It is also Ethiopia's largest aid donor, giving upward of $450 million a year for everything from food and water to military assistance. American taxpayers have a responsibility to ensure that this money is well spent.
By any measure, Gibe III is a lousy investment. It is the third element in a massive five-part dam project on the Omo River and its tributaries. The Ethiopian government wants to generate power, in part for export, by "taming" the Omo. But this is the most poorly planned hydropower project being built on the continent today. The government has cut corners in its preparation, increasing its risks of economic and technical failure, and it has done next to nothing to reduce the project's massive ecological and social footprint. A group of affected people and the organization I work for, International Rivers, already have filed complaints with the African Development Bank, citing five social and environmental bank policies the dam violates.
Gibe III will change forever the Lower Omo River Valley, one of the world's most isolated regions. It is the homeland of a handful of indigenous communities, half a million farmers, herders and fishermen who are largely untouched by modern society. Damming the Omo will wreak havoc with its natural flood cycles, which underlie the cultures and the traditional "flood retreat" farming practices of the Mursi, Bodi, Kara and other communities along it.
The dam will affect ecosystems and disrupt communities all the way to the world's largest desert lake, Turkana, downstream in Kenya. An oasis of biodiversity in a harsh desert, Lake Turkana, a World Heritage site, supports more than a quarter of a million Kenyans and rich animal life. The Omo River accounts for up to 90% of the lake's inflow. That will be curtailed by at least 50% as the dam fills, and it will be reduced thereafter by evaporation from the massive reservoir that will form behind the dam, according to the African Resources Working Group, which is made up of international scientists and scholars who work in Ethiopia. Turkana's salinity -- already high -- will intensify, making it undrinkable and affecting fisheries.
Such outcomes should have been predicted in project analysis, but Ethiopia started building the dam before undertaking a thorough environmental impact assessment. When it finally produced such a report, the project was already two years into construction and the study, again according to the independent African Resources Working Group, was "fundamentally flawed." Ethiopian government officials told the BBC that proper environmental studies were simply "luxurious preconditions."
The people who depend directly on the Omo's precious water would have appreciated having the dam's sweeping effects on their lives properly analyzed before the bulldozers rolled out. International Rivers' studies show that only a tiny proportion of the people have been consulted or effectively informed of the changes the dam will bring, in contravention of guarantees in the Ethiopian Constitution.
For centuries, these unique cultures tied to a harsh landscape have proved highly resilient, but the dam, combined with climate change, may prove to be the last straw. These communities need small-scale water supply systems where they live, increased capacity to grow food crops during times of drought and other forms of climate-adaptation assistance. Big, centralized dams will not address these needs.
Climate change brings huge risks not just for riverine people and biodiversity but for the dam's viability as a development project. Five major droughts since 1980 already have taken a toll on Ethiopia's economy. More than 85% of its electricity now comes from large dams; the figure will be 95% after the dam boom is over. A drought-crippled Gibe III would bring a sea of red ink to Ethiopia and lead to blackouts and economic consequences for regional governments that buy its electricity.
The African Development Bank should closely investigate Gibe III and measure it against the bank's environmental and social standards. Rather than support such destructive projects, it should help Ethiopia drought-proof its energy sector, diversify its energy mix, tap its abundant renewable energy resources and get serious about climate-change adaptation plans for its river peoples. That is what the United States government should be supporting at the bank this week, not the Gibe III dam.
Lori Pottinger works in the Africa program of the environmental group International Rivers.

UN cites reports Eritrea aiding Somali militants

Medeshi
UN cites reports Eritrea aiding Somali militants
Reuters
May 15, 2009
* Security Council wants charged against Eritrea probed* Eritrea denies aiding insurgents in Somalia
Megan Davies
UNITED NATIONS - The U.N. Security Council on Friday voiced concern over reports that Eritrea has been supplying arms to Islamist militants intent on toppling Somalia’s new government and condemned the recent violence.
The 15-nation council demanded that Somali opposition groups immediately end the violence and join reconciliation efforts in the lawless Horn of Africa state.
“The Security Council … expresses its concern over reports that Eritrea has supplied arms to those opposing the (government of) Somalia in breach of the U.N. arms embargo,” the statement said.
It also called for an investigation of the reports.
In an accusation backed by some security experts and diplomats, Somalia’s government said earlier this month that Asmara continues to support al Shabaab militants with planeloads of AK-47 assault rifles, rocket-propelled grenades and other weapons.
Eritrea rejects accusations that it sends weapons to the al Qaeda-linked Islamist militants fighting Somalia’s government.
“We have never done this — it is totally false and misleading,” said Eritrea’s U.N. Ambassador Araya Desta. He said Eritrea had never given financial or military support to opposition factions in Somalia.
“The historical relationship that exists between Eritrea and Somalia is still intact, we fully respect them and we anticipate peace and stability in the country — that is our goal,” said Desta.
One diplomat said the Security Council statement was significant for singling out Eritrea by name. It usually refers to “third countries” or “outside” parties, he said.
Fighting between al Shabaab militants — who admit to having foreigners in their ranks — and pro-government fighters has killed at least 139 people and sent some 27,000 fleeing the pock-marked, seaside capital Mogadishu since late last week.
The Security Council expressed “concern at the loss of life and the worsening humanitarian situation arising out of the renewed fighting.”
Somalia’s 18 years of anarchy has left millions displaced, killed tens of thousands and created one of the world’s worst aid crises. Attacks on relief workers, extortion and regular clashes have hampered groups trying to work there.
Aid organizations warned on Thursday that Somalia’s worst fighting in months was aggravating an already dire humanitarian emergency.NO U.N. PEACEKEEPERS FOR NOW
Somalia has been a byword for anarchy since a dictatorship was overthrown in 1991. Currently, large parts of south and central Somalia are under the control of al Shabaab insurgents and allied Islamist fighters.
The U.N. Security Council has long been under pressure from African states to send a U.N. force to Somalia, but repeatedly delayed deciding. It is due to consider the matter again by June 1.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon recommended in a report to the Security Council last month that the best approach would be to step up support for African Union peacekeepers already in Somalia, known as AMISOM, and for Somali security forces.
If that is successful, the United Nations could gradually build up a U.N. presence and take over from AMISOM. Indonesia has said it would be willing to lead and provide troops for an eventual U.N. peacekeeping mission in Somalia.
Ban has cautioned that sending U.N. blue helmets to Somalia any time soon would be a high-risk move that would likely prompt attacks against the peacekeepers.
Somalia’s moderate Islamist leader Sheikh Sharif Ahmed was sworn in as president in January, promising to forge peace with east African neighbors, tackle rampant piracy offshore and rein in hard-line insurgents.