That shows you all Somali politics is fundamentally fake and the people at the top are in each others pocket. We knew that deal can not be signed by Somaliland it's not sovereign or a nation. It is and will always be a part of Somalia. Hassan Sheikh should be pursued and asked why he signed this deal. Does Farmajo's government have the balls for that?
There's no Somali journalists otherwise this would been revealed a long time ago. We don't know the Bosaso deal at all and those are the same people that want to drill for oil?It is opening of pandora box.Are you ready for it?Because there are heck a lot of “deals” that were signed some we know about and some we do not.
Remember that Thai tuck boat that were given a fishing license by Puntland allowing them to take certain amount of fish and instead taking twice the amount?There's no Somali journalists otherwise this would been revealed a long time ago. We don't know the Bosaso deal at all and those are the same people that want to drill for oil?
All politics is about personal political survival saxib, I have constantly stated that.Yet you brush the assertion as if it holds no merit.No such thing as state interests in Somalia as of now which don't exactly coincide with a political life elongation..That shows you all Somali politics is fundamentally fake and the people at the top are in each others pocket. We knew that deal can not be signed by Somaliland it's not sovereign or a nation. It is and will always be a part of Somalia. Hassan Sheikh should be pursued and asked why he signed this deal. Does Farmajo's government have the balls for that?
Yep , institutions in puntland are extractive institutions which favour a few and throw the populace under the bus.this is due to the Kacaan mindset which was an extractive autocracy, growth in puntland won't be sustained if the political institutions don't change.However many simply shrug it off, it's not just Gaas that's the problem but rather the engrained systems which promote people like Gaas to the top.Remember that Thai tuck boat that were given a fishing license by Puntland allowing them to take certain amount of fish and instead taking twice the amount?
The only way we came to find out was because the Thai authorities caught the boat and penalized it for carrying large quantity of fish, much more than max weight for boat in its size.
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30338304
That's cause you are wrong. There are state interests. Security is a state interest. Welfare is a state interest. Personal interests and state interests can collide.All politics is about personal political survival saxib, I have constantly stated that.Yet you brush the assertion as if it holds no merit.No such thing as state interests in Somalia as of now which don't exactly coincide with a political life elongation..
state interests are interests which are beneficial to the populace.However a leader is always after his/her personal interests.Only when you tie both inextricably together do you succeed in forming a fully functioning state.That's cause you are wrong. There are state interests. Security is a state interest. Welfare is a state interest. Personal interests and state interests can collide.
Big Siil is in a retirement home in UAE.
You said there's no state interests in Somalia. Is security not the interest of the populace? Is maintaining funding for security forces not a state interest? Whether a politician personally benefits doesn't and shouldn't trump some of those 'interests'. That's the point I was making earlier.state interests are interests which are beneficial to the populace.However a leader is always after his/her personal interests.Only when you tie both inextricably together do you succeed in forming a fully functioning state.
State security forces are not only a populaces interests but also a leaders interests.Armed forces allow further centralisation of a state and thus the extractive policies can continue with stronger impunity.However YES as I said before it coincides with the populaces interests of security.You said there's no state interests in Somalia. Is security not the interest of the populace? Is maintaining funding for security forces not a state interest? Whether a politician personally benefits doesn't and shouldn't trump some of those 'interests'. That's the point I was making earlier.
In situations like that it comes down to ethics the situation @Saalax Bidaar posted is a perfect example. Illegal fishing is unpreventable at the moment, those illegal fishermen will continue to fish so some politicians sell them licenses. Is it unethical yes but is it pragmatic too? Yes. There's a lot of grey areas and no black and white at play.
So that's the point I was making the two don't have to be mutually exclusive. Sometimes personal interests and state interests merge. The question of ethics involves all decisions. It's the principles of what's right and what's wrong that includes politics as well. Illegal fishing, under handed deals are all a matter of corruption hence ethics. Puntland, Somaliland and other regions don't have funds to "support" innovation and in some instances such as the illegal fishing they don't have the means to stop it either. Regardless in this case about UAE deals we don't have evidence of corruption yet only lack of transparency.State security forces are not only a populaces interests but also a leaders interests.Armed forces allow further centralisation of a state and thus the extractive policies can continue with stronger impunity.However YES as I said before it coincides with the populaces interests of security.
There is no ethics in politics , to an extent, illegal fishing is one case where the populaces interests and the leaders interests collide.Inherently , extractive states need more money without supporting innovation.This causes fishing licenses being sold for a larger income.This is all on the LEADERS interests
Actually the corruption is caused because of the institutions and the lack of incentives for innovation.If patent systems were created and other incentives the number of innovations in markets would drastically increase.However the mass corruption , lack of property rights and general extractive system will just perpetuate he current state.Somaliland is just as corrupt but if it can fully centralise the region would be transformed.So that's the point I was making the two don't have to be mutually exclusive. Sometimes personal interests and state interests merge. The question of ethics involves all decisions. It's the principles of what's right and what's wrong that includes politics as well. Illegal fishing, under handed deals are all a matter of corruption hence ethics. Puntland, Somaliland and other regions don't have funds to "support" innovation and in some instances such as the illegal fishing they don't have the means to stop it either. Regardless in this case about UAE deals we don't have evidence of corruption yet only lack of transparency.
That shows you all Somali politics is fundamentally fake and the people at the top are in each others pocket. We knew that deal can not be signed by Somaliland it's not sovereign or a nation. It is and will always be a part of Somalia. Hassan Sheikh should be pursued and asked why he signed this deal. Does Farmajo's government have the balls for that?
They already did.lets say the deal was signed by HSM, why cant farmaajo cancel it since the deals of previous governmnets can be changed by the new gov? previous government cant bind another government that comes after it so if that was the case, farmaajo would simply cancel the deal instead of crying to the UN, AU, AL kkkk