When did Somalia die as a country
- Thread starter Lahaine
- Start date
Tiyeglow
A Laandheere always pays his debts
We transitioned from being Africans first democrats (The first African nation to seamlessly transition from one president to another - Aden Adde to Sharmarke) to being a dictatorship in 1969. That is a major jump and deterioration. Then 1991 was the nail in the coffin.
There are a few things to mention however: The civil war technically began in 1978 post-Ogaden, because by definition 1991 was anarchy, it transcended warfare given no one was at the helm.
- 1969 itself didn't actually cause harm and looking at reports at the time, public welcolmed it given the clandestine and corrupt nature of the democratic govt at the time (grass is always greener). Kacaan was pretty successful for about a decade until 1978, then 15 years of civil war turned anarchy.
- Every nation goes through political turmoil and difficulties, but 1991 was a special case of unruly behaviour by moryaans who essentially made us the face of destitution and disruption politically.
- Siyaad Barre ripped the social fabric of society, Aideed burnt the remnants. Both of their roles in destroying Somalia go hand-in-hand.
1991 was the point Somalia would go into self-destruction however.
There are a few things to mention however: The civil war technically began in 1978 post-Ogaden, because by definition 1991 was anarchy, it transcended warfare given no one was at the helm.
- 1969 itself didn't actually cause harm and looking at reports at the time, public welcolmed it given the clandestine and corrupt nature of the democratic govt at the time (grass is always greener). Kacaan was pretty successful for about a decade until 1978, then 15 years of civil war turned anarchy.
- Every nation goes through political turmoil and difficulties, but 1991 was a special case of unruly behaviour by moryaans who essentially made us the face of destitution and disruption politically.
- Siyaad Barre ripped the social fabric of society, Aideed burnt the remnants. Both of their roles in destroying Somalia go hand-in-hand.
1991 was the point Somalia would go into self-destruction however.
When they started destroying infrastructure and selling shit off
The 1977 Ogaden War, specifically how it was conducted, serves as a clear example of winning every battle but ultimately losing the war.
Siad Barre was incapable of effective politicking and overplayed his hand. The Soviets were initially torn, which was all that was needed, but Barre pushed too hard, demanding that the Soviets completely disavow Ethiopia and accept the annexation of the Ogaden. When the Soviets didn't comply, Barre severed ties with the expectation that they would come crawling back. Instead, he forced the Soviets to make a choice, allowing them to fully back Ethiopia, a country they already had an affinity for. Prior to this, the Soviets were hesitant due to Ethiopia's instability compared to Somalia's relative stability.
Barre was naive to believe that the Americans would immediately provide the same level of sophisticated weaponry, especially in the midst of the war. The fact that the entire Somali army was built on Soviet doctrine and equipment made maintaining the military even more difficult after cutting ties.
In the end, losing the war led to economic hardship and increased public questioning of Barre's leadership. His legitimacy relied heavily on the nationalist fervor he had inspired, which he ultimately failed to deliver on. To maintain power, he increasingly relied on his inner circle, setting the stage for the eventual collapse of his regime.
Barre should have done what the Armenians and Russians did post Soviet Union. Defacto annex it but de jure create an independent government and hold onto it for years. Ethiopia would have even more internal stability and put them in an even worse position during the Eritrean-Ethiopian (civil) war. At that point decades would have past and put Somalia in a better position to balkanize Ethiopia.
Siad Barre was incapable of effective politicking and overplayed his hand. The Soviets were initially torn, which was all that was needed, but Barre pushed too hard, demanding that the Soviets completely disavow Ethiopia and accept the annexation of the Ogaden. When the Soviets didn't comply, Barre severed ties with the expectation that they would come crawling back. Instead, he forced the Soviets to make a choice, allowing them to fully back Ethiopia, a country they already had an affinity for. Prior to this, the Soviets were hesitant due to Ethiopia's instability compared to Somalia's relative stability.
Barre was naive to believe that the Americans would immediately provide the same level of sophisticated weaponry, especially in the midst of the war. The fact that the entire Somali army was built on Soviet doctrine and equipment made maintaining the military even more difficult after cutting ties.
In the end, losing the war led to economic hardship and increased public questioning of Barre's leadership. His legitimacy relied heavily on the nationalist fervor he had inspired, which he ultimately failed to deliver on. To maintain power, he increasingly relied on his inner circle, setting the stage for the eventual collapse of his regime.
Barre should have done what the Armenians and Russians did post Soviet Union. Defacto annex it but de jure create an independent government and hold onto it for years. Ethiopia would have even more internal stability and put them in an even worse position during the Eritrean-Ethiopian (civil) war. At that point decades would have past and put Somalia in a better position to balkanize Ethiopia.
Somalia didn't "die" but the current situation we have resulted from 1991. Even the Ogaden War, as negatively impacting it was, could still be recovered from mainly thanks to oil finds in the 80s.
But rebel groups had other plans and rather than just waiting for Siad Barre to inevitably step down from power, they chose to wage war and overthrow the government with no plans for the future.
But rebel groups had other plans and rather than just waiting for Siad Barre to inevitably step down from power, they chose to wage war and overthrow the government with no plans for the future.
Things would have been better off imo if there was never a coup.
It was never born. Somalis were never and are never capable of having a united, governable country.
Thats when things started to unravel, but they werent done and things couldve been done all the way up until the 90s to prevent all of it. I think it all started in the 80s when they started to fund the rebel qabil groups,
You are absolutely wrong,
Yeah they were idiots they all thought they would lead but they all got played in the end. Let me tell you all those people are leading very miserable lives now. They were being supported and funded by cadows of the somali state.
I think 1977 is probably like when they started to plan after seeing the ogaden war.
The previous government was way worse thank god a peaceful transistion of power was done. It worked until the ogaden war then everything just started to weaken.
The second clans were established signaled the end
1969 we went from civilised democracy to a communist clannist dictator
It never existed. Somalia whole history is fighting honorably yet losing.
walaal what do we do whats our exit plan when this is all said and done
In corporate terms, we’re employees. We need some managers on site to help with day to day msnagement. A CEO to help oversee resources and implement future strategies. As long as us employees are getting paid well and have a chance at promotions then I’m good
Trending
-
-
Danish journalist cites a racist Danish Quran burner who said, "The average IQ of a Somali is 68, and the average IQ of an orangutan is 69,"- Started by Fobnimo Till I Dhimo
- Replies: 53
