Michael,
Good hearing from you once again. In the last conversation we had under the thread "America's Role in Somalia", in spite of my opposition to Meles' invasion of Somalia, I wished that the invasion will give Somalis the opportunity to start over again and I hoped to be proven wrong in my assessment of post-Meles-invasion Somalia. As it turned out, it did not take Meles too long to prove that my assessment was correct with his arrogant and foolish attempt to impose his will on Somalis through his proxy. I still would not mind to be proven wrong, but I have now concluded that the chance for bringing "stability" in Somalia with Ethiopian troops on Somali territory is slim to none, and the best scenario for Ethiopia at this point is to unilaterally withdraw from Somalia immediately.
There are many reasons why Meles' invasion of Somalia, in his own words, "to protect the sovereignty of the nation and to blunt repeated attacks by Islamic courts terrorists and anti-Ethiopian elements they are supporting" was destined to fail. To start with, it was clear from the pre-invasion period that Ethiopian invasion and the inevitable occupation of Somalia was not a welcome idea by a majority of Somalis. Period.
Secondly, the main motive for orchestrating the invasion by Meles was to distract from his troubles at home and not to deny terrorists a haven in Somalia as the Bush Administration officials desperately wanted to believe. I am sure the Bush people knew what they were getting into, but they were willing to take a chance with Meles and let the local forces in the region do their bidding as the article you suggested back in January articulated well.
And last, but not least, there were and there continue to be external actors in Somalia (the peevish Eritrean regime being a prime example) who are determined to use various Somali factions as proxies to achieve their own objectives in the region.
Your comparison of the consequences of Ethiopian withdrawal from Somalia with the consequences of American withdrawal from Iraq is not an apt comparison in my view. Please allow me to explain.
First of all, the American intervention in Iraq, although world public opinion was against it and a vocal minority in the US opposed it, it was fully debated by democratically elected representatives of the American people in the US Congress and the legislation authorizing the intervention had received a super majority (more than two-thirds) support in both houses of Congress. On the contrary, the Ethiopian government is an illegitimate regime in the eyes of a majority of its own citizens. The illegitimate parliament supposedly conducted a debate on the merits of military intervention in Somalia, but the outcome was never in doubt. But the Ethiopian people, a clear majority of whom were opposed to the military intervention, were never allowed to express their views.
Although there now is a consensus that the American intervention in Iraq was made on a faulty intelligence, the consensus before the war was the opposite. As a matter of fact, the majority view in America and perhaps around the world before the intervention was that WMDs in the possession of a crazy person like Saddam Hussein, who had a history of using them, was something that should not be tolerated in the post-9-11 world. So, unlike the Ethiopian intervention in Somalia, the American intervention in Iraq, although controversial and badly managed after the initial battle victory, was a mission that was carried out with the will of the American people.
Yes, the war in Iraq is going badly at the moment and the calls for American withdrawal are at a fever pitch at this time. For what it's worth, my view in early 2003 was that the Bush Administration was making a strategic blunder by rushing to go to war. But once the war began, I felt that the right thing to do was to support the Iraq mission until it comes to a satisfactory end. I believe politicizing the war in Iraq ad nauseam, as many on the left are doing nowadays is irresponsible and does not serve the interest of the US and the long-term stability of the Middle East. Therefore, I believe a total withdrawal of US military forces from Iraq at this point in time is ill-advised, and, however wrongly framed the mission was before the war, I am of the opinion that the Bush Administration should be given the tools necessary to carry out the mission in Iraq.
For the reasons I mentioned above and the arguments I have made earlier on this blog, the Ethiopian military has no business being in Somalia and I strongly believe that Ethiopia's long term interests are best served if Meles swallows his pride and withdraws Ethiopia’s troops from Somalia immediately. The more time passes with the Ethiopian military staying in Somalia as an occupation force, the stronger the resentment of Somalis will be towards Ethiopians. This definitely is not in Ethiopia’s interests. I am very sure Ethiopian-Somali enmity will not serve US interests in the region as well.
Unilateral and immediate withdrawal of Ethiopian troops will not make the security situation in Somalia any worse than it is now with Ethiopian troops stationed there. Yes, if Ethipian troops immediately and unilaterally withdraw, Meles' ego will be deflated a bit, but so what? Anyways, what is mostly bad for Meles is usually good for Ethiopia! As to terrorists making Somalia a safe haven, I do not believe Ethiopia's invasion has made much difference. In fact, an argument can be made that the intervention may have emboldened the terrorist elements of the Islamists and, in the long-term, may have made things worse than they were before the invasion.
Fikru
This is a reply to Michael from Germany for the comments he wrote under the posting: "Get out of Somalia".