Somalia is traditionally a pastoral and nomadic society. Throughout the precolonial era, herders of camels, cattle and sheep lived in a world of "egalitarian anarchy" where the main preoccupation of the clan families was the well-being of the herd. The clan structure functioned cohesively. Somali clans share a common ethnic and linguistic identity but distinguish from each other by lineage, history and custom. Somali society is composed of five principal clan families, the Hawiye, Darod, Isaaq, Dir and Rahanwein. Each clan is divided into five, or more, smaller clans which is in turn divided into sub clans. With the opening of the Suez canal and the competition among Britain, Italy and France for the control of the Horn of Africa, Somalia entered the modern world and international politics. The division and colonization of Somalia in the 1880s into areas under French, Italian and British control was artificial. None of the European powers was interested in the development or unity of Somalia. Independent and unified Somali Republic was declared on July 1, 1960. The main problem at that time was that neither colonial power had prepared the country for self-government. With no cohesive, trained civil service and no accepted political norms, individual rivalries for power quickly took their toll. From 1960 to 1969, democratic civilian government had to face a plethora of competing political parties and the dispersal of patronage on the basis of clan and personal relationships. Lacking military equipment, as early as 1964 Somalia turned to the Soviet Union for arms, and by 1968 the army has fallen under Soviet tutelage.
[...] To put it differently, no international action can be intended without the consent of the State.[12] Intervention under Chapter VII UNITAF mandate and command ambiguity (December 1992 to May 1993) The Somalia intervention raises the question of the purpose of the intervention under Chapter VII. The resolution 794 was the first Chapter VII issue adopted by the Security Council in the case of Somalia to allow the use of force with the objective of restoring peace. The resolution was attached both to the UN principles of collective security contained in the Charter, and innovative since it was the first time that the use of force was applied to secure humanitarian relief without the agreement of the state concerned. [...]
[...] Even if the UN remains largely dependent on the nature and quality of state foreign policy, UN officials have some room to manoeuvre in carrying out tasks.” Boutros Boutros-Ghali, UN General Secretary United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM): pursuing a traditional way of intervention A basic United Nations principle: the theory of United Nations collective security Definition and legal basis Security, traditionally defined, was supposed to be the primary task of the UN in the larger family of international organizations-the Un system- that was created during World War II. [...]
[...] Still, the situation in Somalia was not by any means ignored. Throughout 1991, the perspective of UN headquarters was that in responding to Somalia's civil war, the main job of international community should be limited to delivering humanitarian relied supplies. Towards 1991, the situation began to change. Anguish appeals from leaders of the Islamic countries, Mogadishu battle and new secretary-general Boutros Boutros-Gali's concern about the situation led to the sending of Under Secretary-General Jonah to Mogadishu. Jonah's discussions in Mogadishu in the first days of January 1992 made clear that any political progress towards an international settlement or broader political reconciliation would be difficult indeed. [...]
[...] The UN intervention in Somalia in 1992-1995 that has not proved any global success in the region, taught four major lessons. First, if peacekeeping may not be in appearance as efficient as peacemaking, the risks taken are lower and make multilateralism prevail on unilateralist command. Second, the UN role may suffer credibility in peace enforcement measures a plural military impedes to take. Third, the UN principles, legal basis and bureaucracy are often too distant from the reality, revealing a lack of acute judgment or the situation. [...]
[...] Problems raised by this new interventionism Legal issues Issue of the legality of UNOSOM intervention The international intervention of 1992 took place in a particular context. The institutions associated with constitutional governance and the administration of justice in Somalia were completely collapsed. Somalia literally assumed the status of a lawless State. It has lost most of the attributes of Statehood and sovereignty, like its capacity to exercise jurisdiction and an effective government. It had lost major capacities inherent in a State, e.g. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
