The African Union’s swift condemnation of Israel’s recognition of the Republic of Somaliland, as articulated by Chairperson Mahmoud Ali Youssouf, represents a knee-jerk defense of colonial-era borders at the expense of self-determination, effective governance, and regional stability. This rigid adherence to the 1964 OAU resolution on the intangibility of borders is not principled but selective and counterproductive, perpetuating instability in the Horn of Africa rather than resolving it.
Republic of Somaliland is not merely a “breakaway” region, as the AU often portrays it. It was a distinct British Somaliland Protectorate that achieved independence on June 26, 1960, and was recognized by over 30 countries—including Israel—before voluntarily uniting with Italian Somaliland to form Somalia. That union dissolved violently in 1991 amid civil war, genocide, and total state collapse. Since then, Somaliland has governed itself peacefully for over 34 years: conducting multiple free and fair elections, maintaining security, and establishing functional institutions. In stark contrast, Somalia’s federal government in Mogadishu controls limited territory, battles Al-Shabaab insurgency, relies on clan militias and foreign troops (including the AU-led AUSSOM mission), and depends heavily on international aid.
The AU’s selective application of its border principles is glaringly hypocritical. The organization has endorsed secessions when politically expedient—Eritrea’s independence from Ethiopia in 1993 (via referendum) and South Sudan’s from Sudan in 2011 (following a peace deal and referendum)—despite those cases lacking Somaliland’s historical claim to pre-union independence or its proven record of stability and democracy. The AU’s 2005 fact-finding mission to Somaliland itself described the situation as “unique and self-justified in African political history” and recommended finding a special approach. Yet, no action followed, likely due to geopolitical pressures from powerful patrons rather than any genuine commitment to unity.
Chairperson Youssouf’s warning of “dangerous precedents” rings hollow. The real precedent is the AU’s ongoing refusal to engage with Somaliland’s reality, which sustains a failed state in Mogadishu, fuels perpetual conflict, and hinders economic progress. Somaliland’s Berbera port, bolstered by investments from the UAE and Ethiopia, offers a gateway for regional trade and development—yet the AU clings to a fiction that isolates this success story.
The AU claims to uphold Somalia’s “unity, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.” But what sovereignty exists when Mogadishu governs little beyond its capital and relies on external forces for survival? Somaliland neither needs nor desires such imposed “unity”—it has forged a more stable, democratic, and prosperous future independently.
Israel’s recognition rewards a functioning democracy that poses no threat to regional peace, unlike the ongoing chaos in southern Somalia. Far from undermining stability, it acknowledges a reality that the AU ignores: Republic of Somaliland exists and thrives despite decades of diplomatic isolation. True leadership would involve learning from Somaliland’s model of self-governance rather than condemning it.
The Republic of Somaliland is a de jure state with a track record of peace and progress. Recognition of this fact—not blind loyalty to outdated colonial maps—would better advance peace, prosperity, and self-determination across Africa. The AU should reconsider its stance: Republic of Somaliland is here to stay, whether the organization accepts it or not.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/17f8MfPbGr/
