Ahmed Omer

Superbly argued. Somalia’s claims over Somaliland aren’t just weak.They collapse entirely under basic legal scrutiny. Which raises an obvious question: if Mogadishu truly believed it had a legitimate case, why has it never taken it to the International Court of Justice? The answer is as clear as the silence.Because there is no binding legal instrument, no ratified agreement, and no internationally recognized basis to present. Instead, we get political statements dressed up as law, long on rhetoric, but empty of substance

❤️❤️❤️👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾

One of the loudest moral pillars the separatists in Somaliland have leaned on is the horrific suffering of Hargeisa in 1988, but when Israel recognizes Somaliland and Somaliland rushes to celebrate, that entire narrative collapses under its own weight. How can anyone still claim “we were massacred, so we seceded” while openly embracing a state accused of genocide in Gaza, a state whose actions have wiped out entire families and erased whole neighborhoods? How do you preach victimhood while unleashing indiscriminate shelling and massacres on Laas Anod, and while turning a blind eye to the hundreds, if not thousands, killed by the SNM in Awdal and the inter-SNM wars that swallowed entire communities? Yes, the former military regime, where many of today’s Somaliland leaders once held power, committed brutal and unforgivable human rights violations during its clash with the SNM, but past suffering does not give anyone the moral license to tear apart the Somalia Republic. In the end, the sheer double standard, the selective memory, and the celebration of a power accused of genocide only reveal how shockingly hollow the biggest victimhood narrative truly is.