1/3 🧵
“Diplomacy is the art of shaping realities through balance and presence.” – Kissinger (paraphrased)
At Ethiopia’s GERD inauguration, President Dr Hassan Sheikh made clear: Somalia will not watch from the sidelines, it will shape regional outcomes. ⚖️🌍 #Somalia #GERD #Ethiopia
2/3
International peace is not secured by lofty ideals, but through pragmatic diplomacy, power realities, and national interests.
Somalia recognises this. Its foreign policy is not charity ; it is strategy, grounded in sovereignty and leverage. 🧭 #Diplomacy
3/3
By attending GERD’s opening, President Dr Hassan Sheikh asserted Somalia as a decisive actor in the Horn.
Engagement is strength. Dialogue is leverage. Somalia’s policy is clear: protect national interests while shaping stability on Somali terms. 🇸🇴 #Somalia #GERD
@TheVillaSomalia @HassanSMohamud
@AnalystSomalia Abdirashid claims the FGS must “consult” FMSs before implementing the e-visa. This is a misreading of the Constitution. Article 54 is categorical: Immigration & Citizenship are exclusive powers of the Federal Government. Consultation under Articles 50–53 cannot water down exclusivity. FGS is fully within its rights to regulate visas across the country without Puntland’s permission.
2/4
Practical Alternatives & Article 142
Abdieashie suggests “split payments” or revenue-sharing, citing Article 142. This is legally flawed. Article 142 is transitional and does not override Article 54’s supremacy. Immigration is indivisible ; there cannot be two visa systems. Puntland’s extra $60 charge is not “revenue management”; it is an unconstitutional duplication of a federal power.
2/3 Citizens’ Dignity & Rights
Abdirashid argues that double fees violate dignity and equality under Articles 10, 11, 18, and 50. The truth is the opposite: dignity is undermined by Puntland’s unlawful fee, not by the federal e-visa. Equality requires one law, one system, one payment. The real violation is FMSs forcing citizens to pay twice for a single entry , a clear breach of constitutional order.
Critique of The Economist’s “Somalia in Tatters” Article:
The Economist published its Somalia piece on July 24, just one day after the federal government (FGS) condemned Puntland’s seizure of a Turkish-linked ship as piracy. Yet… no mention of the incident. Why?
On July 18, Puntland intercepted the MV Sea World, a vessel allegedly carrying Turkish-marked weapons. The FGS called the seizure piracy. Somali media was ablaze; but The Economist didn’t mention that.
Instead, it spotlighted Puntland’s interior minister, a staunch FGS critic.
The FGS’s stance? Missing in action.
The article praises Puntland’s anti-ISIS efforts—without a single quote from federal officials. The narrative favors one side. Federal context? Absent.
@MPDrAbib , Full Salary, Empty Seat: The Abdillahi Hashi Standard.
🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴
MP Dr. Abdillahi Hashi Abib now lectures government on responsibility, leadership, and billion-dollar proposals.
Bold words, from someone who hasn’t shown up to most parliamentary sessions. But his paycheck? Always on time.
No bills introduced. No debates attended. No votes cast. Just absenteeism, press releases, and self-praise; paid for by the Somali people. Somalia deserves lawmakers, not loud critics with perfect attendance at the bank.
A Masterclass in Legal Illusion – Responding to Sheikhnor Abucar Qassim 🧵
🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴🇸🇴 1/7 @SheiknorQassim , Adeer Sheikhnor, your tweet is a dramatic display of political theatre wrapped in legal confusion. You wave around Chapter 7 of the UN Charter like it’s a “Game Over” card ; but either you’ve misunderstood it, or you’re hoping others have. Let’s unpack your misconceptions.
2/7
Chapter 7 status does not nullify sovereignty. Many sovereign nations have operated under Chapter 7 mandates ; Iraq, Liberia, even Haiti. It authorises measures to maintain peace and security, not to revoke statehood. Somalia is not a UN protectorate.
3/7 You cite UNSC Resolutions 2628 (2022) and 2687 (2023) as “deadlines” missed. But resolutions are not contracts, and the UN system isn’t your personal stopwatch. These are political benchmarks, not legal time bombs.
@SheiknorQassim , Adeer Sheiknor, your tweet is a dramatic display of political theatre wrapped in legal confusion. You toss around Chapter 7 of the UN Charter as if it’s a ‘Game Over’ card ; but it’s clear you’ve either misunderstood it or are hoping others will. Let’s unpack that
🧵
1/6 Chapter 7 status does not nullify sovereignty. Many sovereign nations have operated under Chapter 7 mandates ; Iraq, Liberia, even Haiti. It authorises measures to maintain peace and security, not to revoke statehood. Somalia is not a UN protectorate.
2/6 You cite UNSC Resolutions 2628 (2022) and 2687 (2023) as “deadlines” missed. But resolutions are not contracts, and the UN system isn’t your personal stopwatch. These are political benchmarks, not legal time bombs.
🧵 Thread: Why Somalia’s Unity Remains Legally Intact Under International Law 🇸🇴⚖️
1/4 Somaliland’s 1991 independence claim lacks legal force. On 1 July 1960, British Somaliland & Italian Somaliland united to form the Somali Republic. This union was later confirmed in the 1961 national constitutional referendum, where 90% of voters approved unity. 🗳️
2/4 Though the Act of Union wasn’t perfectly ratified, the 1961 Constitution, approved by a national vote, gave the union full constitutional and democratic legitimacy. In law, popular ratification cures legal flaws. Somaliland leaders held top federal roles for decades. 🏛️