Soviet Union and Arabs Are Quietly Competing for Influence in Somalia's Socialist System (NYT 1975)
The New York Times published a story examining growing competition among Middle Eastern states and the USSR for influence in post-coup Somalia.
And back to politics and newspaper archives for this instalment. This story about Somalia is written by award-winning journalist Thomas A. Johnson, which the New York Times (NYT) reports was one of the first “black journalists to work as a foreign correspondent for a major daily newspaper.” That paper was of course the New York Times itself.
Johnson had a career with a few firsts it seems, as he was also the first black reporter at Newsday. Initially snubbed for a position at the Long Island Press, William McIlwain, then editor of Newsday, hired him as he wanted a black journalist to cover the civil rights struggle. He came up during those years, and according to a Times obituary published in the summer 2008, Johnson found himself well placed to be “a reporter [on] and an interpreter of racial conflict and change.”
But he also managed to find a way out of what sometimes becomes a career cul-de-sac for many journalists of colour who also want to take a shot at other stories. Johnson also held postings in Lagos, Nigeria, where he was based between 1972-1975 and also Vietnam, Europe and the Caribbean.
It was during his time in Lagos that he put pen to pad on Somalia, which like the US at the time was undergoing its own transformation – except Somalia had switched from a dysfunctional democracy to an authoritarian socialist military regime. According to Halgan, the official magazine of the Somali Revolutionary Socialist party, (with the disclaimer that the following claim was modest – and brace yourself): “our revolution is the first serious set back of the imperialistic offensive in this continent.” Despite the magazine’s attempt at “modesty”, it is evident that such a claim is anything but humble, let alone true. One could quite easily argue that several preceding coups, most notably the one orchestrated by Gamal Abdel Nasser, might stake a stronger claim to this dubious accolade but hey, gotta keep your set gassed on the march to socialism. It was still a definite blow to the west though.
Mogadishu joined other post-colonial cities, like Cairo, which Vijay Prishad said were on a “war footing, ready to take on the First World with rhetoric or guns.” That meant pulling Somalia out of its non-aligned posture, placing it more firmly in the camp of revolutionary governments across Africa and Asia, in an ambitious bid to recalibrate the world order. Many Somalis look back and wonder if the eventual pro-Soviet shift was wise in light of the 1977 breakup (which you can read about here), however, during that era, aligning with Moscow was not only fashionable but was also seen as a strategic means of retaliating against the European colonial powers. For Somalis the shift actually began in the mid-1960s when an American diplomat in Mogadishu confessed that a western offer to build Somalia’s military was “pretty punk.” The Somalis took one look at the package he said, and told him “we’re off to Moscow.”
It wasn’t just a vengeful move though, as the west still supported apartheid states in Africa, and Portugal still had her parasitic claws in her African colonies as late as the mid-70s. Cape Verde, which I visited this year, celebrated its own independence in 1975! They’ve erected a monument to Amilcar Cabral in the centre of Praia to memorialise one of their most famous sons, whose anti-imperial exploits in fellow Lusophone country Guinea-Bissau have won him notoriety throughout the Global South.
Johnson’s insightful piece for the New York Times examines the context in which this shift occurred in Somalia in 1975. One year earlier, Somalia signed a treaty of friendship with the USSR, a first of its kind for a sub-Saharan African state, becoming Moscow’s principal ally in the Horn of Africa. Nevertheless, Somalia had religious and cultural ties with the Arab world which go back hundreds of years which Barre’s new regime was sensitive to.
Johnson’s reporting however centres Somali agency in this tug-of-war, rather than the competing extra-regional powers. “Somalia’s position has required that President Mohammed Siad Barre declare repeatedly that the Somalis are their own bosses,” Johnson writes, adding that “such declarations are thought to be for the benefit both of the Somali people and of black African nations.”
He also doesn’t only focus on what Moscow offers Somalia, but also what Somalia offers Moscow: “the Somalis give the Russians the friendship of an African nation with good credentials in the Organization of African Unity, the third world and the Arab League.” For Arab countries he reports, Somalia can play a crucial role in efforts to isolate Israel in Africa where it once wielded considerable influence. Somalia’s “hard-driving” socialist leaders he reports, citing a western diplomat are “simply proud and too vain to take orders from outsiders.” The Soviets agreed with the assessment, telling Johnson that they didn’t suggest which direction the Somalis should take, simply providing assistance per their treaty.
He could have done better in unpacking the differing motivations within what is otherwise presented as a coherent Arab bloc. For example, Egypt didn’t concern itself much with Somalia’s internal dynamics as long as it continued hounding Ethiopia from the east, as Cairo had separate dispute with Addis Ababa over the Nile. On the other hand, as Johnson points out, the Gulf countries were apprehensive about Somalia’s newly professed state ideology and its potential impact on Islam in the country, ranging from women’s rights to religious freedoms.
I’ll finish here and let you all enjoy his piece below. You can find a link to the full story here.
Thomas A. Johnson Special to The New York Times
March 23, 1975
Mogadishu – Although drought‐ravaged Somalia is one of the poorest nations in the world, her friendship is the object of a quiet but strong competition between the Russians and the Arab bloc.
The Soviet Union and Somalia signed a friendship treaty last July. A year ago Somalia, which is predominantly Moslem, became the 20th nation, and the eighth African state, to join the Arab League.
Though African and Western diplomats doubt that Somalia can successfully juggle the often‐conflicting influences for long, the hard‐driving Somali leaders are confident that their “scientific socialist” policies will be effective.
Somalia's position has required that President Mohammed Siad Barre declare repeatedly that the Somalis are their own bosses. Such declarations are thought to be for the benefit both of the Somali people and of black African nations.
Sitting on the continent's easternmost point, the Horn of Africa, Somalia, a desert country the size of Texas, is both physically and psychologically important for the various camps.
Somalia's Soviet‐built port at Berbera provides refueling facilities for Soviet ships in the Gulf of Aden. In addition the Somalis give the Russians the friendship of an African nation with good credentials in the Organization of African Unity, the third world and the Arab League.
To the Arabs Somalia is a gateway to black Africa, where they are interested in reinforcing their recent successes enlisting help in the isolation of Israel. Moslems view Somalia as a springboard for expanding the faith in sub‐Saharan Africa.
The Russians and the Arabs are not the first to seek influence with this nation, estimated at 4.5 million people, most of them nomads of mixed Arab and black ancestry.
During the first 10 years after the former Italian and British colonies become inde pendent as one nation in 1960, the United States poured in more than $150 ‐ million in grants, loans and assistance.
The Soviet Union became the principal foreign backer after a military take‐over in 1969, when the governing Supreme Revolutionary Council proclaimed Somalia a scientific socialist state.
A Soviet embassy source who estimates that 1,000 Russians are involved in educational, health, industrial and agricultural projects, maintained that the Soviet Union did not try to tell Somalia “the direction she should take.” Western sources agree that the Somalis run their own affairs. One source noted, “The Somalis are simply proud and too vain to take orders from outsiders.”
Nonetheless Somalia is dependent on Soviet supplies for her modern 17,000‐man army and on Soviet gasoline.
Arab sources, who say Somalia has been warned not to trust the Russians and not to be so dependent on them, are worried that she is becoming too socialist and less Moslem. The Arabs, it is said, were greatly upset, when 10 religious teachers were executed after they had opposed as contradictory to the Koran a decree giving women equal rights with men.
Another Arab source said that the executions and the Somalis' closeness to Moscow have made it difficult for Arab League officials to raise $100‐million among Arab oil producers to combat the drought here and to assist with the resettlement of herdsmen.