Isaaq Genocide
Genocide: Give Credit Where Credit is Due
In what is now known as Somaliland, an event occurred that is not given the justice it desires. In 1988, Siad Barre, the leader of a government rebellion, became President of a nation in chaos. During his reign, Barre forced a foreign tribe, Ogaden, onto Isaaq territories; which then caused the Isaaq to begin to arm themselves in defense and in turn formed “the Somali National Movement” , Barre then armed and will, eventually, “order the Ogaden refugees”(Combat Genocide Association) to kill all Isaaq. Multiple sources label, what should be called a genocide, a 'rebellion' and an 'uprising’; when, clearly, this event should be considered a genocide due to the fact that it meets the criteria to be labeled …show more content…
One of the ways that Barre was portrayed in this light was through utilizing the way the Isaaq felt, as they supposedly felt “deprived as a clan ”("Somalian Revolution") which would remove any doubt that they would not be the ones to spark any unrest with them and the new government. Now this wasn’t entirely without basis as there were some cases of “Isaaq outbursts against the central government [which] had occurred sporadically since independence” from the previous democratic government, before Barre had taken over. In response to the ‘violent’ Isaaq’s “The military regime conducted...reprisals against the Isaaq” and in many situations acted in an extremely violent manner, some of these acts include “destruction of water wells and grazing grounds” ("Somalian Revolution") Barre was aiming to cripple the Isaaq tribes, either by killing them off, or forcing them out of the country. There was a great amount instability on both sides as neither had total support from another foreign power. In the case of the Isaaqs, according to the Barre government “the dissidents had been gaining strength”("Somalian Revolution"). This claim makes the Isaaq out to be the enemy and instigator of any and all conflict that would occur …show more content…
Sadly though this ‘rebellion’ is treated not as a genocide due to the powers working within and outside of the Somali government. Somali officials state that the Isaaq tribe is to blame for the action taken upon them due to their violent reactions to the Ogden Tribe, meanwhile foreign nations seemingly ignore the notion to label the event as a genocide due to the amount of blame they themselves would be responsible for. It is and unfair and unjust series of events that occurred towards the Isaaq people and should be rectified immediately and have it classified as a
In what is now known as Somaliland, an event occurred that is not given the justice it desires. In 1988, Siad Barre, the leader of a government rebellion, became President of a nation in chaos. During his reign, Barre forced a foreign tribe, Ogaden, onto Isaaq territories; which then caused the Isaaq to begin to arm themselves in defense and in turn formed “the Somali National Movement” , Barre then armed and will, eventually, “order the Ogaden refugees”(Combat Genocide Association) to kill all Isaaq. Multiple sources label, what should be called a genocide, a 'rebellion' and an 'uprising’; when, clearly, this event should be considered a genocide due to the fact that it meets the criteria to be labeled …show more content…
One of the ways that Barre was portrayed in this light was through utilizing the way the Isaaq felt, as they supposedly felt “deprived as a clan ”("Somalian Revolution") which would remove any doubt that they would not be the ones to spark any unrest with them and the new government. Now this wasn’t entirely without basis as there were some cases of “Isaaq outbursts against the central government [which] had occurred sporadically since independence” from the previous democratic government, before Barre had taken over. In response to the ‘violent’ Isaaq’s “The military regime conducted...reprisals against the Isaaq” and in many situations acted in an extremely violent manner, some of these acts include “destruction of water wells and grazing grounds” ("Somalian Revolution") Barre was aiming to cripple the Isaaq tribes, either by killing them off, or forcing them out of the country. There was a great amount instability on both sides as neither had total support from another foreign power. In the case of the Isaaqs, according to the Barre government “the dissidents had been gaining strength”("Somalian Revolution"). This claim makes the Isaaq out to be the enemy and instigator of any and all conflict that would occur …show more content…
Sadly though this ‘rebellion’ is treated not as a genocide due to the powers working within and outside of the Somali government. Somali officials state that the Isaaq tribe is to blame for the action taken upon them due to their violent reactions to the Ogden Tribe, meanwhile foreign nations seemingly ignore the notion to label the event as a genocide due to the amount of blame they themselves would be responsible for. It is and unfair and unjust series of events that occurred towards the Isaaq people and should be rectified immediately and have it classified as a