Author: Théophile Niyitegeka

{When Aden Bare Farah, 23, first boarded a bus taking him away from the bleak rows of dust-coloured tents where he was born and raised a refugee, there was no looking back.}

This time around, he can barely summon the enthusiasm to believe he is finally leaving the ochre sands of Dadaab in arid eastern Kenya, the world’s largest refugee camp, for Pennsylvania in the United States.

Farah is one of scores of Somali refugees who were sent back to the camp last week after US President Donald Trump ordered a ban on travellers and refugees from seven mostly Muslim nations — including Somalia.

“I felt sad and weak. I didn’t know where I belong. I felt I would be stateless forever,” Farah told AFP from Dagahaley, one of several camps inside the complex that houses 256,000 Somali refugees.

His heart sunk as he disembarked again inside the camp where he was born.

His parents were among the first to arrive in the camp built in 1992 to house Somalis fleeing civil war, and which swelled over the decades as new disasters from drought to radical extremists, hit the country.

His father died in 2000 and he was raised by a single mother who, along with him, spent eight years undergoing vetting for resettlement.

“I was very joyful as I took my bag to board the bus for Nairobi where I would stay for a week and then, home.

“I call Pennsylvania home,” he said laughing. “I wish Trump knew that.”

{{WAIT AND SEE}}

After hearing the bad news he switched off his phone, unable to bear speaking to his friends in the camp, having to admit defeat.

“I was depressed. I didn’t have an appetite to eat or do anything else.”

Now, several days later, he has once again been told he will be getting on a bus to Nairobi by the end of this week, after a federal judge barred enforcement of the controversial measure, allowing several refugees to once again enter the United States.

“I think we can go back now, but let us see how it goes,” he said warily.

With a US appeals court due to hold a hearing on the ban on Tuesday, the refugees may be right not to get their hopes up yet.

“I am happy but not too happy until I land in the USA because who knows what will happen in the coming days,” said Halimo Dakan, 72, also one of the camp’s original residents.

She, her husband and six children happily sold all of their belongings in the run-up to their move to Ohio.

Returning to Dadaab was a “journey full of sorrow” for the family and Dakan cannot even imagine the prospect of their resettlement being cancelled for good.

“Life in a Kenyan refugee camp is extremely hard. No work, there is little food and we are not allowed to move freely within Kenya. Life in Dadaab is not permanent.”

{{NO ONE KNOWS SOMALIA}}

The International Organisation for Migration refused AFP requests for details on how many Somali refugees were being sent back and forth.

According to the US State Department’s Refugee Processing Centre (RPC) website, nearly 11,000 Somali refugees were resettled in the US in 2016.

As it is the camp’s residents are facing an uncertain future.

Kenya is pushing to close the sprawling camp near the Somali border over security concerns, claiming Dadaab acts as a terrorist training ground for Shabaab Islamists — who have targeted Kenya since it sent troops into Somalia in 2011.

Kenya claims both the 2013 attack against Nairobi’s Westgate shopping mall and the 2015 attack at Garissa University were planned at Dabaab.

Initially set for November last year, the closure was delayed to May this year.

The move has received stiff criticism from rights groups who accuse the government of seeking to return refugees to Somalia against their will, to face persecution and hunger.

While parts of the Horn of Africa nation are still under control of Al-Qaeda-linked Al-Shabaab militants, the country is also facing its worst drought since a 2010-11 famine left some 250,000 dead.

Over six million people require food aid, half of whom are bordering on starvation, aid agencies have warned.

Dakan described the prospect of returning to Somalia, if the US ban holds and Kenya forces them out, as simply “horrible”.

“There is Al-Shabaab. They will kill my children and recruit them. We don’t belong in Somalia, we don’t have house or land. No one knows Somalia, my husband and I left in 1991.”

{Ethiopia’s commitment to peace-making in South Sudan has been critical for regional stability. It has much to gain from continuing this engagement, including a secure border and trade with a stable neighbour. But achieving lasting peace after South Sudan’s two-year-long civil war is a long-term undertaking.
}

Ethiopia has shown strong leadership and a level of direct involvement in peace efforts in Sudan and South Sudan that few countries can match.

The African Union High Implementation Panel (AUHIP) peace talks on the conflicts are held in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa led the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD, a regional body) peace process on South Sudan and is a guarantor of the August 2015 Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan (ARCSS). It deploys peacekeepers to the UN Mission in South Sudan and is the main contributor to the UN Interim Security Force for Abyei (on the Sudan-South Sudan border). It is also expected to be the lead contributor to the 4,000-strong UN Regional Protection Force (RPF) based in Juba.

Ethiopia’s two-year membership on the UN Security Council (UNSC) should be an opportunity to better connect regionally-led political processes to UN action.

{{Implementing the ARCSS and the Regional Force}}

Following the July 2016 fighting in Juba, ARCSS has been reshaped, and the RPF and national dialogue process created to reinforce its principles. Concerted support is required from Ethiopia, fellow IGAD member states, the Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission (JMEC, overseeing ARCSS implementation and reporting to the IGAD heads of state) and the UN to reduce conflict under an inclusive government.

These processes, and the RPF’s role in supporting them, are fluid and interconnected. For example, a successful negotiation between the transitional government and an armed group increases the chances of successful dialogue between communities caught up in the conflict. There is now a window of opportunity to shape and provide capacity-building to efforts to make the new South Sudan transitional government more inclusive.

Given the trust deficit that exists between South Sudan’s government and opposition figures, the UN’s RPF has a role to play in helping create conditions conducive to ARCSS implementation and national dialogue.

Ethiopia’s support for talks between these parties makes it a critical partner in supporting inclusivity in Juba. For this to take place, the RPF must deploy and demonstrate its worth. In addition to JMEC, the RPF provides a direct link to Ethiopia and other IGAD leaders in their oversight of ARCSS and efforts to form a more inclusive government.

On the sidelines of the forthcoming AU summit, Ethiopia and IGAD leaders should consider what can be done to expedite RPF deployment and how it can be better tied to political engagement to support genuine efforts toward greater transitional government inclusivity.

{{Mutual Security and Prosperity}}

Ethiopia’s mediation and peacekeeping efforts also support stability at home. During Ethiopian Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn’s 28 October visit to Juba, he and President Kiir made assurances that they would not support rebels in either country ­– a critical restatement of a mutual understanding between the two countries.

Ethiopia’s border with South Sudan hosts cross-border communities that experience multiple, overlapping communal tensions that can lead to violence. A large Murle raid from South Sudan into the Gambella region last April required the Ethiopian army’s temporary deployment into South Sudan to secure the return of abducted children and to monitor both sides of the border. This took place during a separate period of intercommunal conflict in Gambella, which was exacerbated by the large numbers of refugees in the region.

Supporting South Sudan to reduce political and communal conflicts along their shared border – which requires effective and inclusive governance from Juba – will improve security in Gambella and reduce refugee inflows, which tend to exacerbate intercommunal tensions in the border region.

Violence and displacement are detrimental to the mutually beneficial cross-border trade that was growing fast before South Sudan’s civil war started in 2013. Stability and security can enable development rather than humanitarian crisis in the impoverished border regions and beyond.

Ethiopia should not waiver in its commitment to ensuring a peaceful South Sudan and use the many tools at its disposal – IGAD, ARCSS, JMEC, the RPF and its term since January on the UN Security Council – to support an inclusive and stable government in Juba. Successful peace-making will ensure greater stability in Ethiopia and facilitate sustained trade and economic development – which is to everyone’s benefit.

Source:Modern Tokyo Times