This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
SUPPORT - As shown in this quote, the Isaaq weren't the only clan involved: "Government atrocities inflicted on the Hawiye were considered comparable in scale to those against the Majeerteen and Isaaq". In addition, very few individuals classify these events as a whole as a genocide, let alone the Isaaq clan solely. Nor is there any cultural, national, racial, religious, etc. differences between them and other clans as they are all ethnic Somalis. [1]. Those differences are what legally defines a genocide.[2]. In addition, the majority of the events already mentioned and those of other clans are current present on the Somali Rebellion article.
After reviewing this users past edits, such as: continuously removing its territorial dispute with neighboring region Puntland in favor of Somaliland (see here, here, here, here, here, and here), changing the map of Somaliland to present it as separate nation (see here, here, and here), removing the disputed Khatumo State (see here), and changing Somalia's map to present its dispute with its Somaliland region as if it had some form of international recognition (see here, here, and here), this article seems to be further WP:PROPAGANDA. Due to the reasons mentioned this article should be deleted. AcidSnow (talk) 05:40, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Support - hyperbole as per o/p. Already more neutrally and contextually discussed elsewhere. Lacks the uniqueness that distinguishes actual genocides, as it's just one of various clan conflicts. Fails genocide on ethnoracial/cultural/national/religious grounds for reasons enumerated above, which are legal prerequisites for genocide per the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide [3]. Also, sensationalist infobox file flouts MOS:LEADIMAGE. Along with the non-neutral political maps, does appear to be political WP:PROPAGANDA. Soupforone (talk) 16:57, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Keep - Note: I am the author of the Wiki article.
The article describes the systematic, state sponsored campaign conducted by Siad Barre and the Somali state against the Isaaq. It was a specific campaign against a specific target, in this case against Isaaq civillians. The article meets all of Wikipedia's guidelines on notability, I was frankly surprised not to find a stand alone article for the subject, given its widespread discussion both academically, officially (by various international organisations) and in international media.
To that point please allow me to quote from various official and academic sources to illustrate my point and prove the article is notable, neutral WP:NPOV, verifiable WP:V and indeed not WP:NOR and thus abides by the principal core content policies of Wikipedia. I hope this will comprehensively clear the issue.
(Please note, emphasis mine):
Selection of references of the Isaaq Genocide in official reports:
1- Report commissioned by the United Nations, comprised of the findings of a human rights investigator recruited by the United Nations to find out if crimes of international jurisdiction (i.e. war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide had been perpetrated in Somaliland.
Based on the totality of evidence collected in Somaliland and elsewhere both during and after his mission, the consultant firmly believes that the crime of genocide was conceived, planned and perpetrated by the Somali Government against the Isaaq people of northern Somalia between 1987 and 1989.[1]
.
— Chris Mburu, Past human rights abuses in Somalia : report of a preliminary study conducted for the United Nations (OHCHR/UNDP-Somalia)
2- Report by the Africa Watch Committee, a branch of Human Rights Watch:
* The government has been at war with the Isaaks since 1981, after the creation of the SNM. Apparently suspecting every Isaak of supporting the SNM, the government unleashed a reign of terror and lawlessness in northern Somalia.
Apparently frustrated by their efforts to defeat the SNM in direct combat, the army turned its firepower, including its air force and artillery, against the civilian population, causing predictably high casualties. On the claim of looking for SNM fighters and weapons, systemic house-to-house searches were carried out and thousands were shot in their homes. Residential areas were targets of artillery shelling; a substantial number of people died as their homes collapsed on them.
Africa Watch's estimate of the number of people killed by government forces, shot point blank, or killed as a result of arial bombardment and artillery shelling and war related wounds, is in the vicinity of 50,000-60,000. (pages. 9,10)
Isaaq grievances deepened over the course of the 1980s, when the Barre regime placed the northwest under military control and used the military administration to crack down on the Isaaq and dispossess them of their businesses. The civil war mounted by the SNM began in May 1988 and produced catastrophe. Government forces committed atrocities against civilians (an estimated 50,000 to 60,000 Somalis died, mostly members of the Isaaq clan, which was the core support for the SNM); aerial bombardments leveled the city of Hargeysa [the second largest city in Somalia]; and 400,000 Somalis were forced to flee across the Ethiopian border as refugees, while another 400,000 were internally displaced.. (page. 10)
Selection of references of the Isaaq Genocide in academic works:
4-
Following its defeat by Ethiopia in 1978, the Somali government of Siad Barre became discredited. The Somali National Movement headed armed opposition, with core support among the Isaaq clan family of north-west Somalia. In May 1988 the SNM nearly captured Hargaisa, the main city of the north-west, and another town, Burao. Siad Barre responded by reportedly declaring that the Isaaq should be wiped out. His son-in-law and commander of the operation, Gen. Mohamed Said Hersi Morgan, reportedly answered that the order couldn't be fulfilled because there were too many of them to kill. This is the closest case of attempted extermination of a group in north-east Africa, thwarted by the intrinsic difficulty of carrying out such a task when faced with fierced armed resistance and the ability of the population to flee across a nearby border.
The city of Hargaisa was destroyed [second largest city in Somalia] in the government's counter-attack. (No other city in contemporary Africa has suffered comparable destruction.) Tens of thousands of people were killed. Virtually the entire populations of Hargaisa and other towns fled the country. The livelihoods of the people of north-west Somalia were all but destroyed by looting, the collapse of markets, the destruction of infrastructure, and the dissemination of landmines which meant that camel herds were unable to move safely to many areas of pasture.
Testimonies from the war are extraordinarily harrowing, comparable in the intensity of fear and violance to the depths of the Rwanda genocide.[2].
— Donald Bloxham, A. Dirk Moses, The Oxford Handbook of Genocide Studies
Further academic sources below, I understand I have quoted at length above so I will try to keep the rest as brief as possible, full citation and links where possible are added:
5-
In January 1986, the Morgan Report was issued, the work of General Mohamed Sidi Hersi "Morgan", Siad Barre's son-in-law of Majerteen background [and commander of operation as mentioned above]. Officially it was a top secret report on "implemented and recommended measures" for a "final solution" to Somalia's "Isaaq problem". Morgan writes that the Isaaq and their supporters must be "subjected to a campaign of obliteration" in order to prevent them "rais[ing] their heads again." .
— Nicholas A. Robins, Adam Jones, Genocides by the Oppressed: Subaltern Genocide in Theory and Practice
6-
In a wave of terror that followed the initial military assault, the Somali Armed Forces engaged in a "systematic pattern" of attacks against unarmed Isaaq villages, as well as summarily executing an unknown number of suspected SNM supporters. Despite the devastation of the north that bordered on genocide, the Siad regime ultimately was unable to stop the advance of guerrilla armies on the capital of Mogadishu, especially after USC guerilla forces stepped up their attacks in the central region of the country.
.
— Lowell Barrington, After Independence : Making and Protecting the Nation in Postcolonial and Postcommunist States p.125
7- Furthermore, in the Encyclopedia of Genocide, edited by genocide scholar Israel Charny (executive director of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem ), the only named group from Somalia in two published tables in that book are the Isaaq.
First table is titled "Minorities Victimized by Discrimination, Ethnic Warfare, Repression, and Genocide 1980-1997" only lists the Isaaqs from Somalia. In fact, they are one of only three named groups from Africa that are designated 'Geno/Pol' in that table. The other two groups designated 'Geno/Pol' in that table are the Tutsi of Rwanda for the period of 1993-1994 (you can read on Rwandan genocide here, and from the Sudan (now South Sudan) the Dinka, Nuba and Shilluk.
The description of Geno/Pol at the bottom of the table states (emphasis mine):
Geno/Pol: The group was the target of deliberate, sustained policies aimed at its collective destruction. (p.270)
The second table which covers earlier genocides than 1980 (that the previous table covered), under the heading "Indigenous Populations, Genocide of" and is titled "Some Cases of Genocides of indigenous Peoples", again has only one group mentioned from Somalia, the Isaaq. (p.350) [3]
Selection of references of the Isaaq Genocide in reputable international media
Below I am presenting coverage by international media as close to the dates of the Isaaq Genocide as possible, this is to confirm that it was a notable incident and discussed widely in the international media at the time as it was taking place.
8- This issue of Reporting by Survival International News, dated 1988 is especially valuable because it records the reporting on the genocide, by international media, in doing so it gives an idea of how the genocide was reported at the time, early on the campaign against the Isaaq:
Since May, government repression of the Isaaq has escalated into something like genocide. Though the Somali government which is armed by the USA in exchange for the use of the strategic port of Berbera has succeeded in sealing off the north to outside observers, account are filtering out that tell of mass bombing of civilians areas and summer execution and imprisonment of non-combatants. Estimates are being given of 10,000 or even 20,000 dead. The capital of the northern region, Hargeisa, is reported to be heavily bombed, with unburied corpses lying in the streets. Villages have been strafed by air-craft. Isaaq living in the south of the country are being rounded up and imprisoned. Meanwhile, refugees, most of whom are Isaaq are pouring across the border into Ethiopian territory; by end of August 1988 there were at least 250,000 in Ethiopia. [4]
— Survival International News, publication
9- The Guardian (1989) and (1993)
... and ground bombardment of all major Isaaq towns and villages in the north in what was described as an act of 'genocide' (The Guardian 1989). This savage attack 'was seen, probably rightly, as an attack on the whole of the Isaaq people.... (page 243)
The number of deaths has been estimated at around 100,000 in the northern towns (The Guardian 1993). Up to 50,000 people are believed to have lost their lives in the capital city, Hargeisa, as a result of summary executions, arial bombardments and ground attacks carried out by government troops (Bake 1993). (page 244) [5]
— Adebayo Adedeji, Comprehending and Mastering African Conflicts: The Search for Sustainable Peace and Good Governance
10- The Washington Post (1990):
In Somalia, the Isaaq clan is the target of government genocide. The Isaaq-based Somali National Movement (SNM), an insurgency group headquartered in Ethiopia for years, invaded Somalia in mid-1988 and now controls a large part of the north.
The government's response has been brutal. An aerial bombing campaign devastated large sections of the cities and productive areas in the north. Wells have been poisoned, villages have been burned and Isaaq civilians have been rounded up and executed by government troops. President Barre has also supplied weapons to Ethiopian refugees inside Somalia and to opposition Ethiopian groups to attack Isaaq civilians. Africa Watch estimates that 50,000 Somali citizens have been killed during the past year and a half, the majority being Isaaq civilians.Link
11a- Aljazeera Article titled:
Investigating genocide in Somaliland
As many as 200,000 people were buried in mass graves in the 1980s under Somali dictator Mohamed Siad Barre.
11b- A documentary first aired on Aljazeera on the subject:
People and Power meets a community coming to terms with the horrors of the past and joins forces with a group of forensic investigators and human rights activists attempting to bring an alleged war criminal, Yusuf Abdi Ali, also known as Colonel Tukeh, to account.Link to video.
12- Genocide Watch:
For the purposes of this Mass Atrocities Alert, Genocide Watch sees the following warning signs of genocide and atrocities being committed against the civilian population of Somalia:
Prior unpunished genocidal massacres, such as those perpetrated by the Barre regime, primarily against the Isaaq clan, in the late 1980s. Source
The plethora of discussions on the subject attest to its notability. This is an important subject that features prominently in the scholarship about the civil war in the former Somali state and specifically pertaining to the period between 1988-1990. There are many more reports and academic works and documentaries that deal with the subject of Isaaq genocide, the list above is a small sample.
I hope one can now clearly see the claim by the initiator of this deletion request that very few individuals classify these events as whole as genocide is incorrect. I cite the specific use of the word genocide in the United Nations' commissioned report (above, point 1), also used academically by Bloxham and Dirk Moses (The Oxford Handbook of Genocide Studies, point 4, above), by Barrington (point 6, if loosely), in the Encyclopedia of Genocide, notably as the single case from Somalia included and one of three from all of Africa (see point 7 please), and in reputable international media, like Survival International (point 8), by both The Guardian (point 9), and The Washington Post (point 10) as well as the title of an Aljazeera article (point 11a) as well as a documentary (point 11b) and finally on Genocide Watch (point 12).
Thus I conclude that the use of the word genocide is appropriate for the page.
The above demonstrates that the topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, and I hope, like me, you see that it is suitable for a stand-alone articleWP:GNG.
I also hope the use of 'people' in relation to Isaaq is fair. Similar usage of 'Isaaq People' is found in both the UN report (point 1) and in 'Comprehending and Mastering African Conflicts: The Search for Sustainable Peace and Good Governance' (point 9), I can provide further academic examples if needed.
Please note that the initiator of this deletion request has been waging an ongoing edit war both on the subject article of this request and other pages too. They have been the one causing vandalism in their deletion of this article (via redirection) see here. This is very disruptive and I have mentioned that much to them in the notes of my edits. The article is well sourced, notable and neutral, there is absolutely no merit to blanking it by putting a redirection on. That is vandalism.
This request for deletion does not make sense. It seems to me, and this is unfortunate, that the initiator of the deletion request harbors negative sentiment against Isaaqs. There is no other reason to request deletion of a well sourced article that deals with such an important subject. So important in fact that the air-bombardment and use of military force against civilians in Hargeisa it is the subject of a war monument erected in the middle of the capital city of Somaliland, Hargeisa, the same city that was levelled by the Somali army and airforce. The arial bombardment of Hargeisa by the Somali Airforce is a very painful and recent memory to many survivors of the genocide and their families. I hope the quotes above conveys the sheer scale of this atrocity.
As for what has been said about my other edits, I am very happy to discuss my edits in the specific articles' talk pages. On their claims of my editing of the dispute page of Somaliland and Puntland. I have updated the article to reflect the realities on the ground as of end of 2016 and beginning of 2017. The page was outdated. The facts are that Somaliland controls every single capital of all the regions it claims. I will be more than happy to provide evidece for this, the editor is relying on non-Somalis' ignorance of the situation on the ground, or perhaps a better way to phrase it is the lack of English language reputable sources the report on the issue.
It is true that there are opposing organisations under names like SSC (now defunct) and Khaatumo (very little support from locals, almost no resources), but these organisation exist in name only and are far from being governments and/or real actors on the ground. In fact, Khatumo itself acknowledges that Somaliland controls the capital of Sool region, I can provide video recordings of the president of this organisation, mr. Ali Galaydh himself admitting that they have no control over these territories. Furthermore, Somaliland is currently in talks with Khaatumo, again, in these talks the leaders of Khaatumo admit Somaliland's control of the capital of Sool region (Laascanood).
Puntland's claim is in name only too, this may not have been the case prior to 2007, but it is now. I am happy to provide extensive evidence in the talk page of that article.
As for the changing of Somalia map. That too is to reflect the realities on the ground, and it is in line with precedent set by other Wikipedia articles. Please see the landing maps of Morocco, India, Pakistan and many other countries where the landing map clearly indicates parts that the country claims but does not control. I tried to keep it to the same neutral colours used in the maps of aforementioned countries, light green and dark green. I am happy to discuss this in detail in that article's talk page.
Due to the above reasons, I hope you can see that the article is notable, neutral WP:NPOV,verifiable WP:V and not WP:NOR and thus abides by the principal core content policies of Wikipedia. I do not understand why it is marked for deletion, that is wrong and disrespectful to the victims of the genocide. I have noticed that much of the content the editor initiating this request works on, or is involved in edit wars over, are slanted against certain Somali groups namely the Isaaq, as is the case for this bizarre delete request, that much is clear. Kzl55 (talk) 02:36, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
This is portion is in response to the creator to this article.
In regards to the term "genocide" you have completely missed my point. I never said these events were not notable, rather that there is no uniqueness to what the Isaaq faced in comparison to the Hawiye and Majeerteen, as did another user (see here: [4] and [5]). In fact, I even stated that those events are already partly mentioned on the Somali Rebellion article along with those of other clans. So points Two, Three, Four, Five, and Six are completely irrelevant as they don't mention a "genocide" but rather the events that occurred.
For those that did use the term "genocide", such as AlJazzera (point Eleven) and The Guardian (Point Nine), it wasn't their word choose (hence the quotation marks), but the words of others, such as victim's family members (see here: [6]. Aljazzera never even referred to the events as "genocide" but rather that they were investigating the claim, hence the title "Investigating genocide in Somaliland". In fact, if you had read the Aljazzera article you would have noticed this : "Evidence that victims hailed from the same clan could indicate genocide, rather than mass-murder". Not only is this a criteria of a genocide,[7] but the victims of the Barre government didn't hail from solely one clan but rather numerous other clans.[8] As such, these events completely fail to meet the criteria of a genocide. In fact, the Survival International News (Point Eight) refers to these events "something like genocide" rather then "it was a genocide". Nor does it provide any form of information on how these events would conclude to meet such a criteria.
The only points relevant for this discussion are One, Seven, Ten, and Twelve since they actually do you use the term genocide to describe those events. Interestingly enough, all those sources fail to mention atrocities committed against other clans. In fact, if one carefully reads points such as the Washington Post article (point Ten) and the encyclopedia (point Seven), then they would would have noticed this:
"The government's response has been brutal. An aerial bombing campaign devastated large sections of the cities and productive areas in the north. Wells have been poisoned, villages have been burned and Isaaq civilians have been rounded up and executed by government troops. President Barre has also supplied weapons to Ethiopian refugees inside Somalia and to opposition Ethiopian groups to attack Isaaq civilians".
"Geno/Pol: The group was the target of deliberate, sustained policies aimed at its collective destruction"
Not only does the encyclopedia and the Washington Post fail to provide further evidence, but these are the same events that other clans faced (see here: [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], and [16]). I have already shown you that the Isaaq weren't the only clan involved multiple times before (see here: [17], [18], and [19]). In addition, members of the Isaaq clan also committed atrocities against other clans during the same period as did other clans, see here: [20] and [21]. Based on the statement made by your points, then all clans faced and participated in a collective genocide. However, as Awale-Abdi points out, multiple sources disagree with the use of the term "genocide", see here: [22]. It's shocking how you would accuse me of "relying on non-Somalis' ignorance of the situation on the ground for information on the maps, yet do exactly that for this by failing to mention other clans, as well as propping up the outlandish notion that the Isaaq are separate "people" form other Somalis.[23]
Although these crimes are truly sad and sickening, they do not constitute a "genocide" as it does not met the legal definition, lacks uniqueness, and nor has there been any form of legal recognition. You have already been informed of this by other users as well (see here: [24], [25], and [26]).
Anyways, your responses to the other points I mentioned are not accurate. For starters, despite captioning the light green portion of this map as the "disputed territory" (see here: [27]), it doesn't not show what portions of the eastern regions that are actually disputed with Puntland per its constitution, see here: [28]. On the other hand, this map presents it as such, see here: [29]. In addition, your attempt, at creating a map that shows actual local control doesn't' accurately reflect it as such, see here: [30]. Nor is your creation of a new Somalia map (see here: [31]) accurate in regards to other wiki articles since the region has no from of international recognition.[32]
As I have already explained to you and other users, this other map also incorrectly designates Somaliland as a separate nation when it is internationally recognized as an autonomous region within Somalia.[33] This isn't how it is illustrated with other regions, such as: South Ossetia, Transnistria, Abkhazia, etc. As I previously shown, this map present it accordingly along with all the other issues: [34]. Not only has a consensus on this map issue already been established, but the map your desire is by no means is in line with other Wiki articles as you oddly claim them to be (see here: [35]). These are the reasons why I and others cite WP:PROPAGANDA. We can continue these discussions at a latter time since they aren't crucial to this discussion other then me and others citing WP:PROPAGANDA.
This article is by no means neutral in any form. You have once again left out how the Isaaq weren't the only clan involved: "Government atrocities inflicted on the Hawiye were considered comparable in scale to those against the Majeerteen and Isaaq". As such, it makes little sense to uses the term exclusively for the Isaaq.
I am sorry but you are mistaken. The usage of term genocide in relation to Isaaq Genocide was not started by myself. "Clan-cleansing and even stronger terms (such as genocide) are regularly used" in scholarship when discussing Isaaq Genocide specifically. I refer you to my discussion on the Majerteen with Abdi Awale below. I discussed at length and brought scholarly examples for why, despite other groups' (like Majerteen) possible brutalisation by Siad Barre, no one in academic circles suggested the use of terms like 'clan-cleansing' or even stronger terms like 'genocide' in reference brutalisation of Majerteen. I refer you to this quote by an actual African historian, Lidwien Kapteijns, focusing on Somalia and translator of historical and cultural Somali texts:
Collective clan-based violence against civilians always represents a violation of human rights. However, when its goal is to exterminate and expel large numbers of people based on their group identity alone, it becomes clan cleansing. No one has suggested this term for the collective brutalization of the people of Mudug [read Majerteen]. However, for the Northwest [read Isaaq], this and even stronger terms (such as genocide) are regularly used. The scale and character of the collective clan-based violence committed against Isaaq civilians - who, although they were not the only civilians brutalized by the government, were especially targeted - suggest that this dimension of state-violence in the Northwest indeed amounts to clan cleansing.
Please note the the scholar (Lidwien Kapteijns) mentions within the same quote, that Isaaq were not the only civilians brutalised by the government, yet she makes the distinction that they were especially targeted and thus their case worthy of the usage of terms like clan-cleansing and even genocide. I am not denying that other groups (like the Majerteen, Hawiye or others) may have been brutalised, but the case that the Isaaq were especially targeted is clear, notable, and accepted by scholarship. I hope you can accept this much.
To further illustrate the point about the comparisons made in scholarship of the difference in scale to what the Isaaq have suffered in relation to other examples of government brutality against other groups, in this case the Majerteen, allow me to quote a different passage by Lidwien Kapteijns (links are in my post below):
There is no doubt that the magnitude and scale of this collective "punishment" by the state of a whole group clan group for alleged, real, or potential acts of political opposition was unprecedented and, for that reason alone, represented a new dimension of state violence in Somali history.
So I hope you accept that the article does not aim to portray the Isaaq Genocide as the only hardship that befell the people of the region, it in no way renders other examples of suffering 'less important'. The accepted concensus in scholarship makes the distinction in the case for Isaaq to use the terms we have discussed (like genocide) due to the sheer scale and the fact that the Isaaq were especially targeted, I think I have made my point.
You said:
The only points relevant for this discussion are One, Seven, Ten, and Twelve since they actually do you use the term genocide to describe those events.
I completely disagree. All the points I have raised (one through eleven) are very relevant to the discussion. You seem to be implying that I have claimed that 'all' of my sources explicitly use the term 'genocide', I have made no such claim. In fact, if you read my post that you are quoting, right above my citations you will see that I stated my intentions of using these sources very clearly:
To that point please allow me to quote from various official and academic sources to illustrate my point and prove the article is notable, neutral WP:NPOV, verifiable WP:V and indeed not WP:NOR and thus abides by the principal core content policies of Wikipedia. I hope this will comprehensively clear the issue.
My main concern in that post (as clearly stated) was to illustrate the notability, neutrality and verifiability aspects of the article itself to warrant its existence, rather than focusing solely on the usage of the term 'genocide'. I do not accept your inference that the use of term genocide in international news outlets such as The Guardian (point 9) and Aljazeera (point 11) is not important just because it may be by others "such as victim's family". This is not a valid criticism because news outlets report on news, thus the usage could indeed have come from the victims' families (I accept the possibility) but it could have come from organisations that monitored the situation or investigators, they did not specify the 'potential' source if they have not declared it. Your comment about (point 8) is hanging on technicalities, in this case the use of the word 'like' instead of explicit mention of 'genocide', your carefulness here contradicts your refusal to accept the very clear explicit mentions of the term 'genocide' I have provided here, herehere or here.
From your post above:
The only points relevant for this discussion are One, Seven, Ten, and Twelve since they actually do you use the term genocide to describe those events. Interestingly enough, all those sources fail to mention atrocities committed against other clans.
Let me get this right, you are discrediting them for not mentioning all heinous acts committed by Siad Barre?
I am sorry but this is absurd. I have discussed the suffering of other groups above. The sources you have accepted to be relevant to this discussion, namely points (1), (7), (10) and (12) are dealing with the specific issue of Isaaq Genocide, I do not understand your expectations of them mentioning other events, dealing with entirely different groups, especially when for some of the events you are citing, the difference in time amounts to a decade (in the case of Majerteen 1978) or more.
Your argument is unreasonable. Are you expecting The Washington Post (point 10) and The Encyclopedia of Genocide, to list every single case of brutality when they are talking about an incident of genocide? I have explained the difference in sheer scale and magnitude between the two above. We are going into the same well here. Other groups have suffered, but when dealing with cases of genocide, only the case for Isaaq Genocide has been made by aforementioned sources including regular use in scholarly output. link
The fact that they do not mention smaller incidents of terrible brutality is not a valid reason to discredit two reputable and impartial sources. The Encyclopedia of Genocide for instance only lists three cases of genocide in all of Africa for that period. It is edited by an impartial genocide scholar Israel Charny with assistance of 100 experts on the subject of genocide. This does not negate that groups around the entirety of the continent may have suffered, but we are talking about the level to which they suffered here as well as the specific targeting of them as a distinct groups.
The links you have added (10-15) deal with the same issue we discussed above namely the issue of other clans suffering. Please look at my comprehensive answer above.
If you believe that the Isaaq committed a genocide on anyone then please go ahead and start an article that is well sourced, notable, verifiable and neutral, no need for derailment in this discussion as this is entirely off topic.
I have only responded earlier to your points regarding my edits history because you raised them, I do not wish to burden this discussion with off-topic remarks as I have mentioned earlier, please do not derail the discussion. I am more than happy to justify every edit and comment I have made, particularly with regards to the maps and control of land in Somaliland and also the 'dispute' map. I do not wish to discuss my statement on your negative edits of Somaliland pages here, it is very clear and I stand by it, I would be happy to participate in a separate discussion on the matter elsewhere (in your talk page perhaps) but this is entirely out with the scope of this discussion. If the above satisfies you then please rescind your request for deletion, as you can see the article satisfies all the requirements and is well sourced. The creation of this article does not lessen the suffering of others, I hope I have made that clear. But it is very important for Isaaq Genocide to have its own page due to notability of the genocide, if you would like to start another project for Majerteen with sources like the Isaaq Genocide then please do so. Kzl55 (talk) 16:19, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
SUPPORT - I'm sorry but I'm going to have to agree with Acidsnow and Soupforone for the following reasons:
(1) The page might give off the impression that the Isaaq clan was somehow "special" during this period in Somalia's recent history which is not the case:
"Barre's elite unit, the Red Berets (Duub Cas), and the paramilitary unit called the Victory Pioneers carried out systematic terror against the Majeerteen, Hawiye, and Isaaq clans.[31] The Red Berets systematically smashed water reservoirs to deny water to the Majeerteen and Isaaq clans and their herds. More than 2,000 members of the Majeerteen clan died of thirst, and an estimated 5,000 Isaaq were killed by the government. Members of the Victory Pioneers also raped large numbers of Majeerteen and Isaaq women, and more than 300,000 Isaaq members fled to Ethiopia." (quoted from Siad's own page)
"As an arid country inhabited by simple farmers and nomads, much of Somalia’s society is clan-based. Its politics under Barre reflected that. Barre was a member of the Darod clan, and in the 1970s after he got Somalia involved in a disastrous war, another clan called the Majeerteen decided to try to get rid of him. Barre cracked down with a paramilitary group called the Red Berets. Their weapon against the Majerteen was environmental: they destroyed the reservoirs their people depended on in the arid region where they lived. In 1979, thousands of them died of thirst." - link
"In other words, the Barre regime could be responsible for a genocide of the Isaaq and Majerteen clans if sufficient evidence to this effect exists, regardless of the fact that it may also have been seeking to quell civil unrest simultaneously."-link
"The widespread unrest in the army led to the April 9, 1978 coup attempt. Although its leader, Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed was Umar Mahamud (Majerten subclan), the core group came from various clans including Hawiye and Isaq. However the state repression focused on the Majerten, because from the onset, Siyad Barre had been wary of this clan's potential threat. He had antagonized the Majerten while for the Italians in the 1950s, when many radical nationalists came from that clan." - link
Other clans suffered atrocities, were targeted by the government and there were even "extermination" measures of sorts enacted against them, the Isaaq clan was not unique in all this. Barre and his regime were simply acting like a dictatorial regime normally does when there is insurrection in their midst rather than despising Isaaqs simply for being Isaaqs and seeking to annihilate every last one of them as a result. Instead, Barre and his regime were simply reacting cruelly to the formation of the "Somali National Movement" (SNM) which,like other Somali rebel militias of the civil-war period, had its "base" in a particular clan (in this case; the Isaaq clan) whom Barre associated with the militia and ordered attacks against as a result.
Unless this page is edited to be about "genocide" among several clans (i.e. with a title such as "Genocide of Somali clans" or something along those lines); it should not be kept, in my opinion. Again, because the Isaaq are not truly unique in this. However, a page with the edited title I mentioned would be totally redundant (as is this "Isaaq Genocide" page) for reasons Acidsnow mentioned since pages like the "Somali Rebellion" page (see here) do mention the atrocities suffered by various Somali clans during this period in recent Somali history. The creator of this page would be better served simply adding text and sources to pages such as the "Somali rebellion" page and leaving it at that (in fact, I welcome adding text to those pages that argues what the Isaaq suffered was a "genocide"). I see no reason why the Isaaq clan in particular deserves some sort of page of its own unless other clans are also to be given a similar page which is unnecessary for reasons mentioned prior.
(2) Acidsnow and Soupforone have a point about the somewhat hyperbolic nature of the article's subject and the fact that the creator's editing history (as pointed out by Acidsnow) seems to point to a bias toward pro-"Somaliland" politics (which often requires fostering & nurturing grievances toward "Somalia") and this thus presents a possible case of WP:PROPAGANDA.
There are sources which ultimately do not entertain the idea that what happened to the Isaaq clan (or even the Majeerteen clan) was truly classifiable as "genocide" (see here, for instance) and just adopting this title outright because some sources imply or lean towards the opposite makes this article, in my opinion, act against WP:NEUTRAL-POINT-OF-VIEWas it outright picks a side. A better set-up for it not to seem like a propaganda page would've been for it to be titled "Atrocities enacted against the Isaaq during the Somali Civil-War" and then have a section where both "pro-genocide labeling" and "anti-genocide labeling" sources are shared whilst, if possible, sharing why both sides are for or against the labeling. But this is totally pointless as stated earlier as this can just be more shortly done in pages like the "Somali Rebellion" page.
(3) This does, partly, smell like a WP:NO-ORIGINAL-RESEARCH breach as well. The page creator's sources look as though they're just being used to weave a narrative that Isaaqs were perhaps specially gencodided when many (not all) of the page creator's sources do is point out the obvious which is that Isaaqs were targeted, the government was at war with them and that they (the Isaaqs) suffered greatly-:
2- "The government has been at war with the Isaaks since 1981, after the creation of the SNM. Apparently suspecting every Isaak of supporting the SNM, the government unleashed a reign of terror and lawlessness in northern Somalia."
3- "Government forces committed atrocities against civilians (an estimated 50,000 to 60,000 Somalis died, mostly members of the Isaaq clan, which was the core support for the SNM); aerial bombardments leveled the city of Hargeysa [the second largest city in Somalia](page. 10)"
6- "In a wave of terror that followed the initial military assault, the Somali Armed Forces engaged in a "systematic pattern" of attacks against unarmed Isaaq villages, as well as summarily executing an unknown number of suspected SNM supporters. Despite the devastation of the north that bordered on genocide, the Siad regime ultimately was unable to stop the advance of guerrilla armies on the capital of Mogadishu, especially after USC guerilla forces stepped up their attacks in the central region of the country. ."
^ (keyword being "bordered" rather than the source outright stating this was definitely genocide)
7- "7- Furthermore, in the Encyclopedia of Genocide, edited by genocide scholar Israel Charny (executive director of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem ), the only named group from Somalia in two published tables in that book are the Isaaq."
^ (This means nothing and is bordering on "Original Research". Other Somali groups suffered comparable atrocities by both state and non-state actors; them not being mentioned does not place the Isaaq clan's terrible suffering ahead of theirs as the only one that was supposedly truly genocidal in nature.)
8- "Since May, government repression of the Isaaq has escalated into something like genocide..."
^ (Emphasis on the word "like". Nevertheless, this then just goes on to describe atrocities the clan suffered like other sources do.)
-and yes; other Somali clans, like the Majeerteen, were targeted, the government was at war with them and they suffered greatly. And, as even one of my own sources points out, it can possibly be argued that a "genocide" of sorts was enacted against other clans such as the Majeerteen as well. None of this, however, outright proves a "genocide" but really just that a dictatorial regime was enacting extreme violence against people it believed were rising up against it. Only sources that outright claim genocide are relevant, frankly. The ones that merely highlight atrocities are just being used to push the genocide viewpoint when they don't explicitly claim this was genocide, so this does partly look like Original-Research meant to support a certain viewpoint the page creator holds. Though this point among my 3 points, in my humble opinion, is the least pressing and relevant.
_______
At any rate, another source even points out that things like "genocide", perhaps more appropriately termed "clan cleansing" as per the source, were arguably enacted against several clans by both state and non-state actors. So why are Isaaq clan members getting a page and not the others? Why is there not a page on the "clan cleansing" enacted against Darods in Mogadishu by militias during this same period in recent history? I say simply because such pages would be redundant (as well as misleading in acting as though one clan's suffering was of unique importance within this trouble period) and would only help serve the political agendas of "clanist" types within the Somali Peninsula. The atrocities suffered by various clans can be outlined in the "Somali Rebellion" or even "Somali Civil-War" page (or both) but anything more than that, in my humble opinion, is unnecessary.
So yes, I support deleting this article. --Awale-Abdi (talk) 15:15, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
This article should be kept - I am sorry but what you have written does not constitute a rebuttal of my post. You are trying to pass off your opinion as a fact, whereas I have presented a well sourced argument. My position is supported by the results of a United Nations's investigation and the majority of scholarly work dealing with the subject (please see below). It is also widely covered and reported on in international media as I have presented above.
There is no need to obfuscate the issue, the argument you are bringing is that the Isaaq Genocide is not notable or worthy of getting its own article just because others may have also suffered under the brutal dictatorship of Siad Barre. Your ignoring of 11 named and reputable sources makes any discussion of the subject very difficult. Let me be clear, I in no way deny that minorities and other groups may have suffered under the Siad Barre regime, however, and I stress this, the attack on the Isaaq was specific on them as a group, the Majeerteen that you mentioned belong to the same group as Siad Barre namely the Darod, whereas Isaaq are an entirely different group. A number of the sources you have provided failed to make this distinction clear, I will elaborate further down.
But before we continue, your constant mention of the attack on other groups, such as the Majerteen is not valid here, not only because of the difference in the dynamics of the relationship between Siad Barre and his fellowDarod the Majerteen vs Isaaq, a separate stand alone group, but you are clearly ignoring difference in sheer scale of the brutality and suffering in the government's dealing with Majerteen in comparison to the "near annihilation" of the Isaaq [here]. What you and AcidSnow are arguing attempting to compare the case of Isaaq and that of Majerteen is not new, and has been put to rest in academic circles. This issue is discussed in academic and scholarship literature when comparing the two cases, allow me to quote Lidwien Kapteijns, the African historian focusing on Somalia and translator of historical and cultural Somali texts:
Collective clan-based violence against civilians always represents a violation of human rights. However, when its goal is to exterminate and expel large numbers of people based on their group identity alone, it becomes clan cleansing. No one has suggested this term for the collective brutalization of the people of Mudug [read Majerteen]. However, for the Northwest [read Isaaq], this and even stronger terms (such as genocide) are regularly used. The scale and character of the collective clan-based violence committed against Isaaq civilians - who, although they were not the only civilians brutalized by the government, were especially targeted - suggest that this dimension of state-violence in the Northwest indeed amounts to clan cleansing.[6]
— Lidwien Kapteijns, Clan Cleansing in Somalia: The Ruinous Legacy of 1991 p.87
The fact is that the vast majority of scholars make a clear distinction between Siad Barre's brutality in dealing with various groups and the specific targeting of Isaaq civilians, and as noted above the widespread use of the term 'genocide' (even if that particular author chose clan-cleansing) when describing the Isaaq situation is not up for debate. This is not to belittle the brutality shown against the Majerteen, but the distinction both in scale and nature of the attack as well as the resulting civilian deaths warrant the use of genocide in talking about Isaaq, that is the point of the article. If you have sources that argue a similar case for the Majerteen then by all means cite the sources and open a separate entry for Majerteen. However the Isaaq Genocide page, for the reasons discussed both in my posts and the multitude of sources provided should stand separately.
I just wanted to deal with your use of Majerteen as a comparable case early in my posts because this is the meat of the argument that all three members present, that the Isaaq case is not unique. This is in disagreement with all of the sources I have presented including official reports by the United Nations (that explicitly mentions the term genocide) and Human Rights Watch as well as the many well respected sources I have presented above.
As for the points you have raised:
(1a) I will start by reminding you that WP:NOTSOURCE, you can not just use a Wikipedia entry as a source to support your argument. I looked at the Wikipedia page you linked to and both links to the source [here] and [here] are dead. This does not aid the discussion in anyway. Whether or not the Majeerteen suffered under Siad Barre is not the issue. Please refer to the quote and discussion on the Majerteen above.
Let me finally remind you that the Majeerteen belong to the same group as Siad Barre, whereas the Isaaq are a totally separate group. Are you disputing this?
If you accept it then I am guessing you are trying to argue that the Isaaq Genocide is not notable because the Majeerteen suffered as well, thus the Isaaq are not unique in suffering. That is not a valid point either. In the scholarly quote above, the author describes the attacks on Majerteen as 'brutalization' and followed that by stating how this term and even genocide are regularly used to describe the violence against Isaaq people, one does not negate the other.
Our discussion here pertains to the attack on Isaaq people as a distinct group, whether or not other groups suffered is beside the point. I can list you many dictators that committed atrocities against some groups and genocides against others if you like, it does not render the attack 'not genocide' just because other groups were attacked to a lesser extent.
If you feel that the Majeerteen have suffered a genocide specific to them as a group with the aims of total obliteration, and have sources to back that up including United Nation investigation reports, Human Rights Watch reports, academic scholarly work and world wide media coverage, all expressly naming Majeerteen and genocide then I invite you to start that article. If that satisfies you I hope you rescind your support for the deletion of this article.
(1b) In your second quote: "Barre was a member of the Darod clan, and in the 1970s after he got Somalia involved in a disastrous war, another clan called the Majeerteen decided to try to get rid of him."
That is factually incorrectWP:AD verging on the misleading (on part of the author, not yourself). Barre was a member of the Darod clan, Majeerteen are not another clan, as they too are members of the Darod clan. The Isaaq however are indeed entirely different. Do you dispute any of this?
I question the use of this webpage as a source, especially as the author, who by his own admission on his About page is focused on the history of climate change and fiction [here]. Nevertheless he seems to be discussing an entirely different issue concerning the Majeerteen and the destruction of their reservoirs. This has nothing to do with the subject of Isaaq Genocide. I have discussed this at length above. Again I am not denying that other groups may have suffered a heavy handed approach and brutalization by the Siad Barre regime, I am however pointing out that the Isaaq people were especially targeted as the sources I have linked to above clearly confirmed. I am also discussing the sheer scale of the Isaaq Genocide with some figures pointing out 50,000-60,000 civilian deaths [here], some report 100,000 [here] whilst the locals are reporting upwards of 200,000 civilian deaths [here], on the other hand the numbers in the sources you are providing about Majerteen point to 2000 civilians dying of thirst here. Please note I do not belittle that number in any way, I am just pointing the difference in scale, and the specific targeting of Isaaq with the express use of the term 'genocide'. We are not talking about combatants, these deaths were all civilian population belonging to a specific group, namely the Isaaq. I hope this point is clear.
(1c) Your third quote is from Read Contra, I have not heard of them before so looked up their About page, which states that they are 'a network of students and communities around the world dedicated to telling stories that are too bold for tomorrow's paper'. Not to discredit them out of some misinformed sense of elitism but I hope when you are discussing an important topic like the deletion of an article about a genocide (even if you yourself do not accept the term), civilian targeting and arial bombardment and consequent complete destruction of the second largest city in Somalia [link] to choose more reputable academic papers or otherwise sources. Nevertheless your source seem in agreement with my post above:
They label the war of SNM rightly as 'Somaliland Liberation war':
The complex history of the region of the world loosely defined as Somalia is terrifically embodied in the moment of the 1987-1991 Somaliland Liberation war and also presents a fascinating academic exercise in international human rights legal analysis.
(But that is beside the point, I accept).
They mention the mass grave sites which the Peruvian Forensic Anthropology team [here] have been excavating of Isaaq victims (the only group mentioned in the discussion of excavation) in your article:
up to 100,000 people are estimated to have lost their lives in the greater Hargeisa area [read Isaaq] as a result of responsive summary executions and aerial bombardments carried out by Barre troops
Note that this is your article I am quoting from above, (no mention of Majeerteen or other groups when discussing excavation or the especially large numbers like 100,000 civilian deaths)
The findings of that Peruvian Forensic Anthropology in that particular area (Gabiley) of the bodies of at least 20 young Isaaq men who 'had been taken to a hill ridge outside of the town and executed on orders of a notoriously sadistic Barre colonel, Yusuf Abdi Ali (nicknamed "Tukeh")' just for suspicion of their membership of SNM.
Yusuf Abdi Ali, as well as other members of the Siad Barre's regime and collaborators in the campaign against the Isaaq are subject of television CBS News reporting [here] and [here]
Other mentions of the work conducted by the Peruvian Forensic Anthropology team mentioned in your article in relation to Somaliland and the excavation of bodies of Isaaq victims includes:
The EPAF document:
Somaliland was a part of the former Republic of Somalia. For 21 years until his fall, the regime of Mohammed Siad Barre carried out massacres against the people of Somaliland. About 60,000 civilians were killed, thousands were victims of enforced disappearance, and 500,000 individuals were displaced before the declaration of independence, in 1991. [link]
And some of the press coverage following the excavation of the team is found:
One last point about that particular source of yours (Read Contra article), it repeats the same mistake of assuming Majeerteen being a different group to Siad Barre, your sources says ... the Barre government response, carried out by loyal Ogadeni clan militias, against opposition movements led by members of two other major Somali clans, the Majerteen and Isaaq, in the north.
Again, let me emphasis, Siad Barre and Majeerteen belong to the same clan, namely Darod, where as Isaaq is a stand alone clan. Two of your sources so far have made this basic mistake, this is why I urge you to use more established scholarly work and avoid web only articles written by non experts.
Furthermore, the author of the article you are quoting from only mentions the Majeerteen in passing, the discussions of the mass grave sites, excavated bodies of victims, 100,000 deaths, the support of legal director of the Center for Justice and Accountability Kathy Roberts [as reported by CNN], all relate to the Isaaq people's case and not at all about the Majeerteen people, do you dispute this?
And finally, as you accepted, the author agrees that the Barre regime could be responsible for a genocide of the Isaaq and Majeerteen. I emphasise he clearly states the reasons behind his acceptance of Isaaq Genocide in terms of the death toll and scale of clamaity, but did not discuss why he included the Majeerteen or the level to which the government brutalised them.
(1d) You fourth quote comes from published notes of a seminar by a peace foundation affiliated with a university [here]. I question its validity in this discussion as a seminar and notes compiled from it are not equivalent to scholarly discussions and output. Again I express my objection to your sources, ranging from webpages of fiction authors to student articles and now seminar notes, especially when you are asking for the deletion of a well sourced article supported by findings from a United Nations' investigation, Human Rights Watch report, published academic works, United States law precedent and ruling and international media coverage. It shows, with all due respects, that you are clutching at straws in your argument, as it lacks reputable sourcing which explains why you are trying to refute aforementioned sources with seminar notes and quotations from various unrelated web sources.
As for the quote itself, first of all let me complete it for you:
The widespread unrest in the army led to the April 9, 1978 coup attempt. Although its leader, Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed was Umar Mahamud, the core group came from various clans including Hawiye and Isaq. However the state repression focused on the Majerten,[7] because from the onset, Siyad Barre had been wary of this clan’s potential threat. He had antagonized the Majerten while working for the Italians in the 1950s, when many radical nationalists came from that clan. The SYL candidate to succeed President Shermarke, assassinated on October 15, 1969, Haji Muse Boqor, belonged to the same sub-clan and many Majerten felt that the top job was stolen from them. Although the original military junta included two Majerten members, Siyad made sure to leave out of the SRC the most prominent colonels belonging to that clan.
This relates to an entirely different episode (1978, where the Isaaq Genocide took place a decade later). And as you can discern from the completed quote above, there were rivalries and competing interests between Siad Barre and the Majeerteen at the time with the SYL candidate being a member of the clan. This is in no way related to the Isaaq Genocide, moreover, I stated above that both Siad Barre and the Majerteen belong to the same clan, this source of yours supports my statement above with the emphasis on Majerteen being a sub-clan rather than a clan, your other sources failed to make this clear and wrote about Majerteen as a seperate clan to Siad Barre's Darod. The framing and context of the discussion when the quote is involving the Majerteen takes a political tone in my opinion when the quote is seen in full. Nevertheless, as I have stated many times, if you feel the brutalization of the Majerteen warrants its own page, and have the sources to document this I am happy for you to start your own page for the Majeerteen.
I hate to dwell on this point, as I believe it does not relate to Isaaq Genocide and the only reason the Majerteen are brought up in this discussion is to dilute the sheer scale of suffering of the Isaaq people, but allow me again to quote from your source, this is the seminar notes, starting from the same page (14):
After describing the aforementioned attack on the Majerteen, the author says:"This was the first "war against his people" launched by Siyad Barre, years before the near annihilation of the Isaaq in the North, and the first time in modern Somali history when the state intervened in the bush not to quell inter-clan warfare but to fuel it.
I stress this again, these are your own sources I am quoting. Please note the mention of 'near annihilation of the Isaaq in the North' [read genocide], the author did not use similar language in describing the attack on Majerteen. This is your own source that you have quoted, now with that in mind, would it satisfy you if the article is titled 'the near annihilation of the Isaaq' as opposed to Isaaq Genocide?
Your following quote deals with he 1960s and 1970s, almost two decades and a decade respectively before the Isaaq Genocide.
I would like to point out that I find it very interesting that your quote cuts off one line above the following:
"By bombing Hargeisa and Burao [read Isaaq cities], indiscriminately killing civilians (15 to 20,000), including columns of displaced people fleeing the combat zone.
Was it just a coincidence that your quote was abruptly cut off just before this line? This smacks of lack of WP:NPOV. Again I am confident the facts, evidence and scholarly output supports my article staying, I would humbly request you rescind your support for the deletion.
The article in question is about a specific event, that is the Isaaq Genocide. I have shown the usage of the term at all levels. I do not dispute nor deny that the Siad Barre regime committed acts of brutalisation against other people, all I am saying is that the targeting of Isaaq was specific and with the aim of total obliteration to Isaaqas a group. To that effect, the article argues, with clearly laid out evidence, that the Isaaq people specifically suffered a targeted campaign with the aim of total obliteration (see my previous post under main request here please). That alone constitutes a stand alone article, provided it is well sourced and abides by Wikipedia's policy of notability, neutrality and verifiability. This article accomplishes all of that. It is presented in a clear manner with all the facts and supporting evidence clearly laid out.
Your argument boils down to the fact that the Siad Barre regime was a dictatorship and that other groups may have also suffered. You fail to prove that the government campaign did not target Isaaq as a group. All the sources you have provided thus far are not of the calibre (either in official or scholar credentials) needed in a request for the deletion of an article.
Remember that the United Nations investigation concluded:
Based on the totality of evidence collected in Somaliland and elsewhere both during and after his mission, the consultant firmly believes that the crime of genocide was conceived, planned and perpetrated by the Somali Government against the Isaaq people of northern Somalia between 1987 and 1989.
This is not said about any other group, not the Majerteen or any others, if you have any reports by UN investigators dealing with other groups I would love to have a look myself. There are no UN reports on any other group concluding with acceptance of a genocide taking place other than the case above with the Isaaq. No widely circulated scholarly work nor anywhere as much coverage in international media as the case with Isaaq. Again this is not said to belittle the suffering of any group, including the Majerteen.
I believe no further evidence is required, but I have provided many more, as outlined above.
For all of the above I can only say that the suggestion for the amalgamation of all subjects related to Somali Government atrocities under one heading is ridiculous to say the least. If you have enough support for other groups to warrant their own page I welcome you to start one. The evidence presented here clearly shows that the Isaaq Genocide as specific to Isaaq is worthy of its own article as it satisfies WP:GNG:
Significant coverage addresses the topic directly and in detail, thus no original research is needed to extract content. This includes United Nation's report, one that specifically uses the term 'genocide', HRW report, many academic and scholarly works, coverage in international media both in print and film.
Reliable and neutral sources for all claims is provided.
Secondary sources are provided.
And they are independent of the subject.
While I do not dispute that other groups may have suffered under the oppressive regime of Siad Barre, based on my reading and the evidence provided above I can not think of any that would actually satisfy all of Wikipedias notability requirements, other than the Isaaq and perhaps some minorities. Do you have any reports by the UN, describing the Majerteen case as a genocide?
As for your rather insulting suggestion that the Isaaq Genocide should be tucked away within the Somali Rebellion page, I would like to invite you to make a similar suggestion to other groups that faced similar calamities, absolutely ridiculous. Not to mention there is quite a bit of self-contradiction when you say "(in fact, I welcome adding text to those pages that argues what the Isaaq suffered was a "genocide"", if you are happy to accept a smaller version tucked away within a different article with text about the Isaaq Genocide, then you should be happy for it to have its own article, but somehow you dont.
You are implying that the sources I have provided and your sources have equal weight in an academic discussion. ::You have provided these sources to argue the deletion:
A selection of academic and scholarly work on the subject. (I am happy to provide more). [here], [here], [here], [here] and [here].
An example of wide circulation in international media including The Guardian, The Washington Post and Aljazeera.
With all due respect I do not think you have an argument. You can not win by simply denying the event, or attempting to dilute it by including the possible suffering of others with the claim that it is not unique enough to be a genocide!
(3) You can not use WP:NOR here. The sources were listed for two reason:
As evidence that the Somali State was specifically targeting Isaaq as a group.
To show examples of the use of the term genocide in scholarly work and in international media as well as official organisations like the United Nations. I never said or implied that every source I list will use the term genocide. That is quite a nice straw man you built there.
As for your total dismissal of of the body of work of noted genocide scholar Israel Charny (executive director of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem), this is just inexcusable. I would like to point out that Israel Charny was working with almost 100 experts of the subject from many countries. Calling it original research is absolutely ridiculous. To quote you the book's description:
The Encyclopedia of Genocide is the first reference work to chart the full extent of this horrific subject with objectivity and authority. The Nazi Holocaust; the genocides in Armenia, Cambodia, Rwanda, and the former Yugoslavia; and the eradication of indigenous peoples around the world are all covered in A–Z entries, written by almost 100 experts from many countries. [link]
You said:
(This means nothing and is bordering on "Original Research". Other Somali groups suffered comparable atrocities by both state and non-state actors; them not being mentioned does not place the Isaaq clan's terrible suffering ahead of theirs as the only one that was supposedly truly genocidal in nature.)
Another straw man. Neither myself nor the book claimed that no one else suffered in Somalia. You just made that up. What the book states however, like many of the sources including the UN report, is that the Isaaq Genocide was one of three large scale genocides to take place in Africa within that specific period. This does not negate the fact that other groups in Africa (and Somalia) could have suffered massacres and terrible atrocities. In the same breath, the United Nations investigation concluded with the description of the tragedy that befell the Isaaq people as 'genocide', would you accuse the UN of doing "Original Research" too?
What you are doing is very disruptive.
I see that you are happy to hang up on technicalities in the usage of the word "bordered" in your point (7) or "like" in point (8) but I ask you why are you ignoring the specific use of the term "genocide" by the United Nations report? Or academically by Bloxham and Dirk Moses (point 4), or in the Encyclopedia of Genocide, notably as the only case from Somalia (my point 7) or Survival International (point 8), also both The Guardian (point 9), and The Washington Post (point 10)? Or by Aljazeera (points 11a and 11b)?
Your comment is neither being fair nor is it neutral WP:NPOV.
The last source you linked to is the same Seminar notes we have discussed above. Please see my points about it in my reply above. It is not another source as you have used it above and I have replied to your points. We are going in circles here. If you feel you have enough support in sources and citations to start an article about clan cleansing of the Darod (by a Darod president no less!) then by all means go ahead, I do not object to a well sourced article on the subject.
No one in this discussion disputes that the Isaaq people suffered a calamity of great proportions, they do not deny the numbers ranging from 50,000 up to 200,000 civilian deaths, they do not even oppose writing the argument for genocide as a small header within a different page, they are just opposed to the label genocide attached to an article about the specific targeting of a distinct group by the state which resulted in what many -including a UN investigator- referred to as a genocide.
This makes no sense.
Please also note that this article does not in any way deny that minorities or other groups might have suffered under a brutal dictatorship. My argument is simple, the Isaaq people have suffered a highly targeted campaign on them specifically as a group, I have provided, I hope, enough evidence to illustrate as much and I am happy to provide more. It is unacceptable for the three users to deny the Isaaq Genocide and even go on to request the deletion of its article based on a whim, and just because Siad Barre was a brutal dictator that may have brutalised other groups. My argument is that there was a campaign targeted against a distinct group, the Isaaq, this much is notableWP:N, verifiableWP:RELIABLE and neutralWP:NPOV.
I hope you find this sufficient to keep the article. Kzl55 (talk) 04:50, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
SUPPORT , because the author of the article is trying to make it seem that the Isaaq clan of Somalis solely were targeted by the regime. This is not the case as illustrated above by the many sources provided, the Hawiye and Majerteen suffered the same fate. Secondly the Isaaq are not a different people or ethnic, but are rather Somalis themselves, so the term genocide would not be fitting for the title in accordance with the Encyclopedia Britannica[36]. Furthermore I believe every form of clan cleansing or massacre should be discussed in 1 page as this article could lead to a Pandora box of different pages discussing the atrocities committed to certain Somali clans. The author in this case is trying to portray the Isaaq as different or more special than other Somalis[37], WP:Propaganda.. Last but not least the Isaaq clan are not victims themselves and a combined SNM+Ethiopian unit has mounted attacks on neighboring clans, leveling their main towns to the ground, killing thousands and causing around 80.000 to flee over the border into Ethiopia and killing hundreds of non-combat civilians in the Sanaag region. [38]. --AlaskaLava - 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Please note, as I have said many times above, I am not 'trying to make it seem' like anything. The UN report as well as many other sources including a Human Rights Watch report as well as a World Bank report and many academic books as well as world media agree that Isaaq Genocide did indeed take place. The UN report, following an investigation concludes as much, even with the explicit use of the word genocide in the report.
Is the UN also trying to make it seem like the Isaaq were targeted?
Again I make the distinction, the Isaaq were absolutely targeted, I do not think anyone in this page disputes this. Whether other groups (like the Majerteen as stated by the editors above) were also targeted is beside the point of this article. If you accept that the Isaaq were targeted by the state then please rescind your support for the deletion. I did not claim that the Isaaq were the only group that was targeted. Please see my other replies above. I have just stated with enough evidence that:
The Isaaq were targeted as a distinct group by the state (others may have also been targeted and I have invited them to start a page if they have enough support in citations).
That the UN report accepts that there was a genocide committed on the Isaaq
That "terms (such as genocide) are regularly used" in describing the Isaaq Genocide
Do you disagree with any of the above?
If not then I ask you to please rescind your support for the deletion of the article. Articles should not be deleted because we disagree with them. There are many articles that I completely disagree with, but I am happy for them to exist provided they are well sourced, verifiable and neutral in tone.
I disagree with you about the following:
as this article could lead to a Pandora box of different pages discussing the atrocities committed to certain Somali clans
We should not just blanket ban all articles out of fear of opening Pandora's box of different pages discussing alleged atrocities. If there is enough evidence they should be discussed and opened up. If there is enough scholarly support for Majerteen then they too should have a page. Blanket ban on all articles about the subject or forcing of amalgamation is not right, I hope you can see as much.
Last but not least this discussion is specifically about the case for Isaaq Genocide. I will be happy to discuss other events in Somali history elsewhere but focusing on the issue at hand, for now, is very important.
Again I ask you to rethink your stance and read my posts above, I am not in anyway against other people having their own page if they have a case, this includes any group from the region. I think the posts I have made are very clear and the evidence is very sufficient. Please rescind your support for the deletion. Kzl55 (talk) 05:51, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Note to admins. I was surprised by the quick succession of posts that support editor AcidSnow in his request to delete this article. I know (from just reading the articles, and by the lack of participation in other discussions) that the population of editors of Somali origin or interested in Somali subjects is not large on Wikipedia, so I checked the activities of editor AcidSnow and found that they have solicited the responses from both editor AlaskaLava [here] and
editor Soupforone [here]. As I am new to Wikipedia, and assuming in WP:AGF that this was a normal practice, I went ahead and left a couple of messages for users that have edited Somali pages in the past.
I have just read that this practice is forbidden WP:NOSOLICIT on Wikipedia:
It is considered highly inappropriate to recruit your friends, family members, or communities of people who agree with you, so that they can support your side of a debate in Wikipedia or to instigate group support in a disruptive manner
While Wikipedia assumes good faith especially for new users, the recruitment of new/experienced editors to Wikipedia for the purpose of influencing a survey, performing reverts, to illustrate a point or otherwise attempting to give the appearance of consensus is strongly discouraged
This is particularly surprising as the editor AcidSnow has been active on Wikipedia since 2013!
Would this be considered Meatpuppetry? Genuine question.
With view of this passage:
Consensus in many debates and discussions is not based upon number of votes, but upon policy-related points made by editors. Newcomers are unlikely to understand Wikipedia policies and practices, or to introduce any non-verifiable evidences that users have failed too support.
And in light of the soliciting of views mentioned above, I hope the admin looks at the policy related points, I believe I satisfy all of them in the article and in my arguments for keeping the page, rather than simply the number of votes in support of deletion and the assumed consensus based on the three posts above.
I shall delete the messages I left in talk pages now Kzl55 (talk) 08:23, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Note for Admins- Firstly, I'd like to address KzI55's accusations here which are truly deplorable. Neither I, nor Soupforone are "friends" of Acidsnow. In fact, Acidsnow and Soupforone have a history of disagreeing on various topics and arguing back and forth until a consensus was reached for days on end. I've had similar experiences with Soupforone and don't even know who AlaskaLava is, whilst Acidsnow in particular is nothing more than an acquaintance to me. Nevertheless, I do consider Soupforone and Acidsnow to be rather productive editors (despite disagreeing with them at times) but think little else of them beyond that. As for the accusation, I'd like to point out that I, in particular, quietly keep track of the goings-on of Somali-related topics and Kzl55 and this page's creation have been on my radar as a result, hence why I hastily interjected. You can check my talk page and you will notice that no one notified me of this page.
It's also important to note that Acidsnow did not seemingly direct AlaskaLava or Soupforone toward any particular viewpoint but merely asked for their opinion on this topic. There was no puppetry here and both of the other editors shared valid reasons for why they support a deletion rather than merely posting something along the lines of "Yeah, I agree with Acidsnow!".
At any rate, I agree with Acidsnow, Soupforone and Alaska simply because I do believe, for the reasons I've shared and they've shared, that this page should be deleted. If Kz does not like that more than one editor is disagreeing with him; this is a truly deplorable way of reacting to that. You seem to have a habit of conducting WP:PERSONAL-ATTACKS (i.e. trying to discredit other editors due to their affiliations or perceived affiliations), Kzl55. Stick to the topic (and things relevant to it) and little else would be my advice. --Awale-Abdi (talk) 15:06, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Response: What I have stated above are not accusations. I have stated facts. Editor AcidSnow solicited the responses from both editor AlaskaLava [here] and editor Soupforone [here]. Do you dispute this?
In my comment you can see that I, assuming this is normal practice on Wikipedia based on AcidSnow's longevity, went ahead and asked for other peoples' thoughts too (I have since removed those posts), exactly like they did. But ceased all of this upon reading WP:NOSOLICIT as it clearly states:
While Wikipedia assumes good faith especially for new users, the recruitment of new/experienced editors to Wikipedia for the purpose of influencing a survey, performing reverts, to illustrate a point or otherwise attempting to give the appearance of consensus is strongly discouraged
This is exactly what AcidSnow did. Your coming here in their defense when you clearly see in their history the messages they sent both aforementioned contributors does not help their case. Notice how I did not include your name when I mentioned the WP:NOSOLICIT clause. I find your condemnation when the facts are clearly presented misplaced to say the least. The facts are we have three votes in support of AcidSnow, two of which AcidSnow solicited directly against good policy and yourself describing your relationship with them as familiar "nothing more than an acquaintance to me", and you all happen to agree with them despite all of the evidence, scholarly use, UN acceptance of a genocide taking place, wide world reporting.
Please be careful with your word choices, I have not accused AcidSnow of directing anyone towards any particular viewpoint. Where do you see that in my post? I am merely stating the fact that they solicited responses, a practice considered highly inappropriate on this platform. It is interesting (and I am making this observation in response to your accusations) that all members AcidSnow solicited just happen to agree with their viewpoint.
It is considered highly inappropriate to recruit your friends, family members, or communities of people who agree with you, so that they can support your side of a debate in Wikipedia
Please refrain from WP:PERSONALATTACKS in future posts and do not put words in my mouth, I did not mention affiliation, I have stated the actions that AcidSnow had taken in getting views, namely asking for 'thought' on the subject, this is against good taste and policy on Wikipedia. I hope you reconsider and take what you've said back. Kzl55 (talk) 17:36, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Now, I have no interest in some long and drawn out argument and will just re-iterate my points from before and partly, where I feel it is adequate, indirectly point to why I think Kzl55 has not sufficiently convinced me that they're invalid:
(1) This page will mislead people into thinking what the Isaaq went through was somehow "special" among what other Somalis went through. Which is not remotely true. Ethnic Somali civilians of the Isaaq clan were mainly targeted because the violent dictatorial regime of the time associated them with the "Somali National Movement" (SNM) rebel militia which did, like all other Civil-War era rebel militias, have its "base" in a particular clan (in this case; the Isaaq clan) (see here). This is no different from how Majeerteens were brutalized because one of them lead a coup against Siad Barre or how Hawiyes were also brutalized by the state for various reasons like the formation of rebel militias among them. And the Isaaq are not at all the only groups who suffered what some may call a "genocide", "verging on genocide" or "genocide-like" under both state and non-state actors:
"In the case of the Rahanweyn people, there was a deliberate effort on the part of Barre and his USC successors to destroy that community - thus a potential genocide was also averted by the intervention." - link
"President Siad Barre reportedly promised that he would take Somalia to hell with him if he were driven from power. He was made good on that promise. In the last year of Siad Barre's rule and the two years immediately following his overthrow, a number of overlapping wars of extreme brutality unfolded with much of the violence direct at the uprooting of ethnic groups. Among them was the dispossession, massacre, and expulsion of the farming minorities of southern Somalia. The two river valleys of Jubba and Shebelle and the rainlands in between were inhabited by two minority Somali clans, the Digil and Rahanweyn cluster of Cushitic peoples distantly related to the Somalis including the Shebelle and Gabwing (also known as Gabweyn), and Somali Bantus. These people occupied the most valuable farmland in the country and as the economy shifted to irrigated schemes, merchants and government officials acquired land leases and dispossessed the minority farmers. The land grab reached its arbitrary and violent peak as the state imploded. Almost all surviving members of this community were refugees in Kenya by the mid-1990s and substantial numbers have been resettled in the United States. This is the most complete case of ethnic cleansing in the Horn." -link
"The events that took place in the 1991 time-frame encompass not only the clan cleansing that targeted "the" Darood but also the large-scale clan‐based brutalization of civilians. Needless to say, within a short period of time, about 400,000 mainly middle class urbanites, most of the Darood clan members, were chased out of Mogadishu and other towns of south and south central Somalia, their properties looted, their women raped and thousands of civilians killed, thus eroding not only the cosmopolitan nature of the city, but precipitating the total collapse of the state." - link (note that sees "clan-cleansing" as a better term for what Somalis did to each other, over "genocide")
"In other words, the Barre regime could be responsible for a genocide of the Isaaq and Majerteen clans if sufficient evidence to this effect exists, regardless of the fact that it may also have been seeking to quell civil unrest simultaneously."- link
It is truly unnecessary to keep this page as a result because of the way it will mislead readers and because it will lead to more of such clanistic pages popping up ("Darod Genocide", "Rahanweyn Genocide" et al.) which is indeed totally unnecessary as all of these atrocities Somali subgroups suffered at the hands of their state and each other (AlaskaLava is quite correct, by the way, that the Isaaq clan led SNM attacked innocent Somali civilians of other clans) can simply be mentioned HERE where they were originally designated spots to begin with. This page will mislead, fuel clan politics among Somalis and waste space.
(2) There is seemingly a bias on Kzl55's part here based on his editing history (shared by Acidsnow at the start of this page) where he displays obvious "Pro-Somaliland" views and an important component of many pro-Somaliland individuals' agenda is sowing discontent between Isaaq clan members and other Somalis by 1. Treating the Isaaq as a unique people within the Somali ethnic group 2. Focusing greatly on how they in particular suffered during times such as the heights of the civil war. This also serves in making the Isaaq in particular look like unique victims of the regime (and perhaps also other Somalis) which aids in discourse with foreigners when speaking on behalf of why "Somaliland" should be globally recognized as an independent state. This page, in my humble opinion, will most certainly serve as a piece of propaganda to such ends and, for those reasons as well as reasons the other editors have shared, will be a WP:PROPAGANDA breach as far as I'm concerned.
(3) Going back to the WP:NO-ORIGINAL-RESEARCH & WP:NEUTRAL-POINT-OF-VIEW breach accusations I made... It is indeed quite troubling that many of Kzl55's/the page creator's earlier sources don't even call this a genocide but instead; them stating the obvious which is that Isaaq clan members were attacked is being used to support the few sources (1, 7, 10 and 12) that do actually seem to consider this a "genocide" whilst sources that do not consider this a genocide (i.e. the US State Department) or that refrain from referring to it as such (many of the page creator's own sources) are ignored or this fact is not mentioned about them.
Why on Earth would this be done in any case that was not WP:ORIGINAL-RESEARCH or actually enjoyed WP:NEUTRAL-POINT-OF-VIEW? The author of the article would have simply shared the few sources that support the view and left it at that rather than, in an original research manner, try to back up the view of those few sources with other sources that merely state the Isaaq clan suffered atrocities, was targeted by the state and so on. This clearly points to an author who supports the "genocide" view rather than any opposing views or arguments (such as ones Soupforone and Acidsnow shared) that this was not in fact a "genocide" but was merely the work of a violent dictatorial regime assaulting a subset of its own people (the Somali people) the way it did with various other clans, regardless of the scope of the casualties, because it was reacting to what it saw as "rebellion".
The page is also picking a side on whether or not this was some sort of "special genocide" within Somalia (compared to what other clans suffered) rather than neutrally being about the disgusting atrocities Somalis of the Isaaq clan suffered whilst stating that this could be considered a genocide and is seen as such by certain sources but that it is not recognized as such by various sources for so and so reasons. But such a neutrally worded page wouldn't even be necessary (as I've stated before) as we already have a place for mentioning the atrocities individual Somali clans suffered under the regime during the rebellion.
___
So yes, for the reasons above and the various reasons shared by the other 3 editors; I am supporting the deletion of this page. We're also just going to go in circles by turning this into an argument against each other's points... My advice for Kzl55 would be to simply list why he thinks this page should remain (he's already done this enough, I'd say) and leave it at that. There's no point in flustering the staff with miles upon miles of text. Thank you, --Awale-Abdi (talk) 15:06, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
I am happy to take you advice, I too feel like we have been going in circles here. Kzl55 (talk) 18:02, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Response - You post contains major discrepancies verging on the misleading. I have answered all of the point you have raised in my previous response to you earlier and provided a comprehensive answer but you chose to ignore it and rehash the same baseless claims you have used. You even went to the troubles of falsely accusing me of making claims I have never made (see point 3 below, which I have actually answered, in full, in my previous response to you). It is very difficult to take your argument in WP:GOODFAITH when you are throwing false accusations, especially around a claim that you have made up entirely. I am sorry, but this is in bad taste.
Taking the issues you have raised one by one:
(1) Your claim is based on your opinion that "the page will mislead people. We are discussing a significant event here, the fact that Isaaq people were especially targeted as I have proven without a shadow of a doubt above. No one disputed that the Isaaq were not especially targeted, you are attempting to obfuscate their suffering by saying that 'other groups suffered as well'. This is not a valid claim. Perpetrators of terrible acts like massacres and genocides often target many groups of people, this is not a valid reason to group all of their victims under one header. You will find no claim in the article in question that the Somali State attacked the Isaaq alone. The African historian Lidwien Kapteijns clearly compares the attacks on Isaaq to attacks on other groups (like the one you mentioned in your post, the Majerteen):
Collective clan-based violence against civilians always represents a violation of human rights. However, when its goal is to exterminate and expel large numbers of people based on their group identity alone, it becomes clan cleansing. No one has suggested this term for the collective brutalization of the people of Mudug [read Majerteen]. However, for the Northwest [read Isaaq], this and even stronger terms (such as genocide) are regularly used. The scale and character of the collective clan-based violence committed against Isaaq civilians - who, although they were not the only civilians brutalized by the government, were especially targeted - suggest that this dimension of state-violence in the Northwest indeed amounts to clan cleansing.
Lidwien Kapteijns in her academic discussion of the matter answers that specific point that you have raised directly. Yes, other people have suffered, but the specific targeting of Isaaqas a group, and the sheer scale and magnitude of their suffering allows for the use of term genocide in the case ofIsaaq, and the term is in fact regularly used in academic circles with reference to the Isaaq as a group. Please note that she did not say the same about the case of Majerteen, she describes their tragedy as brutalization whereas she clearly states terms like clan cleansing and genocide for the case of Isaaq.
Your quote:
"In the case of the Rahanweyn people, there was a deliberate effort on the part of Barre and his USC successors to destroy that community - thus a potential genocide was also averted by the intervention."
Is not entirely relevant to this discussion, the USC was a rebel group that was an actor in the post Siad Barre period. Let us not conflate two distinct groups, one being the Somali State and the other being a rebel group. I am not discussing whether that particular groups (Rahanweyn) had suffered or not, this is an entirely seperate discussion. We are discussing the case for Isaaq and specifically Isaaq Genocide.
I find the contradictions in your opposition to the use of qualifiers very interesting. In your previous post, you objected to my reference using the phrase 'bordered' (your point 6) in reference to the Isaaq Genocide, likewise you objected to the use of the word 'like' in my reference "repression of the Isaaq has escalated into something like genocide", and here you are using a quote that clearly states what you were objecting to namely: "thus a potential genocide was also averted by the intervention." I note the contradition in your stance in that regard, and the fact that you completely disregarded my sources that explicitly mention genocide with no qualification (including the ones you have accepted yourself in your previous post, namely points 1,7,10 and 12)
You second quote is not relevant at all. I am not discussing (let alone disputing) if other groups have suffered under a brutal dictatorship of Siad Barre. I am discussion the subject of Isaaq Genocide. If you feel that this specific group suffered what amounts to genocide then you might want to gather references and start an article for them. As for your source itself, allow me to quote what the scholar (that you referenced) said on the subject of Isaaq Genocide:
Following its defeat by Ethiopia in 1978, the Somali government of Siad Barre became discredited. The Somali National Movement headed armed opposition, with core support among the Isaaq clan family of north-west Somalia. In May 1988 the SNM nearly captured Hargaisa, the main city of the north-west, and another town, Burao. Siad Barre responded by reportedly declaring that the Isaaq should be wiped out. His son-in-law and commander of the operation, Gen. Mohamed Said Hersi Morgan, reportedly answered that the order couldn't be fulfilled because there were too many of them to kill. This is the closest case of attempted extermination of a group in north-east Africa, thwarted by the intrinsic difficulty of carrying out such a task when faced with fierced armed resistance and the ability of the population to flee across a nearby border.
The city of Hargaisa was destroyed [second largest city in Somalia] in the government's counter-attack. (No other city in contemporary Africa has suffered comparable destruction.) Tens of thousands of people were killed. Virtually the entire populations of Hargaisa and other towns fled the country. The livelihoods of the people of north-west Somalia were all but destroyed by looting, the collapse of markets, the destruction of infrastructure, and the dissemination of landmines which meant that camel herds were unable to move safely to many areas of pasture.
Testimonies from the war are extraordinarily harrowing, comparable in the intensity of fear and violance to the depths of the Rwanda genocide.[7].
— Donald Bloxham, A. Dirk Moses, The Oxford Handbook of Genocide Studies
I hope you are satisfied with this source, seeing as you have used it yourself. It illustrates the point that I am making, namely that the Isaaq have suffered "attempted extermination" as a group.
Your third quote comes from a seminar notes, I have expressed my objection to its inclusion in a discussion of academic sources before. I hope I have made that clear. Nevertheless allow me to quote this very source that you have used, after describing the attack on the Majerteen, the author says::
"This was the first "war against his people" launched by Siyad Barre, years before the near annihilation of the Isaaq in the North, and the first time in modern Somali history when the state intervened in the bush not to quell inter-clan warfare but to fuel it."
Please note that this author's (that you are quoting) explicit mention of 'near annihilation of the Isaaq in the North' [read genocide], the author (again, I remind you of quoting them) did not use similar language in describing the attack on Majerteen. This is your own source that you brought into this discussion, now with that in mind, would it satisfy you if the article is titled 'the near annihilation of the Isaaq' as opposed to Isaaq Genocide?
Your fourth quote is from a student article, again I have clearly stated (at some length) why I object to the use of these sources in this very important discussion. Furthermore, I highlight that your source supports my argument in that:
They mention the mass grave sites which the Peruvian Forensic Anthropology team have been excavating of Isaaq victims (the only group mentioned in the discussion of excavation.)
They mention the sheer magnitude of this tragedy very clearly "up to 100,000 people are estimated to have lost their lives in the greater Hargeisa area [read Isaaq] as a result of responsive summary executions and aerial bombardments carried out by Barre troops" (again they do not mention any of that for other cases you bring up, like the Majerteen.
The findings of that Peruvian Forensic Anthropology in that particular area (Gabiley) of the bodies of at least 20 young Isaaq men who 'had been taken to a hill ridge outside of the town and executed on orders of a notoriously sadistic Barre colonel, Yusuf Abdi Ali (nicknamed "Tukeh")' just for suspicion of their membership of SNM.
I just do not understand how this source supports your argument. I have pointed some mistakes in your source above, namely that it lists Majerteen as a separate group Siad Barre. This is factually incorrect. Please see my reply above.
And finally, as you accepted, the author agrees that the Barre regime could be responsible for a genocide of the Isaaq and Majeerteen. I emphasise they clearly state the reasons behind thier acceptance of Isaaq Genocide in terms of the death toll and scale of calamity, mass graves etc, but did not discuss why they included the Majeerteen or the level to which the government brutalised them.
All of this leads me to a very important question. Why are you obsessed with not allowing other groups (provided they have a reasonably solid claim backed by clear evidence) to have their articles? I think this stance is unreasonable and unproductive for this platform. Anyone with notable, verifiable, and neutral content (on any subject) should be allowed a space to share and discuss their subject, this is what Wikipedia is for.
(2)::You take us into further digressions by mentioning unrelated topics, like alleged SNM attacks, or my edit history (I have said earlier that I am happy to discuss, in detail if you like, any edit I have made, but not on this talk page). This discussion is about Isaaq Genocide, please stay on topic.
(3) Are you honestly going to argue that the article is not valid because: "the page creator's earlier sources don't even call this a genocide"?
I responded to this bizarre claim above. You seem to be implying that I have claimed that 'all' of my sources explicitly use the term 'genocide', I have made no such claim. In fact, if you read my post, right above my citations you will see that I stated my intentions of using these sources very clearly:
To that point please allow me to quote from various official and academic sources to illustrate my point and prove the article is notable, neutral WP:NPOV, verifiable WP:V and indeed not WP:NOR and thus abides by the principal core content policies of Wikipedia. I hope this will comprehensively clear the issue.
My main concern in that post (as clearly stated) was to illustrate the notability, neutrality and verifiability aspects of the article itself to warrant its existence, rather than focusing solely on the usage of the term 'genocide'. No where did I claim that all of sourcing will focus on genocide, please provide a quote next time you make this claim (this is the second time you do so, I have already answered that point above but you just ignored it). Furthermore, you continue to ignore the explicit use of the term 'genocide' I have provided here, herehere or here.
I am hoping this ends this song and dance. I am fine with you ignoring my rebuttals but please do not make up things I have never claimed and dress up an argument around them. If any point I have made above is not clear I am happy to discuss further in detail. This article is of a very important subject historically, politically and culturally as agreed on by neutral academic scholars, United Nation reports, Human Rights Watch reports, world wide coverage both in print and in film, as well as corroborated by an intonational forensic anthropology teams, it is also supported by well known genocide scholars Israel Charny (executive director of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem) and legal director of the Center for Justice and Accountability Kathy Roberts among many others. The request for deletion is baseless as clearly demonstrated, and thus it should stay. Keep. Kzl55 (talk) 18:16, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Note - this page doesn't use the usual AFD template, and it seems that the article is missing from the AfD log. As a result, only people watching the article or individually informed about it are likely to have seen it. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:26, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
AGAINST - This page should be kept , because it has all the criteria of a good valid wikipedia page see [8]
and what a bout the Mohammad Ali Samatar lawsuit which was before his death and which is a big source for this page ,and should be used in this page [9][10][11][12][13]
and to the Cordless Larrytalk if you thought that acidsnow by calling for the helps of other editors like AlaskaLava [14] and that resulting in somehow 3 editors against 1 then you are wrong because a valid sourced page should not be deleted by the number of editors against it but by if it doesn't have the criteria or the source material .Bysomalilander (talk) 19:20, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
This isn't a deletion discussion because AcidSnow didn't start the AfD properly, Bysomalilander, so none of these "votes" count towards anything. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:07, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
No problem, Bysomalilander. The place to report any suggestion of canvassing would be WP:AN/I rather than here. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:58, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
The case to keep the article
Extended content
This article describes a very important subject to the region, what the users above have attempted was obfuscation the subject with references to other atrocities that the Siad Barre regime may have committed, making the baseless assumption that the perpetrator of human rights violations such as massacres and genocide would only target a single group, (the Nazis for instance persecuted both the Jews, and Roma people, one does not negate the other or make it less important) or that I ever made the claim that only a single group, namely the Isaaq, suffered under that regime. Or that somehow the suffering of Isaaq negates possible crimes committed against other groups. That is all false. What I have stated however, and this is backed up by multitude of distinguished authorities on African history and the vast majority of scholarship consensus in addition to official reports by the United Nations, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and the World Bank among others that the Isaaq suffered a targeted, sustained, state-sponsered operation with the aim of total obliteration and genocide. To that end I have supported my argument with neutral sources and included some examples of international coverage. The article is thus notable, verifiable and neutral.
I will answer one of the most recurring points of contention, I believe this is the base for the case the above users are making. That Isaaq were not especially targeted and/or that: "In addition, very few individuals classify these events as a whole as a genocide, let alone the Isaaq clan solely."
This is absolutely false. The classification of this particular campaign against the Isaaq in both official reports and scholarship is very clear. Allow me to share a limited sample of the explicit use of the word genocide in reference to the Isaaq from reputable neutral and verifiable sources including the United Nations' report:
(1) Report commissioned by the United Nations, comprised of the findings of a human rights investigator recruited by the United Nations to find out if crimes of international jurisdiction (i.e. war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide had been perpetrated in Somaliland.
Based on the totality of evidence collected in Somaliland and elsewhere both during and after his mission, the consultant firmly believes that the crime of genocide was conceived, planned and perpetrated by the Somali Government against the Isaaq people of northern Somalia between 1987 and 1989. [15]
And also:
A keen study of the conduct of the Somali army during the war in the north, particularly from May 1988, clearly shows that the Siad Barre government was engaged in systematic campaign of elimination against the Isaaq people. [16]
(2) In Civil Wars in Africa: Roots and Resolution, the author discusses the genocidal proportions of the campaign against Isaaq, please note that this author also mentions the heavy-handed approach of the government against the Majerteen, yet never called it genocide, or genocidal:
After failing in an anti-Siyad (Siad Barre) coup attempt in 1978, Colonel Abdullahi Yusuf fled to Ethiopia, where he established the Somali Salvation Democratic Front (SSDF). The front attracted support mostly from his subclan of the Majerteen clan (another part of the Darod clan-family that spawned Siyad). The SSDF, following a burst of cross-border activities, atrophied as a result of heavy reliance on foreign funding from Libya, Abdullahi Yusuf's dictatorial leadership, and Siyad's ability to appease many of the Majerteen as fellow cousins within the Darod clan-family. Eventually, with funds and clan appeals, he was able to entice the bulk of SSDF fighters to return from Ethiopia and participate in his genocidal wars against the Isaq in the north and later against the Hawiye in the South, including Mogadisho. [17]
(3a)Lidwien Kapteijns, the African historian focusing on Somalia and translator of historical and cultural Somali texts, compares the Isaaq case against the case of other groups like the Majerteen:
Collective clan-based violence against civilians always represents a violation of human rights. However, when its goal is to exterminate and expel large numbers of people based on their group identity alone, it becomes clan cleansing. '''No one''' has suggested this term for the collective brutalization of the people of Mudug [read Majerteen]. However, for the Northwest [read Isaaq], '''this and even stronger terms (such as genocide) are regularly used'''. The scale and character of the collective clan-based violence committed against Isaaq civilians - who, although they were not the only civilians brutalized by the government, '''were especially targeted''' - suggest that this dimension of state-violence in the Northwest indeed amounts to clan cleansing.
(3b) In Contested States in World Politics, the author makes a similar point:
Popular discontent with Barre's dictatorship had become widespread by the late 1970s, most acutely so in the North. The people in the region were subjected to blatant economic deprivation (receiving under 7 per cent of nationally disbursed development assistance), severe restrictions on trade and growing centralization of administrative functions in Mogadishu. Notherners were moreover targeted for harsh repression by government forces, in particular the politically influential Isaaq clan from whose ranks the SNM rebel movement drew most of its recruits. Although the barre government had also targeted other resistance groups and their followers during the period of insurgency, 'no other Somali community faced such sustained and intense state-sponsored violence' as the people of former British Somaliland [read Isaaq].
The deliberate, state-sponsored killing and population displacement that accompanied Somali military operations in the North have been depicted by the government of Somaliland and by human rights bodies as acts of ethnic cleansing, genocide and war crimes. [18]
(3c) In Making and Unmaking Nations: The Origins and Dynamics of Genocide in Contemporary Africa, the author in discussing the campaign against Isaaqs (in addition to other groups mentioned in this discussion like the Majerteen), but only states the systematic nature of campaign against the Isaaq only (perhaps, as they suggested, due to it being well documented, unlike other cases):
The Somali cases qualify as examples of mass categorical violence. The violence was group-selective (first Majerteen, then Isaak, then Hawiye and Ogaden). Though not well documented for all groups, the violence was clearly of a large and systematic scale against the Isaak. The Isaak population was labeled as the enemy. The logic of violence was primarily coercive: The main purposes were to weaken support for the rebellion. Africa Watch concluded that the policy [against the Isaaq] was "the outcome of a specific conception of how the war against the insurgents should be fought," and the logic was to "punish civilians for their presumed support for the SNM attacks and to discourage them from further assistance." [19]
And:
Throughout the mid-1980s, in particular following SNM attacks, Somali [state] forces tended to target Isaaks collectively through assassinations, arrests, and destroying their means of survival - livestock, homes and water. Some of the worst violence occurred after significant SNM attacks on large cities in the north in May 1988, as the Barre regime collectively targeted Isaaks through indiscriminate aerial bombings; house-to-house searches; the destruction of wells, livestock and shelter; and executions. A detailed report by Africa Watch estimated 50,000 to 60,000 civilian deaths over a nineteen-month period starting in May 1988. [20]
(3d) In The History of Somalia:
Throughout the early 1980s, Barre's forces launched a program of systematic destruction of the Isaaqs, periodically practicing genocidal attacks against unarmed Isaaq villages. [21]
And:
By the end of 1988, the north as a whole faced the danger of total annihilation. One estimate of the number of deaths within a month totalled about 50,000 with about half a million refugees scattered across Somalia.
The magnitude of the devastation and deaths the government forces left in their wake made the SNM change its goal from a struggle to bring about a change in government to an unwavering fight to liberate the Isaaqs from a genocidal campaign of destruction. [22]
Note that as the author also discussed the Majerteen, they never used language as strong (as genocide) as they did in the case of Isaaq:
The major actors in the SSDF remained political activists from the northeastern Majerteens, a subclan of the Darod. Back then after the 1978 coup, Barre had employed a mixture of of subterfuge, violence, and deplomacy to persuade the other Darod subgroups against the Majerteens, and at a point even to break up the cohesion within the SSDF, luring their fighters back into Somalia. Then with the appropriate doses of rewards, Barre attempted to set Majerteen militia up against the Isaaq-led rebellion in the northwest. [23]
(4) In Crisis Management and the Politics of Reconciliation in Somalia:
At a later date, those same refugees [from Ethiopia] were given military training and were recruited as soldiers by the Barre regime. The trained refugees took part in the military dictator's policies of extermination and genocide of the northern population [read Isaaq] as well as the systematic destruction of its main cities. The indiscriminate bombardment and artillery shelling caused massive destruction, turning the cities to ghost towns. [24]
(5) In The Weekly Review, Issues 815-827 reported:
Founded in 1981, the SNM launched the first major uprising against Barre and kept up a steady bush war at a time when the Ogadeni comprised the bulk of Barre's armed forces, which have been accused of committing genocide in northern Somalia in attempts to decimate the Issaaq rebellion. [25]
(6) In Genocides by the Oppressed: Subaltern Genocide in Theory and Practice, a genocide scholar from the Department of History at North Carolina State University writes:
The assumption that genocide's victims belong to a less powerful group also needs to be destabilized. Is it not curious that minorities such as the Isaaq in Somalia, Tutsi in Rwanda, or Jews in Nazi Germany even when they were objectively rather subdued and politically marginalized, still seemed so threatening to genocidal perpetrators that exterminating them seemed the only "solution"? Why was it it not sufficient simply to marginalize them? why did the perpetrators feel a need to go to elaborate lengths to "send messages" to the victims - messages, that is, of humiliation? Does a simple scapegoat explanation suffice? [26]
And about Siad Barre as a genocidal perpetrator:
As noted above, many genocidal perpetrators have ended up worse off than they were prior to the genocide. To the outside observer, viewed through a lens of self-interest, genocide - apart from being morally repugnant - hardly seems worth the effort. Hitler brought ruin not only upon the the world, but upon his own followers and himself. He led an entire society into the abyss, as if this had been his aim. Many Hutu génociddaires live miserable lives today. Somalian dictator Siad Barre died in exile - hated, not venerated, in his own country.[27]
(7) In: Charles H. Cutter's Africa, 2005:
As the civil war began, Siad Barre focused his wrath (and American-supported military might) against his Northern opposition [read Isaaq]. Hargeisa, Somalia's second city and the former capital of British Somaliland was bombed, strafed and rocketed. Some 50,000 people are believed to have lost their lives there as a result of summary executions, aerial bombardments and ground attacks. The city itself was destroyed. Streams of refugees fleeing the devastation were not spared by government planes. The term "genocide" came to be used more and more frequently by human rights observers. [28]
(8) In Africa Special Report: Bulletin of the Institute of African American Relations:
But it was the confrontation with the Somali National Movement (SNM), led by the Isaak, the largest clan in the north, that revealed the depths which Barre and his relative-generals were prepared to plumb. The word genocide came justly to be used by international human rights observers. [29]
(9) In The Oxford Handbook of Genocide Studies:
Siad Barre responded by reportedly declaring that the Isaaq should be wiped out. His son-in-law and commander of the operation, Gen. Mohamed Said Hersi Morgan, reportedly answered that the order couldn't be fulfilled because there were too many of them to kill. This is the closest case of attempted extermination of a group in north-east Africa, thwarted by the intrinsic difficulty of carrying out such a task when faced with fierced armed resistance and the ability of the population to flee across a nearby border.
The city of Hargaisa was destroyed [second largest city in Somalia] in the government's counter-attack. (No other city in contemporary Africa has suffered comparable destruction.) Tens of thousands of people were killed. Virtually the entire populations of Hargaisa and other towns fled the country. The livelihoods of the people of north-west Somalia were all but destroyed by looting, the collapse of markets, the destruction of infrastructure, and the dissemination of landmines which meant that camel herds were unable to move safely to many areas of pasture.
Testimonies from the war are extraordinarily harrowing, comparable in the intensity of fear and violence to the depths of the Rwanda genocide.[30]
(10) In the Encyclopedia of Genocide:
Edited by genocide scholar Israel Charny (executive director of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem ), the only named group from Somalia in two published tables in that book are the Isaaq.
First table is titled "Minorities Victimized by Discrimination, Ethnic Warfare, Repression, and Genocide 1980-1997" only lists the Isaaqs from Somalia. In fact, they are one of only three named groups from Africa that are designated 'Geno/Pol' in that table. The other two groups designated 'Geno/Pol' in that table are the Tutsi of Rwanda for the period of 1993-1994 (you can read on Rwandan genocide here, and from the Sudan (now South Sudan) the Dinka, Nuba and Shilluk.
The description of Geno/Pol at the bottom of the table states (emphasis mine):
Geno/Pol: The group was the target of deliberate, sustained policies aimed at its collective destruction. (p.270)
The second table which covers earlier genocides than 1980 (that the previous table covered), under the heading "Indigenous Populations, Genocide of" and is titled "Some Cases of Genocides of indigenous Peoples", again has only one group mentioned from Somalia, the Isaaq. (p.350)
(11) In Genocide Watch:
For the purposes of this Mass Atrocities Alert, Genocide Watch sees the following warning signs of genocide and atrocities being committed against the civilian population of Somalia:
Prior unpunished genocidal massacres, such as those perpetrated by the Barre regime, primarily against the Isaaq clan, in the late 1980s. Source
(12) In Somaliland: The Anatomy of Secession
Defeat in battle, followed by attempted assassinations, persuaded President Siad Barre to embark on a defensive course of ethnic nepotism, and an aggressive course of near genocide towards the main northern clan group - the Isaaq. [31]
(13) In Understanding Statebuilding: Traditional Governance and the Modern State in Somaliland:
The Somaliland identity is not necessarily centred on people saying 'I am a Somalilander.' Instead, it is the identity of the political entity itself. From the beginning the Somaliland identity has highlighted its separateness from the south. It has invoked the brutality of the Barre regime and the genocidal campaign he waged in the north [against Isaaq]. Somalilanders have also been described as more refined than other Somalis based on the British colonial experience as opposed to the Italian experience in the south. [32]
(14) In Somaliland 1991: Report and Reference:
The base criminality of having laid over one-million unmarked mines, booby traps and other lethal devices in the Northern Region, was only matched by the gravity of Siad Barre's pursuit of a policy of genocide towards the Issak group of clans in the North. [33]
(15) In Somalia - The Untold Story: The War Through the Eyes of Somali Women
In May 1988 the SNM attacked and briefly captured Burao and Hargeisa, the two main towns in the north west. Siad Barre's response was genocidal: days of aerial and ground bombardment of both towns by the Somali Armed forces, backed up by South African mercenary pilots; the round-up and summary execution of hundreds of civilians; the complete destruction of the towns' infrastructure; and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people.
By the time the bombardment had ended the city of Hargeisa was in ruins and thousands were dead. Unknown numbers of people had been massacred and buried in mass graves; more than half a million people had fled south and to the border. Anti-personnel mines were planted in streets, houses and livestock thoroughfares to kill, maim and deter return. Some 50,000 [Isaaq] civilians were estimated to have been killed between May 1988 and March 1989. (Amnesty International & CIIR/ICD 1999). [34]
(16) In Conflicts and conflict resolution in Middle Eastern societies--between tradition and modernity:
By 1988, the Siad Barre regime waged a war against the Isaaq, which acquired genocidal proportions. [35]
(17) In Culture and Customs of Somalia:
The regime's response was swift and brutal; the plan followed was nothing less than a genocide. [36]
And also:
Those morbid words became a reality in the north [read Isaaq], as the army directed its fire power against the civilian populations. Jet fighters would take off from Hargeisa airport and drop their deadly cargo a few miles away in downtown Hargeisa.Artillery units positioned on the ridges that surround the city would train their sights on the residential quarters of the city and fire round after round of shells. Then soldiers would go door to door to physically eliminate any remaining residents and to loot homes. In one month, Hargeisa and Burao were reduced to rubble and became ghost towns. [37]
(18) In Annihilating Difference: The Anthropology of Genocide:
In the table 3.1 titled: Genocides of Indigenous Peoples in the Twentieth Century, the only group to be named from Somalia are the Isaaq with the dates 1988-1989. [38]
Many of these groups are outnumbered and outgunned by the state, so they resort to guerrilla tactics or civil disobedience. The peoples of West Papua and other areas claimed by Indonesia have been massacred and subjected to severe abuse at the hands of the Indonesian military. The Isaaks of northern Somalia were treated brutally by Somali government forces, who not only bombed and shot them but also poisoned their wells and utilized a scorched-earth policy to destroy their resource base. Similar kinds of tactics were used by the Germans against the Hereros in Namibia between 1904 and 1907... Over the past thirty years, tens of thousands of Quiche Maya and other Guatemalan Indians were killed, their villages destroyed and their crops burned by the Guatemalan military... [38]
(19) In Gendercide and genocide:
Survivors of genocide, that is, people belonging to the group targeted for genocide. In Somalia this was the Issaq tribe, in Rwanda the Tutsi, in Burundi also the Hutu. The group of survivors consists of two parts, namely those who survived because they were not in the country when the genocide happened -some of them returned after the genocide- and those who survived ongoing onslaught inside the country.[39]
(20) In Somalia 1991-1993: Civil War, Famine Alert and UN "Military Humanitarian" Intervention (this source despite stating accusations of genocide against Siad Barre, does not mention Isaaq but it was added as it was the successor government, according to the author, that made the accusations):
While observers predicted an escalation of tensions between the two clans, on October 23 the Somalian government accused the forces loyal to Siad Barre of destroying the country and committing acts of genocide. [40]
(21) In Genocide, War Crimes and the West:
But this [in reference to Isaaq Genocide] was a massacre that took place in obscurity - far from television cameras, since the regime refused to allow reporters into the region. Even the international Red Cross was denied the right to bring food and medicine to the civilian population (Brittain, 1988; see also Mather, 1988). The survivors of these genocidal strategies claim today that only the courage of the SNM fighters saved them from outright extermination. [41]
[In reference to British-made Hawker Hunter fighter aircraft Siad Barre obtained from Kuwait]:
Piloted by white Rhodesians and South Africans, these same fighter aircraft would rain death upon [Isaaq] refugees fleeing a genocidal campaign in the north in 1988. [41]
Under the heading 'The destruction of the North' [read Isaaq], and in discussing the situation pertaining to Isaaq:
By 1988, the regime had committed a well-documented and genocidal 'ethnic cleansing' of large areas of Somalia, though this was a term that would gain currency in the media only later.[41]
Further elaboration on strafing of Isaaq refugees mentioned:
In two months, from May to July 1988, between 50,000 and 100,000 people were massacred by the regime's forces. By then, any surviving urban Isaaks - that is to say, hundreds of thousands of members of the main northern clan community - had fled across the border into Ethiopia. They were pursued along the way by British-made fighter-bombers piloted by mercenary South African and ex-Rhodesian pilots, paid $2,000 per sortie (see Simmons, 1989; House of Representatives, 1988).
The insurgents, with the help of an open rebellion by a northern Somali population aggrieved by years of massacres, torture, ill-treatment, economic plunder, and social neglect rapidly took control of the main cities and most of the country side.
Ideologically, the SNM was a Western-leaning movement and 'one of the most democratic movements in the Horn of Africa'.[41]
(22) In After Independence: Making and Protecting the Nation in Postcolonial and Postcommunist States:
The authoritarianism of the Siad regime alienated the elites of increasingly marginalized clan groupings, and defeat in the Ogaadeen War unleashed a variety of clan-based pressures. The extended civil war of the 1980s and the 1990s, most notably the Siad regime's unleashing of what virtually constituted a policy of genocide against northern clans [read Isaaq], was particularly destructive for the future of pan-Somali nationalism. [42]
(23) In Final Solutions: Mass Killing and Genocide in the 20th Century:
The only case of a targeted collective punishment of a named group from Somalia recorded in 'Counter-guerrilla Mass Killings in the Twentieth Century' table, under the 'ethnic motives' column is the case of Isaaq, no other group is named from Somalia. [43]
(24) In War Destroys, Peace Nurtures: Reconciliation And Development In Somalia:
Even before the civil war that started in 1988, the Siyad Barre regime had been committing human rights abuses such as torture, rape, detentions, mass arrests, restriction of movement, confiscation or destruction of property, and summary executions against the Isaaq. However, the worst crime (the genocide) occurred during the months of June, July, and August of 1988, during heavy fighting in the main towns of Hargeisa and Burao between the forces of Siyad and the opposing liberation movement, the Somali National Movement. [44]
And:
Peter Kieseker, a spokesman for Community Aid Abroad describing government policies in the region, commented, "Genocide is the only word for it. It is estimated that about 60,000 persons were killed in this genocide, more than 10,000 of whom are believed to have been buried in mass graves by government authorities. (Alison Whyte "Human Crisis that Has Poisoned a Nation" in The Independent. February 13, 1989.)
And:
The Observer of Sunday 3 July 1988, wrote:
Thousands of Somali refugees are fleeing into neighbouring Ethiopia from a massacre in the north of the country... The refugees are from the northern provincial capital of Hargeisa, where according to Amnesty International and other outside agencies, Somali government troops have been carrying out a systematic massacre of the population. [Somali artillery and bombing is reducing Hargeisa] to rubble. A French technician, M. Jean Metenier estimated that 1,000 people had been killed in Hargeisa alone and said he saw at least 150 bodies in the street. Rebel estimates put the number killed as 5,000. [44]
Also:
The first paper in section three sets out to prove use of genocide [in the case of Isaaq]. Statistics, sites, dates and events are listed including references to many mass graves. [44]
And:
In part, he sought to enter into a peace treaty with Ethiopia in order to reduce Ethiopian assistance to the SNM. Second, he launched a full-scale and all out military attack on the Isaaq/SNM territories. Finally, he invoked the highest level of oppression against civilians to deter the Isaaq clan from supporting the SNM. [44]
(25) In Me Against My Brother: At War in Somalia, Sudan and Rwanda:
Far from feeling any remorse [about the campaign against the Isaaq], President Barre was beside himself with joy at his "triumph." According to one former Somali official who paid a visit: "I have never seen Barre so relaxed and happy throughout my long association with him. He did not look like a president who had just destroyed his second capital, causing so much suffering and anguish. He simply saw himself as a Darod [clan] chief who had totally annihilated an enemy clan." [45]
And:
"Barre's methods altered the traditional laws -and limits- of war. He encouraged soldiers to loot and sell freely what they could steal, setting in motion a strategy of banditry - until then little known in Somali conflicts except during the reign of the Mad Mullah - that was later replicated by roaming militias. [46]
(26) In Warqaddii Geerida (Dad-qalkii Hargeysa):
They [forensic anthropology team] will look for bindings, close-range headshot wounds and other signs of systemic killing, said Baraybar [Director of the Peruvian Forensic Anthropology Team (EPAF)], who has worked on probes in Haiti, Bosnia and elsewhere. Evidence that victims hailed from the same clan could indicate genocide, rather than mass-murder. [47]
And with reference to US court precedent against the prime minister of Siad Barre:
Not all perpetrators have escaped justice. In 2012, seven Somali victims secured $21 million judgment against Mohamed Ali Samantar, a Barre-era prime minister, for planning the torture and killing of Isaaq clansmen, in a US court. [48]
(27) The Washington Post (1990):
In Somalia, the Isaaq clan is the target of government genocide. The Isaaq-based Somali National Movement (SNM), an insurgency group headquartered in Ethiopia for years, invaded Somalia in mid-1988 and now controls a large part of the north.[49]
(28) In discussing contemporary forms of extermination in the book Nomadic Peoples and Human Rights, Jérémie Gilbert states severe criminal attacks on nomadic societies in relation to the adoption of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in 1948:
From 1948 to the present, several nomadic communities have been the victims of severe criminal attacks which have put their survival in jeopardy. [.. after discussing West Papua and the killing of 150,000 hunter-gatherers]. The Isaaks of Somalia found themselves trapped in a similar situation involving a conflict between pro-independence and government forces the 1980s. An estimated 50,000 to 60,999 people, the majority of them Isaaks, died between 1988 and early 1990. As Hitchcock noted: "[C]amel and goat-keeping pastoral nomads were victimized by the Somalia government due to the suspicion they were providing economic support to the insurgents." [50]
(29) In Genocide in the Twentieth Century: Critical Essays and Eyewitness Accounts, the subject of Isaaq and the campaign against them is discussed under the header 'Physical and Cultural Genocide of indigenous Peoples', the only group from Somalia discussed:
"The oral testimonies presented here have been chosen to illustrate the types of information available on genocides of various indigenous peoples. The accounts are drawn from Guatemala, Somalia [in the case for Isaak as quoted below] and Zimbabwe." [51]
Please also read:
...Fighting in northern Somalia, members of the Isaak clan disappeared, some of the hands of the Somalia National Security Service and paramilitary forces whose task was to root out dissent. An estimated 50,000 to 60,000 people, the majority of them Isaaks, died during the 1980s, most of them in the period between 1988 and early 1990. Civilians were targeted along with suspected insurgents. The Somalia government forces carried out sweeps of both urban and rural areas, and both massacres and extra judicial executions occurred. [52]
Below are some examples of neutral, non-Somali eye-witness accounts and reports, they are all very reputable, including the venerable I. M. Lewis the premier professor of Somali studies:
(30) In Conflict and the Refugee Experience: Flight, Exile, and Repatriation in the Horn of Africa:
the Somali Armed Forces appear to have engaged in a widespread, systematic and extremely violent assault on the unarmed civilian Isaaq population of northern Somalia in places where and at time when neither resistance to these actions nor danger to the Somali Armed forces was present. The Somali Armed forces conducted what appears to be a systematic pattern of attacks against unarmed, civilian Isaaq villages, watering points and grazing areas of northern Somalia ... In an additional pattern of systematic, organised, and sustained Somali Armed Forces actions in Berbera, which has not been the object of an SNM attack or the scene of a conflict, at least five hundred, and perhaps many more Isaaq men were systematically rounded up and murdered, mainly by having their throats cut, and then buried in mass graves ..., apparently solely because they were Isaaq ... (Gersony 1989, 60-61).
(31) In Eritrea and Ethiopia: From Conflict to Cooperation:
The shocking destruction of Hargeisa and Burao (Somalia's second and third largest cities,) for example does not seem to correspond to any rational political/military objective. Had Siad planned to win and turn Hargeisa into an Ogadeni settler-city for instance, he would definitely have needed houses to shelter them instead of the horrendous rubbles confronting us today. Had he felt unable to win the war militarily, then he surely would have liked to strike out a compromise with Isaaq leaders and elders. Saving most of the cities would have been necessary as a matter of expediency.
Most evidence point to the Siad military machine utilizing massive violence as an instrument of total destruction [against the Isaaq in this case]: not as means to a carefully thought-out political end, but as an end in itself. As Professor I.M. Lewis, the leading foreign scholar on Somali studies observed: "The North, as I saw when I last visited it in 1985, began to look and feel like a colony under a foreign military tyranny." [53]
(32) In The New Africa: Dispatches from a Changing Continent:
In 1981, opponents primarily of the northern Isaak clan formed the Somali National Movement (SNM). The SNM operated out of Ethiopia until Somalia and Ethiopia signed a peace pact in May 1988, requiring each country to expel rebels of the other. The following month, members of the SNM fought their way into several key northern Somali cities, including Burao and Hargeisa, killing a number of senior government officials. In reprisal, Barre sent his son-in-law, General Mohamed Siad Hersi (known as Morgan), to bomb Hargeisa without restraint. In the three month battle of Hargeisa, an estimated 40,000 people were killed and some 400,000 people in the area fled to Ethiopia. More than 70 percent of the buildings in Hargeisa were destroyed. Refugees I interviewed who had fled to Ethiopia from Hargeisa told of planes intentionally bombing and shooting civilians in the streets.
The scope of the destruction was still evident when Betty and I went there early 1993. I had never seen such devastation. [54]
I will stop here.
As you can see the list is exhaustive, the scholarly consensus is clear. There are so many more sources that deal with the subject with such clarity, I am happy to add more. I hope the above clarifies that the bizarre claim that "very few individuals classify these events as a whole as a genocide" or that 'what happened to the Isaaq is not unique enough to warrant a page' or "this is original research" or any of the, frankly absurd, claims we saw in this discussion are well and truly false.
The deletion process clearly states:
Generally speaking, notable subjects will be those for which sufficient sourcing is available
And thus abides by the principal core content policies of Wikipedia.
Further to this, the case against the article has employed highly inappropriate practices including vandalism in their deletion of this article (via redirection) see here and WP:CANVAS as highlighted By initiator of the request soliciting of both editor AlaskaLava [here] and
editor Soupforone [here], with editor Awale Abdi self-identifying as an acquaintance. All of the users that were solicited, just happened to support editor AcidSnow.
I hope this will comprehensively clear the issue.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kzl55 (talk • contribs) 14:18, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
The article is not currently nominated for deletion, Kzl55. I have collapsed your wall of text. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:40, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
I see, my post was in defence of the article with reputable scholarly sourcing. Many thanks for your help.Kzl55 (talk) 18:15, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Speaking of which, Kzl55, could you complete the citations, such as Møller, which are incomplete? Cordless Larry (talk) 19:09, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Will do, I am sorry about that, it was my first use of the platform so did not know how to insert citation fully on Wikipedia. If there is one positive thing to have come out of this discussion, I now know how to fully cite to specific page-links on Wikipedia. I plan on replacing all the text citations with links for easier viewing. If you have any other input pease share it would be appreciated. Kzl55 (talk) 19:31, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
@Kzl55:, @Cordless Larry:, others: I have not reviewed the wall of text above. For now, I suggest the following to the editors active on this article...
Quote: This article theorizes both the causes and the consequences of the state-sponsored genocidal campaigns leveled at the Isaaq clan-group, which can be considered as a case of a “forgotten genocide.”[1]
Quote: Barre shrewdly channeled the subsequent frustration and anger into an internal quasi-genocide directed against scapegoat clans such as the Isaaq.[2]
Quote: "...escalated into genocidal onslaught against the Isaaq clan family"[3]
Quote: "It may be possible to translate the subjective identification of groups from the context of genocide to our discussion of national self-determination for peoples. The inhabitants of Somaliland, ethnic Somalis overwhelmingly of the Isaaq clan, were singled out by the former regime for persecution because of their clan affiliation.".[4]
Etc.
References
^Ingiriis, Mohamed Haji (2016). ""We Swallowed the State as the State Swallowed Us": The Genesis, Genealogies, and Geographies of Genocides in Somalia". African Security. 9 (3). Taylor & Francis: 237–258. doi:10.1080/19392206.2016.1208475. {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)
^Lindner, Evelin Gerda (2001). "Humiliation and human rights: Mapping a minefield". Human Rights Review. 2 (2). Springer Nature: 46–63. doi:10.1007/s12142-001-1023-5. {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)
^De Waal, Alex, Jens Meierhenrich, and Bridget Conley-Zilkic (2012). "How mass atrocities end: An evidence-based counter-narrative." Fletcher F. World Affairs, Vol 36, Number 1 (Winter), pp. 15-21
^Roethke, Peter (2006), "The right to secede under international law: the case of Somaliland", Journal of Modern African Studies, Cambridge University Press, Vol. 44, pp. 408-409
Please consider the above scholarly sources. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 20:45, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Good finds, Ms Sarah Welch. I think all of that should be incorporated into the article in some form or another. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:00, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Ms Sarah Welch Thank you very much for your good finds. I appreciate you taking the time to find these, and they will certainly be added to the source list. I have summarised some of the quotes I have used in my most recent post below for you and Cordless Larry (and all others interested without time to read the longer post) to look at, all in all there are around 35 reputable sources that all explicitly use the word genocide, I will only post 7 quotes from various sections of the earlier post below for sake of brevity (note that the number in brackets at the end corresponds to their order in the post for further reading):
Quote: "Based on the totality of evidence collected [...] the [United Nations] consultant firmly believes that the crime of genocide was conceived, planned and perpetrated by the Somali Government against the Isaaq people." (1) [1]
Quote: "Although the barre government had also targeted other resistance groups and their followers during the period of insurgency, 'no other Somali community faced such sustained and intense state-sponsored violence' as the people of former British Somaliland [read Isaaq]." (3b) [2]
Quote: "The trained refugees took part in the military dictator's policies of extermination and genocide of the northern population [read Isaaq]." (4) [3]
Quote: "In Somalia, the Isaaq clan is the target of government genocide." (27) [4]
Quote: "Siad Barre's response was genocidal: days of aerial and ground bombardment of both towns by the Somali Armed forces, backed up by South African mercenary pilots..." (15) [5]
Quote: "By 1988, the Siad Barre regime waged a war against the Isaaq, which acquired genocidal proportions." (16) [6]
Quote: "Survivors of genocide, that is, people belonging to the group targeted for genocide. In Somalia this was the Issaq tribe, in Rwanda the Tutsi, in Burundi also the Hutu." (19) [7]
I thank you again for taking the time to add scholarly sources and hope you can take a look at the above sources at a convenient time. They contain both official reports from the UN and scholarly sources as well as an example of international coverage.Kzl55 (talk) 21:58, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
@Kzl55: Good, but the article doesn't cite most of the sources you just mentioned (I am taking they are fine, AGF). It should. Rewrite or expand this article, with these and the sources I suggested above. Include isbn, doi etc info in your cites for easier WP:V. Consider embedding quotes with each cite. One more thing.... do mention "although the Barre government had also targeted other resistance groups and their followers during the period of insurgency" or something equivalent for NPOV. A balanced article would mention at least once, citing source such as Geldenhuys you mention, that clans/groups other than Isaaq were also victims. I have still not read the wall of text in "extended content" above: WP:TLDR. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 00:14, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
@Ms Sarah Welch: great points. Will do. Could you please elaborate (or link) what you mean by embedding quotes? If that is possible I feel it would eliminate the 'wall of text' aspect to such posts. Also with regards to previous extended content I mentioned do let me know if you would like a summary like I posted above of the rest of the points, I would be happy to provide one. Many thanks again Kzl55 (talk) 15:59, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
@Kzl55: Here is an example summary sentence for the article and a cite with embedded quote,
Not only Isaaq clan, but other groups were also targeted by the Barre government for harsh repression.[1]
References
^Geldenhuys, D. (2009). Contested States in World Politics. Springer. p. 133. ISBN978-0230234185., Quote: "Northerners were morever targeted for harsh repression by government forces, in particular the politically influential Isaaq clan from whose ranks the SNM rebel movement drew most of its recruits. Although the Barre government had also targeted other resistance groups and their followers during the period of insurgency, 'no other Somali community faced such sustained and intense state-sponsored violence' as the people of former British Somaliland."
cite fmt (for cut and paste)..... <ref>{{Cite book| url= https://books.google.com/books?id=Sa2HDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA133 |title= Contested States in World Politics |last= Geldenhuys|first= D.|year= 2009 |publisher= Springer|isbn= 978-0230234185| page= 133}}, Quote: "Northerners were morever targeted for harsh repression by government forces, in particular the politically influential Isaaq clan from whose ranks the SNM rebel movement drew most of its recruits. Although the Barre government had also targeted other resistance groups and their followers during the period of insurgency, 'no other Somali community faced such sustained and intense state-sponsored violence' as the people of former British Somaliland."</ref>
More info and alternate ways for doing these: WP:CITE. On rest, please focus on improving the article and citing scholarly sources properly to this article, with embedded quotes as above. No need to post walls of text. No need to inappropriately convert this talk page into WP:FORUM. Right now, in this article too many cited sources are incomplete, weak, or with "full citation needed" tag. That makes the article look weak. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:11, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Noted, will update the article, really appreciate your input! Kzl55 (talk) 17:19, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
![[28]](http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/africa/txu-pclmaps-oclc-795784383-somalia_2012_somaliland_and_puntland.jpg){kind=link}
![[29]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_Somaliland_within_Somalia.png){kind=link}
