History, just like a relic, is deeply and sentimentally embedded in the minds and hearts of people. Can Laws change history and geography of traditional and colonial borders? The eyes of the world are on the ominous threat on Kenya’s National Security posed by neighboring Somalia, in what is a rare geopolitical joke, seeks to alter a colonial and ancient sea boundary through a court process. Perhaps the objectives of such an ambitious plan is beyond Mogadishu, a state under care of regional powers and the West. Strategic Intelligence (S.I) has been observing, recording, and analyzing each related event. Our objective is to bring into context what this means and providing new insight.
History repeats itself. It is like a tradition, Countrymen reminisce it. Geography is home, and Countrymen live and hang on in there. You cannot wipe out history and geography. They are every patriots relic. Its their heritage.
African boundaries were drawn by Western colonial powers with little regard for ethnic or national settlements, a panacea for future conflict, with Kenya-Somalia row posing a classic example. In Somalia, the pressures for political and economic liberalization that are emerging from foreign powers seeking military and economic hegemony, will put enormous sociopolitical strain on the East African region and perhaps cost its security. These dynamics are already playing out, pitting Kenya against Ethiopia, Horn Countries, and its core partners in both war on terror and economics.
What does Somalia Want? Annexing Kenyan Maritime Property?
Somalia is laying a claim on a maritime triangle whose continental shelf is believed to be rich in both natural gas and crude oil. What Somalia is seeking is the boundary to extend to the southeast as an extension of it’s land border, ignoring geographical principles and the historical aspect of it, thus seeking to annex nearly 62,000 square miles of Kenyan maritime property, a legal and political impossibility. It is not clear if Mogadishu wants a maritime border delimitation or sea boundary beaconing. In the lexicon of border studies, a boundary’ is the line which divides the territory or maritime space of two States, while a ‘border’ is what has to be crossed in order to enter a state. What does Somalia want? Both or one of the 2?
If Somalia is seeking delimitation of an international boundary, then ICJ will advice that Nairobi and Mogadishu engage and define it in a treaty, a legally-binding instrument. As earlier argued, many world international boundaries were delimited in very general terms leaving scope for conflicting interpretations, thus ICJ’s ruling may not be biding either opening doors for regional conflict and political upheaval. Maybe, upon a diplomatic armistice, a treaty will be realized leading to massive maritime survey to demarcate the boundary. And this doesn’t need the lengthy court process, diplomatic tradeoffs can payoff.
ICJ Clout Ambiguity
Late August 2019, China told Manila it’d not recognize The Hague Ruling on Disputed Territories of Southern China Sea. Beijing delivered a tough message to Philippine President Dutertes telling him that its position on the disputed South China Sea was not up for negotiation. China claims most of the contested sea, including waters close to Philippine shores, and has rejected a UN-backed international tribunal ruling that said its assertion to the body of water is without legal basis.
Kenya has already issued a warning to both ICJ and Somalia and its sponsors, it’ll not cede even an inch of its territory.
However, Kenya’s approach has been viewed as too soft, and that this is an indicator it’s worried its legal and diplomatic teams doesn’t inspire confidence, partly right and wrong. Interestingly, there’s not a single model for demarcation lawyers can use to argue delimitation. Actually theorists argue that the nature and frequency of boundary marking depends on the physical and human geography of the boundary land-scape, thus, as argued by S.I intelligence analysts, geography and history plays a key role in making any related decision, and ICJ has almost zero clout in this case, unless they make bollocks of academia.
Kenya shouldn’t be worried whatsoever, for legally, the contested boundary is unambiguously delimited but appropriately demarcated given the particular geographical, political and historical setting. The current demarcated boundary as seen on the maps may not reflect the delimited line on the sea. Besides, when historic delimitation sources conflict with present-day realities on the ground, scholars and legal experts in the subject recommended negotiations at the highest political and diplomatic levels.
It’s a legal cul-de-sac at ICJ, and that’s the truly profound.
