The Anarchy Advantage in Somalia
Brian Doherty | December 27, 2006, 8:00pm
As Ethiopia invades to break the power of the Union of Islamic Courts over Mogadishu and much of Southern Somalia, Benjamin Powell over at the Independent Institute argues that Somalia has been doing better without an effective central government of late than it was with one. The heart of it:
In conducting research for a new study comparing Somalia’s economy relative to 42 other African countries, my coauthors and I examined 13 different measures, including life expectancy, immunization and disease rates, access to various telecommunications, and access to water/sanitation.
In 2005, Somalia ranked in the top 50 percent in six of our 13 measures, and ranked near the bottom in only three: infant mortality, immunization rates, and access to improved water sources. This compares favorably with circumstances in 1990, when Somalia last had a government and was ranked in the bottom 50 percent for all seven of the measures for which we had that year’s data: death rate, infant mortality, life expectancy, main telephone lines, tuberculosis, and immunization for measles and DTP. Furthermore, we have found that during the last years of Somalia’s government, 1985 to 1990, their performance was deteriorating compared to other African nations as their relative ranking fell in five of these measures. Since their government’s collapse, Somalia has seen its relative ranking improve in four of these measures and deteriorate in only one: infant mortality.
Perhaps most impressive is Somalia’s change in life expectancy. During the last five years of government rule, life expectancy fell by two years but since state collapse, it actually has increased by five years.
Powell's full study on Somalia.
An earlier short report by me on a World Bank study coming to similar conclusions. (You will note I mistakenly referred to Somalia as a West African nation in that piece--it is, of course, in East Africa.)
libertreee | December 30, 2006, 2:01pm | #
Comment on several posts--
1. All Somalis are well armed, and fiercely independent. It is not likely that they will tolerate for long a "strong authoritarian takeover" of the country by either the Islamic Courts or the Ethiopians.
2. The Somalis in 1991 made a conscious, well considered decision to abandon Western style government. It is simply NOT a question of evil warlords preventing the people from getting what they want. By and large, most of the people, despite 15 years of constant UN and US intervention, plus natural disasters, do NOT want a western style government.
3. Considering that there have only been a few real anarchies that we can look at besides the most primitive aboriginies, I think it can still be said that anarchies do NOT collapse into chaos or submit to the first authoritarian group that wants to rise to power.
As examples, the Icelandic Commonwealth lasted for three hundred years as an anarchy, before it became corrupted.
The Celtic Irish lasted for one thousand years without a central government before finally crushed by Cromwell c 1640.
There is evidence that an anarchy lasted in Southern India in the bronze age for 700 years.
Of these examples, the Irish were the ones invaded the most. Yet, they gave ground grudgingly, and were not completely conquered for 4 centuries by the British. The British had the advantage of a more or less unified throne that collected taxes to build armies. The Irish, like the Somalis, did not collect taxes to build a unified defense, yet their volunteer and guerrila style defense lasted for centuries. In the twentieth century, it was Michael Collins IRA guerrila resistance that freed Ireland from British rule, NOT DeValera's attempts to fight the British with Westphalian style regular armies. The IRA has been studied by Arabs since the Battle of Algiers.
We are entering into a new era of governance. Although we think we are small, the basic libertarian premise of decentralization, secession and yes anarchy has a good chance of success. The Westphalian nation states are reeling and certainly the overall centralization that occurred in the late nineteenth century is waning.
If we can end the American empire, we will see more Somalis. Some of it will be ugly, but overall not as ugly as the western style governments that the Somalis believe are the cause of Africa's problems (genocide, corruption, poverty.)
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSS
