However, it is almost certain that a small country in Africa will pose a considerable and difficult challenge for the next president. This country is, of course, Somalia, which has dominated the international agenda for some time now due to increasing piracy threatening international trade. It is for this reason as well as a fear of increasing chaos that the US took the matter to the UN Security Council this week to try to enlist its support for two resolutions on Somalia.
The first resolution, drafted by the US, concerned land and air operations against the pirates. After overcoming serious misgivings among Security Council members, the US won a unanimous 15-0 endorsement last Tuesday for this resolution, Number 1851(2208), which authorizes countries fighting piracy off the Somali coast to take all necessary actions in Somalia's territory and its airspace for one year, subject to consent by the country's federal government.
Meanwhile, the commander of the US Navy's 5th Fleet, Vice Adm. William E. Gortney, cast doubt on the wisdom of land operations against pirates on Somali soil, saying the possibility of inflicting civilian casualties "cannot be overestimated." Of course these remarks by the admiral weaken the possibility of any land-based or aerial military action beforehand and show the possible opposition of the US Navy.
The second resolution, which the US believes is essential for both bolstering the first and strengthening the federal government of Somalia to prevent a security crisis, has not received much support from the council. The Bush administration mounted a last-ditch push this week to muster international support for a UN peacekeeping mission in Somalia.
However, major countries such as France, Britain and Russia are resisting the UN peacekeeping proposal, arguing that there is no peace to keep in Somalia. "It is hard to see happening. We can see a case for a peacekeeping force to back a peace process, though it is not clear you have a viable peace process," a top European official said in this regard.
In fact, there is almost no international support for sending a peacekeeping force to Somalia as the US has proposed, confirmed by none other than UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon last Wednesday.
He said that over the past four months, he has asked at least 50 countries and three international organizations to support the Security Council's request for a substantial peacekeeping force to stabilize Somalia. "Not one nation has volunteered to lead,'' he pointed out. “The replies have been very lukewarm or negative."
Ban also said it would be too risky to send UN peacekeepers to Somalia, where piracy is rampant off the coast and Islamic forces are gaining ground against the weak and fragile transitional government.
"The situation is not ripe, the conditions are not favorable to consider a UN peacekeeping operation. The situation is very volatile and dangerous, risky for peacekeeping operations to operate there," he added.
In fact, Ban supports a powerful multinational force for stabilizing Somalia, but he concluded last month that even a larger and better-equipped UN peacekeeping force of 22,000 blue helmets would not be capable of doing it. In this regard, he appealed to Saudi Arabia, Nigeria and Turkey, but these countries refused to take part in any peacekeeping operation.
With slim hope for a UN peacekeeping force and imminent withdrawal of Ethiopian troops, which back the current powerless interim government, after which opposition Islamist groups are certain to take on the government, bringing about further chaos and instability, Somalia will become a major challenge for Obama. Given the fear of al-Qaeda and other groups gaining more of a foothold in Somalia, Obama will have to act, but how is anyone's guess.
