3.3: Comparative Case Study - Botswana and Somalia

Learning Objectives

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Compare and contrast Botswana and Somalia’s historical context for political outcomes
• Apply the understanding of political capacity in Botswana and Somalia

Introduction

Why compare and contrast Botswana and Somalia? Why select these two countries for consideration when discussing the main focal point of “the state?” This selection could be categorized as falling into Most Similar Systems Design. (The Most Similar Systems Design (MSSD) asks comparativists to consider at least two cases where the cases are similar, but the outcomes from these cases are different.) Botswana and Somalia have a number of geographic and historical circumstances in common, and yet the resulting political outcomes have been very different. The primary difference between these two countries is their forms of legitimate authority.

Botswana

• Full Country Name: Botswana, Republic of Botswana
• Head(s) of State: President
• Government: Parliamentary Republic
• Official Languages: Setswana, English
• Economic System: Market-Oriented Economy
• Location: Southern Africa
• Capital: Gaborone
• Total land size: 224,610 sq. miles
• Population: 2,254,069
• GDP: $18.726 billion
• GDP per capita: $7,817
• Currency: Pula

The Republic of Botswana is a landlocked country located in southern Africa. It is bordered by South Africa to the south, Namibia to the northwest, and Zimbabwe to the northeast. The country is credited with perhaps being the “birthplace” of all modern humans dating back over 200,000 years ago. Archeologists and anthropologists have analyzed trace evidence of human civilization through ancient tools, cave drawings, and evidence of farming practices that existed in the region over time. Although there is robust evidence of the region’s population adopting agricultural practices and following tribal norms and values, the first actual written records of life in Botswana were not noted until around the 1820s.

Botswana was one of many African countries affected by the Scramble for Africa (1880 to 1914), sometimes also called the conquest of Africa, where Western European powers (Britain, France, Belgium, Portugal, Spain, and Italy) attempted to control and colonize all parts of Africa. Botswana was dominated by Britain and called the Bechuanaland Protectorate. (A protectorate is defined as an area or nation that is managed, possessed, controlled, and protected by a different state. The area or nation relies on the security provided by another state, but is still allowed, to some extent, to dictate its own local politics and activities.)

The region was called a protectorate because Britain annexed, or took over, the region on the basis that they were “protecting” the main tribes from the Boers. As descendants of Dutch colonists in Southern Africa, the Boars frequently attempted to take over the territory of Botswana tribes. To protect their economic, military, and moral interests in Botswana, Britain permitted the Bechuanaland Protectorate to operate under its own leadership and rules, but supplied resources to protect the region from the Boers. Beyond this, allowing for any encroachment of the Boers in the region may have compromised British interests when it came to German and Dutch interactions.

At the beginning of the 20th century, more power was shared with the various tribes and councils within Southern Africa. In 1964, the United Kingdom allowed Botswana to declare its independence. The country held its first elections in 1966, following the creation of its Constitution in 1965.

Today, Botswana is considered Africa’s oldest and most stable democracy, though it is not without some number of issues. The country's constitution provides the supreme law of the law and basis for rule, as well as seeks to protect the citizens of Botswana and provide for certain civil liberties. (Civil liberties are individual rights protected by law to ensure the government does not unreasonably interfere with certain specific individual rights (e.g. freedom of speech, religion, assembly, etc.)) Botswana is a parliamentary republic, which the executive branch is given its powers by the legislative branch, a.k.a. parliament. The president serves as both the head of state and head of government, and is elected by, and held accountable by, Botswana’s Parliament.

Although Botswana’s government has three branches of government with defined powers according to its constitution, and even though free elections do occur, there is some question as to how free Botswana actually is. The Freedom in the World Index categorizes Botswana’s democracy as free, but a number of global indexes for democracy, including the Democracy Index, have categorized Botswana as having a flawed democracy. (Chapter Four will discuss the various manifestations of democracy worldwide, but it is worth noting that not all democracies are categorized as fully democratic.)

Botswana has been dominated by single-party rule since independence. It tends to be a red flag of sorts when only one political party has held power time and time again. This action could be an indication that a lack of fair competition exists. Another area of concern: Botswana does not have full freedom of speech, and freedom of the media is constantly under threat. In addition, migrants, refugees, and the LGBTQIA+ community face constant discrimination under the law.

Botswana’s current situation is a mixed bag. On the one hand, Botswana does have the oldest, the most stable, and the least corrupt democracies in Africa. All this being acknowledged, it bears noting that many African countries have struggled with government authority, the basis of legitimacy of leadership, and the practice of democracy. Compared to other countries in Africa, Botswana does seem to be a leader. However, when comparing the country globally, its flawed democracy does rank it lower in terms of democracies worldwide.

Why has Botswana’s government been reasonably successful in light of the many failed or failing governments in Africa? The answers could be attributed to culture, and to some extent, luck. In the mid-1960s, at the time of Botswana’s independence, life was fairly traditional and undisturbed. A clear change of the seasons led to predictable crops and the management of agriculture. Agriculture was the dominant economic activity and life was pretty stable. In addition, prior to the move to formal independence, the protectorates and lose agreements with the United Kingdom allowed the region to operate with its own leaders within tribes, preparing the people of Botswana for a hierarchical power dynamic where tribal decisions were based on consensus and agreement. In other words, there was already sort of an informal democracy in place. A saying in Setswana seems to capture this sentiment: “Kgosi ke Kgosi ka batho”: A chief is a chief by the will of the people. (Lewis, Jr., 2020) Within this sentiment, the leadership that was in place at the time of independence was forward-thinking, open to modernization, and to progressive ideas and attitudes.

The lack of British interest in geographical resources also benefited Botswana's political outcomes. Unlike other regions, Botswana was largely left alone, and was not a victim of exploitation. Instead, many in Botswana actually felt abandoned by the government of the United Kingdom. It’s been said that a government official in Botswana quipped, ”The British left us with nothing!” He then paused, thoughtfully, and added, “On the other hand, the British left us with nothing.” (Lewis, Jr. 2020) Botswana was largely left to fend for itself, developing its own institutions and governmental practices, which enabled a transition from previous practices with, relative to other countries, a level of ease.

Somalia

• Full Country Name: Somalia, Federal Republic of Somalia
• Head(s) of State: President, Prime Minister
• Government: Federal parliamentary republic
• Official Languages: Somali, Arabic
• Economic System: Informal
• Location: Eastern Africa
• Capital: Mogadishu
• Total land size: 246,201 sq miles
• Population: 15,893,219
• GDP: $5.218 billion
• GDP per capita: $348
• Currency: Somali Shilling

Somalia is a country located in Eastern Africa, the Horn of Africa, and bordered by Kenya, Ethiopia, and Djibouti. The region is thought to have been settled by the first human beings (homo sapiens) on the planet, who emerged roughly 300,000 years ago. Archeological digs have unearthed pyramids, tombs, and ancient cities as well as tools, burial grounds, and homes and walls. Over time, the land that is now Somalia was affected by various civilizations and outside influences given its location as a trade pathway with India and China through Southwest Asia (Middle East). In the 9th century, Islam was introduced to the region and grew to become the predominant religion of present-day Somalia.

Much like Botswana, Somalia was a target within the Scramble for Africa. However, Britain and Italy fought for control over Somali territory, to the detriment of the Somalians. In World War I, Italy, which had turned fascist under the rule of Benito Mussolini, sought to annex Ethiopia. Italian troops, along with some Somali troops, were able to take back parts of Somalia formerly dominated by the British. Years later, during World War II, Britain was able to successfully take back its former Somali territory, as well as other parts held by Italian forces. Often Somalians were put in difficult positions where they had to side with one or the other.

After years of dispute in the international community, Somalia formed the Somali Republic in 1961. A referendum was put forth for the people to accept a constitution. Unfortunately, most Somalians were not allowed to participate in the adoption and formal voting in for the new constitution. Although a president and prime Minister were put into place, their positions were not the product of voting. In 1969, President Abdirashid Ali Shermarke was assassinated during a military coup d’etat led by Major General Mohamed Siad Barre, who then became the leader of the Supreme Revolutionary Council (SRC) and controlled the country. The country fell to an authoritarian dictatorship, with the SRC dissolving the legislature and the judiciary, and suspending the constitution. In addition, the SRC renamed Somalia, the Somali Democratic Republic, though there was no constitution nor any democratic institutions.

In 1976, Mohamed Siad Barre disbanded the SRC and formed the Somali Revolutionary Socialist Party. Barre’s administration was a communist regime that attempted to wed the Islamic traditions of the region with socialist ideas of equality. In 1991, in the face of increasingly authoritarian rules, Barre’s rule came to an end through the combined efforts of different clans who opposed Barre’s rule. The northern part of the country, previously occupied by Britain, declared independence from the rest of Somalia, though it has never been recognized as independent from the global community to this day. The rest of Somalia became a power vacuum and a civil war began where the clans which had ousted Barre now fought for dominance. Many political scientists began calling Somalia a ‘failed state’ because there was no dominant authority able to reign supreme. Instead, the region was dominated by many groups vying for authority, but none of these powers were able to gain any long-standing legitimacy or form any kind of durable government structure.

In 2000, the Transitional National Government (TNG) was established, and Abdiqasim Salad Hassan was selected to be the president. Ideally, this government was put in place to help Somalia transition to a formal and legitimate government authority. But, the time period was not stable. For example, the prime minister’s office turned over four times within the first three years of the TNG’s establishment. Finally, in 2012, the Federal Government of Somalia was formed, which had been the most permanent central government authority in place since 1991. Although a federal parliamentary republic is utilized, the country is not a democracy, and Freedom House categorizes Somalia as ‘not free’.

The civil war that began in 1991 has not ended. Internal disputes still wreak disastrous consequences on the Somalian people. The federal government lacks widespread support. There is constant political infighting, massive corruption as well as continuing drought conditions and the displacement of millions of Somalians. The government is also inefficient, unable to collect taxes, unable to stimulate economic productivity, and operates on an insufficient government budget.

In the cases of Botswana and Somalia, it can be interesting to consider the similarities and differences that led to present-day outcomes. Although both countries were deeply affected by the Scramble for Africa, the colonial governments left the respective regions in different ways. While the British largely left Botswana to its own devices, Somalia did not have the same luck. Instead, Somalia had been initially dominated partly by Italy and partly by Britain. In time, Somalia was also affected by World War I and World War II in ways Botswana was not. The persistent disruptions and foreign interventions faced by Somalia left it fragile and more difficult to break away. Lacking the pre-existing conditions that Botswana benefited from, i.e. its relatively seamless transition to democratic institutions and the benefit of Britain leaving without further exploitation, and having suffered from a number of internal and external issues (e.g. turbulent history, frequently disputed territories, climatic shows disrupting agriculture, disease, and poverty), Somalia is still struggling. In many ways, the latter half of the twentieth century was disastrous for Somalia because the area was considered to be of geo-political importance, particularly during the World Wars and the resulting Cold War. The future of Somalia is uncertain, as the region is currently suffering from intense drought conditions in the midst of the ongoing civil war which began in the 1980s.