The Turkish-mediated peace talks between Ethiopia and Somalia provide a compelling case study in strategic communication, particularly through the contrasting approaches of Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud. Their respective strategies significantly shaped the discourse surrounding the conflict and its potential resolution.
Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s Strategic Communication
- Adherence to a Scripted Narrative: Abiy’s meticulously crafted delivery ensured a consistent and coherent narrative, positioning Ethiopia as a constructive participant in the dialogue.
- Framing Techniques:
• Downplaying Aggression: By characterizing the crisis as a ‘misunderstanding,’ Abiy effectively redirected the narrative away from accusations of territorial expansion, fostering a more favorable perception of Ethiopia’s actions.
• Economic Justifications: He framed Ethiopia’s objectives as rational policy decisions driven by economic necessity, thereby legitimizing its interests in the region.
• Family Metaphor: By likening the dispute to a family quarrel, Abiy sought to diminish perceptions of hostility, normalizing Ethiopia’s stance in the process.
• Narrative of Sacrifice: Highlighting the contributions of Ethiopian troops in Somalia under African Union missions, Abiy aimed to portray Ethiopia’s involvement as protective, countering narratives of destabilization.
President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s Strategic Communication
- Lack of a Strong Counter-Narrative: In contrast, President Hassan’s remarks did not robustly defend Somalia’s position. His emphasis on cooperation overlooked critical issues of sovereignty and Ethiopia’s historical aggressions.
- Alignment with Ethiopian Narratives:
• Neighborly Nations Metaphor: By framing the relationship as one between two neighboring nations, he risked downplaying the complex geopolitical context that has historically positioned Ethiopia unfavorably in Somalia’s eyes.
• Friendship Assertion: Hassan’s characterization of Somalia as a ‘true friend of Ethiopia’ inadvertently subordinated Somalia’s narrative of sovereignty.
• Troop Acknowledgment: By recognizing the sacrifices made by Ethiopian forces, he reinforced Abiy’s framing of the situation, undermining Somalia’s historical grievances against Ethiopia.
Strategic Implications
The differing approaches underscore important lessons regarding strategic communication in diplomatic contexts:
• Clarity and Consistency: Abiy’s structured communication effectively projected Ethiopia’s narrative, allowing it to shape the dialogue significantly. The lack of strong counterarguments from Hassan facilitated Ethiopia’s narrative dominance.
• Maintaining Sovereignty: A diplomatic approach that overlooks critical issues such as sovereignty and international law can severely weaken a nation’s negotiating position. Hassan’s conciliatory tone, while well-meaning, risks normalizing Ethiopia’s past aggressive actions as justifiable.
• Careful Messaging to Uphold Narrative: For Somalia to strengthen its position, future communications should prioritize sovereignty and rights. It is crucial to adopt rhetoric that critiques Ethiopian actions while reframing notions of friendship to acknowledge existing power dynamics.
In conclusion, the dynamics of these peace talks illustrate that strategic communication choices are vital in shaping national narratives and influencing diplomatic outcomes. Somalia must adopt a more assertive stance in future negotiations, ensuring that its core issues are prominently addressed and defended to counter narratives that portray Ethiopia’s presence and intentions as benign.
Dr. Alikheyr A. Mohamed
DFAI, PKLM, Writer, Development and Humanitarian Consultant in the Horn of Africa
Email: alikheyr@gmail.com
