Rethinking Humanitarianism | Somalia’s plan to break free from aid dependence

Share & more Editor’s note: This episode was made in collaboration with Start Network as part of a series that explores what really drives change in the humanitarian system, and what it tells us about future efforts to transform the system for the better. Find previous episodes here. For Abdihakim Ainte, a senior Somali government official, the international humanitarian system’s sudden contraction has been both a “cataclysmic” shock – with devastating immediate consequences – and a reckoning that could ultimately accelerate Somalia's path towards greater self-reliance. “No one likes always sitting around a table where heads of state are complaining, asking, and begging for money for aid,” says Ainte, a senior adviser for food security and climate change in the office of Somalia’s prime minister. “States who are on the receiving end of aid will find an alternative pathway out of this dependence.” Ainte’s interview is a follow-up to last week’s collaborative episode between Rethinking Humanitarianism and Start Network on how humanitarianism is being reshaped from the top down. While last week’s episode explored how power, money, and politics is changing the humanitarian landscape from the perspective of donor states, host Christina Bennett spoke with Ainte to get his take from the point of view of a country that traditionally receives aid. Ainte argues that Somalia’s Mutual Accountability Framework (MAF) has shifted some power back to the Somali state, but that progress is quickly undone when drought and famine strike, as UN agencies assume a greater role while the Somali government, he says, is “kept in the dark”. Ainte also outlines his vision for a Somali-state led humanitarian response – one in which aid dependence gives way to mutually beneficial trade, while funding gaps are offset by private sector investment, diaspora support, and domestic revenue-boosting ventures such as natural resource exploration. “You should earn the credibility from the people. It's not only a matter of improving and increasing your accountability in terms of the systems and the resources,” says Ainte, adding that it’s also about believing “in institutions so that whenever crisis knocks the door, they should not call WFP, or FAO, or other external agencies; they should call… the internal local institutions rather than outside institutions.” “A new framework [or] compact has to be devised,” concludes Ainte, “one that is built on a mutual collaboration. One that is built on mutual benefits.” Guest Abdihakim Ainte, senior adviser for food security and climate change in the office of Somalia’s prime minister Key moments [05:28] – Who really controls aid in Somalia? [10:47] – How UN agencies sideline the state in crises [18:24] – “It’s very grim”: What happened on the ground when donors walked away? [20:28] – Plan B: Private sector, diaspora, and domestic revenues [29:45] – Aid diversion and mutual accountability [37:58] – “The aid cut could be a blessing in disguise” [45:00] – The Türkiye model of donor relations Subscribe on Spotify, Apple, Google, Stitcher, or YouTube, or search “The New Humanitarian” in your favourite podcast app. Got a question or feedback? Email [email protected] or have your say on Twitter using the hashtag #RethinkingHumanitarianism. Transcript | Somalia’s plan to break free from aid dependence Abdihakim Ainte Whenever crisis knocks the door, they should not call WFP, or FAO, or, you know, other external agencies. The 991 should be the internal local institutions rather than outside institutions. Tammam Aloudat Welcome to this special edition of the Rethinking Humanitarian podcast in collaboration with Start Network. In this 6-episode series, we explore what really drives change in the humanitarian system, and what it tells us about future efforts to transform it for the better. Christina Bennett In this episode: we continue our discussion on how politics, power, and money influence humanitarian response from the top down – this time from the perspective of a country on the receiving end of Western donor policy. Tammam Aloudat From The New Humanitarian, I’m Tammam Aloudat. Christina Bennett And from Start Network, I’m Christina Bennett. Tammam Aloudat Christina, last week we started our conversation on how humanitarianism is being changed from the top down, and that is particularly with governments. And we've talked last week with someone who comes from a donor government. Column Wilson led the FCDO's humanitarian department in the UK government until last year, and he was quite pointed in talking about the tension between the humanitarians who work there and the politicians who have, you know, multiple other purposes. He said something we'll be getting into in this episode. He called on donor governments to rise up, smell the coffee, or risk getting left behind. Colum Wilson I don't think the principal big donors are going to be able to move fast enough in this direction, and they're going to become a little bit of an anomaly. They're going to be left behind. The new frameworks and ways of working will be being determined out in the rural areas of Somalia, and in the rural areas of, I don't know, Bangladesh, rather than in Geneva, and London, and Washington. Christina Bennett Yeah, and I think that's right. I think Colum’s right. It has been the rhetoric that Western donor governments need to step out, step back, and shift power and responsibility to governments who have been recipients of ai, to step into their role as as taking responsibility for aid in their country. That has been the rhetoric in the sector for some time now, and it's, it's at least the intention. But it also begs the question: Will the big Western donors, like Colum's former employer and others, will big Western donors be able to let go, be able to step aside, and let others lead? And do governments like the ones Colum was mentioning, like Somalia, like the government of Bangladesh, governments that have been dependent on Western foreign aid for so long, will they have the legitimacy in the eyes of their own people to step in and step up, to take up their responsibility and accountability for aid? It's a really interesting set of questions for me. Tammam Aloudat And it is. It absolutely is. And it's, it falls in a, in a particular political context where, you know, donor governments aren't handing over responsibility; they are dumping responsibility. They are stopping aid effectively. Yes, the rhetoric existed for a long time, but it's not coming to be realised now, it is being dropped as, as a sort of a collective responsibility. And those governments that may or may not be ready and that have been made vulnerable probably for a long time by the politics of aid have to rise up in a way that they also become relevant and legitimate in the eyes of their people, or risk that they wouldn't be able to fulfil that need. Christina Bennett And without those resources that they were so used to… Tammam Aloudat Exactly. Christina Bennett … for the last, you know, decades. Tammam Aloudat Exactly, aid costs money, and the money might not be forthcoming anymore. Christina Bennett So I think this will be really interesting. You know, now that we heard from Colum and the perspective of a country that traditionally gives aid, we wanted to hear more about this perspective from a country that traditionally receives aid, and have this conversation with them about these questions: how have the seismic seismic shifts at the top affected people on the ground, and how are their governments responding to it? So I got to speak with a top official in one of the very countries Colum shouted out about in that clip. Somalia has been devastated by the shuttering of USAID and the contraction of aid funding in general, but it's also eager to renegotiate its relationship to aid following those cuts. Abdihakim Ainte is a senior advisor for food security and climate change in the office of Somalia's prime minister. He was also heavily featured a while ago in a New Humanitarian article where he slammed humanitarian organisations for creating perpetual aid dependency in Somalia. He joined me from Mogadishu. Let's take a listen. — Christina Bennett Abdihakim, welcome to the podcast. Abdihakim Ainte Well, thank you so much, and thanks for having me. Christina Bennett We just had a whole conversation with a former senior representative from a donor about how donor governments influence how aid is delivered on the ground. So I want to hear from you: Who holds the most influence in how aid is delivered in Somalia? Abdihakim Ainte Well, that's a very intricate question. I mean, always influence comes with a degree of resources and a degree of, you know, having some money into, into the pot. And Somalia is really a very complicated, and probably is one of the most complex aid industry in the world, because of its history that has been ripped with a lot of cyclical droughts and famines. And that has put Somalia on the path of being one of the most intricate humanitarian landscape in the world. So, who holds the influence? I think some 15 years ago, when the country was having a transitional government, the international agents largely had an influence on the direction through which development projects are being implemented. And Somalia has ended the Transitional [Federal] Government in 2012, when the current president, who was then the president of the post-transitional government, came into power, and he immediately started putting the aid architecture of the country, and put together a framework that is called Mutual Accountability Framework. And this compact has articulated and outlined the partnership between the donor community and the recipient country, which is in Somalia. Within this compact, there were a number of obligations, both side, that includes that aid should be efficient, but also more importantly, aid should be done in accordance with the government's priority and alignment. I mean, despite some– obviously some people can challenge that notion – but largely the government do hold a significant amount of influence as it regards to how aid is being managed, delivered, and implemented. Christina Bennett So maybe take me through this a little bit. You've mentioned this Mutual Accountability Framework works in practice, from the point where a donor decides to give money to Somalia, and that money is received on the Somalia end. Abdihakim Ainte 06:47 Essentially the framework outlines and gives the government of Somalia to put its priority to the donor community. Then, both the government of Somalia and the donor community hold an annual – not annual, but depends on that, whether that meeting is required – they have an accountability framework forum. And they sort of discuss the priorities that the government of Somalia put forward for investment. And it is very rigorous and a very open, transparent process through which the government of Somalia and the donor community largely, you know, back and forth the details of that compact and which priority, which area should be given focus. Now, there are some emergency cases where certain shocks could happen, and it could derail the compact. And this, more often than not, happens when drought strikes and when you know major famine strikes. What happens is, the donor community then organises the aid and immediately the money comes into that. Christina Bennett So, how much of that money that comes into Somalia from a donor government actually goes through the government, and how much of it bypasses the government. Abdihakim Ainte 09:06 Of late, and I'm talking about over the last few years, I think the accountability, the Mutual Accountability compact has been really improved, and the donor community has channelled most of their money through the government systems . That does not mean most of the aid money comes within the government frameworks. A lot of it also does implement outside this framework. They span across different spectrum of fields, including health, nutrition, food security, education, and so on. But largely, and I can take an example: The World Bank, which is the largest multilateral partner for Somalia and has probably the largest development assistance in Somalia, has well over $2 billion investment in Somalia. Every penny of the World Bank goes into the government system of Somalia. Even those even those pennies that are going outside the system, still they tend to go priorities and areas that is already been defined or classified by the government of Somalia as a funding should go, money should go into that area. Christina Bennett Okay, I'm curious about something, Abdihakim, because you did give an interview to The New Humanitarian recently, last year, I think. You were really frustrated about the extent to which money humanitarian funding went, bypassed the Somali government and went to agencies that were possibly not aligned with the priorities of the government of Somalia. But what you're describing to me here is a situation where everything works really well: The priorities are jointly agreed, the Mutual Accountability Framework holds everybody to account, and the government of Somalia is calling the shots. What's changed? Abdihakim Ainte So the context with which I spoke in The New Humanitarian was in the wake of the drought, when we are entering into a period of a humanitarian crisis. And it is in this period when the funding allocation of the government of Somalia gets tricky, and that the money either is very very small, or even those, the money that's coming into the country, you know, goes through a very tedious bureaucratic process within the UN agencies. And even if it does, then the government, either does not control anything, or they are being kept in [the] dark, or they are being kept outside the conversation of how that money— that concern still remains. I'm not changing the, the tone of that. I mean, in every drought, or in every humanitarian crisis, the behaviour of the broader UN agencies – and I single out here, I'm not talking about the broader development partners in the country, I'm talking about specifically the UN entities that make a significant portion of the contribution to the country – in the wake of the humanitarian crisis in the country, often, they do operate largely outside the government system, and they take advantage out of that crisis that we are sucked in. Christina Bennett And do you think that the government of Somalia, even in these emergency cases, should be able to wield more influence than it does? Abdihakim Ainte We're hoping to change that, but it's not easy, because of the endured and protracted nature of the crisis that we are in. And because of that, it's very difficult for the government to, to trail or trace every penny and how that money goes through, who's implementing which. We really don't know. I mean, this is a very elaborate, complicated, cumbersome system that is being channelled from different parts, and it's very difficult, especially amidst of crisis. And you know, you've worked, Christina, in a crisis situation. You know, during crisis, often you have a little amount of time for sit in meetings and coordinations because all the time you are either fundraising or either you are, you know, you're pushing donors to put more money so that you can save lives. So in every, in all emergency conditions and, and situations, we faced the same dilemma, and that dilemma is: Should you focus on – because you are stuck in a box, and that box is very uncomfortable box – so should you stick in that box and follow whatever terms that you meet in that box, or you should let people die in front of you, let humanitarian situation unfold in front of you? So it's a moral dilemma, you know, because you cannot let people die in front of you, and that is the moral responsibility. Christina Bennett So what– am I hearing you saying, then, that there is, there are situations where you, as as a government, have to have to cede power and decision making to organisations in the name of saving lives, in the name of a of a fast response? Abdihakim Ainte And in many ways, in the names of even access, creating an access, because there are certain areas where government of Somalia does not have the ability to deliver food aid. I mean, in this case, where Al-Shabaab, you know, the terrorist organisations and these armed militias do control. So even in those areas, you have people facing a humanitarian dilemma. And from a government and moral standpoint, you cannot turn your eyes away from those places. So you have to then trade in and trade in with the UN agencies and the donor community to give them the access, the NGOs, the local NGOs, so that you give a corridor or a passage so that the aid and assistance goes into these even places. So there are a lot of trade-offs, Christina. It's not one-size-fits scenario. You gotta be trading off some of your power and dynamics to ensure that aid is being delivered. Christina Bennett A few minutes ago, you alluded to the fact that we are living in unprecedented times. Somalia itself has experienced extreme cycles of drought and flooding. You've just discussed famine. We're also in a pivotal moment for the humanitarian system itself, and the last 18 months or so has been really critical to the whole system. Humanitarianism has become more overtly political and more overtly transactional. There was always a degree of politics, but now we're seeing it in black and white, in front of our faces every day. The fact that USAID shut down a year ago, a year and a half ago, emblemised one of the many shifts in that direction. And I want to hear a little bit from you about how the dismantling of USAID has affected everyday people in Somalia, has affected the situation in Somalia, and has affected the way that the state has responded to this shift in the way that the international system has acted in the last year, year and a half. Abdihakim Ainte 31:01 I mean, we have been thrown into an uncertainty, you know, pathways on one day. And yes, I mean, the politicising of aid, Christina, is not only a degree; it is very naked and very prevalent. And sorry to say that, because we are bearing the politicisation of aid firsthand, so we're living through that. The USAID complete dismantlement or shutdown in Somalia, and the following cut of other donors, respectively UK and Germany, in its totality, they have left Somalia with almost a $600 billion, $500 billion in tune that was going into a different critical areas of nutrition, of life savings, of education, health – I mean, most basic rudimentary services and provisions. So they immediately impacted— and we're talking about a life, we're talking about a death and life people. So the impact of it is far reaching, and we're already seeing through that coming and manifesting in different directions. Even the current drought that is hovering in the country, you know, stems primarily because of the funding that has been cut for the people, especially the vulnerable people, because they have been receiving on social protection programmes that were giving at least the space to breathe and prepare for the next drought and the next cycle of phase. So money has been withdrawn from these people, and now they've been left with anything. So the 18-month cut that had happened, the impact of it is now being felt now in the most acute and the most in the most appalling way. So… and it's very, you know, unprecedented time that we are living because of the choices that have been made globally, and countries in the Global South are bearing the heaviest price of this complete, you know, dismemberment of the aid architecture and the international system. Christina Bennett 34:40 Paint this picture for me. How have those decisions affected everyday people in Somalia? What does that look like on the ground? Abdihakim Ainte 34:49 It's very grim, because I mean as you can imagine, we're talking about, you know, millions of Somalis who were living in different IDP camps, who have been been on aid recipient for years, and the government of Somalia was trying to build a system that can help them move away and move away completely from the these IDP makeshift camps and become people with with decent and dignified life. So the little resources that have been going in this system have completely collapsed overnight, and the shock is absolutely cataclysmic in terms of the proportionality of the people that have been affected, the effect that is happening, their ability to purchase the basic commodities, their ability to sustain their lives. So it manifests, Christina, in different corners, whether in the water provisions, in shelter, in health. So it's a matter of death and life, And also, people have also lost their jobs. I mean, so many families have been working through the different aid industry in the country, and they have been lost their jobs overnight. [They] received email saying that even your 15 days work that you have worked in the past, you cannot even receive it as a reimbursement. So money has completely been shut down, and they have been thrown away. So it's pretty pretty appalling conditions, and the effect is really unprecedented in scale. Christina Bennett So then, how has the Somali state responded to this shift? You've got the evisceration of USAID. You've got three or four major donor governments to Somalia cutting their funding. You've just described, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for Somalia lost almost overnight. How is the Somali state responding to this shift in international humanitarian action? Abdihakim Ainte Well, that's a very good question. You know, because of the resilience that Somali people have built over years, and because we have gone through even a darker time, a lot of people even are saying this that this could be a tipping point for Somalia to reflect its own image and picture, and chart a path, whether you know acute aid dependence is sustainable or whether we can you know cut corners and find a pathway out of this funding cuts. So the government of Somalia have really stepped up to the plate, and we have turned to the private sector. I mean, we have a very vibrant private sector that are, at least now, been able to fill in the immediate gaps that has been left. For example, the private sector, in totality, they have pledged a significant amount of money to go to the most acute people who are facing an extreme hunger through different provisions. So we've now turned to the private sector to see if we can increase and mobilise more domestic revenues to increase our ability to generate a more internal resources to offset the gaps that have been left. But it's not enough. It's far from meeting the target. We're talking about $600 million, or almost equivalent to $500 million money that has been withdrawn or cut, you know, overnight. So it will take some time. Then there's a diaspora that are, you know, sending the money. The good thing about aid in Somalia, often people tend to think that only it’s the international money that is the life-saving. No. Also the Somali people also they have been contributing a lot to the life-saving you know you know efforts in in the country. So the diaspora were contributing significantly, and they have also increased their contribution to the current cycle of drought, and it's already been seen their contribution in number in this. So the choices are very tough. The state is trying to cope with through increasing and improving its domestic revenue, turning to the diaspora, but also navigating through, you know, countries that we think we can do a bilateral trade relation rather than aid relation. Christina Bennett Do you think the private private sector funding will sufficiently fill the gap, and what sort of terms will that funding be given to you? Are the terms going to be better or worse than international donor terms? Abdihakim Ainte I mean the short answer is no. I think the private sector will not be able to sufficiently fill in the gap in any given time. I think it will take some time the private sector to step up to the plate. But it's not only the private sector here that we should turn to. But there are non-traditional, also, countries that we can find a balance and that we can try to see if we can have a more increased trade relation. Also untapping the natural resources of Somalia. So now we are exploring an oil. I'm not sure if you're following with that. So the government is now almost on the verge of exploring first time in the history in oil. So this could be an area and another opportunity for us to really move away the aid dependence. And this oil exploration and other different natural resources or natural resources of exploration would be opportunities where the government of Somalia should find. But the private sector alone cannot and will not be able to fill in the vacuum in the short term. It's going to be [a] long time until we find that. It's gonna get worst before it gets better, as the saying goes. It's gonna get worst. Christina Bennett So let's just say that you're successful in raising domestic revenues through all of the the different possibilities that you've just discussed: private sector, sovereign wealth funds, oil revenues, diaspora funding. There is a perception that a government like Somalia doesn't necessarily have the capacity or skills to step in where the international community has stepped out. Is that true? Does the Somali state have the capacity to offset the reductions in aid? Abdihakim Ainte There's two answer to this question. I mean, first one is capacity, here? I mean, what do we mean here? What are we referring here when we say the state capacity? And I often hear about the question of the capacity comes in. Of course, the state capacity, it's not the best of the best. I mean, you're talking about a state that is recovering from a deeply fractured, protracted civil war, right, of 30 years, Christina, and you cannot expect the state to have the the capacity to respond to every crisis. That cannot happen over time. However, if the question is framed around whether the government of Somalia has the credibility, and whether it has institutions that are able to respond and to take the leadership in their hand, yes, it's available, it's in place. But are they enough to scale and respond? The answer is no. And I always confront this question: What is the level of capacity of the state? And I say the level of the capacity can only function as much as of how much resources it has, but also it's a state that is still and until today going through a very tumultuous, a very critical juncture, because on one hand it is battling and struggling with regaining its security apparatus, rebuilding the security architecture of the country. On the other hand, you have a natural humanitarian crisis that are always pulling you in. When you thought you've already moved out from that, you have a crisis that always pulling you in, and that will require immediately. So it's a building state while you are also fighting the war in the middle of the way. So it's not it's not the choices are not easy, and it does not have a shortcut answer. But if the framing of the question is whether the state of Somalia does have institutions that are well placed and to guard the crisis and to respond, yes, because the government operates into federal layer. There is a national government of Somalia sitting in the capital city of Mogadishu, but also there are federal member states that are working closely with the national government of Somalia, and both of them have at least a modicum of institutions that are working and delivering something. But – then always there is a but – do you have the sufficient resources? No. Can you predict tomorrow? No. Do you have the capability that is required to forecast the challenge of tomorrow, not the challenge of today? Christina Bennett So, what do you do in the meantime? What's going to fall through the cracks as Somalia tries to reach the capacity that you're describing? Abdihakim Ainte We need to certainly invest in our institutions so that we are better prepared for the crisis of tomorrow. I mean, there are a lot of, you know, tools that are available within the toolbox, whether in early warnings. I mean, the most critical part is, you know, how can you predict for the weather of tomorrow and make sure that you forecast the data and the information rightly and accurately, and you deliver to the people, especially people who are living in the front lines, so that you give an appropriate and right information so that they can prepare when the crisis is about to strike. It's about investing the ability of our people: their skills, their knowledge, so that they can better prepare. It is about increasing our revenue so that we have resources, dollars that is being generated from our own resources rather than looking outward. I mean, looking inward, you know, generating money from our own. So it's a combination of investing in institution, people, resources, and it will gonna take time. I mean, Christina, like I said, this is a state that is regaining its ability, regaining its institutions day after day, and it's always be a messy. It's not, it's not beautiful… You know, reengineering a state that has completely collapsed from the ashes, it's not easy. It's gradual, it's an incremental process that requires patience, that requires capital, that requires skills, and it will take some time. Christina Bennett There's also a perception that if large amounts of funding were channelled through the government of Somalia, that funds channelled through the government of Somalia would end up in corruption. And as a matter of fact, in that New Humanitarian article, a Somali analyst that was quoted in the article said that, you know, funding the Somali government directly will end in corruption and “unimaginable suffering”. What do you say to that? Abdihakim Ainte So the question of corruption always, you know, comes in every discussion. In the humanitarian context, they called diversion of aid, right? That's what they call it, to be blunt. So there is a mechanism in place in every, especially institutions that are working and delivering humanitarian assistance. They have a very strong, robust aid diversion, you know, systems in place. And this is also a conversation or a discussion that takes place even in the Mutual Accountability Framework between the donor side and the government side. Now, corruption often is big and broad, and how you measure corruption is also another subject, maybe for another day to be discussed. But as far as the delivery of aid assistance goes or concerns, it's very important that first of all, the aid that is coming in the country comes through the mutual accountability platform or framework that we have. Thirdly, there is a strong system in place that we can, even from you here, you can track how many aid has been delivered to X and where. And the government every single day dedicates resources and knowledge and information as to how we can prevent and improve our accountability system. I know, and we are, you know, cognizant about how the question of corruption always corrodes our credibility – and it certainly does grow our credibility. Always, you will find instances where money ends up in the buckets of few individuals. But are we better off than we were the last cycle of election in terms of the aid and the money that has been given to the right people, to the intended people? Absolutely, yes. You can see it by the books. Even you can go to the aid community in Somalia and ask them how the money has been spent. But it's an ongoing mutual conversation that we need to engage. And one final thing, Christina, here: the question of accountability is not a one-sided one. It has to go both ways. Even those in the UN systems, they also need to be also asked and confronted the real question is of how the money are being designed and implemented through. So we're doing from our part. Now the other side also they have to do their part. Christina Bennett So let's say then that the government of Somalia is successful in building its capacity. There's money flowing through it, and there's a Somali-led aid response. What does that state-led response look like? How is it different from an international donor-led response? Abdihakim Ainte The state-led response would would look like that responses that can predict the crisis of tomorrow. That the resources are in place before crisis hit. That we are able to immediately activate and trigger all the necessary measures in place. That we have the full sufficient capacity to respond. That our institutions – both the federal and the national level – have the ability to immediately trigger the resources, and the informations, and the knowledge that's required. It means that the state of Somalia is capable of responding and saving their citizens, their people from collapsing into a complete chaos – the same way as every state, every responsible state does it. It's a responsibility that rests within the shoulder of the government of Somalia through its different institutions and systems. Christina Bennett And you've spoken a lot in this conversation around accountability: mutual accountability, accountability to people. What's to say that the government of Somalia will be accountable to its people, and that it won't just replicate the same top-down dynamics that you have in a donor-led response. Abdihakim Ainte From the government perspective, the accountability is to increase people to rely and trust the system of the government of Somalia. That there is no mistrust in the systems that is in place. And evidently, now in the government, I mean, people do tend to really believe and trust in the system. I'm not only here referring the federal you know layer in Mogadishu, I'm talking about across the national and subnational layers: people are trusting their systems. They are trusting their institutions. Their institutions are there for them to respond when there is a need for responding immediately. And the second one: it's about the credibility. You should earn the credibility from the people. It's not only a matter of improving and and increasing your accountability in terms of the systems and the resources, but also letting the people to believe in institutions so that whenever crisis knocks the door, they should not call WFP, or FAO, or, you know, other external agencies. The 991 should be the internal local institutions rather than outside institutions. Christina Bennett And what about localisation? I mean, as you know, there's been this huge push for locally-led humanitarian responses, and locally led not only being of local government or national governments, but local civil society. What about local responders? Is there room for them in the scenario you're painting? Abdihakim Ainte I mean, certainly yes. If you're referring here [to] the local NGOs and the local, you know, people, of course, there is room for it. And even though they also are facing an unprecedented challenges when it comes to fundings. But in fact, Somalia has more local organisations operating and delivering aid systems probably than any other country in the Horn of Africa that I can remember of. Every corner that you can go, even in remote places, you'll find, you know, localisation. You can find local communities responding, local organisations providing and giving the front respond immediately. So, the localisation and the local voices are available. And that's something that we're all – even the government of Somalia – is absolutely proud of. And it has been even there even before even the government. I mean, during even the civil wars. I do remember whenever crisis happened, we were immediately calling the local organisations that are nearby to help them. Christina Bennett But is that the job of the international community, or would that be the job of the Somali government if the Somali government was in fact leading all these responses? Abdihakim Ainte Well, it's the job of the government of Somalia, but also it's the job of also working, both side, of the local NGOs and the international NGOs to find a way in which they can build very close partnerships. I mean, one of my obsession with the current system that I have, right– so because you said now we're living in absolutely a different timeline than we have lived before, the entire landscape has changed. Therefore, the business cannot be as usual, okay, things have to change. Local NGOs and international organisations has to change their behaviours. The business model of the yesterday cannot be fit for the business for tomorrow. Aid has changed. Dynamics have changed. I mean, we're now living in a world where people are, you know, countries, sovereignty are being absolutely decimated, and are being tormented in a broad daylight. So the entire arc of aid industry and international system is now on the precipice of a complete collapse. So we need to adapt and find a more agile, more compatible model that we can find in. And that's why I press all organisations, whether international or local, to also make sure that they have to adapt with the world that we are entering now. Christina Bennett So we've been talking to a lot of people for this podcast. You know, people that believe in the system, people that think it needs to be turned on its head. But everyone feels that this moment, this pivotal moment in our humanitarian history, is both a catastrophe and a catalyst. A catastrophe because of all of the lives that are being lost as a result of, you know, aid organisations pulling out and money things being defunded and there not being enough money, but also a potential catalyst for something new to emerge. And I want to know: Do you feel that this is a moment that creates an opportunity for a different relationship between states and external actors? Abdihakim Ainte Indeed. Absolutely yes. The aid cut could be a blessing in disguise. And we are now, you know, exploring different alternatives to see if the government of, you know, states – whether in Somalia, or in Kenya, or in Ethiopia, or or in any other country around the world who have been receiving aid – if they can find an an absolute new alternatives. And Somalia is absolutely exploring that. And we're doing that through the private sector, through changing the tenor and the dynamics around us, that we will now be exploring the sources that I've talked about. Even the language around states have changed. I mean, can we have a mutual trade rather than aid, right? There's a lot of conversation. So this could be a moment, a defining moment where, you know, countries such as Somalia to see the current challenges and turn the current challenges into an opportunity, and them inward rather than looking outward. And by inward is trying to untap their potentials, harness their resources, harness their knowledge. They can do it, and the signs and the indications are showing every day that as we are moving away from the previous world order— I mean, call it a rupture. So, if that rupture is of something to be learned from and drawn, is: states who are on the receiving end of aid will find an alternative pathways out of this dependence. Christina Bennett How are the donors reacting to Somalia stepping into this role? How are they reacting to using this moment of rupture to establish a new relationship? Are they supportive? Abdihakim Ainte Well, yes. I mean, the donors they also would like to see a new opportunities being discussed. I mean, no one likes always to be sitting around a table where heads of state are always complaining, and whining, and asking, and begging for money for aid. No one likes it. It's very disconcerting and very disorienting, right? People are very uncomfortable, even when you are a government official and sitting in a room where, you know, a government bureaucrat from FCDO or a bureaucrat from the German government always pulls out a piles of paper and reports, and then says “Oh this, and money, and…”— it's very indignifying. No one likes that. So now that that conversation is gone, and now we are entering and having a new discussion, one that is built on: what are the opportunities between the two countries? If we were doing aid, how can we turn that aid into an opportunity? How can we use that by investing the right resilience opportunities available in the country, whether in fishery, in agriculture, in [a] vast array of areas to invest? So that is the type of conversation, and they seem to be really very supportive and very energised, I would say. And everyone now is preparing, preparing for the next world that we are entering into. Christina Bennett You know, although you're saying nobody wants to hear countries beg for their money, on the other hand, donor states have used international aid really effectively as an instrument of power. So, in this new sort of relationship you're picturing or you're describing to us, are donors seeing this as a threat to that power? Are they willing to give up that power in order to let Somalia get on with supporting its own country? Abdihakim Ainte Well, influence cannot only be drawn out from money in aid. It can be drawn out from also, you know, investing or having money by other means, right? If for example, an X country has a significant amount of investment in our port, or in different part of the country, I mean, certainly that country would have a sway. It will have a significant sway on influence on that country. No doubt about it. The only question that everyone is now is asking, and now there's a reckoning – there's a reckoning between even the donor community, even and recipient countries – that aid industry cannot be sustained as it is, and there has to be a change. And whether those countries are ceding their power over aid, I don't think so i's a right prescription. They can have their influence through other means, through bilateral trades, through bilateral collaborations, and it's really happening in many countries, and there are countries that are really proving that in Somalia now. Christina Bennett So from where you're sitting now, Abdi Hakim, in the Prime Minister's Office of the Government of Somalia, how would you like to see the relationship between Somali actors, the Somali state, and other humanitarian actors – whether it's donors, whether it's local responders – how would you like to see that relationship evolve? Abdihakim Ainte There has to be a new rethinking in terms of how we approach to the entire humanitarian aid. No one would like to see depleted photos being put out on reports, on newsletters – we have had that enough. Wveryone, whether in traditional or non-traditional, even the local responders, they are fatigued. There is a moral fatigue of money being, or handouts being given to people living in different makeshift camps. No one would like to see that. It's very inhumane. It is very old-fashioned. It is indignifying. It does not serve the interest of anyone. So the way we see, and the way we we would like to see, is a new compact, a new framework of compact has to be devised, and that compact has to be one that is built on a mutual collaboration, one that is built on mutual benefits: that you benefit and we benefit, but not on the basis of only one state is receiving free money and the other one is pouring free money. I think that that literature has to come to an end. Christina Bennett Is there a government that you know of that's already operating the way that you've described? Can we get inspiration from that? Abdihakim Ainte I mean, Türkiye. Türkiye is one country really leading the way for the donor community in Somalia. Not they are coming with big bags [of] money. And by the way, Türkiye contributes to Somalia far less money, far less money than what [the] U.S. and U.K. or Norway contributes to Somalia. But guess what they do? They come with their money, they ask the government of Somalia through the different people, even the local people, and they ask: "What do you need now? I'm not going to give you money that will come through aid packages and aid bands or handouts. Tell me something that I will give you, but you can use it for the long term.” And we say roads; they build roads. We say hospitals; they build hospitals. They build —this is the model. I mean, Türkiye does not enjoy the trust of Somalia from nowhere. Of course, they have their own questions, and we can have that conversation for another day, Christina. But let's call it for what it is: they have really showed a model, a new model that is built on entirely the need of the Somali people. And they don't channel the money through an intermediary agencies. They don't do that. They come and do it. And they're really winning; winning hearts, winning minds, and winning even the model. I mean, obviously with caveats and with big shortcomings. It's not absolutely the perfect one, but it's the one that if you want to explore inspirations or a model that to be looked [at], it’s the Türkiye model. Christina Bennett Abdihakim Ainte, thank you so much for your time today, and thank you for joining us on this podcast. It's been a real pleasure to hear from you. Abdihakim Ainte And I'm so happy to be contributing to this podcast. Thank you so much. — Christina Bennett To our listeners, we’d love to hear from you – What should the future of state-led humanitarianism look like for countries who traditionally receive aid? Tammam Aloudat Thank you for joining us on this special edition of Rethinking Humanitarianism in collaboration with Start Network. Christina Bennett This episode was hosted by Tammam Aloudat and Christina Bennett, and produced and edited by Melissa Fundira. Concept and editorial support from Irwin Loy and Kia Howson. Mixing by Tevin Sudi. Tammam Aloudat If you have any questions or comments, you can email us at [email protected]. Please rate and subscribe to our show wherever you get your podcasts. Also consider becoming a member of The New Humanitarian to help us continue reporting from the hearts of crises. Go to www.thenewhumanitarian.org to find out more.