Rituals or Rights? The Politics of Female Genital Modification in Somalia
By Yasmin Yousof
The issue of Female Genital Modification (FGM) in Somalia is a topic deeply entrenched in politics at both the local, governmental and international levels. Local leaders who are vested in establishing their political legitimacy, as well as governmental officials attempting to validate Somali government in the international sphere, have all manipulated the topic in an attempt to sustain their political power. With its increasing politicization, it appears that FGM is becoming more and more difficult to solve.
Female Genital Modification, referring to a surgical operation performed on women involving genital circumcision, has been practiced in Somalia for thousands of years. Statistically, 100-140 million women have undergone FGM worldwide, with another 3 million at risk in Africa alone. In Somalia, FGM is viewed as a practice deeply embedded in Somali cultural and religious roots, and is performed on girls as young as five. Regarding FGM, Somalia’s amended constitution reads “the circumcision of girls is a cruel and degrading customary practice, and is tantamount to torture. The circumcision of girls is prohibited.”
Despite this, the practice is widespread, with many local communities blatantly disobeying the law in what they argue is the preservation of their cultural identity. According to a recent qualitative study: “There is a strong resistance towards the abandonment of the practice in Somalia... and widespread support for the continuation of the Sunnah circumcision.” Because nearly 90 percent of the population openly supports some form of FGM, local leaders follow the whims of their constituents. These leaders, whose followings primarily comprise of the traditional rural masses, promote FGM in order to be viewed as credible in the eyes of their traditional support bases.
Somalia has been in political shambles for nearly two decades. The country fell into tumultuous instability after the disposing of its president, and the impact of the gruesome civil war was obvious: very quickly international aid and assistance ceased, the International Monetary Fund withheld money, and the UN acknowledged Somalia as a humanitarian crisis. Two generations later, democratically elected Hasan Sheikh Mohamud came to power. His vision was broad and powerful – he sought to reenter Somalia into the international stage. In January of 2013, the United States recognized Somalia as a sovereign state. Shortly after, the United Nations lifted a 21-year long arms embargo, the longest of its kind. In June, the European Union and more than seventy members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States voted to allow Somalia entry into the Cotonou Agreement, ensuring economic support.
In September of this year, Mohamud did something no other Somali president did before him; he blatantly and openly took an opposition position against rape, sexual violence, and FGM in Somalia. Speaking to Amnesty International, he noted that FGM was “against the modern way of life...against Islam” and very soon would be wiped out entirely. In response to criticism of gender inequality being rampant in Somalia, Mohamud combated by saying gender equality has been legally recognized since the early 60s, but historical institutions and cultural barriers have long been obstacles Somalia is battling. The same week coinciding with Mohamud’s speech against FGM and gender inequity, Somalia received nearly 2.4 billion dollars from the European Union as part of a deal to help Somali development. The timing of the EU aid and the public statement regarding such a touchy and controversial subject is no coincidence. Mohamud’s neglect of local affairs, coinciding with the timing of the EU aid, elucidate the reasoning behind his public statement against FGM. Such public opposition to FGM can be viewed as an attempt to gain international favor in support of a gender equality that is the touchstone of contemporary Western principles. It appears that Mohamud and his administration have no interest in the preservation of or outlawing of FGM for humanitarian purposes. Rather, his vested interests lie in aligning himself with Western norms in order to precipitate Somalia’s reentry of the international sphere.
In the same way local leaders are using the issue of FGM to sustain political power through the religiocultural legitimacy that support of FGM provides, Mohamud and his administration are doing the very same thing. Yet in Mohamud’s case, his opposition to FGM and support of such Western norms only furthers the estrangement between the Somali population and government. Coming from a top-down institution like the government, opposition to FGM is not perceived as a defense of women, but rather an attack on a culture that needs to be preserved. In his effort to reconcile Somali relations especially with the West, Mohamud’s stance on FGM has alienated a significant portion of the population who see it as an imperial attack on traditional and local culture. Therefore, despite calls from Mohamud for gender equality, the end of FGM in Somalia is hardly any nearer.
Given the political context, the “complete eradication of FGM” that Mohamud called for in Somalia seems extremely unrealistic. While it is certainly a violating practice, FGM is the epitome of self-identity, womanhood, and entry into the social arena for the women of Somalia. Opponents arguing the dehumanization and cruelty of female circumcision too often forget that first and foremost, FGM is an intimate ritual deeply embedded in Somali culture. Therefore, its removal will likely be dependent on local grassroots movements, and not from any top-down institution. Hopefully, those grassroots movements will have the capacity to end the practice once and for all.
Female Genital Modification, referring to a surgical operation performed on women involving genital circumcision, has been practiced in Somalia for thousands of years. Statistically, 100-140 million women have undergone FGM worldwide, with another 3 million at risk in Africa alone. In Somalia, FGM is viewed as a practice deeply embedded in Somali cultural and religious roots, and is performed on girls as young as five. Regarding FGM, Somalia’s amended constitution reads “the circumcision of girls is a cruel and degrading customary practice, and is tantamount to torture. The circumcision of girls is prohibited.”
Despite this, the practice is widespread, with many local communities blatantly disobeying the law in what they argue is the preservation of their cultural identity. According to a recent qualitative study: “There is a strong resistance towards the abandonment of the practice in Somalia... and widespread support for the continuation of the Sunnah circumcision.” Because nearly 90 percent of the population openly supports some form of FGM, local leaders follow the whims of their constituents. These leaders, whose followings primarily comprise of the traditional rural masses, promote FGM in order to be viewed as credible in the eyes of their traditional support bases.
Somalia has been in political shambles for nearly two decades. The country fell into tumultuous instability after the disposing of its president, and the impact of the gruesome civil war was obvious: very quickly international aid and assistance ceased, the International Monetary Fund withheld money, and the UN acknowledged Somalia as a humanitarian crisis. Two generations later, democratically elected Hasan Sheikh Mohamud came to power. His vision was broad and powerful – he sought to reenter Somalia into the international stage. In January of 2013, the United States recognized Somalia as a sovereign state. Shortly after, the United Nations lifted a 21-year long arms embargo, the longest of its kind. In June, the European Union and more than seventy members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States voted to allow Somalia entry into the Cotonou Agreement, ensuring economic support.
In September of this year, Mohamud did something no other Somali president did before him; he blatantly and openly took an opposition position against rape, sexual violence, and FGM in Somalia. Speaking to Amnesty International, he noted that FGM was “against the modern way of life...against Islam” and very soon would be wiped out entirely. In response to criticism of gender inequality being rampant in Somalia, Mohamud combated by saying gender equality has been legally recognized since the early 60s, but historical institutions and cultural barriers have long been obstacles Somalia is battling. The same week coinciding with Mohamud’s speech against FGM and gender inequity, Somalia received nearly 2.4 billion dollars from the European Union as part of a deal to help Somali development. The timing of the EU aid and the public statement regarding such a touchy and controversial subject is no coincidence. Mohamud’s neglect of local affairs, coinciding with the timing of the EU aid, elucidate the reasoning behind his public statement against FGM. Such public opposition to FGM can be viewed as an attempt to gain international favor in support of a gender equality that is the touchstone of contemporary Western principles. It appears that Mohamud and his administration have no interest in the preservation of or outlawing of FGM for humanitarian purposes. Rather, his vested interests lie in aligning himself with Western norms in order to precipitate Somalia’s reentry of the international sphere.
In the same way local leaders are using the issue of FGM to sustain political power through the religiocultural legitimacy that support of FGM provides, Mohamud and his administration are doing the very same thing. Yet in Mohamud’s case, his opposition to FGM and support of such Western norms only furthers the estrangement between the Somali population and government. Coming from a top-down institution like the government, opposition to FGM is not perceived as a defense of women, but rather an attack on a culture that needs to be preserved. In his effort to reconcile Somali relations especially with the West, Mohamud’s stance on FGM has alienated a significant portion of the population who see it as an imperial attack on traditional and local culture. Therefore, despite calls from Mohamud for gender equality, the end of FGM in Somalia is hardly any nearer.
Given the political context, the “complete eradication of FGM” that Mohamud called for in Somalia seems extremely unrealistic. While it is certainly a violating practice, FGM is the epitome of self-identity, womanhood, and entry into the social arena for the women of Somalia. Opponents arguing the dehumanization and cruelty of female circumcision too often forget that first and foremost, FGM is an intimate ritual deeply embedded in Somali culture. Therefore, its removal will likely be dependent on local grassroots movements, and not from any top-down institution. Hopefully, those grassroots movements will have the capacity to end the practice once and for all.
