Silanyo is Somaliland's President, not its Foreign Minister.

A big issue with recognition is with the country from which it breaks away (the metropolitan state). If Sudan accepts South Sudan's sovereignty, then other countries will follow suit. There is a precedent for this in Africa, in Eritrea. Ethiopia fought hard to keep Eritrea but when the time came, Ethiopia recognized their independence and sovereignty. This of course is not the case with Somaliland. Somalia does not accept their independence.
Much of it has to do with the international communities relationship with the metropolitan state, more than the breakaway state. Will China recognize South Sudan if Sudan doesn't? No, because the relationship with Sudan is more important. Would the US recognize Abkhazia in spite of Georgia? Also no. And that is what is unique about Somaliland. What country in the world really cares about a relationship with the utterly failed Somalia? Recognizing Somaliland doesn't cost a country a reliable partner.
And if it's historical precedence people want, Somaliland has that; as it was a different colony than Somalia, with historical colonial boundaries, to which the African Union says they adhere.

All of this talk of the "international community" when there really is only one power that decides who is given "independence" and who is forced to be subjugated to majority state.

Let us not pretend that there isn't a global empire which inherited the world order, or took it, from European colonial empires who carved up the planet to suit their whims and desires.

When the Russian Federation was formed out of the USSR, Russia granted referendum votes to Baltic and Slavic nations who promptly seceded. But Chechnya and Dagestan, colonies conquered by the czars, were forced to submit to Moscow without a referendum. And America approved of this because everyone knows that if Russia looses access to the Caucasus mountain ranges, there is only wide open plains from the foothills to Moscow- virtually indefensible in today's military capacity. So the West approved of Russia's imperial conquests in order to sustain its role on the continent and world arena.

Mindinao was a province of the Sultanate of Brunei before European colonial empires invaded the southeast Asian islands. Mindinao was part of the Malay people, but as part of the "DIVIDE AND CONQUER" strategy towards Muslim people, European colonial empires divided Malay people into various segments, forcing Mindinao to be a province of Christian dominated Phillipines.

Somaliland has tried to build relations with the UK and Australia, in particular to harness Somaliland's rich mineral resources. There are estimated to be 100s of billions worth in coal and other minerals in Somalia.

Pretending that there is an "international community" that decides the "fate" of tiny helpless nations is dishonest and fraudulent. And to PERPETRATE that foreign agendas weren't in play to force secession is also a fraud.

For the record, Colombia tried to build the Panama canal with French assistance, but failed. Thereafter, America fomented a "Panamanian" rebellion for independence. After clashes, America stepped in and forced Colombia to allow Panamanian independence, which it did. Promptly after, America set up a major military base for 90 years and built the Panama canal.

An innocent force for independence?

Southern Sudan has oil and minerals and China has had mineral rights for decades for the region. A new nation would present new legal rights. It would also force that new nation to be subservient and dependent upon America and others.

America educated, trained, and supported the SPLA for decades in order to bring about secession. I guarantee you that if a foreign power had supported the American Confederate army, it would very likely had succeeded in sustaining secession.

It isn't really arbitrary concerning which states are recognized. It's a matter of political realities. The global community wants a Somalia to exist so they hold off on recognizing places like Puntland or Somaliland even though those two have better claims to being states.

USAMA2,

You are very wrong about Sudan, my friend.

I am a Sudanese and I was in Sudan during the war.

In fact, the U.S supported North Sudan ( or the government of Sudan) for most of the war, from 1955 to 2005. The U.S government stopped supporting the Khartoum regimes starting in 1989 when Omar Bashir took over power by a military coup. 1989 is the year.

Now, the U.S only starting paying attention to the human suffering in Sudan in the 1990s. And do you know why? I doubted it. During the 1990s, Osama Bin Laden was in Sudan at the peak of Islamic fundamentalism in the country. Sudanese politicians like Bashir and Hassan al Turabi were pushing through with their Islamization and Arabic in the South Sudan. It was this time that the government declared Jihad on the Southern populace. Villages were burned down in the name of Allah. Air crafts came three to four times a day to bomb villages, huts, etc. These aircrafts, which were sent from Khartoum, came in the morning, the afternoon, and the evening. It was devastating. And this is why Southerners are sure to vote for 100% secession. They know what unity means to them and it is death.

Now about the U.S, it forced out Osama bin Laden in 1997, and the U.S bombed a pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum in 1997, because Clinton thought it was weapons factory. This is the time that the U.S made a 180 degrees turn in policy in Sudan.

From this period onward, the U.S intensified humanitarian efforts, food, shelter, etc. U.S was never supplying weapons to South Sudan ( or the South's army, SPLA). Maybe now the U.S is helping the South as it professionalize it former rebel army into a fullblown conventional army.

My Question is: Why do all arabs thinks everything wrong with them has to do with the West or America. It is ridiculous. Wake it and pay attention to the issues. Analyze on a case by case basis.

Arabs are now saying that the problem in Sudan is America ( and the West)'s conspiracy to break up another arab country. Well, Sudan is not an arab country to begin with. It is an African country. Those Sudanese have just been brainwashed to think that they are arabs, when in fact they are treated like trash in the Middle East by the real arabs. Sudan is atleast 90% Black. Just wait until arab-wannabes Sudanese like Darfuris wake up and realize their sorry situations and the idea of Sudan as being an arab country will soon come to an end.

So, arabs need to stop crying over Sudan. There was war in Sudan for 50 years and they were supporting the North as it promoted and executed Jihad against the southern populace. Luckily the southerners have pulled through with the war and now they are in a situation to depart and leave behind their racist, arab-wannabe brothers in the North. That is the problem of the arab world. They care about arab power and prestige to the point that they become oblivious to the actual human suffering. Is your God really race neutral?

Really?

May I remind FP viewers that as most of African sovereign nations, Somaliland also got independence from the Britain on 26 June1960, and over 39 strong countries recognised Somaliland as a sovereign state with viable government, defined bounderies and supporting population.
Now that African Union opted for Africans and would be states respect as pre-colonial bounderies, and applying that very point on Somaliland for over a period of 20 years - while overlooking the mere fact the would be State of Somaliland only re-claimed their pre-colonial borders and issue the was not applicabe. Furthermore, it was the AU host and then leading Stat of Ethiopia who propogated for territorial bounderies left as colonil powers left them (even if left opression blunders behind), mainly to bury Somali Government's claims of land and people in both Ethiopia and Kenya.Such shameful AU charter was holding until the irony of Ethiopia giving independence to Erirea came to being and thus breaking it before anyone else.
If however, a sovereign State of Southern Sudan comes to being and issue of Somaliland recognition was not reconsidered by the AU, it will be a tragedy to view legalised injustice of applying law to some and not to onother.