Ayrotv.com- The recent decision by UNESCO to recognize the SITI region in Ethiopia and Zayla in the Awdal/Salal region as historically linked to the Issa people has raised significant concerns among historians, scholars, and the local communities involved. This decision appears to be based on narratives that lack substantial historical evidence, prompting a call for a reevaluation of the processes that led to this controversial acknowledgement.
At the heart of this issue is the expectation that an esteemed organization like UNESCO would uphold rigorous standards of research and verification when dealing with sensitive territorial claims. The responsibility to ensure accuracy in such matters is crucial, especially given the potential ramifications of altering historical narratives and the identities of communities. The question arises: Where was the check and balance in this process?
Critics argue that the decision overlooks centuries of documented history regarding the Gadaboursi people, who have long been recognized as the rulers of the Zayla region. Historical records indicate that during the era of colonialism, both the British and the French engaged directly with the Gadaboursi kings, known as “Ugaas.” These interactions were not mere formalities; they were essential pacts that acknowledged the Gadaboursi’s sovereignty over the territory extending from Zayla to Harar, with Zayla serving as a significant capital.
The assertion that the Issa people have historical ties to these regions must be substantiated with credible evidence. UNESCO’s decision appears to lack this critical historical backing. It raises concerns about the group responsible for this project. Were they adequately equipped with the necessary historical expertise? Did they consult existing archives or historical artifacts that could provide a clearer picture of the region’s past?
For those seeking clarity, a wealth of information exists within British and French governmental records. Archives, such as those housed at Oxford University, contain documents detailing the agreements made with the Gadaboursi kings. Additionally, understanding the historical context of the Ottoman Empire’s influence in the region could shed light on the complexities of territorial claims. The Gadaboursi, who had their own alphabet known as “Far Gadaboursi,” played a significant role in trade and governance, further complicating the narrative being proposed by UNESCO.
The implications of this decision extend beyond academic discourse; they challenge the integrity and reputation of UNESCO itself. A misstep of this magnitude could be seen as a scandal, jeopardizing the organization’s credibility in the realm of cultural heritage recognition.
In light of these concerns, it is imperative for UNESCO to review its decision regarding the SITI region and Zayla. A thorough investigation into the historical claims and the evidence supporting them is essential to rectify this situation. The head of UNESCO should take these criticisms seriously and consider retracting the recognition until a comprehensive review is conducted.
In conclusion, the issues raised by this decision highlight the need for rigorous historical research and accountability in international organizations. UNESCO must ensure that its actions reflect a commitment to truth and justice, especially in matters that shape the identities of communities and regions. The call for a reexamination of the historical context surrounding Zayla and the SITI region is not just a plea for accuracy; it is a demand for respect for the rich and complex histories that define these lands.
By: PROF. BURAALE XINIIN
