Connect with us


Photos of the Somali Beach Where Decades of Civil War Are Forgotten



Friday night on Lido beach in Mogadishu.

This article originally appeared on VICE Canada.

Toronto photographer Yasin Osman knows that Google search isn’t kind to Somalia. If you look up the country, chances are you’re going to read about al Shabaab attacks or food shortages—you’re not likely to learn it has the longest coastline in Africa.

So on a recent trip with the humanitarian group #LoveArmyforSomalia, Osman set out to capture the nightlife and beach culture. “I haven’t been to Somalia since I was a child; it was my first time going back,” Osman said. “The only thing I kept thinking about while on the plane was Lido beach, and the stories my mother use to tell me about it.”

Osman says his mom often spent Friday nights after school hanging out, drinking tea, and making jokes by the ocean in Mogadishu—something he couldn’t imagine until he saw for himself. “Within the first few minutes I was there, I couldn’t help but smile. Around me, I saw boys playing soccer, kids dancing, and mothers teaching their daughters to swim,” he said. “It was more beautiful than I had envisioned.”

The photos have hit a nerve on social media, something Osman credits to the contrast next to media coverage of more than two decades of civil war. “I think it’s because Somalis want to see Somalis being portrayed in a positive light. We want to see that love being shown, and it’s resonating with people that I’m trying to change the narrative.”

Because the joy of Osman’s subjects is truly irresistible, and who knows, these faces might end up in Google image search one day. Here are more photos from Lido beach in Somalia.

Follow Yasin Osman on Twitter.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply


Could Somalia be your next holiday destination?



Somalia might not be the first destination you would think of when booking a holiday, but this week the country joined UN World Tourism Organisation in the hopes of changing your mind. Before decades of violent conflict, the beaches of Mogadishu were a popular destination, attracting visitors from around the world.

Shuaib Abdalla, Operations Manager at the Somali Tourism Association, told Newsday how the country hopes to attract tourists in the coming years.

Continue Reading

Briefing Room

US State Department Issues Another Travel Warning for Ethiopia



US Dept. of State — The Department of State warns U.S. citizens of the risks of travel to Ethiopia due to the potential for civil unrest and arbitrary detention since a state of emergency was imposed in October 2016.

The Government of Ethiopia extended the state of emergency on March 15, 2017, and there continue to be reports of unrest, particularly in Gondar and Bahir Dar in Amhara State. This replaces the Travel Warning of December 6, 2016.

The Government of Ethiopia routinely restricts or shuts downs internet, cellular data, and phone services, impeding the U.S. Embassy’s ability to communicate with U.S. citizens in Ethiopia and limiting the Embassy’s ability to provide consular services. Additionally, the Government of Ethiopia does not inform the U.S. Embassy of detentions or arrests of U.S. citizens in Ethiopia.

Avoid demonstrations and large gatherings, continuously assess your surroundings, and evaluate your personal level of safety. Remember that the government may use force and live fire in response to demonstrations, and that even gatherings intended to be peaceful can be met with a violent response or turn violent without warning. U.S. citizens in Ethiopia should monitor their security situation and have contingency plans in place in case you need to depart suddenly.

Given the state of emergency and the unpredictable security situation, U.S. citizens in Ethiopia should have alternate communication plans in place, and let family and friends know that communication may be limited while you are in Ethiopia. The Department of State strongly advises U.S. citizens to register your mobile number with the U.S. Embassy to receive security information via text or SMS, in addition to enrolling in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP).

For further information:

US Department of State

Continue Reading


What to Know About Travel Ban Appeals



Does federal law give President Donald Trump broad legal authority to freeze immigration by refugees and citizens of some predominantly Muslim nations? That’s the question before two federal appellate courts.

By GENE JOHNSON, Associated Press

Does federal law give President Donald Trump broad legal authority to freeze immigration by refugees and citizens of some predominantly Muslim nations?

That’s the question before two federal appellate courts that have now heard arguments over Trump’s revised travel ban and are being asked by Trump’s opponents to use the president’s own anti-Muslim campaign rhetoric against him. Federal courts in Hawaii and Maryland earlier this year blocked Trump’s revised travel ban from taking effect. Trump wants those decisions reversed.

On Monday a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Seattle heard Hawaii’s lawsuit challenging the ban, which would suspend the nation’s refugee program and temporarily bar new visas for citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

Last week, judges on the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, heard arguments over whether to affirm a Maryland judge’s decision putting the ban on ice.


Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall told the appellate court judges the president’s directive falls squarely within his duty to secure the nation’s borders and that it does not discriminate against Muslims in its language or in its operation.

Previous presidents have blocked certain foreign nationals: Jimmy Carter used his authority to deny some Iranians entry to the U.S. during the hostage crisis, Ronald Reagan to bar Cubans who didn’t already have relatives here; and President Barack Obama to keep out North Korean officials. On Monday Wall said the order doesn’t say anything about religion. “This order is aimed at aliens abroad, who themselves don’t have constitutional rights,” Wall said.


They argue it violates the Constitution by disfavoring Islam and point to statements Trump made repeatedly as a candidate in which he said he would ban Muslims from entering the country. In issuing his decision blocking the ban in March, Judge Derrick Watson in Honolulu cited what he called “significant and unrebutted evidence of religious animus” in Trump’s campaign statements. Speaking before the 9th Circuit judges on Monday, Neal Katyal, who represented Hawaii, also said Trump had repeatedly spoken of a Muslim ban during the campaign and after. “This is a repeated pattern of the president,” Katyal said.

They also argue that the while the president has broad authority over immigration, that power extends only as far as Congress has granted it. Because Congress has already adopted a scheme regarding when people may be excluded from the country for terror-related activities, the president cannot override that with his travel ban, they argue.


In 1952, with the nation fearful of communist infiltration, Congress gave the president the authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act to take action: “Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may … suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate,” the law says. But a law subsequently passed by Congress bans discrimination on the basis of nationality when it comes to issuing immigrant visas. How those laws might authorize or constrain Trump’s actions is a key aspect of the travel ban cases.


Trump’s attempted travel bans have caused the number of refugees coming into the U.S. to plummet in the last two months, despite his executive orders largely being blocked in the courts. The number of refugees arriving in the U.S. dipped to 2,070 in March, which was a six-year low except for a period in 2013 when the federal government was shut down. The figure was slightly higher in April, at 3,200, but it was still much lower than the months preceding Trump’s order. An executive order signed by Trump in January decreased the refugee limit from 110,000 to 50,000 this fiscal year, but the cap was not blocked in court until mid-March. That caused the State Department to tightly rein in monthly arrivals when the cap was in effect.

Earlier this month, the State Department announced it wants to review social media, email addresses and phone numbers from some foreigners seeking U.S. visas, as part of the Trump administration’s enhanced screening of potential immigrants and visitors.


The federal appellate judges are considering rulings by two federal judges against the travel ban. Neither U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang in Maryland nor Watson in Hawaii bought the administration’s reasoning that the ban is about national security. Watson criticized what he called the “illogic” of the government’s arguments and cited “significant and unrebutted evidence of religious animus” behind the travel ban. He also noted that while courts should not examine the “veiled psyche” and “secret motives” of government decision-makers, “the remarkable facts at issue here require no such impermissible inquiry.” But the scope of the rulings differed. In a challenge brought by Hawaii, Watson blocked the federal government from enforcing its ban on travel from six mostly Muslim countries and its suspension of the nation’s refugee program. Chuang only blocked the six-nation travel ban, saying it wasn’t clear that the suspension of the refugee program was similarly motivated by religious bias.


The appellate courts in Washington state and Virginia will issue their decisions, though exactly when they’ll rule is uncertain. The travel ban cases are expected to reach the Supreme Court at any rate, but that would likely be cemented if the 4th and 9th Circuits reach differing conclusions about its legality.

Last week, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan in the nation’s capital said she’s “inclined to agree” that the travel ban is unlawful, but held off on a request to block it because of the pending appeals court cases. Hawaii Attorney General Douglas Chin said Monday that means even if the 4th and 9th Circuits side with the administration, the travel ban could be put on hold yet again.


Associated Press reporter Meredith Hoffman in Austin, Texas, contributed to this report.

Continue Reading