Somalia Ruined: Intervention Fails Again

I predicted when the Ethiopians rode into Mogadishu in January, 2007, that the minute they fled with their tails between their legs, the Islamists would swarm back in to retake their place of power. I was right, but the time period was off — only because the occupiers, and the “Transitional National Government” they propped up, stayed far longer than anyone expected.

It’s been barely two years, but in that time span, Somalia’s economy and civil society has been gutted as if by fire — and in many cases, the literal sense applies. Of course, many things have changed since early 2007. Some of the more radical Islamists have gained strength after hardening as an armed insurgency. Half of Mogadishu’s population has been displaced by the fighting between the “transitional government” and the Islamist factions.

The tragedy is even more bitter because this is not par for the course in Somalia. Over the 15 years from 1991 after the end of the civil war, Somalia went from famine to having a functioning economy. Somalis enjoyed services such as schools, hospitals, multiple competing electricity, phone and internet companies and even a Coca-Cola bottling plant. It wasn’t Belgium by any stretch, but Somalis did for themselves what decades of foreign intervention never accomplished in any other country. All this despite the United States’ funding and arming of warlords — to “fight al-Qaeda,” of course — who continually threw off any peaceful equilibrium that might have been reached through economic stability. Those warlords now make up much of the foundering “government.”

The pirates that the world has been sweating lately do not exist in a vacuum — Somalia’s slide back down into the pit of poverty at the hands of its UN-installed “government” has forced the toughest among them to make a living where they can. Most of them would surely rather return to making money in another, less dangerous trade.

The Islamist groups have been fighting each other in recent weeks, but even this hasn’t kept one faction or another from snapping up bits of former “government” property and power. It seems the more moderate factions and tribal militias are fed up with the brutal tactics of the al-Shabaab group and are trying to finish them off before the “transitional” regime is officially routed.

I don’t know how this situation will end, except that it’s clear that forcing a state on authority-averse Somalis didn’t work the first 15 times, and likely won’t again in the future. The big question is, why wasn’t that obvious to “the international community”? Or — don your tin foil — maybe it was all along.

47 thoughts on “Somalia Ruined: Intervention Fails Again”

    1. Right on Andy!

      Jeremy Sapienza, you can call me tinfoil. I don’t think it’s at all likely that we will leave them alone. Our whole foreign policy is run out of fear of competition. Keeping the rest of the world unstable is the name of the game. It profits the power elite in so many ways. Thanks for the great article.


  1. So is Obama going to continue the same Bush-era interventionist policies in Somalia that he is doing in Pakistan? Will we see more “targeted killings” of supposed al-Qaeda operatives (and even more Somali civilians) by American drones in months to come?

    1. Doing so would be stupid and self-defeating, which is why he’ll do it. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

    2. Of course Obama will continue most of these policies (he’s already ordered bombings in Pakistan); you really think Bush started this mess? Let’s try to remember that it was Clinton who was so eager to intervene in Somalia in the first place. 911 did NOT “change everything”; there’s a seamless thread of continuity tying together all of the modern American Imperial Presidencies.

      1. dave,
        Actually it goes back to Poppy Bush. For reasons unfathomable to us, he deployed the first troops to Somalia. He did this going out the door.

  2. This sounds like a job for “United Nations Man’! Global interventionist and bon vivant extraordinaire. Yup, send in the “Clinton.” He’ll fix it sure enough. Hell, worked in the Balkans. Hmmm, or did it?

  3. Even though the Ethiopians have given up on Somalia, I suspect our interventionists in DC have not. For nearly two decades the continued American intervention in Somalia has brought nothing but more chaos in the Horn of Africa. Add to this an increasing number of young Somali-Americans have been returning to the country of their ancestors to receive paramilitary\terrorist training. How long before the deadly concoction of failed neocon foreign policy and failed immigration policies blow up (once again) in America’s face?

    1. So things are working as planned, then. I mean, how can we fight a war on terror if we don’t create any terrorists to fight? We need to use all those bullets somewhere, don’t we? So we create an arc of instability with our constant interventions so that we can justify — our interventions.

      It’s much the same as with the Israelis, who somehow always manage to stir things up a bit every time the Arabs start sounding a bit more reasonable.

  4. The problem with somalia is not that interventionism has failed it’s that no one has earnestly tried. A relatively small amount of money and a sustained effort could fix it’s ailments. However neither the U.S. nor Europe have any intrest in seeing a stable and 99% Muslim state emerge out of Somalia, a state that could in the future try to regain the mainly Somali region of Ethopia known as The Ogaden. As long as the myth of Ethopia as a ” Cristian ” nation remains the West will never allow Somalia to see peace.

    1. I’m sure the latest incarnation of (I would argue unaffordable) military expansionism, AFRICOM, will organize another coalition of ‘humanitarian’ interventionist forces to create another Afghanistan and Iraq. Afghanistan, Iraq, our proxy Georgia, soon Iran and North Korea. Hell, what’s a ‘world’ war without Africa?

      Certainly Susan Rice, now as inspired U.S. ambassador to the U.N., will finally be in a position to implement her long advocated ‘architectural’ changes to Africa.

      I’m sure she can turn mass murder into art (or at least political architecture)! Foreign political engineering, the privileges of power. And we complain about Hitler! I salute you Rice, SIEG HEIL!

    2. Are you out of your mind? Somalia is a failed state. It is one of the poorest and most backward, lawless countries in the world. Look what happened when we intervened there in the early 1990’s. Look at the trouble we are having “nation-building” in Iraq and Afghanistan. Some “cakewalk” that turned out to be! And what makes you think Somalia wants our intervention or would not oppose it fiercely? If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome, then you qualify Scott.

      1. Andy, I couldn’t agree more. Speaking of failed states, where is the money for these proposed interventions going to come from? Great article on the telegraph titled, “Bad News, its 1931, Good News, its not 1933 yet.”.

        The question is, are we going to repeat the same mistakes leading to WW2 and use war to stimulate the economy? If so, we should remember that the second world war ended with the use of atomic weapons. Recognizing that fact, how is any future global conflict likely to end?

        A sobering thought.

  5. Somalia was in its way to become stable under the ‘Islamic courts’ several years ago ,but that did not go well with the US who sees any group that is not follow its dictates as hostile,al-Qadea afliated,and terrorist.The US sent its client state Ethiopia to crush the hopes of the Somalis.

    1. Maybe I’m confused but isn’t our motto, “If you don’t serve us, your against us!” or something like that?

      Shame on the Somalis. Don’t they realize they are supposed to be another client state?

  6. Considering Obama’s Kenyan heritage, I wonder if he will take a much more openly interventionist role in East Africa then his Iraq-obsessed predecessor did. I cringed when I heard Hillary Clinton being asked about Darfur during her confirmation hearings. Militarized “humanitarian” intervention in Darfur and potentially Somalia seem very likely under Obama and Clinton, especially in the case of the former. If Obama and Clinton do end up going into Darfur and\or Somalia with no-fly zones, bombing raids, targeted killings, and “peacekeepers” we will undoubtedly see the “antiwar” liberals like Keith Olbermann and cheering the interventions on with the same zeal and dedication as Fox News and right-wing radio did for the invasion of Iraq. A “peacekeeping” expidition in Darfur and regime change in Khartoum is something that liberals and neocons can all rally around.

  7. First of all, the Ethiopians always go in and out of Somalia so this is no surprise. there is no conventional somalia army just insurgents and jihadists who think they get virgins for suicide bombing.

    secondly, why did you ignore the United Nations peace-deal, which was the only reason why ethiopia left somalia as part of the deal. and you lack knowledge about clan fighting in somalia because the islamist are certain clans only, without any control in puntland and somaliland. what about american tax money in humanitarian aid and development projects sent for years??
    also the moderate islamists are working with the government because the PM is successfully negotioting. i just wasted my time trying to explain to an idiot. give me back my 2 minutes!!

    1. I agree with both Scott and Dave.

      Ethiopia came to Mogadishu to prop up a UN-backed Transitional Government. They went there with promises from the AU and later the UN that they would relieve their troops and help establish a moderate government. Unfortunately, no country dared to back up their promises, so the Islamists created a perfect narrative of the ‘invading Ethiopians trying to take over their country.’ The result: thousands dead and millions displaced.

      This is just the latest example of how non-intervention by the western world has brought Somalia to near extinction. But While the West forgot, one country didn’t forget: Saudi Arabia.

      In the West’s ten years of neglect toward Somalia, the Saudi’s have invested millions toward building mosques, sending missionaries, and creating a generation of Waahabi fundamentalists. They systematically destroyed centuries of deep-rooted and moderate sufi islam in Somalia. They preyed on the weak, the hungry, and uneducated–filling their minds with anti-imperialist, anti-western theology.

      The hope for Somalia lies in true economic development: creating jobs, building infrastructure, and social services. The hope for Somalia lies in conflict resolution between clans and sub-clans. The hope for Somalia lies in moderates being able to be heard over the voices of fundamentalist hatred and narrow-mindedness.

      Obama’s America can be an example to Somalia of how to overcome centuries of prejudice and bigotry, how to transition power peacefully, how to moderate the role of religion in politics, and finally how to compassionately reach out a humanitarian and economic arm to those around the world that need it the most.

      1. the islamic courts were doing just fine in stablizing the country, werent they?

        but anything islamic is definitely not the flavor of the day, so the islamic courts were run out of town and a puppet from puntland was installed in a new, and phony, government.

        On October 14, 2004, the Somali Transitional Federal Parliament elected Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed, previously president of Puntland, to be president of Somalia. Because of the situation in Mogadishu, the election was held in a sports centre in Nairobi, Kenya. Yusuf was elected with 189 of the 275 votes from members of parliament.

        Somalia wikipedia

        well, hell…

        and now that the pirate ploy and the puppet president have been horselaughed out of town, it’s back to the drawing board.

        1. Your story sounds reasonable if it was historically correct.

          The fact is Somali ‘warlords’, or more accurately ‘clan strongmen’, have controlled their ancestral territory since the fall of the Siyaad Bare government.

          During these years, 14 attempts at forming a national unity government had failed. Finally, through a 4-year long reconciliation conference held in Kenya, all the Somali clans united together to form a new constitution in 2004. The rules of the constitution were to have the representative parliament select the transitional Prime Minister, who would reestablish the national unity government in Mogadishu, and hold democratic elections within 5 years.

          But as the new government made plans to return to Somalia, fundamentalist Islamic court leaders (busy stoning thieves and adulterers and calling it justice) decided they didn’t want this secular-leaning government to take over Mogadishu. If that happened they would have to surrender their powerful roles to a non-sharia judiciary system.

          So the court leaders gathered together and rounded up a militia, and they asserted their control over the capital city, (which after 15 years of civil war, had reverted into the domain of a single clan). They made a few reforms, and then tried to pitch to the world that Mogadishu was doing just fine without a representative government.

          But hey Wadosy, if you’re cool with religious totalitarianism increasing its influence in East Africa and the Middle East, maybe you won’t care if James Dobson and the Christian right gather a militia, invades D.C., sweeps the streets of alcohol and secular music, and declares itself the true government of America?

      2. “non-intervention by the western world has brought Somalia to near-exticntion”,,,,

        WRONG! Somalis brought Somalia to “near-extinction” (by the way, I would bet Somalia’s birthrate is higher then any western country, so much for “extinction”). Intervention, particularly American intervention only makes things a thousand times worse. Look at Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Europe in WW1 and the whacked-out, practically guaranteed to start another war, Versailles treaty. We don’t need any more Wilsonian, Clinton or Bush, “interventions”. The USA cannot solve the world’s problems.

      3. Jeff, your proposition of altruistic intervention in Somalia is very ‘nice’ but rejects geo-political realities. If in doubt just look at Afghanistan and Iraq.

        It is easy to justify invasions and occupations as altruistic however lets not be naive. You state the goal was to establish a moderate government. Without going into the puppet government debate, you believe we should do it like we did in Afghanistan and Iraq?

        We’ll ignore the fact that any secular government would have been unacceptable to the majority of the population, (but this was never going to be a democratic process), this form of political engineering is exactly why we have Afghanistan and Iraq.

        You stated that “the Islamists created a perfect narrative of the ‘invading Ethiopians trying to take over their country.’ The result: thousands dead and millions displaced.”.

        Do you believe that to suggest that the Islamists are solely at fault and responsible for the large number of deaths is balanced or reasonable? I would suggest your political bias and hatred of the Islamists is obvious. Your assessments are not balanced or impartial and do not consider the consequences of similar previous interventions.

        You try to justify Ethiopia’s intervention. As long as Ethiopia occupied Somalia, transparently on behalf of the ‘altruistic’ U.S., there was going to be armed resistance to the foreign presence. How many insurgent wars have we won? How many insurgent wars have we won through proxies?

        Moral issues aside for a moment, the flawed strategic proposal of military intervention, completely rejecting the obvious need for a political solution, will only prolong this war.

        As for our charitable foreign aid (from U.S. tax funds) only those completely ignorant of realities do not recognize that these funds are also widely used for political purposes (as political leverage). To argue otherwise reflects little understanding of politically motivated economic strategies.

        As for our help in developing their economic system, are you aware of our current (and worsening) economic situation? And we’re a role model? Then again those who can’t do, teach.

        You say ‘Obama’s America’ can be an example? Are you aware of global opinion of the U.S. after Afghanistan, Iraq and the Palestinian crisis? And how are Obama’s policies any different? Of course, his rhetoric is more seductive, very much like your speech. That’s about it.

    2. Dave, interesting ‘spin’ on events. Also interesting how the resort to offensive and abusive remarks always defines a persons character to others.

      Now I want my two minutes back.

    3. If something happenes to be repeated on the idiot box , on certain web sites,or talk shows does not make it true.”jihadists who think they get virgins for suicide bombing.”

      The Tamil tigers have used suicide bombings in Sri Lanka,Ceylon. The Tamil tigers happen to be not Muslims.Suicide bombings is method to affect a political change.The often repeated notion of ‘getting virgins for suicide bombing’ is nothing more than a myth .The idea that suicide bombings is the sole monopoly of so called jihadists or Muslims is total nonsense.But you certainally not learn that from the idiot box that most Americans get their education from
      “The LTTE’s Black Tiger are known to deploy suicide attacks, including suicide bombing. They pioneered the use of concealed suicide bomb vests,[117]. According to Jane’s Information Group, between 1980 and 2000, the LTTE carried out a total of 168 suicide attacks causing heavy damage on economic and military targets.[95].

      Here are few notes about Somalia:

      “Right out of the gate, in the second paragraph, Tomlinson asserts – without any qualification or attribution whatsoever – that those resisting the American-backed invasion of their country by are “threatening to turn the country back into a haven for al-Qaeda.” (9/11! 9/11!) Just two paragraphs later, he provides this description of the Islamic Courts council that had brought Somalia its first measure of peace and stability in 15 years before its overthrow by Ethiopian tanks and American bombs:
      …Islamic radicals who grabbed power for six months last year, filling Somalia’s power vacuum with a strict religious government. Like the Taliban who once ruled Afghanistan and hosted Osama bin Laden, the Somali movement, the Council of Islamic Courts, harbors al-Qaeda terrorists, U.S. officials say.
      Just like the Taliban! Osama bin Laden! 9/11! 9/11! At least this paragraph offers one of Tomlinson’s rare uses of a source – albeit unnamed ones – to back up his bald assertions. But the import is clear: the Islamic Courts council is the same thing as the Taliban and al Qaeda, and thus the invasion of Somalia is entirely justified as part of the noble War on Terror that President Bush is waging to keep Americans safe.
      Nowhere does Tomlinson offer even a pro forma mention of the Islamic Courts’ constant denials of any involvement with al Qaeda. Nor does he mention – doubtless because, in his sweet ignorance, he does not know – that the Courts themselves were comprised of various factions of varying degrees of religious fervor, from moderates to more hard-core fundamentalists. They were never simply a monolithic bloc of Taliban-style fanatics. You’d have to look to Mr. Bush’s longtime family friends, the Saudi royals, for that kind of thing; their kingdom is by far the most repressive religious regime on the face of the earth – and also a haven for not a few al-Qaeda supporters, including some very highly placed and quite wealthy ones. “

      “Very few Americans understood their nation had just invaded another in an act worthy of the late, unlamented Chairman Leonid Brezhnev.
      Much of Somalia has already been occupied by Ethiopia’s powerful, US-financed army which invaded that defenseless nation, with Washington’s blessing, under cover of the Christmas holiday.
      It is an open secret in Washington that the Somalia operation is to be the Bush/Cheney Administration’s new model for war against recalcitrant Muslims. The White House failed to convince India or Pakistan to rent their troops for occupation duty in Iraq, but it has succeeded in using Ethiopia’s army in Somalia. Ethiopia’s repressive regime was only too happy to invade Somalia and received large infusions of aid from Washington. The Administration is duplicating the British Empire’s wide scale use of native troops (“sepoys” in India; “askaris” in East Africa) in colonial wars.
      But is Somalia really a “hotbed of terrorism” as Washington claimed? The US-Ethiopian invasion of Somalia was sparked by last fall’s defeat of corrupt Somali clan warlords. They had recently been armed and financed by the CIA to fight the growing popularity of local Islamists.
      The warlords had kept Somalia in turmoil and near anarchy for 15 years. Last year, a group of Muslim jurists and notables, the Union of Islamic Courts, managed to defeat the warlords and impose a rough form of law and order on many parts of chaotic central and southern Somalia. Northern Somalia is ruled by a secessionist government based around the strategic port of Berbera. “

      “This is classic Establishment thinking here: the reduction of complex human societies to a few unruly character traits, supposedly unique and endemic faults that the poor creatures can’t control but which pose a danger to civilization, thus justifying massive military action to bring them to heel – for their own good, of course. Gettleman is stalwart in this regard. He ignores the direct and quite open American military involvement in the invasion: the U.S. training, arming and funding of the Ethiopian military, the deployment of U.S. Special Forces in the invasion, the airstrikes launched by U.S. planes on fleeing refugees, and the role of U.S. intelligence agents in arresting and “rendering” Somali refugees to the torture chambers of the Ethiopian dictatorship – all of which has been thoroughly documented by reputable mainstream newspapers in Europe, Asia, and Africa. Aside from one passing reference, in the 27th paragraph, of “covert American help” in the invasion, the only other mention he makes of any American involvement in Somalia is the Bush Administration’s “pledge of $100 million to rebuild the country.” Just another noble mission, in other words, another act of purest altruism from the “shining city on the hill.”

  8. that “pirates of puntland” story was just too lame to fly, no matter how hard the AEI pushed it.

    the AEI tried to inflate the pirates and their motorboats into some big menace that threatens oil shipments around africa… which is ludicrous, but the neocons were hoping to use the pirate threat to enlist more support for their iran war, which would have closed hormuz and stimulated pipeline construction to israel, at which point the oil would have been shipped through the med straight to europe, bypassing africa , and eliminating a long haul.

    but things are so up in the air, now, with obama and the elections in israel, it’s kinda hard to figure out what’s going on.

    if the superbowl gets nuked, then we’ll have a clue.

  9. It’s funny; even without my foil hat I can clearly see Allbright, Brezinski, Holbrooke, Susan Rice, Hillary, etc, scurrying around, whiskers twitching. Maybe I don’t need it any more. The B team practicing the dark arts on the dark continent, confident that no one will notice. Go, Skinnies!

  10. For all the people who believe that we should interveve in Somalia I have a few questions. First, even if we could help why should it be the US’s job? Where in the constitution does it say that the Federal government has the right to steal from me to aid anyone? If your so concerned about the plight of the Somalies why don’t you just go ahead and spend your time and money trying to help instead of insisting that I do it for you with my hard earned dollars? The State has no right to steal from me to aid anyone, plain and simple. Individuals have every right to spend their money as they choose. So knock yourselves out, I’ll spend my time and what little extra money I have for charity here at home.

    That’s the core problem with most do-gooder liberal socialists, they demand my money and my neighbors money for each of their little pet projects. How am I supposed to save up enough for my children’s college education, healthcare, etc. when your constantly picking my pocket?

    I’m not even going to get into how lousy are history has been in regards to our “helping” other countries.


    1. All very true. The only purpose of the U.S. military should be to defend America, not build or rebuild Somalia, or any other country. This mentality that the U.S. is the world’s cop, or social worker, is wrong. Wrong in principle and wrong in fact when actually played out.

  11. Stateless in Somalia, and Loving It

    “As for Somalia being lawless, Van Notten, a Dutch lawyer who married into the Samaron Clan and lived the last dozen years of his life with them, specifically challenges that portrayal. He explains that Somalia is a country based on customary law. The traditional Somali system of law and politics, he contends, is capable of maintaining a peaceful society and guiding the Somalis to prosperity. Moreover, efforts to re-establish a central government or impose democracy on the people are incompatible with the customary law.

    Van Notten distinguishes between the four meanings of the word “law” — statutory, contractual, customary, and natural law. The common misunderstanding is that legitimate rules only come from formally established entities and that therefore a country without a legislature is lawless. Refuting that misunderstanding, van Notten explains that a perfectly orderly and peaceful country can exist when people respect property rights and honor their contracts. While natural laws denote peace, liberty, and friendly relations, statutory laws represent commands. Statutory laws reflect the preferences of legislators, who impose “morality” on those they govern and regulate their ability to voluntarily enter into contracts. This, according to van Notten, is wrong from the standpoint of both morality and law…

    Questions arise as to rampageous warlords when discussing a country without a central government. Van Notten explains that warlords exist because of the efforts to form a central government, not because of its absence:

    “A democratic government has every power to exert dominion over people. To fend off the possibility of being dominated, each clan tries to capture the power of that government before it can become a threat. Those clans that didn’t share in the spoils of political power would realize their chances of becoming part of the ruling alliance were nil. Therefore, they would rebel and try to secede. That would prompt the ruling clans to use every means to suppress these centrifugal forces… in the end all clans would fight with one another.” (van Notten, 136; 2005)

    He thus asserts that efforts by the United Nations are not only futile, but also harmful to the Somalis.”

    “Significantly, the Somalis get it. They have learned through experience that less government is good, and that no government is better. Hear what telecommunications tycoon Abdirizak Ido told Mr. Cockburn: “We have been through some hard times, but the worst was when we had a government. Once there was no government, there was opportunity!”

  12. Wadosy, your comment about the pirates is closer to the truth than most of the boyz in this forum will ever admit. However, I believe there is even more into it than the eye meets.

    And, (Andy 2009-01-27 09:37:16) yes, you are right, the wisest thing to do – is to leave us (Somalis) alone! ;-)

  13. Idiocy is usually described as “endlessly repeating the same process, hoping for a different result”. What does this say about our military interventionist policy?

  14. None of this is an accident. You think the world wants a strong African non-capitalist state in that location? The world is still very colonialized.

    1. Jackson, the ‘White Zimbabwean’ created and backed ‘MDC’ in Zimbabwe, established by white businessmen (Eddie Cross, Roy Bennet), who state that their intention is to privatize Zimbabwe’s public assets certainly supports your observation.

    2. Somalia without a state was the most nakedly capitalist country on earth. What the “world” does not want is people being too damn free — free of control, free of the international system. Somalis created something from nothing, no resources, no significant aid, nothing — and the West felt emasculated and had to destroy it anew.

      1. I agree wholeheartedly with you, Jeremy! What we [Somalis] did – no other Nation/State in modern history managed to do – however, years of westerns’ brain washing and indoctrinating us against our own African values – some of us [especially our stupid leaders/politicians] do not see things the way you just described it.

        Moreover, these same stupid leaders/politicians of ours take with them another chunk of our people – because of the stupid tribe loyalty, and unfortunately, the west wins again with out much effort. You see, the west won the battle and the war when they convinced us to believe that our defining character is the tribe itself. The greatest misfortune we Africans have is our own refusal to use and trust our own brains instead of the westerns’. :-(

  15. Pretty good post. Ho appena imbattuto il tuo blog e volevo dire che ho apprezzato molto leggere il tuo post sul blog. Alcun modo sarò sottoscrivendo il feed e spero di postare di nuovo presto.

  16. J'ai besoin de le souligner, que dans tous les temps que j'ai passé en ligne, sites d'information suivants, je n'ai pas lu un aussi utile et bien conçu que celui-ci, je n'ai pas souvent des commentaires sur internet des journaux néanmoins pour vous-même, jeressenti le besoin de faire une exception, ce n'est certainement travail vraiment haut et totalement opposé à l'imbécillité, qui je passe beaucoup de mon temps sur la ligne, la lecture. Merci de prendre le temps et investir l'effort de présenter à vos lecteurs avec un rapport de 1ère classe. J'ai hâte de lire beaucoup plus de votre travail, à nouveau des acclamations.

  17. Tchad Blanc interprétation du lookbook de are generally Rugby Ralph lauren Hommes 2012 Spg, l'interprétation du furthermore pur model relaxed américaine. Coupés de taille et d'autres détails deviennent souligne 2012Ralph printemps Lauren.

Comments are closed.