Opinion: The State Must Come First: Somalia Must Reject a Return to Transitional Politics | Dawan Africa

“Somalia’s hard-won state-building gains should not be sacrificed in the pursuit of short-term political advantage. Yet that is precisely the risk posed by the Somali Future Council’s latest proposal.”-Ali Omar Mohamed

—–

On 27 July 2026, the Council issued an open letter to the heads of state, defence ministers, and chiefs of defence forces of the countries contributing troops and police to the African Union Support and Stabilisation Mission in Somalia (AUSSOM).

Issued ahead of the Kampala Summit, the letter calls on foreign governments to condition their continued security engagement in Somalia on a new domestic political arrangement, including the establishment of an unelected transitional council to replace or exercise authority over the country’s existing federal institutions.

That proposal is not simply misguided. It is constitutionally indefensible, politically dangerous, and unbecoming of anyone who aspires to lead Somalia.

The country formally ended the transitional era in 2012. That achievement was not a procedural technicality. It marked the culmination of years of sacrifice and state-building by the Somali people, supported by African and international partners.

The federal institutions established since then remain imperfect, but they represent the gradual restoration of Somali sovereignty: a recognised federal government, a functioning Parliament, national security institutions, ministries, courts, an electoral commission, and an expanding system of public administration. Their shortcomings should be addressed through reform—not by dismantling the constitutional order whenever political disagreements arise.

The proposed transitional council would not represent reform. It would represent regression, replacing constitutionally established institutions with an appointed body whose membership, mandate, and accountability would rest on political bargaining rather than constitutional legitimacy.

Somalia has travelled this road before. Transitional arrangements repeatedly produced political paralysis, disputed mandates, patronage, and prolonged uncertainty instead of lasting stability.

The first responsibility of every Somali political leader—whether in government or opposition—is to protect and strengthen the Somali state. Political competition is legitimate, but it must never come at the expense of institutions that generations of Somalis struggled to rebuild.

Outsourcing Somali Politics to Foreign Capitals#

The letter asks Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Burundi, and Egypt—countries whose soldiers and police officers have sacrificed greatly in support of Somalia—to use their security engagement to influence the country’s internal political settlement.

That is an extraordinary request for self-described Somali patriots to make.

Somalia’s political disagreements are real and deserve serious, inclusive, and peaceful resolution. But they must be settled by Somalis, through Somali institutions and Somali-led dialogue—not by encouraging troop-contributing countries to determine who governs in Mogadishu or how Somalia’s constitutional order should evolve.

Once foreign security partnerships become instruments of domestic political competition, every political faction will be tempted to seek leverage abroad rather than confidence at home. That is not how sovereign states are strengthened. It is how they are weakened.

Even more concerning is the suggestion that AUSSOM’s continued engagement should be linked to partisan political demands. The mission already faces significant financial and operational pressures. Creating additional uncertainty would not strengthen Somalia’s democracy or improve governance. It would only create opportunities for Al-Shabaab and Da’esh to exploit political divisions.

The same principle applies to calls for international financial institutions or development partners to reduce their engagement with Somalia. Support from organisations such as the World Bank helps finance public administration, education, healthcare, infrastructure, economic reform, and essential public services.

Whatever one’s political views, suspending national assistance does not punish a president or a government alone. It affects civil servants, teachers, health workers, businesses, and millions of ordinary Somali citizens.