The joint statement released by the Somali Salvation Forum (Madasha Samatabixinta Soomaaliyeed) on May 31, 2025, levels serious allegations against President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s administration, including corruption, authoritarianism, and failure in national security. While political critique is essential in a democratic society, a closer analysis reveals that the opposition’s accusations are selective, politically motivated, and lacking in balance. Below is an analytical breakdown of the main points raised and why a more nuanced view is necessary.
1. Counter-terrorism efforts: A complex but ongoing fight
The opposition accuses the government of failing to combat terrorism. However, this claim oversimplifies a highly complex and evolving security landscape. Somalia’s struggle against Al-Shabaab and ISIS-linked militants is not a challenge that can be resolved through military force alone. It requires consistent coordination between federal and regional forces, community mobilization, and international intelligence sharing.
Under President Hassan Sheikh’s leadership, the government has implemented a multipronged strategy that includes:
- Reclaiming territory from insurgents, particularly in central and southern regions.
- Empowering local communities through Ma’awisley militias and clan-based resistance movements.
- Enhancing regional cooperation, particularly with neighboring Ethiopia and Kenya.
- Securing international support, including from the African Union Transition Mission (ATMIS) and the United States.
While setbacks exist—as they do in any asymmetric conflict—the notion that the government has “failed” is not only misleading but ignores measurable gains made on the ground.
2. Corruption allegations: Real concerns, but not new
Corruption remains a persistent challenge in Somalia, but it is disingenuous for the opposition—many of whom held power during some of the country’s most opaque administrations—to position themselves as reformers without accountability for past failures.
The current administration has:
- Implemented biometric payroll systems to reduce ghost workers in the civil service.
- Digitized tax collection and connected it to the central bank to reduce leakages.
- Established partnerships with international anti-corruption agencies.
- Pushed for legal reforms, such as strengthening the Auditor General’s powers.
While these reforms are not yet transformative, they mark a break from the systemic impunity that characterized previous governments. Thus, the opposition’s framing of corruption as a uniquely current phenomenon lacks historical honesty.
3. Political exclusion: A question of process or power?
The opposition claims they are being excluded from political processes. In reality, the government has convened multiple national consultative forums, including federal member states and opposition-aligned leaders, to discuss electoral reforms, constitutional amendments, and national reconciliation.
The real contention appears to be control over the process, not exclusion from it. Many of the current opposition figures seek a return to power and are using this narrative to delegitimize inclusive—but not always favorable—government-led processes.
Moreover, Somalia’s fragmented political structure makes full consensus nearly impossible. The government’s role is to facilitate—not surrender to—every political demand.
4. Land privatization and economic mismanagement: A double standard
The opposition’s claim of illegal land privatization and economic decline also warrants scrutiny. The Somali economy, like many post-conflict economies, faces major structural weaknesses: insecurity, climate shocks, limited infrastructure, and a large informal sector.
Despite these constraints, the government has:
- Increased domestic revenue collection year over year.
- Negotiated debt relief milestones under the HIPC initiative.
- Began regulating land tenure and property rights, previously dominated by informal agreements and elite capture.
Ironically, many controversial land deals and privatizations occurred under previous administrations, some led by the very signatories of the current opposition statement. Their sudden concern for transparency raises questions of political convenience rather than genuine reformist intent.
5. The role of the opposition: Critique or destabilization?
Democracy thrives on dissent, but opposition must also be constructive and solutions oriented. The Somali Salvation Forum’s statement, while detailed in its criticisms, fails to offer a coherent alternative vision. It lacks policy proposals, timelines, or frameworks for national cooperation.
Furthermore, holding a political summit while security forces are engaged in frontline battles against insurgents risks sending dangerous signals of disunity—something extremist groups could exploit.
Conclusion: A moment for responsible leadership
Somalia stands at a critical juncture. The need for reform, reconciliation, and institutional resilience is real. However, weaponizing political critique for electoral positioning, without acknowledging past failures or proposing viable solutions, weakens the democratic process.
President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s government is not without fault, but it has shown a willingness to engage, reform, and respond to national challenges. The opposition must now decide whether it wishes to be part of the solution, or remain trapped in a cycle of blame without accountability.
About the author: Abdi Hilowle (Coowle) is a political analyst specializing in political science. He has contributed to various publications and policy platforms on state building, democratic transition, and post conflict issues. He is also a lecturer at university.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official stance of Caasimada Online or its members.