Why Somalia Cannot Afford Another Self-Inflicted Crisis
Political competition is the defining feature of every democracy. Elections are designed to offer citizens a peaceful opportunity to choose between competing visions, hold leaders accountable, and renew political legitimacy. When managed responsibly, electoral competition strengthens institutions, broadens participation, and reinforces public confidence in the state.
However, elections can also become moments of national vulnerability when political competition transforms into political polarisation. The distinction is important. Competition seeks to persuade; polarisation seeks to defeat. Competition accepts disagreement within shared constitutional rules; polarisation questions the legitimacy of opponents and erodes the institutions that exist to manage political differences peacefully.
For countries with mature institutions, such tensions can often be absorbed without threatening the stability of the state. Somalia, however, remains in the process of rebuilding its political order after decades of conflict and institutional collapse. Our democratic foundations are still developing, constitutional questions remain unresolved, and public trust in national institutions continues to evolve. In such circumstances, political polarisation carries consequences that extend far beyond electoral politics.
The months preceding national elections therefore represent not only a political contest but also a test of the country’s institutional resilience.
A Fragile Political Settlement
More than three decades after the collapse of the central state, Somalia has made remarkable progress in rebuilding national institutions. Federal and state governments operate across much of the country, constitutional structures continue to evolve, security institutions have expanded, and democratic participation has gradually increased.
Yet these achievements remain fragile because they depend not only upon legal frameworks but also upon political trust.
Trust cannot be legislated into existence. It is built through dialogue, compromise, constitutional restraint, and confidence that political competition will remain peaceful regardless of its outcome. Whenever political actors abandon these principles, they weaken the foundations upon which state-building depends.
Political crises therefore impose costs that extend well beyond government offices. They affect security operations, economic confidence, international credibility, and citizens’ faith in democratic institutions.
Security Cannot Be Separated from Politics
Somalia continues to confront determined extremist organisations that seek every opportunity to exploit political uncertainty.
History demonstrates that insurgent groups rarely depend solely upon military strength. They succeed when political institutions become divided, when public confidence declines, and when governments become distracted by internal disputes rather than national security.
Periods of political confrontation inevitably consume leadership attention. Decisions become delayed, coordination weakens, and strategic priorities shift from governing the country to managing political conflict. Such conditions provide extremist organisations with opportunities to recruit, reorganise, spread propaganda, and undermine public confidence in the state.
The greatest strategic advantage Somalia can deny its enemies is political unity.
Economic Stability Requires Political Stability
Political uncertainty also carries significant economic consequences.
Businesses postpone investment when policies appear unpredictable. Development projects slow as institutions become preoccupied with political disputes. Investors seek certainty, while international partners increasingly evaluate governance alongside security when determining future support.
Ordinary citizens bear the greatest burden. Delayed public services, reduced employment opportunities, rising uncertainty, and slower economic growth are often the hidden costs of prolonged political confrontation.
Economic resilience cannot be separated from political stability.
Public Trust Is the Nation’s Most Valuable Resource
The legitimacy of any democratic system ultimately depends upon public confidence.
Citizens may accept political defeat if they believe institutions remain fair. They may tolerate temporary disagreements if they trust that constitutional mechanisms will resolve them peacefully. However, repeated political crises gradually erode that confidence.
When citizens begin to believe that politics serves only competing elites rather than the broader national interest, participation declines, cynicism increases, and social divisions deepen.
Rebuilding public trust requires years of consistent leadership. Losing it can occur remarkably quickly.
The Responsibility of Leadership
Political maturity is measured not during periods of agreement but during periods of disagreement.
The government carries a particular responsibility to demonstrate restraint, encourage inclusive dialogue, respect constitutional processes, and govern in a manner that strengthens confidence across the political spectrum.
The opposition likewise bears responsibility to pursue peaceful democratic competition, present credible alternatives, and engage sincerely whenever opportunities for meaningful dialogue emerge.
Political victory achieved at the expense of national cohesion ultimately weakens both winners and losers alike.
A Narrow Window of Opportunity
Somalia approaches this electoral period at a time of significant geopolitical change. International attention is increasingly divided among multiple global crises, while expectations for greater Somali ownership continue to grow.
This changing environment leaves less room for prolonged political confrontation.
The institutions that Somalia has painstakingly rebuilt over the past three decades should not be placed at unnecessary risk through avoidable political disputes. Elections should strengthen legitimacy, reinforce constitutional governance, and deepen national confidence—not reopen old divisions or create new uncertainty.
The Choice Before Us
Every election presents two possible paths.
One path leads towards greater political inclusion, stronger institutions, and increased public confidence. It requires compromise, patience, and a willingness to place the long-term interests of the republic above immediate political advantage.
The other path leads towards deeper mistrust, institutional paralysis, and renewed instability. History demonstrates that recovering from political breakdown is always more difficult than preventing it.
Somalia has travelled a long and difficult road since 1991. The progress achieved has required enormous sacrifice by citizens, security forces, political leaders, civil society, the private sector, and international partners alike.
The responsibility now rests with today’s political leadership to ensure that electoral competition strengthens rather than weakens the republic.
Democracy is ultimately not tested by whether elections are held, but by whether political rivals possess the wisdom to protect the nation while competing for the privilege of leading it.
Somalia cannot afford another self-inflicted political crisis.
The cost would be measured not only in lost opportunities, but in the future of the state itself.