Pre-empting a power struggle
Next week, Somalia’s President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud will mark two months since he was elected. His chosen Prime Minster Hamza Abdi Barre will have served almost one month.
In public, relations between the two leaders so far appear cordial and warm. But that could change once they conclude naming a new cabinet and the new government gets down to work. There is reason to be cautious, since there is an inherent instability in the Somali power structure. The current hybrid model that shares executive power between the president and the prime minister has great capacity for generating friction; in large part, this is because the provisional constitution has not sufficiently deconflicted executive roles and functions properly.
Since the first transitional government was established in Arta, Djibouti, Somalia has had five presidents and 15 prime ministers. Statistically and on average, this works out to about three prime ministers for every president in a four-year term. The average political life span of a Somali PM is 15 months. Several reasons explain why presidents and prime ministers, who often start cordially, later fall out against each other. The most significant of these is ambiguity in the Provisional Constitution and a lack of a clear distinction of powers between the two executives. While the president can appoint a prime minister, he cannot sack him by decree; instead, he must submit a vote of no confidence against the him to parliament for consideration.
Presidents Abdiqasim Salad Hassan, Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed, Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, and Hassan Sheikh Mohamud (in his first term) each had three prime ministers. Former President Mohamed Abdullahi Farmaajo had two, His successor, Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, has appointed Hamza Abdi Barre as his prime minister. No president has ever selected a prime minister that he has not hand-picked. Unlike in some countries where the prime minister can come through a power-sharing arrangement among different political parties, Somalia's president nominates the prime minister of his choice. The only requirements are adherence to the 4.5 clan formula and a vote (a formality) by the parliament.
So why do Somalia's presidents and their prime ministers fall out? One reason is the aforementioned ambiguity of the constitution. In the provisional constitution, under Articles 90 and 100, the respective responsibilities and powers of the president and the prime minister are stipulated. But, Articles 90 and 100 also give the president and prime minister ambiguous and redundant power controls.
The two offices of the prime minister and the president can at times have overlapping roles and responsibilities. This ad-hoc overlap is the genesis of rifts between the technical teams of the two offices. In addition to a lack of clear roles, most technocrats are appointed for political reasons, not for their expertise; and they often behave like politicians. Some become territorial, and they stoke and feed off of conflict. Conflicts related to these technical teams can simmer for long periods before later being escalated to the core staff of the president and the prime minister. With lack of clarity over standard operating procedures, both dig in their heels and political trench warfare ensues. Backing down or compromise is seen as a form of weakness. Eventually, the prime minister is removed through a no confidence vote in parliament, or compelled to resign for fear of the ignominy of such a vote.
In addition, the Council of Ministers is appointed by the prime minister, but in consultation with the president. Some members assume positions knowing well they owe their allegiance to the president. These divided loyalties often generate tensions and foster divisions. Lack of respect for the chain of command is widespread. If the prime minister tries to discipline a minister, the president often blocks the reprimand by defending his friends.
Also, Somalia does not have a functioning Constitutional Court. Disagreements between the government branches and their principals are mostly resolved through negotiation. When negotiation reaches a dead end, goodwill dries up and a fierce power struggle ensues. The only institution left to arbitrate is the parliament. However, instead, legislators often see power struggles as an opportunity to cash in and make money from the antagonists. As a result, core issues behind the original dispute are lost.
A key driver of these clashes arises when a prime minister begins to exhibit presidential aspirations. The president sees this as hostile and quickly puts up barricades, creating an actual rift between the two. Related, because the prime minister is in charge of the electoral process, the president often expects the prime minister to favour him. Failure to do so has also led to major fallouts.
The relationship between the political centre represented by the federal government and periphery in the form of the Federal Member States (FMSs) is also contentious; this too has ignited tensions between the president and the prime minister. This has especially been true during FMS elections. Conflict becomes unavoidable if the two leaders do not share a common policy toward these elections.
How can President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud and Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre avoid falling into another of these never-ending political deadlocks in Somalia? Appointing mature, knowledgeable political and technocratic experts to government positions would be a good starting point. Such appointments are likely to assist in depoliticising the government, and encouraging dialogue in the event of frictions between the two offices.
President Mohamud and the Prime Minister Barre should also be encouraged to revisit the constitutional provisions on power-sharing, and to press for changes that will provide clarity on their respective roles, and boost stability within the Government of Somalia. Together with judicial reform, including empowering the Constitutional Court, such changes could turn out to befit the tenure and legacy of both leaders.
The Somali Wire Team
Gain unlimited access to all our Editorials. Unlock Full Access to Our Expert Editorials — Trusted Insights, Unlimited Reading.
Create your Sahan account LoginUnlock lifetime access to all our Premium editorial content
Two days of heavy clashes (3–4 June) in the Somali capital, Mogadishu, between federal troops and opposition-aligned forces have underscored both the fragility of the city’s security environment and the volatility of electoral politics. Although relative calm has since returned to the two hardest-hit districts - Hawl Wadaag and Abdiaziz - and mediation efforts have intensified, tensions remain high, fuelling fears of renewed armed skirmishes. Credible reports of mass clan militia mobilisation on the edges of Mogadishu speak to a conflict that is widening. The militarisation of politics and elite fragmentation over the electoral process have shattered a core assumption: that Somali leaders will ultimately step back from the brink to negotiate a way forward. Consequently, the country is entering a perilous phase in which domestic factions alone cannot resolve the impasse, making neutral, external mediation a necessity.
Puntland President Sa'id Abdullah Deni is unofficially in the race for the federal presidency of Somalia. By most accounts, the regional leader is running again and this explains his re-engagement with Mogadishu after a three-year hiatus. Driven by shifting electoral dynamics, Deni’s decision to re-engage with the centre forces him to confront a radically altered political landscape in Mogadishu. Under President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud (HSM), the federal government has rewritten the rules of Somali politics, altering the institutional framework and consolidating executive authority.
A flurry of media reports in recent months suggest the US and Eritrea could be inching towards a potential deal to reset decades of frosty relations and a partial lifting of American sanctions imposed in 2021. The news of discreet talks between the two sides, mediated by Egypt, was initially reported by the influential Washington Post newspaper in April 2026 and have since been partially confirmed by official sources.
On 10 May, the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS) unilaterally conducted its contentious 'one-person-one-vote' (OPOV) electoral model in South West State (SWS), directly overriding opposition demands for a negotiated, consensus-based framework. Crucially, the very laws underpinning these OPOV elections are themselves deeply contested: the electoral framework was created following a rushed revision of Somalia’s constitution that many federal member states and opposition groups rejected. The vote, exclusively managed by the National Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (NIEBC), saw localised polling in 13 districts and across 126 poll centres and 276 stations. While 376,212 citizens were registered, actual turnout reached 132,430 voters - a participation rate of approximately 35.2% - with 128,276 valid ballots cast and 4,154 deemed spoilt/invalid. The electoral outcome, unsurprisingly, solidified a decisive mandate for Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s Justice and Solidarity Party (JSP); the governing party secured an absolute majority of 51 out of 95 contested legislative seats, comfortably outpacing its closest rival, Sharif Hassan Sheikh Aden’s Ururka Horumarka, which claimed 14 seats.
The Federal Government of Somalia (FGS) has effectively entered a 'grey transition' - a deeply fraught and hotly-contested interregnum that could upend decades of state-building and foment greater instability. By utilising the March 2026 constitutional amendments to extend his presidential mandate until May 2027, Hassan Sheikh Mohamud (HSM) has effectively plunged the fragile Horn of Africa state into a profound period of severe internal strain and legitimacy crisis. This legalistic manoeuvre has roiled domestic politics and put Western partners of Somalia in a difficult spot. If Somalia's Western allies concede to HSM's fait accompli without extracting concessions from him on a negotiated settlement, they are likely to embolden Hassan Sheikh.
Somalia is entering one of the most dangerous political periods in its recent history. An unprecedented convergence of unresolved constitutional disputes, contested electoral arrangements, rising tensions between federal and regional actors, and the growing politicisation of state security institutions has pushed the country towards a potentially destabilising impasse.
'Give Peace a Chance' was the title of a 1969 single written by John Lennon, recorded during his famous honeymoon 'bed-in' with Yoko Ono. Capturing the counterculture sentiments of the time, it was adopted as an anthem of the anti-Vietnam War movement in the following decade. Thirty years later, a provocative inversion of the title-- 'Give War a Chance'-- was adopted in a well-known Foreign Affairs article by Edward Luttwak in 1999, in which he argued that humanitarian interventions or premature negotiations can freeze conflict, resulting in endless, recurring war. Luttwak contended that war has an internal logic, and if allowed to 'run its course', can bring about a more durable peace.
A foreign-backed president, a besieged capital city, and a jihadist movement affiliated with Al-Qaeda-- this time not Somalia, but Mali. Late last week, Jama'at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM), the transnational Salafist-jihadist group in Mali, stormed across much of the country's north, as well as entering Bakamo and assassinating the defence minister. The coordinated offensive-- in conjunction with the Tuareg separatist movement, the Azawad Liberation Front (ALF)-- has left the military junta reeling, and forced the withdrawal of their Russian allies from a number of strategic towns.
Last week, a bombshell Wall Street Journal article revealed that Washington was exploring a reset in relations with Eritrea, with US envoy for Africa Massad Boulos having met privately with senior regime officials in Egypt. Any normalisation of ties now appears to be on ice, with the reaction to Boulos's meetings — facilitated by Egypt — having been met with short shrift. But the episode speaks to broader issues about American foreign policy in the Horn and the accelerating reconfiguration of the Red Sea political order, which will not go away simply because this particular overture may have stalled.