Peace at what cost? Negotiations with Al-Shabaab
The prospect of negotiations between Al-Shabaab and the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS) is looming again. In and of itself, talks may be no bad thing-- particularly if they can end this protracted and brutal conflict. The major problem is that the FGS is in no position to draw critical concessions from Al-Shabaab if they do enter into negotiations in the near future. Nor does it appear that the FGS is particularly interested in drawing necessary concessions; 'peace' alone would now be enough, no matter what demands Al-Shabaab lays out. And these demands are sure to be substantial.
The militant group has been gaining ground against a bleak security backdrop for the federal government and its allies. While the concentrated military materiel and security personnel in Mogadishu, Kismaayo, Baidoa, and a handful of other cities are likely too much for the jihadist group to overcome, we can assume that swathes of rural southern Somalia will return to the grip of Al-Shabaab in the coming months as African Union forces withdraw.
If the FGS decides to negotiate with Al-Shabaab in the coming months, it will be doing so from a weakened political and military position. Moreover, given the likelihood of Qatar orchestrating such talks, a pre-determined outcome of power-sharing with Al-Shabaab appears likely. It is also important to note that Al-Shabaab may not be undertaking the negotiations alone. Al-I'tisaam, its ideological competitor and Qatar-connected affiliate, could well play a role as a key silent partner or power broker that would tip the balance of negotiations towards Al-Shabaab.
First on the table would likely be Somalia's security dynamics, with the possible disarmament, demobilisation, and reintegration (DDR) of Al-Shabaab combatants, as previously touted by federal officials. The notion that Al-Shabaab will happily lay down its arms or could somehow be compelled to do so fundamentally misunderstands the current power imbalance. While Al-Shabaab is smaller in simple fighting numbers than the mismatched coalition of federal, regional, and local forces under the nominal command of Mogadishu, its forces are greater than the sum of their parts. It is therefore likely that thousands of jihadist fighters would somehow have to be integrated into Somalia's security architecture.
If this is the case, Somalia's entire security architecture would be corrupted. The command structure of the Somali National Army (SNA) would be radically altered to align with Al-Shabaab's extremist military structure. The Amniyaat, Al-Shabaab's feared secret service, could end up replacing the National Intelligence and Security Agency (NISA), an aspiration of its neo-Salafist former Director Fahad Yasin.
Comparisons are perhaps too often made between Afghanistan and Somalia. But Somalia in 2024 and pre-2021 Afghanistan do share several similarities, including decades of protracted Islamist extremist insurgencies, a fatigued international presence, and withdrawing multinational peacekeeping forces, as well as a corrupt domestic elite. Still, it is important to note the differences between the two countries as well; perhaps the most important among these is that Al-Shabaab wields strong currents of Somali irredentism. Unlike the Taliban, overwhelmingly focused on Afghanistan, Al-Shabaab continues to violently project itself into Kenya and Ethiopia. What would happen to Jaysh al-Ayman, Al-Shabaab's Kenyan wing, if negotiations occur? Does it simply pull back from bases in the Boni forest, or does it continue infiltration of Somali border communities in Mandera and elsewhere?
Leaving aside the structure of any possible talks, it is essential to try to envisage the kind of 'jihadist' state Al-Shabaab might seek to establish. The extreme edicts it currently imposes indicate what Al-Shabaab could seek to replicate across Somalia if given the keys of power. The few remaining secular elements of Somali society could well be rolled back. In the field of education, already deeply limited education for girls could be further curtailed with the introduction of a widespread hard-line neo-Salafist curriculum. The full niqab could be made mandatory, and Arabic, not Somali, could possibly become the primary language of instruction. Dancing, music, and other 'foreign' influences could also be targeted.
While armed conflict might subside, Somalia's grim humanitarian situation would likely deteriorate further. With over 6 million people internally displaced -- mostly around major urban centres like Baidoa and Mogadishu-- critical relief could evaporate with independent humanitarian operations curtailed. Hundreds of millions in USD for humanitarian and climate projects would disappear, leaving one of the world's most climate-vulnerable countries even less prepared for intensifying natural disasters. Without the technical expertise and funding offered to the Somali Disaster Management Agency by international donors, destructive flooding, as in October and November 2023, would become far more devastating.
The international community was much more heavily invested in Afghanistan than in Somalia by a degree of many magnitudes. But it has essentially washed its hands of the country with the Taliban at the helm. Somalia's elite has long been adept at playing off and exploiting international funding, but this, too, barring Qatari engagement, could vanish overnight.
The security situation in Somalia might stabilise to a degree, but that should not be mistaken for 'positive peace.' Like the Taliban, Al-Shabaab fighters could also endanger parts of Somalia's current security and political class. Some political elites might escape to Nairobi, Cairo, or Ankara, where many spend much of their time anyway. But those now part of the Danab or Gorgor special forces could face retribution from emboldened jihadists. Al-Shabaab has repeatedly shown a propensity to target retired or former political officials. While such violence could be partially ameliorated if it comes to power– it could also be quietly redirected towards those it views as puppets of foreign powers.
Of course, none of this is set in stone, but it is all worth considering. It is not fear-mongering but a serious reminder of what is currently at stake. There is a sense that Mogadishu has, in a way, given up; and with security so bleak, calls for peace negotiations with Al-Shabaab could grow in the coming months. But peace at what cost?
By 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.