Hospitals in Armed Conflict
Hospitals and health clinics are generally not targeted deliberately in armed conflict because a belligerent could lose international credibility immediately and be liable for prosecution under the International Humanitarian Law. In recent years, as armed conflicts have surged and the fog of war rendered any reporting hard to verify, hospitals are increasingly becoming targets in themselves.
In Somalia, there is no hard evidence of an armed group targeting hospitals, but in July 2023 during the Laas Anood conflict, a hospital came under indirect fire and was partially destroyed. The SSC-Khatumo rebels claimed the Somaliland army was deliberating shelling the hospital. Activists cited the shelling of the hospital as evidence of ‘war crimes’ and demanded the Muse Bihi administration be taken to the International Court of Justice at The Hague. The authorities in Hargeisa denied the claims. The Somaliland Army’s use of imprecise artillery and the SSC-Khatumo rebels’ use of areas near the hospitals to launch mortar attacks certainly played a big role in transforming the hospital and its surrounding areas into an active combat zone.
Protection of medical facilities, patients and staff is a value enshrined in guidelines for conduct of war – a binding blueprint that has been signed by almost every state in the world: the Geneva Conventions. Put simply it states that all people have the right to medical treatment: civilians, children and combatants from all sides. Not only should the clinic or hospital be considered neutral and outside of the conflict, but ambulances, staff and those seeking medical care have access to the hospitals/clinics. Even your enemy should receive medical care. The principle of medical neutrality dictates that medical personnel and facilities must be allowed to care for all sick and wounded people and ensure access to care for all, regardless of their affiliation or involvement in the conflict. Sadly, we are witnessing a steady rollback of such universal values in many countries and Somalia is no exception. Many Somali doctors and nurses have fled over the past decades to more safe environments abroad. Insecurity in the health environment has forced many closures of services in Somalia since the fall of the Siyad Barre regime in 1991. They can broadly be categorised into basic groups. Failure in the aftermath of state collapse in the early 1990s led to government closure of a robust health care system. The myriads of governments since then have categorically failed to resurrect governmental health care despite billions in assistance. Therefore, the initial conflict led to a state breakdown of healthcare that almost completely was not filled by ensuing government institutions.
Into this gap, stepped NGOs (both international and local) and private health care providers. The insecurities they faced were different. Many security incidents were not headline driven massive military assaults. For 25 years, they fell broadly into two categories: people that had grievances about the perceived quality of care for a loved one and issues relating to internal structure (i.e. hiring of local staff). In both of these categories, international organizations and staff and local Somalis abilities to both understand their respective cultures added an accelerant to disagreements.
Over time, Somalia’s insecurity has turned medical professionals - both foreign and local - into high-value targets. Skilled health workers have been abducted or held for ransom, transforming them into bargaining chips in a wider web of political and criminal violence. Most infamously, in April 2019, Al-Shabaab militants abducted two Cuban doctors who had been deployed to Kenya as part of a bilateral healthcare agreement. These doctors were held captive for ransom for approximately 18 months, during which the militants are believed to have exploited their medical skills to treat injured fighters and local communities in areas under their control. Fear of abduction and lack of protection have made both local and international medical personnel increasingly unwilling to work in Somalia. The international NGO footprint in the Somali medical realm is but a shadow of what it was even during the difficult contextual times in the 2000s.
Hundreds if not thousands of trained staff have left the country. The attack at the medical graduation ceremony in December 2009, put a generational chill in aspiring medical personnel training. A suicide bomber targeted the graduation ceremony for medical students at the Shaamo Hotel in Mogadishu. The attack killed at least 19 people - mostly students - including the minister of Health, and injured dozens more. Government malaise has not re-invigorated the situation. Kidnapping and security incidents have crippled international medical response. But Somalia and the world continues to evolve with regards to attacks on healthcare.
When it comes to security for medical personnel and structures, Somalia can be thankful that it has not had targeted airstrikes on medical facilities or ambulances. As the country works toward a more stable and resilient health system, past incidents should be treated not as anomalies, but as warnings. Strengthening protections for medical staff, reinforcing the neutrality of healthcare spaces, and building contingency protocols must form part of any sustainable healthcare strategy. In a context where health workers have so often been forced to operate under threat, ensuring their safety is a humanitarian imperative and is essential in rebuilding public trust in the system.
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
A president does not pay a visit to Wajir by accident. When William Samoei Ruto chose Wajir as the centre stage for Kenya’s Madaraka Day celebrations on 1 June — the first sitting president to do so — he was not merely varying the ceremonial calendar. He was making a premeditated statement about who belongs at the centre of Kenya’s state and who no longer belongs at its margins. The message was not merely ‘taking Nairobi to NorthEastern.’ It was the centring and mainstreaming of an ethnic Somali-dominated region that, for much of Kenya’s post-colonial history, has been treated as a security issue rather than a political constituency.
Somaliland President Abdirahman Irro’s trip to Israel in June (from 14-17) was far more than symbolism. Not only was it a calculated strategic diplomatic play, and a chance for Somaliland to appear on the world stage, but also an opportunity for Somaliland to present itself as a fully-functional state, able to conduct foreign relations and cut bilateral deals. Irro, a seasoned former diplomat, navigated the intricate demands of state protocol with remarkable ease - cutting an immaculate, regal figure in his navy-blue suit. Accorded full head-of-state honours, he laid a wreath at the Theodore Herzl mausoleum, engaged in high-level talks with President Isaac Herzog and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, opened the new Somaliland embassy in Jerusalem and convened meetings with Knesset members, senior officials, and business leaders. For Israel, hosting President Abdirahman Irro in Jerusalem functioned to signal its strong commitment to deepening strategic ties while also countering perceptions of waning diplomatic momentum.
Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake. Napoleon Bonaparte’s classic rule of combat seems to be the guiding doctrine behind Al-Shabaab’s sudden, uncharacteristic radio silence as Mogadishu’s political elite tear themselves apart. As the ‘government-in-waiting’, one would have assumed the militants would take full advantage of its adversaries’ internal divisions, maximising the propaganda opportunities this offers, and campaign for their own cause. Typically quick to weaponise any intra-Somali division, the militant group's decision to sit out the latest intra-Somali fracturing is intriguing. By withholding its usual blitz of propaganda, the group is playing a longer, quieter game - waiting for the federal house to implode further before stepping in.
While much international attention is on Mogadishu – understandably so - another electoral crisis is brewing in the regional state of Galmudug. Historically unstable, prone to Al-Shabaab violence and destabilisation and wracked by chronic inter-clan frictions and periodic armed hostilities, the looming vote appears likely to aggravate the situation and foment more divisions.
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.