Deciphering Al-Shabaab’s Radio Silence
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.
Al-Shabaab seems to be deliberately skirting the fraught internal political situation, choosing instead to comment on Somaliland President Abdirahman Irro’s trip to Israel, the opening of a new Somaliland mission in Jerusalem and the US’ decision to bar Somali football referee Omar Artan from entry to the football World Cup due to his "association with suspected members of terror organisations." The latter commentary from Al-Shabaab on Artan is especially interesting. The jihadist group normally regards football as ‘lahw’ (a frivolous pastime unbecoming of a believer) and has in the past targeted kiosks where young people congregate to watch the UK Premier League. The idea of defending Artan and lambasting the US would seem opportunistic; an example of the militants modifying ideology to appropriate a potent nationalist narrative.
Equally puzzling is the marked decline in Al-Shabaab attacks in recent months. This decline sits within a broader trend of declining deaths by terror attack: equating to roughly 24% each year since 2023. Usually the first to take full advantage of national instability, past trends would predict that Al-Shabaab would increase their activities to further destabilise the government they strive to replace.
However, to read this decline in attacks as a weakening of Al-Shabaab - or any notable improvement in the security environment - would be a misunderstanding; to quantify the threat by simply using death as a metric would systematically misrepresent the reach of Al-Shabaab. Instead, a clear shift is being observed, as Al-Shabaab moves away from mass-casualty terrorism, to focus on territorial warfare, technological development, and troop mobilisation.
It should be noted that - although somewhat surprising - this approach that the group has adopted is not unprecedented. The group adopted a similar tactic during the electoral crisis of 2021-22 under the Mohammed Abdullah Farmaajo administration.
But this shift does little to explain Al-Shabaab’s silence regarding the ongoing political turmoil in Mogadishu.
Extensive past propaganda campaigns have made it clear that Al-Shabaab intends to overthrow the ‘apostate’ system that rules Somalia. And it has long been clear that they would prefer to do this peacefully and enter the political scene as ‘saviours’ rather than with aggression. While their rivals take fate into their own hands, it is clear that Al-Shabaab need not interfere in the crisis. With no skin in the political game, they would rather watch their adversaries maul each other, while losing political capital, credibility and legitimacy. An outcome that Al-Shabaab has tried tirelessly to realise over the years is now being carried out by the very actors it has aimed to target. At this stage, an intervention by Al-Shabaab might galvanise the divided elites and distract from the chaos that is currently working in Al-Shabaab’s favour.
Further, as mediation efforts falter and the mobilisation of arms and clan militias continue unabated, Al-Shabaab may simply be biding its time. Propaganda campaigns and other interventions may be most effective only once armed hostilities have broken out: and the group may have seen this to be an inevitability. In this case, silence is not disinterest, but tactical prudence.
The confusion that stems from any election-related turmoil acts as a shroud for Al-Shabaab’s activities; they can penetrate ever deeper into Mogadishu and the government, not to mention into Lower and Middle Shabelle. These gains in territory and influence would allow the group to respond to any attacks that may come from a post-Hassan Sheikh Mohamud (HSM) government. Bringing attention to themselves via a new propaganda campaign may prove more destructive than constructive at this critical stage of consolidation.
Although Al-Shabaab does not participate in formal political processes, the group maintains decisive influence over the outcomes. Their capacity for violence as political leverage allows the group to shape, veto, or overturn whatever the formal actors decide. Unlike the politicians, whose influence is contingent on office, Al-Shabaab’s leverage will not expire with a term or a deal.
The jihadist group will take advantage of this influence at a time that suits their wider strategy, but this timing might be harder to predict. Where some predicted that Al-Shabaab might take advantage of the crumbling political system, others when Mogadishu became a battleground for clan militias: clearly the group is waiting out for a more significant turn of events.
One scenario that may prompt Al-Shabaab into action would include escalated intra-elite fragmentation combined with a fracturing of the military and security apparatuses, as well as widening inter-clan warfare. In this case, Al-Shabaab would be able to fill any emerging vacuum created in this instance.
Improved integration and influence within disaffected clans may bring additional benefits to Al-Shabaab: opposition fighters are likely to require additional support, should conflict break out. Clan militias would likely turn to Al-Shabaab for extra trained anti-government fighters to join their ranks. This reliance would give Al-Shabaab additional leverage in the future.
Another likely explanation is that Al-Shabaab is becoming increasingly content with establishing a parallel government, moving away from their previous endeavours to overthrow the federal government. Having established control of significant swathes of Southern Somalia, large enough to rival the physical size and economy of Jubaland or Puntland, their grip on Somali society is unlikely to wane significantly. Their move away from excessive violence may be a manifestation of shifting ambitions, while they wait for an alternative window of opportunity to exploit.
Al-Shabaab’s inactivity to date is both a blessing and a warning. Somalia’s partners have been allowed to concentrate on the unfolding political crisis without distractions from potential Al-Shabaab attacks. Additionally, every opportunity Al-Shabaab declines to attack makes the next one more likely to be taken. Security partners should use this opportunity to predict and prepare, understanding that the likelihood of exploitation of the situation would be hard to pass up.
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
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.
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.
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.