Throughout history, great nations have often been called upon to make difficult decisions that influence the fate of entire regions. Today, the United States faces such a moment in its policy towards Somalia. In an era of shifting alliances and heightened global competition, America’s interests in the Horn of Africa will be best served by continuing to support Somalia’s territorial integrity. By doing so, the United States reinforces its strategic position and builds on its longstanding record of effective security cooperation with Somalia—a partnership that has advanced counterterrorism efforts and bolstered regional stability.
The Horn of Africa, long a crucible of conflict, now hovers at a critical juncture. Clan-based ambitions threaten to fracture Somalia’s national cohesion. Yet all these groups, divided by lineage but sharing a common Somali heritage, need not become separate states. Allowing one region to break away would encourage others to follow suit, leading to a dangerous domino effect of fragmentation. Such fractures risk balkanizing the region, perpetuating instability, and handing extremist groups like Al Shabab fertile ground to regroup. By contrast, supporting Somalia’s unity helps sustain the security environment that has allowed U.S.-Somali collaboration to weaken terrorist networks over the years.
Let us be clear: granting international recognition to any secessionist movement would open a Pandora’s box. We need look no further than the aftermath of Sudan’s partition, which did not yield lasting peace but rather entrenched conflict and suffering. We must not risk repeating such a tragedy in Somalia. Instead, the United States must remain committed to Somalia’s sovereignty within its recognized 1960 borders—an enduring policy that has helped stabilize one of the world’s most strategically vital regions.
In this environment, global competitors are eager to exploit any vacuum. Competitors to American interests, actively pursuing influence across the region, stand ready to leverage instability to advance their strategic and economic interests at the expense of America’s position. Weak, fragmented entities are more susceptible to under-the-table deals, resource extraction, and outside interference. Maintaining Somalia’s unity helps limit such opportunities, ensuring that U.S. interests are not undercut by a malign competitor taking advantage of turmoil.
The security stakes are particularly high. While ISIS has lost ground in other parts of the world, its leadership now eyes Africa as a new frontier. Recent news suggests senior ISIS figures are relocating to regions where governance is weak and unity is fraying. A divided Somalia would distract the central government from counterterrorism operations and disrupt the successes already achieved through close U.S.-Somali security cooperation. By contrast, a unified Somalia can direct its full energy toward combating extremist groups, helping ensure that these dangerous organizations do not find a new foothold to threaten American or regional security.
Moral responsibility calls to us as well. The Horn of Africa is no stranger to humanitarian crises—its people face displacement, climate-driven hardships, and economic adversity. Fragmenting Somalia would further entrench these problems, turning clan differences into flashpoints for violence and leaving vulnerable populations even more exposed. By supporting a cohesive Somali state, Washington encourages equitable representation, economic development, and the broader conditions necessary to address root causes of instability. In so doing, the United States stands not only for its own strategic interests but also for a more secure and just future for millions of Somalis.
Somalia’s resource potential adds another dimension to the necessity of unity. Its coastal waters hold promise for substantial energy development, which can foster shared prosperity if managed under a stable, centralized authority. Fragmentation would ignite disputes over resources and maritime boundaries, likely leading to renewed conflict and missed opportunities. A unified Somalia, conversely, can foster transparency, attract responsible investment, and ensure its people benefit from these resources—all while reinforcing the stable environment in which U.S. interests can flourish.
Some may argue that endorsing secessionist claims offers a swift solution to lingering grievances. However, the United States does not seek shortcuts that undermine long-term stability. America’s strength has always rested on principled support for unity, rule of law, and inclusive governance. By helping Somalia strengthen its institutions, enhance security forces, and foster inclusive political dialogue, the United States ensures that clan affiliations enrich national identity rather than fracture it into competing states.
The choice before us is clear. We can endorse divisions that would unravel the progress made in building Somalia’s security capacity, or we can reaffirm our support for the unity of a nation whose stability is essential to the Horn of Africa and to American interests. For decades, the U.S. has recognized Somalia’s sovereignty and benefited from a productive counterterrorism partnership. Now is not the time to abandon this stance.
By standing firmly behind a unified Somalia, we choose lasting stability over highly risky short-term fixes. We preserve a security environment that keeps extremist networks off balance, deny opportunities for strategic competitors to undercut U.S. influence, and protect a region whose stability is integral to global commerce and counterterrorism efforts. Through foresight, diplomacy, and principle, we can help Somalia maintain its hard-earned unity while advancing and protecting America’s enduring interests in the Horn of Africa.
Dr. Dahir Hassan Abdi is the Ambassador of Somalia to the U.S.
Source: realclearworld.com
You must be logged in to post a comment.