Puntland State’s Denial, Somalia’s Dilemma: What the Bosaso Flights Say About a Region in Transit
What was said — and what was denied
- Advertisement -
Last week’s exchange in Somalia’s Upper House has exposed more than a question about a few flights. It highlighted the fragility of authority in a country where federal and regional powers overlap, and where rumours can take on geopolitical weight. Somalia’s defense minister, Ahmed Moalim Fiqi, told senators that planes leaving Bosaso in Puntland State had been “transporting items to Chad, Niger, and western Sudan,” and conceded that “what they carry, we do not know. That requires verification.”
Puntland State’s government was swift in its rebuttal. The regional administration, which controls Bosaso and the airport there, called the allegations “baseless” and politically motivated, insisting no unauthorised international flights take off from its runway. Federal and regional officials have promised an investigation, but the episode has already shone a spotlight on a recurring problem across the Horn of Africa: porous borders, contested authority, and the murky business of modern conflict logistics.
Why this matters beyond Somali politics
At first glance the dispute may seem parochial — a federal minister raises concerns, a regional government pushes back. But the implications are wider. Since the eruption of war in Sudan in 2023, the conflict has sucked in a web of actors and services that often operate outside clear legal frameworks: private military contractors, militias, and shadowy transport arrangements. Media investigations have suggested that mercenaries and foreign fighters have transited through unexpected hubs, and the Horn has become an attractive logistical launchpad because of its ports, airstrips and networks of brokers.
For Somalia, this dovetails with pre-existing fragilities. The state’s monopoly on force remains weak in many regions; Puntland State is a semi-autonomous polity with its own security apparatus and distinct political calculations. That makes oversight of airports, cargo manifests and charter flights difficult. It also creates an opening for actors who profit from moving men and materiel across borders — whether for private profit, ideological causes, or both.
From Bosaso to global hot spots — a pattern of privatized warfare
The allegations echo a broader trend: the privatization and commodification of conflict. From mercenary groups in Africa and the Middle East to private contractors in Ukraine and Libya, states and non-state actors increasingly turn to market mechanisms to fill military needs. When those markets grow, so does the need for transport, recruitment hubs, and logistical channels. Air corridors that once carried diplomats and cargo can be repurposed to ferry fighters, equipment, or other unspecified “items.”
That is partly why the defence minister’s pointed admission — even hedged with uncertainty — should unsettle diplomats and security officials. If Bosaso is being used as a node in a regional chain of movement, it raises questions about compliance with international norms, the efficacy of Somali customs and aviation controls, and the broader securitisation of the Horn of Africa.
Local economies, global consequences
Bosaso is not Kabul or Khartoum; it is a port city whose life revolves around fishing, livestock trade and cross-border commerce. But those legitimate economic veins can be exploited. Airports like Bosaso’s can serve both licit and illicit markets. For residents and local traders, any association with mercenary flights or arms movements carries reputational and security risks.
There are human costs, too. Somalia remains locked in a long fight against al-Shabab; any diversion of attention or resources toward foreign conflicts can erode counterterrorism efforts and humanitarian responses. And there is the moral calculus the defence minister invoked in the Senate: “As Muslims, if we allow harm to reach our Muslim brothers for political or material gain, we lose something far greater — in this world and the hereafter.” Whether framed in religious or civic terms, that sentiment underlines how the movement of fighters from one theatre to another is rarely a purely transactional matter for communities connected by faith, family or trade.
The credibility test for institutions
Somalia’s federal system is being tested on multiple fronts: governance, security, economic recovery and diplomacy. This episode places a spotlight on the country’s administrative capacity. Can the federal government and regional administrations work together to audit flight records, inspect cargo manifests, and, if necessary, sanction wrongdoing? Or will politics — competing narratives, local rivalries, and weak institutions — prevent transparent investigation?
International partners have reason to watch closely. The risk is not only that illicit transfers reach conflict zones, but that allegations themselves become leverage in internal disputes, used to score political points rather than to find truth. That would be a familiar arc in many fragile states: a scandal erupts, initial statements are politicised, and the underlying issues — governance, oversight, and accountability — remain unresolved.
Questions that remain
Key facts remain unverified. Who chartered the flights? What were the cargo manifests and passenger lists? If mercenaries did transit, how were they recruited, paid and moved? And crucially, what role did local actors play — knowingly or unknowingly — in facilitating those movements?
These are more than technical queries. They touch on the international community’s responsibility to curb the spread of private violence and to support fragile states in strengthening their regulatory and investigative capacities. They also invite a moral reckoning about the commodification of conflict: at what point does private profit override public safety and regional stability?
For residents of Bosaso and towns across Puntland State, the immediate questions are practical: will investigations disturb trade? Will security tighten at the cost of freedom of movement? For policymakers in Mogadishu, Addis Ababa, Khartoum and beyond, the dispute over a few flights is a reminder that in a connected age, local actions often have international consequences.
As investigators — domestic and international — seek clarity, Somalia faces a choice. It can let the episode become another unexamined fragment in a history of weak oversight, or it can use the moment to shore up aviation controls, improve transparency between federal and regional authorities, and reassure neighbours that its territory will not be a launchpad for violence elsewhere. The stakes are higher than headlines; they touch on sovereignty, rule of law, and the future course of conflict and commerce across a turbulent region.
By Ali Musa
Axadle Times international–Monitoring.
