Somali premier’s public vow of loyalty to president rekindles debate over power and principle
From a town hall in Mogadishu, a simple line set off a storm
- Advertisement -
MOGADISHU — When Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre told a packed town hall that he “respects the president and will not act in a way that contradicts his leadership,” the words landed as both balm and warning. To some in the room they were a sign of cohesion at a fraught moment; to others they echoed a deeper question about the balance of power in Somalia’s fragile state.
The exchange unfolded in a familiar postwar rhythm: officials speaking in public forums, elders in attendance, and citizens seeking reassurance that governance will edge closer to stability. Yet the prime minister’s pledge quickly ricocheted beyond the hall into parliament, social media and diplomatic circles, drawing sharp responses from lawmakers and commentators.
Split parliament, sharper questions
Critics in the federal parliament accused Barre of subordinating the office he holds to the president, Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, asserting that such declarations undermine the constitutional separation of roles. “PM Hamza portrayed himself as someone handpicked by President Hassan Sheikh, lacking an independent mandate or representation,” said MP Sanyare, reflecting anxieties shared by other legislators about centralisation and the erosion of institutional checks.
By contrast, allies framed the comments as a welcome demonstration of unity at a time when Somalia needs coherent leadership. “Prime Minister Hamza’s statement reflects respect and trust between him and the president,” said MP Cali Hoosh, adding that visible harmony can be a bulwark against factionalism and infighting.
That tension — between solidarity and safeguard — goes to the heart of Somalia’s political puzzle. The constitution gives the president the power to nominate a prime minister, but the cabinet and the prime minister’s programme must win parliamentary approval. In practice, personal loyalties and clan dynamics often color these formal lines.
Why the phrasing matters beyond rhetoric
In a country emerging from decades of conflict, words spoken by senior figures are not merely gestures; they can shape the trajectory of reforms, the implementation of an election roadmap, and the management of security threats such as al-Shabab, which remains a potent and adaptive insurgency across large swaths of the country.
For international partners — the United Nations, African Union, the European Union, and donor countries — the clarity of Somalia’s governance structures is a litmus test for aid, capacity-building and security cooperation. They have repeatedly urged inclusive, transparent politics and strong oversight to prevent the sort of executive aggrandisement that can unravel fragile democracies.
Within Somalia, the memory of past crises is long. Delays in nationwide elections, periodic stand-offs between presidents and prime ministers, and disputes between Mogadishu and regional states over powers and resources have fuelled public scepticism about elite bargains made behind closed doors. Voters and diaspora communities watch such pledges skeptically: unity can mean progress, but it can also mask inertia or mutual protection among the powerful.
Clan ties, patronage and political survival
No discussion of Somali politics is complete without the role of clans and informal networks. Political appointments and alliances are often mediated through clan elders, business interests and informal coalitions. For a prime minister, publicly aligning with the president can be a strategic move to guarantee the president’s support during delicate votes in parliament or when assembling a cabinet that reflects Somalia’s intricate clan balance.
Yet that calculus has costs. If the prime minister is seen as the president’s custodian rather than an independent executor of government policy, parliamentarians — especially those who draw authority from regional constituencies — may push back, stalling legislation or scrutinising appointments and budgets more aggressively.
What could happen next?
- Possible cooling: The pledge could be a momentary olive branch that leads to smoother cooperation on security operations, anti-corruption efforts and the stalled electoral roadmap.
- Escalation: If parliament or powerful regional leaders view the pledge as a precursor to centralised control, they could intensify scrutiny of the cabinet, hindering governance at a critical time.
- International signal: Donors and partners might press both offices for clearer institutional safeguards — demanding transparency and parliamentary oversight as conditions for deeper engagement.
In other fragile and transitioning democracies, similar moments have often forced a choice: deepen institutions or double down on personal loyalty networks. Somalia’s choice will ripple into the lives of ordinary citizens — from those seeking reliable public services in Mogadishu’s neighbourhoods to farmers and traders in Puntland State and Jubaland who look to the central government for security and development.
Questions that will shape Somalia’s future
As the debate unfolds, several questions loom. Can public institutions be strengthened so that loyalty to office does not become loyalty to a person? Will the prime minister balance personal allegiance with the constitutional duty to work with parliament and regional states? And perhaps most crucially, will Somalia’s leaders turn cohesion into concrete progress on security, elections and the delivery of services?
For citizens who remember the long years of chaos, the stakes are clear: political harmony is desirable, but not at the expense of accountable government. As one Mogadishu resident put it at a coffee stand near the city’s seafront: “We want leaders who can work together, yes — but also leaders who answer to the people. Respect between leaders should not replace respect for the law.”
It is a refrain that echoes across fragile democracies: the challenge is not simply to avoid public feuds but to build institutions that survive them.
By Ali Musa
Axadle Times international–Monitoring.
