U.S. Airstrikes Intensify in Somalia Amid Al-Shabaab’s Territory Gains

Escalating Airstrikes in Somalia: A Complex Landscape

As we navigate the ongoing military operations in Somalia, it becomes increasingly clear that we are witnessing a significant moment in the region’s fight against terrorism. Recently, a series of airstrikes coincided with the initiation of Phase IV of the operation, which aims to eradicate the last remnants of militant cells believed to be taking refuge in remote hideouts, often alongside their families. This raises an important question: in our efforts to combat these threats, are we also considering the human cost?

According to the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), this year has seen an unprecedented focus on dismantling ISIS cells in northern Somalia, with at least 30 of the conducted airstrikes targeting these groups. Not to be overlooked, al-Shabaab, another notable insurgent organization, has felt the heat of the intensified campaign, facing at least 20 airstrikes primarily in the central and southern regions—particularly in Hiiraan and Jubaland. If this pace continues, 2025 may surpass the previous record of 63 annual airstrikes set during Donald Trump’s presidency. But at what cost do these military metrics come?

Despite the uptick in airstrikes, the ground realities tell a different story. Al-Shabaab has recently captured three towns in the Hirshabelle region—Moqokori, Gumare, and Tardo—within just two weeks. In this context, one might ponder: how is it possible for militants to regain ground when there is so much focus on aerial bombardment? The federal troops, alongside allied Ma’awisleey militias, who previously led the 2022 offensive that retook these areas, seem increasingly on the back foot. This disconnect between air operations and ground control exemplifies the complexities involved in modern warfare.

Criticism of governmental support has emerged strongly within the federal assembly. Several lawmakers have voiced concerns over the insufficient backing for local fighters. One MP notably pointed out, “We can’t even send basic supplies, like water tankers, to our frontline units.” This harsh reality leaves towns vulnerable to coordinated assaults from al-Shabaab, including dreadful acts like suicide car bombings. The sentiment in the air is palpable: why does it often feel like the courage of local fighters is met with a lack of state support?

As al-Shabaab shifts focus towards encircling strategically important government-held towns like Bulobarde and Jalalaqsi, the tension escalates. These towns are currently defended by African Union peacekeepers from Djibouti, yet the roads leading to these areas have grown perilous. The resultant disruption in aid and supply lines poses a dire threat to civilians caught in the crossfire. One can’t help but wonder: when will we prioritize the safety and well-being of the innocent amidst the chaos?

Interestingly, AFRICOM has temporarily chosen to withhold casualty estimates from Somalia while undergoing a policy review. While officials reiterated their commitment to disclosing quarterly civilian harm reports, the recent absence of routine casualty figures in strike announcements has attracted substantial scrutiny. For instance, many Somali civil society organizations and human rights monitors have criticized this lack of transparency. They argue that without consistent disclosures, holding military actions accountable becomes an uphill battle.

In May, a question arose regarding AFRICOM’s commitment to transparency, which was subsequently addressed by General Michael Langley, the commander of AFRICOM. “We are still very transparent after strikes,” he stated robustly. “Our main concern is the protection of civilians, and it has shown effectiveness.” Yet, the effectiveness of such a pledge remains subjective, experienced differently by the various stakeholders involved. Are those living under the shadow of such military operations truly feeling safe?

As the narrative unfolds, it is crucial to consider the human dimension of these military strategies. Every airstrike may be a tactical victory in the eyes of some, but the emotional toll on families, communities, and individuals is irrefutable. Isn’t it a sobering reality that behind every statistic lies a story—stories of fear, loss, and resilience?

In the tumult of these military actions and political debates, we must remain empathetic to the plight of the Somali people. The question for us all becomes: how do we balance national security imperatives with the fundamental need to protect innocent lives? The answers to such poignant queries may pave the way for a more compassionate and effective approach to conflict resolution.

As we observe the situation’s evolution, it’s imperative that our discussions resonate not just with facts and figures but also with understanding and compassion. Lasting peace is built not only on military might but on the foundation of mutual respect and humanitarian concern.

Perhaps, as we reflect on these pressing issues, we should remember the words of Martin Luther King Jr.: “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” In this ongoing struggle, every effort toward peace is commendable, but the journey requires us to look closely at the essence of humanity that binds us all.

Edited By Ali Musa
Axadle Times International—Monitoring