U.S. carries out airstrike on ISIS in Puntland State amid broader campaign in Somalia
MOGADISHU — The U.S. military said Tuesday that it conducted an airstrike on Islamic State militants in Somalia’s rugged Al‑Miskaad mountains, continuing a pattern of remote strikes aimed at degrading extremist groups in the Horn of Africa.
- Advertisement -
U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) said the late‑September operation occurred on Sept. 26 in a remote area roughly 60 kilometres (37 miles) southeast of Bossaso, the bustling port city at the heart of Somalia’s semi‑autonomous Puntland State state. “No civilian casualties or damage were reported,” AFRICOM said in a brief statement, a line underscoring the sensitivity that surrounds U.S. strikes in populated or contested areas.
What happened and why it matters
The Al‑Miskaad range has become a hideout for an Islamic State affiliate that has steadily built a foothold in northern Somalia even as the better‑known al‑Shabab dominates the south. The mountainous terrain — steep valleys, high ridgelines and narrow tracks — gives small bands of fighters significant freedom of movement and complicates ground operations by Puntland State security forces and their partners.
Puntland State authorities, who have been conducting operations against the militants since late 2024, welcomed the U.S. action, a regional security official said. “We continue to push insurgents out of their bases and deprive them of safe havens,” the official added on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of ongoing operations.
The strike is the latest in a series of U.S. actions across Somalia. Since President Donald Trump returned to the White House in January 2025, American forces have stepped up air operations, including both strikes on al‑Shabab in the south and separate missions against ISIS affiliates in Puntland State. Military officials say adjustments to rules of engagement have given commanders more flexibility to act quickly against fleeting targets.
Local impact and wider implications
For people in Puntland State, the constant drumbeat of strikes and local offensives has been both a relief and a source of anxiety. “We want peace, courts and schools — not bullets from the sky,” said a small‑town shopkeeper near Bossaso who asked not to be named. Residents in the mountain areas often live hundreds of kilometres from government centres, and the line between combatant and civilian can be thin in contested countryside.
Even when strikes avoid civilian harm, the long‑term effects can ripple through communities: disruption of grazing and farming routines, fears of reprisal by militants, and the displacement of families who lose access to markets and services. The U.S. emphasis on precision, surveillance and limited ground presence reflects a global trend toward remote counterterrorism — but also raises persistent questions about how to translate kinetic success into stable governance on the ground.
How the groups differ
Al‑Shabab, an affiliate of al‑Qaida, remains Somalia’s most powerful insurgent movement, controlling territory and conducting high‑profile attacks, mostly in the south and around Mogadishu. By contrast, the Islamic State presence in Somalia is smaller and more dispersed, focused largely in the north and in isolated mountain enclaves where it carries out assassinations and small bombings.
Analysts say the groups differ in tactics and ambitions: al‑Shabab seeks to control territory and impose a strict social order, while the Islamic State cell in Puntland State appears to blend insurgency with guerrilla hit‑and‑run attacks and targeted violence. Both, however, exploit weak governance, porous borders and ungoverned spaces.
U.S. strategy and regional partnerships
AFRICOM emphasized that the strike was part of a broader effort to “work with Somali and international partners to disrupt terrorist networks,” language that reflects Washington’s preference for enabling local forces while conducting targeted operations when called for. U.S. officials argue this approach reduces the need for large troop deployments while still denying extremist groups freedom to plan and operate.
But critics — including some African diplomats and rights groups — warn that an overreliance on strikes does not build local capacity or address the underlying political and economic grievances that feed militancy. They ask whether a campaign focused primarily on degrading militant capabilities will be enough to prevent future resurgences. How will Puntland State and Somalia as a whole stitch together security gains into functioning courts, police and basic services?
Questions ahead
The strike underlines a persistent tension in international counterterrorism: how to balance rapid, low‑footprint military options with deeper investment in political reconciliation and development. As foreign militaries tighten their use of technology — drones, precision munitions and real‑time surveillance — they must also wrestle with when and how to transfer responsibility to local actors.
For residents of Puntland State, the questions are immediate and practical: will security operations make roads safe enough for traders and students? Will families displaced by fighting be able to return? And for a global audience, the strike prompts another question: in an era of remote warfare, how do we measure success beyond the number of militants killed or bases struck?
As Somalia’s complex mix of clan politics, regional autonomy and insurgency endures, isolated strikes may blunt threats in the short term. But long‑term stability will likely depend on a wider set of tools — governance, justice and economic opportunity — alongside continued international support.
By Ali Musa
Axadle Times international–Monitoring.
