A System Under Strain
Somalia is once again approaching a decisive and delicate political moment. With President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s term nearing its end on 15 May, the country has entered a narrow window in which a clear, credible, and inclusive roadmap must be agreed. Only 53 days remain, and the cost of drifting without consensus is rising by the day.
At the center of this moment stands Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre. If he is willing to jump in and take the lead—much like former prime ministers have—Somalia can move in a new direction, one defined by hope and resilience, and survive its greatest setbacks both in the immediate future and over the long run. In a system designed to balance power and prevent any single office from dominating, the Prime Minister’s role must be more than procedural: it must be catalytic. When institutions and the country are under pressure, the Prime Minister should convene stakeholders, set clear priorities, communicate transparently, and act decisively to build consensus. By doing so, he can transform a moment of crisis into an opportunity for durable progress.
The roots of Somalia’s current governance model lie in the 2012 Provisional Constitution. After decades of state collapse and armed conflict, this framework was designed to reduce tensions, rebuild trust, and ensure shared responsibility among Somalia’s diverse communities. It established a dual executive: the President as head of state with defined responsibilities, and the Prime Minister as the leader of government, responsible for daily executive work and administration.
This arrangement was not simply legal. It was political and social by design. Somalia’s clan structure and history of mistrust toward centralized authority required a system where power is distributed, institutions check each other, and political decisions are negotiated rather than imposed. The constitution aimed to create stability through inclusion.
Yet in recent years, that balance has steadily weakened.
A Presidency Expanding, a Premiership Shrinking
Across political circles, civil society, and among federal stakeholders, a growing perception has emerged that executive authority has increasingly concentrated around the presidency. Critics argue that the Prime Minister’s office has been reduced in practice, becoming less independent and less capable of asserting the responsibilities the constitution intended.
This matters because when the Prime Minister’s role is narrowed, the system loses one of its main stabilizers. The Prime Minister is meant to coordinate government, manage political friction, and act as a bridge among federal institutions, member states, and parliament. When that office becomes constrained, conflict spills into other arenas.
Parliament, too, faces scrutiny. The legislature, led by Speaker Adan Mohamed Nur Madobe, is constitutionally expected to provide oversight, serve as a check on executive power, and represent national consensus. However, concerns persist about whether parliament is operating with sufficient independence and strength to assert its constitutional mandate. When both the premiership and parliament are perceived as weakened, the entire governance structure becomes exposed.
This is not an academic concern. It is the kind of institutional imbalance that can quickly turn political disagreements into constitutional crises.
A Divided Political Landscape and Unresolved National Questions
These institutional pressures are unfolding at a time of deepening political division. Relations between federal leaders, member states, and opposition actors have become more tense. National questions that require unity remain unresolved, especially constitutional amendments and the future electoral model.
Somalis broadly support moving toward a one-person, one-vote electoral system. It is a long-held ambition and an important democratic goal. But implementing such a major transition without broad consensus, adequate preparation, and trust among stakeholders risks producing the opposite effect: deeper division, competing political processes, and disputes over legitimacy.
Somalia has been here before. History shows that political transitions without agreement do not simply delay progress—they can reopen national wounds.
A Defining Moment for Leadership
As the presidential term nears its end, the urgency becomes unavoidable. Somalia’s stability at previous transitional moments has often depended on the conduct and courage of key leaders during periods of uncertainty.
Former Prime Ministers such as Nur Hassan Hussein, Abdiweli Mohamed Ali Gaas, Omar Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke, and Mohamed Hussein Roble each faced difficult moments when the political system was under strain. Whether through negotiation, institutional defense, or maintaining continuity of governance, they played roles that helped prevent political vacuum and protected fragile stability. Their experiences remind Somalia of one clear lesson: when institutions are fragile, leadership must be deliberate, visible, and anchored in constitutional order.
Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre is now facing a comparable test.
This moment demands more than routine governance. It requires political awareness, constitutional clarity, and the willingness to act decisively when the system itself is under pressure. If the current trajectory continues without a workable agreement, Somalia risks entering a dangerous phase defined by institutional paralysis, legitimacy disputes, and competing processes. Unlike previous years, the international community appears less willing or less able to intervene directly. That places even greater responsibility on Somali leaders to prevent a breakdown.
What Must Happen Now
At this stage, the Prime Minister’s role becomes central. The position is not merely administrative. It carries the expectation of national stewardship during uncertainty. The question is whether Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre will remain aligned with the current direction or take steps to restore constitutional balance and initiate inclusive dialogue among all stakeholders.
This is not an easy choice. Any meaningful move toward independence and mediation may trigger resistance from within the system. But history judges leaders by what they do when the state is at risk, not when politics is comfortable.
If Somalia is to avoid political collapse, several steps must be treated as urgent priorities:
First, a credible national dialogue must be launched immediately. This cannot be symbolic. It must include federal member states, parliamentary leadership, opposition actors, and key societal stakeholders.
Second, constitutional order must be reaffirmed in practice, not just in speeches. That means respecting the separation of roles between the presidency and the premiership, and allowing institutions to function without intimidation or manipulation.
Third, any electoral or constitutional change must be pursued through consensus, sequencing, and readiness. Reform without agreement creates conflict, not democracy.
Fourth, the Prime Minister must either lead this process or acknowledge that the country requires a new political arrangement capable of carrying the transition.
Rising Tensions: New Alliances, New Risks
These concerns are intensified by emerging political developments. A coalition calling itself Golaha Mustaqbal Soomaaliya (Council for the Future of Somalia) has reportedly formed, bringing together two federal member states and influential former politicians. After a previous meeting with President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud ended without results, the coalition is reportedly considering a parallel process that excludes the current administration if the presidency refuses dialogue. This risks triggering the gravest political crisis since 1991 and jeopardizing Somalia’s prospects for stability.
At the same time, new conflict between HSM and the leader of South West State is creating an alarming atmosphere. The risk of direct confrontation in that state would be a national disaster. South West State is already under pressure from drought and humanitarian strain. Adding political confrontation—especially one that could turn violent—would not only deepen suffering, it could destabilize the federal structure at the worst possible time.
All of this is happening while the country faces an imminent leadership deadline. In such circumstances, drifting is not neutral. Drifting becomes a decision in itself.
A Clear Warning, and a Narrow Window
The coming weeks will test Somalia’s institutions and its political class. Somalia can still avoid collapse, but only if leaders treat dialogue and constitutional order as national survival tools, not political options.
For Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre, this is more than a political challenge. It is a defining moment. If he takes the lead, defends constitutional balance, and brings stakeholders to the table, he can help steer Somalia away from a dangerous edge. If he does not, then Somalia may have no choice but to consider a new Prime Minister capable of leading the transition, because the country cannot afford paralysis at a time like this.
Somalia does not need more slogans. It needs a roadmap, a credible process, and leaders willing to place the nation above narrow interests. The time for that is now.
By Abdikadir Ahmed
Political Analyst, Abdikadair@gmail.com
