President Hassan’s isolation deepens as UAE arms regional ties

Reports of Emirati military training for forces from Puntland and Somaliland expose the widening rift between Mogadishu and Somalia’s federal member states. Critics argue that President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s confrontational approach to federalism, constitutional reform and elections has helped fuel the crisis.

MOGADISHU (WDN) — Somalia’s political crisis is deepening as reports emerge that the United Arab Emirates is providing advanced military training to forces from Puntland and Somaliland, including instruction in drone operations and counter-drone defence, amid deteriorating relations between Mogadishu and Abu Dhabi.

The reported training is said to involve Emirati facilities and, according to unconfirmed accounts, Israeli military personnel. However, no independent confirmation has emerged regarding the number of personnel involved, the precise nature of the training or the alleged Israeli role. Neither the UAE, Puntland nor Somaliland has publicly confirmed the reported arrangements.

For President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s administration, the reports raise concerns about military cooperation outside the federal government’s direct control. But the growing estrangement between Mogadishu and other Somali political centres cannot be understood solely as a foreign interference problem. It also reflects a deeper domestic dispute over federalism, constitutional legitimacy and the rules governing the country’s next elections.

Mogadishu is not Somalia

Critics of President Hassan argue that his government has contributed to the current crisis by weakening the federal compact, pursuing constitutional changes without a broadly accepted political settlement and failing to reach agreement with opposition leaders and federal member states on the constitution and electoral arrangements.

Instead of building consensus on the distribution of powers and the rules of political competition, the administration has faced persistent disputes with political opponents and regional authorities. Those disagreements have weakened trust in Mogadishu’s claim to speak for the entire country.

The result is a political landscape in which federal member states increasingly pursue their own diplomatic and security relationships, while the federal government views some of those arrangements as challenges to national authority.

The fundamental problem is that Mogadishu is the seat of the federal government, not a substitute for Somalia itself. A president cannot secure national political legitimacy simply by consolidating control over the capital while relations with important federal member states remain strained.

Somalia’s federal system was designed to distribute authority and accommodate regional interests in a country emerging from decades of conflict. Its durability depends on negotiation, constitutional clarity and cooperation—not unilateral decisions followed by demands for compliance.

The UAE dispute exposes a deeper political failure

The federal government has previously expressed concern that the UAE is supporting armed forces outside Mogadishu’s direct command, warning that such arrangements could create competing security structures. Officials have invoked Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces as a cautionary comparison.

That comparison remains a political warning rather than proof that Puntland or Somaliland forces are intended to follow the Sudanese model. The reported training arrangements also remain unverified and should not be treated as established fact.

Nevertheless, the controversy illustrates the risks created when national institutions lack a trusted mechanism for resolving disagreements over security, constitutional authority and foreign partnerships.

If President Hassan’s government believes that military cooperation between the UAE and regional authorities threatens Somalia’s sovereignty, it must address the issue through credible diplomacy, intergovernmental dialogue and an agreed constitutional framework. Public alarm and accusations alone will not repair the fractured relationship.

At the same time, Puntland and Somaliland must consider how their external security relationships affect wider regional stability and the prospects for a negotiated political settlement.

Negotiation, not confrontation, is the way forward

The crisis ultimately returns to the unresolved questions of constitutional reform and elections. Who has the authority to determine the constitutional rules? What electoral system will govern the next political transition? How will federal and regional institutions reach agreement on matters affecting the entire country?

These questions cannot be settled sustainably by one administration acting alone. They require negotiations that include the federal government, federal member states and opposition stakeholders, with clear commitments to constitutional procedures and an agreed electoral roadmap.

President Hassan’s government risks making its own position more difficult if it treats dissent as disloyalty and regional autonomy as a threat rather than a constitutional reality. Conversely, regional authorities must also recognise that durable national security requires cooperation and clearly defined responsibilities.

The UAE’s reported training programme may become another source of confrontation, but it is not the origin of Somalia’s political divisions. Those divisions have been aggravated by the failure to establish a broadly accepted settlement on federalism, constitutional reform and elections.

Somalia’s crisis cannot be resolved by treating Mogadishu as the country’s sole political centre. The way forward is to restore confidence in the federal compact, negotiate constitutional and electoral arrangements with the opposition and regional authorities, and ensure that national security policy rests on cooperation rather than political coercion.

WardheerNews

The post President Hassan’s isolation deepens as UAE arms regional ties appeared first on WardheerNews.