By Ahmed M. Roble
Friday March 13, 2026
Former President Farmaajo has recently increased his political visibility in Mogadishu, engaging with supporters, outreach of media figures, political allies, and sections of the opposition as discussions around the country’s future political landscape intensify ahead of a possible 2026 presidential contest. However, his renewed activity also exposes a form of political cognitive dissonance: while projecting confidence and mobilizing networks as though a comeback is plausible, the broader political environment—marked by shifting alliances, unresolved political grievances, lingering controversies of his presidency, an underdog from his sub-clan and resistance among key federal and regional actors—suggests that such ambitions face significant structural barriers.
This tension between aspiration and political reality defines the current perception of Farmaajo’s maneuvering in Mogadishu. On one hand, his messaging appeals to loyal constituencies that credit his administration with efforts to strengthen national sovereignty and security. On the other hand, many political stakeholders interpret his re-emergence as symbolic positioning rather than a viable pathway to re-election, particularly within Somalia’s yet to know and complex indirect electoral system. As a result, Farmaajo’s latest movements highlight the psychological and strategic paradox often seen in post-presidential politics: the persistence of personal ambition and political identity even when the institutional and coalition dynamics make a return to the presidency highly unlikely.
When Farmaajo assumed office in 2017, he entered the presidency on a powerful wave of public optimism. Many Somalis, exhausted by corruption, insecurity, and persistent elite fragmentation, viewed his nationalist message, emphasis on sovereignty, and promises of institutional reform as the beginning of a new political era capable of restoring accountability and national dignity. Yet as debate grows over the possibility of his political return, a more difficult question confronts the country: can Somalia afford to revisit a leadership approach that critics argue deepened political polarization and strained relations between the federal government and regional states, rather than consolidating the unity and institutional trust our nation urgently needs?
Federalism Under Strain
Somalia’s federal system, though imperfect and still evolving, was designed as a mechanism to manage diversity and prevent the re-emergence of authoritarian centralization. Instead of nurturing this fragile architecture, Farmaajo’s presidency often appeared to treat federal member states as adversaries rather than partners. Political disputes routinely escalated into security stand-offs, and institutional paralysis through sanctions to the disbursement of international aid, projects, grants and budgetary support.
Relations between Mogadishu and states such as Puntland and Jubaland deteriorated into cycles of distrust and open confrontation coupled with the destructive and unforgiving legacy of wrapping up the political settlement between Hiraan and Middle Shabelle- Hir- Shabelle. Rather than convening inclusive dialogue platforms, Villa Somalia at the time frequently opted for brinkmanship — a strategy that may consolidate short-term authority but erodes long-term cohesion.
Perfecting federalism requires ongoing negotiation, compromise, and shared ownership of national decisions. What Somalia experienced during his tenure was instead a recurring perception that power was being centralized in Mogadishu, with regional leaders sidelined or pressured. In a country still recovering from civil war and state collapse, such tactics are not merely political missteps — they are structural risks.
Security and Politicization
Supporters of Farmaajo often argue that his administration prioritized security reform and rebuilding the Somali National Army. Yet critics contend that security institutions became entangled in political competition. Allegations of politicized deployments and intelligence disputes reinforced the perception that security agencies were not always insulated from electoral maneuvering.
Meanwhile, the persistent threat of Al-Shabaab remained largely unresolved chaotic security with the most death after the Ethiopian occupation in the in the capital. While progress against the insurgency requires sustained multi-administration effort, the broader concern lies in whether internal political fractures diverted attention from a unified national security and offensive strategy and counterterrorism efforts cannot succeed when political elites are locked in confrontation.
Foreign Policy, Populism and Institution-Building
Farmaajo’s tenure also coincided with strained regional diplomacy. Tensions with neighboring Kenya escalated over maritime disputes and security cooperation. While defending sovereignty is legitimate and necessary, diplomacy in the Horn of Africa demands calibrated engagement. When foreign policy becomes entangled with domestic political positioning, it risks isolating the country at a time when international support remains critical for security and economic recovery.
Geopolitically, Somalia’s strategic location makes it complex. It cannot afford reactive diplomacy shaped by political survival calculations. It needs steady, consensus-driven engagement that transcends individual leadership cycles. Farmaajo’s political brand relied heavily on populist, nationalist rhetoric and anti-corruption narrative. Such themes resonate deeply with citizens frustrated by decades of elite impunity. However, rhetoric alone does not build institutions.
Critics argue that, instead of fostering independent, accountable governance, his administration concentrated power in a small, insular circle, effectively sidelining formal institutions. At the heart of this shadowy power structure was the notoriously secretive former Al Jazeera journalist, Fahad Yasin, who claims to be a kingmaker and whose influence and mysterious presence have earned him a reputation as a Rasputin-like figure, quietly shaping the regime from behind the scenes until their defeat and subsequent political rupture in 2024.
Somalia’s sustainable state-building requires distributing authority through transparent institutions, not consolidating it around personalities. In states emerging from collapse, personalization of power — even under reformist banners — carries historical echoes. Somalia’s stability depends on institutionalization of authority, not its consolidation. Somalia’s future stability depends on whether power is institutionalized — not personalized.
Reverse from State Collapse- The Cost Polarization
Nothing illustrates the divisive nature of Farmaajo’s tenure more vividly than the 2021 term- extension episode. When parliament voted to extend the presidential mandate beyond its constitutional limit, Somalia entered one of its most dangerous political crises in recent years. Armed factions aligned with rival leaders took positions in Mogadishu. The specter of intra-elite conflict loomed. Critics describe this action as an attempt to undermine electoral independence, and a hallmark criticism of authoritarian governance.
Even though the extension was eventually reversed, the damage lingered. Constitutional norms were weakened. Public trust in democratic transition suffered. International partners voiced concern, and domestic polarization intensified. In fragile democracies, precedent matters. The willingness to stretch constitutional boundaries — even temporarily — plants seeds of future instability and ultimately state collapse. A leader seeking to return to office must convincingly demonstrate that such episodes were lessons learned, not templates to be refined.
Perhaps the most enduring legacy of the Farmaajo years is political polarization. Elections became existential battles. Federal-state relations became arenas of zero-sum competition. Trust between stakeholders eroded. Somalia’s recovery remains delicate. It faces economic vulnerability, climate shocks, security threats, donor fatigue due to the collapsing international system under President Trump and unfinished constitutional negotiations. Reintroducing a leadership figure associated — fairly or unfairly — with clan grievances and deep political divisions risks reopening old wounds.
A Forward-Looking Imperative
The debate over the potential return of Farmaajo should move beyond personality politics and focus squarely on governance philosophy. Somalia must ask itself whether it needs a return to confrontational centralization or a new chapter of cooperative federalism, whether it requires rhetorical nationalism or painstaking consensus-building. Any candidate, including Farmaajo, must demonstrate clearly that they can govern differently from the past, while the nation must reflect carefully on its previous choices to avoid repeating mistakes.
Somalia’s trajectory remains unfinished. Its institutions are young, peace is fragile, and unity is partial. In this environment, the margin for divisive politics is narrow. The country cannot afford leadership that risks deepening societal fractures. What is needed is governance that bridges divides rather than exploits them—leadership that sees federalism as partnership, dissent as dialogue, and power as stewardship rather than personal possession. Public expectations are high for principled, forward-looking leadership that prioritizes nation- building over personal or factional gain.
The dramatic fall of Farmaajo from grace underscores the risks of returning to leadership that relies on populism and confrontation. History reminds us that demagogues have leveraged popular appeal to pursue dangerous agendas. Re-electing a leader who has already fallen short of expectations would imperil Somalia’s hard-won gains. The country cannot afford to gamble its fragile progress on a figure whose record demonstrates both a lack of responsible leadership and a tendency toward divisive governance. Somalia’s future depends on transcending political rivalries, not recycling them.
Ahmed M. Roble he can be reached at [email protected].
The views expressed in this article are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect Hiiraan Online’s editorial stance.
