By Ismail H. Warsame

The recent agreement between the Puntland Government, DP World (Dubai Ports) and the merchant community over cargo charges at Bosaso Port is a welcome development. After days of tension that threatened to disrupt Puntland’s busiest commercial gateway, the government demonstrated flexibility by reducing the disputed fees, while merchants accepted a compromise that allows trade to resume.
That is good news for everyone.
A functioning economy depends on predictability, and Bosaso Port is the economic heartbeat of Puntland. Every interruption at the port affects importers, exporters, transport companies, consumers, and government revenues alike. Governments should be firm in defending the public interest, but wisdom also lies in knowing when dialogue produces better results than confrontation. In this instance, compromise served the broader public interest.
Yet the successful resolution of the commercial dispute should not obscure the larger questions confronting Puntland.
Economic disagreements can often be settled around a negotiating table. Security disputes rarely can.

Despite the easing of tensions at the port, Bosaso continues to host armed units formerly associated with Puntland’s security forces under General Mohamud Diano. Reports have alleged that these forces are now aligned with the Somali National Army (SNA) rather than the Puntland administration. Whatever the precise facts on the ground, the existence of competing claims of loyalty inevitably raises concerns about institutional cohesion and the state’s monopoly over the lawful use of force.
These concerns appear to have had practical consequences. Reports indicate that President Said Abdullahi Deni relocated from the presidential residence on the outskirts of Bosaso to another part of the city because of security considerations. Whether viewed symbolically or operationally, such a move illustrates the sensitivity of the prevailing security environment.

Meanwhile, attention shifted to Garowe.
General Jimcaale was seen publicly displaying a heavily armed militia on the outskirts of the Puntland capital. Public demonstrations of armed strength are seldom ordinary events. They communicate political messages as much as military capability, particularly during periods of heightened political uncertainty.
His route into Puntland attracted additional attention. According to reports, he travelled from Mogadishu through Laascaanood before entering Puntland territory. Earlier, he had been received in Mogadishu by the Federal Government and was subsequently announced as commander of the so-called 54th Division of the Somali National Army, a military formation whose operational status has itself been the subject of public debate.
Taken individually, each of these developments might be interpreted differently. Taken together, however, they point toward a broader institutional question: how should overlapping political authority and competing security structures be managed within Somalia’s federal framework?
History suggests that this is not a trivial question.
Throughout history, governments—regardless of ideology—have regarded divided military loyalty as one of the greatest threats to state stability. Economic disagreements can be negotiated. Political disagreements can often be mediated. Competing chains of military command are considerably more difficult to reconcile.

One historical episode illustrates this principle.
During the final years of Ethiopia’s Derg government, relations between Addis Ababa and the Somali Salvation Democratic Front (SSDF) deteriorated over the movement’s desire for greater operational independence. The disagreement culminated in the detention of SSDF Chairman Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed by the Ethiopian authorities.
According to accounts of those events, elements within the SSDF protested Yusuf’s detention, creating what Ethiopian authorities regarded as an unacceptable military challenge.
Mengistu Haile Mariam reportedly summoned senior SSDF figures who had not been detained and explained his government’s position in memorable terms:
“My government itself came to power through an army mutiny that overthrew Emperor Haile Selassie. We cannot allow you to demonstrate such an example before our own forces in the Ogaden.”
Whether recounted as political history or as an illustration of statecraft, the episode conveys an enduring lesson. Governments that themselves emerged from military upheaval are often especially alert to any signs of fragmentation within armed institutions. More broadly, states generally regard divided military allegiance as an existential concern because it directly affects their ability to maintain constitutional order.
This historical parallel does not suggest that different political contexts are identical. Rather, it highlights a consistent institutional reality: governments tend to view competing armed loyalties as fundamentally different from ordinary political disagreement.
That distinction remains relevant today.

The agreement at Bosaso Port demonstrates that dialogue can resolve commercial disputes when parties are prepared to compromise. It is an encouraging example of pragmatic governance.
Security, however, demands something more than compromise alone. It requires professional institutions, clearly defined chains of command, public confidence, and a shared commitment to constitutional authority. Without those foundations, even successful economic negotiations may offer only temporary relief while deeper structural tensions continue to accumulate beneath the surface.
Puntland has built a reputation over many years for relative stability compared with much of Somalia. Preserving that reputation will depend not only on maintaining commercial confidence but also on strengthening institutions capable of managing political disagreement without allowing security fragmentation to take root.
The lesson from Bosaso is therefore twofold.
First, flexibility in economic governance can reduce unnecessary confrontation and strengthen public confidence. Second, economic stability cannot be separated indefinitely from institutional security. Prosperity rests not only on functioning ports and active markets but also on credible public institutions that exercise authority through law rather than through competing armed actors.
Bosaso may have regained commercial momentum.

The more consequential challenge now lies in ensuring that institutional cohesion keeps pace with economic recovery. History suggests that governments can survive difficult negotiations over taxation and trade. The more enduring test is whether they can preserve the unity, professionalism, and legitimacy of the institutions entrusted with safeguarding the state itself.

-Part II-

Learning from Successful States

Somalia need not search for solutions in theory alone. History offers numerous examples of societies that successfully reduced the political importance of ethnicity, tribe, religion, or regional identity without attempting to erase them altogether.

Singapore inherited a deeply divided society consisting of Chinese, Malays, Indians, and other minority communities. Rather than outlawing ethnic identities, the government deliberately strengthened state institutions while enforcing equal standards within the civil service. Recruitment became increasingly merit-based, corruption was aggressively prosecuted, and public housing policies deliberately mixed communities to reduce segregation. Ethnic identity remained culturally important, but competence became the currency of government.

Botswana followed a different but equally instructive path. At independence in 1966, it was one of the poorest countries in Africa. Rather than allowing tribal competition to dominate the state, Botswana built a professional bureaucracy, respected constitutional institutions, and maintained prudent management of public resources. Traditional leaders retained respected advisory roles through the House of Chiefs, yet executive authority remained accountable to constitutional government. The coexistence of traditional authority and modern state institutions became a source of stability rather than conflict.

Rwanda, despite its own unique historical context, pursued another lesson after the 1994 genocide. The state deliberately discouraged ethnic mobilisation in public administration while simultaneously investing heavily in institutions, public order, education, and service delivery. Although Rwanda’s political model remains debated internationally, its experience demonstrates that rebuilding public institutions can gradually reduce the political salience of inherited identities.

South Korea presents yet another example. Following war, poverty, and authoritarian rule, advancement within government increasingly became tied to education, professional examinations, and administrative competence. Economic transformation followed institutional reform rather than preceding it.

The common denominator across these diverse experiences is unmistakable.

None attempted to abolish historical identities.

All sought to make those identities progressively less decisive in determining access to state power.

That is precisely the lesson Somalia should embrace.

Federalism and Meritocracy Are Compatible

One of the most persistent misconceptions in Somali political discourse is that federalism somehow prevents meritocracy. The evidence suggests otherwise.

Federal systems exist successfully across the world, including the United States, Germany, Canada, Switzerland, Australia, India, and Nigeria. Their federal arrangements recognise regional diversity while maintaining national standards for constitutional governance, public finance, defence, and civil service professionalism.

Federalism does not weaken the state.

Weak institutions weaken federalism.

Somalia’s federal system emerged from historical necessity after state collapse and civil war. It reflected political realities that could not simply be ignored. Attempting to dismantle that settlement through recentralisation would likely intensify rather than resolve political tensions.

Instead, federal institutions themselves must become increasingly professional.

Regional administrations should compete through better governance rather than stronger clan mobilisation. Citizens should compare governments according to schools built, hospitals functioning, roads completed, security maintained, and corruption reduced—not according to the genealogy of office holders.

Competition between governments can become an engine of national progress if institutions rather than clans become the basis for political legitimacy.

The Roadmap to Meritocracy

Somalia’s transformation requires neither revolutionary rhetoric nor constitutional romanticism. It requires disciplined institution-building sustained across decades.

The first priority remains security. Armed forces, police services, and intelligence institutions must recruit, train, promote, and discipline personnel according to professional standards rather than political patronage. Security institutions that represent the republic rather than particular constituencies become the foundation upon which every subsequent reform depends.

Second, the civil service must become genuinely professional. Competitive examinations, transparent recruitment procedures, performance evaluations, and protection against arbitrary political dismissal should gradually replace informal patronage networks. Public office must be viewed as national service rather than political entitlement.

Third, judicial independence requires strengthening. Judges cannot administer impartial justice while fearing political interference or clan retaliation. Equal application of the law remains the cornerstone of constitutional government.

Fourth, education must produce citizens rather than merely graduates. Civic education should emphasise constitutional rights, public ethics, institutional accountability, peaceful political participation, and national responsibility. Students should understand not only where they come from but also the obligations they owe to the republic they collectively share.

Fifth, corruption must become politically expensive. Anti-corruption commissions, independent auditors, parliamentary oversight committees, and investigative journalism must function without intimidation. No democracy survives when corruption becomes normalised.

Finally, economic opportunity must expand beyond political patronage. Young entrepreneurs should succeed because they innovate, invest, and create employment—not because they possess privileged political connections.

Meritocracy ultimately depends upon equal opportunity.

Without opportunity, merit becomes merely another slogan.

Citizenship Above Lineage

The Somali Republic cannot be rebuilt by asking citizens to forget their history.

Nor can it succeed by pretending that lineage no longer matters.

Instead, Somalia must establish a new hierarchy of public values.

A Somali may remain proud of his or her clan while recognising that public office belongs to the nation.

A judge should be respected because of integrity.

A soldier because of courage.

A teacher because of knowledge.

A doctor because of competence.

A minister because of performance.

A president because of constitutional leadership.

Not because of genealogy.

When public confidence shifts from lineage to institutions, political culture itself begins to change. Elections become contests over programmes rather than clan arithmetic. Public administration becomes increasingly predictable. Investors gain confidence. Citizens begin expecting fairness instead of favours.

That is how nations mature.

Policy Recommendations

To translate this vision into practice, Somalia should pursue the following long-term national programme:

1. Preserve traditional elders as advisory and reconciliation institutions while removing routine executive functions from clan structures.
2. Establish an independent national civil service commission responsible for merit-based recruitment and promotion.
3. Introduce transparent procurement systems for all public contracts.
4. Strengthen judicial independence through constitutional guarantees and professional training.
5. Expand civic education from primary school through university with emphasis on constitutional citizenship.
6. Professionalise security institutions through unified standards of recruitment and promotion.
7. Create independent anti-corruption agencies with genuine prosecutorial authority.
8. Encourage political parties organised around policy platforms rather than clan alliances.
9. Strengthen federal institutions through cooperation rather than political confrontation.
10. Promote national symbols, public service ethics, and constitutional patriotism capable of uniting citizens beyond inherited identities.

None of these reforms will produce immediate miracles.

Institution-building is measured in decades, not election cycles.

Conclusion: The Unfinished Republic

Somalia stands at a historical crossroads.

One road continues the familiar cycle of clan mobilisation, institutional weakness, corruption, insecurity, and political fragmentation.

The other road is undoubtedly more demanding. It requires patient institution-building, constitutional discipline, accountable leadership, professional public administration, and citizens willing to judge governments by performance rather than lineage.

The choice is not between clan and state.

The choice is whether the state remains permanently subordinate to the clan.

Somalia’s greatest national project is therefore neither abolishing clan identity nor glorifying it.

It is restoring the proper relationship between society and government.

The clan should remain a respected social institution.

The state must become an impartial constitutional institution.

That is the distinction upon which Somalia’s future depends.

The republic will not endure because Somalis stop belonging to clans.

It will endure because every Somali, regardless of lineage, comes to believe that citizenship offers greater protection, greater opportunity, greater justice, and greater dignity than political patronage ever could.

Only then will Somalia complete the unfinished journey from kinship to constitutional nationhood.

---

Notes

1. Douglass C. North, Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).
2. Francis Fukuyama, Political Order and Political Decay (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2014).
3. Samuel P. Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968).
4. I. M. Lewis, A Modern History of Somalia, 4th ed. (Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 2002).
5. Ken Menkhaus, “Governance without Government in Somalia,” International Security 31, no. 3 (2006–2007): 74–106.
6. Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson, Why Nations Fail (New York: Crown, 2012).
7. Joel S. Migdal, Strong Societies and Weak States (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988).
8. African Development Bank, Governance in Africa (Abidjan: AfDB, various editions).

Bibliography

Acemoglu, Daron, and James A. Robinson. Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. New York: Crown, 2012.

African Development Bank. Governance in Africa. Abidjan: African Development Bank.

Fukuyama, Francis. Political Order and Political Decay. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2014.

Huntington, Samuel P. Political Order in Changing Societies. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968.

Lewis, I. M. A Modern History of Somalia. 4th ed. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 2002.

Menkhaus, Ken. “Governance without Government in Somalia.” International Security 31, no. 3 (2006–2007): 74–106.

Migdal, Joel S. Strong Societies and Weak States. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988.

North, Douglass C. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

---

Support WDM — the home of fearless, independent journalism that speaks truth to power across Somalia and the region.
For subscriptions, research papers, and policy publications, contact WDM via WhatsApp at +252 90 703 4081.