Unconfirmed Reports: PSF Remnants Allegedly Seeking New Bases in SSC Territory

EDITOR’S NOTE: This is a developing story based on unconfirmed reports. Independent verification is still pending.

If these reports prove accurate, they would signal that remnants of the PSF are attempting to regroup rather than disband by relocating their operational bases in Bosaso and Qarho into SSC-controlled territory. Such a move would raise serious questions about the group’s intentions and whether the recent security operations in Puntland have merely dispersed, rather than dismantled, the organization.

Any attempt to establish armed bases outside Puntland’s constitutional security framework risks expanding instability beyond its original theatre and complicating an already fragile political and security landscape.

The critical question is no longer whether the recent confrontation has ended, but whether it is entering a new phase.

WDM will continue to monitor developments and update readers as independently verified information becomes available.

A WDM Editorial

Disarm the Clan Militias. End Political Violence. Restore the Rule of Law.

A state cannot coexist with private armies.
It is as simple as that.
Every time a political disagreement in Puntland is settled with armed mobilization instead of constitutional process, the state loses a little more of its authority. Every revenge killing carried out in the name of clan honour, every politically sponsored militia, and every illegal gunman patrolling our towns chips away at nearly three decades of institution-building.
Enough.
Garowe was built to be the capital of a constitutional state—not a stage for armed political intimidation. Bosaso should be known for commerce, not convoys of gunmen. Galkayo has already buried too many of its sons and daughters to clan revenge. Qardho and every Puntland town deserve schools, investment, and opportunity—not fear, checkpoints, and technicals mounted with heavy weapons.
Let us stop deceiving ourselves.
There is no such thing as a “constitutional militia.”
There is no such thing as a “good armed group.”
And there is certainly no political objective noble enough to justify terrorizing civilians.
Those who reach for the gun after losing the political argument have already admitted they have lost the constitutional one.
The tragedy is that many who now challenge Puntland through violence contributed nothing to building it. Puntland was not created by militias. It was founded in 1998 through dialogue, reconciliation, sacrifice, and a deliberate rejection of the warlordism that destroyed Somalia after 1991.
Its founders understood a timeless principle: a government that does not control the legitimate use of force is not truly governing.
The late President Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed understood this better than most. Agree or disagree with aspects of his leadership, he never confused state authority with militia authority. He understood that a state cannot negotiate its sovereignty with armed factions. The Constitution either governs everyone, or eventually it governs no one.
That lesson has never been more relevant.
Today, Puntland faces a growing danger—not only from terrorists, but from the normalization of politically motivated violence, clan revenge, and illegal armed groups operating outside constitutional authority. Every politician who quietly encourages militias for short-term political advantage is gambling with Puntland’s long-term survival.
But there is another truth that deserves equal attention.
The problem is no longer only the existence of militias. It is also the absence of justice.
Puntland has yet to demonstrate that political violence carries real legal consequences.
Nearly 38 people were killed in political violence in Garowe not long ago, yet the public has not seen those responsible—or those accused of organizing, financing, or instigating that violence—held accountable before independent courts of law. No transparent prosecutions. No public trials. No judicial closure worthy of a constitutional state.
That silence is dangerous.
Impunity is the oxygen of political violence.
When those who organize bloodshed are not brought before the courts, others draw the obvious conclusion: violence is survivable, accountability is optional, and the law is negotiable.
Nothing could be more destructive to public confidence.
Justice delayed is not merely justice denied.
In Puntland, justice ignored becomes an invitation to the next gunfight.
This is where the Puntland authorities face their greatest constitutional test.
Security operations alone are not enough. Arrests alone are not enough. Public statements alone are not enough.
The law must complete the journey.
Those against whom there is sufficient credible evidence of committing, organizing, financing, or inciting political violence must be investigated professionally, prosecuted independently, and tried fairly before competent courts. No sacred cows. No political favourites. No clan exemptions.
The law must become stronger than the gun.
Yet in doing so, Puntland must never abandon the principles that distinguish a constitutional state from those who seek to undermine it. Every security operation must respect human rights. Civilians must be protected. Due process must be guaranteed. Collective punishment has no place in Puntland. Justice must be firm, but it must also be lawful.
That is not a weakness.
That is civilization.
The founders of Puntland did not sacrifice to replace one armed faction with another. They built institutions so future generations would no longer have to live at the mercy of men carrying guns outside the law.
Puntland now faces a defining choice.
Either it restores the rule of law, disarms every illegal militia, prosecutes political violence without fear or favour, and reaffirms the state’s exclusive authority over the use of force—
Or it continues down the road where every political disagreement is settled by armed mobilization, every killing goes unanswered, and every act of impunity plants the seed of the next conflict.
The choice should not be difficult.
One Constitution.
One government.
One chain of command.
One system of justice.
Zero tolerance for political violence.
The gun did not build Puntland.
The gun must never be allowed to bury it.

Reported by Abdilatif Ahmed

“The Puntland Diaspora Community in the United Kingdom (UK) expresses its deep concern regarding the escalating security situation and strongly condemns what it views as actions by President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud and the Federal Government of Somalia that are increasing military tensions and instability affecting Puntland.

According to information received by the Community, additional troops, heavy weapons, and military equipment have reportedly been deployed toward Galkacyo. The Community considers these developments a serious escalation that threatens peace, security, social stability, and national unity, while increasing the risk of armed confrontation with potentially severe political, humanitarian, and security consequences.

The Community believes that military mobilisation represents a departure from dialogue, constitutional governance, and peaceful dispute resolution. At a time when Somalia requires unity, reconciliation, and cooperation to address national challenges, the use of military force to resolve political disagreements risks deepening divisions, weakening institutions, and undermining public trust.

The Puntland Diaspora Community strongly condemns what it views as the use of state military resources and authority to apply political pressure on Puntland. Political and constitutional disputes must be resolved through dialogue, negotiation, mutual respect, and adherence to federal principles, democracy, constitutional order, and the rule of law—not through confrontation or coercion.

The Community warns that continued military escalation around Galkacyo could endanger civilian lives, increase humanitarian risks, cause displacement, disrupt economic activity, and further weaken political stability in Puntland and Somalia as a whole.

The Puntland Diaspora Community firmly maintains that political disagreements must never be resolved through force or military threats. All disputes must be addressed through genuine dialogue, peaceful engagement, and constitutional processes.

Therefore, the Puntland Diaspora Community in the United Kingdom calls for:

The immediate cessation of military activities that could further escalate tensions in Galkacyo and Puntland.

A renewed commitment by all political leaders to peaceful dialogue, constitutional processes, and sustainable solutions.

Full respect for the constitutional rights, security, and autonomy of Federal Member States.

Protection of civilians, public infrastructure, and humanitarian access in accordance with international principles.

Greater involvement by regional and international partners in supporting mediation and de-escalation efforts.

The Community believes that continued escalation risks weakening Somalia’s institutions, undermining national unity, and diverting resources from essential priorities, including security, economic recovery, and democratic development. Lasting peace and stability can only be achieved through inclusive governance, accountability, reconciliation, and genuine political dialogue.

The Puntland Diaspora Community therefore calls upon President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud and the Federal Government of Somalia to exercise restraint and avoid any actions that may further increase tensions with Puntland. Priority must be given to constructive dialogue, protection of civilians, preservation of peace, and strengthening Somalia’s federal institutions.

The Puntland Diaspora Community in the United Kingdom reaffirms its commitment to a peaceful, united, democratic, and federal Somalia based on justice, constitutional governance, mutual respect, and the rule of law. The Somali people deserve responsible leadership that prioritises national interests, resolves disputes through dialogue, and protects the future and wellbeing of all citizens.”

Translated from Somali by WDM Desk

Mogadishu, August 4th, 2026

The Future Somalia Council strongly condemns the weapons and forces being deployed to the city of Galkacyo by Hassan Sheikh Mahmoud, the President whose term has expired, actions that have created a climate of conflict and pose a serious threat to peace, stability, and the coexistence of the people living in the Galmudug and Puntland regions.
Today’s fighting, which resulted from weapons transported into the Galkacyo district, is an example of the danger that can arise from the irresponsibility and misguided ambitions of the President whose term has expired, who is taking increasingly dangerous steps against the country, its people, and Somali statehood with each passing day.
The city of Galkacyo has been recovering over the past ten years from conflicts and clan warfare, yet it is unfortunate that the President whose term has expired is igniting conflict in the city and creating renewed insecurity and instability.
It is astonishing that at a time when the terrorist group Al-Shabaab is regaining areas that were liberated at great cost of bloodshed, the President whose term has expired is using the weapons and forces meant to liberate the country to instead stir up tensions in peaceful areas.
Finally, the Future Somalia Council calls on regional administrations, traditional elders, religious scholars, intellectuals, and civil society to work together for peace and stability, and to jointly prevent the conflict that the President whose term has expired is inciting in Galkacyo.

A WDM Editorial
A government’s priorities are revealed not by its speeches, but by where it commits its soldiers, its money, and its political energy. Today, Somalia faces an uncomfortable question: why does a Federal Government whose constitutional mandate expired months ago appear more determined to escalate tensions in Galkayo than to liberate Somali territory still occupied by al-Shabaab?
Galkayo has suffered enough.
It is a city burdened by divided administration, decades of unresolved clan grievances, contested jurisdiction, recurring insecurity, and the pressures of displacement. It should be a place where federal institutions cooperate to preserve stability—not another arena for political confrontation.
Yet allegations continue to emerge that federal-aligned actors are encouraging militia mobilization around Galkayo instead of concentrating national efforts against the insurgency that continues to occupy Somali soil.
The contrast could hardly be sharper.
Adan Yabaal, barely 200 kilometres from Mogadishu, was celebrated as one of the Somali National Army’s major victories in 2022. Yet al-Shabaab recaptured the strategic town in April 2025, and it remains outside government control. That is not a peripheral setback. It is a reminder that Somalia’s principal battlefield remains unfinished.
Then there is Jilib—al-Shabaab’s long-standing operational headquarters and self-declared capital since 2014. Despite years of military campaigns, international support, airstrikes, and repeated offensives, the movement’s political and military nerve centre remains intact. More than a decade later, the federal government has still not reclaimed the insurgency’s capital.
Instead, an altogether different pattern appears to be emerging.
South West State has experienced sustained federal intervention following disputes over regional authority. Galmudug now finds itself in open political tension with Villa Somalia. And Galkayo, sitting on the sensitive boundary between Puntland and Galmudug, increasingly risks becoming the next flashpoint.
Whether every allegation proves accurate or not, the perception itself is deeply damaging. Federalism cannot survive if Federal Member States come to believe that political independence invites pressure while constitutional cooperation receives intimidation.
The irony is particularly striking because the Federal Government itself operates under a constitutional cloud. Its constitutional mandate expired months ago, yet instead of prioritizing constitutional consensus, national reconciliation, and the recovery of territory held by terrorists, it appears increasingly preoccupied with political confrontation against Federal Member States. A government whose own constitutional legitimacy is disputed should exercise restraint—not open new political and military fronts.
Former Prime Minister Omar Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke recently warned that a conflict in Galkayo would divert precious military resources from the fight against al-Shabaab and ISIS. On that point, he is entirely correct. Somalia cannot afford another internal front while terrorists continue to occupy strategic territory.
But his warning leaves unanswered the most important question: who is creating the conditions for such a conflict?
Warning against war while remaining silent on those whom critics accuse of orchestrating the political and military tensions around Galkayo is an incomplete analysis. If federal-aligned actors are contributing to militia mobilization and political destabilization, then condemning the consequences without confronting their alleged role treats the symptoms while ignoring the disease.
The Provisional Constitution did not establish federalism so that Mogadishu could politically discipline Federal Member States. It established federalism to disperse power, reduce conflict, and unite Somali institutions against common national enemies.
That enemy is not Puntland.
That enemy is not Galkayo.
That enemy is al-Shabaab.
If a Federal Government whose constitutional mandate expired months ago still possesses the troops, resources, and political determination to project force, those assets should first be directed toward liberating Adan Yabaal, reclaiming Jilib, and dismantling al-Shabaab’s remaining territorial sanctuary. Those are the battles that matter. Those are the victories the Somali people have waited for.
Manufacturing political crises in areas outside the Federal Government’s effective administration does not strengthen the Somali state. It weakens federalism, diverts scarce security resources, and risks opening another front in a country already fighting for its survival. More paradoxically, it undermines the very federal system that President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud has repeatedly presented as a cornerstone of his government’s political agenda. A strategy that erodes the constitutional autonomy, mutual trust, and institutional integrity of the Federal Member States ultimately weakens the Union it claims to defend.
History will not judge leaders by how effectively they confronted fellow Somalis. It will judge them by whether they defended the Constitution, respected the limits of their mandate, and liberated the territory still occupied by terrorists.
Somalia does not need another constitutional crisis.
It does not need another federal confrontation.
It needs Adan Yabaal back.
It needs Jilib back.
It needs a government that fights al-Shabaab—not federalism.