Mohamed Dhabancad, a key member of the Technical Committee for the Future Council, hailing from the Puntland Government, describes Somalia’s federal negotiations as deeply troubled or stalled. The talks, between the Federal Government of Somalia and the Somali Future Council, remain stalled over elections, constitutional legitimacy, security and whether any eventual settlement will be implemented. The Future Council is an opposition coalition that includes major national political figures and the leaders of Puntland and Jubaland.
His account is best read in two layers: what independent reporting confirms, and what remains his political interpretation. On the first, the record is clear. Somali Magazine and other outlets have reported that repeated rounds of talks have failed to resolve disputes over the electoral model, constitutional amendments and election-management arrangements. On the second, Dhabancad goes further, arguing that the deadlock stems chiefly from the federal side.
Concessions without reciprocity
Dhabancad’s central charge is that President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud has been intransigent and unwilling to accommodate opposing positions. This is his political assessment, not an established fact. There is, however, evidence of persistent disagreement. WardheerNews reported that during the February talks Hassan Sheikh held firm on the amended constitution and his preferred electoral model, while the Future Council accused the government of inflexibility.
According to Dhabancad, the opposition has already made significant concessions, retreating from some earlier positions to reach a negotiated electoral arrangement. The problem, he says, is that the federal side has not reciprocated. As a result, the dispute is no longer only about what kind of election Somalia should hold. It is increasingly about whether the parties can trust one another to honor whatever they agree with.
The Doolow drone incident and security guarantees
That question of trust is sharpest on security. Dhabancad placed particular weight on the reported drone attack on the Doolow residence of Gen. Mahad Abdirahman Shub, former commander of the Somali Custodial Corps, which came as negotiations approached a potentially decisive stage.
The Future Council condemned the incident and called for an independent investigation, alleging that a drone struck Shub’s home and injured him and members of his family, Shabelle Media Network reported. The federal government reportedly denied responsibility and offered a different preliminary explanation for the explosion. Available reporting does not establish federal responsibility.
The timing nonetheless deepened opposition concerns. Mohamed Abdirizak Mohamud, another opposition figure, told Hiiraan Online that the incident occurred as negotiators were close to agreeing on a Democratic Transition Task Force.
For Dhabancad, security guarantees are therefore inseparable from the political agreement itself. Opposition leaders need assurances covering their personal security, meeting venues, hotels, airport movements and other arrangements tied to negotiations and elections. That, he said, is why the Future Council wants the international community involved not merely as a facilitator but as a credible guarantor.
Hirshabelle and parallel elections
Dhabancad also tied the national talks to elections in Hirshabelle. The issue matters because the Future Council is seeking a national electoral framework while federal authorities press ahead with electoral arrangements in the federal member states.
Earlier in 2026, Dawan Africa reported that Hassan Sheikh and Hirshabelle President Ali Abdullahi Hussein Guudlaawe had agreed that Guudlaawe would contest the forthcoming state election on the ruling party’s ticket. The negotiations later became entangled in whether regional elections should proceed before a national settlement. According to Somalia Today, opposition representatives sought to suspend member-state elections until a national agreement was reached, while federal negotiators refused to bring those elections into the talks.
Dhabancad’s objection is that an election cannot be agreed as part of a negotiated framework and then implemented unilaterally in ways that alter the substance of the deal. His concern, in other words, is as much about compliance as about the electoral formula.
A “manufactured opposition”
Dhabancad further alleged that Hassan Sheikh is mobilizing supporters and government-aligned figures to present themselves as an alternative opposition, diluting the Future Council’s negotiating weight. “Staying in Villa Somalia nightly, and visiting Foreign embassies daily, doesn’t make one an opposition“, Dhabancad says.
In his view, this creates a false equivalence between the organized opposition and actors close to the incumbent. It allows the government to claim it is consulting a broad spectrum of political forces rather than negotiating principally with the coalition challenging its electoral program. This characterization remains Dhabancad’s and should stay attributed to him unless further evidence establishes coordination between the presidency and specific nominal opposition groups.
International guarantees: the remaining obstacle
These concerns converge on the role of international partners, now among the most sensitive questions in the talks. Dhabancad said the Future Council wants international actors to guarantee both security and implementation. The Fikir Institute has reported a related dispute over terminology: Hassan Sheikh reportedly prefers that international actors be called “facilitators” rather than “mediators,” while the opposition seeks a stronger role for them in ensuring implementation.
Dhabancad also referred to ongoing negotiations over the wording of a joint statement and the creation of an electoral or transitional mechanism. Outstanding issues include the 4.5 clan power-sharing formula, women’s representation, election-management bodies, security arrangements and the timetable for elections.
Conclusion
Dhabancad’s message is that the negotiations have not collapsed, but the remaining disagreements go well beyond electoral technicalities. They now concern political trust, constitutional legitimacy, security and enforceability. In his telling, the Doolow incident, the Hirshabelle process and the cultivation of a government-friendly opposition all show that verbal commitments are no longer enough.
His core demand is straightforward: a negotiated electoral settlement, credible security arrangements, international guarantees and a mechanism ensuring that whatever the federal government and the Future Council sign is implemented as agreed rather than later changed by either side.