By Abdullahi Haji-Daud Warsame
The recurring tension between Somalia’s Federal Government (FGS) and the Federal Member States (FMS) has become a common feature of Somali politics. However, the recent statement by the Minister of Defense, Ahmed Moallim Fiqi, during his address to the Upper House, introduced an unusual degree of controversy.
The minister was expected to brief the chamber on defense and operational matters. Instead, his remarks appeared to rely on unverified reports and general references, without clear evidence or supporting data. Rather than focusing on practical security challenges, the minister’s comments introduced claims that risk undermining Somalia’s national and diplomatic interests.
Specifically, the Defense Minister’s statement appeared to characterize Somalia as a conduit for illegal activities affecting regional and international stability. Given that Bossaso, located in Puntland State, is one of the country’s key commercial hubs, such remarks, if not properly substantiated can have implications for Somalia’s overall national image.
This article examines the content of the minister’s statement, outlines its contradictions and implications, and highlights the potential consequences for Somalia’s governance and diplomacy.
“Yes, it exists, and it’s not fake news, nor an exaggeration that aircraft carrying shipments have been flying out of Bossaso city (Puntland, Somalia) to Chad, Niger, and Western Sudan. It’s not confirmed regarding the transport and shipment of these flights. Reports indicate that Colombian mercenaries are involved, but we don’t have sufficient reliable evidence for this information.” Minister Fiqi stated before the Senate:
From the phrasing, the minister seemed to treat the reports as credible. His assertion that the matter was “not fake news or exaggeration” signaled a degree of certainty before the Senate. However, his subsequent clarification that the information was “not confirmed” created internal inconsistency within the same statement.
Further, by linking the alleged flights to the ongoing conflict in Sudan and mentioning “Colombian mercenaries,” the minister introduced additional complexity without providing supporting intelligence or evidence.
From a diplomatic perspective, such statements which are made before a national legislative body and referencing other sovereign states, carry significant weight. Without corroboration, these kinds of remarks could be misinterpreted internationally, potentially straining relations or raising questions about Somalia’s internal oversight mechanisms.
On November 7, 2025, the Puntland Government issued a formal response to the Defense Minister’s claims. The statement categorically denied any involvement in the Sudan conflict or the use of Bosaso Airport for operations abroad.
Puntland described the allegations as baseless, asserting that they constitute a campaign of “defamation, fabrication, and incitement” by the Federal Government.
The statement emphasized Puntland’s active role, along with international partners, in combating ISIS and Al-Shabaab terrorists in the Bari region, highlighting that these claims could inadvertently support terrorist narratives. Puntland also clarified that the only legitimate armed forces in its territory are its own constitutional forces, noting that the Federal Government has no formal security architecture in Puntland. The government further stated that any militias funded by Mogadishu within Puntland fall under the full responsibility of the Federal Government.
This reaction underscores the sensitive nature of Minister Fiqi’s statement, reflecting potential ramifications for both federal-state relations and Somalia’s diplomatic positioning in the region.
Public communication from senior officials in charge of national security requires precision, restraint, and adherence to verified facts. When a defense minister delivers statements to a constitutional body such as the Senate, the information is automatically elevated to official status and carries both domestic and international implications.
In this context, the minister’s remarks represent what can be described as a “double impact.” First, they were made in a high-level institutional forum. Second, their public dissemination amplified their potential political and diplomatic consequences.
Defense ministries are among the most sensitive institutions in any government. Their leadership is expected to communicate with strategic caution, employing diplomatic language and avoiding ambiguities that may affect national security or external relations. Statements before the legislature or media should be anchored in verified data, consistent analysis, and alignment with national interests.
Governments act based on interests and rational assessments rather than moral impulse. When allegations of illegal activities arise, it is the responsibility of the Ministry of Defense, in coordination with other relevant agencies, to conduct internal verification before issuing public statements.
If such activities are confirmed, established procedures require discreet engagement through diplomatic channels, intelligence coordination, and intergovernmental mechanisms. In contexts like Somalia, where federal authority is sometimes limited across regional administrations, strategic discretion is critical. Publicly disclosing unverified claims can expose vulnerabilities and undermine the credibility of the state.
Even when other nations raise formal concerns, the appropriate response is to handle the matter through confidential bilateral channels. Unprompted disclosure of sensitive or unconfirmed information risks creating internal divisions and complicating foreign relations.
The minister’s statement has been widely reported by regional and international media, shifting the narrative from a localized issue between the FGS and Puntland to a national-level concern involving Somalia’s international profile.
Such exposure may invite diplomatic inquiries and could influence how foreign partners assess Somalia’s governance and control over its territory. Domestically, the remarks may also deepen political friction between the federal government and Puntland, particularly given the sensitivities surrounding regional autonomy and intergovernmental coordination.
In a political environment already marked by mistrust, such statements can reinforce perceptions of partisanship or regional bias. They may also complicate ongoing efforts to align the Federal and State constitutions and weaken cooperation on national security priorities.
To maintain institutional credibility and national cohesion, Somali federal institutions must ensure that public communication especially by key ministers remains factual, coordinated, and professionally delivered. Official briefings should avoid speculative or unverified claims, particularly those involving foreign governments or regional administrations.
Clear delineation of ministerial responsibilities is essential. For instance, defense portfolios should focus on national security strategy and military affairs, while communication and internal coordination should fall under the relevant ministries.
Finally, both federal and state authorities must recognize that their actions and statements contribute to Somalia’s international image and long-term stability. Responsible leadership requires strategic communication, evidence-based decision-making, and adherence to professional and diplomatic standards.
Somalia’s security does not depend solely on military strength, but also on disciplined, informed, and credible leadership at every level of government.
Abdullahi Haji-Daud Warsame is a PhD scholar in Defense and Strategic Studies and a senior diplomat who served as Head of Mission at the Somali Embassy in Moscow & Deputy Head of Mission, Pakistan. He can be reached at hachi.daud@gmail.com