By Dr. Liban Cigaal
In the contemporary world, the survival and legitimacy of states rest upon three interlinked pillars: economic interdependence, national security, and geopolitics. Together, these constitute what is widely referred to as the Trilemma. As Singapore’s Prime Minister Lawrence Wong (2025) explains, international economics highlights a persistent paradox: only two of these pillars can be secured at the same time, never all three. States are thus compelled to prioritize two while strategically managing the third. When mishandled, this Trilemma can result in collapse, fragmentation, or political paralysis.
The end of World War II reshaped the global system into two opposing camps: the Soviet-led communist bloc and the Western bloc spearheaded by the United States. This division became the defining feature of the Cold War, which lasted until 1991. African states, including Somalia, found themselves pulled into this great power rivalry. In an attempt to secure economic and military support, Somali leaders aligned alternately with Moscow and Washington, seeking to maximize all three pillars at once. The strategy was unsustainable, and by the end of the Cold War, Somalia had collapsed into civil war, offering a stark reminder of the costs of mismanaging the Trilemma.
The collapse of the Soviet Union ushered in an era of U.S. unipolar dominance. For nearly two decades, Washington and its allies defined the rules of the international order through economic liberalization, security alliances, and interventionist geopolitics. For fragile states such as Somalia, this order meant heavy dependence on external actors for economic aid, security assistance, and political legitimacy. The global rhetoric of free trade and globalization masked the fact that many developing states lacked the institutional capacity to benefit from such a system without falling deeper into dependency.
In the twenty-first century, the Trilemma has grown even more complex. The United States has partially retreated from the liberal international order it once championed. Free trade agreements have been rolled back in favor of protectionist policies. Security commitments overseas have been reduced, with Washington pressing allies to share more of the burden. Meanwhile, geopolitical competition has intensified, with China, Russia, and regional middle powers asserting themselves more forcefully.
This shifting balance is acutely visible in Africa and the Middle East. The dispute over the Nile between Egypt and Ethiopia exemplifies how economic interdependence and national security are in direct conflict with geopolitics. Similarly, the rivalry between the United Arab Emirates and Qatar in the Horn of Africa has drawn fragile states into a web of external competition, reshaping their domestic and foreign policies. These cases highlight the lived reality of the Trilemma: states cannot simultaneously secure economic interests, ensure national security, and avoid entanglement in great power rivalry.
Somalia today remains a clear case of the difficulties posed by the Trilemma. Economically, it is heavily reliant on external aid, remittances, and foreign investment. Yet, as Dr. Dambisa Moyo has argued, no country has ever been built on aid. In Africa, trillions of dollars have been poured in over the past fifty years. In the 1970s, around ten percent of Africans lived under the poverty line; today, that figure exceeds seventy percent. Much of this money never reached its intended beneficiaries, and what did arrive was often captured by corruption and patronage networks. For Somalia, this lesson is stark: foreign aid cannot substitute for sound governance, domestic revenue generation, and accountable institutions. Its security sector remains dependent on international forces and bilateral assistance, even as domestic insurgencies and clan-based conflicts persist.
Geopolitically, Somalia is at the center of great power competition, with the United States, China, Turkey, and Gulf states all vying for influence over its ports, resources, and political alliances. Somali leaders often oscillate between different external patrons, seeking short-term gains in economic aid or security guarantees. Yet this approach only deepens the state’s vulnerability. Without a coherent long-term strategy that prioritizes two pillars while deliberately managing the third, Somalia risks repeating the mistakes of the Cold War era.
The Trilemma of economics, security, and geopolitics is a central reality of contemporary international politics. History since 1945 demonstrates that no state can maximize all three pillars simultaneously. The Cold War revealed the dangers of overextension, while the unipolar moment of U.S. dominance briefly provided stability. Today, however, a multipolar world of rising powers, regional rivalries, and U.S. retrenchment has made the Trilemma even more acute. For Somalia, navigating this reality requires not only strong leadership but also intellectual clarity.
The country’s future depends on whether its policymakers and thinkers can develop a strategy that balances economic interdependence, security needs, and geopolitical pressures. The concept of the Trilemma offers a framework through which Somali intellectuals, scholars, and leaders can analyze the dilemmas of statecraft and design responses that secure national survival while avoiding the fate of past failures.
Dr. Liban Cigaal is a writer and political analyst. Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Somali Stream.
