Afyare Elmi: “the continuation of Somali conflicts seems inevitable”

Since 1978, Somalia has been engulfed in a series of civil wars. These conflicts have had a devastating impact on the nation, tearing apart its social fabric, eroding national pride, and leaving behind a trail of destruction and despair. The constant fighting has caused the “tragic shipwrecking of the hopes and aspirations of the nation”, bringing nothing but displacement, misgovernance, political instability, economic collapse, deep-seated grudges, and a loss of tolerance among the people. Somalia, meanwhile, has become a byword and haven for chaos.  

Since the complete collapse of the Somali Republic in 1991, which made Somalia’s civil war more complex, what sustains the fighting, and why a resolution remains elusive are not well understood. Despite dozens of so-called “reconciliation” conferences held both within the country and abroad, tangible solutions to relieve the suffering of the Somali people remain out of reach. As time passes, the conflicts become more complex, and potential solutions seem to disappear into a bottomless pit of confusion.

In this context, Geeska interviewed Dr Afyare Abdi Elmi, a distinguished Somali scholar, author, and researcher. Elmi is a non-resident senior fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs and a research professor at the City University of Mogadishu. Previously, he served as the executive director of the Heritage Institute for Policy Studies in Mogadishu and as an Associate Professor of Security Studies at Qatar University’s Gulf Studies Programme. His research focuses on conflict, security, and peacebuilding in Africa and the Middle East.  

In this interview, Elmi discusses the origins of Somalia’s civil wars and the factors that sustain them, potential solutions.

Ahmed Hisam Mido: Since the fall of the Somali Republic, Somalis have been trapped in unending civil wars. What inspired you to study and contribute to the literature on Somali conflicts?

Afyare Elmi: Thank you for your question. It takes me back to why I chose to pursue social studies. In 1989, I migrated to Canada, which at the time was hosting many refugees who were struggling there. As I completed secondary school and prepared to enrol in higher education, I found myself uncertain—like many students at that stage—about which field to choose.

In 1991, I came across a tape recording of Rashid Ghannouchi, an Islamic intellectual, addressing young Muslim refugees. His message encouraged them to study the social sciences, particularly law, journalism, economics, and political science. That advice deeply resonated with me and played a significant role in my decision to study political science.

Additionally, my personal experience as a product of Somalia’s civil wars was a major influence. These wars forced me to leave my country and seek refuge in exile. Lastly, the broader African context at the time was marked by interstate conflicts, with over 20 civil wars raging across the continent. The lack of substantial academic literature on these conflicts motivated me to contribute to this field.  

AHM: In your book Understanding the Somali Conflagration, you assert that Somalis have been living through civil wars since the late 70s. Could you elaborate on the root causes of these conflicts and what are the factors you identify as “instigators” fuelling the wars?

AE: The Somali civil war stems from three primary causes.  

First, competition for resources and power: This competition permeated all aspects of governance, including state authority, access to weapons, employment opportunities, and foreign aid. Events such as the failed coup of 1961, the military coup of 1969, and the subsequent rise of armed resistance movements were all fuelled by dissatisfaction with governance and the desire to rule.

Secondly, colonial legacy: Colonial powers divided Somalia into five parts. Two of these territories united after gaining independence, sparking efforts to reclaim the remaining lands. This led to wars with neighbouring countries and internal instability, ultimately culminating in civil war.

Lastly, the military regime: The authoritarian nature of the military regime stifled political avenues and blocked all routes to power, eventually becoming a key factor in the country's descent into war.

In addition to these causes, there are four major factors that have exacerbated and prolonged the conflict. These are: youth unemployment, the widespread availability of firearms, Somali cultural practices rooted in hostility and vendettas, and the politicisation of clan dynamics.

These elements have fuelled the conflict and deepened its complexity.  

AHM: In your co-authored paper The Somali Conflict: Root Causes, Obstacles, and Peace-Building Strategies, you discuss the factors fuelling the war. However, social media, which has become a prominent contributor to modern conflicts, wasn’t mentioned. How do you think social media has reshaped the dynamics of Somalia’s civil wars since you wrote it? 

AE: Social media has significantly altered the dynamics of warfare in Somalia. In the past, poets often acted as the voice of clans, but today, social media influencers have taken on this role. They spread misinformation, instigate conflicts, manipulate and alter images, and distort voices to create false data that appears real.

Perhaps most troubling is how social media platforms are used to teach children about clan divisions, further entrenching the cycle of conflict. At the time we conducted our research, social media was not prevalent, but today it is a powerful and dangerous tool that must be monitored closely.

AHM: You have been a vocal critic of the federal system in Somalia. Do you believe federalism plays a role in perpetuating these conflicts?

AE: Federalism, as a governance system, is not inherently flawed. It has been implemented in many countries, including large countries, those with large populations, and those with high diversity. Federal countries in Africa include Nigeria, South Africa, and Ethiopia. However, in Somalia, federalism has been shaped by clannism, embedding clan-based politics into its structure. This has made federalism an instigator of conflict, playing a similar role to that of clannism in the past.

AHM: Why do you think Somalia’s conflicts continue without a clear resolution?  

AE: In their book Ending Civil Wars: The Implementation of Peace Agreements, Downs and Stedman identified eight key factors that complicate the implementation of peace agreements and prolong conflicts. They argued that if even one of these factors is present, the likelihood of a prolonged conflict increases significantly. Unfortunately, Somalia exhibits seven of these eight factors, which explains why the conflict continues to persist.

These factors include:

1. The lack of a comprehensive agreement
2. A high number of warring parties
3. Spoilers
4. A high number of soldiers
5. Hostile neighbouring states or networks
6. A collapsed state
7. The demand for secession

Given the prevalence of these factors in Somalia, it is evident that peace implementation faces immense obstacles, and the continuation of Somali conflicts, unfortunately, seems inevitable.

AHM: Some people wonder why a single group or party has not emerged victorious to take control and stabilise the situation, as often happens in similar conflicts elsewhere. Syria today is an example where Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has emerged as primus inter pares. What do you think prevents either outcome in Somalia’s case?

AE: That’s an insightful question. Even among the guerrilla groups that seized control of different parts of the country after the fall of Siad Barre’s regime, there were individuals who recognised early on that a singular victor was unlikely to emerge. This stems from the fact that these groups had fundamentally divergent visions and goals, with little to no common ground between them.

After the collapse of the military regime, the war shifted from being a collective resistance against the state to an inter-clan conflict, driven by competing interests. These armed factions lacked the governance frameworks, organisational discipline, and unifying ideology necessary to consolidate and maintain control over the territories they captured.

To draw a contrast, the armed resistance in Ethiopia against Mengistu’s regime provides a starkly different example. In Ethiopia, the resistance groups were unified by a shared vision and a singular objective: seizing power and rebuilding the state. This cohesion allowed them to succeed in governing once they defeated the regime.

In Somalia, however, the absence of a shared vision or coordinated effort among the various factions created a power vacuum that only deepened the fragmentation. As for agreements, while numerous accords have been signed, the primary issue lies in their lack of implementation. Agreements have often failed to translate into action, and to this day, the commitments made in those agreements remain unfulfilled.

AHM: Lastly, what do you think would help bring Somalia’s civil war to an end?

AE: The primary solution lies in strengthening state institutions. Authority over security and justice, now scattered in the possession of many non-state groups, must be centralised within the state, leaving no room for non-state actors to share these powers. Once authority is centralised, independent institutions must be established to monitor and regulate the use of state power, ensuring it is not abused. Building strong, transparent, and accountable governance structures is the key to resolving Somalia’s conflicts and fostering lasting peace.