Editorial | The Recall of the U.S. Ambassador to Somalia Must Trigger Stronger U.S. Political Engagement

Editorial Note

This editorial reflects the views of Garowe Online and is intended to draw the attention of the United States government—particularly the U.S. State Department—to the political risks facing Somalia at a critical transition point. It is published in the interest of accountability, stability, and the long-term recovery of the Somali state.

The U.S. Ambassador to Somalia is among the diplomats recently recalled by the United States Department of State. This development comes at a sensitive and familiar moment in Somalia’s political calendar—one in which the mandate of the Federal Government, under President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, is nearing its end, while no clear, agreed-upon political or electoral framework is in place.

This coincidence is not accidental in its implications. Somalia has reached a point where political disputes at the end of every federal term have become routine. Year after year, Somali leaders fall into the same pattern of disagreement—arguing over election models, timelines, and constitutional interpretation—while the country remains locked in transition.

More than thirty years after the collapse of the Somali state, the fundamentals have barely shifted. Somalia has not fully recovered from institutional breakdown, and that failure carries a heavy cost. It is a national tragedy, and one that continues despite sustained international engagement.

For decades, the United States has invested heavily—financially, militarily, and diplomatically—to help Somalia stand on its feet. American taxpayers have funded security operations, state-building programs, and humanitarian support, all aimed at preventing total collapse and giving Somalia a chance at recovery. Yet the results remain limited.

Without U.S. military and intelligence support, the fight against Al-Shabaab would not have held. The reality is clear: without American involvement, the group could have taken Mogadishu. Security gains, however, are only holding the line. They are not solving the problem.

Somalia’s deepest crisis is political.

The failure lies in leadership that is not prepared to guide the country out of perpetual transition. Too many Somali politicians remain focused on power, positions, and short-term advantage, rather than on building institutions, respecting agreements, or preparing the ground for genuine national recovery. As a result, international assistance stabilizes the situation temporarily, but never changes the trajectory.

Against this background, it is meaningless—indeed damaging—when American political discourse at times reduces Somalis to dismissive language, even as U.S. policy continues to spend enormous resources trying to prevent Somalia from collapsing. One cannot describe a people in such terms while simultaneously underwriting their survival. The contradiction weakens policy credibility.

The recall of the U.S. Ambassador should therefore not be treated as a routine diplomatic reshuffle. It should be a moment for reassessment.

This is the time for the U.S. government, and particularly the State Department, to take firmer political ownership of the Somalia file. Somalia does not need less engagement. It needs clearer, more forceful engagement—focused not only on security, but on political accountability.

Washington should appoint an ambassador with real political authority—someone empowered to confront manufactured disputes, to push Somali leaders toward consensus, and to challenge the endless cycles of political brinkmanship that serve no national purpose. Diplomatic presence must go beyond observation and statements; it must actively shape outcomes.

Equally important is accountability for the enormous financial resources being poured into Somalia. The United States has a right—and a responsibility—to demand results. Too often, Somalia’s political leadership has opened the country’s economic opportunities and natural resources to external actors who contribute little to stability, while sidelining partners who actually finance Somalia’s survival. This imbalance is neither sustainable nor acceptable.

Somalia’s problem is not a lack of international goodwill. It is the absence of leadership willing to be accountable—to its own people and to those who fund the country’s recovery.

If the United States continues to invest without insisting on political responsibility, the cycle will continue. The recall of the ambassador should mark a turning point. Somalia needs firm diplomacy, clear expectations, and leadership that answers not to narrow interests, but to the Somali people themselves.

GAROWE ONLINE