By Dayib Sh. Ahmed

The relationship between Somalia and Ethiopia has been profoundly shaped by centuries of conflict, rooted in historical and colonial legacies. The Berlin Conference of 1884, where European colonial powers partitioned Africa, had lasting repercussions for the Horn of Africa. Somali territories were divided into five separate regions without regard for the shared ethnic, cultural, and religious ties of the Somali people. Southern Somalia came under Italian control, Northern Somalia (now Somaliland) under British rule, Britain transferred control of Somalia Northern Frontier (NFD) to Kenya and Djibouti under French administration, while the Somali-inhabited Western Region (Hawd Reserve Area and Ogaden) were ceded to Ethiopia. This division fragmented Somali identity and set the stage for enduring regional instability. The Hawd Reserve Area and Ogaden region’s allocation to Ethiopia became contentious, fueling Somali resentment. The 1954 British withdrawal from the Hawd Reserve Area and Ogaden, transferring them to Ethiopia, provoked widespread protests among Somalis, who saw it as a betrayal of their aspirations for unity and self-determination.

This colonial legacy deepened Somalia’s territorial claims and ignited a series of conflicts with Ethiopia. The unresolved disputes and the psychological scars of colonial partition continue to influence the region’s geopolitics, posing ongoing challenges to Somalia’s national cohesion and its pursuit of territorial integrity. The history of Somali-Ethiopian confrontations even extends beyond the colonial era. One of the earliest significant conflicts occurred in the 16th century during the campaign of Imam Ahmed Gurey (Ahmed Gurey). As a Somali military strategist, Gurey sought to expand Somali influence and spread Islam in Ethiopia, a predominantly Christian kingdom. His forces initially achieved significant territorial gains but were ultimately repelled by a coalition of Ethiopian and Portuguese forces. Gurey’s campaign left a lasting legacy on Somali-Ethiopian relations. In the early 20th century, Sayyid Mohamed Abdulle Hassan’s Dervish Movement emerged as another chapter of Somali resistance. While primarily focused on opposing British and Italian colonialism, the movement also clashed with Ethiopian forces, which Sayyid viewed as part of the broader colonial threat. Although the British suppressed the Dervish Movement in 1920, it became a symbol of Somali resistance and sovereignty.

After gaining independence in 1960, Somalia adopted the policy of “Greater Somalia,” aiming to unite all Somali-inhabited territories, including the Somali region (Ogaden) under Ethiopian control. This territorial dispute escalated in 1964 with border skirmishes and culminated in the Ogaden War of 1977–1978. Under President Siad Barre, Somalia launched a military campaign to reclaim the Somalia region (Ogaden), initially achieving significant victories. However, Cold War dynamics shifted the balance, as the Soviet Union and Cuba supported Ethiopia, forcing a Somali retreat. The defeat weakened Somalia’s government, contributing to the instability that eventually led to civil war. Ethiopia, meanwhile, solidified its hold over the Hawd Reserve Area and Ogaden, perpetuating the rivalry and entrenched tensions that define Somali-Ethiopian relations today.

 Somalia’s Sovereignty Undermined: A Nation Under Siege

Since the post-civil war era, Ethiopia has systematically undermined Somalia’s sovereignty through military interventions and political manipulation. This persistent interference has evolved over decades into a more calculated strategy to dominate Somalia politically, economically, and territorially. For example, in December 2006, Ethiopian military forces intervened in Somalia under the pretense of supporting the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) against a coalition of Islamic courts. Nevertheless, it was evident that Ethiopia pursued its own strategic objectives. Consequently, Ethiopia’s intervention in Somalia gave rise to Al-Shabaab, a terrorist organization that has since caused significant devastation to Somalia and the broader Horn of Africa region. Despite their efforts, Ethiopia suffered significant military losses and failed to capture Mogadishu alone. Reflecting on this history, it is evident that Ethiopia cannot independently occupy Somalia as it attempted in the past. Nevertheless, the potential involvement of other countries supporting Ethiopia from behind the scenes raises serious concerns. For-instance, during his visit to Ethiopia on November 12, 2024, French President Emmanuel Macron declared France’s support for Ethiopia’s quest for access to the sea, emphasizing discussions guided by international law and respect for neighboring countries. This statement evokes fears reminiscent of colonial times, where foreign powers like France might enable Ethiopia’s ambitions.

While Ethiopia lacks the capacity to achieve such objectives on its own, external support could significantly shift the balance, posing a grave threat to Somalia’s sovereignty. Ethiopia’s actions epitomize its long-standing imperial ambitions, which extend far beyond trade agreements or temporary land leases. Having solidified its past conquests over Somali territories, Ethiopia is now advancing its final phase: a deliberate campaign to dominate and seize what remains of Somali lands. This aggression is calculated and systematic, aiming to dismantle Somali sovereignty piece by piece. However, they will never fully succeed. The Somali spirit of resistance and unyielding determination remains unshakable, standing as a powerful force against any attempts to divide or subjugate our beloved nation.  The recent Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between Ethiopia and the self-declared state of Somaliland represents the culmination of these efforts, plunging Somalia into political instability. Widely condemned as illegal under international law, the agreement grants Ethiopia a 50-year lease to establish a naval base on Somalia’s coastline, further eroding Somalia’s territorial integrity.

Another-hand The MoU has provoked widespread outrage across Somali society, seen as a blatant violation of the country’s sovereignty and an alarming indicator of Ethiopia’s growing influence in the region. While the Somali government initially condemned the agreement, its subsequent handling of the crisis has been marked by inconsistency and weakness. President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s decision to engage directly with Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed during Ankara-mediated talks has deepened mistrust among Somalis, many of whom question his commitment to protecting the nation’s sovereignty. The Ankara Declaration, intended as a framework for reconciliation and cooperation, has instead amplified fears of betrayal. For us Somali, we see it as a symbolic surrender to Ethiopia’s imperial ambitions, raising alarm that Somalia’s sovereignty is being sacrificed under external pressure. For many, this episode underscores a troubling pattern of leadership failure, where the Somali government appears more focused on placating foreign actors than defending the nation’s territorial integrity.

The connection between Ethiopia’s historical encroachments and its current maneuvers is clear: this is a continuation of a long-standing strategy to exploit Somalia’s internal divisions and weaken its geopolitical standing. What’s different now is the added dimension of international complicity and the Somali government’s inability—or unwillingness—to respond decisively. The Somali people, however, remain steadfast in their refusal to accept compromises that threaten their nationhood. The battle for Somalia’s sovereignty is far from over, but the resilience of its people ensures that their spirit of defiance will endure.

Hassan on the spotlight amid concessions to Ethiopia.

President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s handling of Ethiopia’s involvement in Somalia, particularly regarding the controversial Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), reveals a troubling disregard for international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and a fundamental failure to safeguard Somalia’s sovereignty. The MoU, which allegedly grants Ethiopia a 50-year lease for a naval base on Somalia’s coastline, directly contravenes Somalia’s constitutional and legal obligations to protect its territorial integrity. This agreement appears to sideline fundamental principles of international law, raising serious legal and political concerns. According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Somalia retains sovereign rights over its territorial waters, exclusive economic zone (EEZ), and continental shelf. Any agreement affecting these rights must undergo proper legal procedures and align with the national interest, requiring the involvement and consent of Somalia’s legislative institutions, including Parliament.

President Hassan’s failure to consult Parliament and secure the necessary legal scrutiny undermines Somalia’s democratic process and violates its constitutional framework. Despite Parliament’s resolution rejecting the illegal Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Ethiopia, Hassan chose to disregard it, demonstrating a troubling lack of respect for both Parliament and the rule of law. This disregard not only weakens Somalia’s institutional integrity but also emboldens external actors to exploit the nation’s vulnerabilities. The lack of institutional transparency surrounding the MoU has drawn sharp criticism, with many arguing that the deal prioritizes Ethiopia’s strategic interests at the expense of Somalia’s long-term sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Currently emboldened by the incompetency of Somalia’s leadership and institutional weakness, Ethiopia’s historical resistance to Somali unity, particularly regarding territories like the Hawd Reserve Area and Ogaden region, reinforces fears that the MoU is part of a broader strategy to exploit Somalia’s internal divisions and weaken its geopolitical standing. President Hassan’s failure to assert Somalia’s legal and territorial rights in this context raises questions about his understanding of foreign policy and international law, as well as his commitment to protecting Somalia from external encroachments. This approach also exposes Somalia to potential international legal challenges and undermines its position in the Horn of Africa. By neglecting to leverage the principles of international law to counter Ethiopia’s hegemonic ambitions, President Hassan has not only weakened Somalia’s sovereignty but also set a dangerous precedent for future foreign engagements. His inability to provide decisive, legally grounded leadership in such critical matters highlights a failure to uphold Somalia’s interests on the global stage.

Ethiopia now, its aggressive tactics—leveraging both military and diplomatic means—are seen as an attempt to exploit Somalia’s internal divisions and weaken its central authority to keep the country in a perpetual state failure.

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s dismissal of the MoU as a “misunderstanding” has only deepened mistrust, especially given his previous threats to use force if denied access to Somali ports. For many Somalis, this reflects a continuation of Ethiopia’s policy of undermining Somalia’s sovereignty through manipulation and coercion. Amid these challenges, President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s leadership has become increasingly questionable as he engages in Ankara-mediated talks without securing Ethiopia’s withdrawal from the MoU. This signals a troubling willingness to compromise on Somalia’s sovereignty. The vague language of the Ankara Declaration, coupled with the president’s conciliatory tone during negotiations, has left many Somalis feeling that the nation’s core interests have been sidelined. A majority of Somalis have described Hassan Sheikh’s approach as lacking strategic depth, fueling widespread public frustration and a growing sense of betrayal. The intersection of Ethiopia’s aggressive posture and the Somali government’s perceived inability to respond decisively has created a volatile and precarious situation. The combination of mounting external pressure and internal discontent underscores the urgent need for stronger, more assertive leadership to safeguard Somalia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

 Domestic and Regional Fallout from the Ankara Declaration

The Ankara Declaration, initially hailed as a step toward de-escalation, has become a lightning rod for criticism both domestically and regionally. Its ambiguous language, particularly regarding Ethiopia’s position on the controversial MoU, has fueled widespread fears that Somalia’s territorial sovereignty is being undermined. Adding to the controversy, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, long regarded as a trusted ally of Somalia, recently made remarks during a youth event in Erzurum that exacerbated tensions. Erdoğan stated that Ethiopia is a vast country, twice the size of Somalia, but it is landlocked. He emphasized that it is a fact Ethiopians are deeply concerned about having such a large territory without access to the sea. While intended to highlight Turkey’s evolving ties with Somalia, these comments were perceived by many Somalis as dismissive of their nation’s sovereignty. This backlash has tarnished Erdoğan’s previously favorable reputation among Somalis, raising questions about Turkey’s true intentions and its commitment to Somalia’s independence.

Against this backdrop, the Ankara Declaration is widely seen as a betrayal of Somalia’s national interests, drawing sharp criticism from across the political and social spectrum. Civil society groups, opposition leaders, and ordinary citizens alike have condemned President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s leadership. His endorsement of a declaration perceived as prioritizing superficial diplomatic gains over safeguarding Somalia’s territorial integrity has sparked widespread outrage. Many views his actions as capitulating to external pressures, compromising the sovereignty he is sworn to protect.

This growing discontent underscores a severe crisis of confidence in Hassan Sheikh’s leadership. His decisions and actions reflect a disregard for the aspirations of the Somali people and the lessons of history. Domestically, his reckless approach has eroded trust, as he appears to have willingly compromised the nation’s sovereignty and left Somalia vulnerable to escalating aggression. His erratic policy shifts and indecisiveness have only deepened public frustration and distrust. Regionally, the fallout from Hassan Sheikh’s decisions has intensified tensions in the Horn of Africa. Ethiopia’s aggressive posture, including its increasing military presence in Somalia and strategic use of economic agreements like the MoU, has exacerbated divisions among regional states. What was initially regarded as an opportunity to correct past mistakes in his second term has instead devolved into a leadership crisis that threatens Somalia’s future.

Ethiopia’s dual role as both a troop contributor to ATMIS and a regional actor pursuing hegemonic ambitions has fueled mistrust and rivalry. Somalia has consistently voiced its opposition to Ethiopian troops participating in the peacekeeping mission, but the failure to take a decisive and resolute stand following the Ankara Declaration has further undermined efforts to protect the nation’s sovereignty. Adding to these concerns is President Hassan Sheikh’s frequent visits to Eritrea—13 times in the past two years—despite his earlier opposition to Eritrea’s involvement in Somalia’s affairs. This sudden and unexplained shift in his stance raises serious questions: what has driven this change, and what implications does it hold for Somalia’s future?

Adding to the complexity, Asmara has expressed its own concerns regarding the recent Somalia-Ethiopia agreement signed in Ankara. Abdulkadir Idris, an advisor to Eritrea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Somali Affairs, criticized the agreement’s lack of transparency and warned of potential repercussions for Eritrea-Somalia relations. Idris highlighted that previous agreements, involving Eritrea and Egypt, were primarily aimed at safeguarding Somalia from Ethiopian encroachment. He further cautioned that if Somalia were to grant Ethiopia access to a waterway, Eritrea would reconsider its relationship with Somalia, describing Ethiopia as a major threat. This convergence of unresolved issues reflects a troubling lack of clarity and consistency in Somalia’s foreign policy, which not only risks alienating key regional partners like Eritrea but also jeopardizes Somalia’s sovereignty and strategic interests in the Horn of Africa. A more transparent and principled approach is urgently needed to navigate these challenges effectively. The growing presence of Turkey, Egypt, and Ethiopia on Somali soil has created a volatile environment, where external powers with competing agendas are now clashing within Somalia itself. This external interference only complicates Somalia’s struggle for sovereignty, peace, and stability, making it more critical than ever for Somalia to assert its own interests and protect its territorial integrity. Somalia is increasingly becoming a battleground for regional rivalries, further destabilizing the country and eroding its sovereignty.

The domestic and regional fallout from this situation highlights the complex challenges facing Somalia and the glaring failures of leadership in addressing them. Internally, the Somali government must confront growing public frustration and disillusionment by abandoning its erratic and unprincipled foreign policy. This requires a shift toward transparency and a stronger alignment with the aspirations of the Somali people, which has been severely lacking under the current leadership. Externally, Somalia must navigate a polarized regional landscape while balancing the competing interests of allies like Eritrea and Egypt regarding the Ethiopia-Somalia issue. President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s failure to act decisively has not only weakened Somalia’s position but also enabled Ethiopia to exploit the situation, deepening its influence in the region. The Somali government must reclaim its sovereignty, prioritize the nation’s territorial integrity, and ensure its survival in an increasingly unstable Horn of Africa.

Dayib Sh. Ahmed
Writer, political analyst and WardheerNews contributor
Email: Dayib0658@gmail.com