Dr. Abdurahman Baadiyow

Somalia’s clannism has been presented in overly simplistic terms that fail to capture its true complexity. Clannism in Somalia has been presented as being divisive rather than being a product of centuries-old systems of lineage and traditional systems of solidarity and governance. However, the recent history of political manipulation and conflict has created a situation in which there is much misinformation about clannism in the country. Somalia’s political elites have repeatedly framed clannism as the central malady and chronic obstacle to state-building, yet this persistent focus has often produced the opposite effect, deepening divisions rather than resolving them.

This article will briefly discuss the complex role of clans and clannism in Somali society, addressing several interrelated issues such as the separability of clans and clannism, the negative nature of clannism, and the difference between social clannism and its political counterpart. It will also discuss the historical inseparability of clans and Islam, clans as small self-governing states, the nation of Somalis, the parallels between clannism and nationalism, the radicalization of clannism and nationalism, the politicization of clans and Islam in Somali society, and the role of clans in the collapse of the Somali state, before finally addressing the balance required between the state and clans/clannism for Somalia’s future.

1. Why Are Clans and Clannism Inseparable?

Clans and clannism are necessarily interrelated and cannot be distinguished. Thus, clans are the genealogical and social bases upon which Somalis define their notion of belonging, lineage, and collective identity, while clannism is the political and cultural reality of these same bases. In fact, the latter cannot exist without the former, as the former provides the framework, and the latter brings it to life through its everyday politics of loyalty, mobilization, and social practice. Thus, persons who recognize the validity of the clans but reject clannism do not understand the phenomenon. This is because they fail to recognize the depth to which these phenomena are embedded within Somali social organization.

2. Why Somali Nationalists Sought to Eradicate Clannism?

Somali nationalists aimed to eradicate clannism because they thought that it hindered national unity, modern state-building, and functional institutions in Somalia. They were influenced by the modernization theory of the mid-20th century, which presumed that traditional institutions must decline for modern states to prosper. However, this approach was based on a monocultural model of modernity, ignoring the concept of multiple modernities, which asserts that societies can modernize based on their own cultural principles rather than abandoning them. In other words, the failure of the nationalist agenda is that clan affiliation was too entrenched in Somali society to be removed.

Therefore, the problem today is not about getting rid of tradition but finding a way to integrate the state, clans, and Islam in the context of Somali-specific modernity.

3. What Is the Distinction Between Social and Political Clannism?

Social clannism is defined as “the practical means by which Somalis rely on clans for solidarity, kinship, conflict management, and social security.” It is underpinned by traditional practices such as xeer, common ancestry, clan alliances, and reciprocity and is essentially a cultural and social security system. Political clannism, on the other hand, is defined as “when clan identity is mobilized as a means of acquiring political power, resources, or control.”

It is a situation in which clans are used in a bid to gain control of leadership positions in government, or in a bid to control resources within a state. As such, political clannism breeds nepotism and poor governance within state institutions, undermining meritocracy and weakening administrative effectiveness. While social clannism brings about unity and a sense of belonging among members of a society, political clannism brings about competition and a lack of unity among members of a society. Social clannism is a system that sustains society, while political clannism is a system that shapes and/or distorts the exercise and acquisition of power in a state.

4. Is Clannism Always Bad?

The answer to this question is not as simple as it may seem, and most Somalis tend to respond negatively. While Clannism has been used for political gain and has resulted in exclusion and competition for power and resources, it must be appreciated within its historical context. Clannism was the vital instrument of mutual protection and social welfare in the pastoral society of Somalia. It was the glue that kept the Somali nation united and alive. Therefore, Clannism is neither good nor bad; it is neutral and depends on whether it is used wrongly for political gain or for the common good of the Somali people.

To fully appreciate Clannism and its place within Somali society today, it must be appreciated within its historical context. In Islam, the distinction between good and bad actions is articulated through the concepts of Ma‘rūf (promoting what is right) and Munkar (forbidding what is wrong), and harmful forms of clannism can likewise be assessed and regulated through these same moral principles to it as bad or good. The biography of Prophet Muhammad provides ample examples of how clan solidarity supported the spread of Islam and protected him when the Quraysh sought to block his mission. He was shielded by his clan under the leadership of his uncle Abu Talib, who, despite not being a Muslim, defended him out of loyalty and clan duty.

5. Why Clan Identity and Islam Are Inseparable?

Before the colonial intrusion of the late nineteenth century, Somali identity rested on two core pillars: clans and Islam. The arrival of Islam in the Horn of Africa in the seventh century reshaped the region’s social organization, influencing both spiritual life and the formation of lineage structures. As the new faith spread, it helped solidify the patrilineal descent systems that define Somali clans today, with ancestry traced through fathers and grandfathers to major founding figures such as, for example, Darood, Dir, and Hawiye, systems rooted in Islamic marital norms and legal traditions. This suggests that the contemporary clan system evolved in tandem with Islam rather than before it.

The integration of clan identity with Islamic belief produced a social model in which lineage loyalty was reinforced by shared religious values: clans ensured protection and solidarity, while Islam provided the ethical framework for social order and conflict resolution. Together, they created a durable system of governance and mutual support that enabled Somali communities to thrive even without a modern system of governance.

6. Clans are Small States

In the absence of a national state, every clan, especially the Diya-paying ones, was like a small state. Every clan had its own territory, population, and customary laws. Every clan also had its own leadership structure, which was very vital in the maintenance of order and the resolution of conflicts within the clan. The autonomy of the clans allowed them to develop their own identity and systems of governance, which were recognized by other clans. Each clan also had its own distinctive symbols, which were marked on their livestock so that their animals could be easily recognized by others.

Every clan, in a way, had interactions with other clans, which can be compared to the interactions between states. There was the formation of alliances, the making of peace treaties, and the development of trade agreements, all of which were built on the foundation of mutual respect and customary laws. All these interactions not only defined the social setting but also helped in the creation of solidarity and loyalty within every clan. Diya-paying, which is a traditional form of compensation for the damage or losses caused to one another, is one such structure. It highlights the need for accountability and cooperation among the clans, as well as the need for the maintenance of peace and stability within and between the small states.

7. Somalis are a Nation of Clans

The Somali people are, at their very core, a clan-based nation. This does not mean fragmentation, as one might think. Rather, it means that the very foundation of the sociopolitical order, through which the Somali people have historically defined themselves, their identity, and their place within the broader Somali society, is clan-based. For centuries, long before the advent of the modern state, the clan system was the primary framework through which the Somali people organized their communal lives, regulated their social interactions, settled their conflicts, and enhanced their economic cooperation.

Every clan was a state, united by ties of kinship, customary law, or xeer, and shared responsibility. Thus, the clan system was, and indeed remains, the complex web of alliances, lineages, and loyalties that united the broader Somali nation. It is, therefore, not accurate to think of the clan system as somehow marginal or ancillary. Rather, it is the very essence of the Somali identity, the very DNA of the Somali society, which defines the way the Somali people think of themselves and their place within the broader society. It is, therefore, impossible to understand the Somali past and present without fully appreciating the significance of the clan. The clan system in Somalia is not limited to a vertical patrilineal structure; it also includes complex horizontal networks created through intermarriage, alliances, and shared social obligations.

8. Clannism as a Micro-Form of Nationalism

Clannism and nationalism also display significant structural affinities, despite their different levels of scale. Both are products of group identity, shared narratives, emotional affiliation, and a sense of belonging to a larger group. Each creates an image of “we,” which differentiates insiders from outsiders and unifies individuals toward shared goals. Clannism achieves this through kinship and family, basing allegiance on genealogical affiliation, while nationalism achieves it through a broader identity of historical memory, territorial attachment, and political aspirations. In other words, both are products of symbolic unity, shared myths, and the perception of shared destinies.

It is because of this similarity that clannism so readily replaces nationalism in Somalia. It is the same phenomenon, just at a different level. Thus, clannism can be understood as a form of small-scale nationalism at the lower level of social organization, just as nationalism can be seen as clannism expanded to the broader collective level of the state.

9. How Clannism and Nationalism Become Radicalized?

Clannism and Nationalism have the potential to be radicalized as the emotional pull they exert is used in an exclusionary or aggressive manner. Although both are natural forms of group identity, they have the potential to develop into an ideology that defines group membership in absolute terms. When Clannism is radicalized, the loyalty to one’s lineage is elevated to the highest virtue, while other clans are viewed as rivals or enemies. Similarly, radicalized Nationalism places the nation as the highest virtue, with others viewed as enemies of the state or the nation. The transition from identity to ideology in both Clannism and Nationalism is what defines the conditions for polarization, fragmentation, or violence. The recognition of the potential for these forms of belonging to be easily radicalized or intensified is important in understanding the threat they pose when left to run their course.

According to Islamic tradition, radicalized clannism or nationalism is understood as “Taʿaṣṣub” (تعصب) – “blind, unjust, or hostile partisanship to one’s own group,” which is explicitly prohibited in Islam. The Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) condemned this practice, saying: “He is not one of us who calls to ʿAsabiyyah (Blind Partisanship); he is not one of us who fights for ʿAsabiyyah; and he is not one of us who dies upon ʿAsabiyyah.” (Sunan Abī Dāwūd, 5121). Yet most Islamic scholars fail to make a clear distinction between clannism in its neutral meaning and taʿaṣṣub – the prohibited blind loyalty to one’s own group, which often leads to the confusion of clan identity in Islamic ethics. In fact, the word “clannism” itself is not used in any Islamic tradition or text, but what is condemned in Islam is not the very idea of lineage-based identity but its unjust or aggressive application.

10. The Mutual Acceptance of Tradition and Modernity

This acceptance of both tradition and modernity is vital in the building of a coherent society in Somalia. Rather than seeing the two as being in perpetual conflict with one another, it is possible to see them as complementary elements in the building of a strong society. Tradition can be seen as the source of cultural continuity, social norms, and indigenous systems of governance like the xeer that provide the foundation for the identity of the Somali people. On the other hand, modernity can be seen as the source of the systems that provide the foundation for the effective engagement of the Somali people in the globalized world. When the two elements of tradition and modernity are combined in a way that is harmonious with one another, it is then that society can be both legitimate and functional. The question that then arises in the case of the Somali society is how the two elements can be combined in a way that is both respectful of the identity of the society while being functional in the building of the state.

11. The Question of Reconciling State and Society

At the core of the political conflict in Somalia is the question of how to reconcile the state and society represented by the clans, and Islam. Each of these elements has tremendous symbolic value as a source of identity and authority. Moreover, the logic that guides them is not necessarily the same. The logic of the state is modernity itself as an institutional entity. The logic of the clans is the traditional social organization of kinship. The logic of Islam is the overarching moral and spiritual framework that guides personal and collective conduct. The real question is which one to prioritize over the others to establish a functional balance that would allow the three pillars of the Somali society to coexist without one being undermined by the others.

Of course, from Islamic perspective, the proper order of Somali identity would have Islam, nationalism, and clan arranged like three concentric circles, from largest to smallest. The largest of these circles, the outermost, would-be Islam, the overarching moral, spiritual, and ethical system for individual and collective life in Somalia. Inside this circle would be nationalism, the circle of civic loyalty and shared historical fate, which binds together all Somalis as one people regardless of their clan affiliation. Inside this circle of nationalism would be the smallest of the three circles, the clan, which represents one’s immediate social circle, lineage, and kinship bonds. This visualization of the proper order of Somali identity helps clarify the proper order of loyalties in a well-functioning society, which is the subordination of clan identity to the overarching unity of nationalism, which in turn is subordinated to the universal values of Islam.

12. Conclusion

The Somali society is determined by the complex interplay of Islam, nationalism, and clannism, which are identities whose interaction determines both the social cohesion and the political tension in Somalia. At the center of this complex is the inseparable relationship between clans and clannism. This complex has provided security, welfare, and conflict resolution, although in the modern period it has been used for exclusion and competition. The combination of Islam and lineage further determined the Somali society, which created communities that were small, self-ruling states with customary law and moral values. These factors explain why Somalis are a nation of clans and why clannism can be like nationalism in its ability to provide social cohesion yet also be radicalized.

The demise of the Somali state was partly due to the militarization of clans and radicalization of Islamism, which transformed the identities that were once forces for stability into forces for conflict. In the future, stability requires the reconciliation of tradition and modernity and the establishment of a balance between the state, the clan system, and Islam. How to harmonize these three elements remains the most urgent question facing Somali intellectuals and scholars today.

Dr. Abdurahman Baadiyow
Email: abdurahmanba@yahoo.com
____________
Related articles
Tribute to the mighty genius of Somali clannism By Prof Said S Samatar
Tribalism and its challenges to state formation in Somalia By Dayib Sh. Ahmed