Former Intelligence Chief Says Reductions Send a “Deeply Disappointing” Message to Those Who Sacrificed Their Lives and Health for the State

Mogadishu (WDN) — Former National Intelligence and Security Agency chief Fahad Yasin has sharply condemned what he says is a decision by Somalia’s Federal Government to reduce financial benefits for military retirees, soldiers disabled in service and families of fallen members of the armed forces.

In a lengthy statement addressed directly to President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud and his administration, Fahad described the reported reductions as deeply disappointing and warned that they risk undermining confidence in the state among the very people who have sacrificed most for it.

Fahad published the statement on his Facebook page under the title “A Statement to President Hassan and His Administration.” He argued that the issue did not begin with the latest decision, saying there had previously been complaints about the treatment of vulnerable members of the Somali armed forces, particularly families of fallen soldiers, disabled personnel and retirees.

He warned that further reductions in their financial support could reinforce a perception that those who gave their lives, health and working years to Somalia are being neglected rather than protected and honoured by the state.

A Question of Law and Accountability

Fahad’s criticism comes as the Federal Government has established a legal framework governing the care of orphans of fallen soldiers, disabled personnel and retired members of the Somali Armed Forces.

The government issued Regulation No. 198 governing the agency responsible for those groups in March 2026, with the regulation subsequently published in the government’s official bulletin in August. Fahad argued that any decision affecting their financial rights should therefore be supported by a clear legal basis, transparent procedures and accountability.

He challenged President Hassan Sheikh and his administration to explain publicly:

• the legal basis for the reported reductions;
• who authorized the decision;
• the legal authority under which it was implemented; and
• why the financial burden was being placed on what he described as the most vulnerable members of the armed forces.

Without such an explanation, Fahad said, serious questions could arise over whether the decision is consistent with the laws and regulations intended to protect the rights of fallen soldiers, disabled personnel and retirees.

“This Is More Than a Financial Decision”

The former intelligence chief expressed particular disappointment at the prospect of reducing payments to families left behind by soldiers who died serving the country. He argued that such payments should not be treated as charity.

The families of fallen soldiers, he said, have a claim on the state because their relatives made the ultimate sacrifice in Somalia’s service. Disabled soldiers, meanwhile, paid for their service with their health and physical abilities.

“The martyrs gave the nation the most precious thing a human being possesses — their lives,” Fahad said. He argued that the children and widows of fallen soldiers should therefore not have to regard government assistance as a favour.

Instead, he said, it should be understood as an obligation arising from the sacrifices made by those who died defending the country.

What Message Does This Send to Soldiers?

Fahad’s most pointed argument concerns the effect of the reported reductions on serving troops.
He asked how a soldier currently fighting on the front lines could be expected to make the ultimate sacrifice for the country if the message from the state is that his family could later see its support reduced.

The question goes directly to the relationship between a military and the state it serves. “How can the soldier on the front line today be expected to sacrifice his life for the nation if the message is that, when he is killed or disabled, the support provided to his children and family will be reduced?” Fahad asked. He argued that an effective military depends not only on weapons and training but also on trust.

A soldier must believe that the state he is defending today will protect his family tomorrow if he dies in service. If that confidence is weakened, he warned, one of the foundations of the national armed forces is also weakened.

A Call for the Decision to Be Reversed

Fahad called on President Hassan Sheikh and his administration to immediately reverse any cuts to benefits affecting fallen soldiers, disabled personnel and military retirees and to restore the financial rights of their families.

He rejected the argument that budget savings should begin with the families of soldiers who died defending Somalia. “A budget cannot be repaired by starting with the orphans of soldiers who died for the country,” he argued. “Savings cannot be sought from the families of those who gave their lives to save the nation.”

He also called on parliament, the judiciary and other relevant institutions to examine the legal basis for the decision and ensure that the rights of fallen soldiers, disabled personnel and retirees cannot be reduced simply through an administrative decision.

The Deeper Issue: What Does the State Owe Its Soldiers?

At the heart of Fahad’s statement is a question that extends beyond the reported financial reductions. It is a question of the state’s obligation to those who serve it.

Somalia continues to depend heavily on its armed forces in the fight against Al-Shabaab and other security threats. Yet the former intelligence chief argues that the state’s commitment to its soldiers cannot end when they leave the battlefield — particularly when they leave it because they have been killed or permanently disabled.

His argument is ultimately about trust. A soldier who risks his life for Somalia needs confidence that the state will not abandon his family if he does not return.

Fahad’s closing message was therefore directed not only at the government but at the principle of national responsibility itself: Those who died defending Somalia cannot defend themselves today. The state they died for must therefore become their voice, their protection and the guardian of the families they left behind.

For Fahad Yasin, reducing their support is not merely a budgetary decision. It is a test of what Somalia believes it owes to those who sacrificed everything for the country.

WardheerNews