By Abdelkarim A Haji Hassan

In many authoritarian regimes, power, fame, and fortune are inseparable, as political office becomes an instrument for personal enrichment, political survival, and the cultivation of public prestige. Research by institutions such as the Carnegie Endowment, Harvard University, and numerous policy think tanks highlights how authoritarian leaders exploit public office for personal enrichment and political entrenchment, manipulating state institutions and resources to consolidate power, prolong their rule, and protect elite interests often at the expense of democratic institutions and the broader public interest.

More than three decades after the collapse of the central government, Somalia remains mired in insecurity, political division, institutional weakness, and persistent poverty. Successive administrations have come and gone, each promising to restore the state and improve the lives of citizens. Yet the country remains stuck in a familiar cycle: leaders compete fiercely for power, while the basic responsibilities of government security, public services, and the protection of public resources remain unmet.

Somalia’s crisis is often explained through clan rivalry, terrorism, federal disputes, or foreign interference. These factors are real, but they do not explain the central failure: a political leadership that has repeatedly placed the pursuit and preservation of power ahead of the national interest. The problem is not simply that the state is weak. It is that those entrusted with rebuilding it has too often treated political office as a prize to be captured, rather than a responsibility to be discharged.

The clearest evidence is the distance between the privileges enjoyed by political elites and the conditions endured by ordinary Somalis. While leaders bargain over positions, alliances, and the next political contest, millions continue to face inadequate healthcare, poor schools, unemployment, displacement, insecurity, environmental perils, the impact of climate change and limited access to essential services. The public is asked to endure hardship and make sacrifices, while those at the top remain consumed by political survival and the distribution of influence and accumulation of wealth.

A Nation Held Hostage by Political Ambition

The country’s international rankings expose the scale of this failure. Transparency International’s 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index gives Somalia just 9 out of 100, placing it 181st among 182 countries. The 2026 Fragile States Index ranks Somalia as the world’s most fragile state- at the global bottom. In the 2026 Global Peace Index, Somalia stands 153rd out of 163 countries—11th from the bottom. The Mo Ibrahim Foundation’s Ibrahim Index of African Governance places Somalia 53rd out of 54 African countries, with an overall governance score of 25.5 out of 100. These indices measure different dimensions—perceived public-sector corruption, state fragility, peacefulness, and governance—but together they paint a damning picture of a country still at the bottom of many international measures of state performance.

These rankings should not be dismissed as statistics or blamed entirely on circumstances beyond the government’s control. They reflect decades of political failure and the inability of successive leaders to build institutions that can protect public resources, enforce the law, provide security, and deliver services. A country cannot move forward when corruption is entrenched, public authority is contested, and the institutions meant to serve citizens remain weak or subject to political influence.

Yet the pursuit of power is only part of the problem. In Somalia, public office has increasingly come to be associated with personal wealth, prestige, and political recognition. For too many political actors, the attraction of leadership appears to lie less in the opportunity to serve and more in the access, status, and fortune that come with holding office. The presidency, ministerial posts, parliamentary seats, and senior appointments are treated as prizes in an intense political competition. The question is unavoidable: are leaders seeking public office to serve Somalia, or to secure fame and fortune for themselves?

Villa Somalia has become the most visible symbol of this contest. The presidency and presidential politics have repeatedly been dominated by maneuvers to retain or regain power, forge political alliances, reward family members and clan affiliations, loyalists, and consolidate control over the institutions and resources of government. The struggle for the presidency often commands more political energy than the country’s urgent problems. National priorities become secondary to the calculations of those seeking to remain in office.

This pursuit is made easier by the weakness of independent institutions. Parliament has too often failed to exercise robust and consistent oversight of the executive, while the judiciary lacks the independence and institutional strength required to hold powerful officials to account. When the institutions responsible for scrutinizing government, enforcing constitutional limits, and investigating the misuse of public resources cannot act independently, the executive faces too few meaningful restraints. Accountability becomes selective, and public office is left dangerously exposed to abuse.

The consequences are visible in the country’s condition, which we are witnessing firsthand: public resources are being squandered through corruption, political interference is undermining state institutions, insecurity is crippling economic activity, and endless power struggles are diverting political leaders from their responsibility to govern the country. These same failures are perpetuated every four years, only to be recycled for further concentration of power and renewed manoeuvring to retain political control. This is not a sustainable path to state-building. It is a cycle that protects the political class while leaving the country’s fundamental problems unresolved.

The Temporary Glory of Political Power

Political power is temporary, but the consequences of how it is exercised can define a nation for generations. Those who pursue public office for fame, fortune, and personal glory may enjoy the privileges of power for a brief period, but once that power fades, what remains is their legacy or the damage they leave behind.

Somalia does not need another contest in which the principal prize is the control of Villa Somalia. It needs leaders prepared to put the country ahead of their political fortunes, accept limits on their authority, and submit their decisions to independent scrutiny. Public resources must be managed transparently; parliament must be independent and hold the executive to account; courts must be able to act without political pressure; and public appointments must serve the country rather than reward clan and political loyalty.

Ultimately, the test of leadership is not how long a person occupies office, how much influence they accumulate, or how prominently their name is remembered. It is whether citizens are safer, public institutions are stronger, corruption is reduced, and the country is better governed when that leader leaves office. Until Somalia’s political class is judged by these standards, fame and fortune will continue to outweigh public service—and the Somali people will continue to pay the price.

In the end, history remembers leaders not for the wealth they accumulated or the power they wielded, but for what they delivered to their people and the nation they were entrusted to serve.

Abdelkarim A Haji Hassan
Email: abdelkarimhass@gmail.com
——-
Related Articles
Governance by patronage: Why Somalia remains trapped in crisis By Abdelkarim A Hassan
The advisory overload: Appointments without purpose By Abdelkarim A Hassan