Somalia’s government is requesting a delay in the withdrawal of African peacekeepers, warning of a potential security vacuum if the withdrawal proceeds too quickly. Documents seen by Reuters reveal concerns that resurgent al Shabaab militants could exploit the situation.
The African Union Transition Mission in Somalia (ATMIS) is scheduled to withdraw by December 31, with a smaller force expected to replace it. However, in a letter to the acting chair of the African Union Peace and Security Council last month, the Somali government asked to delay until September the withdrawal of half the 4,000 troops due to leave by the end of June. This letter has not been reported before.
A joint assessment conducted in March by the Somali government and the AU, reviewed by Reuters, recommended adjusting the withdrawal timeline “based on the actual readiness and capabilities” of Somali forces. The assessment, mandated by the U.N. Security Council, warned that a “hasty drawdown of ATMIS personnel will contribute to a security vacuum.”
“I’ve never been more concerned about the direction of my home country,” said Mursal Khalif, an independent member of the defense committee in parliament.
The European Union and United States, the primary funders of the AU force in Somalia, have sought to reduce the peacekeeping operation due to concerns about long-term financing and sustainability, according to four diplomatic sources and a senior Ugandan official.
Negotiations about a new force have been complicated, with the AU initially pushing for a more robust mandate than Somalia wanted, according to three diplomatic sources. A heated political dispute could lead Ethiopia to pull out some of its most experienced troops.
Neither Somalia’s presidency nor the prime minister’s office responded to requests for comment.
Mohamed El-Amine Souef, AU special representative to Somalia and head of ATMIS, stated that there was no definitive timeline for concluding negotiations but emphasized that all parties were committed to an agreement that ensures sustainable peace and security. “The AU and Somalia’s government have emphasized the importance of a conditions-based drawdown to prevent any security vacuum,” he told Reuters.
The Peace and Security Council is scheduled to meet on Thursday to discuss the drawdown and the follow-up mission. As the withdrawal proceeds, with 5,000 of approximately 18,500 troops leaving last year, the Somali government has projected confidence, stating that the new force should not exceed 10,000 troops and should focus on securing major population centers.
The call for a smaller force likely reflects the views of nationalists who oppose a heavy foreign presence in Somalia, according to Rashid Abdi, an analyst with Sahan Research, a Nairobi-based think tank focused on the Horn of Africa.
Worried Neighbors
Uganda and Kenya, which contributed troops to the departing mission, are also concerned. Henry Okello Oryem, Uganda’s state minister of foreign affairs, said that despite intensive training efforts, Somali troops could not sustain a long-term military confrontation. “We do not want to get into a situation where we are fleeing, the kind of thing that we saw in Afghanistan,” he told Reuters. Oryem said Kenya accepted the drawdown requested by the U.S. and EU but stressed that the concerns of countries with forces in Somalia should be heard.
Kenyan President William Ruto told reporters in Washington last month that a withdrawal not based on conditions on the ground would mean “the terrorists will take over Somalia.”
An EU spokesperson stated that the EU is focused on building domestic security capacities and supports, in principle, a Somali government proposal for a new mission with a reduced size and scope. A U.S. State Department spokesperson said the force should be large enough to prevent a security vacuum and noted that Washington has supported all AU requests to the U.N. Security Council to modify the drawdown timeline.
In response to a question about Ethiopian forces, the spokesperson said it was critical to avoid security gaps or unnecessary expenses “incurred by swapping out existing troop contributors.”
Setbacks
Two years ago, an army offensive in central Somalia initially seized large swathes of territory from al Shabaab. In August, President Hassan Sheikh Mohamed declared his intention to “eliminate” the powerful al Qaeda offshoot within five months. However, al Shabaab counter-attacked, retaking the town of Cowsweyne, killing scores of soldiers and beheading several civilians accused of supporting the army.
“This broke the hearts of Somalis but gave courage to al Shabaab,” said Ahmed Abdulle, a militiaman from a clan in central Somalia. The Somali government has not publicly provided a death toll for the Cowsweyne battle and did not respond to a request for a toll for this story.
“There were enough troops in Cowsweyne, over a battalion, but they were not organized well,” said a soldier named Issa, who fought in the battle. Issa reported that car bombs had blasted through the gates of Cowsweyne army camp on the day of the attack, highlighting a shortage of defensive outposts to protect bases from such attacks.
Ten soldiers, militiamen from local clans, and residents in areas targeted by the military campaign reported no army operations in the past two months following additional battlefield setbacks. Reuters could not independently establish the extent of the territorial losses to al Shabaab. Somalia’s National Security Adviser stated on X this week that the army had held most of its gains.
The peacekeepers’ withdrawal could make it more difficult to hold territory. While analysts estimate Somalia’s army at around 32,000 soldiers, the government acknowledged in the assessment with the AU a shortage of some 11,000 trained personnel due to “high operational tempo” and “attrition.” The government has stated its soldiers are capable of confronting al Shabaab with limited external support.
Somalia has defied gloomy predictions before and has expanded its security forces in recent years. Residents of the seaside capital Mogadishu – whose ubiquitous blast walls testify to the threat of Shabaab suicide bombers and mortars – say security has improved. Once-quiet streets now bustle with traffic, and upscale restaurants and supermarkets are opening.
An assessment published in April by the Combating Terrorism Center at the United States Military Academy said an Afghanistan-like collapse was unlikely, helped by ongoing external support. The United States, for instance, has about 450 troops in Somalia to train and advise local forces, and conducts regular drone attacks against suspected militants.
However, the assessment’s author, Paul D. Williams, a professor of international affairs at George Washington University, said the militants’ estimated 7,000-12,000 fighters would nevertheless be “slightly militarily stronger” than Somali forces because of superior cohesion and force employment.
International Support
Somalia’s security has been underpinned by foreign resources since Ethiopia invaded in 2006, toppling an Islamist-led administration but galvanizing an insurgency that has since killed tens of thousands of people. The U.S. has spent more than $2.5 billion on counterterrorism assistance since 2007, according to a study last year by Brown University. This figure does not include undisclosed military and intelligence spending on activities like drone strikes and deployments of American ground troops.
The EU says it has provided about $2.8 billion to ATMIS and its predecessor since 2007. Turkey, Qatar, and other Middle Eastern countries also provide security assistance.
However, resources are under strain. The EU, which pays for most of ATMIS’s roughly $100 million annual budget, is shifting toward bilateral support with an eye toward reducing its overall contributions in the medium term, according to four diplomatic sources. Two diplomats interviewed by Reuters, who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe private negotiations, said the U.S. and EU want to scale back peacekeeping operations due to competing spending priorities, including Ukraine and Gaza, and a belief that Somalia should take more responsibility for its own security.
Some European countries would like to see the new mission financed through assessed contributions of United Nations member states, which would increase the financial burden on the United States and China, the diplomatic sources said. The State Department spokesperson stated that the U.S. did not believe such a system could be implemented by next year but emphasized a strong international consensus to support the follow-on mission. The EU did not address questions about the financing of the replacement mission.
Financing for the new mission can only be formally addressed once Somalia and the AU agree on a proposed size and mandate.
(Reuters)
