Somalia Is Debating Power When It Should Be Debating the State

Every time Somalia enters a new political crisis, the national debate returns to the same familiar questions: Who will become president? Which alliance will dominate? Which clan or political group will gain influence? What will happen to the constitution, the election system or the balance of power?

These questions are important. But they are not the main issue. The bigger question is not only who should govern Somalia, but what kind of state Somalia is trying to build.

This is at the center of Somalia’s political crisis. The country does not lack people who want power. It lacks a long-term national project for rebuilding the state, one that puts institutions, accountability, public services and national strategy above personal ambition.

Since the collapse of the Somali state in 1991, the country has experienced war, terrorism, political fragmentation and weak institutions. Several generations have grown up without a state fully capable of providing security, justice, education, employment and basic public services. Yet political debates still focus more on individuals than institutions, more on alliances than reforms, and more on who will win power than what will be built after power is gained.

When politics becomes only a competition for power, the purpose of power is forgotten. A state is not built through presidential titles, campaign slogans or temporary alliances. It is built through strong institutions, laws that are enforced, leaders who are held accountable and public services that reach ordinary citizens.

Somalia’s challenge is therefore not only a leadership crisis. It is also a crisis of political expectations.

Those who seek national leadership should be expected to answer serious questions. How will they strengthen the rule of law? How will they build a professional civil service? How will they create opportunities for young people? How will they reform education? How will they improve security outside Mogadishu? And how will they make federalism work in a way that keeps the country united while respecting local realities?

Too often, these questions are missing from the political debate.

Accountability cannot exist without a society that demands it. The public, the media, the diaspora, academics, civil society, traditional leaders and especially the younger generation must challenge those who seek power. If candidates are not asked to explain their ideas and plans, there is little pressure for them to develop meaningful solutions.

This matters even more because Somalia is entering a new geopolitical era. The Horn of Africa has become one of the world’s most strategically important regions. Ports, trade routes, security partnerships and regional influence are shaping politics across the Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden and the wider Indian Ocean.

For Somalia, this creates both opportunity and risk. The country’s geographic position can attract investment, strengthen regional trade, improve infrastructure and support economic growth. A stable Somalia could become an important connection between Africa, the Middle East and the Indian Ocean region.

But geography alone does not build a nation. Without strong institutions and strategic leadership, Somalia’s location can become a weakness instead of an advantage. Other countries will always pursue their own interests. The question is whether Somalia has the vision and capacity to define its own national interests before others define them on its behalf.

A country without a clear strategy risk becoming a playing field for the interests of others.

The unresolved question of Somaliland reflects the same underlying problem. The debate is often reduced to recognition versus territorial integrity, but the issue goes deeper. It is also connected to the failure to build a stable, legitimate and functioning federal state. If Somalia had stronger institutions, greater public trust and a more inclusive political system, the Somaliland question might have been addressed long ago through a serious national process, such as a referendum where people could decide their own political future.

This is not an issue that should be decided by one president, one clan, one region or one political group alone. It is a Somali national matter that requires dialogue, legitimacy, stability and public trust.

When those conditions are absent, the issue remains unresolved. Somaliland gains more room to act independently, while regional and international actors gain greater influence. Political vacuums are never left empty.

This concern became clearer to me when I contacted electoral authorities in Mogadishu to understand what is required to establish a political party. I expected the process to be based mainly on public support, membership and signatures. Instead, I was told that registration required a significant financial fee. The contrast with Norway, where I live, was striking. In Norway, establishing a political party is primarily about gathering signatures from citizens who support a political platform. It is not intended to be a financial barrier to political participation.

I also asked what it would cost if I were to run as a presidential candidate. I was told that in the previous presidential election, the registration fee alone was around US$50,000, and that the next campaign could very likely cost even more. Then, as if to reassure me, I was told that because I am a woman, I might be allowed to pay slightly less than a male candidate.

In addition, people familiar with the process explained that a serious presidential campaign could cost close to US$1 million, partly because political support and votes are often connected to financial resources, networks and influence.

This should concern everyone who cares about Somalia’s future.

When the path to power requires enormous financial resources, and the institutions meant to regulate power remain weak, politics risks becoming a private investment rather than a public responsibility. Public office can become less about serving the people and more about access, privilege and personal gain.

Somalia needs a political culture where candidates are judged less by who they know or how much money they have, and more by what they are prepared to do for the country. Anyone seeking national leadership should be expected to present a serious plan for the future.

That is why the next election should be more than a competition for office. It should be a test of vision, competence and responsibility — and of what candidates intend to build with the power they seek.

Somalis should not only ask who wants to lead, but who has a clear plan to build institutions that can outlast any individual leader.

Since 1991, Somalia has waited for a state that can protect its people, provide basic services and represent the nation with dignity. Elections alone will not create that state. Presidents alone will not create it either.

It will emerge only when society demands higher standards from those who seek power, and when leaders understand that power is not the final goal.

The real goal is a functioning Somali state.