by Jama Ayaanle Feyte
The recent diplomatic friction triggered by growing Israel–Somaliland cooperation has laid bare a fundamental reality: Turkey’s posture in the Horn of Africa is not that of a disinterested peacemaker, but of a strategic stakeholder. Ankara’s opposition to Somaliland’s external engagements is a calculated move to preserve its own influence, not a principled stand for Somali unity. This revelation fundamentally disqualifies Turkey from any claim to impartial mediation between Somaliland and Somalia. A truly neutral broker operates without vested interests in the outcome; Turkey, however, has a profound geopolitical and economic investment in maintaining a specific regional architecture—one where its influence in Mogadishu remains paramount and Somaliland’s sovereignty remains unacknowledged.
From Principle to Realpolitik: The Strategic Calculus Behind the Rhetoric
Turkey’s appeals to the sanctity of Somali territorial integrity and Islamic solidarity are often misread as ideological drivers. In practice, they serve as potent rhetorical tools for a more concrete aim: containing Somaliland’s international agency. An active, diplomatically recognized Somaliland would forge its own trade partnerships, establish independent security cooperation, and diversify its diplomatic portfolio. This autonomy directly threatens Ankara’s model of influence, which has been built on being a dominant external patron to the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS) in Mogadishu. A strong, recognized Somaliland would rewire the Horn’s geopolitical circuits, creating new centers of power and partnership outside Turkey’s orbit. Therefore, what is framed as a principled commitment to “unity” is, in essence, a strategic imperative to maintain a dependent and centralized Somali political entity that Ankara can more easily influence.
The Military Gambit: Arming Instability and Enabling Hostility
Critically, Turkey’s patronage has escalated beyond diplomacy and development into direct military enablement. Ankara has become the primary arsenal for the fragile FGS, providing advanced weaponry—including armed drones, armored vehicles, and most provocatively, F-16 fighter jets—to a government plagued by instability and internal fissures. This military infusion is not a stabilizing force for Somalia; it is a tool of geopolitical coercion and a dangerously provocative act. Turkey is arming a central authority whose officials have, at times, publicly declared hostile intentions toward Somaliland and its people, recalling the tragic prelude to the civil war three decades ago. By choosing to disproportionately arm one side with advanced capabilities, Turkey is not mediating a dispute—it is taking a militarized side, directly threatening the peace and security Somaliland has painstakingly built for over thirty years. This action proves Turkey is not a peacemaker but an active participant fueling a dangerous imbalance and empowering revanchist agendas in Mogadishu.
The Irrelevance of the Davutoğlu Era: A Changed Somaliland in a New World
Any notion of resurrecting the mediation framework of the 2012–2013 period—often associated with former Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu’s “zero problems with neighbors” policy—is a geopolitical fantasy. That model presumed a certain level of Turkish paternalistic leverage and a Somaliland more willing to subsume its aspirations for the sake of a Turkish-brokered dialogue. The Somaliland of today operates from a position of hardened strategic foresight and hard-won confidence. It meticulously selects reliable partners, manages its own affairs with deliberate sovereignty, and pursues recognition through a confident, independent diplomatic corps that engages directly with capitals worldwide. This evolved reality renders obsolete any mediation tactic that seeks to infantilize Somaliland or pressure it into concessions under the banner of an outdated “unity” framework. Attempts to impose such antiquated models will not only fail but risk destabilizing the region by creating unrealistic expectations and fostering resentment, especially when the purported mediator is simultaneously arming the other party.
The Somaliland Doctrine: Sovereignty, Strategy, and Steadfast Diplomacy
For the Republic of Somaliland, the path forward is non-negotiable and clearly defined. Its recognition will be secured not in the negotiating rooms of third-party capitals, but through steadfast, strategic, and sovereign diplomacy. This means:
- Deepening Alliances with Trustworthy Partners: Engaging with states that respect Somaliland’s constitutional sovereignty and engage with it as a genuine counterpart, not a political abstraction.
- Institutional Defense: Vigilantly protecting its legitimate, democratically tested institutions from any diplomatic process that seeks to bypass or undermine them, especially when faced with a militarily empowered adversary.
- Learning from History: Rejecting any dialogue format that replicates the imbalanced conditions of the past or that is overseen by a party actively undermining its security. Somaliland’s proven record of state-building must be the foundation, not ignored in favor of abstract political projects enforced by foreign arms.
Dialogue conducted under externally dictated formats, on uneven footing, or under the shadow of a mediator who arms one side, is not a path to peace; it is a recipe for unraveling three decades of monumental state-building achievement. It would dishonor the stability Somaliland has carved out in a turbulent region and further delay the international recognition it has indisputably earned.
Conclusion: Discarding the Mediation Theater
The conclusion is inescapable and grave: Turkey cannot be, and has never been, an honest broker. Its significant military, economic, and political investments in Mogadishu—now catastrophically extended to providing F-16s and other offensive weapons—combined with its clear strategic interest in limiting Somaliland’s international ascent, create an irreconcilable and actively dangerous conflict of interest. Turkey is not facilitating peace; it is bankrolling a potential conflict and resurrecting the specter of past violence to serve its own imperial nostalgia.
The future of any engagement between Somaliland and Somalia—if it is to have any chance of success—must be structured on a foundation of mutual and direct respect, free from the overbearing and militarized shadow of a mediator with its own agenda. The international community must see the mediation theater for what it is: a geopolitical facade for aggressive patronage that threatens regional stability.
Somaliland’s destiny is being written in Hargeisa, through its institutions and its diplomatic perseverance. Its rightful place in the community of nations will be secured by partners who engage with it on its own terms: as the de facto sovereign state it has been for over thirty years, not as a subordinate actor in a geopolitical drama directed—and armed—from Ankara. The era of imbalanced, interest-driven, and militarized mediation is over. Somaliland’s march toward recognition will continue, with or without the permission of those whose influence depends on its denial.
Mr. Jama Ayaanle Feyte, Somaliland-born politician, Journalist, and Horn of Africa political analyst
