United States Institute of Peace • www.usip.org • Tel. 202.457.1700 • Fax. 202.429.6063

UNITED STates institute of peace

© USIP 2010 • All rights reserved.

“Many experts worry 

that the current situation in 

Somalia will contribute to the 

spread of transnational terrorism, will enable Somalia to 

become a safe haven for extremist groups and will make 

the waters off the Somali coast 

more vulnerable to piracy.”

January 14, 2010 

International Engagement with 

Somalia

Summary

•	 The Ethiopian invasion of Somalia in 2006, supported by the U.S, had the unintentional consequence of fueling splinter insurgent groups including Al-Shabab and Hizbul Islam.

•	 Currently Somalia faces a humanitarian crisis with 3.6 million people displaced.

•	 Countering the insurgency and alleviating the humanitarian crisis in Somalia demands a 

creative rethinking of international policy.

•	 While the 2008 Dijbouti Accord created a more inclusive Transitional Federal Government 

(TFG), the international community must weigh whether continued support for the TFG will 

bring real progress in governance or if it will strengthen popular support for the insurgency.

•	 If the international community sees support for the TFG as beneficial, they could consider 

policies including:

- Flooding Somalia with development aid and investing in civil society;

- Expanding the African Union (AU) peacekeeping mission to include representation from 

other Muslim countries;

- Finding creative solutions for inter-Somali governance and reconciliation. 

•	 If the international community calculates that support for the TFG is not beneficial because it 

will only fuel the insurgency, they should consider a policy of “constructive disengagement,” 

withdrawing support from the TFG and the AU peacekeeping mission, while simultaneously 

investing in local and regional development projects. 

In the wake of the foiled terrorist attack on December 25, 2009, there are growing fears that Somalia could become similar to Yemen in terms of its ability to serve as a training ground for extremists. 

Somalia, like many areas in Yemen, is another case where the absence of government control 

presents a major concern for international policymakers. Many experts worry that the current 

situation in Somalia will contribute to the spread of transnational terrorism, will enable Somalia 

to become a safe haven for extremist groups and will make the waters off the Somali coast more 

vulnerable to piracy. Meanwhile the conflict in Somalia continues to displace millions. However, it 

is unclear how the international community should engage to alleviate the situation. 

What are the United States and the international community’s goals for a Somalia policy, and 

what is the best way to achieve them? Specifically, will continued support for the Transitional 

Stephanie Schwartz

E-mail: sschwartz@usip.org

Phone: 202.429.4713

peaceBrieF4
© USIP 2010 • All rights reserved.

Federal Government (TFG) produce concrete improvements in their governing capacity or will it 

serve to only strengthen popular support for the insurgency?

To address these issues, the United States Institute of Peace held a public event to examine 

how current international policy is affecting the situation on the ground, and how different policy 

approaches could promote better governance and help to stabilize this highly volatile situation. 

Bronwyn E. Bruton, from the Council on Foreign Relations, Abukar Arman, an independent policy 

analyst, presented their arguments, moderated by David R. Smock of the U.S. Institute of Peace. 

Background

Somalia has been without a central government since 1991. Since that time there have been 14 

different efforts to establish a new government. In 2004, the TFG was established with support 

from the international community to revive national government institutions and establish control 

over Mogadishu. However, the TFG has never had effective control over the whole country. 

During this time the Islamic Courts Union (ICU) challenged the power of the TFG, establishing 

courts in the communities it controlled. Seeing the ICU as a threat, the Ethiopians invaded Somalia 

in 2006 with support from the U.S. While the invasion forced the ICU to flee and splinter, rather 

than quelling the insurgency, the invasion became a rallying point for splinter insurgent groups. 

In particular, two radical Islamist militant groups, the Al-Shabab and Hizbul Islam, have emerged 

as serious threats against the TFG. The Al-Shabab now controls roughly the southern half of the 

country and has established links with al-Qaida. What once was a small insurgency has become a 

national movement that has not only drawn support from within Somalia, but has sparked “home 

grown” radicalization in the U.S., Australia and Europe.

In late 2008, the Djbouti Accord was signed, and established a new, more inclusive TFG under 

the leadership of Sheik Sharif, a moderate Islamist. While the Ethiopians withdrew in early 2009, 

the government of Somalia continues to face serious threats from the radical Islamist groups. 

Moreover, it is likely that Eritrea has been providing financial support and arms supplies to the 

Al-Shabab, making Somalia the battleground for ongoing Ethiopian-Eritrean conflict. 

Should the International Community Continue to Support 

the TFG?

While the panelists agreed that the U.S. military support for the 2006 Ethiopian invasion exacerbated the situation, it remains unclear how the international community should proceed or if the 

international community should continue to support the TFG and bolster its capacity to govern 

effectively. 

The international’s community’s broad goals for Somalia have been to: 

•	 Prevent Somalia from becoming a safe haven for terrorists from Yemen and other neighboring countries;

•	 Prevent the spread of transnational terror;

•	 Prevent the radicalization of Somali youth;

•	 Protect military and commercial sea highways and prevent piracy;

•	 Monitor and stabilize the Horn of Africa and East African regions;

•	 Help create stability and security for the Somali population.

International Engagement with Somalia

page 2 • PB 4 • January 14, 2010
© USIP 2010 • All rights reserved.

Yet, it is unclear whether supporting the TFG is the best way to achieve these goals. One argument, put forward by Abukar Arman, is that while the TFG has not yet demonstrated its power to 

govern effectively, supporting the TFG is the only logical way to help stabilize Somalia. There are 

a number of indications that support for the TFG could be effective this time around. First, it has 

become clear that Somalis are fed up with the continuous war and want to see real change. The 

protests against the Al-Shabab in the wake of the December 2009 bombing of a medical school 

graduation are representative of this shift and of the public’s desire to put an end to the decades of 

violence. At the same time, the newly elected TFG has been gaining popular support. Sheik Sharif 

has become a popular figure both within Somalia and even among an extremely vocal and politically divided diaspora. Many Somalis are now trying to go back and assist the new government—

allowing the flow of experts, technocrats and other highly trained Somalis to return and assist the 

government. The new TFG has also demonstrated its commitment to making the government 

provide much needed services to the Somali people—such as improvements in sanitation and 

access to medicine, Arman underscored. Whether it can provide these services is up for debate—

but the international community should not cut off support for the one viable government entity 

that is gaining popular support.

However, according to Bronwyn Bruton, the U.S. response to support the TFG has not worked—

and will not work in the future. U.S. policy is not working because the TFG is not capable of 

contributing to the international community’s goals and, thus far, support for the TFG has been 

halfhearted at best. As it is still struggling for control over Mogadishu, the TFG does not have 

the power or governing capacity to provide basic services for the population, let alone help to 

prevent the spread of terrorism within its borders or to impose rule of law on the sea’s highways. 

In fact, according to Bruton, U.S. attempts to prop up the TFG militarily have backfired, alienating a 

significant part of the Somali population and contributing to the current conflict that caused the 

displacement of 3.6 million people. These are conditions in which radicalization will only flourish. 

Moreover, the African Union peacekeeping troops do not have the supplies they need, such as 

food and munitions. While the goals of preventing terrorism are in line with the U.S. goals in Iraq 

and Afghanistan—in reality Somalia is not a priority for the U.S. and international community, and 

until it is, support to the TFG will not be enough, Bruton argued.

Potential International Engagement Alternatives

Whether or not the international community should support the TFG, it is clear that current 

international policy needs to reexamine how to address the devastating crisis now facing Somalia. 

There are a number of potential alternatives to armed intervention or exclusive military support 

that the international community could adopt. 

According to Arman, the U.S. and international community should support the TFG, contingent 

on the unity government making reconciliation and elimination of the so-called “4.5” clan-based 

parliamentary system top priorities.

In addition to providing direct support to the TFG, Arman argues that there are a number of 

ways the international community could use “soft power” to promote stability in Somalia:

•	 Focus on development and humanitarian assistance through Somali civil society

According to Arman’s argument, the international community should focus on humanitarian 

and development assistance, and “flood Somalia with food and medicine,” and then empower 

civil society organizations to deliver these and other services, such as education, that would 

improve the quality of life for many Somalis.1 To prevent corruption, a commission could be put 

in place to oversee the delivery of services and provide a backbone of organizational structure 

International Engagement with Somalia

page 3 • PB 4 • January 14, 2010
© USIP 2010 • All rights reserved.

and governance. The international community should also recognize Somali civil society 

groups—many of whom already promote inter-Somali dialogue—as a resource for reconciliation 

and empower them with training and funding to begin a reconciliation process rooted in Somali 

religious and cultural values.2

As a part of supporting the growing civil society, the international community can also help 

put incentives in place for skilled Somali diaspora to return to Somalia and contribute to the 

reconstruction process. While many diaspora are already trying to go back, they face a number of 

challenges and have little incentive to do so.

•	 Support national disarmament and reconstruction

While supporting the TFG, Arman suggests that the international community should also support a national disarmament program, offering training and small grants as incentives to turn in 

weapons, as well as begin a massive reconstruction project that will provide jobs and catalyze the 

development of sustainable government institutions. 3

•	 Expand peacekeeping forces

At the same time that the international community is focusing on “soft power,” Arman suggests 

that the international community should urge the expansion of the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) peacekeeping forces. Because the current AMISOM mission is perceived by many 

Somalis to be dominated by Ethiopia and simply an attempt to continue to Ethiopian occupation, 

the expanded AMISOM forces must include representation from other Muslim countries, such as 

Turkey, Egypt and Pakistan to be seen as a legitimate peacekeeping operation.

•	 Find creative solutions for inter-Somali governance and reconciliation 

Finally, Arman recommends finding a new solution to promote cooperation between Somalia 

and the two semi-autonomous regions of Somaliland and Puntland. One option could be to establish technical commissions on economic, social and reconciliation issues. These commissions could 

then decide how to distribute resources based on how they could best serve all three regions 

and therefore act as a bridge between the three entities. This would allow for the maintenance of 

separate “Somali” identities while also providing a venue for serious dialogue on the issues that 

remain essential to improving livelihoods and security in Somalia. 

While Arman suggests that the international community should pursue these policies in 

coordination with the TFG, Bruton’s argument that the TFG is a non-viable institution suggests a 

much different international strategy:

•	 “Constructive Disengagement”

This term, coined by Ms. Bruton, refers to a strategy whereby the U.S. and international community would stop supporting the TFG in its fight for control over Mogadishu, and instead allow 

clan fiefdoms to regain control over their local communities, as they did in 2006. Bruton claims 

that while it is the common line that Somalia has been in a state of anarchy since 1991, this is not 

actually the case. In 2006, because of the strict security rules imposed by the ICU, the conflict had 

normalized and clan chiefs took advantage of the relative security to instead become businessman. As a result, these chiefs had a stake in maintaining a level of law and order so their goods 

could move from place to place. Moreover, during this time different clans made viable agreements over access to farmland, water and grazing. This moderate level of local governance led to 

real improvements to the lives of Somalis, and throughout this period al-Qaida was not a threat. 

According to Bruton’s argument, the best thing the U.S. can do is strategically pull its support 

to the TFG and the AU peacekeeping mission, while simultaneously supporting local and regional 

development projects as a tool of reconciliation. In this scenario the international community 

would focus on helping grassroots communities to regain some control and prevent the spread of 

International Engagement with Somalia

page 4 • PB 4 • January 14, 2010
© USIP 2010 • All rights reserved.

extremist ideologies. For example, international aid agencies could support development projects 

to build roads or wells between communities, and then facilitate the process of an achieving an 

agreement between the clans over usage rights. This will allow for the emergence of a moderate 

level of rule of law and local reconciliation while also providing tangible peace dividends to local 

communities. 

Endnotes

1. Arman, Abukar. “A New Paradigm for Somalia.” Huffington Post, December 29, 2009. http://

www.huffingtonpost.com/abukar-arman/a-new-paradigm-for-engagi_b_406363.html (accessed 

January 6, 2009).

2. Ibid.

3. Ibid.

About This Brief

The United States Institute of 

Peace held a public event in 

December 2009 to examine 

how current international 

policy is affecting the situation 

in Somalia, and how different 

policy approaches could promote 

better governance and help 

to stabilize this highly volatile 

situation. Bronwyn E. Bruton, from 

the Council on Foreign Relations, 

Abukar Arman, an independent 

policy analyst, presented their 

arguments, moderated by David 

R. Smock of the U.S. Institute 

of Peace. Stephanie Schwartz, 

the author, is a senior program 

assistant with the Center for 

Mediation and Conflict Resolution, 

which organized this event and 

coordinates USIP’s Somalia work.

USIP provides the analysis, training and 

tools that prevent and end conflicts, 

promotes stability and professionalizes 

the field of peacebuilding.

For media inquiries, contact the office 

of Public Affairs and Communications, 

202.429.4725

United States 

Institute of Peace

1200 17th Street NW

Washington, DC 20036

202.457.1700

www.usip.org

International Engagement with Somalia

page 5 • PB 4 • January 14, 2010