UN special rep tells Xamar its over!

[World]

the local SNA might make deals with them THEY ARE USUALLY ILMO ADEER. its not hordes of AS marehan fighters capturing tuulos in middle shabelle.

Shabab Hawiye will butcher non Shabab Hawiye

But non Shabab Hawiye won’t butcher Shabab Hawiye

 

[reer]

When AIAI were militarily defeated in Bari, Reer Bari let their own boys off the hook. They allowed them to reintegrate into society.

The Ciise Maxamuud in Nugaal went into the masaajids where Ciise Maxamuud AIAI members sought shelter and butchered them with knives.

Guess what region is terror free today and which one still has problems?

youre right. similar in gedo ittihad were defeated which invloved a intra clan war. but somalis especially konfurians today dont have the appetite for 1990s-esque battles anymore. even the warlords can be bought and shipped to istanbul/nairobi with a monthly laaluush stipend.

AS arent making the same blunders as maxkamdaha and ittihad did. they dont have a particular qabiil led leadership like maxkamadaha and they dont undermine the local clan ownership.

Menkhaus notes that when AIAI first took over Luuq, the clan composition of its
leadership was the same as that of the town (which was dominated by the Darod/Marehan
subclan). Later, AIAI adjusted its model and tried to implant a mixed-clan council. Both models
proved unworkable: when AIAI adopted a single, majority clan identity, it became a player in
local clan rivalries and was vulnerable to charges of exploiting Islam to further Marehan
ambition. The mixed-clan identity fared no better, Menkhaus writes; it merely exposed AIAI to
“clannish charges of being an occupying force” (Ibid.: 114). https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA574116.pdf

Shabab Hawiye will butcher non Shabab Hawiye

But non Shabab Hawiye won’t butcher Shabab Hawiye

which one gets a steady salary?

 

[El Nino]

Didn’t HSM talk recently about negotiating with Shabaab??

Seems like beesha caalamka are dropping their hardline agenda against terrorist organisations. I wonder why.

No funding for AUSSOM/AMISOM (last line of defense) and USAID cuts. There aint that much money in Somalia no more and thus no benefit in propping up a weak puppet government who, if we are honestly speaking, is incredibly incompetent and corrupt, which is by design.

Nonetheless, in order for negotiations to work, FGS needs to be in a much stronger position then AS. I have proposed of eliminating Shabaabs hardliners and commanders, only mostly leaving those who are in the group for money.

Also regarding money, Bay and Sh/hoose regions need to be completely liberated. Shabaabs ability to tax the 2 biggest urban centers in southern Somalia (Baidoa and Xamar) is getting them serious tax revenue. They need to be starved off from money, they are eating too good now.

you would have to bomb and massacre marehan abgaal habar gidir d&m. those are some clans that AS gets alot of help from. tell me do you think hsm will launch an onslaught on sections of his clan? will farmajo do it? will abdirahman abdishakur start massacring cayr?

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

Would killing key figures on the AS side give a clear advantage for FGS in the negotiation table? I find it hard to believe commanders and foot soldiers would risk continuing fighting after seeing their top commanders dead.

 

[Burqad]

When AIAI were militarily defeated in Bari, Reer Bari let their own boys off the hook. They allowed them to reintegrate into society.

The Ciise Maxamuud in Nugaal went into the masaajids where Ciise Maxamuud AIAI members sought shelter and butchered them with knives.

Guess what region is terror free today and which one still has problems?

You can’t smuggle weapons or send troops to Mozambique through Riyoole lands unlike Bari so you’re point is nonsensical, since IS-Sumal is a financial and logistics node for ISIS which is why it has so many foreigners in it.

 

[Burqad]

Didn’t HSM talk recently about negotiating with Shabaab??

Seems like beesha caalamka are dropping their hardline agenda against terrorist organisations. I wonder why.

No funding for AUSSOM/AMISOM (last line of defense) and USAID cuts. There aint that much money in Somalia no more and thus no benefit in propping up a weak puppet government who, if we are honestly speaking, is incredibly incompetent and corrupt, which is by design.

Nonetheless, in order for negotiations to work, FGS needs to be in a much stronger position then AS. I have proposed of eliminating Shabaabs hardliners and commanders, only mostly leaving those who are in the group for money.

Also regarding money, Bay and Sh/hoose regions need to be completely liberated. Shabaabs ability to tax the 2 biggest urban centers in southern Somalia (Baidoa and Xamar) is getting them serious tax revenue. They need to be starved off from money, they are eating too good now.



Would killing key figures on the AS side give a clear advantage for FGS in the negotiation table? I find it hard to believe commanders and foot soldiers would risk continuing fighting after seeing their top commanders dead.

Americas current plan seems to be to kill the more extreme members of AS in order to further negotiations.

 

[Flightboi]

Didn’t HSM talk recently about negotiating with Shabaab??

Seems like beesha caalamka are dropping their hardline agenda against terrorist organisations. I wonder why.

No funding for AUSSOM/AMISOM (last line of defense) and USAID cuts. There aint that much money in Somalia no more and thus no benefit in propping up a weak puppet government who, if we are honestly speaking, is incredibly incompetent and corrupt, which is by design.

Nonetheless, in order for negotiations to work, FGS needs to be in a much stronger position then AS. I have proposed of eliminating Shabaabs hardliners and commanders, only mostly leaving those who are in the group for money.

Also regarding money, Bay and Sh/hoose regions need to be completely liberated. Shabaabs ability to tax the 2 biggest urban centers in southern Somalia (Baidoa and Xamar) is getting them serious tax revenue. They need to be starved off from money, they are eating too good now.



Would killing key figures on the AS side give a clear advantage for FGS in the negotiation table? I find it hard to believe commanders and foot soldiers would risk continuing fighting after seeing their top commanders dead.

HSM should not negotiate with Shabaab at least for now. HSM unfortunately doesn't have the upper hand if negotiations begin right now. If negotiations must happen then it should happen with HSM finally regains the upper hand on Shabaab.

 

[therandomone]

Quite interesting how Al Shabab can bomb Mogadishu and kill 500 people, and that doesn’t affect their legitimacy and credibility, but FGS engaging in counter terrorism affects their credibility and legitimacy.

That really did make them lose credibility. But won't the somali govt killing 10s of thousands Somalis be worse ?

 

[Burqad]

HSM should not negotiate with Shabaab at least for now. HSM unfortunately doesn't have the upper hand if negotiations begin right now. If negotiations must happen then it should happen with HSM finally regains the upper hand on Shabaab.

HSM will never have the upper hand, and there is no need for negotiations with the Khawarij. A popular non-corrupt Somali government is what is required to defeat them and as long as a criminal like him is in charge there is no chance of victory.

That really did make them lose credibility. But won't the somali govt killing 10s of thousands Somalis be worse ?

It’s like if I was racing someone, they broke their leg and then I demanded I break my leg as well. Like a non-schizo AS that don’t blow up ice cream shops and shoot people for watching the World Cup would obviously be doing better, so it’s insane to me that they want to copy them.

 

[NidarNidar]

It's a hsm masterclass of political acumen and maneuvering. It took him only few years to make alshabab into a legitimate stakeholder in Somalia by the world. In few years these people would be praising alshaba and standing next to them as they hand over the country to them hahahhagaView attachment 361859

 

[Idilinaa]

The title of the thread and twitter caption is extremely misleading, and it’s important to clarify what was actually said.

The UN Special Rapporteur did not say “it’s over” or that the government should surrender to al-Shabaab. What he emphasized was something many security experts, analysts, and even Somali officials have pointed out before , that a purely military solution is not enough. That’s not new or shocking; it’s a reflection of modern counterinsurgency strategy.

What he said:

“I encourage the government to intensify its efforts to negotiate with receptive elements of al-Shabaab and to seek political reconciliation rooted in Somali customs of dialogue and negotiation.”

This aligns with the long-standing Somali tradition of conflict resolution , using dialogue, clan mediation, and local reconciliation mechanisms alongside military pressure.

This doesn’t mean legitimizing al-Shabaab’s leadership or ideology. It’s about splitting the movement, peeling off fighters who can be rehabilitated, and weakening the group from within.

The idea of a "moderate wing" might be new terminology to some, but it simply refers to rank-and-file members or defectors who aren’t ideologically committed, or who joined out of economic desperation or local disputes. There have already been successful reintegration efforts in places like Baidoa and Kismayo under DDR (Disarmament, Demobilization & Reintegration) programs. So it's something that's known to work.

The most effective way to dismantle al-Shabaab will come from local, grassroots efforts, rooted in Somali-led reconciliation and community-based pressure. It’s similar to how the ICU managed to bring stability in the early 2000s by pushing out U.S.-backed warlords , not through sheer force alone, but by leveraging legitimacy, dialogue, and community consensus.

 

[Idilinaa]

The most effective way to dismantle al-Shabaab will come from local, grassroots efforts, rooted in Somali-led reconciliation and community-based pressure. It’s similar to how the ICU managed to bring stability in the early 2000s by pushing out U.S.-backed warlords , not through sheer force alone, but by leveraging legitimacy, dialogue, and community consensus.

You can see why this hasn't happened yet, you can hardly achieve this with an outside foreign imposed and funded government that lacks legitimacy and is seen as predatory, if anything all FGS and HSM does by being present in this form is sustain things which was they have since they booted out the ICU.

 

[3LetterzMM]

Shabab Hawiye will butcher non Shabab Hawiye

But non Shabab Hawiye won’t butcher Shabab Hawiye

And that right there is where the whole problem lies. It's very simple the day the people of Konfuur decide they're done with AS is the day they'll be defeated and cease to exist.

Xamar needs a president willing to pull out all the stops a real no nonsense attitude to terrorism. Start by spreading the news across the country any affiliation with AS will result in immediate death withholding Intel on a member gets you thrown in jail even if you're related to them u either snitch or go to jail.

Let AS know that there's a new sheriff in town show the people that going against us is 100x more scary than going against AS. Big gestures have to be made no more prisoners or rehabilitation every village that gets taken back you publicly execute all of them for the whole town to see the leaders heads get hanged up in the market so no one gets any ideas about rebelling. Everytime a terrorist attack happens we retaliate 10x harder by bombing the shit out of their villages.

Somalia could be cleansed in less than a month if they took a Honduras like stance on terrorism. A scorched earth policy is the best way to go burn all these villages down to the ground bomb the shit out of them then run in after to take back control.

Civilians will be killed but you have to think about the bigger picture letting AS run around will result in much more civilian deaths in the long run also if you want people in these cities to fight back against AS you have to make them fear you more and the only way to do that is to show em you're willing to kill them. You do that then it gives them an ultimatum either fight back and maybe die or sit back and face certain death. We are beyond trying to limit civilian deaths only thing we can do is absolutely burn everything down and rebuild from the ashes.

 

[The Oponian Guild]

The title of the thread and twitter caption is extremely misleading, and it’s important to clarify what was actually said.

The UN Special Rapporteur did not say “it’s over” or that the government should surrender to al-Shabaab. What he emphasized was something many security experts, analysts, and even Somali officials have pointed out before , that a purely military solution is not enough. That’s not new or shocking; it’s a reflection of modern counterinsurgency strategy.

What he said:


This aligns with the long-standing Somali tradition of conflict resolution , using dialogue, clan mediation, and local reconciliation mechanisms alongside military pressure.

This doesn’t mean legitimizing al-Shabaab’s leadership or ideology. It’s about splitting the movement, peeling off fighters who can be rehabilitated, and weakening the group from within.

The idea of a "moderate wing" might be new terminology to some, but it simply refers to rank-and-file members or defectors who aren’t ideologically committed, or who joined out of economic desperation or local disputes. There have already been successful reintegration efforts in places like Baidoa and Kismayo under DDR (Disarmament, Demobilization & Reintegration) programs. So it's something that's known to work.

The most effective way to dismantle al-Shabaab will come from local, grassroots efforts, rooted in Somali-led reconciliation and community-based pressure. It’s similar to how the ICU managed to bring stability in the early 2000s by pushing out U.S.-backed warlords , not through sheer force alone, but by leveraging legitimacy, dialogue, and community consensus.

Negotiation is surrender, for the crimes and multiple terror attacks they’ve committed, and for the thousands of innocents they’ve killed in cold blood. Quite frankly I’m surprised to know that many people in this thread were open to compromise with AS.

 

[The Oponian Guild]

The title of the thread and twitter caption is extremely misleading, and it’s important to clarify what was actually said.

The UN Special Rapporteur did not say “it’s over” or that the government should surrender to al-Shabaab. What he emphasized was something many security experts, analysts, and even Somali officials have pointed out before , that a purely military solution is not enough. That’s not new or shocking; it’s a reflection of modern counterinsurgency strategy.

What he said:


This aligns with the long-standing Somali tradition of conflict resolution , using dialogue, clan mediation, and local reconciliation mechanisms alongside military pressure.

This doesn’t mean legitimizing al-Shabaab’s leadership or ideology. It’s about splitting the movement, peeling off fighters who can be rehabilitated, and weakening the group from within.

The idea of a "moderate wing" might be new terminology to some, but it simply refers to rank-and-file members or defectors who aren’t ideologically committed, or who joined out of economic desperation or local disputes. There have already been successful reintegration efforts in places like Baidoa and Kismayo under DDR (Disarmament, Demobilization & Reintegration) programs. So it's something that's known to work.

The most effective way to dismantle al-Shabaab will come from local, grassroots efforts, rooted in Somali-led reconciliation and community-based pressure. It’s similar to how the ICU managed to bring stability in the early 2000s by pushing out U.S.-backed warlords , not through sheer force alone, but by leveraging legitimacy, dialogue, and community consensus.

The ICU didn’t “push out” the warlords, they simply co-opted them and welcomed them, as they more often than not fellow kinsmen and relations. Why the revisionism?

 

[3LetterzMM]

Are you a lice-headed Amhara? The heroes of galbeed did not receive any aid from the republic, Imperial Abyssinia lied and invaded the somali republic because they could not understand that.

All I did was read the wikipedia page that was linked If u got a problem take it up wit mr wikipedia

 

[Itsnotthateasy]

AS is here to stay according to this UN official, and since the SNA has pretty much collapsed, it’d be wiser to pursue negotiations and dialogue with AS “moderate” wing.

problem is, I don’t think there’s a moderate wing of AS, and this is the first time I’m hearing such terminology from an international organisation.

The reason they are now talking like this is because there is no money for AUSSOM. The end of the AU mission in Somalia is now being realistically considered. A funding conference was meant to take place at the end of April and then at the end of May and it hasn't happened. There's no appetite for it. The UN are running around Somalia trying to build some kind of coalition. The US has rejected HSMs moves. HSM is carrying on regardless I think he has support from some countries. The final show down is coming soon in the next few months.

The political collapse will follow the International community diverging on agenda which has started in a big way now. Somalia Quint (UK, UAE, US, Turkiye, Qatar) hasn't met since October 2024. The UN is essentially in no mans land, building a coalition against HSM while supporting his federal changes? Very strange. Turkiye looks like it will back HSM. US is against HSM and his electoral/constitutional and federal changes.

 

[Itsnotthateasy]

The reason they are now talking like this is because there is no money for AUSSOM. The end of the AU mission in Somalia is now being realistically considered. A funding conference was meant to take place at the end of April and then at the end of May and it hasn't happened. There's no appetite for it. The UN are running around Somalia trying to build some kind of coalition. The US has rejected HSMs moves. HSM is carrying on regardless I think he has support from some countries. The final show down is coming soon in the next few months.

The political collapse will follow the International community diverging on agenda which has started in a big way now. Somalia Quint (UK, UAE, US, Turkiye, Qatar) hasn't met since October 2024. The UN is essentially in no mans land, building a coalition against HSM while supporting his federal changes? Very strange. Turkiye looks like it will back HSM. US is against HSM and his electoral/constitutional and federal changes.

View attachment 361967

More on this topic from washington post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/05/27/somalia-al-shabab-american-troops-trump/

This article is trying to convince US adminstration to take another look at Somalia. The Mogadishu mob are desperate for the old status quo under which they were rapidly centralizing power. They understand that the turks are not going to really be able to fill the void and might only make things worse.

 

[Idilinaa]

Negotiation is surrender, for the crimes and multiple terror attacks they’ve committed, and for the thousands of innocents they’ve killed in cold blood. Quite frankly I’m surprised to know that many people in this thread were open to compromise with AS.

It's not surrender, it's standard counter-insurgency practice. No successful counter-insurgency campaign anywhere in the world has been won through military force alone. At some point, reconciliation, dialogue, and reintegration are necessary components , especially with lower-level operatives or communities/individuals drawn in by circumstance rather than ideology

Look at examples like Colombia with FARC, or the various programs used in Northern Ireland against the various militant terror orgs. The aim is not to reward criminals, but to break the insurgency’s cohesion, isolate hardliners, and reduce the group’s recruitment base.

You don’t negotiate from weakness ,you negotiate strategically to weaken them. That’s not surrender; that’s smart policy.

Read this publication by a prominent Somali scholar

Dialoguing and negotiating with Al-Shabaab: the role of clan elders as insider-partial mediators​

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17531055.2020.1863099

Finally, the article explores the idea that, instead of relying on foreign third-party mediators to resolve Somalia's protracted stalemate at the macrolevel, clan elders, as credible insider-partial mediators possessing locally sourced legitimacy and perceived integrity, have the capacity to help overcome the stalemate between Al-Shabaab and the FGS.

It's conclusions pretty much echo what i've voiced. You guys don't get that Alshabaab is sustained by the illegitimacy of FGS and foreign meddling. Otherwise they would have been done away with long ago and quickly.

The ICU didn’t “push out” the warlords, they simply co-opted them and welcomed them, as they more often than not fellow kinsmen and relations. Why the revisionism?

They absolutely fought and defeated the warlords. The Islamic Courts Union (ICU) wasn’t just a political accommodation , it was a direct response to the chaos and brutality caused by the warlords who filled the power vacuum after the collapse of the central government and emerged from Proxy groups. These warlords were often backed by foreign interests and were largely responsible for fragmenting Mogadishu and exploiting the population.

The ICU, formed from a coalition of grassroots Sharia courts, gained popular support precisely because it restored stability and security by pushing out these warlords, not by co-opting them. While there may have been cases where some defected or were reconciled later, the early ICU rise was clearly a result of decisive military and civic victories over them.

 

[X29]

It's not surrender, it's standard counter-insurgency practice. No successful counter-insurgency campaign anywhere in the world has been won through military force alone. At some point, reconciliation, dialogue, and reintegration are necessary components , especially with lower-level operatives or communities/individuals drawn in by circumstance rather than ideology

Look at examples like Colombia with FARC, or the various programs used in Northern Ireland against the various militant terror orgs. The aim is not to reward criminals, but to break the insurgency’s cohesion, isolate hardliners, and reduce the group’s recruitment base.

You don’t negotiate from weakness ,you negotiate strategically to weaken them. That’s not surrender; that’s smart policy.

Read this publication by a prominent Somali scholar

Dialoguing and negotiating with Al-Shabaab: the role of clan elders as insider-partial mediators​

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17531055.2020.1863099

It's conclusions pretty much echo what i've voiced. You guys don't get that Alshabaab is sustained by the illegitimacy of FGS and foreign meddling. Otherwise they would have been done away with long ago and quickly.



They absolutely fought and defeated the warlords. The Islamic Courts Union (ICU) wasn’t just a political accommodation , it was a direct response to the chaos and brutality caused by the warlords who filled the power vacuum after the collapse of the central government and emerged from Proxy groups. These warlords were often backed by foreign interests and were largely responsible for fragmenting Mogadishu and exploiting the population.

The ICU, formed from a coalition of grassroots Sharia courts, gained popular support precisely because it restored stability and security by pushing out these warlords, not by co-opting them. While there may have been cases where some defected or were reconciled later, the early ICU rise was clearly a result of decisive military and civic victories over them.

So how is this going to get negotiated what do they want

 

[3LetterzMM]

It's not surrender, it's standard counter-insurgency practice. No successful counter-insurgency campaign anywhere in the world has been won through military force alone. At some point, reconciliation, dialogue, and reintegration are necessary components , especially with lower-level operatives or communities/individuals drawn in by circumstance rather than ideology

Look at examples like Colombia with FARC, or the various programs used in Northern Ireland against the various militant terror orgs. The aim is not to reward criminals, but to break the insurgency’s cohesion, isolate hardliners, and reduce the group’s recruitment base.

You don’t negotiate from weakness ,you negotiate strategically to weaken them. That’s not surrender; that’s smart policy.

Read this publication by a prominent Somali scholar

Dialoguing and negotiating with Al-Shabaab: the role of clan elders as insider-partial mediators​

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17531055.2020.1863099

It's conclusions pretty much echo what i've voiced. You guys don't get that Alshabaab is sustained by the illegitimacy of FGS and foreign meddling. Otherwise they would have been done away with long ago and quickly.



They absolutely fought and defeated the warlords. The Islamic Courts Union (ICU) wasn’t just a political accommodation , it was a direct response to the chaos and brutality caused by the warlords who filled the power vacuum after the collapse of the central government and emerged from Proxy groups. These warlords were often backed by foreign interests and were largely responsible for fragmenting Mogadishu and exploiting the population.

The ICU, formed from a coalition of grassroots Sharia courts, gained popular support precisely because it restored stability and security by pushing out these warlords, not by co-opting them. While there may have been cases where some defected or were reconciled later, the early ICU rise was clearly a result of decisive military and civic victories over them.

Never negotiate with terrorists dawg that's like the oldest rule in the book these aren't reasonable folk the only deal they'll agree to is one that gives them more power. Not only that you want clan elders to negotiate terms you done lost ur mind these elders will happily give up everything if the guys on the other side of the table are the same clan as them.

You wanna defeat AS you have to punch lower than them be willing to do things they aren't willing to do. The side willing to take things farther always wins that's war in a nutshell for you.