John Campbell

Africa in Transition

Campbell tracks political and security developments across sub-Saharan Africa.

Print Print Cite Cite
Style: MLA APA Chicago Close


Somalia: Is Collective Military Action the Answer?

by John Campbell
November 8, 2011

Kenyan troop stand guard at the Garrisa airstrip near the Somali-Kenyan border October 18, 2011. (Stringer/Courtesy Reuters)

This is a guest post by Mohamed Jallow. He is an interdepartmental associate at the Council on Foreign Relations and graduate of the CUNY Colin Powell Center for Policy Studies. Mohamed came to the United States as a refugee from Sierra Leone in 2003.

As Kenya’s invasion of Somalia approached its third week, smaller African nations—Djibouti and Sierra Leone—have upped their contribution to the African Union mission in Mogadishu. They are there partly to shore up support for the transitional government and AU forces, but mostly to take advantage of al-Shabaab’s vulnerabilities at a time when it is under duress. The United States has drones in the skies over Somalia, and there are indications that Ethiopia is preparing to engage any al-Shabaab forces that try to flee from the Kenyan army. With all these converging forces pressing on al-Shabaab, there is once again another opportunity to end the Somali conflict, at least from a military perspective.

Al-Shabaab has become a menace in the region, and the internationalization of its activities is becoming unbearable. The group has launched attacks in neighboring countries, including Kenya. The final straw came with incursions into Kenyan territory by al-Shabaab linked kidnappers, forcing the country to launch an offensive against militants it believes were directly threatening its lucrative tourism industry.

One might think that the African Union would take advantage of the Kenyan invasion. However, it has so far been unable to muster both the military manpower, and the political will to launch an offensive to get rid of al-Shabaab. Africa’s erstwhile heavyweights—Nigeria and South Africa— have been conspicuously absent. Nigeria actually promised to send troops but so far has not followed through.

If the AU manages to secure more troops and contributions from other countries, launching an offensive against al-Shabaab from the north could shrink the size of al-Shabaab controlled territory, and cut off its supply lines, effectively starving it of much needed resources to sustain a long fight. Simplistic as that may sound, there is real potential here for a military end to al-Shabaab’s dominance over Somalia, as well as removing the threat it poses to the transitional government and the AU forces protecting it.

While I am not a strong advocate for military action in many cases, a stronger and more forceful intervention by the African Union in this instance (with the blessing of the transitional government), especially when the Kenyan army and American drones are on the heels of al-Shabaab, is the best opportunity to end the decades long suffering in Somalia.

Post a Comment 6 Comments

  • Posted by My2Cents

    While it may cripple Al-Shabaab, it is wishful thinking that a successful military intervention will bring peace to Somalia. The best it can hope to do is convince the Somali’s that they do not want to get their neighbors angry enough to come after them.

    Which is probably a worthwhile goal in itself.

  • Posted by Mohamud

    Mr Jallow,

    This is yet another short sighted article on solving the Somalia “problem”. Military action has proven to be a failed policy in Somalia. It not only emboldens the Shabaab but it causes scores of civilian casualties. It is impossible for a drone or mortars to distinguish between enemy and civilian. This is a war fought in the midst of civilian populations and the tiny number of Shabaab fighters will melt back into populations with no problem. The Somalia problem is a political one. You commented about an intervention requiring the blessing of the transitional government, this note alone tells me that you are not in touch with the reality on the ground. The transitional government is only around because of the AU, and in fact when the Kenyan military had an incursion into Somalia recently the transitional government had no clue what was happening. Please sir instead of pushing for more war, push for reconciliation and an end to corrupt leaders.


  • Posted by derek breed

    Is there any chance at all that Kenya has a different agenda – gaining the use of the port of Kismayu to partner in the nefarious export of South Sudanese oil?

  • Posted by Maduka

    Can someone tell Mr. Jallow that the Nigerian Army is very busy facing off the Boko Haram challenge?

    Nigeria is not obligated to intervene in East Africa. Somalia is Kenya and Ethiopia’s problem not ours.

  • Posted by Mazzdark

    Kenya has no need for Kismayu as a seaport because it already has anything upto ten on the Indian Ocean, Mombasa is just the biggest. The simple most obvious reason will suffice, that Al Shabbab are a bunch of thugs trying to take over the neighbourhood, and we who come from here have decided not to allow it….risky or not.

  • Posted by Ben

Post a Comment

CFR seeks to foster civil and informed discussion of foreign policy issues. Opinions expressed on CFR blogs are solely those of the author or commenter, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions. All comments must abide by CFR's guidelines and will be moderated prior to posting.

* Required