Somalia has been under a UN arms embargo since 1992, with the UN Security Council renewing this decision annually. The most recent review of this matter took place in November 2022, during which the Council decided to maintain the embargo. However, there appears to be a potential breakthrough as certain restrictions and controls on the arms embargo have been eased. On July 18th of the current year, Somali National Security Advisor Hussein Maalim announced that his country had managed to purchase heavy weapons in 2022 after the United Nations relaxed the conditions for arms acquisition.
Maalim stated that the Somali government successfully acquired “anti-aircraft weapons, howitzers, and helicopters.” However, he did not offer specific details about the source and types of these weapons. He also revealed the intention of his country to submit a renewed request to the Security Council in November to lift the arms embargo imposed on Somalia. The purpose behind this request is to bolster their efforts in combating terrorism.
Slow Response
Over the past years, Somalia has persistently called for the lifting of the arms embargo imposed on it to bolster its counterterrorism efforts. However, the response from the Security Council has been notably slow. The Council has been conducting field assessments and evaluating the capabilities of the Somali army in confronting the “Al-Shabaab” movement, which has led to periodic easing of arms restrictions.
The calls from Somalia to lift the arms embargo have grown more urgent, especially since the current president, Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, assumed office on May 16, 2022. He launched a comprehensive war on terrorism and now aims to intensify the demands for lifting the embargo during the upcoming November.
On June 23rd of last year, during his visit to the United States, Mohamud delivered a speech before the Security Council, urging the lifting of the arms import ban imposed on his country since 1992. He stated, “The arms embargo on Somalia has become a prominent obstacle hindering the country’s journey towards achieving peace.”
Urgent Necessity
In contrast to the slow response and Somalia’s pressures to lift the comprehensive arms embargo to enhance military capabilities against terrorism, there are pressing demands facing the Somali government concerning counterterrorism operations. Therefore, lifting the arms embargo may be considered a necessity from their perspective, based on the following considerations:
- Persistence of Terrorist Organizations’ Activities: Despite Somalia’s success in containing the activities of the “Al-Shabaab” movement and driving its elements out of areas under its control or influence since May 2022 until now, particularly in the central regions of the country, the movement’s operational activity continues. This is evident despite the engagement of clan members in confrontations with the movement’s elements, the ongoing military operations, and preparations for advanced stages to attack the movement’s strongholds in southern Somalia.
Irrespective of the evaluation of the army’s and pro-government clan militias’ control over the movement’s strongholds in the central regions of the country, and whether it can be considered a defeat for the movement or a tactical withdrawal, the threats posed by “Al-Shabaab” remain active, particularly in the southern states. This is notably evident with the escalation of operational activities towards neighboring countries, specifically Kenya, as evidenced by a series of operations within Kenyan borders in the past few months.
Lifting the arms embargo would empower the Somali army to maintain its counterterrorism operations, particularly in light of President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s comprehensive war against terrorist organizations, with “Al-Shabaab” being a primary focus. The confrontations persist due to the movement’s ability to adapt to field changes and its possession of financial and armament capabilities.
- The Army’s Pursuit of Qualitative Superiority: Building upon the previous point, Somalia demonstrates a strong determination to bolster its capabilities and broaden its sources of armament in the near future, aiming to achieve qualitative superiority against terrorist organizations, especially “Al-Shabaab,” which possesses significant armament capabilities. This pursuit is particularly notable as they persistently invest millions of dollars in illegal arms acquisitions, disregarding the arms embargo imposed on non-state actors by the UN Security Council as part of the decision to enforce the arms embargo in Somalia.
The capability of “Al-Shabaab” to purchase weapons is closely tied to its ability to generate significant revenues, estimated to reach up to $100 million annually. This financial strength enables them to maintain a steady supply of weapons through illicit cross-border networks, particularly with connections to Yemen. This was evident when the United States imposed sanctions on a weapons smuggling network associated with the movement in November 2022.
As a result, Somalia is determined to ensure that its army achieves qualitative superiority in terms of armament compared to “Al-Shabaab.” This very objective led the UN Security Council to ease the conditions of the arms embargo, allowing the army to possess heavy weapons during the November 2022 session.
- Withdrawal of African Union Forces: The recent developments in the Somali landscape, particularly the withdrawal of the African Union forces known as “AMISOM,” pose significant challenges for the current regime. There are growing concerns about the potential implications of this withdrawal, especially regarding the potential increase in operational activities of “Al-Shabaab” in the event of a vacuum left by the withdrawal.
The withdrawal of African forces is being carried out in planned stages, and the first stage was completed in June of the previous year. Consequently, the Somali army took on the responsibilities of the departing forces, which has increased the pressure it faces in terms of securing the internal situation.
Despite the arms embargo, Somalia found a solution through an agreement reached months before the initial phase of the forces’ withdrawal during a summit of neighboring country leaders. This agreement outlined a strategy to confront “Al-Shabaab” by deploying joint forces, potentially compensating for the withdrawal of AMISOM forces.
- Relying on Internal Capabilities: Historically, counterterrorism operations in Somalia have heavily relied on external military support, whether from the United States, neighboring countries, or African forces. The stability of Somalia has been closely tied to the involvement of external actors, primarily due to the military weakness of the Somali army.
This weakness has been a key factor in the imposition of an arms embargo on Somalia since 1992, driven by concerns that weapons could end up in the hands of terrorist elements, particularly advanced weaponry, and the challenge of securing such weapons. However, with the implementation of programs to train and strengthen the Somali army, their level of competence has improved, resulting in a gradual lifting of the partial arms embargo by the Security Council.
The current government is making significant efforts to enhance its reliance on internal capabilities, especially through ongoing training programs with the US forces or other countries. Additionally, the Somali president aims to reintegrate the 5,000 troops trained in Eritrea into operations against terrorist organizations. By pushing for the lifting of the arms embargo, there is a possibility of increasing reliance on internal capacities in the near future, supported by continued assistance from international and regional partners.
- Control over Liberated Areas: In recent years, the Security Council has eased arms restrictions, allowing for the arming of security forces within certain limits to support security and stability operations in Somalia. This condition becomes particularly significant in the upcoming period, considering the successful collaborative efforts of the army with international and regional partners, as well as some clan members, in driving terrorist elements out of certain areas in the central regions of the country. However, it also poses challenges in securing the liberated areas from “Al-Shabaab.”
As a result, establishing control and security over the liberated areas represents a more challenging phase than driving out the terrorist elements. This underscores the crucial role that increasing armament capabilities, through lifting the arms embargo, will play alongside other factors in preventing “Al-Shabaab” elements from infiltrating those areas and reclaiming control over them.
Ongoing Obstacles
Despite the progress made in Somalia’s counterterrorism operations and the resulting calls to completely lift the arms embargo for bolstering military capabilities against terrorism, the factors that initially led to the imposition of this decision still exist, presenting a barrier to its full removal.
Lifting the complete arms embargo would enable the purchase of more advanced weaponry, especially given that numerous countries are prepared to supply such arms, amid fierce international competition in the arms market. As a consequence, there is a risk that some of these weapons could fall into the hands of “Al-Shabaab,” particularly as the movement continues to possess substantial operational and combat capabilities.
Furthermore, this issue is closely tied to the limitations of the Somali army’s capabilities in preventing “Al-Shabaab” from accessing such weapons by securing and fortifying storage centers. Evaluating this process poses considerable challenges. While the partial lifting of the arms embargo indicates the army’s increasing ability to secure weapons, it does not negate the fact that “Al-Shabaab” still retains the capacity to conduct sophisticated operations in multiple areas across Somali territory.
The obstacles to the complete lifting of the arms embargo are also related to the restrictions on providing these advanced weapons to pro-government militias, particularly since the embargo covers non-state actors, including these militias. This raises significant questions about the feasibility of ensuring that these militias do not possess substantial armament capabilities.