By Dahir Alasow | Waagacusub.net — Opinion / Analysis Mogadishu — The Federal Government of Somalia's decision to annul all cooperation agreements with the United Arab Emirates (UAE)—including security and defence-related arrangements—represents one of the most consequential foreign-policy turns Somalia has taken in years.

It is not merely a bureaucratic cancellation of memoranda. It is a strategic message: Mogadishu is reasserting sovereignty through diplomacy, and it is willing to absorb the political and security shock that may follow.

The decision was announced after an emergency meeting of the Council of Ministers, reportedly brought forward ahead of schedule—an indication that the government wanted to signal urgency and national resolve.

1) A sovereignty argument — but also a political line in the sand

Somalia’s leadership has framed the cancellation as a sovereignty-protection move. This framing matters. In Somalia’s political context, the word "sovereignty” is not symbolic—rather, it is tied to:

• who controls security operations,

• who funds and influences armed forces,

• who negotiates external partnerships, and

• whether regional administrations act independently of Mogadishu in international security matters.

Somalia has long struggled with the "dual power” problem: a federal government responsible for the international face of the country, while some federal member states maintain direct external relationships—sometimes economic, sometimes political, sometimes security-related.

In that environment, external security partners can unintentionally (or intentionally) empower fragmentation.

Thus, Somalia’s Cabinet appears to have made a firm calculation: security agreements must not translate into parallel authority structures.

2) President Hassan’s pivot: from Abu Dhabi to Doha and Riyadh

What makes this move even more striking is the political history. President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud has previously navigated relationships with Gulf actors pragmatically. The UAE, for years, was one of the most active external players in Somali security and political networks.

Now, the government is clearly shifting the regional anchor:

• Saudi Arabia — a strategic heavyweight with diplomatic and economic gravity

• Qatar — a political operator that has invested heavily in state-to-state relationships

If Doha indeed steps into the UAE’s former role—especially regarding salary support for forces—then Somalia will not only have changed partners, it will have changed the entire influence architecture surrounding national security.

This is a pivot that signals:

Somalia wants "state-to-state” support, not "network-to-network” arrangements.

3) The Gulf rivalry is moving deeper into Somali territory

Somalia has never been isolated from Gulf competition, but the arena is shifting. Previously, Gulf rivalries played out through:

• media narratives

• political endorsements

• elite financing

• development branding

• indirect security engagements

Now, the rivalry is increasingly tied to who pays for security and who shapes decision-making.

That is why this decision will not remain a Mogadishu headline. It is likely to:

• deepen pressure on regional leaders,

• trigger diplomatic outreach campaigns,

• and intensify strategic competition in security institutions.

In simple terms: Somalia is becoming a more decisive battleground of Gulf influence—not less.

4) The federal member state factor: the real test is internal cohesion

A key challenge is the UAE’s historical influence with certain Somali federal member states. Some regional leaders have reportedly been visiting Dubai—an important detail not because travel itself is controversial, but because it signals ongoing channels of alignment.

Somalia’s federal structure already suffers from weak coordination. When external actors have direct influence over sub-national leaders, the result can be:

• parallel negotiations,

• conflicting security agendas,

• competing armed units,

• and increased mistrust of Mogadishu.

This is the central risk following the Cabinet’s decision:
a foreign-policy cancellation can rapidly become an internal political confrontation.

If mishandled, it could expand the distance between the federal government and some regional administrations.

5) Security consequences: can Somalia replace UAE support fast enough?

Security agreements are not just papers. They translate into:

• logistics, training, equipment

• stipends, allowances, payments

• intelligence-sharing networks

• operational coordination

If UAE support exits rapidly, Somalia must answer a practical question:

Who fills the vacuum — and how quickly?

If the gap is not filled, the risks are clear:

• weakened force morale if salaries/stipends stall

• operational disruption

• fragmented command structures

• militant groups exploiting uncertainty

This is why any pivot must come with a clear continuity strategy. It is not enough to cancel agreements; Somalia must show a replacement framework for stability.

6) A new phase: Somalia wants respect — not dependency

There is a larger theme behind this decision. Somalia is signaling that:

• it wants partners, not patrons,

• cooperation, not competition inside its politics,

• investment, not leverage,

• respect, not conditional influence.

This is a legitimate national ambition.

But ambitions require discipline. Somalia must ensure that new partnerships—whether with Qatar or Saudi Arabia—do not become a repeat of the same problem under a different flag.

Conclusion: a brave reset, but it must be managed with precision

This policy shift is bold. It is historic. It may be necessary.

Yet, it is also risky.

Somalia is stepping into a new Gulf equation where diplomacy will be sharper, competition will be deeper, and internal Somali unity will be tested.

If Mogadishu executes this decision with strategic clarity—protecting cohesion, ensuring security continuity, and maintaining a unified foreign policy—Somalia could emerge stronger and more sovereign.

If not, the country may enter another cycle of fragmented influence and competing alignments.

Somalia’s sovereignty must be defended—but sovereignty also requires strong institutions.
This decision has created a moment of national reset. Now the real work begins.