By Ahmednur Uleeh - Chief Policy Advisor to the Prime Minister of Somalia
“Sometimes leadership is measured not by the crises that happen, but by the confrontations wisely prevented through patience and restraint.”
Leadership is not always measured by dramatic victories. Sometimes, it is measured by the crises that never happen because someone chooses restraint over confrontation. I understand some readers may dismiss my reflections here by saying that I am serving in the same office of the Prime Minister H.E. Hamza Abdi Barre, others may ask how one can speak of progress when the Prime Minister faced political difficulties even in his own constituency such as Kismayo and Garowe. These are fair questions, but they also require a fairer way of judging leadership in Somalia. Somalia is not an easy country to govern, and a Prime Minister must operate amid insecurity, fragile institutions, federal-state tensions, clan politics, regional rivalries, and unresolved constitutional questions. In such an environment, politics is not only about quick wins, but also about managing complex challenges with patience, vision, and responsibility.
Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre’s tenure has often been judged through the lens of Somalia’s many political crises, yet perhaps his most important contribution has been less visible: choosing restraint over confrontation, stability over personal ambition, and national interest over narrow political gain.
Those of us closely working with him can attest that his leadership has not been defined by political drama or public confrontation, instead, it has been marked by patience, restraint, and a commitment to institutional continuity. At moments when many leaders might have escalated disputes, Hamza often chose dialogue. Even when faced with criticism, interference, regional resistance, and political provocation, he avoided turning disagreements into personal battles.
Critics may see this as weakness. I see it as political discipline.
In Somalia’s fragile political environment, escalation may bring short-term satisfaction, but it can also deepen division and paralyze institutions. By refusing to personalize federal-regional disputes, Prime Minister Hamza helped prevent political disagreements from becoming larger national crises. Many of our political elite may not know, but one of the most exposed positions in Somali politics is the office of the Prime Minister. Hamza Abdi Barre faced pressure from many directions and yet rather than responding to every attack, he chose patience and restraint. Even when regional leaders denied him access to areas linked to his own political constituency, he avoided escalation. That approach helped prevent political gridlock at least at the federal level and allowed the government to continue functioning.
Unlike many politicians in Somalia one of the most notable aspects of Hamza’s tenure has been his refusal to govern as a representative of one region, clan, or constituency. Somali politics is often shaped by clan interests and regional loyalties. In such an environment, it would have been easy for him to retaliate against opponents from his own regions or political communities,
but he did not, he instead chose to act as a Somali national leader rather than as a regional or clan politician.
Hamza’s personal integrity deserves recognition, we all know Somalia continues to face serious governance and corruption challenges, and no administration was free from such criticism, but Hamza is one of those Prime Ministers who managed to largely avoid personal corruption and despite smear campaigns and political traps, his name has not been seriously stained by corruption allegations. I am sure, you will agree with me that, in Somalia’s political environment maintaining a reputation for modesty, discipline, and personal credibility is itself a significant achievement.
Related articles
Politically he made the most difficult political choices that previous administrations often avoided, and one clear example is the issue of Sool, Sanaag, and Cayn. For years, the status and grievances of the people of SSC-Khaatumo remained sensitive and unresolved. Hamza’s administration took a clear position by supporting their aspirations and their integration into Somalia’s federal framework. Whether one agrees with every aspect of that decision or not, it marked an important political step on an issue long treated with hesitation.
Another important feature of Hamza’s leadership has been his preference for persuasion over pressure. In political reconciliation efforts, including discussions in Galmudug, he relied more on dialogue and consensus-building than public confrontation. His style has never been theatrical, but it has often been practical. He understood that in Somalia, sustainable political progress often comes through patience, negotiation, and careful management of competing interests. Perhaps his most important decision was choosing stability over personal ambition.
Somali politics has often suffered from destructive rivalry between Presidents and Prime Ministers. In the past, such conflicts have caused instability, government paralysis, and institutional breakdown, in this term it is Hamza that avoided turning the office of the Prime Minister into a rival political center, and by maintaining a functional working relationship with the President, he helped preserve executive stability during a difficult period. My point here is that instead of underestimating such decision, we could agree that political stability is not inactivity. By avoiding unnecessary confrontation at the top of government, Hamza helped Somalia complete a rare period of executive cooperation without the usual destructive internal conflict.
I know’ and I agree that fair assessment does not require silence about shortcomings, but fairness requires context, and indeed in Somali context, it is easy to criticize a Prime Minister who has not delivered everything people hoped for, but his legacy will be remembered for something quieter but deeply important, and that is a political maturity, patience, restraint, and national responsibility at a time when Somalia could easily have faced deeper confrontation, In this period Hamza showed that compromise is not always weakness, that patience is not the absence of leadership, and that stability is often the foundation for national progress.
This is why I say that Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre offered Somalia something it has long needed, which is calm leadership in a time of political turbulence, a steady hand when the country needed restraint, balance, and responsibility.
————
*Ahmednur Uleeh is the Chief Policy Advisor to the Prime Minister of Somalia and a former Permanent Secretary in the Office of the Prime Minister of the Federal Republic of Somalia.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Dawan Africa platform.