The maritime security and defense agreement between Somalia’s Federal Government and Türkiye is facing mounting political and legal resistance from the Puntland and Jubaland administrations, both of which have warned against the deployment of Turkish naval vessels in waters off their coastlines.
The objections reflect a broader dispute over federal authority, constitutional powers, and control of Somalia’s maritime resources, exposing deep divisions within the country’s federal system.
Both administrations argue that the agreement was concluded without meaningful consultation with federal member states, making it politically unacceptable and legally questionable from their perspective.
Their statements are aimed not only at Ankara but also at Mogadishu, signaling opposition to what they describe as an increasingly centralized approach to national security and natural resource management.
The dispute comes amid already strained relations between the Federal Government and several regional administrations over constitutional amendments, electoral reforms, and the balance of power within Somalia’s federal structure.
Constitutional and Legal Questions
At the center of the disagreement is the interpretation of Somalia’s Provisional Constitution.
Puntland and Jubaland contend that matters involving natural resources, territorial waters, and national security require genuine consultation and cooperation between the Federal Government and the federal member states before binding agreements are concluded with foreign governments.
The two administrations further argue that, until a comprehensive legal framework governing the division of maritime authority and offshore resources is agreed upon, they retain responsibility for protecting coastal areas within their respective jurisdictions.
Mogadishu, however, maintains that foreign affairs, defense, and international agreements fall under the constitutional mandate of the Federal Government.
Potential Security and Diplomatic Implications
The dispute could complicate implementation of the Somalia-Türkiye maritime defense agreement, particularly if Turkish naval assets begin operating along the Puntland and Jubaland coastlines without coordination with the regional administrations.
Such a scenario risks creating operational tensions, political confrontation, and potentially security incidents involving local authorities.
Beyond its immediate security implications, the disagreement highlights the broader challenge of implementing international agreements in Somalia while major constitutional questions remain unresolved.
Analysts warn that continued disputes between Mogadishu and federal member states could undermine national unity, weaken security coordination, and create uncertainty for international partners seeking to support Somalia’s maritime security and counter-piracy efforts.
Türkiye has become one of Somalia’s closest strategic allies over the past decade, investing heavily in military training, infrastructure, humanitarian assistance, and economic development.
The maritime defense agreement is intended to strengthen Somalia’s ability to protect its territorial waters, combat piracy, illegal fishing, and other maritime threats.
However, its long-term success may depend not only on technical implementation but also on whether Somalia’s political leaders can bridge internal federal disagreements over authority, resource management, and constitutional governance.