Addis Standard’s recent opinion: “Vulnerability: The Somali oil trade in turkeys could endanger a new crisis in the horn,” written by Adam Dowd Ahmed, brings anticipated skepticism to the agreement on forged hydrocarbons between Somalia and turkey. Though careful consideration of resource management and local stability is undoubtedly guaranteed, Adam’s analysis succumbs to an overly simple narrative of exploitation and imminent crisis. This perspective unfortunately overlooks Somali’s strategic partnership, the well-established global norms that dominate emerging hydrocarbon producers, and the persuasive economic orders driving the effects of wider stabilization that Turkey seeks to exert within Africa’s unstable horn.
From my advantage here in Mogadishu, this contract appears to have far fewer reckless gambling poised to ignite further vulnerability, and a carefully calculated step to unlock the possibilities of Somalia’s dormant economy – a move entirely necessary by decades of instability and a significant lack of internal capabilities.
Adam’s central competition rests on the claim that the 90% cost recovery clause granted to Turkey constitutes a “sweep control” and is inherently “exploitative.” This interpretation reveals fundamental misconceptions of the core mechanics that underpin the Production Shared Agreement (PSA), a globally recognized and widely adopted framework for resource development in countries such as Somalia. These countries still tackle conflict and underdeveloped heritage, often lacking billions of dollars of capital and highly specialized skills essential for complex offshore exploration. This 90% allocation is not a permanent confiscation of Somalia’s inherent wealth. Rather, it serves as a temporary mechanism designed to allow Turkey to recover its substantial, high-risk initial investment in exploration and infrastructure development.
Importantly, once these advance costs are recovered, the process that essentially encourages efficient and rapid development shares the important benefits generated between Somalia and Turkey. Additionally, Somalia has wisely secured immediate 5% royalties on every barrel of hydrocarbons already produced, securing an early revenue stream. Simply frame this arrangement to ignore the harsh reality that mere exploitation will still embrace the frustration of these potentially vast resources for decades to come, without such partnerships, and ignore the harsh reality that no tangible benefits for the long-standing Somali people.
Additionally, the writer laments that the unrecognized bonuses of signatures and development within the scope of this initial contract. While these financial incentives are undoubtedly a desirable component of resource development transactions, their absence in basic agreements with countries that are still actively recovering from the deep scars of long-term conflict is far from unusual. Somalia’s immediate priorities are to attract large foreign investments and launch a critical process of resource exploration without burdening a crippling level of sovereign debt. These bonuses representing Somalia’s additional financial benefits can be negotiated strategically and effectively in subsequent stages of the partnership, particularly as exploration activities result in positive outcomes and Somalia’s inherent negotiating power naturally increases within the framework of the contract. Similarly, another point of competition for Adam, the provisions that allow for the repatriation of revenues, are standard and indeed important inclusion in international investment treaties. Such clauses are essential to attract foreign capital and promote the trust of key investors needed for long-term engagement. It is also important to recognize that these provisions are carefully balanced by the implementation of robust tax laws and strategic incentives designed to encourage local reinvestment.
Turkey’s longstanding multifaceted relationship with Ethiopia, Kenya and Djibouti, all the pivotal players of the region’s geopolitical landscape further highlight the broader strategic vision.
With a particular emphasis on Somaliland, Adam’s criticism of the lack of comprehensive consultations with regional states undoubtedly touches on deep, sensitive, politically complex issues within Somaliland’s internal dynamics. While the pursuit of a broader national consensus building is an ideal and long-term objective, the Federal Government of Somali (FGS) as an internationally recognized sovereign authority representing Somalia as a whole, has the inherent constitutional obligation and legal privilege to control Somali’s natural resources within internationally recognized signs. The multifaceted engagement with Somaliland in Turkey is characterized by actively promoting dialogue between Hargesa and Mogadishu and providing important development assistance to the region, clearly indicating a subtle, strategically balanced approach, rather than completely ignoring regional concerns. To suggest that the agreement is a “geopolitical provocation” towards Somaliland fundamentally overlooks the delicate, complicated, balanced acts that Turkey actively undertakes on the wider horn of Africa. Turkey’s longstanding multifaceted relationship with Ethiopia, Kenya and Djibouti is all vital players in the regional geopolitical landscape, highlighting a broader strategic vision beyond the simple and ultimately unproductive zero-sum game.
The alarms raised by writers regarding the first 5% royalties secured by Somalia also guarantee important contextualization. This immediate revenue stream, perhaps at first glance, is undoubtedly important for countries addressing the immediate financial needs that stem from decades of national vulnerability and underdevelopment. This represents the tangible and uncertain future in which Somalia seeks to independently fund and carry out complex offshore exploration, representing the concrete and immediate economic benefits that arise in Somalia from the start of the project. Historical precedents in many other countries strategically utilize their ability and experience to embark on their own hydrocarbon journeys on similar or less favorable initial conditions and gradually increase in subsequent agreements to ensure better deals, providing a much more realistic and historically grounded perspective than the immediate and somewhat dismissed condemnation of this first royal speed.
Finally, Adam’s speculative claims about Turkey’s underlying motivation hint at a direct link between his involvement with Somalia and his perceived set-off in other geopolitical fields, regretting the true economic and strategic integrity demonstrated between the two countries. Somalia is actively seeking trustworthy, dedicated long-term partners due to its multifaceted development and its pressing security needs. Turkey is steadily growing across the African continent, with a strategic obligation to diversify its energy sources, and is willing to find strategically important collaborators in Somalia. Robust security cooperation between the two countries, including Turkey’s key military training mission based in Mogadishu, is directly contributing to Somalia’s long-term stability.
Sign up for the AllAfrica newsletter for free
Get the latest African news
success!
Almost finished…
You need to check your email address.
Follow the instructions in the email you sent to complete the process.
error!
There was a problem processing the submission. Please try again later.
To dismiss this important agreement simply as “exploitation and destabilization” is to ignore the profound economic and strategic reality facing Somalia today
In conclusion, Ahmed Adam’s analysis correctly highlights the enduring importance of transparency and inclusive regional involvement in any resource development effort, but ultimately presents a distorted assessment of the turkey and Somali hydrocarbon agreement. From the ground in Mogadishu, this agreement does not provide reckless fuel for further vulnerability within the already complex territories. Instead, it represents a strategic imperative – a necessary and practical step for Somalia to ultimately harness its long-term natural wealth, attract important foreign investment, and lay a critical foundation for long-term economic recovery and sustainable development. This is a partnership clearly based on mutual strategic and economic needs, consistent with established global industrial norms for emerging hydrocarbon producers.
The immediate focus is to ensure a transparent, accountable, transparent and accountable implementation of the contract, fostering continuous and constructive dialogue across Somalia and the broader region, and eagerly constructing the critical institutional capabilities needed to maximize the long-term benefits of this strategic partnership for Somalis. To simply dismiss this pivotal agreement as “exploitation and destabilization” is to ignore the profound economic and strategic reality facing Somalia today, and the steps required to ensure a more prosperous and stable future for all citizens. As.
Editor’s Note: Abdinasir Ali Osman (Professor) is a senior researcher, consultant and trainer based in Mogadishu, Somalia, with over 35 years of experience in the humanitarian, development, governance and institutional capacity building departments.
