Is the capital just land or a center for people?

The capital is not only a city where government institutions are located, but it is also a symbol of unity, power, and the solidarity of the communities it represents. Therefore, the election of the capital has political, economic, social, and security significance that surpasses the appointment of a city to serve as the government’s headquarters.

In Somalia, following the collapse of the central government, debates have emerged regarding the status of Mogadishu and who has the right to govern the national capital. Similar debates are taking place in some of the federal states, where the selection of the capital is sometimes linked to historical claims, geography, power-sharing, and clan relations.

From an administrative and geographical perspective, the capital must have the capacity to host government institutions, facilitate social and administrative connections, and provide essential services. It is also important to consider the connectivity of regions, access to transportation, infrastructure, and the facilitation of citizens reaching administrative centers.

Security, geographical location, and community neutrality are also crucial in the selection of the capital. It is worth considering that the capital should not be located in a place particularly vulnerable to border conflicts, foreign invasions, or isolation, and it should be a center that diverse communities can equally accept. However, neutrality does not mean that no single clan can dominate the city, but rather that the rights of the residents must be respected, governance must be inclusive, and other communities should be able to trust it.

Is the capital part of the power-sharing of clans?

It is important to ask how the selection of the capitals of the federal member states of Somalia is linked to the power-sharing of clans. Sometimes, instead of choosing a capital based on administrative, geographical, security, and economic criteria, there emerges a debate that if one clan receives the presidency, another clan is convinced to accept the capital. This makes the capital part of the political power-sharing, rather than being an administrative center intended for the common good.

For example, the debates in Hirshabelle include the views held by some of the Hiiraan community regarding the combination of the presidency and the capital Jowhar. Similarly, the debates in Jubbaland reflect opinions related to Bu'aale, Baardheere, and how political power and the administrative center are distributed among regions and clans. In Mogadishu itself, there is a debate about how to reconcile the rights of the local community, the status of the national capital, and the representation of Somali citizens.

The fundamental question is: Is it appropriate to determine a capital based on a clan power-sharing agreement, or should it be based on administrative, economic, geographical, security, and social criteria independent of who holds political power?

It is also worth asking whether the federal system has changed the power accumulation that was criticized in the central government, or if it has simply recreated the same structure at the state level. If the capital becomes the place where power, resources, and economic opportunities are concentrated, while other regions feel deprived of representation and services, it is possible that the federal system may revive some of the issues it was created to address.

Ultimately, the most important question is not just which city deserves to be the capital, but how to build a capital that unites diverse communities, ensures security, establishes inclusive governance, and promotes economic development that is not limited to the capital city. Therefore, the debate must move beyond the question of who owns the city? to how can a capital be built that respects the rights of its residents, while also being seen by the wider community as a center that they equally share in?

It is noteworthy that the debate over the status of the national capital is deeper than that of state capitals. It hosts national institutions, foreign embassies, and other facilities that are linked to immovable assets, economic infrastructure, and investments that cannot be easily relocated.

Therefore, the decision regarding the national capital has political, economic, and diplomatic implications that require special consideration. These issues, particularly the status of Mogadishu, the possibility of changing the capital, and the potential impacts, will be thoroughly analyzed in a study independent of this brief text.