Jubaland formally blamed Turkiye and Somalia’s federal authorities for the September 3—4 strike. Turkiye has not acknowledged conducting the operation, and no independently verified evidence identifying the aircraft has been released. General Shub survived.
The controversy reflects a wider pattern in Turkiye’s foreign interventions, although Ankara has used different methods in Libya, Syria and Sudan
...a Moslem country located in the Horn of Africa. It is noted for its affinity for rule by ex- or current generals, its holy men, and for the oppression of the native Afro population by its Arab conquerors. South Sudan, populated mostly by the natives, split off from Sudan proper, which left North and South Darfur to be oppressed by the guys with turbans...In Libya, Turkiye intervened openly after signing security agreements with the UN-recognized government in Tripoli
...a confusing city, one end of which is located in Lebanon and the other end of which is the capital of Libya. Its chief distinction is being mentioned in the Marine Hymn...
. Its parliament authorized the deployment in January 2020, and Ankara provided troops, advisers, drones, air defences and support from allied Syrian fighters. Turkiye publicly defended the operation as assistance requested by Libya’s legitimate government.
In Syria, Turkiye acted more directly and largely without Damascus’ consent. Since 2016, it has launched named military operations, deployed ground forces and conducted acknowledged
...
KABOOM!...
s against ISIS and Kurdish-led groups it considers connected to the PKK. Ankara invokes national security and self-defence, while critics have challenged the legality and civilian consequences of its operations.
Sudan presents a quieter model. Turkiye has not announced a combat deployment, but documents examined by The Washington Post showed that the Ottoman Turkish company Baykar supplied the Sudanese military with drones and missiles worth at least $120 million. Ottoman Turkish-made drones have conducted strikes, although available evidence does not establish that Ottoman Turkish personnel operated them or selected their targets.
Somalia now risks becoming a combination of these models: an officially acknowledged security partnership accompanied by military operations whose details, authorization and accountability remain unclear.
The federal government says Ottoman Turkish military assistance supports operations against al-Shabaab
... the Islamic version of the old Somali warlord...
. But the political context has changed. President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s original four-year mandate reached its expected conclusion on May 15, 2026. Villa Somalia argues that constitutional amendments extended the presidential and parliamentary terms to five years, while opposition leaders and several federal member states reject their application to the incumbents. The extension’s legality remains disputed.
That dispute makes foreign military cooperation especially sensitive. Turkiye is working primarily through Villa Somalia even as Puntland
...a region in northeastern Somalia, centered on Garowe in the Nugaal province. Its leaders declared the territory an autonomous state in 1998. Puntland and the equally autonomous Somaliland seem to have avoided the clan rivalries and warlordism that have typified the rest of Somalia, which puts both places high on the list for Islamic subversion...
, Jubaland, sections of South West State and national opposition figures challenge the federal administration’s authority and accuse it of disregarding Somalia’s federal consensus.
If Ottoman Turkish aircraft are being used solely against al-Shabaab, Ankara can point to its formal security partnership with Mogadishu. If they are used against federal-state forces or political opponents, however, Turkiye would risk crossing from counterterrorism assistance into Somalia’s internal power struggle.
The central concern is therefore not simply whether Turkiye is present. Its presence is well established. The question is whether a contested federal administration can authorize foreign military power against Somali actors without consultation, transparent legal oversight or agreement from the federal member state where an operation occurs.
Turkiye’s experiences in Libya, Syria and Sudan show that Ankara is often open about its broader strategic objectives while remaining silent about particular missions and operational decisions. In Somalia, that silence could deepen mistrust unless the Doolow strike is independently investigated and its chain of authorization disclosed.
| Related: Americans headed for high-risk nation urged to prepare wills, leave DNA samples ahead of time |