JOWHAR — A growing debate over political representation and power-sharing in Hirshabelle State has renewed calls for a review of the administration’s political structure, including how senior leadership positions are distributed among the communities that make up the state.
Supporters of greater political representation for the Hawaadle community argue that concerns over political inclusion should be addressed through dialogue, consultation and a transparent power-sharing framework rather than being treated as a clan confrontation.
The debate has also prompted comparisons with other federal member states, particularly Galmudug, where several communities participate in the region’s political and administrative structures. Some political voices argue that the presidency of Galmudug has, in practice, been closely associated with the Habar Gidir community, while other communities have not mounted the same level of public political opposition to that arrangement.
Supporters of this argument say the comparison highlights what they describe as an inconsistency in how political representation is discussed across Somalia’s federal member states. They argue that calls for fair representation should be applied consistently and should not become a source of hostility toward any particular community.
Critics of the current political arrangements in Hirshabelle, meanwhile, argue that the state’s power-sharing system requires greater consultation and a clearer understanding of how leadership positions should be allocated between Hiiraan and Middle Shabelle.
Some political voices from Hiiraan have questioned why discussions concerning Hawaadle’s political representation, particularly in Hiiraan and parts of Middle Shabelle, frequently generate strong reactions from rival political actors.
They maintain that political competition is normal, but warn that disagreements should not be transformed into hostility between communities. They argue that clan-based political confrontation could deepen divisions and make it more difficult to build effective and stable state institutions.
“Clan hatred and social division cannot provide a lasting solution,” community and political voices have emphasized, calling for dialogue, compromise and an agreed framework for political representation.
Hirshabelle was established as a federal member state bringing together communities from Hiiraan and Middle Shabelle. Since its formation, however, disagreements over political representation, leadership positions and the distribution of political power have remained among the state’s most sensitive political issues.
Those advocating reform argue that the current debate should be used as an opportunity to examine the broader political structure of Hirshabelle rather than focusing solely on individual positions or candidates.
They say any future power-sharing arrangement should clearly address the distribution of senior government positions, parliamentary representation and political participation, while ensuring that major communities feel adequately represented.
Supporters of reform further argue that political arrangements should be based on fairness, inclusiveness, consultation and mutual agreement, rather than political pressure, temporary alliances or communal rivalry.
The debate comes as Hirshabelle continues to face broader political and institutional challenges. A power-sharing system that is not widely accepted by the state’s constituent communities could continue to generate disputes and weaken cooperation between political leaders and local communities.
The issue is therefore increasingly being framed as more than a contest over a single political position. It has become part of a wider discussion about whether Hirshabelle’s political structure adequately reflects the demographic, geographic and political interests of the communities within the state.
For many advocates of reform, the solution is not to replace one community’s dominance with another, but to establish a political system in which all constituent communities have a clear and respected stake in government.
They argue that political leaders, lawmakers, elders and community representatives should return to dialogue and work toward a revised agreement that can command broad public confidence.
The comparison with Galmudug is also being used by some political voices to call for consistency in Somalia’s federal political system, arguing that debates over representation should be addressed through the same principles of fairness and political inclusion across all federal member states.
Ultimately, the stability and future of Hirshabelle will depend on whether its political actors can move away from clan-based confrontation and build a system based on dialogue, fairness, inclusiveness, accountability and a mutually accepted power-sharing arrangement.
The central question facing Hirshabelle is therefore not simply who should hold a particular political position, but whether its political institutions can develop an arrangement that is viewed as legitimate and fair by the communities they are intended to represent.
