Have you ever wondered why some wars rage on with barely a whisper in the headlines? In 2025, the United States has unleashed over 50 airstrikes in Somalia, a staggering number that’s climbing fast. Yet, flip through the news, and you’ll find little mention of this escalating conflict. It’s as if an entire war is unfolding in the shadows, unnoticed by most. The reasons behind this silence—and the implications of these military actions—deserve a closer look.
The Unseen War in Somalia
The Horn of Africa has long been a region of turmoil, but the intensity of US involvement in Somalia this year is striking. According to military reports, the US has conducted over 50 airstrikes in 2025 alone, targeting groups like ISIS Somalia and al-Shabaab. That’s a pace that could shatter previous records. What’s driving this surge, and why isn’t it making waves in mainstream media?
I’ve always found it curious how some conflicts capture global attention while others slip through the cracks. Somalia’s story feels like one of those overlooked chapters, buried under the noise of bigger headlines. Perhaps it’s the complexity of the region’s politics or the fatigue of reporting on endless wars. Whatever the reason, the lack of coverage doesn’t diminish the stakes.
A Surge in Airstrikes: What’s Happening?
The US military, through Africa Command (AFRICOM), has been relentless in its operations this year. Recent strikes have zeroed in on Somalia’s northeastern Puntland region, particularly around the port city of Bossaso. These attacks aim to weaken the ISIS affiliate hiding in the rugged Cal Miskaad mountains. Meanwhile, in central and southern Somalia, the US is also targeting al-Shabaab, a militant group with ties to al-Qaeda.
These aren’t small operations. The US is backing local forces, including Puntland’s counter-terrorism units and the Mogadishu-based Federal Government, in a multi-front battle. Yet, details about these strikes—like casualty counts or civilian impacts—are scarce. Military reports often lack transparency, leaving us to piece together the puzzle.
“The lack of detailed reporting on these strikes raises questions about accountability and oversight.”
– Defense analyst
This secrecy isn’t new, but it’s troubling. Without clear data, it’s hard to gauge the human cost or the effectiveness of these operations. Are these strikes hitting their targets, or are they fueling resentment and instability?
The Players: ISIS, al-Shabaab, and Local Forces
To understand this conflict, you need to know the key players. Somalia’s militant landscape is complex, with two major groups at the forefront: ISIS Somalia and al-Shabaab. The former, a smaller but growing faction, emerged in 2015 as a splinter from al-Shabaab. It’s entrenched in Puntland, using the region’s mountains as a hideout.
Al-Shabaab, on the other hand, is a broader threat. Born out of a US-backed Ethiopian invasion in 2006, this group has waged a relentless insurgency against Somalia’s fragile government. Its recent gains, including capturing a town in the Hiraan region, have raised alarms. Some US officials even fear that Mogadishu, the capital, could fall.
- ISIS Somalia: A smaller, localized group in Puntland, targeted by recent US strikes.
- Al-Shabaab: A larger, al-Qaeda-linked militia controlling parts of southern and central Somalia.
- Puntland Forces: Local counter-terrorism units supported by US airstrikes.
- Federal Government: Somalia’s central authority, struggling to maintain control.
The interplay between these groups creates a volatile mix. The US supports local forces to keep both militants at bay, but the strategy isn’t foolproof. Al-Shabaab’s resilience suggests that airstrikes alone won’t tip the scales.
Why the Media Silence?
Here’s where things get murky. With over 50 airstrikes in 2025, you’d expect a flurry of headlines. Instead, there’s a deafening silence. Why? For one, Somalia’s conflict lacks the geopolitical weight of other wars. It’s not a proxy battleground for superpowers, nor does it involve high-profile actors that grab attention.
Another factor is media fatigue. After decades of reporting on African conflicts, some outlets may see Somalia as “just another war.” I’ve noticed this pattern before—stories from distant regions often struggle to compete with domestic news or flashier global crises.
Then there’s the issue of access. Somalia’s instability makes it tough for journalists to report on the ground. Without vivid imagery or firsthand accounts, the story feels abstract to audiences. Combine that with the US military’s tight-lipped approach, and you’ve got a recipe for obscurity.
“When conflicts are complex and far from home, they often fade into the background.”
– International relations expert
The Human Cost: What We’re Not Hearing
Every airstrike carries a human toll, but we rarely hear about it. The US military has stopped sharing casualty estimates, citing operational security. This lack of transparency leaves a gap in our understanding. Are civilians caught in the crossfire? Are these strikes weakening militants or radicalizing more?
Local reports offer some clues. In Puntland, counter-terrorism operations have targeted areas once used as militant hideouts, including places where families were present. The absence of clear data makes it hard to assess the fallout, but history suggests that airstrikes can have unintended consequences.
In my view, this opacity is a disservice. Without open reporting, we risk repeating mistakes from past interventions. Somalia’s history—particularly the 2006 Ethiopian invasion—shows how foreign involvement can backfire, spawning groups like al-Shabaab in the first place.
The Bigger Picture: US Strategy in Somalia
The US presence in Somalia isn’t just about airstrikes. It’s part of a broader strategy to prop up the Federal Government and counter extremist groups. But this approach has its critics. Some argue that endless military support creates dependency, while others see it as a necessary bulwark against chaos.
Recent debates within the US government highlight the stakes. Earlier this year, some officials floated the idea of scaling back operations, even evacuating the US embassy in Mogadishu. Others, advocating a hardline stance, pushed for escalation. The hawks seem to have won, with airstrikes ramping up.
| Conflict Element | US Role | Outcome |
| Puntland Operations | Airstrikes, local support | ISIS weakened, but ongoing |
| Al-Shabaab Fight | Airstrikes, government aid | Mixed; militant gains persist |
| Mogadishu Security | Embassy presence, training | Unstable; city at risk |
This table simplifies a messy reality. The US is juggling multiple goals—countering terrorism, stabilizing the government, and securing its own interests. But the question remains: is this strategy working, or is it pouring fuel on a fire that’s been burning for decades?
Historical Context: How We Got Here
Somalia’s turmoil didn’t start in 2025. The roots trace back to the early 2000s, when a US-backed Ethiopian invasion toppled a coalition of Muslim groups in Mogadishu. Out of that chaos emerged al-Shabaab, a radical faction that grew into a formidable force. By 2012, it had pledged loyalty to al-Qaeda, cementing its status as a global concern.
The US has been entangled ever since, using drones, airstrikes, and ground support to prop up Somalia’s government. But the cycle of violence persists. Each strike may kill militants, but it also risks alienating locals, feeding the very insurgency it aims to crush.
Somalia Conflict Timeline: 2006: Ethiopian invasion, al-Shabaab emerges 2012: Al-Shabaab joins al-Qaeda 2015: ISIS Somalia forms 2025: Record US airstrikes
This history matters. It shows how interventions can spiral, creating new problems as they solve old ones. Somalia is a case study in the perils of foreign involvement—and the cost of ignoring it.
What’s Next for Somalia?
As airstrikes continue, the future looks uncertain. Al-Shabaab’s gains suggest that military force alone won’t resolve the conflict. The Federal Government remains weak, controlling little beyond Mogadishu. Meanwhile, the human toll—though poorly documented—grows with each strike.
I can’t help but wonder if there’s a better way. Could diplomacy or economic support do more than drones? The US’s current path feels like a high-stakes gamble, with no clear endgame. Without broader attention, Somalia’s plight risks staying in the shadows.
- Increase transparency: The US should share more data on airstrike outcomes.
- Support local governance: Strengthening Somalia’s institutions could reduce reliance on military aid.
- Engage the public: Media coverage could pressure policymakers to rethink their approach.
These steps won’t solve everything, but they could shift the trajectory. Somalia’s story deserves to be told—not just for the sake of awareness, but to hold those in power accountable.
Why It Matters to You
You might be reading this from thousands of miles away, wondering why Somalia’s conflict matters. The truth is, these airstrikes reflect broader questions about US foreign policy and its global impact. Every drone strike shapes perceptions, fuels narratives, and affects stability far beyond Somalia’s borders.
Moreover, the silence around this war highlights a deeper issue: what stories get told, and which ones don’t? By shining a light on Somalia, we can better understand the world’s hidden conflicts and our role in them.
“Understanding global conflicts starts with asking why some stories stay untold.”
– Conflict researcher
So, what can you do? Stay curious. Dig into the news that doesn’t make the front page. Somalia’s war may be far away, but its ripples reach us all.
