Nisar Majid, Khalif Abdirahman and Marika Theros explore how a local peace deal has endured in one of Somalia’s most politically contested towns, despite recent setbacks.
Drawing on forthcoming research by the PeaceRep Somalia team, this blogpost examines what Galkayo reveals about the challenges and possibilities of implementing local agreements in fragmented and transnational contexts.
This blogpost accompanies a new policy brief by the authors: Sustaining the Post-Agreement Peace – Galkayo, Somalia
A Peace Agreement Still Holding – Galkayo, Somalia
Seven years on from the signing of the 2017 Galkayo ‘local’ agreement, the post-agreement peace can be considered a relative success in Somalia’s otherwise volatile, violent and fragmented context. This is in spite of a wider environment of conflict and an upsurge of revenge killings in Galkayo itself during 2024. This blogpost draws on a forthcoming article and policy brief which examine the dynamics of this post-agreement peace, drawing on work undertaken by the PeaceRep Somalia team.
Much of the scholarly and policy literature on peacemaking focuses on the processes and mediation strategies needed to reach agreements, rather than those required for their implementation and long-term sustainability.[1] However, most national agreements collapse within five years, often leading to renewed conflict, while local agreements are frequently described as short-lived and transitory.[2] The Galkayo agreement has endured. Scholars increasingly emphasize the implementation phase as crucial for long-term stability,[3] yet much of this literature remains focused in this respect on national-level agreements, leaving critical gaps in understanding the dynamics of implementing local agreements such as found in Galkayo.
A Fragmented Landscape of Peace and Conflict
Galkayo town is positioned centrally, both geographically and politically, in Somalia’s fragmented political landscape. In many ways, it serves as a microcosm of the country’s broader peace and conflict landscape. It lies at the intersection of competing identity groups, two of Somalia’s Federal Member States (FMS), and a major trade corridor, all factors influencing the country’s ongoing process of state formation. It is also heavily influenced by political elites in Mogadishu and by diaspora populations from the different identity groups that are attached to the area.
The 2017 agreement, which followed two to three years of ceasefires and negotiations successfully ended large-scale conflict and fostered improved relations and investments across the divided town, making it an important case concerning the implementation of local agreements and one we wrote about previously. More recently, however, in 2024, waves of revenge killings have tested its resilience, highlighting both its achievements and its vulnerabilities.
The capitals of Puntland (Garowe) and Galmudug (Dhusamareb) act as centers of political gravity for their respective regions, pulling traditional and official authorities in Galkayo in opposite directions. Mogadishu, capital of the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS), also exerts influence, highlighting the overlap between national and state-level politics. Election cycles only intensify these dynamics. In 2024, for example, local youth activists in Galkayo highlighted the preoccupation and physical presence of Galkayo elders in Garowe, the state capital, accusing them of neglecting insecurity and the rising revenge killings in their own town. Their elders prioritized their presence in the state capital due to the pressures of upcoming elections for the state president, further incentivised by the prospect of receiving financial ‘benefits’.
The central regions of Somalia, including Galkayo, have long been well-connected to diaspora populations, who play a significant role in shaping region’s political and economic dynamics. Today, diaspora continue to be critical actors as migration and transnational relations intensify. In 2024, local elders in Galkayo reported the use of WhatsApp groups connecting local and diaspora populations as new platforms for clan mobilisation with clan-based conflict articulated through social media reaching external audiences. Elders in Galkayo argue that these new dynamics complicate their ability to intervene, mediate and de-escalate conflict. At the time of writing, a former Somali General and prominent peacemaker during the Galkayo agreement-making process, who originates from Galkayo, has been actively seeking diaspora support for a united clan position on Galkayo, consulting constituencies in the USA and Canada to do so. This underscores the ongoing significance of transnational actors in Galkayo’s peace and conflict dynamics.
Research highlights
Amongst the key insights of our research is that the endurance of the agreement reflects the potential of adaptive, trans-scalar mediation efforts, customary governance mechanisms, and the sustained commitment of local actors. Unlike many national agreements, which often emphasize formal power-sharing frameworks, Galkayo’s process relied on flexibility, iterative problem-solving, and localized legitimacy rather than rigid institutional designs. This flexibility however exposes a key vulnerability: the process has remained highly dependent on the leadership, networks, and credibility of individuals.
In addition, the study finds that the absence of a unified security framework continues to leave the town vulnerable to revenge killings and cycles of violence, while governance remains fragmented, with dual administrations and overlapping authorities. These governance and security gaps reinforce localized insecurities, which can easily spill over into broader political and clan rivalries, especially during election cycles or periods of wider regional instability.
The Galkayo case illustrates the importance of seeing peace implementation as a dynamic and relational process requiring continuous mediation and adaptation to evolving political, economic, and security dynamics. By demonstrating how local processes are shaped by – and in turn shape – broader political economies and governance arrangements, our analysis highlights the need for peace implementation strategies to be explicitly designed to accommodate these shifting conditions and to reduce over-reliance on individual mediators.
The Galkayo case highlights the importance of actively engaging the Somali diaspora in peace processes, recognizing that their influence spans economic investment, political mobilization, and the amplification of conflict narratives through digital platforms. A trans-scalar approach not only links local, federal, national and international actors, but must also engage diaspora networks as essential stakeholders in both peace implementation and conflict prevention.
See the accompanying Policy Brief for further details including recommendations.
[1] Madhavi Joshi, ‘New avenues in peace implementation research: actors, geolocation, and time’, Peacebuilding, 12(1), (2022): 82–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/21647259.2022.2154958
[2] Christine Bell and Laura Wise, ‘The Spaces of Local Agreements: Towards a New Imaginary of the Peace Process’, Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding. 16:5, (2022): 563-583, DOI: 10.1080/17502977.2022.2156111
[3] Terence Lyons, ‘Successful peace implementation: plans and processes’. Peacebuilding, 4(1), (2015): 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/21647259.2015.1094906; Joshi, ‘New avenues in peace’.
About the authors:
Nisar Majid is Research Director of the LSE-PeaceRep Somalia programme at the London School of Economics and co-author of Famine in Somalia. Khalif Abdirahman is a Somali activist, senior field researcher at the LSE-PeaceRep Somalia. programme. with considerable experience of community engagement. Marika Theros is an academic at LSE and practitioner, having advised governments, international organizations, and civil society on peace processes in complex conflict zones.