The Uganda troop withdrawal from Somalia has begun, with its government indicating that the country’s military deployment there is expected to end by the close of 2027. The first group of soldiers has returned home under an agreement between Kampala and Mogadishu, opening a phased drawdown of a mission that has made Uganda one of the longest-serving external security partners in Somalia.
The timetable marks a significant shift for Somalia’s security arrangements. Ugandan forces have been present in the country since 2007, initially as part of the African Union mission that was deployed to support the Somali government and help push back the al-Shabaab insurgency. Their role has continued through successive changes in the mission’s name and structure. The departure will not happen all at once, but the announced end date gives Somali authorities, the African Union and other partners a defined period in which to adjust.
Uganda’s withdrawal is being described as a phased process tied to a bilateral understanding with Somalia. The first returning contingent is an initial step rather than evidence that the entire force has already left. Several thousand Ugandan personnel have served in Somalia under the African Union framework and through separate bilateral arrangements at different times. Public reporting has used varying figures for the size of those deployments, so the total number remaining and the pace of each stage will need to be clarified by the governments and the mission as the plan proceeds.
The move comes as Somalia is still confronting al-Shabaab, an armed group that has waged an insurgency for more than 15 years and continues to carry out attacks against security forces, government targets and civilians. Somali forces have taken on more responsibility in recent years, but their capacity remains uneven across the country. The central question is whether the security institutions can hold territory, protect key routes and towns, and respond to attacks as foreign forces reduce their presence.
Uganda was among the first countries to send troops to Somalia under the African Union’s mission in 2007. The deployment followed a period in which the Somali transitional authorities faced a serious threat from militant groups and had limited capacity to secure the capital and other strategic areas. African Union forces helped defend government institutions, support the rebuilding of national security structures and conduct operations alongside Somali troops.
The mission has changed over time. The African Union Mission in Somalia, known as AMISOM, was replaced by the African Union Transition Mission in Somalia, or ATMIS, as responsibility was gradually meant to shift towards Somali institutions. A further transition brought in the African Union Support and Stabilization Mission in Somalia, known as AUSSOM. The changes reflected a long-running effort to move from a large international peace-support deployment to a model in which Somali security forces would take the lead, with external assistance focused on support, training and targeted operations.
That transition has been difficult. Al-Shabaab has remained capable of striking in areas outside its direct control, disrupting roads and commerce, and challenging the authority of the federal government. Military gains have not always translated into durable local administration. Holding territory requires police, courts, local officials, logistics and public services as well as soldiers. When those structures are weak, an area cleared by security forces can remain vulnerable to renewed militant pressure.
Uganda’s role has therefore involved more than a troop presence at fixed bases. Its personnel have supported operations, protected strategic locations and helped secure the institutions of the federal government. The deployment has also carried costs for Uganda, including the risks to soldiers and the sustained financial and logistical demands of maintaining forces abroad. The government’s decision to begin a drawdown is consequently both a bilateral political choice and a change in the regional security picture.
Somali officials have sought to build national forces capable of assuming a larger role, but the handover has raised concerns among security partners about the readiness of units, the reliability of funding and the ability to maintain pressure on al-Shabaab. Analysts have warned that a rapid or poorly coordinated departure could open gaps in vulnerable areas. Those concerns do not mean that the withdrawal timetable must be abandoned; they underline why the process needs to be linked to clear benchmarks and a realistic assessment of what Somali forces can hold.
Uganda’s announcement is also not the same as the end of all international security assistance to Somalia. The African Union mission is a multilateral operation, and its future depends on decisions by the African Union, the Somali government, troop-contributing countries and international partners. Uganda can reduce or end its own deployment under the bilateral plan, while other countries may continue to contribute personnel or support. The overall mission’s size and mandate will therefore need to be considered separately from Kampala’s decision.
Funding is another pressure point. African Union missions have relied on a combination of contributions from troop-contributing states and international financial or logistical support. Any drawdown must account for the cost of moving personnel, maintaining remaining units and ensuring that Somali forces have transport, communications, medical evacuation and supply systems. A reduction in troops without replacement capability can make operations harder even if the number of Somali personnel on paper continues to rise.
The political relationship between Mogadishu and federal member states will matter as much as troop numbers. Somalia’s federal system has faced disputes over authority, elections and the distribution of security responsibilities. Local administrations may have different views about which forces should protect their areas and how national command structures should operate. A successful transition requires agreement on who gives orders, who provides support and how disputes are resolved when a security crisis crosses administrative boundaries.
For Uganda, the next stages will involve decisions on the size and timing of returning groups, the condition of the units remaining in Somalia and the arrangements for handing over responsibilities. Kampala will also need to manage the domestic implications of bringing troops home, including their reintegration into other assignments and the public explanation of what the deployment achieved. The government has presented the timetable as an orderly withdrawal under an agreement, rather than an immediate abandonment of the mission.
For Somalia, the priority will be to prevent a security vacuum. That means identifying the bases, routes and facilities where Ugandan units currently provide support, assigning replacement forces before each departure and checking whether those replacements have the equipment and command structure required for the task. It also means maintaining cooperation between Somali units and the remaining African Union contingents. A calendar alone cannot guarantee a safe transfer; the sequence of handovers will matter.
The continued threat from al-Shabaab is likely to be the main test of the transition. The group has used attacks to demonstrate that it can still reach high-profile targets and to undermine public confidence in the government. Even where security forces have the upper hand, preventing attacks requires intelligence, local trust and sustained policing. Military operations can disrupt militant networks, but they cannot by themselves resolve the grievances and governance problems that help an insurgency survive.
Uganda’s decision sets a clear political direction: a nearly two-decade deployment is moving towards an end by late 2027. The practical consequences will depend on the details still to come, including the timetable for each contingent, the future size of AUSSOM and the ability of Somali forces to take over critical responsibilities. The first troops returning home make the transition tangible, but the central measure of success will be whether Somalia can maintain security as its most experienced external partner steps back.
SOURCE
Reuters; Associated Press; Agence France-Presse; Uganda People’s Defence Forces; African Union Support and Stabilization Mission in Somalia