Qualitative field analysis reveals fragmented and non-linear pathways toward engaging Al-Shabaab, highlighting the necessity of moving beyond military-first solutions toward structured dialogue.
This article uses Somalia as a critical case to interrogate the limits of military-first approaches and rethink the assumptions that have governed the scholarship on dialogue with militant Islamist and jihadist groups. Drawing on qualitative research and fieldwork conducted between October 2024 and February 2025, it develops a multi-scalar analysis of attempts to engage Al-Shabaab, tracing evolving discourses towards negotiation as well as factors that have created or disrupted windows of opportunities for dialogue. By hybridising negotiation theory with insights from peacebuilding and conflict transformation, the article argues that dialogue in Somalia is best understood as a fragmented, non-linear and political process rather than a linear sequence of causal events. The findings suggest that while a formal practice of negotiation with jihadist groups has yet to emerge in Somalia, scattered attempts to establish points of contact and emerging signals of interest from various actors reflect a growing recognition of the need to move beyond military-centred solutions. As such, the Somali case offers a useful lens to assess the infrastructure needed to build dialogue, as well as the factors that can either facilitate or obstruct military disengagement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cavallaro et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: