In 2025 the United States intensified its air strike campaign against al Shabaab militants in Somalia. In the period between February and June, U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) reported 38 airstrikes, nearly twice as many as it reported in the 2023 and 2024 years combined.
The strikes targeted both the al Shabaab and the ISIS Somali groups, which could indicate a heightened amount of American military involvement in the Horn of Africa. This build-up was in reaction to a series of al Shabaab attacks that reclaimed land occupied by the Somali government troops, especially in Shabelle and Galguduud. In early 2025, the Al Shabaab militants took almost 100 kilometers of Mogadishu, increasing the discussions once again about whether the group could destabilize the capital or not.
There were also warnings of al Shabaab growing more collaborative with Yemeni Houthi rebels, and AFRICOM Commander General Michael Langley reported an expanding terrorist infrastructure that could impact the U.S. homeland security.
Tactical Impact And Challenges Of Air Campaign
The success of the air campaign today is no longer measured in strike numbers, but in their operational effect. While AFRICOM previously reported militant kill counts per operation, openness on that has dropped off since mid-2025. Early-year statistics showed 1.4 militants per strike on average killed, lower than years gone by. That would suggest a likely trend towards more concentrated strikes against leadership nodes rather than indiscriminate area action.
Somali troops claimed battlefield victories. They claimed to have killed or captured more than 100 fighters in coordination with U.S. support. But independent verification is limited, and wartime confusion over central and southern Somalia makes it hard to know casualty numbers. Lack of post-strike reporting adds to the murkiness of the bigger impact on al Shabaab command or morale.
Airstrikes Versus Structural Resilience
Despite tactical interruptions, al Shabaab has deep roots within Somali society. The group’s ability to tax trade lines, provide alternate systems of justice, and maintain a steady source of recruits gives it enduring power in areas where federal authority is absent. Past U.S. air campaigns give the precedent: transient interruption, militant adaptation, and return. The 2025 campaign, though more vigorous, appears under the same constraints unless paired with deeper counterinsurgency reforms.
Broader Security And Political Context In Somalia
The internal political dynamics in Somalia continue to hinder military coordination, and the rifts between the Federal Government of Somalia and the regional administrations, like Puntland, served to limit any collaborative military implementation efforts. Al Shabaab has exploited this separation in varying capacities and has gained control of transport and communications lines and supervisory authority over bargaining visits in central Somalia.
Ocassional bilateral operations conducted by Somali National Army forces and the African Union Transition Mission in Somalia (ATMIS), have included episodic successes. Large theatre operations launched in August 2025 along the Beledweyne front, recovered territories and districts, etc. However, the capacity for al Shabaab to execute elaborate attacks, including anti-plot development against senior officials, or bombings in Mogadishu continues to put the group’s potential threat in perspective.
Civilian Harm And Strategic Blowback
Civilian casualty is nonetheless a core concern. Independent monitors have estimated that U.S. airstrikes since 2017 may have killed up to 150 civilians. They have been used by al Shabaab for anti-Western propaganda and recruitment among disaffected groups. Even where civilian casualty is inadvertent, perceptions of foreign intervention erode support for both the Somali federal government and its foreign supporters.
This dynamic has the ability to amplify instability. Rural communities targeted by airstrikes generally do not have access to grievance mechanisms or post-conflict relief, again cementing the group’s claims that only it provides security and justice. Thus, each airstrike however tactical is a political expense if not put in a framework of governance.
Strategic Justifications And U.S. Homeland Security
The US Department of Defense has explained the surge in 2025 on the basis of threats to US national security from Somalia. Intelligence analysis shows that al Shabaab militants are seeking to develop channels to connect with global jihadist networks to facilitate attacks outside East Africa. Although no plots against the U.S. homeland have materialized in 2025, General Langley emphasized the group’s global ambitions during congressional hearings in March.
This position is underpinned by a post-9/11 policy which permits the threat of force to be employed against incipient threats before they mature into full-blown attacks. The return of urgency comes from fears that chaos in Somalia would see trends echoed in Afghanistan, where militant movements took advantage of power vacuums to establish cross-border networks.
Expanding U.S. Military Commitments In Africa
Aside from drone and manned aerial attacks, U.S. military advisers are still embedded among Somali special forces in the Danab Brigade. While Washington has not resumed large troop deployments, the number and pace of military missions indicate Somalia remains important to America’s counter-terrorism operations in Africa.
But anxieties remain that airpower, though tactically attractive, is not able to substitute for political stability or popular resilience. Military action will discourage near-term threats but will not eliminate the root causes of extremism, including unemployment, petty corruption, and alienation from the political process.
The Limits Of An Air-Driven Strategy
The political infrastructure of the Somali insurgency is complex. Al Shabaab derives legitimacy not only from ideology but also from its infiltration of local economies, informal justice frameworks, and clan politics. Air campaigns barely dismantle these frameworks. Absent effective justice, economic opportunity, and responsive government, the group continues to have legitimacy in parts of the society.
Somalia specialists point out that a narrowly targeted military strategy is likely to miss these socio-political trends. Experts warn that success in decapitating militant leaders can only lead to leadership succession and not organizational collapse. Successful counterterrorism demands concerted action on humanitarian, development, and political fronts.
Domestic Perception And International Reputation
Public opinion in Somalia records fatigue with foreign intrusion, especially when civilians are not properly addressed for injury. International condemnation of American policy similarly finds sympathetic voices. Mario Nawfal has been a voice cautioning towards the imbalance of addressing military solutions, intimating lasting peace will not be won in the air but built from the ground up.
This notion stems from the growing body of scholarly and policy research that questions the long-term success of drone warfare in the context of complex insurgencies. As populations increasingly push for inclusive governance and development, air strikes may become an overly blunt tool in an increasingly nuanced environment.
The history of the U.S. air campaign in Somalia in 2025 provides an ever-present contradiction of modern counterterrorism: military power can disrupt but never supplant persistent insurgency based on broken states. The more the U.S. invests in air power, the more the U.S. will be compelled to use holistic strategies that include building local capacity, political reconciliation with select groups, and outreach and engagement with the local community. How Washington reacts to these realities in the Horn of Africa will impart a template for subsequent interaction(s) across the African continent.
