Editorial — One Report, Two Narratives: Turkey’s New Intelligence Assessment in Somalia

Somalia, 7 December 2025 -A comparison between the articles published by Daily Sabah and Nordic Monitor on the National Intelligence Academy’s report concerning Turkish–Somali relations reveals a textbook example of how media narratives diverge when reacting to the same document.

While the first article treats the report as evidence of the success of Turkey’s engagement in Somalia, the second presents it as proof of the fragility of the environment in which Turkey operates and the dangers inherent in its expanding role. In this sense, the intelligence report becomes raw material, and the real difference lies in how each outlet reshapes it to serve its political framing.

From the outset, the identity of each media platform plays a decisive role in shaping the narrative. Daily Sabah, which is closely aligned with the Turkish government, consistently presents Ankara’s foreign policy in a positive tone that emphasizes achievements and legitimizes Turkey’s growing presence in the Horn of Africa. Nordic Monitor, on the other hand—a platform run by Turkish journalists and dissidents based in Europe—writes from a critical standpoint that seeks to expose what it views as shortcomings or risks in Turkey’s policies, especially those linked to domestic political or economic motives. The comparison thus becomes, from its first moment, a confrontation between two opposing political narratives rather than two analyses of a single document.

In Daily Sabah’s narrative, Somalia appears as a country steadily advancing with significant Turkish support in military training, infrastructure, education, healthcare and humanitarian relief. The intelligence report is framed as validation of a successful partnership model. The presence of security, political and economic risks functions merely as a backdrop that justifies Turkey’s continued engagement and enhances its necessity. The more complex Somalia’s situation appears, the more essential the Turkish role looks. The weaker the state, the stronger the argument for Turkey as its “steadfast partner.”

Nordic Monitor flips this narrative. Somalia becomes a deeply fragile arena requiring cautious interpretation. The five risks highlighted by the report—al-Shabab, the unresolved federal system, weak state institutions, climate shocks and geopolitical competition—are presented not as ordinary challenges but as indicators of a high-risk environment for Turkey itself. Ankara’s involvement is portrayed as carrying political, economic and security consequences that may not be fully calculated. The narrative brings in sensitive issues such as aid allegedly directed to companies close to the Turkish leadership, drone transfers without UN approval, and wide concessions granted to Turkey in energy agreements.

Thus, while Daily Sabah assigns Turkey a leading role in “saving the Somali model,” Nordic Monitor interprets the same role as an attempt to extend Turkish influence into a strategically valuable region with potential political and economic stakes at home. The intelligence report no longer becomes a story about Somalia alone, but also a window into Turkey’s internal contest over the meaning of its foreign policy.