Somalia has once again drawn global attention, not because of political progress or regional stability, but due to controversial remarks by U.S. President Donald Trump. In several speeches and White House briefings around January 2026, Trump openly dismissed Somalia, describing it as “not even a country” and “the worst in the world.” The statements quickly sparked international outrage and revived long-standing debates about Western perceptions of Somalia.
Trump’s remarks were not isolated comments. On multiple occasions, he portrayed Somalia as a place without organization, government, or institutions, reducing its global image to piracy and chaos. Within the context of U.S. domestic politics, these comments were frequently linked to attacks on his political opponents, including Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, who was born in Somalia, as well as the Somali-American community in Minnesota.
During a lengthy White House briefing on January 20, 2026, Trump tied Somalia’s image to immigration enforcement, deportation policies, the termination of Temporary Protected Status, and allegations of massive welfare fraud. Supporters framed his words as “straight talk,” while critics condemned them as racist, xenophobic, and historically misleading.
Beyond the controversy, historians and African studies experts argue that such statements drastically oversimplify reality. Somalia indeed faces severe challenges today due to decades of civil war and extremist violence, but dismissing Somalia as a nation erases a long and complex history that once placed it among the most influential regions in East Africa.
Long before the United States was founded in the late eighteenth century, the Somali lands were home to powerful and sophisticated sultanates. These political entities were not only organized states but also major players in international trade and Islamic civilization.
The Ajuran Sultanate, which flourished between the fourteenth and seventeenth centuries, stands as one of the strongest examples. Ruling much of southern Somalia and the Indian Ocean coast, Ajuran developed advanced irrigation systems, managed agricultural surplus, and dominated trade with Arabia, Persia, and India. Its military strength even enabled it to resist Portuguese expansion in East Africa.
In northern Somalia, the Warsangali Sultanate emerged as a long-lasting maritime power. For centuries, it controlled strategic routes along the Arabian Sea and maintained diplomatic relations with regional and foreign actors, surviving well into the colonial era.
Equally significant was the Majeerteen Sultanate in northeastern Somalia. With a centralized administration, taxation systems, formal legal structures, and armed forces, Majeerteen was considered one of the most modern polities in the Horn of Africa before European intervention.
In southern Somalia, the Geledi Sultanate controlled fertile agricultural lands and major trade corridors leading to Mogadishu. Geledi rulers maintained political stability, managed economic resources, and played a crucial role in regional governance throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
The Hobyo Sultanate, though established later, demonstrated that Somali statecraft endured into the modern era. Hobyo practiced active diplomacy with European powers, seeking to preserve sovereignty and political autonomy during an age of imperial expansion.
The collective legacy of these sultanates shows that Somalia possessed deep traditions of governance, law, commerce, and diplomacy long before the concept of the modern nation-state. Somalia was not merely a land of conflict, but a central node in the Indian Ocean world.
Scholars emphasize that Somalia’s modern decline cannot be understood without addressing colonial partition, Cold War geopolitics, and repeated foreign interventions. Ignoring these historical forces, they argue, leads to fundamentally flawed conclusions about Somalia’s nature as a society.
Although Trump’s remarks were framed within domestic political battles, many observers believe they inflicted lasting harm on the dignity of an entire nation. Such rhetoric, critics say, reinforces harmful stereotypes and undermines efforts toward constructive engagement.
Supporters of Trump counter that his words reflect Somalia’s current reality as a fragile state affected by terrorism and corruption. Yet critics insist that present-day instability should not erase centuries of political achievement and cultural development.
Modern Somalia undoubtedly continues to face immense obstacles in rebuilding state institutions. However, its history demonstrates that Somalis once governed complex societies comparable to other great civilizations of their time.
To dismiss Somalia outright is to deny its historical contributions to African and Islamic civilization. Many view such dismissal as both inaccurate and deeply unjust.
For Somali communities in the diaspora, Trump’s statements struck at the core of their identity. They argue that today’s crises do not define the totality of who Somalis are as a people.
The controversy has reignited a broader discussion on how history is selectively remembered or erased in contemporary politics. Somalia may be struggling today, but its past clearly refutes the notion that it was never a nation.
In a world dominated by short political soundbites, Somalia’s story serves as a reminder that nations cannot be judged solely by their darkest periods. Behind today’s turmoil lies a history of power, resilience, and enduring statehood.
