ESSAY Title: From Guns to Trust: How the Community Policing Model Can Help Build Peace in Hirshabelle State, Somalia.

Photo: Workshop on Strengthening Hirshabelle Police Capacity in Strategic Planning, UN Compound, Beledweyne, September 2025.

By Farah Muhumed Hirane.

Author

PEACE IS NOT JUST A SLOGAN.

The Role of Youth in Peacebuilding, Social Integration, and Stability in the Horn of Africa

Master’s in Governance, Peace & Security Management-Specialist Security Management.

Frhlamaane@gmail.com.

Abstract.

This essay examines how the community policing model can contribute to sustainable peace and security in Hirshabelle State, Somalia. The state has experienced prolonged insecurity, conflict, displacement, and limited public trust in formal security institutions. While conventional security responses can address immediate threats, they do not necessarily establish the relationships needed to maintain long-term stability. The essay argues that the community policing model is a practical approach that strengthens police–community relations, encourages local participation in security, improves police accountability, and supports continued security at the community level. It further examines how stronger cooperation between police and residents can improve communication, identify local security concerns early, and strengthen the relationship between communities and state institutions. The essay concludes that community policing cannot resolve all of Hirshabelle’s security challenges, but it can provide an important foundation for improving local security and supporting a more sustainable peace.

Introduction.

For many years, communities in Hirshabelle State, Somalia, have experienced insecurity, conflict, displacement, and limited trust in formal security institutions. In such an environment, lasting security cannot be achieved through military and police operations alone; it also requires strong and constructive relationships between security institutions and the communities they serve. Community policing provides an alternative approach by promoting dialogue, cooperation, trust, community participation, and joint efforts to identify and address local security challenges.

The experience of Hirshabelle demonstrates why this approach is necessary. In 2022, local clan fighters, known as the Macawiisley, mobilized against Al-Shabaab and worked alongside government forces to push the group out of large parts of central Somalia, including areas of Hirshabelle. Although these military gains initially appeared significant, they were not sustained in all areas. By 2025, Al-Shabaab had returned to several previously recovered locations, including Moqokori, Mahas, Adan Yabal, Masjid Ali Gaduud, Tardo and other areas, following the withdrawal of government forces and allied militias.

These repeated cycles of military advances and territorial reversals demonstrate that defeating an armed group is not the same as building lasting security. Forces may clear a town of armed fighters, but lasting peace depends on whether communities feel safe, protected, and confident in the institutions responsible for their security. Weapons and military operations can address immediate threats, but they cannot, on their own, build the trust and cooperation required for sustainable peace. Therefore, this essay argues that the community policing model offers Hirshabelle State a more sustainable pathway to peace by strengthening trust between citizens and security institutions, increasing community participation in local security, and shifting the focus from responding to violence toward preventing conflict and building lasting cooperation.

Background.

Brief History of the Community Policing Model.

The Community Policing Model is an approach where police and communities work together to prevent crime, solve local security problems, and improve public safety. Instead of police working alone, the model emphasises partnership, trust, communication, problem-solving, and community participation.

According to Nalla and Boke, community policing includes “programmatic content” which, when effectively utilized, provides for a pragmatic response to the intricacies of the criminal enterprise. This is often achieved when police officers excel in three main duties: law enforcement, order maintenance, and service (Nalla and Boke 2011, 286, 288).

Community policing was developed by the United States Department of Justice in the 1970s. Community policing “has been the most popular trend in policing during the past few decades” (Sozer and Merlo 2013, 506). Established primarily as a practical response to the increasing limitations of traditional professional policing, such as the lack of innovative tactics or community engagement being utilized, the inception of community policing was in response to these new-age law enforcement problems (Ong and Jenks 2004, 54). It has even been suggested that the implementation of community policing has had an influence on policing strategies throughout the world (Sozer and Merlo 2013, 506).

Because community policing started over thirty years ago, there is a lack of consensus among scholars as to what exactly it entails. Stated another way, there are disagreements as to what characteristics are employed in a successful community policing campaign.

Despite these disagreements, community policing continues to offer numerous benefits to departments that utilize this practice. The disagreement between scholars has, unsurprisingly, gained attention from critics who dispute the benefits and successes of community policing by concentrating on the generality and redundancy of its mission. According to Rosenberg, “community policing is a very flexible umbrella term for a diverse range of activities and programs. Today, almost every specialized program developed by a police department is labelled community policing” (Rosenberg et al. 2008, 294).

Community Policing in Africa.

Community policing became increasingly important in Africa during the 1990s, particularly as countries sought to move away from centralized and often authoritarian policing inherited from the colonial period. South Africa played a major role, with Community Policing Forums introduced during the democratic transition to strengthen police accountability, public participation, and police–community partnerships.

Community Policing in Somalia.

Photo: GBV ToT participants after training at General Kahiye Police Academy, Mogadishu, 28 February 2026.

In Somalia, community-oriented policing became part of the police reform process following the establishment of the Federal Government in 2012. In 2016, the Federal Government and its Federal Member States endorsed a New Policing Model, supported through the Heegan Plan (2017–2025), to develop a more community-oriented and accountable police service.

The approach has since expanded through community engagement and Local Policing Partnership Boards (LPPBs), aimed at strengthening trust, cooperation, and communication between police and communities. Somalia's 2026 Voluntary National Review reports that 10 LPPBs had been established across five Federal Member States.

Thesis Statement.

The repeated loss of towns previously recovered through military operations demonstrates that military force alone cannot provide sustainable security in Hirshabelle. Community policing offers a complementary approach by strengthening trust, cooperation, and communication between communities and security institutions. Although it cannot address all drivers of conflict, community policing can contribute to more sustainable peace by improving police–community relations, encouraging local participation in security, and strengthening community confidence in formal security institutions. This essay argues that community policing provides a practical foundation for strengthening local security and supporting sustainable peace in Hirshabelle State.

Key Points for Discussion.

1. Rebuilding Public Trust: Restoring the Relationship Between Police and Communities.

Public trust is a basic requirement for effective policing. A police institution may have trained personnel, equipment, and legal authority, but its ability to protect communities remains limited when residents do not have confidence in those responsible for their security. In Hirshabelle, years of conflict, displacement, changing territorial control, and limited government presence have created distance between communities and formal security institutions. In many areas, residents have encountered security forces mainly during periods of fighting, arrests, checkpoints, or other emergencies. Such experiences can create the perception that the police are a temporary security presence rather than a permanent institution serving the community.

This gap between citizens and police has practical consequences. When people are uncertain about the reliability of security institutions, they may hesitate to report crimes, share information, or seek police assistance. They may instead turn to family networks, clan elders, religious leaders, or other informal mechanisms to deal with security problems. Although these local structures remain important in Somali society, reliance on them alone cannot provide a consistent system of public protection. A functioning state requires a police service that communities recognise as legitimate, accessible, and responsible for their safety.

Community policing can help address this problem by changing how police officers interact with the public. Rather than limiting police activity to responding to incidents, officers maintain a presence within the communities they serve and develop a better understanding of local conditions. Meetings with residents, discussions with community leaders, neighbourhood visits, and engagement with women and young people can provide opportunities to understand concerns that may not appear in formal security reports. More importantly, such engagement allows residents to become familiar with the officers responsible for their area.

The quality of police conduct is equally important. Trust cannot be created simply through meetings or public awareness activities. Residents judge security institutions by how officers treat them in practice. Fair treatment, respect for citizens, professional conduct, confidentiality, and timely responses to complaints are therefore central to building credibility. Where residents believe that the police apply the law fairly and take their concerns seriously, cooperation becomes more likely. Where they experience discrimination, neglect, or abuse, confidence can quickly decline.

Community policing can also strengthen communication between residents and security institutions. Local communities often possess knowledge about emerging tensions, criminal activity, disputes, and unusual movements that may not be immediately visible to government authorities. When a relationship of confidence exists, residents are more likely to communicate such concerns through appropriate channels. This can help police identify problems at an earlier stage and respond before they develop into serious incidents. In areas affected by armed groups, this local knowledge can be particularly valuable because security forces cannot observe every development within a community.

However, rebuilding trust in Hirshabelle should not be treated as a short-term exercise. Communities that have experienced prolonged insecurity are unlikely to change their perceptions because of a single programme, meeting, or deployment of police officers. Confidence develops through consistent experience. Police officers must demonstrate over time that they are present, professional, impartial, and responsive. Likewise, security institutions need mechanisms through which citizens can raise concerns and receive appropriate responses. Without such consistency, community policing risks becoming a temporary project rather than a meaningful change in the relationship between citizens and the state.

The approach should also include a broad range of community members. If engagement is limited to political figures or influential elders, the police may receive only a partial picture of local security concerns. Women, youth, business owners, religious leaders, displaced people, and other residents can provide different perspectives on the risks affecting their communities. Their participation can make local policing more representative and help identify problems that might otherwise remain unnoticed.

For Hirshabelle, the importance of community policing therefore extends beyond improving the public image of the police. It is about establishing a working relationship in which communities are willing to communicate with security institutions and police are prepared to listen and respond professionally. Such a relationship can improve access to local information, strengthen public confidence, and increase the legitimacy of formal security institutions. Over time, these changes can provide a stronger foundation for local security than a system that depends primarily on military presence and emergency responses.

Analysis

From my perspective, the main value of community policing in Hirshabelle is its ability to make security more responsive to local realities. Communities differ in their social relationships, disputes, concerns, and security risks, so a uniform security approach cannot address every problem effectively. Community policing allows officers to understand these local conditions and respond to concerns at an earlier stage.

This approach does not replace military or other security operations. Instead, it complements them by addressing the community-level factors that influence security. Its long-term value lies in creating a better understanding between police and communities and ensuring that local security decisions are informed by the realities and needs of the people they are intended to protect.

2. Making Communities Partners in Security: From Passive Recipients to Active Participants.

Security in Hirshabelle cannot be maintained by police and military forces alone. Police officers cannot be present in every village, neighbourhood, market, or rural area at all times. Residents, however, are present in these places every day. They understand their communities, know the people who live there, and often recognise changes in local conditions before they become visible to security authorities. For this reason, involving communities in security can make policing more informed and responsive.

Community policing gives residents a role in identifying and discussing the problems affecting their areas. These problems may include disputes between families or clans, criminal activity, youth involvement in violence, tensions over land or resources, or the movement of armed groups. Instead of waiting until such problems result in violence, police can work with community representatives to understand the causes and consider possible responses. This allows security efforts to focus not only on incidents but also on the conditions that may lead to them.

The involvement of different groups within the community is particularly important. Elders can provide knowledge of local relationships and help address disputes through dialogue. Women can identify security concerns that may be overlooked in traditional security discussions, particularly those affecting families and vulnerable members of the community. Young people can provide information about issues affecting their peers and can play an important role in preventing youth involvement in violence. Including these groups gives police a broader understanding of local security conditions.

Community participation can also improve the flow of information. Residents may notice unusual movements, growing tensions, threats, or other warning signs before the police become aware of them. If appropriate and trusted channels exist for reporting such concerns, communities can help security institutions respond at an early stage. This does not mean that residents should take the law into their own hands. Their role is to communicate concerns and work with legitimate authorities, while police remain responsible for professional investigation and enforcement.

Another important area is local dispute resolution. Many conflicts begin with relatively small disagreements but become more serious when they are not addressed early. Community policing can bring police, elders, and other relevant actors together to understand such disputes and determine when dialogue, mediation, or formal police intervention is appropriate. This can help prevent local disagreements from developing into wider violence.

For this approach to work, participation must be genuine. Communities should not simply be invited to meetings where decisions have already been made. They should have opportunities to explain their concerns, suggest priorities, and provide feedback on police activities. At the same time, police institutions must establish clear boundaries so that community participation does not replace professional policing or allow informal groups to exercise police powers.

In Hirshabelle, this partnership can be particularly valuable because security conditions vary from one community to another. A solution that works in an urban area may not be suitable for a rural settlement. Local participation allows police to understand these differences and adjust their approach accordingly.

Analysis

This analysis indicates that community participation is one of the strongest features of the community policing model because it recognises that local people are not merely recipients of security services. They are also an important source of knowledge about the conditions affecting their communities. When their knowledge is connected to the work of professional police officers, security responses can become more timely and better suited to local circumstances.

For Hirshabelle, the important issue is to establish a clear and trusted system through which communities can communicate with the police without fear or political pressure. If elders, women, youth, and other residents are given meaningful opportunities to contribute, community policing can help identify problems earlier, support peaceful resolution of local disputes, and reduce the likelihood that small tensions develop into larger conflicts. The strength of the model is therefore not in transferring police responsibilities to communities, but in combining professional policing with the knowledge and participation of the people who live in the communities.

3. From Military Gains to Lasting Security: Sustaining Peace at the Community Level.

Military operations are often necessary when armed groups control towns or threaten civilian populations. In Hirshabelle, government forces and allied local fighters have at different times succeeded in removing Al-Shabaab from areas under its control. These operations can create an important opportunity for communities to regain access to their homes, markets, schools, and other services. However, removing an armed group is only the first stage of restoring security. The more difficult task is keeping the area secure after the fighting has stopped.

One of the weaknesses of relying mainly on military operations is what happens after forces withdraw. When an area is left without a stable security presence, armed groups may find an opportunity to return. Residents may also become uncertain about who is responsible for their protection. If local security arrangements are weak, communities can once again face threats, restrictions, and violence. This creates a cycle in which territory is recovered through military action and later becomes insecure again.

Community policing can help address this gap by establishing a more permanent form of local security. Police officers who remain connected to a community can monitor local developments, respond to incidents, and maintain communication with residents after military operations have ended. Their role is different from that of military forces. The military may be required to conduct operations against armed groups, while the police are responsible for maintaining public order, protecting civilians, responding to crime, and dealing with everyday security problems.

Continued police presence also gives communities a clear point of contact for security concerns. Residents should know where to report a threat, whom to contact when a dispute begins, and which institution is responsible for responding. This becomes especially important in places that have experienced repeated changes in control. A reliable local police presence can provide a sense of continuity even when wider security conditions remain difficult.

Another important contribution is early identification of threats. After an area has been recovered, security risks do not necessarily disappear. There may be unresolved disputes, criminal activity, tensions between groups, or attempts by armed organizations to regain influence. Police who regularly engage with residents can become more familiar with these developments. Information from the community can help authorities recognize warning signs before they develop into serious incidents. This is particularly important in rural areas where government security forces cannot maintain a large presence everywhere.

Community policing can also help create a sense of local responsibility for maintaining peace. When residents understand that security is not only the responsibility of armed forces, they can contribute through lawful reporting, participation in local security discussions, and cooperation with police. This does not mean that civilians should confront armed groups or carry out police duties. Their contribution should remain within safe and legal channels, while trained security personnel remain responsible for enforcement and protection.

The approach is also important for rebuilding everyday life after conflict. People are more likely to reopen businesses, send children to school, return to farms, and move freely when they believe that security will be maintained. Police can support this process by protecting public spaces, responding to crime, managing local disputes, and maintaining order. In this sense, security is not simply about keeping armed groups out of a town; it is also about creating conditions in which ordinary life can continue without constant fear.

For Hirshabelle, this distinction is important because the repeated recovery and loss of territory shows that military success does not automatically produce lasting stability. A town may be cleared of armed fighters, but if the institutions responsible for maintaining security are weak or absent, the same problems can return. Community policing provides a way to connect military gains with longer-term local security by ensuring that communities are not left without a functioning security relationship once military operations end.

Analysis

In my analysis, the main weakness of a security strategy based heavily on military operations is not necessarily the operations themselves, but the difficulty of maintaining the gains they achieve. Military forces can create the conditions for recovery, but another institution must remain behind to protect civilians and manage the everyday problems that follow.

Community policing can help fill this space. A consistent police presence, supported by local cooperation and clear reporting channels, can make it harder for insecurity to return unnoticed. It also gives residents a continuing connection to formal security institutions after military forces have moved elsewhere.

For Hirshabelle, lasting security should therefore be measured not only by whether a town has been recovered, but by whether its people can continue living there safely after the operation is over. Community policing can help turn temporary military gains into more durable local security.

4. Strengthening Local Accountability: Building a Police Service Responsive to Communities.

A police service cannot maintain public confidence if it is not accountable for how it uses its authority. In Hirshabelle, strengthening accountability is particularly important because communities have experienced years of conflict and weak state institutions. When residents believe that police officers can act without explanation or consequence, they may be reluctant to cooperate with them. Accountability helps address this concern by creating a relationship in which police officers are expected to explain their actions, follow established procedures, and respond appropriately to public concerns.

Community policing provides practical opportunities for this to happen at the local level. Regular meetings between police representatives and community members can give residents a safe and organized way to discuss security problems. Communities can raise concerns about issues such as poor police response, unfair treatment, unnecessary use of force, corruption, or failure to investigate complaints. These discussions should not be treated as attacks on the police. Instead, they can help police commanders understand weaknesses in their service and identify areas that require improvement.

An important part of accountability is having clear channels for complaints. Residents should know where and how they can report misconduct or poor service. If a person does not know whom to contact, or believes that making a complaint will have no result, there is little reason to report the problem. Community policing structures can help connect residents with responsible police officials and provide a means for complaints to be recorded and followed up. This can make the police service more accessible to ordinary citizens.

Accountability also requires police institutions to respond to complaints in a professional manner. Not every complaint will be justified, and not every problem can be resolved immediately. However, residents should receive an appropriate response and, where possible, an explanation of what action has been taken. This is important because silence can create the impression that police institutions protect their own personnel rather than the public. A transparent response, even when the outcome is not what the complainant expected, can strengthen confidence in the process.

Community participation should also extend to discussions about local security priorities. Police may consider certain problems to be urgent, while residents may face different concerns in their daily lives. For example, police may focus heavily on armed threats, while communities may also be concerned about theft, domestic violence, disputes between young people, road safety, or insecurity around markets and schools. Bringing these concerns into local discussions can help police understand what residents consider most important.

This does not mean that communities should control police operations. Professional decisions must remain with trained police authorities, particularly when dealing with serious crimes and armed threats. The purpose of community participation is to ensure that police planning is informed by local concerns and that residents have an opportunity to question, contribute to, and provide feedback on policing priorities.

Accountability is also important for preventing abuse of police authority. Officers who know that their conduct is subject to professional standards and legitimate public scrutiny have stronger incentives to follow the law and treat people fairly. At the same time, police officers themselves need protection from unfair accusations and political interference. A proper accountability system should therefore be based on clear procedures, evidence, and impartial review rather than pressure from powerful individuals or groups.

For Hirshabelle, this balance is essential. Community policing should not become a mechanism through which influential community members interfere with police investigations or demand special treatment. Instead, it should create a structured relationship in which communities can express concerns while police remain responsible for enforcing the law professionally and impartially.

Analysis

In my view, accountability is what gives community policing credibility. Asking communities to cooperate with the police has little value if residents have no meaningful way to question poor conduct or raise legitimate concerns. At the same time, accountability should not weaken police authority; it should make that authority more professional and responsible.

Hirshabelle needs a police service that is strong enough to enforce the law but responsible enough to listen to the public. When residents can raise concerns, receive proper responses, and see that police conduct is subject to clear standards, accountability becomes part of everyday policing rather than a separate administrative process. This can strengthen the credibility of the police and create a healthier relationship between security institutions and the communities they serve.

5. Strengthening State Legitimacy: Connecting Security Institutions with Local Communities

State legitimacy is closely connected to how people experience government in their daily lives. For many citizens, the police are one of the most visible representatives of the state. A person may have little contact with a government ministry or other public institution, but they are likely to encounter police officers when seeking protection, reporting a crime, resolving a dispute, or moving through a checkpoint. The way police officers treat people can therefore influence how communities view the state as a whole.

In Hirshabelle, this relationship is especially important because years of conflict have weakened public institutions and created gaps between communities and government authorities. In some areas, people have experienced periods in which government institutions were absent or had limited capacity to provide basic security. When state institutions are unable to protect residents consistently, people may depend more heavily on clan structures, traditional elders, or other local actors. These structures remain important, but long-term stability also requires citizens to have confidence in formal state institutions.

Community policing can help close this gap by bringing police services closer to the communities they are expected to protect. When officers regularly engage with residents, respond to local concerns, and explain their responsibilities, the state becomes more visible, positively and practically. People begin to experience government not only through political leaders or official announcements, but through everyday services that directly affect their safety.

State legitimacy also depends on fairness. If police officers are perceived to protect only certain groups, favour particular clans, or treat communities differently, their presence may increase rather than reduce tensions. Community policing can help address this risk by encouraging police to serve the wider population and to consider the security concerns of different groups. Fair treatment does not mean giving everyone the same response in every situation; it means applying the law professionally and without discrimination.

Another important issue is accessibility. A police institution cannot build legitimacy if ordinary people do not know where to seek help or believe that its services are available only to influential individuals. Community policing can make police services easier to approach by creating clear points of contact between officers and residents. When a farmer, shopkeeper, young person, woman, or community elder knows how to raise a security concern and expects a reasonable response, the state becomes more relevant to everyday life.

Community policing can also strengthen the connection between local communities and wider government institutions. Local police officers can communicate community concerns to district and state authorities, while government authorities can use information from communities to improve security planning. This creates a two-way relationship rather than a system in which decisions are made at higher levels without sufficient knowledge of local conditions.

However, community policing alone cannot create state legitimacy. People judge government institutions through many areas, including justice, public services, education, employment, and political representation. If police are expected to build trust while other institutions remain ineffective or unfair, the results will be limited. Community policing should therefore be viewed as one part of the broader effort to strengthen the relationship between citizens and the state.

Analysis

My analysis suggests that community policing can contribute to state legitimacy because it allows citizens to experience the state at the community level. The legitimacy of government is not built only through laws, policies, or political institutions; it is also shaped by everyday experiences. When a police officer listens to a resident, responds fairly to a complaint, protects people without discrimination, and remains present in the community, that interaction can influence how the citizen views the wider state.

For Hirshabelle, this is particularly significant because the state needs institutions that communities can recognize as their own rather than as distant authorities. Community policing can help bridge this gap by connecting formal security institutions with the daily lives of citizens. Its contribution to peace is therefore not limited to crime prevention; it can also strengthen the public's confidence that the state is capable of providing protection, exercising authority responsibly, and serving its communities.

Evidence/Examples.

1. Evidence from Beledweyne.

   

   Photo: Community Policing Training, Beledweyne, Hiraan, Somalia, October 2025.

In Beledweyne, weak communication and limited cooperation between police and communities made local security more difficult. A community policing initiative brought police, elders, women, youth, and local leaders together to rebuild trust.

Community members had been reluctant to report security incidents, while police struggled to receive timely information. Poor communication and perceptions of unfair treatment further increased mistrust. Through community policing dialogues, both sides discussed their concerns and agreed to work together. Community representatives helped identify security problems, while police committed to better communication and follow-up.

Gradually, the relationship shifted from suspicion to cooperation. Community members became more willing to communicate with police, while officers became more engaged with local concerns. This improved police-community communication, increased the sharing of security information, and strengthened the participation of women, youth, and elders in local security.

One community elder described the change simply: “Before, we saw the police as separate from us. Now, we are beginning to work together to solve our security problems.”

The experience showed that trust is a security tool. Regular dialogue, inclusion, and respectful communication can encourage communities to cooperate with police and help prevent conflict. The Beledweyne experience demonstrates that sustainable security is built when police and communities become partners and share responsibility for safer and more peaceful neighbourhoods.

2. Evidence from Jowhar, Hirshabelle State.

   

   Photo: Workshop on International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Human Rights Standards in Policing for Police Headquarters Personnel, Jowhar, July 2025.

For some time, residents in a community in Jowhar had become Doubtful to work with the police because of poor communication, delayed responses, and limited police engagement. At the same time, police struggled to receive timely information from the community, making it difficult to prevent and respond to local security concerns.

The situation began to change through community policing, which brought police officers, elders, women, youth, and local leaders together to discuss their concerns and find ways to work together. A local Police-Community Partnership Board was established to provide a regular platform for communication and joint problem-solving.

As cooperation improved, community representatives became more willing to share security information, while police officers increased their engagement with residents. Elders helped strengthen communication with families, youth supported early-warning activities, and women gained a stronger voice in local security discussions.

One community member described the change simply: “Before, we were afraid to speak to the police. Now, we have a place where we can raise our concerns and work together to solve them.”

The experience showed that the main change was not simply increased police presence, but a stronger relationship between police and the community. Mistrust gradually gave way to communication, cooperation, and shared responsibility.

The lesson is clear: when communities are included in security decisions, and police listen and respond to their concerns, trust can become a practical tool for preventing conflict and building safer communities. The Jowhar experience highlights the importance of regular dialogue, inclusive partnership boards, effective communication channels, and community-based early warning in strengthening community policing.

Analysis

Above, the two scenario-based exercises, together with the broader community policing activities in Jowhar and Beledweyne, demonstrate a growing effort to strengthen police–community relations in Hirshabelle State. The evidence suggests that effective community policing requires more than increasing police presence; it depends on building trust, improving communication, and creating opportunities for communities to participate in local security.

The challenges identified in both Jowhar and Beledweyne, particularly weak communication, limited community engagement, and mistrust, highlight the importance of strengthening cooperation between police and communities. The establishment of spaces for dialogue, joint problem-solving, and community participation provides a practical approach to addressing these challenges. The involvement of elders, women, youth, and local leaders also demonstrates the importance of inclusive participation in community security.

The broader initiative, supported by UNDP and implemented by the Ministry of Internal Security of Hirshabelle State, reinforces these efforts through capacity building for both police officers and community members. Implemented in Jowhar and Beledweyne, the initiative seeks to strengthen police–community partnerships and promote shared responsibility for security.

Overall, the evidence indicates that sustainable community policing depends on regular dialogue, inclusive participation, capacity building, timely communication, and mutual trust. These elements can help create stronger partnerships between police and communities and contribute to more effective and responsive local security in Hirshabelle State.

Summary of Main Points.

This essay has examined the potential of community policing to strengthen peace and security in Hirshabelle State. The discussion has shown that effective policing depends not only on the ability to respond to security threats, but also on the relationship between police institutions and the communities they serve. Where people have confidence in the police, they are more willing to communicate their concerns, report security problems, and cooperate with lawful authorities. Such trust is built gradually through respectful treatment, consistent engagement, and professional conduct.

The essay has also highlighted the importance of involving communities in local security. Residents are not simply people who receive protection from the police; they have knowledge of their own communities and can identify emerging tensions, disputes, and other problems at an early stage. Involving elders, women, youth, and other community representatives can therefore give police a better understanding of local conditions and help address problems before they develop into wider violence.

Another factor to consider is the difference between military success and lasting security. Military operations can be necessary to remove armed groups and recover territory, but the recovery of a town does not automatically guarantee long-term safety. Once military forces withdraw, communities still need a reliable institution capable of maintaining public order, responding to crime, and addressing everyday security concerns. A consistent police presence can help provide that continuity.

The discussion has further shown that police accountability is essential to maintaining public confidence. Communities are more likely to cooperate with police when officers are expected to act professionally, respect the law, respond to complaints, and remain answerable for their conduct. Accountability therefore strengthens not only police performance but also the credibility of the institutions they represent.

Finally, community policing can strengthen one of the most important foundations of lasting peace: the relationship between citizens and the state. When people can access police services, participate in local security discussions, and see their concerns addressed, the state becomes more than a distant authority; it becomes a visible and accountable institution in their daily lives. The experiences discussed in Beledweyne and Jowhar demonstrate the practical value of sustained police–community engagement, where regular communication can strengthen cooperation, improve public confidence, and narrow the gap between security institutions and the communities they are responsible for protecting. For Hirshabelle, this relationship is essential because lasting peace will depend not only on controlling insecurity, but also on building public confidence in the institutions that must protect and serve communities long after a security crisis has passed.

Taken together, these points support the central argument of this essay: Hirshabelle needs more than short-term security gains to achieve lasting peace. Sustainable security requires strong local relationships between communities and the police, supported by meaningful participation, accountability, and a consistent state presence.

Final Thought and Recommendations.

Lasting peace in Hirshabelle will be determined not only by how successfully insecurity is confronted, but by how effectively security is maintained once the immediate threat has passed. Recovering a town is an important achievement, but it does not by itself guarantee that residents will remain safe. The real challenge begins afterwards: maintaining public order, protecting civilians, addressing local disputes, and ensuring that communities have a reliable institution to which they can turn when security concerns arise.

This requires a shift in emphasis from short-term security responses toward sustained community-level policing. Police officers need to remain connected to the areas they serve, understand local conditions, and work within the law to address problems before they develop into wider conflict. A consistent and professional police presence can provide the continuity that communities need after periods of violence and instability.

Community policing should therefore be treated as a long-term component of security and peacebuilding in Hirshabelle, rather than as a temporary programme. The Hirshabelle authorities, police leadership, and development partners should invest in continuous police training, adequate resources, community engagement, and effective Local Policing Partnership Boards (LPPBs). These structures should provide genuine opportunities for residents to raise concerns, discuss local security priorities, and receive feedback from the police.

The participation of women, youth, elders, religious leaders, business communities, and other local actors should also be strengthened. Their involvement can provide police with a broader understanding of local concerns and ensure that security priorities reflect the experiences of the wider community. At the same time, community participation should operate within a clear framework that preserves professional police authority and the rule of law.

Community policing will not resolve every cause of insecurity in Hirshabelle, and it cannot replace other security measures when serious threats arise. Its value lies in strengthening the relationship between the state and the communities it serves. If police and communities can develop a relationship based on professionalism, participation, accountability, and confidence, security can become more than the temporary absence of violence; it can become a condition that communities are able to maintain together.

Key references:

• South African Government, Safety and Security White Paper. Official South African Government reference

• United Nations, A New Policing Model for Somalia, 2016. UNSOM reference

• United Nations Police, Advancing Police Reform in Somalia, 2016. UN Police reference

• Federal Government of Somalia, Somalia Voluntary National Review 2026. Somalia VNR 2026

• Nalla, M. K., & Boke, K. (2011). Panacea or a Painful Prick: Police Officers' Views of Community Policing. [Journal name not provided], 286–288.

• Ong, R., & Jenks, D. (2004). Community Policing: The Past, Present, and Future. [Journal name not provided], 54.

• Rosenberg, D., et al. (2008). Community Policing: A Contemporary Perspective. [Journal name not provided], 294.

• Sozer, M. A., & Merlo, A. V. (2013). The Impact of Community Policing on Crime Rates: Does the Effect of Community Policing Differ in Large and Small Cities? [Journal name not provided], 506.

• Federal Government of Somalia. (2017). Heegan Plan (2017–2025): National Police Reform Strategy.

• Ministry of Internal Security, Hirshabelle State, & United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (n.d.). Community Policing Initiative in Jowhar and Beledweyne.

• Federal Government of Somalia. (n.d.). Federal Police.

• Hirshabelle State. (n.d.). State Police