Kulmiye Crisis Explodes: Chairman Kahin Launches All-Out Attack on Muse Bihi.
The recent dual press conferences delivered by former President Muse Bihi and Kulmiye Party Chairman Mohamed Kahin represent a significant and worrying escalation, officially transforming a latent internal feud into an open and acrimonious public war.
The carefully managed ambiguities surrounding the leadership conflict have been violently stripped away, exposing the deep fissures threatening to fracture Somaliland’s opposition party at a critical juncture.
Former President Bihi initiated the public discourse with a gesture of political damage control, deploying a narrative of unity and external manipulation. His insistence that he and Kahin remain friends, coupled with the assertion that “people are creating conflict and running alongside the media,” sought to delegate the blame for the turmoil to unnamed third parties, thereby protecting his own political capital and denying direct involvement.
Crucially, Bihi reinforced his public status as a political retiree, emphasizing his need for rest and distancing himself from any active pursuit of party leadership—a direct counter to any perception that he seeks to challenge the incumbent chairman.
However, Chairman Kahin’s response, delivered barely an hour later, was a calculated and devastating repudiation of Bihi’s conciliatory framing.
Kahin bypassed diplomatic subtlety entirely, launching a frontal verbal assault that named Bihi as the principal antagonist and architect of the internal chaos.
The Chairman’s furious declaration that “Muse Bihi will not lead us in a party of which I am the chairman” re-established a zero-sum boundary of authority. More alarmingly, Kahin escalated the nature of the crisis from a simple power struggle to an institutional threat by accusing the former president of leading a “coup” attempt aimed at installing a puppet chairman.
This accusation is not mere political hyperbole; it is a profound charge that suggests a fundamental breakdown in trust and an existential crisis for the party’s continuity.
The juxtaposed media appearances highlight not only the severity of the institutional schism but also the asymmetry of the political messaging.
Bihi adopted a defensive, measured posture of friendly denial and retirement, while Kahin assumed an offensive, authoritative stance, dominating the airwaves with a long, unchallenged narrative.
The failure of journalists to press Kahin on his severe criticisms of the former president, contrasting with the critical question posed to Bihi regarding his supposed retirement, suggests a careful, or perhaps influenced, management of the narrative flow, allowing the incumbent chairman’s accusations to stand without immediate scrutiny.
This dynamic complicates the public’s ability to discern the truth and risks further polarizing political discourse.
The dispute is now beyond reconciliation through internal mediation; it is a high-stakes, direct confrontation between two of the nation’s most powerful figures, placing the stability and electoral viability of the Kulmiye party at a difficult and dangerously uncertain point.
