NAIROBI —The United States has issued a blunt message to its international partners: it will no longer carry the financial burden of the African Union’s peacekeeping mission in Somalia alone.
Speaking in Washington on Monday, Senator Jim Risch, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the U.S. remained committed to the African Union Support and Stabilisation Mission in Somalia (AUSSOM), but called on European and African nations to “pull their weight.”
“We haven’t refused to support the AU mission,” Risch said. “But we won’t allow others to duck their responsibilities while American taxpayers pick up the bill.”
The AU-led force, which supports Somali troops battling al-Shabaab and Islamic State affiliates, has struggled with funding shortfalls and operational challenges. Though the U.S. is one of its major backers, frustration in Washington is growing over what many see as lopsided cost-sharing—particularly under the current funding framework established by United Nations Security Council Resolution 2719.
Risch criticised the resolution, claiming it lets other countries avoid meaningful contributions while giving the UN “cover for its own failings.”
In response, Republican Senators Risch, Ted Cruz (Texas), and Rick Scott (Florida) introduced the AUSSOM Funding Restriction Act of 2025. The proposed legislation would block U.S. funds from going to AUSSOM under the existing arrangement until both the UN and AU show they are spending responsibly.
“This bill is about protecting American taxpayers and demanding transparency,” Risch said. “We won’t keep writing blank cheques for a broken system.”
Senator Cruz echoed the sentiment, urging quick action. “We can’t allow U.S. resources to be used in ways that don’t support our national interest,” he said. Scott added that it was “unacceptable” for allies to shirk their financial duties while expecting the U.S. to underwrite international missions.
The legislation marks a broader shift in how Washington views its global commitments. As debates over foreign aid grow louder at home, lawmakers are increasingly calling for more oversight and more contribution from other nations.
Still, the bill is likely to raise concerns among some African leaders who argue that cutting U.S. support could weaken counterterrorism efforts at a time when extremist threats in Somalia remain active and dangerous.
African Union officials have yet to formally respond to the proposed funding restrictions. But in past discussions, AU diplomats have defended the mission’s role in stabilising Somalia and urged international partners not to let politics derail security progress on the ground.
European capitals, meanwhile, have offered more measured financial support to AUSSOM but have traditionally relied on Washington’s lead in security matters on the continent.
The U.S. says that balance must now change.
“This is not about abandoning Somalia,” said a State Department official, speaking anonymously. “It’s about making sure that support is shared fairly and that missions like AUSSOM deliver real, measurable outcomes.”
With Somalia preparing for major elections and facing ongoing threats from militant groups, the stakes remain high and the future of AUSSOM may now depend not just on troops in the field, but on what lawmakers in Washington decide in the coming weeks.
