By Ali-Khadar Hassan Osman
The latest criticism of Somaliland’s President following his appearance at a U.S. think tank has opened a broader question: Is Middle East Eye reporting on Somaliland as an impartial media outlet, or is it reflecting a political position shaped by its ownership and editorial worldview?
President Abdirahman Mohamed Abdillahi Irro was recently criticized by Middle East Eye after speaking at a U.S. research institution about Somaliland’s strategic importance and its case for international recognition. But according to politician Ali-Khadar Hassan Osman, the criticism should not be viewed simply as conventional journalistic scrutiny.
“Middle East Eye is not an impartial news outlet; it is a political platform driven by particular interests,” Osman argues.
The distinction matters because the disagreement goes beyond one article or one interview. Somaliland’s growing diplomatic relationship with Israel has placed the nation at the intersection of two highly sensitive political questions: Somaliland’s pursuit of international recognition and the wider Middle East debate surrounding Israel and Palestine.
For Osman, that intersection provides important context for understanding Middle East Eye’s coverage.
Ownership and editorial questions
Osman points to the ownership structure of Middle East Eye, arguing that it raises legitimate questions about the outlet’s editorial orientation.
According to UK corporate records cited by Osman, Jamal Awn Jamal Bessasso, described as a Dutch-Palestinian businessman, holds more than 75 percent of the shares and voting rights in MEE Limited, the UK-registered parent company of Middle East Eye.
Osman argues that this ownership structure deserves consideration when assessing the outlet’s coverage of Somaliland, particularly since Somaliland’s diplomatic engagement with Israel has become a central issue in its foreign-policy debate.
His argument is not that ownership alone proves editorial bias. Rather, he contends that when ownership, political outlook and editorial direction appear closely connected, readers should examine the resulting coverage with greater scrutiny.
“Expecting such an outlet to provide entirely impartial coverage may be unrealistic,” Osman argues.
A clash of political narratives
The dispute also reflects a wider clash between competing political narratives.
Somaliland has increasingly presented its strategic location along the Gulf of Aden, its maritime position near the Bab el-Mandeb and its potential role in regional security as part of its argument for closer relations with major international powers.
Its engagement with Israel has added another dimension to that diplomatic strategy.
For Middle East Eye, however, the relationship between Somaliland and Israel has been treated through a markedly different political lens, according to Osman. He argues that the outlet’s coverage reflects opposition to Somaliland’s decision to pursue a diplomatic path that differs from prevailing political positions in the region.
In this reading, the controversy is not simply about President Irro or his appearance at a Washington think tank. It is about a larger disagreement over Somaliland’s foreign-policy direction.
Beyond one article
Osman says Middle East Eye has for years portrayed Somaliland negatively and argues that its recent criticism should therefore be examined within that broader editorial pattern.
He maintains that the outlet’s choice of headlines, framing and issues reflects more than ordinary journalistic disagreement.
“Somalilanders have the right to examine Middle East Eye’s coverage with caution and skepticism,” he says.
That does not mean every criticism published by Middle East Eye should automatically be dismissed. Nor does it mean that every report supportive of Somaliland should automatically be accepted as objective. Rather, Osman’s argument is that readers should consider the interests, ownership and political context surrounding any media organization when assessing its coverage.
Who is reporting—and from what perspective?
At the heart of the controversy is a question that applies far beyond Somaliland: Can journalism remain completely separate from the political and ideological environment surrounding the institution that produces it?
For Somaliland, this question has become increasingly important as its international campaign enters a more consequential diplomatic phase.
The country is seeking recognition while simultaneously expanding relationships with states and institutions whose interests do not always align with established regional positions. That inevitably produces criticism, competing narratives and intense scrutiny.
Osman argues that Somaliland should therefore respond to criticism with evidence rather than simply accepting the narrative presented by any particular media organization.
In his view, Middle East Eye’s coverage should be read in that context—not as an unquestionable account of events, but as one interpretation shaped by its own editorial and political environment.
“Middle East Eye is not simply reporting on the President of Somaliland,” Osman concludes. “It is reacting to Somaliland’s independent decision to pursue its own diplomatic interests.”
For Somaliland, the lesson is straightforward: in an increasingly contested information environment, the question is not only what a media outlet reports, but also who owns it, what perspective it brings, and how its coverage should be independently assessed.