The future of Iran-Africa-Israel Triangle
Iran’s continued presence against Israel’s advanced technology. Which can win the heart of African states? By Javid Ghorban Oghli
Israeli Prime Minister Avigdor Lieberman has returned to his country on Friday after an eight-day tour to Africa. In this article, I would try to have a brief review of Afro-Iranian relations, an analysis of Lieberman’s visit to Africa and likely objectives behind the tour. Expansion of the zone of influence as a fundamental diplomatic goal is introduced in the first part of the article. As all other countries, Iran and Israel follow this goal in other parts of the world, including Africa:
During the early years of revolution, Iranians’ attitude towards Africa was entirely different from their present mindset. It was the ideological viewpoint on Africa –as an oppressed entity- which dominated the diplomatic activities, inspiring humanitarian activities such as construction, establishing health clinics etc.
During the 8-year war with Iraq, beside the fierce battles fought with Iran, diplomatic missions were conducted to gain international support, Africa being a target of this campaign. Considering that nearly half of the Non-Aligned Movement and one-third of UN members were African states, Iran had quite a strong motive to bring them into its camp. Iran’s major activity during the first decade after the revolution was expanding its sphere of influence, ’exporting’ the revolution and having a support in its war against Iraq.
A fair judgment would reveal that Iran has made considerable accomplishments in Africa. Considering that during the past thirty years Iran has been in constant challenge with the international community and our competitors are ready to foil our diplomatic efforts, what we have achieved is remarkable. Friendly reception Hashemi Rafsanjani and Khatami enjoyed during the African tours can be good evidence.
The missing link of Afro-Iranian relations was economic exchanges, or in other words, economic diplomacy. Gradual corrections were made with Hashemi Rafsanjani’s presidency and the Construction Government. His 1996 visit to six African countries, although years late, was the summit of Iran’s economic campaign, launched besides Iran’s yet existing ideological objectives, which of course had been pushed to the background. Hashemi was accompanied by head of the Iranian Central Bank and ministers of economy-related ministries in his visit. The policy was followed by Khatami during the Reform Era and a relatively sustained mechanism for facilitation of economic ties with African states was devised during his presidency.
Iran’s participation in Organization of African Unity started with the attendance of then deputy foreign minister in the 1996 Harare Conference. Up to 2002, when the African Union was established, Iran attended the annual meetings of the organization as an observer. Although symbolic, presence in the most important political meeting in Africa provided an opportunity for negotiations with leaders of African states.
Unfortunately, political –or I’d better say propagandistic- use of Iran’s attendance in African summits has pressurized the weaker and poorer states of the continent who depend on financial aids of developed countries, hence ringing the alarm for our adversaries. The Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his Venezuelan counterpart Hugo Chavez were invited to the 2006 African Union summit held in Gambia. The first reaction to Ahmadinejad’s presence was cutting off the microphone and aborting his speech. Ahmadinejad made another speech in the afternoon session after Iranian diplomats’ negotiations. However, Iran was not invited to the last summit held in Libya. Despite claims that Iran had decided not to send a delegation to the meeting this was clearly because of the pressure by some African states and observers (especially European countries).
Avigdor Lieberman’s African visit is the first trip of a senior Israeli official to African countries in twenty years. This long absence could have had two reasons: first, Africa’s low priority for Israeli policymakers and second, Israel’s unpopularity in this continent. The 1970s prime minister of Israel Golda Meir –known by some as the founder of Afro-Israeli ties- believed that Israelis and Africans suffer the same pains. However, relations between Israel and African states severed after the Arab-Israeli wars in 1967 and 1973. Urged by the Arab League, twenty-nine African countries cut their ties with this country and joined the Israel boycott movement. Nevertheless, the 1978 Camp David treaty between Egypt and Israel rendered the boycott null and void. During the recent years, Israel’s atrocious attacks on Lebanon in 2006 and Gaza in 2009 have once again provoked anti-Israeli sentiments in Africa.
It seems that more than intending to counter Iran’s influence in this continent, Lieberman seems to be trying to polish his country’s image among the African states and extend Israel’s political and economic influence in the region, evident from the composition of the delegation accompanying him. Of course as Iran’s regional competitor and adversary, Israel wishes to undermine Iran’s international state. No doubt in his African tour Lieberman has talked of the threats of a country pursuing nuclear weapon and willing to wipe Israel off the map. I have to say Iran’s current state -especially with the post-election turmoil, diplomatic adventurism, failure to convince the world about its peaceful nuclear purposes and increasing concurrence between Western countries and Israel has created circumstances in which opposition to Iran is regarded as a merit. Naturally Israelis take advantage of this opportunity.
Which has better chances in Africa? Iran with its continued presence in Africa or Israel with a new African approach after twenty years? In brief I can say that Israel also suffers a weak international position. The solidarity between Palestinians and Africans and continued aggressive policies may hinder Israel. Things have become worse for this country since the rise of hawkish Benjamin Netanyahu to power. However, with the fluid political developments and West’s pressures on Israel to actively engage in the peace process, we can not keep our hopes up for cold relations between Israel and African states. Camp David initiated a new age of Afro-Israeli relations, so may a new peace deal between Arabs and the Jewish state. Advanced industrial, agricultural and irrigational technologies and determination to invest give Israelis a good chance to initiate fruitful relations with African countries. Add to this Israelis concentrated decision-making mechanism and their determination.
Currently, Israel runs embassies in only ten African countries. Eleven African countries on the other hand have embassies in Israel which all in all shows that Afro-Israeli relations are at best lukewarm. Lieberman’s African tour included Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda in East Africa, and Nigeria and Ghana in west, all countries traditionally in good terms with Israel. Let’s not forget that these five are all major African states, Ethiopia and Uganda being countries through which two major Nile branches pass before their confluence in Khartoum, Sudan.
Iran and Israel are two regional and international competitors, naturally seeking to undermine each other’s influence. I believe that an instrumental attitude towards Africa can strongly harm our ties. With a realistic assessment of Africa’s needs and avoiding propagandistic and adventuristic policies, Iran can advance its position in this continent, foiling not only Israel’s, but also West’s –the main donor to African countries- efforts.
Our prudent behavior and compliance to international rules and regulation encourages our friends to resist or at least take a neutral stance when facing pressures from Israel and Zionist lobbies. If we think that using propagandistic policies with merely domestic consumption (denying the Holocaust, wiping Israel off the map etc.) can bring us the support of ’downtrodden masses’ of Africa, we are just giving Israel and other competitors an opportunity to destabilize our position. We also take away the chance for our allies to stand against Israel.
Besides these, Iran is facing an enormous challenge, i.e. the dispute over its peaceful nuclear activities. Ahmadinejad’s policies and Western countries’ smear campaign has brought us hard days in the international scene. I believe that despite the lesser weight of African countries in the diplomatic scene, the need to inform them about the true nature of our nuclear program is urgent. Further transparency and rationality in foreign policy seems to be a must at the current circumstances. This is the only way to curb Israel’s anti-Iran campaign in the international scene, and in Africa.
During the early years of revolution, Iranians’ attitude towards Africa was entirely different from their present mindset. It was the ideological viewpoint on Africa –as an oppressed entity- which dominated the diplomatic activities, inspiring humanitarian activities such as construction, establishing health clinics etc.
During the 8-year war with Iraq, beside the fierce battles fought with Iran, diplomatic missions were conducted to gain international support, Africa being a target of this campaign. Considering that nearly half of the Non-Aligned Movement and one-third of UN members were African states, Iran had quite a strong motive to bring them into its camp. Iran’s major activity during the first decade after the revolution was expanding its sphere of influence, ’exporting’ the revolution and having a support in its war against Iraq.
A fair judgment would reveal that Iran has made considerable accomplishments in Africa. Considering that during the past thirty years Iran has been in constant challenge with the international community and our competitors are ready to foil our diplomatic efforts, what we have achieved is remarkable. Friendly reception Hashemi Rafsanjani and Khatami enjoyed during the African tours can be good evidence.
The missing link of Afro-Iranian relations was economic exchanges, or in other words, economic diplomacy. Gradual corrections were made with Hashemi Rafsanjani’s presidency and the Construction Government. His 1996 visit to six African countries, although years late, was the summit of Iran’s economic campaign, launched besides Iran’s yet existing ideological objectives, which of course had been pushed to the background. Hashemi was accompanied by head of the Iranian Central Bank and ministers of economy-related ministries in his visit. The policy was followed by Khatami during the Reform Era and a relatively sustained mechanism for facilitation of economic ties with African states was devised during his presidency.
Iran’s participation in Organization of African Unity started with the attendance of then deputy foreign minister in the 1996 Harare Conference. Up to 2002, when the African Union was established, Iran attended the annual meetings of the organization as an observer. Although symbolic, presence in the most important political meeting in Africa provided an opportunity for negotiations with leaders of African states.
Unfortunately, political –or I’d better say propagandistic- use of Iran’s attendance in African summits has pressurized the weaker and poorer states of the continent who depend on financial aids of developed countries, hence ringing the alarm for our adversaries. The Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his Venezuelan counterpart Hugo Chavez were invited to the 2006 African Union summit held in Gambia. The first reaction to Ahmadinejad’s presence was cutting off the microphone and aborting his speech. Ahmadinejad made another speech in the afternoon session after Iranian diplomats’ negotiations. However, Iran was not invited to the last summit held in Libya. Despite claims that Iran had decided not to send a delegation to the meeting this was clearly because of the pressure by some African states and observers (especially European countries).
Avigdor Lieberman’s African visit is the first trip of a senior Israeli official to African countries in twenty years. This long absence could have had two reasons: first, Africa’s low priority for Israeli policymakers and second, Israel’s unpopularity in this continent. The 1970s prime minister of Israel Golda Meir –known by some as the founder of Afro-Israeli ties- believed that Israelis and Africans suffer the same pains. However, relations between Israel and African states severed after the Arab-Israeli wars in 1967 and 1973. Urged by the Arab League, twenty-nine African countries cut their ties with this country and joined the Israel boycott movement. Nevertheless, the 1978 Camp David treaty between Egypt and Israel rendered the boycott null and void. During the recent years, Israel’s atrocious attacks on Lebanon in 2006 and Gaza in 2009 have once again provoked anti-Israeli sentiments in Africa.
It seems that more than intending to counter Iran’s influence in this continent, Lieberman seems to be trying to polish his country’s image among the African states and extend Israel’s political and economic influence in the region, evident from the composition of the delegation accompanying him. Of course as Iran’s regional competitor and adversary, Israel wishes to undermine Iran’s international state. No doubt in his African tour Lieberman has talked of the threats of a country pursuing nuclear weapon and willing to wipe Israel off the map. I have to say Iran’s current state -especially with the post-election turmoil, diplomatic adventurism, failure to convince the world about its peaceful nuclear purposes and increasing concurrence between Western countries and Israel has created circumstances in which opposition to Iran is regarded as a merit. Naturally Israelis take advantage of this opportunity.
Which has better chances in Africa? Iran with its continued presence in Africa or Israel with a new African approach after twenty years? In brief I can say that Israel also suffers a weak international position. The solidarity between Palestinians and Africans and continued aggressive policies may hinder Israel. Things have become worse for this country since the rise of hawkish Benjamin Netanyahu to power. However, with the fluid political developments and West’s pressures on Israel to actively engage in the peace process, we can not keep our hopes up for cold relations between Israel and African states. Camp David initiated a new age of Afro-Israeli relations, so may a new peace deal between Arabs and the Jewish state. Advanced industrial, agricultural and irrigational technologies and determination to invest give Israelis a good chance to initiate fruitful relations with African countries. Add to this Israelis concentrated decision-making mechanism and their determination.
Currently, Israel runs embassies in only ten African countries. Eleven African countries on the other hand have embassies in Israel which all in all shows that Afro-Israeli relations are at best lukewarm. Lieberman’s African tour included Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda in East Africa, and Nigeria and Ghana in west, all countries traditionally in good terms with Israel. Let’s not forget that these five are all major African states, Ethiopia and Uganda being countries through which two major Nile branches pass before their confluence in Khartoum, Sudan.
Iran and Israel are two regional and international competitors, naturally seeking to undermine each other’s influence. I believe that an instrumental attitude towards Africa can strongly harm our ties. With a realistic assessment of Africa’s needs and avoiding propagandistic and adventuristic policies, Iran can advance its position in this continent, foiling not only Israel’s, but also West’s –the main donor to African countries- efforts.
Our prudent behavior and compliance to international rules and regulation encourages our friends to resist or at least take a neutral stance when facing pressures from Israel and Zionist lobbies. If we think that using propagandistic policies with merely domestic consumption (denying the Holocaust, wiping Israel off the map etc.) can bring us the support of ’downtrodden masses’ of Africa, we are just giving Israel and other competitors an opportunity to destabilize our position. We also take away the chance for our allies to stand against Israel.
Besides these, Iran is facing an enormous challenge, i.e. the dispute over its peaceful nuclear activities. Ahmadinejad’s policies and Western countries’ smear campaign has brought us hard days in the international scene. I believe that despite the lesser weight of African countries in the diplomatic scene, the need to inform them about the true nature of our nuclear program is urgent. Further transparency and rationality in foreign policy seems to be a must at the current circumstances. This is the only way to curb Israel’s anti-Iran campaign in the international scene, and in Africa.