Africa and Israel Share a Common Enemy in Radical Islam

Global terror attacks dating from 9/11, London, France, Belgium, Kenya, Pakistan and the ongoing Boko Haram in Nigeria as well as many other wars across many nations of the world all point to a similar source, Islam.  In the wake of the European migrant crisis the door has been opened to a new wave of terrorism that can affect most countries in Europe.

According to the demographer Michèle Tribalat, there are about 20 million Muslims in Europe, with some 5 million of them in France. This amounts to roughly 8% of the population of France. The USA, UK, and Germany have 5% respectively.

Both the Charlie Hebdo along with another attack at a Paris kosher market days later, was carried out by French Muslims that were North African and West African Migrants. Well before the attacks, which left 17 dead, the French were discussing the possibility that tensions with the country’s own Muslim community were leading France toward some kind of armed confrontation.  Europeans would have never handled such a massive in flux of Muslim migrants at any other moment in their generally xenophobic history. The movement of Muslim migrants coincided with a collapse in European birthrates, which has given the current immigration a nearly unstoppable momentum.  With the rise of modern political Islam, which injected Islam with a radical ethos, the migration crisis has now become a threat to world peace.

How can it be Curbed?

There has long been a growing political relationship between the Israeli government and most sub-saharan African countries. In these ties lie the solution and shield against the scourge of radical Islam.  Those African countries at war with radical Islam have found Israel to be an experienced and reliable partner. Beyond security, Israel is seen as an ally with little historic baggage and with little interest in undermining the sovereignty of African nations.

The ties between African-Israeli relations can be traced back to the dying embers of colonialism in the mid-1950s. This was followed by a formal recognition of relations through the establishment of official channels. One example is the setting up of the Israeli Embassy in Accra, Ghana in 1956.

From the beginning of its inception, Israel’s own war against Arab nationalism made it a necessity to search elsewhere for partners. Israel being encircled by hostile Arab countries gave it the impetus to build relationships with the newly independent African countries (as well as in Iran at that time). It is important to note that Israel’s motives to provide aid to Africa were driven by ideology, as opposed to the post-colonial guilt motives of the British and other nations.

In the 1970s due to many anti-Israel votes cast by African nations at UN-Conferences, Israel’s political motives moved from being ideological to pragmatic. Israel began to target only African countries where it had clear strategic or economic interests the Israeli presence grew at a fast pace.

The nature of African-Israeli relations has been determined by key changes in the global geopolitical arena. After the burden of colonialism had been lifted off African shoulders, Israel embarked on establishing diplomatic missions based on a twofold policy of diplomacy and technical cooperation.

The Coming War: Egypt, Ethiopia, and the Nile

When Egypt’s then-president Mohamed Morsi said in June 2013 that “all options” including military intervention, were on the table if Ethiopia continued to develop dams on the Nile River, many dismissed it as posturing. But experts claim Cairo is deadly serious about defending its

historic water allotment, and if Ethiopia proceeds with construction of what is set to become Africa’s largest hydroelectric dam, a military strike cannot be discounted.

Egypt fears the new dam, slated to begin operation in 2017, that it will reduce the downstream flow of the Nile, which 85 million Egyptians rely on for almost all of their water needs. Officials in the Ministry of Irrigation claim Egypt will lose 20 to 30 percent of its share of Nile water and nearly a third of the electricity generated by its Aswan High Dam.

“One reason for the high level of anxiety is that nobody really knows how this dam is going to affect Egypt’s water share,” Richard Tutwiler, a specialist in water resource management at the American University in Cairo (AUC), tells Institute of Policy Studies. He added “Egypt is totally dependent on the Nile. Without it, there is no Egypt.”

Ethiopia, on margins of international attention largely for many decades by the international community has suddenly become a focus of interest. The country, source of 80% of the Nile’s waters, and now intends to impose its own vision for the river and a different division of its waters. Egypt, having been the dominant power in the region for 200 years, is still reeling from recent political upheavals, economic weakness and the drastic diminution of its development — all of which reduce it to the status of one Nile state among many, without the capacity for action.

Egypt is entirely dependent on other states for its water, almost all of which comes from the Nile. Its four principal sources rise several hundred kilometers beyond Egypt’s southern border: the Blue Nile, Sobat and Atbara and its tributaries located in Ethiopia, which provide around 80%, and the White Nile in Uganda, which provides the rest.

Egypt’s share of Nile water has until now been regulated by a 1959 agreement with Sudan, under which Egypt gets 55.5bn cubic meters a year and Sudan 18.5bn. (The annual flow averages 84bn cubic meters, 10bn of which evaporate from Lake Nasser, created by the construction of the Aswan Dam, which came into operation in 1964.) This agreement allotted nothing to Ethiopia and other upstream states.

In 2010 Ethiopia secured a treaty reorganizing water-management and construction projects, the New Nile Cooperative Framework Agreement. Burundi, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Tanzania are signatories. Under this treaty, a commission representing all the signatories will approve (or reject) large-scale hydraulic projects, dams, canals and anything else that has an impact on the course, volume or quality of the Nile’s waters.

This alliance between six of the nine members of the Nile Basin Initiative — the forum in which Nile states try to find practical solutions and formulate joint projects (1) — has shaken things up in the region. Egypt refused to sign without an undertaking from the signatories not to alter the current division of the water and to recognize the “historical rights” of downstream nations (Sudan and Egypt). It now finds itself without any right of inspection in the Renaissance Dam project — a source of discord — and, for the first time in its history, without a right of veto, which it had thought innate.

Ethiopia’s renaissance as a regional power is under way, strengthened by assets it has hitherto lacked. We are witnessing the emergence of a strong Ethiopia capable of playing a key geopolitical role in its zones of influence: the Nile basin and East Africa.

Egypt has appealed to international bodies to force Ethiopia to halt construction of the dam until its downstream impact can be determined. And while officials here hope for a diplomatic solution to diffuse the crisis, security sources say Egypt’s military leadership is prepared to use force to protect its stake in the river.

Former president Hosni Mubarak floated plans for an air strike on any dam that Ethiopia built on the Nile, and in 2010 established an airbase in southeastern Sudan as a staging point for just such an operation, according to leaked emails from the global intelligence organization Stratfor posted on WikiLeaks.

A long-simmering water conflict between Ethiopia and Egypt has moved a step closer to resolution, after the countries’ foreign ministers announced that they had reached a preliminary agreement on sharing Nile waters.

The deal, which still needs to be approved by the heads of state of Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan, appears to be an important breakthrough, observers say – although details of the agreement have not yet been made public.

“This is significant in my view,” Mwangi Kimenyi, a Brookings Institute fellow who co-authored a book on the need for a new legal regime on sharing Nile water, he told Al Jazeera. “Any development in the sharing of Nile water that is based on negotiations between the stakeholders is a positive development.”

The prospective deal is important because it marks a move away from Egypt’s historical insistence on maintaining colonial-era agreements on water rights. However without some mechanism for significantly increasing the overall supply of water it is unlikely to resolve the core issue of total demand exceeding available supply—and head off the grave consequences that it will inevitably precipitate.

The Kurdish-Russian-Israel Detente is Set to Change the Middle East

“We don’t aspire to create an autonomous zone that is exclusive to the Kurdish nation,” said Rodi Osman, director of the Syrian Kurd’s representative office in Moscow. “We envision to install a federal regime, democratic and secular, in which all parts of Syrian society can live and by which they will feel themselves represented,” he told reporters.

The fact though, is that the newly declared autonomous zone is another step along the way towards an independent Kurdish state, not only in Syria, but in Iraq as well.  The Kurds are the largest indigenous group of people still without a sovereign state.  However, that may be changing.

If the Kurds do in fact reach independence, in at least a partial part (Iraq and Syria) of their historic homeland, they will have ISIS to thank. Without ISIS, the Kurds would have at little leverage on the world to back them towards independence.  Interestingly enough, it has been Russia as of late that has come to bat for the YPG (People’s Defense Units) in Northern Syria. While the USA, Turkey and all parties in Syria rejected the Kurdish declaration, Moscow, did not.

Russia’s abrupt pullout of Syria, maybe more to do with a realignment in Putin’s strategic thinking in who he can support to continue boxing in Turkey and bolstering his control in the Middle East.  Remember, the Kurds are primarily secular and they have proven themselves very efficient in rooting out and destroying ISIS.  An independent Kurdish state in Northern Syria and Iraq, backed by Russia would not only put an end to American hegemony in the region(if there is any left). It would however be a death knell to Turkey’s expansionist philosophy.  For Putin, he cannot accomplish this with Iran and Syria’s Assad as they bring far more downside.  

For Israel, A South Sudan Redux?

As the Western world continues its decline, Israel has been carefully continuing its strategic realignment. It is no secret that Israeli officials met with Russian representatives about security issues in the North. This meeting took place just days before the Syrian Kurds declared their autonomy. It is also known that not only does Israel buy Kurdish oil and train the Peshmerga in Iraq, but Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu has gone on record supporting Kurdish independence.

Some would point towards South Sudan as a model for Israel to replicate with the Kurds. However similar, there are some very big differences.  The first is that Turkey, the USA, and the rest of NATO is in direct opposition.  The Kurds seem to have the entire world against them, except Russia. Yet, expecting Russia to rush a Kurdish state is to expect them to drop both Syria and Iran. This was very unlikely until now and that’s what makes the situation very interesting.

The Sunnis and Shiities look upon Kurdish independence as a break up of Arab colonialism from the South and Turkish colonialism from the North.  The Kurds, as are the Jews, Druze, and Arameans are the true indigenous people’s of the region. An independent Kurdish state would help no other Middle Eastern country except for Israel and with Putin’s increasing involvement in the region, an independent Kurdistan is becoming more of a reality than ever before. If the switch is on for Russia, Kurdistan would only need Israel’s tacit support, since the Russian Bear could offer it far more. For Israel, it needs to make sure it is on the right side of this geopolitical shift.  If not it could risk becoming further isolated.

Nigeria is a Sinking Ship

From East to West, North to South the Biafran conflict is heating up globally. The Biafran war, fought between Nigeria and Biafra from the years 1967-1970 has been recorded as the most brutal civil war any black Nation has ever witnessed. With the help of the British, innocent young people, mostly women and children numbering close to 6 million lost their lives.

The leadership the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has infused  a new spirit into the struggle for self-determination.This spirit has awoken from its slumber the drive to  exhibit the  fundamental human right under the rule of law to protest the Buhari lead Administration.  This Nigerian government has unleashed terror on the innocent citizens who are seeking a better life and good governance for their children and future generation.

Scores have been killed by the Department of State Security (DSS), including those shot by the combination of both military and police personnel.  Despite Amnesty International being aware of these  heinous crimes, the United Nations lead by Ban Ki-Moon and world leaders have kept quiet.  Nigerian security forces continue to kill Biafrans in secret, attacking street vendors who sell newspapers with anything concerning Biafra.  The Buhari led government has even destroyed Coca-cola customized products and their warehouses that were made especially for Biafra awareness.

Is Nigeria meant to be democratic or an autocracy?

The Nigerian state is presently suffering from governmental incompetence, human rights abuses, and a lack of justice for the ordinary man. Ironically the government’s policies have backfired. Buhari believes the killing of unarmed innocent civilians will subdue the struggle. Yet by attacking and jailing Nnamdi Kanu they have ended up making him the most influential personality of the century.  The struggle for self-determination of the people of Biafra has now become a global one.

The crux of the issue now is convincing those who think the Biafran protests are merely a mirage that they should wake up from and face the new reality that there is no going back.  The message to the world must be clear that the level of insecurity that Nigerian government operates in, is total. We don’t want what happened in 1967-1970 to happen again. Despite the Biafran willingness  to lead a peaceful struggle, how long shall we fold our arms and watch our citizen been killed in cold blood?

“I will lead a 500,000000 Million man march that will crack Nigeria globally!” Those were the words of the brave Biafraian and we are getting close to it. Both local and International media, organizations, world leaders are now getting up to see the injustice that has been meted out to the people of Biafra by the central authorities in Buhari’s so called Nigeria.

Considering where we began, much has been achieved and yet more needs to be done.  There is no going back on Biafran independence. There is a deep lack of credibility in Nigeria concerning the independence of the judiciary system.  This has added to the ordinary citizen lacking any confidence in all aspects of the government’s relationship with the broader society. We have all seen this in the ongoing case of Nnamdi Kanu the Leader of the Indigenous people of Biafra and the Nigerian government.

The Mohammed Buhari lead Administration has taken the whole pf Nigeria for granted and it is very imperative to remind him that he can’t eat his cake and have it also.  It is not going to be like those days when he refused to appear before a tribunal on charges corruption.

We call on all well-meaning lovers of freedom especially the Israeli government to take a stand and look into the issue of Biafra and Nigeria’s Christians in order to help lead them to freedom from the oppression of the Islamic state of Mohammed Buhari.

Israel As Part of a Broader African Dynamic

“Israel is coming back to Africa; Africa is coming back to Israel,” Dore Gold said, quoting the Prime Minister Netanyahu during a recent launch of the Knesset’s new Africa Caucus. Gold said his words to a visiting delegation of African Muslim leaders from the Republic of South Sudan, Zambia, Cameroon, Kenya, Rwanda and Ethiopia.

The increased awakening of the Israeli government and the populace to the natural ties between Africa and Israel is something of a turbo-charged realization that Israel and Africa share far more in common than Israel does with its counterparts in the Middle East.

These relationships can be traced back to Biblical times when the Kings of Israel had ongoing relationships with the Kings of Egypt, Kush, and what became known as Axum, better known by its modern name Ethiopia. Trade and military partnerships became the norm after the King of Kush sent his army to defend the Judean King Hezekiah from the Assyrians. For whatever reason the Kings of Judah felt far more comfortable in dealing with their African counterparts than their Semitic cousins in the Middle East.

Roman Conquest of Judea sets the beginning of the Slave Trade on the African Continent

When the Romans finally crushed the Judean revolt as well as subsequent Jewish revolts around the Empire, they sold the Judeans into slavery. Judean slaves were sold into Africa and Europe. The Jews that remained in Israel suffered under persecution and physical threats.  

The war against Judah morphed into a religious struggle as the Roman Empire adopted Christianity, a small Jewish sect and warped it, cutting it off from its root. The Jewish exile swung into full force and oppression as the Jews that had now been scattered became second class citizens under both Christian Europe and the Islamic Middle East.

Within a short time these two colonial forces borrowing religious motifs from the crushed Judean culture undertook a continuance of their expansion past Israel into the heartland of Africa itself. It is not surprising that expulsions and forced slavery ensued over the centuries in Africa much the same way it began in Israel since the latter was seemingly an extension of the former.

The clear connection between Israel’s suffering and African suffering at the hands of European Christians and Arab Muslims is made that much more powerful by the fact that Israel is actually part of the African continent.  The African plate’s Northernmost part ends in Northern Israel and runs along the Jordan River to the South.  Looking at Israel in this light makes the Judean expulsion the beginning of Africa’s colonial period.

Israel is clearly in the North Eastern part of Africa
Israel is clearly in the North Eastern part of Africa

 

1948 Reversed the 2000 Year Struggle Against Colonialism in Africa

When Jewish sovereignty returned to the Land of Israel in 1948, it marked the beginning of the end of Western and Middle Eastern colonialism on the African continent. The fact that the country that had been the location of the first Western colony in Africa, marked what would become the beginning of the end of colonial control over the continent. From Kenya to Ghana, Zimbabwe to Tanzania, the colonial powers began to pull back granting freedom to their former holdings across Africa.  

With the increased relations between many Sub-Saharan African countries and Israel, there is a quiet realization that something quite natural is in fact taking place. Despite years of Pro-Palestinian rhetoric, Africans are recognizing that they share far more commonality with Jews and Israelis than Palestinians and Arabs. This realization is more than religious, it is borne out of a parallel journey through exile, Western Colonialism, and the fact that faith and determination brought both sides the independence they desired and deserved.

Going Forward

Israel must continue to strengthen its partnership and friendship with like minded African countries.  Sub-Saharan African countries provide Israel with more than just friendly business partners, they represent the hope that together former Western colonies can in fact break free of the past and work together to build self sufficient countries that can change the world.

Israel can start do this now by redefining itself as a Semitic African Nation; one that was exiled and has come home. After all, the Torah is clear that while the Patriarchs traveled from Mesopotamia to the Land of Israel, the Nation of Israel was borne out of servitude in Egypt.  It was there that it became a Nation and in Sinai where it received its National ethos by way of the Torah.

Ironically speaking, the 21st Century may be defined as the century where the Western World’s former colonies became the World’s next leaders. That would be a profound miracle, but one that may actually happen if Israel’s African shift continues to play out.