Israel Versus Turkey in Africa

CrossFireArabia
Opinion
December 29, 2025

By Prof. Dr. Yahya Amir Hagi Ibrahim

The strategic waters of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden have once again become a flashpoint, with recent actions suggesting a dangerous escalation that threatens to unravel fragile stability and deliberately target international investments. Israel has shifted toward a posture that uses access to the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden as part of its broader regional strategy. At the same time, Türkiye is deepening its footprint in Somalia with long-term development projects spanning energy, infrastructure, and space technology. After Israel’s decision to recognize Somalia’s breakaway region, Somaliland, Somalian President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud pays a critical visit to Türkiye.

Houthis and Bab al-Mandab Strait

In response to Israel’s genocide on Gaza, Yemen’s Houthi rebels have launched drones, missiles, and maritime attacks targeting Israel and commercial shipping (toward Israel or flying the flag of Israel-supporting countries) in the Red Sea, Gulf of Aden and nearby waters. In response, Israel has conducted multiple airstrikes in Yemen.

More recently, Israel’s recognition of Somalia’s breakaway region, Somaliland, as an independent state in December 2025 marked a dramatic diplomatic shift. Israel became the first UN member state to formally recognize the breakaway region (situated near the strategic Bab al-Mandab Strait), drawing strong objections from Somalia, Türkiye, Egypt, and others who view the move as a threat to regional stability.

Alarmingly, these actions appear to deliberately focus on areas where Türkiye has made significant investments in stability and capacity-building, signaling steps aimed not just at military objectives but at broader stabilization. This calculated targeting strikes at the heart of a pivotal and transformative partnership between Türkiye and Somalia. Over recent years, this alliance has moved far beyond diplomacy into tangible, nation-building projects designed to foster economic growth and regional security. To see them threatened is to see a blueprint for progress put at risk.

Over the past decade, Türkiye has built a deep, multi-layered partnership with Somalia, positioning itself as a key security and economic partner. Ankara’s long-term involvement began in earnest with high-level visits in 2011 and expanded through defense, economic, and development agreements.

Central to this is hydrocarbon exploration: under agreements granting rights across some 15,000 square kilometers of Somali offshore blocks, the Turkish Petroleum Corporation (TPAO) has conducted seismic surveys and plans to begin oil drilling by 2026, potentially harnessing significant reserves.

Beyond energy, Türkiye desires to include cutting-edge technological infrastructure. Ankara is planning a space launch facility in Somalia, leveraging the country’s equatorial advantage for satellite launches and potentially missile testing. The project (part of broader cooperation agreements signed in 2024) is expected to strengthen Türkiye’s aerospace capabilities and deepen strategic ties.

Turkish capacity-building

Türkiye’s footprint also extends to security and capacity-building. The Turkish military operates Camp TURKSOM, its largest overseas base, which trains Somali forces and enhances naval and coastguard capabilities. Joint agreements signed in recent years include maritime security cooperation to patrol Somali waters for a decade, protecting both regional stability and economic activities. Additionally, Turkish infrastructure investments include modernization of airports, hospitals, fishery programs, and diplomatic compounds.

Türkiye’s strategy is structural, aimed at building Somali capabilities and mutual economic stakes. Whether through oil, space technology, or infrastructure, Ankara’s footprint in the Horn of Africa is designed for sustained impact.

The author who has contributed this piece to Anadolu, is the deputy chairman of RAAD Peace Research Institute, a Somaville University Mogadishu board member and lecturer on economic development.

CrossFireArabia

Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

News Opinion

World Cup, Wimbledon Kicks: Flags, Nepotism, Red Cards and a Watermelon!

Saleem Ayoub Quna
July 9, 2026

By Saleem Ayoub Quna

For a change I would like to give credit to President Trump’s, latest attempt to support the American team before facing off Belgium’s team on July 6, when the day before, and despite his tight and loaded schedule, he called “his friend” Gianni Infantino, FIFA’s President, and asked him for a second look at the punishment against the American striker Folarin Balogun, who made a foul against a Bosnia-Herzegovina player in the match they played earlier on July 2, and which the US won 2-0.

FIFA regulations stipulate that when a player gets a red card during a match for an offense he makes against the other team, he should be suspended from playing in the following match! Mr. Infantino obliged and lifted the ban against the American player. But the match against Belgium in which Balogun played was won by Belgium 4-1.

This intervention episode by Trump on behalf of the American national soccer squad did not end there and led to a controversy that would not be settled before the closing of the 32nd round of the current international tournament.

Infantino was criticized by many within and outside the FIFA body and was asked to resign his post as head of this huge powerful organization. In brief, this episode shows that behind the broad smiles and nice words, sits a huge monster of nepotism and even possible corruption!

Also it means that sports, as a human “noble” endeavor, is not immune from certain uncouth and loath viruses that can affect and may shatter the dreams of other less resourceful nations!

Then we have the phenomenon of waiving national flags when a team wins a match. This occasion is ceased by some staff of the winning teams and players to demonstrate their support for a certain political or human cause or admiration of a person. This is exactly what Hossam Hassan, head-coach of the Egyptian team did when his players defeated Australia on July 3 as they scored 4 goals against Australia which scored only 2 goals, in the final shootout play of the match.

Coach Hassan came down to the pitch and waived the Palestinian flag in a sign of support for the Palestinians in beleaguered Gaza, which celebrated Egyptian performance at the tournament. Israel protested this solidarity gesture with Palestinians and labeled it as anti-Semitic, but FIFA officials maintained that flags belonging to FIFA members, (including Palestine) are allowed to be waived on this occasion!

On the other side of the Atlantic, and in London to be precise, another major sports event is underway, known as the Wimbledon grand slam championship. Wimbledon is known for its strict rules starting with the must-wear white attire, by all players and staff!

On June 29, the Turkish Tennis player, Zeynep Sonmez, ranked 51 by WTA, defeated American player Ann Li 2-1. Sonmez wanted to waive a sign of support for the Palestinians, but could not and according to Jamie Baker, the Wimbledon Tournament Director: “Wimbledon rules do not allow political massaging from players”!

So, what does Ms. Zeynep Somez do?! She sticks a small rubber shock absorber to her racket in a shape of a watermelon composed of the four colors of red, white, black and green! To that subtle demonstration, the Wimbledon people could not raise a finger or blow a whistle!

In this regard, other sources insisted that some people among the audience waived the Israeli which was received by a blind eye!

So next time I attend an important tournament or watch it on TV, I will keep my eyes open on tactics and kicks of this sort, which actually might add to the fun of watching!

Opinion

New York: AIPAC Stranglehold No More !

CrossFireArabia
July 8, 2026

By James J. Zogby

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has long held sway in elections, threatening and intimidating any opposition. When a critic of Israel was defeated, they boasted of victory as a lesson for others. In last week’s Democratic primary elections in New York City, three insurgent critics of Israeli policies defeated AIPAC-endorsed candidates, pointing to the potential end of an era for the pro-Israel lobby.

 AIPAC’s approach to politics and elections was smart. Formed by the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, they were connected from the outset to an impressive national network of American Jewish leaders, activists, and donors they used to effectively influence members of Congress to embrace pro-Israel positions.  They’d visit elected officials in Washington seeking endorsements of legislation and enlist local leaders in a congressperson’s district to make the pitch.

They’d have local representatives offer to help write new candidates’ Middle East policy positions. Implicit were the promise of support if the official or candidate did what was asked—and the threat of opposition if they didn’t.  AIPAC also spawned a network of PACs—political action committees—to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars to distribute for or against candidates depending on their positions on Israel.  Strategic in their operations, not everyone benefited from AIPAC’s largesse.

Chairs of important congressional committees and very supportive congressmembers facing tough reelections received bundled contributions. When elected officials repeatedly stepped out of line, their opponents would benefit from PAC monies and bundled contributions from individual pro-Israel donors.  Overall, the amounts were not overwhelming but sufficient to send a message. When an election went their way, the lobby would crow about the victory, whether or not their support had been a factor. Their goal was communication: “Fear us, or you too can be defeated.”  

With the end of federal oversight of independent election expenditures, AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups created “super-PACs” to raise and spend tens of millions of dollars each cycle. In 2022 and 2024, they effectively targeted a few candidates critical of Israel and spent millions to defeat them.  After Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, we’ve witnessed a dramatic collapse of public support for Israel—especially among Democrats. AIPAC can no longer make examples of just a few candidates, with well over 100 electeds now critical of Israel. Add to this that AIPAC has become so toxic they’ve been forced to create new entities or rely on alternates to distribute funds to candidates.  Meanwhile, Israel’s behaviors alienate more voters. And the more money AIPAC spends, the more toxic its brand—even when they win, their heavy-handed tactics lead to declining support.

This brings us to last week’s New York primaries, a turning point in US politics when two prominent pro-Israel members of Congress were defeated by challengers critical of Israeli policies and supporters of Palestinian justice, and a former leader of pro-Palestinian campus protests won an open race. Not only did AIPAC and its allies spend millions and fail, but also these elections were upfront about Israeli policies and Palestinian rights.  

A hallmark of pro-Israel groups’ past campaign involvement was the lengths they’d go to not make support for Israel a public issue. They’d raise money from their supporters based on Israel, but their expenditures would pay for ads criticizing a candidate’s age or “radical agenda,” never mentioning the candidate’s position on Israel. In these NY contests, many issues mattered to voters, especially frustration with the Democratic establishment’s failed policies—but they were also about Israel, and voters knew it.   

In predictable reactions from the pro-Israel side, some accused the targeting of AIPAC’s money and influence as unfair or even antisemitic—ignoring decades of AIPAC boasting about its money and influence as the source of its power. Others claimed that with the election’s results, “Jews no longer feel safe in New York,” ignoring that the most prominent contest’s victor is Jewish—a self-proclaimed progressive Zionist who strongly opposed Israel’s genocide against Palestinians. Finally, some desperately attempted to dismiss the entire election as just about New York with no larger significance, ignoring the changed national political landscape as similar contests emerge everywhere.   

The bottom line is that after a half-century AIPAC’s hold over politics has been weakened. It won’t go away anytime soon, but a real debate over US Middle East policy can now take place. Thank you, New York voters

James J. Zogby is president of the Washington-based Arab American Institute  and contributed this article to The Jordan Times