Connect with us

World News

Israel’s Somaliland Gamble

Published

on

Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY):- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr Qamar Bashir analysis: Israel is perhaps the only country on the planet that speaks a different language when it comes to words like independence, sovereignty, human rights, security, and good-neighbourly relations. It has stretched these terms so far that the mass killing of civilians in Gaza, the destruction of entire neighbourhoods, and the cutting-off of food, water and medicine are reframed as “self-defence.”
The International Court of Justice has already found it plausible that Israel’s actions in Gaza amount to genocide and ordered it to allow humanitarian relief and prevent further atrocities. The International Criminal Court has gone further still, issuing arrest warrants for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and others for alleged war crimes, including the use of starvation as a weapon. Yet Israel continues with near-complete impunity, striking Syria and Lebanon at will, clashing with Iran and ignoring UN resolutions and global outrage.
Into this already combustible environment, Israel has taken another extraordinary step. On 26 December 2025, it became the first country in the world to formally recognise Somaliland as an independent and sovereign state. For over three decades, the world refused to cross this line. Israel not only crossed it, but it also celebrated the moment.
To appreciate the shockwaves this created, one must understand Somaliland’s story. The territory in north-western Somalia declared independence in 1991 after the collapse of the Somali state. Since then, it has built working institutions, its own army and currency, and a relatively stable political system. On the surface, this stability strengthens its moral case for independent statehood. But no country recognised it — because African and international diplomacy rests on the principle of maintaining inherited borders to prevent separatist domino effects. Somalia, the African Union and regional organisations have always insisted that Somaliland remains a part of Somalia’s sovereign territory.
Israel’s move directly challenges this consensus. Somalia immediately condemned it as a “deliberate attack” on its sovereignty and vowed resistance through legal and diplomatic channels. The African Union and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development backed Mogadishu, warning of severe destabilisation risks. The Arab League declared the recognition “illegal” and urged the UN Security Council to act. A broad coalition of Arab, Muslim and African states followed with their own condemnations. This is not simply solidarity with Somalia; it is a defence of the fragile rule-set that prevents Africa’s borders from unravelling.
So why would Israel knowingly walk into this storm?. The answer is written on the map. Somaliland sits on the Gulf of Aden, near the Bab el-Mandeb strait — one of the world’s most strategic maritime chokepoints. A substantial share of global trade and energy flows through this narrow corridor. The port of Berbera is effectively an observation post on the gateway to the Red Sea and the Suez Canal at a moment when Houthi attacks, piracy and great-power rivalry have turned the area into a contested arena.
Seen from this perspective, Israel’s recognition looks less like humanitarian sympathy and more like hard-nosed realpolitik. A friendly government in Somaliland offers intelligence, security and possibly — in time — military access opposite Yemen and on the maritime route that connects Asia, the Gulf and Europe. It gives Israel the opportunity to extend its rivalry with Iran and its allies into another theatre and deepen its maritime influence at a critical global artery. It also signals that international borders can be “re-interpreted” when they obstruct strategic goals — an irony not lost on those watching events in the occupied Palestinian territories.
African states understand this clearly — which is why their reaction has been so firm. Many already face separatist pressures of their own. If territorial integrity becomes negotiable here, it becomes negotiable everywhere. And once unilateral recognition is normalised, powerful states will be tempted to redraw other borders for their own advantage.
The Arab and Islamic world views the move with even deeper suspicion. For them, Israel’s record — from Gaza to Lebanon and Syria — suggests that Somaliland could become an outpost for surveillance, naval projection and long-term security schemes. Some even fear it may one day be linked to displacement or demographic engineering related to the Palestinian question. Whether those fears are justified or not, the political distrust they reflect is real — and volatile.
The United States, meanwhile, has chosen public caution. President Trump has said Washington is “not ready” to recognise Somaliland and reaffirmed support for Somalia’s unity. Yet, given the intimacy of U.S.–Israeli relations, few observers believe such a dramatic step was taken without at least a reading of American sentiment. It is entirely plausible that Israel is acting as a spearhead — testing reactions from African and Arab partners, many of whom hold trillions of dollars in U.S. assets — before Washington considers any shift toward de facto support.
If that interpretation holds, this is not merely an Israeli initiative but part of a broader divide-and-rule strategy in the Horn of Africa — a region already strained by Ethiopian-Egyptian tensions, Red Sea militarisation, Somali instability and Gulf rivalries. Rather than integration and development, the region gains another sovereignty dispute and another justification for military build-ups and strategic manoeuvring.
All of this comes at a time when Israel is already more diplomatically isolated than at any point in decades. It faces genocide proceedings in The Hague, ICC warrants against its leaders, and growing distance even from traditional partners. Opening an additional front of confrontation with Somalia, the African Union, the Arab League and the wider Islamic world only deepens the perception of Israel as a state willing to discard international norms whenever they obstruct strategic ambition. Even if Israel secures tactical advantages in Somaliland, the long-term political costs may significantly widen its circle of hostility and mistrust.
This development must therefore not be dismissed as a narrow legal gesture. It is a political shockwave at the heart of the Horn of Africa — detonated while Gaza still bleeds, Lebanon remains tense, Syria continues under intermittent bombardment, and Iran stands in permanent confrontation. If the world accepts the fragmentation of Somalia by unilateral recognition today, it should not be surprised when similar moves appear elsewhere tomorrow, cloaked in the language of “freedom” but dictated by power rather than law.
For Somalia and its partners, the response must be firm yet constructive. They should resist this precedent at the UN, AU, Arab League and OIC, while recognising that Somaliland’s grievances cannot simply be wished away. A credible federal settlement, fair resource-sharing and meaningful political inclusion remain the only sustainable alternatives to secession driven by external sponsorship.
Israel’s recognition of Somaliland is therefore not merely a diplomatic handshake. It is a calculated strategic gamble — one that deepens mistrust in an already fractured region and risks turning the Horn of Africa into yet another arena of proxy competition. Whether that gamble ultimately benefits Israel, or becomes another catalyst for instability and backlash, will depend on how the international community — and above all Somalia itself — responds in the months ahead.

World News

‘National security is non-negotiable’: Parliamentary secretary on Afghanistan strikes

Published

on

By

ISLAMABAD: Parliamentary Secretary for Information and Broadcasting Barrister Danyal Chaudhry on Monday stressed that national security was “non-negotiable” after Pakistan carried out strikes on terrorist targets in Afghanistan, killing over 80 terrorists.

“Pakistan has always chosen the path of dialogue and peaceful coexistence. But when Afghan soil continues to be used for proxy attacks, we have no choice but to defend our homeland. National security is non-negotiable,” Chaudhry said in a statement.

The PML-N MNA affirmed that the people of Pakistan “stand firmly” with their armed forces in the fight against terrorism.

He urged the Afghan government to take “decisive action to prevent its land from being used for cross-border militancy”, warning that lasting peace in the region depended on the “complete dismantling of terrorist sanctuaries”.

Noting that the recent operation “successfully neutralised militants involved in attacks on Pakistani soil”, Chaudhry stressed: “This action was aimed solely at those responsible for violent attacks inside Pakistan. Every precaution was taken to protect innocent lives.”

He also pointed to Afghanistan’s emergence as a “sanctuary for multiple terrorist groups”. Referring to a United Nations report, he noted that militants from 21 terror outfits were operating from Afghan territory, posing a serious threat to regional stability.

He specifically called out India’s “continued support for terrorist networks”.

“India is actively funding and training these groups, equipping them to carry out cross-border attacks against Pakistan. Such elements deserve no concessions,” the parliamentary secretary asserted.

His remarks came after Pakistan carried out airstrikes on Afghanistan in a retaliatory operation targeting groups responsible for recent suicide bombings in Pakistan.

The strikes killed “more than 80 terrorists”, according to security sources.

The strikes were conducted in retaliation for a series of suicide attacks in IslamabadBajaur, and Bannu that had claimed the lives of Pakistani security personnel and civilians. Authorities described the operation as intelligence-based and proportionate, aimed solely at those responsible for the attacks.

‘Decisive struggle against terrorism’

Separately, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Governor Faisal Karim Kundi asserted that the country will “not allow our soil to be destabilised by forces operating from across the border in Afghanistan”.

In a post on X, he said: “The citizens of Pakistan, especially the resilient people of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, stand firmly with our armed forces and security institutions in the defense of our homeland.”

He further said: “The sacrifices of our martyrs bind us together as one nation. In this decisive struggle against terrorism, Pakistan stands united, resolute, and unwavering.

“Our sovereignty is non-negotiable, and the people of this country stand shoulder to shoulder with the state to protect it at all costs.”

Continue Reading

World News

More than 1,500 Venezuelan political prisoners apply for amnesty

Published

on

By

A total of 1,557 Venezuelan political prisoners have applied for amnesty under a new law introduced on Thursday, the country’s National Assembly President has said.

Jorge Rodríguez, brother of Venezuelan interim President Delcy Rodríguez and an ally of former President Nicolás Maduro, also said “hundreds” of prisoners had already been released.

Among them is politician Juan Pablo Guanipa, one of several opposition voices to have criticised the law for excluding certain prisoners.

The US has urged Venezuela to speed up its release of political prisoners since US forces seized Maduro in a raid on 3 January. Venezuela’s socialist government has always denied holding political prisoners.

At a news conference on Saturday Jorge Rodríguez said 1,557 release requests were being addressed “immediately” and ultimately the legislation would extend to 11,000 prisoners.

The government first announced days after Maduro’s capture, on 8 January, that “a significant number” of prisoners would be freed as a goodwill gesture.

Opposition and human rights groups have said the government under Maduro used detentions of political prisoners to stamp out dissent and silence critics for years.

These groups have also criticised the new law. One frequently cited criticism is that it would not extend amnesty to those who called for foreign armed intervention in Venezuela, BBC Latin America specialist Luis Fajardo says.

He noted that law professor Juan Carlos Apitz, of the Central University of Venezuela, told CNN Español that that part of the amnesty law “has a name and surname”. “That paragraph is the Maria Corina Machado paragraph.”

It is not clear if the amnesty would actually cover Machado, who won last year’s Nobel Peace Prize, Fajardo said.

He added that other controversial aspects of the law include the apparent exclusion from amnesty benefits of dozens of military officers involved in rebellions against the Maduro administration over the years.

On Saturday, Rodríguez said it is “releases from Zona Seven of El Helicoide that they’re handling first”.

Those jailed at the infamous prison in Caracas would be released “over the next few hours”, he added.

Activists say some family members of those imprisoned in the facility have gone on hunger strike to demand the release of their relatives.

US President Donald Trump said that El Helicoide would be closed after Maduro’s capture.

Maduro is awaiting trial in custody in the US alongside his wife Cilia Flores and has pleaded not guilty to drugs and weapons charges, saying that he is a “prisoner of war”.

Continue Reading

World News

Iran students stage first large anti-government protests since deadly crackdown

Published

on

By

Students at several universities in Iran have staged anti-government protests – the first such rallies on this scale since last month’s deadly crackdown by the authorities.

The BBC has verified footage of demonstrators marching on the campus of the Sharif University of Technology in the capital Tehran on Saturday. Scuffles were later seen breaking out between them and government supporters.

A sit-in was held at another Tehran university, and a rally reported in the north-east. Students were honouring thousands of those killed in mass protests in January.

The US has been building up its military presence near Iran, and President Donald Trump has said he is considering a limited military strike.

The US and its European allies suspect that Iran is moving towards the development of a nuclear weapon, something Iran has always denied.

US and Iranian officials met in Switzerland on Tuesday and said progress had been made in talks aimed at curbing Iran’s nuclear programme.

But despite the reported progress, Trump said afterwards that the world would find out “over the next, probably, 10 days” whether a deal would be reached with Iran or the US would take military action.

The US leader has supported protesters in the past – at one stage appearing to encourage them with a promise that “help is on its way”.

Footage verified by the BBC shows hundreds of protesters – many with national Iranian flags – peacefully marching on the campus of the Sharif University of Technology at the start of a new semester on Saturday.

The crowds chanted “death to the dictator” – a reference to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei – and other anti-government slogans.

Supporters of a rival pro-government rally are seen nearby in the video. Scuffles are later seen breaking out between the two camps.

Verified photos have also emerged showing a peaceful sit-in protest at the capital’s Shahid Beheshti University.

The BBC have also verified footage from another Tehran university, Amir Kabir University of Technology, showing chanting against the government.

In Mashhad, Iran’s second-largest city in the north-east, local students reportedly chanted: “Freedom, freedom” and “Students, shout, shout for your rights”.

Sizeable demonstrations in other locations were also reported later in the day, with calls for further rallies on Sunday.

It is not immediately clear whether any demonstrators have been arrested.

Last month’s protests began over economic grievances and soon spread to become the largest since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

The US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (Hrana) said it had confirmed the killing of at least 6,159 people during that wave, including 5,804 protesters, 92 children and 214 people affiliated with the government.

Hrana also said it was investigating 17,000 more reported deaths.

Iranian authorities said late last month that more than 3,100 people had been killed – but that the majority were security personnel or bystanders attacked by “rioters”.

Saturday’s protests come as the Iranian authorities are preparing for a possible war with the US.

The exiled opposition is adamantly calling on President Trump to make good on his threats and strike, hoping for a quick downfall of the current hardline government.

But other opposition groups are opposed to outside intervention.

The opposing sides have been involved in disinformation campaigns of social media, trying to maximise their conflicting narratives of what Iranian people want.

Additional reporting by BBC Persian’s Ghoncheh Habibiazad, and BBC Verify’s Richard Irvine-Brown and Shayan Sardarizadeh.

Continue Reading

Trending