OPINION: The Chronology of Israel’s Recognition of Somaliland
By Dr. Ali Abdulkadir Gutale
The formal recognition of Somaliland by the State of Israel on December 26, 2025, was not a diplomatic accident but the executed final phase of a long-term geopolitical strategy. This chronological analysis, drawing on a spectrum of Israeli, regional, and critical maneuvers published from 2016 to 2025, documents the deliberate planning that treated the division of Somalia as a strategic opportunity.
Phase 1: The Strategic Foundation (2016)
The groundwork was laid nearly a decade prior. In 2016, the Al Jazeera Centre for Studies documented Israel’s strategic return to Africa, framing it as a “penetration” with clear, enduring objectives: securing the Bab el-Mandab Strait, gaining African diplomatic support, and establishing military and economic partnerships. This early analysis identified the Horn of Africa as a targeted zone of influence, establishing the consistent strategic drivers for all subsequent actions.
Phase 2: Target Identification & Internal Caution (2021)
By 2021, Israeli strategists were openly evaluating specific opportunities. An analysis from Tel Aviv University’s Moshe Dayan Center explicitly named Somaliland as a potential partner, noting its stability and positive outlook toward Israel in plain contrast to the “hardline” stance of Somalia. The report confirmed that “the potential benefits of cooperation with strategically located Somaliland are obvious” for Israel. However, it concluded with a caution that defined early Israeli policy: recognition would be seen as a “provocation” that could jeopardize Israel’s broader diplomatic aspirations in Africa. This document serves as the baseline, capturing the moment the strategic value was identified but deemed too risky.
Phase 3: Advocacy, Blueprinting, and Escalation (2024-2025)
The period from 2024 saw the strategy shift from assessment to active advocacy and detailed planning, coinciding with heightened regional tensions.
- The Critical Warning: The Turkish think tank TASAM(Turkish Asian Centre for Strategic Studies) warnedthat Israel’s actions constituted a “chaos influence” strategy, deliberately undermining Somali sovereignty and exacerbating regional disputes to control strategic chokepoints.
- The Military Corollary: The Shaf Centre for Future Studies and Analysis of crisis and Conflicts provided detailed evidence of the accompanying security strategy, confirming an Israeli military base in Eritrea and outlining plans for expansion, framing this as a direct threat to regional stability.
- The Public Advocacy: Pro-normalization voices published explicit roadmaps. The N7 Initiative (Pro-normalization advocacy and research organization) argued for “Israel–Somaliland normalization,” presenting Somaliland as a pro-Western “gateway” crucial for maritime security. This was complemented by media articles in The Times of Israel Blog, which built a public case for partnership based on shared threats and historical ties.
- The Official Strategic Blueprint: Most significantly, Israel’s own Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) published a pivotal assessment in October 2024. It endorsed Somaliland as a strategic “game changer” and directly addressed the Ethiopia-Somaliland deal as a key development causing “significant tension”. While it advised acting “below the threshold of recognition” to avoid diplomatic backlash, it validated the core strategic logic: partnering with Somaliland was essential to countering Iran and securing the Red Sea.
Phase 4: Execution (December 26, 2025)
Israel’s decision to grant formal recognition marked the definitive abandonment of the 2021-era caution. It demonstrated that the perceived strategic imperative, securing a foothold in the Horn of Africa to counter Iranian influence and control vital maritime routes, now outweighed the risks to diplomatic norms and regional stability.
Pro-normalization voices published explicit roadmaps. The N7 Initiative (Pro-normalization advocacy and research organization) argued for “Israel–Somaliland normalization,” presenting Somaliland as a pro-Western “gateway” crucial for maritime security.
Analysis: Implications of a Deliberate Strategy
This chronological evidence reveals that the recognition is a tool of political warfare with devastating implications for Somalia and the region.
- Sovereignty as Collateral: The documents show that for Israeli strategists, the unity and sovereignty of the Somali state were secondary to a larger geopolitical contest against Iran. Internal African borders became malleable in pursuit of security alliances.
- The Creation of Adversarial Blocs: As the INSS report itself notes, the move hardens regional divisions, crystallizing an Israel-UAE-Ethiopia-Somaliland axis against a Somalia-Egypt-Turkey bloc. The Horn of Africa is transformed into a proxy theatre for Middle Eastern rivalries.
- An Invitation to Conflict: Recognition incentivizes the militarization of the Gulf of Aden coastline. As warned by the Shaf Centre, it risks making Somali territory a direct target in regional conflicts, importing the volatility of the Yemen war onto the African continent.
- The Betrayal of African Solidarity: It is a deliberate foreign assault on the foundational African Union principle of uti possidetis (the inviolability of colonial borders), setting a catastrophic precedent for secessionist movements across the continent.
Conclusion
The recognition of Somaliland is the culmination of a decade of strategic planning, documented in successive layers of policy analysis. It is the logical endpoint of a foreign policy that views the fragmentation of weaker states as an acceptable cost for achieving national security objectives. The Somali people now face a sophisticated, pre-meditated strategy of division. The response must be one of unwavering unity, strategic diplomatic resistance at the AU, UN, Arab League, and OIC, and a clear-eyed understanding that the promise of patronage for one region is a trap that endangers the future of the entire nation. Sovereignty is not negotiable.
Goobjoog News is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor or any other article of interest to our readers. We’d be glad to hear what you think about this article or any other article in our opinion sections.