
Africa on edge: How global tensions between Israel, Iran and the US threaten stability
The conflict in Iran may seem far away, but it's creating volatility that African leaders must act on urgently.
Israel, Iran and the United States' (US) escalating hostilities have sent geopolitical tremors far beyond the Middle East. With the fragile ceasefire holding for now, the world waits tensely to see if a broader regional or global conflict will erupt.
For African policymakers, three critical vectors demand close scrutiny — security, diplomatic and economic. Each carries risks that may have outsized effects on the continent.
The first danger lies in the security sphere. The conflict risks drawing multiple global powers — Russia, China, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (Nato) — into yet another Middle Eastern quagmire. Historically, when the great powers collide, Africa often becomes an unintended theatre of competition and collateral.
The scars of the Ukraine and Gaza conflicts are still apparent in myriad economic, diplomatic and security shocks. There is a worrying sense of déjà vu in the current situation.
If global tensions spill into new ideological or military standoffs, African countries could get trapped in the messy middle. North and East African states face particular exposure to direct risks from primary and proxy actors.
Security vulnerabilities
Iranian projectiles have already lit up Cairo's night sky — a reminder of Egypt's security vulnerabilities; with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi advocating for de-escalation.
Elsewhere, US-aligned military assets in Djibouti and Somalia, and Israel's assets in Eritrea, could become the focus of retaliatory strikes by Iran or its regional proxies, such as the Houthis.
There is also an indirect security risk arising from a reprioritisation of Western strategic interests. With defence budgets and attention stretched by the Ukraine war and domestic concerns, Africa's security sectors may find themselves increasingly under-resourced and unable to manage transnational threats.
Testament to Africa's declining geostrategic value in the Western security psyche, the continent received little attention during recent G7 and Nato meetings. Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad, Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger are already feeling the brunt of Western retrenchment in the Sahelian theatre. Further disengagement would leave them even more vulnerable to insurgencies.
Human security — often overlooked — is also at stake. Food insecurity, climate shocks and governance deficits already strain many African states. Fresh pressures could arise if Middle Eastern instability fuels large-scale migration or refugee flows into Europe. European diversion of development funding to manage such spillovers could further undermine safety nets for Africa's most vulnerable populations.
Religious and sectarian tensions, exacerbated by Middle East developments, may also inflame local disputes in Africa's multi-faith societies. A concern is Nigeria where Shia groups could engage in attacks in solidarity with Iran.
Compounding these risks is the spectre of nuclear proliferation. If Iran abandons nuclear restraint, other regional players may follow, raising the chances of an arms race with global consequences.
Weakened influence
For Africa — a strong proponent of nuclear disarmament under the Pelindaba Treaty — such a shift would weaken its influence in future global arms control negotiations.
Diplomatically, pressure on African states to take sides will intensify. They may be forced into uncomfortable choices — between Washington and Tehran, or the US and its rivals in Moscow or Beijing — with sanctions or aid withdrawal the price for defiance.
South Africa is in a particularly delicate position. Its inconsistent foreign policy has left it walking a narrow tightrope. Washington has sparred with Pretoria over its stance on Israel, its domestic policies, proximity to Iran, and its alignment with BRICS. The US could react punitively to any sign of sympathy towards Iran.
Multilateral institutions, especially the United Nations Security Council and expanded BRICS+, will also be tested. Iran's recent accession to BRICS has added complexity and may strain the bloc's unity. African members like South Africa, Egypt and Ethiopia could face awkward choices should the bloc lean towards favouring Tehran.
The implications are profound. A world that abandons international law for raw power threatens the very framework that protects smaller, less powerful states. For Africa, this is an existential issue — without rules-based multilateralism, the continent's collective influence diminishes.
Worse, a global slide into 'might is right' politics may embolden expansionist African leaders. Ethiopia's Abiy Ahmed Ali, Rwanda's Paul Kagame and Morocco's King Mohammed VI could feel encouraged to pursue territorial ambitions under the cover of global disorder. Others may take 'preventive' strikes against perceived enemies like the US and Israel — illegal under current international law.
Africa's collective voting strength at global forums may also erode in such a scenario. If influence weakens, so too does Africa's leverage on crucial matters such as debt restructuring, climate finance and development aid. Only through a unified, strategic voice can the continent avoid marginalisation.
Yet the most immediate and tangible impact is economic. Global uncertainty traditionally sparks a 'flight to safety', strengthening the US dollar and weakening African currencies. This raises debt servicing costs for African sovereigns, many of which are heavily dollar-indebted. Bond yields could spike, and fiscal pressures — already strained by post-pandemic recovery and fallout from the Ukraine war — would tighten further.
Energy security is another looming flashpoint. Disruption of the Strait of Hormuz — the conduit for a third of the world's oil — would send energy prices soaring. Net oil importers, including many African economies, would suffer painful imported inflation, raising transport, food and energy costs. This would intensify cost-of-living crises and complicate monetary policy just as central banks prepare to loosen rates to spur growth.
Recession
Broader trade disruptions, coupled with the expiry of US President Donald Trump's tariff reprieves, could drag the global economy into recession. For Africa, the fallout could be severe. Depreciation-driven debt deterioration could complicate restructuring in Zambia, Ethiopia and Ghana. Others — like Kenya and Nigeria, where debt servicing swallows more than 30% of revenue — would face even tighter fiscal constraints.
Smaller economies reliant on customs-sharing arrangements, like Lesotho and Eswatini, are also vulnerable, with Southern African Customs Union earnings there already projected to decline by as much as 20% this year.
Limited fiscal buffers would force many African governments to divert funds from development spending to cover external gaps — risking social unrest, political instability and the erosion of already thin reserves.
Still, a few bright spots exist. Rising gold prices could benefit producers like Ghana and South Africa. Likewise, higher oil prices may boost revenues for exporters like Nigeria, Angola, Algeria and Libya. Yet these gains probably wouldn't offset the broader economic harm of disrupted supply chains, slower global growth and weaker demand for non-commodity African exports.
In this volatile context, African leaders must act. Security capacities and collaboration must be bolstered to reduce dependence on foreign powers and cushion against internal and external threats.
Diplomacy must become more unified and strategic — both to protect Africa's interests and uphold the international rules that safeguard its sovereignty. Economic resilience, through fiscal prudence, dollar de-risking and deeper regional market development, is urgent.
The Iran crisis may rage abroad, but its sparks are falling on African soil — and the continent must brace for impact. DM
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

IOL News
6 hours ago
- IOL News
Unfinished Freedom: Africa's Long Walk Beyond the 1884 Berlin Conference:
Mphumzi Mdekazi is CEO of Walter and Albertina Sisulu for Social Justice, he writes in his personal capacity. Image: Supplied By Mphumzi Mdekazi On June 12, 2025, we gathered at Vaal University of Technology (VUT) not just to honour the towering legacy of Walter Sisulu, whose birthday was on May 18, 1912– a revolutionary, a father of our democracy, and a quiet architect of freedom—but the day was also used to reflect on the deeper, historical roots of the struggles that continue to shape our continent. Walter Sisulu believed, above all else, in the unity, dignity, and potential of African people, and he understood that true liberation would not come with the lowering of colonial flags, but with the dismantling of colonial logic—embedded in institutions, economies, and minds. It is for that reason that, partially, the fulcrum of his inaugural memorial lecture looked back—not to dwell—but to understand, so that we may act differently going forward. I would assume that, as we have gathered in the Vaal, we all knew that our problems as the African continent are located at the Berlin Conference of 1884. In 1884–85, in cold, chandelier-lit halls of imperial Europe, 14 European powers convened what is now known as the Berlin Conference—also called the Congo Conference. Not a single African was present. Yet the lives of millions would be irrevocably changed. There, the continent was carved up like a pie. Arbitrary borders drawn across ethnic groups, kingdoms, ecological zones and ancient trade routes. Entire civilizations dismembered. Africa was not seen as a place of peoples, cultures, or sovereignty, but as territory to be occupied, extracted, and exploited. This process was legitimized by the so-called principle of 'effective occupation,' which required European powers to demonstrate control over African territories to claim them. In truth, it was a license for conquest, enslavement, and cultural erasure. As Frantz Fanon warned us: 'Imperialism leaves behind germs of rot which we must clinically detect and remove not only from our land but from our minds as well.' The mid-20th century brought political decolonization. Flags were changed, anthems composed, and parliaments erected. But what did we really inherit? We inherited a map not made by us. States that were, in many cases, artificially constructed with no national consensus. We inherited economies wired to feed Europe's factories, not Africa's people, and tragically, we inherited elite classes—many of whom became, in the words of Amílcar Cabral, 'the transmission belt of foreign interests.' Yes, we achieved formal independence, which some were celebrating recently. But the substance of freedom remains unfinished. The promise of decolonization has produced mixed results. We have seen moments of triumph and excellence, indigenous innovation, Pan-African solidarity, democratic progress, but also the painful betrayal of liberation ideals, especially here at home in South Africa. The post-colonial African states have too often been caught between external manipulation and internal misleadership. Between structural adjustment and military coups. Between IMF dictates and elite capture. Today, we see new waves of defiance. The people of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger, nations in the Sahel, are attempting to reimagine sovereignty in a world still structured against African independence. Their struggle is fraught. Attempts to build new political and economic models are met with sanctions, destabilization, and even covert efforts at regime change. Often, external forces act not alone but in collaboration with internal elites who fear change. I call these collaborators 'committed and helpless or hopeless slaves, who mistakenly believe that Africa's total liberation will come from a coloniser and our former oppressors'. The Sahel defiance is inspiring the youth, the majority of our continent, understandably so because these young Sahel leaders represent our real African liberation aspirations. These young people, born in the ashes of neoliberal broken promises, are reclaiming the right to shape their future. As Thomas Sankara once declared: 'We must dare to invent the future.' Our Continent needs economic Justice, not Charity or IMF Loans. Africa is not poor; it is impoverished. Through stolen resources, unjust trade, climate injustice, and debt traps, weare made to kneel before the same powers that once colonized us, a case in point is the recent oval meeting in the US, where voluntarily our rare earth minerals as a country were offered and donated without a request, with an apologetic anatomical posture to the Groot Baas. Today, African countries spend more on repaying interest than on investing in education or healthcare. As Julius Nyerere warned decades ago: 'They made us believe that development meant becoming more like them. But development should mean becoming more like ourselves.' We must now demand not aid, but restitution. Not charity, but economic justice in memory of Walter Sisulu. Walter Sisulu understood that liberation is a process, not a moment. He lived through a century of struggle, from the pass laws to the Robben Island cell, from exile to the birth of democracy, leading his family, which conservatively accounts for 59 years in prison combined, for committing no crime, but to demand equality and justice. Such a sacrifice must not be sacrificed for immediacy and silver or short-term myopic pliability. His life teaches us that freedom requires integrity, vigilance, sacrifice, and above all, solidarity across borders, ideologies, and generations. This calls for ethical leadership. As the Foundation that bears his and Mama Albertina's names, we recommit ourselves today to that Pan-African vision, a continent of self-reliant nations, accountable, ethical leadership, educated citizens, and just economies. We invite African thinkers, students, workers, women, elders, the downtrodden and especially the youth to carry forward this (Walter Sisulu's) legacy. To free the continent not only from external domination, but from internal betrayal, as this is a serious hazard towards the gains of our liberation. Let us look beyond Berlin, towards African Rebirth and Reawakening. Let Walter Sisulu serve as more than remembrance. Let it be a moment of reckoning and renewal. Once again, we must look beyond Berlin, beyond the maps we did not draw, beyond the narratives we did not write. It is time for a new African imagination. It is time to complete the freedom that Walter Sisulu and his generation began. As Africans, let us rise. Let us remember. Let us rebuild. Mphumzi Mdekazi is CEO of Walter & Albertina Sisulu for Social Justice, and he writes in his personal capacity.

The Star
7 hours ago
- The Star
Ramaphosa and Trump to discuss trade relations at G7 Summit
Mashudu Sadike | Published 2 weeks ago President Cyril Ramaphosa is set to meet with US President Donald Trump on the sidelines of the Group of Seven (G7) Summit in Canada this weekend. The meeting will focus on key issues, including the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and US-SA tariffs. Ramaphosa's meeting with Trump comes after South Africa submitted a revised framework proposal to the US, aiming to expand trade and investment relations between the two countries. The US imposed tariffs on South African imports in April, with a 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs of 30% against South African exports. The tariffs were part of a broader set of 'liberation day' tariffs imposed by Trump on all US trading partners. However, they were later reduced to a base rate of 10%, with the expectation that countries would use the 90 days to propose solutions addressing the US's trade deficit concerns. Ramaphosa's meeting with Trump will be his second in about three weeks, following their tense encounter at the White House last month. During their previous meeting, Ramaphosa emphasised the importance of the US's role in the G20 Summit and invited Trump to attend the G20 Leaders' Summit in Johannesburg later this year. Trump agreed to attend, and Ramaphosa sees this as a positive development for bilateral relations. According to sources close to Ramaphosa, the meeting agenda will include discussions on AGOA, providing duty-free access to the US market for some African products. The agreement is set to expire in September, and South Africa is eager to see it renewed. Ramaphosa will also raise concerns about US-SA tariffs, urging the US not to increase them beyond the current 10% if negotiations on a new trade framework are not concluded by July 9. The sources further said the meeting between Ramaphosa and Trump was significant, given the current state of US-SA trade relations. 'The business sector has expressed concerns about the rise of tariffs, and Ramaphosa is under pressure to come up with answers. A successful meeting could help to ease tensions and pave the way for improved trade relations between the two countries,' the source added. Presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya did not respond to questions as to what to expect at the upcoming meeting. However, Ramaphosa, while speaking to journalists on Tuesday after he announced the date for the National Dialogue on various issues affecting the country, confirmed that he would be meeting Trump, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Ramaphosa said he was invited by Carney, who holds the presidency of the G7, and would also use the opportunity to talk about the G20 Summit to be hosted by South Africa in November, where Trump will take over the presidency. 'We're going to use it as a platform to begin to consolidate what we want to achieve in November when the leaders' summit takes place here (in Johannesburg),' he said. Last month, Ramaphosa and his delegation included Minister of Trade and Industry Parks Tau, Minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni, Agriculture Minister John Steenhuisen, and International Relations Minister Ronald Lamola. His goals for that meeting included resetting US-SA relations and beginning serious engagement with the US on trade and investment. He emphasised that South Africa did not 'go kowtowing' to the White House but rather took the initiative to engage with the US. 'For us, it's important for us as a nation to reposition ourselves in the very turbulent geopolitical architecture or situation that we have,' Ramaphosa said at the time. Cape Times


The Citizen
13 hours ago
- The Citizen
SA not ready for fallout if Israel-Iran ceasefire fails, warns UJ professor
As the ceasefire between Iran and Israel holds, the world watches with bated breath to see what will happen next between the two regional powers. To gain insight into the situation, Caxton Local Media spoke to Dr Suzy Graham, professor in the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Johannesburg. Discussing the ceasefire, Graham explained that although it is still early days, the truce holds real potential, though it remains inherently fragile. 'Its longevity hinges on disciplined diplomacy, credible inspections, and political will from all actors. If any of these break down, especially due to hardliners or indirect aggression via proxies, the truce could unravel quickly,' she said. For now, however, the signs are cautiously optimistic. A ceasefire on edge: What's holding it together? Graham believes the ceasefire was primarily driven by a rapid cycle of escalation and daring diplomacy aimed at avoiding further catastrophic conflict. Although the ceasefire appears to be working, she warned that initial breaches from either side could lead to its deterioration. She described the thought of a third world war as unthinkable. 'Despite social media speculation, the probability of a full-scale World War III remains low, but not zero,' Graham said. South Africa's position: Legal, vocal, and diplomatic Speaking about South Africa's stance on the Israel-Iran conflict and how it aligns with the country's broader foreign policy, Graham said South Africa will almost always call for dialogue in any conflict situation. 'The South African government has been vocal in strongly condemning the recent military strikes on Iran, describing the attacks as violations of international law. It has urged all parties, Iran, Israel, and the USA, to engage in UN-led dialogue, emphasising diplomacy, restraint, and nuclear inspection,' she explained. Regarding the potential impact on South Africa if the conflict reignites and becomes a wider regional crisis, Graham said the country would likely continue championing international law, human rights, and nuclear non-proliferation. She noted that South Africa could strengthen its moral leadership among Global South and Muslim-majority countries. 'At the same time, the country could face intense backlash from Israel and Western allies, particularly the USA, Germany, and the UK, especially if Pretoria doubles down on its International Court of Justice genocide case or calls for sanctions. 'South Africa could see reduced goodwill from Western investors or governments, especially if tensions rise over its international legal campaigns or alignment with Iran.' 'In the immediate term, South Africa would likely call for a ceasefire, condemn aggression, and activate international and legal channels. In the short term, it might push for UN and BRICS statements and engage the African Union and Global South partners. 'In the mid-term, it would need to manage economic fallout, reinforce public diplomacy, and maintain BRICS plus solidarity. In the longer term, South Africa could use the crisis to push for UN Security Council reform, nuclear disarmament, and multipolar global governance.' Graham emphasised that if South Africa is drawn into the conflict, its role would be principled, vocal, and legalistic, not military. 'It may be drawn in politically, but not militarily,' she said. 'The country's focus would remain on shaping the normative global order, not engaging in hard power projection.' What escalation could mean for South Africa Although South Africa would not be militarily involved, Graham said a wider Middle East conflict would hit its economy hard, particularly through rising fuel prices, increased trade costs, and inflation. 'An escalation in the Israel-Iran conflict could seriously disrupt global oil flows, and South Africa, as an energy-importing nation, would feel the effects quickly and deeply. 'The country's inflation rate, currency, fiscal stability, and household livelihoods would all come under pressure.' When asked if South Africa is prepared for possible knock-on effects of war, such as cyberattacks or disruptions in trade, Graham said the country is not fully ready for the complex and interconnected consequences of a major regional war involving Iran and Israel. 'While it has some institutional frameworks and economic policy tools, South Africa lacks a coordinated national resilience strategy, particularly for cyber threats and maritime trade disruptions. 'A greater focus on strategic planning, inter-agency coordination, and public-private resilience building is urgently needed.' Breaking news at your fingertips… Follow Caxton Network News on Facebook and join our WhatsApp channel. Nuus wat saakmaak. Volg Caxton Netwerk-nuus op Facebook en sluit aan by ons WhatsApp-kanaal. Read original story on At Caxton, we employ humans to generate daily fresh news, not AI intervention. Happy reading!