Kenya media’s coverage
of the visit by Benjamin Netanyahu, the first by a sitting Israeli prime
minister in 30 years, has predictably focused on the “goodies” that he was
supposedly bringing. There has been lots of discussion of what the country stands
to gain from cooperation with Israel in areas ranging from security to
agriculture but relatively little about the price Israel would extract for such
cooperation.
It is undeniable that
the Israelis have much to offer. As we have been constantly reminded over the
course of the last few days, the visit comes on the 40th anniversary
of Operation Thunderbolt, the spectacularly daring Israeli commando raid on
Entebbe Airport in Uganda which freed over a hundred hostages from a hijacked
Air France plane. The rescue cemented Israel’s fearsome reputation in dealing
with terrorist threats and such expertise will undoubtedly come in handy as Kenya faces up
to terror threats of its own emanating primarily from the Somalia-based
extremist group, Al Shabaab.
Beyond security, Israel
is famed for its agricultural and water management innovations which have made
the desert bloom as well as for its booming hi-tech industry whose goods and
services account for half its industrial exports. Its disaster response capabilities
have many times been on display whenever Israeli crews have lent a hand to
their Kenya counterparts to extract people trapped in collapsed buildings. In these,
and in many other areas, Kenya can derive substantial benefits from a closer
relationship with the Jewish state. As the late Tom Mboya once remarked, “any
African who turs Israel cannot fail to be impressed by the achievement made in
such a short time from poor soil and with so few natural resources”.
There is, though, another
side to this coin. Netanyahu’s visit is
also a charm offensive. “Israel is coming back to Africa. Africa is coming back
to Israel,” he has declared. Israel’s overriding objective in its relations
with the continent has always been to break out of its political and diplomatic
isolation. But it is important that we do not lose sight of the reasons why that
isolation exists in the first place.
Past ruptures in
Africa’s relationship with Israel have been attributed to pressure by Arab
states, particularly in the aftermath of the 1973 oil crisis and the Yom Kippur
War (“The Arabs have the numbers, the space and the oil. In the third would
they outweigh Israel” as Senegal’s first President, Léopold Sédar Senghor, put
it) and Tel Aviv’s relations with the apartheid regime in South Africa. However, these issues have for the most part
been resolved and, by her own count, Israel today maintains full diplomatic
relations with 39 of 47 of the countries south of the Sahara and has nine
resident embassies on the continent.
The major sticking
point has been the Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. The African Union
has repeatedly stressed its support for the establishment of a Palestinian
state and condemned the “illegal and illegitimate” Israeli occupation of
Palestinian territories as well as her settlement policies which “contravenes
International Law and undermines the two-state solution and prospects for peace”.
African countries have also repeatedly blocked Israeli attempts to regain
observer status at the African Union precisely because of this.
It is not surprising
that nations on the continent, which have themselves experienced the horrors of
racist colonial domination, would feel a sense of solidarity with the
beleaguered Palestinians. In 2014, South African icon, Desmond Tutu said the "the
systemic humiliation of Palestinian men, women and children by members of the
Israeli security forces … is familiar to all black South Africans who were
corralled and harassed and insulted and assaulted by the security forces of the
apartheid government."
Breaking this African
consensus is Netanyahu’s declared aim. And he seems to have at least partially
succeeded in winning over President Uhuru Kenyatta, who has now called for a “re-evaluation”
of Africa’s relationship with Israel. In doing so, Uhuru has traded in our
values – and sold out the Palestinians for thirty pieces of silver.
But perhaps we should
not be surprised. After all, in the recent past, the Kenyatta administration has stood with North
Korea, Myanmar, Iran and Sudan at the UN to oppose protections for human rights defenders
and voted with China and Russia to remove references to freedom of expression
in a resolution on online freedom. Let’s face it. Values are not his strong
suit.
