As global powers compete for Africa, Israel risks being left on sidelines - opinion

Israel cannot afford to be left out. Yet Israeli engagement remains episodic, symbolic, and far too small for the scale of what is unfolding.

These are precisely the fields in which Israel has world-class expertise – and where African governments are actively seeking partners who can build capacity, not extract value. This concept – partnership rather than extraction – is where Israel has a natural advantage. It is also where history matters.

In the modern era, this spirit resurfaced in the 1950s and 60s, when, just after Israel’s establishment and in the early years of African independence, leaders like David Ben-Gurion and Golda Meir understood that Africa was not a distant continent but a strategic neighborhood.

Dozens of newly independent African states were seeking to define their alliances and identities; each held a vote in the UN, and each was choosing its friends. Israel – young, besieged, and resource-poor – could have turned inward. Instead, it showed up.

Israel arrived not with money, a commodity it lacked, but with agronomists, teachers, water engineers, and doctors. It brought what it had: knowledge, experience, and a spirit of problem solving.

By 1967, nearly a third of Israel’s diplomatic missions were in Africa. A tiny, besieged state was investing limited diplomatic capacity in a continent most of the West still treated as a peripheral arena. It was not charity: It was a grand strategy grounded in values and long-term thinking.

Then came 1973. The Yom Kippur War, the oil shock, and the Arab boycott forced African leaders into a harsh dilemma. Many of their countries were newly independent, poor, and in desperate need of capital.

On one side stood a small country with minimal resources and many enemies. On the other side stood oil-rich Arab states, backed by a powerful narrative of pan Arab solidarity and enormous financial leverage. Many African governments chose the latter and cut ties with Israel.

But the consequences extended beyond Israel’s diplomatic setbacks. Israel was no longer there to serve as a counter to the model of the foreign actors coming to Africa to extract resources and gain strategic influence.

Today, a new generation of Africans is questioning that model. Young people are asking why their countries – endowed with essential minerals and human talent – are not the primary beneficiaries of their wealth. They want opportunities, not dependency; capacity-building, not extraction. They want a different future.

To understand why this moment is so critical, it helps to look closely at what is already happening on the ground. China understands Africa’s strategic importance extremely well. So do Russia and the Gulf states. Chinese-built roads, railways, and ports now stretch across the continent, part of a long-term effort to shape markets, supply chains and political influence. And it is not only China.

After years of neglect, the United States is re-entering the arena by backing major initiatives such as the Lobito Corridor, a transformative project connecting Angola’s Atlantic coast to the copper and cobalt belt of the Democratic Republic of Congo. These are not simply infrastructure projects; they are geopolitical arteries designed to determine who controls the minerals that will power the next chapter of the global economy.

Russia, which lacks China’s financial muscle, has expanded its security footprint through military networks and targeted propaganda operations, particularly in the Sahel. The UAE and Qatar are emerging as influential investors and political actors. Yet much of this activity still follows the same familiar pattern: extracting resources and influence rather than building lasting local capacity.

This is precisely where Israel’s experience speaks directly to Africa’s aspirations.

We cannot compete with China or the Gulf in sovereign wealth funds or megaproject loans. But we should not try to. Israel’s strengths lie elsewhere: in water management, desert agriculture, emergency medicine, renewable energy, cybersecurity, digital government and the ability to innovate under constraint. These are precisely the tools African governments are seeking.

And just as Africa needs Israel, Israel needs Africa.

Israel desperately needs political and economic diversification. Its legitimacy is eroding in many Western capitals. UN votes are often hostile. Its economy is heavily concentrated in a few markets that are vulnerable to political shifts. Africa can be a crucial part of the solution.

A growing bloc of African partners can offer diplomatic support in multilateral forums and open vast new consumer markets for Israeli technologies. In return, Israel can offer something distinct: a partnership model that is neither colonial nostalgia nor raw power politics, but one rooted in mutual benefit.

The challenge is that Israel still behaves like a small state thinking in short-term cycles. Everything is tactical; engagement rises and falls with individual ministers, headlines or diplomatic crises. Without long-term structures, Israel cannot succeed in Africa.

To change that, Israel needs a framework that endures beyond personalities and political cycles.

The only way forward is to build institutions that operate on a 20- to 50-year horizon, not limited to the terms of governments.

Israel needs a durable platform that enables companies to work in Africa with real support – smart financing tools, risk-sharing mechanisms, regulatory backing, export promotion, and the ability to participate meaningfully in major infrastructure projects alongside international partners.

Israeli firms must be present where decisions are made, not as funders but as knowledge partners and problem solvers. Institutions like the Israel-Africa Relations Institute and new partnerships with think tanks abroad are early building blocks of this long-term architecture, but they must be scaled and sustained beyond any individual government or donor.

This also requires consistent presence on the ground: embassies with strong economic missions, agricultural demonstration farms, joint research centers, health training programs, and regular trilateral dialogues linking Israel, African states, and partners such as the United States or the UAE on shared challenges like Sahel terrorism and Red Sea maritime security.

And it requires something Israel rarely prioritizes: narrative. Israeli media almost never treats Africa as a central strategic arena. It appears mainly in the context of migration or violent conflict. As long as the public conversation ignores the emerging continent, policymakers will see it as peripheral.

Yet everything about Africa’s trajectory suggests the opposite.

By 2048 – Israel’s centennial – Africa will be the world’s largest market for Israeli-style innovation. It will shape global alliances, supply chains, climate solutions and political blocs in international institutions.

Whoever is present today will shape those outcomes. Whoever is absent will be shaped by them.■