Israel policies pose danger to African countries

Jun 26, 2013

Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu is happy with current efforts to drive out African migrants from the state of Israel.

By Swaib K. Nsereko

Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu is happy with current efforts to drive out African migrants from the state of Israel. Most of the victims, approximating 10,000 are from Eritrea, South Sudan, and Darfur region of Sudan.

Under this campaign, Israel has constructed a 225-kilometer fence to keep Africans from entering it through the Sinai region of Egypt.

The Netanyahu administration has bargained with some, perhaps unconscious African countries to be the dumping grounds for the human rejects it finds unfit to accommodate!

Like Jews elsewhere in the world sought refugee, thousands of Africans sought asylum in the occupied Palestine territories after fleeing from hot spots of East and Central Africa.

However, Israeli senior politicians have consistently accused the migrants of criminal activity. As such, they have incited racial demonstrations against poor Africans as well as physical assaults and the destruction of their homes and businesses.

Generally, in Israel, there are still segregated roads, housing and sidewalks. Simply one wonders what is there for Africa to learn as best practice from Israel. And the reverse appears true plus for the Jewish state to just seek using the continent for selfish ends. The tragedy is that this practice is potentially dangerous for Africa.

Matter of fact is that the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, in a suspicious sense, takes some African migrants to be ‘infiltrators,’ from enemy states.   And politicians, including Premier Netanyahu are on record stressing the infiltration line—whose sentence is death.

 

He was quoted saying: "We have stopped the infiltration phenomenon. Last month only two infiltrators entered Israel, compared to more than 2,000 a year ago. Now we are focused on the infiltrators leaving."

 Because of the difficulty in screening who is who among the migrants, it proved cheaper for Israel to just get rid of the whole lot!

However, if ‘infiltrators’ are dangerous to Israel, they are so to any other African country, where it intends to dump them. They are, in that sense, wrong elements—which, therefore, constitutes the danger of Israel’s relations with Africa.

The countries of Israel’s choice to deport these people are still unnamed. But, it is obvious they must be among those countries having ‘good’ diplomatic relations with the Jewish state.

So the ‘infiltrators’ against Israel might still want to pursue its interests and projects in their new host country for the benefit of their pay-masters. If the masters could happen to be yet another African country, it will then render that country at logger heads with the new home for the unwanted migrants.

This, therefore, renders Africa in a state of perpetual proxy conflicts that are detrimental to its stability and development.

In that case, the countries Israel seeks to host its presumed enemies will eventually also wish to get rid of the bad ‘elements,’ by deporting them to where they originally escaped.

This will render their lives in harm’s way, which is against the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to Refugees. The convention proscribes countries hosting refugees from sending them to where they would face physical or political danger.

It is, therefore, more logical for the African Union, Israel and the United Nations  High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) to negotiate a new destination outside Africa for the migrants. This would be so, if really Israel wishes peace and stability for Africa.  

The writer is the spokesman, Jeema Party

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});