The former Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani called for the formation of a strategic defence alliance bringing together Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan. Al Thani has described it as an “urgent need” in light of developments and changing regional and international dynamics.  He made this call weeks before the attack on Iran by Israel and the US on 28^th February 2026.  It is not the first time Israel attacked Iran whilst in negotiations.

In June 2025 Israel attacked Iran whilst it was it was negotiating its nuclear program with the US.  Iran retaliated with hundreds of missiles and drones targeting Israeli cities and the US military base in Al Udeid in Doha, Qatar.  Al Udeid is the largest US military base in the Gulf region. In September 2025 Hamas leadership was attacked in Qatar by Israel whilst meeting to consider a ceasefire proposal from the US on the war on Gaza.

Qatar has spent billions of US dollars on US’s weapons and military hardware including a huge investment at the Al Udeid military base.  It is estimated that Qatar has spent over 19 billion USD over time in Al Udeid.  Notwithstanding, Qatar has remained vulnerable from external military attacks and its sovereignty has been compromised over the past months.

On 28 February 2026, the US and Israel started launching unprovoked attacks on Iran.  They killed the Supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei and over 180 school girls at the Tayyebeh girls’ elementary school in the city of Minab in the early stages of the attack.  Iran retaliated to the attacks by firing hundreds of drones to Israeli cities and US military installations in the Gulf.

The US and Israel have called for a regime change in Iran.  Speaking to the media on 5^th  March 2026, Donald Trump said “he wants to be involved in picking up the next leadership in Iran”.  Iran has vowed not to allow foreign interference in their politics including how its leadership is elected.  Such rhetoric from the president of the US presents a threat to the political process in Iran.  Moreover, Trump’s hope and ambition that the US can come into Iran, impose its political will and preference and still have a stable Iran is farfetched and dangerous.  It could lead to political instability in Iran and indeed the region.  Iran has suffered tremendous infrastructural and leadership devastation already in this conflict.  However, its government has vowed to continue fighting and judging by how it has resisted over the past couple of days since the start of this war, it is unlikely to collapse.

Secondly, the Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu has said repeatedly that he wants to eliminate all threats to Israel in the region including obliterating Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon.  Hamas and Hezbollah have refused to disarm and are both showing signs of recovering from the devastating war on Gaza.  The recent attacks of Israel by Hezbollah in retaliation to the killing of Ayatollah Khamenei, caught Israel and many in the world by surprise.  After heavy bombardment and killing of its leadership by Israel over the past 24 months, they are still capable of sending missiles and drones hitting their targets in Israel.  Likewise, Hamas – who got praised by Trump – for their great work in helping to allocate the dead bodies of the Israeli captives in Gaza – are still governing Gaza.

Notwithstanding the devastation of Iran and the killing of its leadership, its political infrastructure is likely to endure.  However, as long as the government of Iran continues to function, with all its current political infrastructural framework, it will continue to be targeted by Israel.  Moreover, Hamas, Hezbollah have not disarmed.  The Houthis in Yemen continues to attack US’s and Israeli’s interests in the Red Sea.  Basically, notwithstanding the military attacks on these organisations and Iran, they are still standing albeit weaker.  This means the “threats” to Israel remain, it also means that future conflicts between Israel and the US on one hand and Iran will continue as long as both Israel and the US refuse to accept the status quo.  This reality brings us back to what the former prime minister of Qatar raised i.e., the strategic defence alliance in the region.  Second, a need for the reconfiguration of the military arrangement in the region.  The recent unprovoked attacks on Iran and its subsequent retaliation have added a momentum to these discussions.  The attacks have also raised questions about the significance of the presence of US’s military bases in the region.  Particularly, whether countries in the region should continue having strategic military partnerships with the US?  Iran has insisted that US military bases in the region are legitimate targets and it will continue targeting them in retaliation and in defense of their people and sovereignty.

The conclusion therefore is that unless there is a reconfiguration of the security arrangements in the region, the US and Israel are likely to attack Iran again.  Iran is likely to retaliate in the manner it is currently doing, targeting both Israel and US’s bases and infrastructure in the region.  Iran has repeatedly said “it is not targeting its friendly neighbors rather the interests and assets of the US and Israel in the region”.  Consequently, Gulf countries hosting these bases will continue to be targeted by Iran.

Cote d’Ivoire continues to play an important role in the politics and economy of West Africa. The region has been experiencing a number of political challenges with a number of countries either under the military rule or facing political uncertainty. Moreover, political popularism in the region continues to stagnate political development and economic growth There are four countries – Burkina Faso, Niger, Mali and Guinea- currently under the military rule in West Africa. This has raised concerns not only in the region but in other parts of Africa. Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger have been suspended from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). They have since formed Alliance of Sahel States which they “plan to replace ECOWAS”. This has raised tensions and concerns of political polarization, economic stagnation and possibly furthering political instability in the region.

Cote D’Ivoire will be holding elections on 25 October 2025. The incumbent, President Alassane Ouattara has confirmed his candidacy for re-election. On 04 June 2025, the country’s electoral commission published a final list of the voters’ register. Ouattara remains very popular in the country and polls suggests that he is likely to be re-elected. Reuters reports that “Ouattara is in a very strong position to win the elections”. Under the presidency of Ouattara, Cote D’Ivoire has had impressive economic growth for four successive years. This year, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is projected to grow from 6% to 6.3%. Ouattara assumed office after defeating former President Laurent Gbagbo in 2010 presidential elections. Gbagbo refused to leave office; his refusal triggered political violence which led to widespread destruction of property and a large number of civilian deaths. According to the United Nations (UN) and Human Rights Groups, more than 3000 people were killed and more than 1 000 000 people displaced as a result. In 2011 Gbagbo was finally forced to relinquish power. He was subsequently arrested and charged with crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague. After lengthy court procedures Gbagbo was acquitted, he returned to the country on 17 June 2021. During his trial at the Hague, Gbagbo was convicted in absentia in 2018 for embezzling public funds of the Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO). His ambitions to contest elections in 2020 and in 2025 failed as a result of his conviction; the law in Cote d’Ivoire prohibit anyone convicted of criminality from running for presidential elections.

Notwithstanding the rise of political popularism in the region, Cote d’Ivoire is in a rather different position from most countries in the region. First, the country has sustained a positive economic growth multiple years in row making it one of the fasted growing economies not only in the region but in the whole of Africa. Between 2012 and 2019 the economy of Cote d’Ivoire had an economic growth of between 7%-8%. The country has also managed to streamline its cocoa exports which remains the mainstay of its economy. Cote d’Ivoire is one of the world largest cocoa producers; 40% of cocoa global supply come from the country. Subsequently large numbers of economic migrants from neighboring countries, especially Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger have been flocking into Cote d’Ivoire seeking opportunities. Large amounts of financial remittances from Cote d’Ivoire flow into the region particularly Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger. This is significant, as it indicates the important role Cote d’Ivoire plays in the regional economy.

Furthermore, with political turmoil and changes in most countries in the region, Cote d’Ivoire has largely become a significant conduit between business and countries in the region. Political stability, fiscal discipline and good governance has made Cote d’Ivoire an investment magnet. It is these achievements that continue to contribute towards the popularity of President Ouattara. Since taking office in 2011, Ouattara has transformed large parts of the economy in the country, there has been large scale infrastructural development including investments in mining, energy, agriculture and other economic sectors.

Countries in the region must leverage on the experience of Ouattara as they move forward with “reforms in their respective countries”. Ouattara’s access to foreign direct investments and his credibility within the global markets - both in Africa and abroad - could be leveraged by countries in the region towards their own economic developments. Ouattara could play significant political and economic roles in this regard. His role as a trusted statesman in the region is key in rebuilding trust and confidence in regional economies and governments.

However, as Cote d’Ivoire heads towards elections a number of huddles have emerged.

First, some Ivorians have taken to the streets to challenge the barring of some eminent people - particularly former President Laurent Gbagbo and Tidjane Thiam - from contesting elections. The constitution of Cote d’Ivoire does not allow those that have criminal convictions and those with dual citizenship to stand for presidential elections. Laurent Gbagbo is a convicted criminal and Tidjane Thiam, a former CEO of Credit Suisse, was removed from the election roll and barred from running in the elections due to his dual citizenship.

Second, there are some Ivorians who have accused President Ouattara of violating the constitution by standing and running for the fourth-term. The constitution of Cote d’Ivoire was amended in 2016. Amongst changes in the constitution was limiting the terms of office of the president to two terms. The amendment was instituted and sponsored during the second term of Ouattara. The objective of amending the constitution was to avoid endless occupation of presidential office by one person. However, what has been a bone of contention has been the effective date of the amended constitution. In other words, when ware the amendments supposed to have come into effect? The constitution is quiet in that regard. Ouattara availed himself for another term arguing that the constitution only became effective after it was enacted in 2016, meaning that the first two terms he occupied as the president where annulled by the constitutional amendments. He has argued that a new constitution approved in 2016 reset his two-term limit in 2020. Despite the constitutional debate, the constitutional council approved Ouattara’s bid to run for the third term in 2020 and subsequently for the fourth term in 2025. Both terms are regarded as the first and second terms respectively according to the amended constitution of 2016.

Turkiye has been very busy this July, not only has it welcomed thousands of tourists mainly from the Gulf countries for their summer holidays; a number of political events have been taking place there. Foremost amongst those has been the dismantlement of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK). The PKK was founded by Abdullah Ocalan in 1978. Ocalan a Marxist-Leninist separatist launched an armed struggle against the Turkish state in 1984. The organisation’s main objectives were to create a Kurdish state on Turkish territory. In May 2025 the PKK announced that it was disbanding its activities and will be handing over its weapons for destruction. The handing over of weapons by the fighters of the PKK started days ago and have dominated the news better part of the week of 15 July 2025 overshadowing other significant political events.

There was also the fighting between the Arab Bedouin and Druze minority in the city of Suwayda in Syria. The fighting left scores of people, mainly from the Druze community, dead and hundreds displaced. The relationship between Bedouin and Druze communities in Syria’s southern province of Suwayda has long been marked by complexity, alternating between periods of cooperation and violent confrontation. Ever since the fall of Bashar al Assad in December 2024 Turkiye has been assisting in the rebuilding of the infrastructure and socio-political fabric of Syria. Therefore, whatever political events occurring in Syria resonate within Turkiye as was the conflict in Suwayda. What further amplified the news about Suwayda was the Israeli attack on the Syrian military headquarters in Damascus, Syria. Israel claimed that the attack was in retaliation for the attack on the Druze community in Suwayda. The Israeli attack in Damascus caused extensive damage to infrastructure, killed and injured scores of Syrians. Turkey condemned the attack and accused Israel of wanting to derail the development and construction of a new political order in Syria. According to the official statement from the Turkiye’s foreign ministry, “Israel’s attacks on Damascus, following its military interventions in the south of Syria, constitute an act of sabotage against Syria’s efforts to secure peace, stability, and security”.

Importantly, for the past 9 years the people of Turkiye have been commemorating the attempted coup on the 15th July. Turkiye witnessed the bloodiest coup attempt in its modern history on 15 July 2016, when a faction of the Turkiye military launched a coordinated attempt to topple President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government. The Turkiye government has blamed Fethullah Gulen, a Turkish cleric and businessman who lived in self-imposed exile in the state of Pennsylvania in the US until his death on 20 October 2024, for plotting the coup with his followers. The Turkish government calls Gulen’s network the Fethullah Terrorist Organisation (FETO). The 15th July 2016 attempted coup dramatically changed the politics of Turkiye. The overwhelming rejection of the coup by the people of Turkiye communicated a clear message to the world, Turkiye does not have appetite for coups anymore. Since the establishment of the modern Turkish Republic, Turkiye has had three coups before the attempted coup in 2016. In 1960 Prime Minister Adnan Menderes was overthrown by the military. Prime Minister Suleyman Demirel was forced to resigned amid economic turmoil and unrest in 1971. There was also a toppling of the government in 1980 which resulted in mass arrests and torture of political opponents. The last coup before the 2016 attempt was in 1997 when Prime Minister Necmettin Erbakan was pressured to resign by the military.
On 15 July 2016 the Turkish people of all persuasions filled up the streets and prevented the coup from materialising. All Turkiye, even those who were vehemently against the leadership of AK Party and the leadership of Tayyip Erdogan joined in the streets to stop the coup. It was indeed at that point when President Erdogan became a true leader of Turkiye. The country became united behind his leadership, which gave him the power to implement changes in the political discourse of Turkiye for many years to come marking a new era in Turkiye’s politics. In April 2017, the Turkish population narrowly approved the constitutional changes necessary to transition to a presidential system, by 51.4 per cent to 48.6 per cent. Importantly, there was also a change of political leadership in Istanbul. After 25 years of AK Party rule, it lost the elections to the Republican People’s Party (CHP). The AKP’s candidate, former Prime Minister Binali Yildirim lost the mayoral elections of Istanbul to Mr Ekrem Imamoglu, of the Republican People’s Party (CHP).

Over and above the constitutional changes that led to the transition to the presidential system in parliament and political party changes in the mayorship of Istanbul, there were other notable changes in the political infrastructure in Turkiye. The events of 15 July 2016 weakened the deep state that has always impacted and controlled Turkiye’s politics from behind the scenes. The Turkish phrase derin devlet literally means “deep state.” According to historian Ryan Gingeras, the term “generally refers to a kind of shadow or parallel system of government in which unofficial or publicly unacknowledged individuals play important roles in defining and implementing state policy.” The dismantling of the “Deep State” allowed further development of the democratic changes in Turkiye. The grip of the deep state particularly the military elite that controlled the politics of Turkiye over the years, suffocated socio-political realities and possibilities in Turkiye. The situation in Turkiye of 2025 is certainly a far cry from the Turkey of the pasts where politics was dominated by the deep state and the military apparatus as the “permanent occupiers of power”.
Finally, the failure of the attempted coup also served as a clear signal to other resistance movements inside Turkiye. The masses in the country were sick and tired and had lost appetite for violent takeover of governments. Coups and armed resistance to influence politics in Turkiye were no longer an option for the people of Turkiye. Luqman Rezi a local political analyst argues that “it is this realisation that has led to the PKK to abandon armed resistance. This realisation has also pushed the PKK to mainstream political contestation instead of violence”. Importantly though, the PKK’s political fortunes in the region have been rapidly weaning, particularly with the toppling of Bashar Al Assad and the liberation of Syria. The entrenchment of Turkiye in the politics of the region after the fall of the regime of Bashar al Assad has been critical. It can be argued therefore that the attempted coup of 15 July 2016 did not only unite the people of Turkiye against coups, it also assisted in entrenching and legitimised the power of President Erdogan and the AK Party. Significantly, it significantly weakened the deep state and altered the influence of the army in Turkiye forever.

The assassination of one of the highest-ranking Generals and the Commanders of Al Quds Force – part of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) – Qasem Soleimani, opened an unprecedented form of conflict in the Gulf region. Soleimani was killed in Iraq on 3 January 2020 by an US drone strike in Iraq, while travelling to meet Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul Mahdi. Iran retaliated by targeting the US military facilities in Iraq, it fired more than a dozen ballistic missiles at two Iraqi air bases housing US forces days after the assassination. According to The Times of Israel, Israel helped the US in that operation.
The leader of Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh was killed by Israel in Tehran after attending the inauguration of the President of Iran Masoud Pezeshkian. Another pure violation of the sovereignty of Iran and international law. The killing of Haniyeh in July 2024 came on the heels of the attack and killing of a number of Iranian diplomats at the embassy of Iran in Damascus, Syria on 01 April 2024. Israel – with the support of the US – has continued to assassinate Iranian officials at will inside Iran.

Qatar had joint military operations with the US during the Operation Desert Storm in Iraq in 1991. After the operation, Qatar and the US signed a Defence Cooperation Agreement. The agreement was expanded in 1996 to include the building of Al Udeid Military Air Base at a cost of more than $1 billion. The Al Udeid Military Air Base is the largest US military base in the Middle East. Iran attacked Al Udeid in retaliation to the US’s attacks of Iranian nuclear sites in Fordo, Natanz and Esfahan in Iran in June 2025. Although the retaliation strikes were downplayed by the US and Qatar, the attacks seemed to have been carefully choreographed, exposing a new fault line in US-Qatar military cooperation.
The question in most minds of Qataris is; what will happen next time when the US decides to attack Iran, will Iran retaliate by attacking Qatar again? Notwithstanding the repeated mantra of “a friendly, brotherly love and appreciation” between Qatar and Iran, the biggest threat to Qatar’s security and political stability now and in the near future is a possible war between Israel and the US against Iran. The targeting of Iran by Israel and the US presents a new security threat in the region.

Al Udeid has served as “a symbol of protection for the State of Qatar against potential attacks and other forms of hostilities”. However, when put to the test, Al Udeid has failed to meet those expectations. Besides the recent Iran attacks of the US military installations in Al Udeid; when Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain and Egypt led a blockade against Qatar in 2017, there was no forewarning from the US notwithstanding Al Udeid’s superior military intelligence. According to the Qatari Defence Minister, Khalid al Attiyah, “Actually it was not a mere intention. There was a plan to invade Qatar”. The “plan was set into two phases, imposing the siege with the aim of creating an overall state of panic, which would have a direct impact on the Qatari street, then executing a military invasion”.

The possible future conflicts involving the US and Iran have raised serious concerns about the safety of US’s assets and personnel in the region. It has also triggered a debate, particularly within the US media, of the viability and rationale of the country’s continued involvement in Israel’s wars in the region. The Make America Great Again (MEGA) leading supporters such as the executive chairman of Breitbart News, Stephen Banon and right-wing journalist and social media influencer Tucker Carlson have questioned “the US continuing blind support Israel’s wars in the Middle East”. Tucker Carlson a known Trump supporter and a right-wing voice has been the loudest. He has been “urging the US to stay out of Israel’s war with Iran”. Bannon and Carlson are part of a broader effort to overturn the “GOP’s hawkish consensus on Israel”. Notwithstanding his unwavering support of Israel, Trump has been critical of Benjamin Netanyahu war mongering strategy in the region. Trump has entered into lucrative business relationships with countries in the Arab/Persian Gulf recently; Netanyahu stands to disturb that relationship. The US and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have agreed to turn Abu Dhabi “to a site of the largest artificial intelligence campus outside the US”. The US will allow “the UAE to import half a million Nvidia semiconductor chips, considered the most advanced in the world in the artificial intelligence products”. According to The Guardian, Saudi Arabia struck a similar deal of semiconductors, obtaining the promise of the sale of hundreds of thousands of Nvidia Blackwell chips to Humain, an AI start-up owned by the Saudi Sovereign Wealth Fund. Indeed, given these interests and the strengthening relationship between the US and the Gulf countries, the US has much more to lose if it continues to blindly support Israel’s wars.

The relationship between Iran and the State of Qatar is very strong, both countries share gas exploration sites in the South Pars/North Dome. They are the gas condensate fields located in the Arabian/Persian Gulf. They are by far the world’s largest natural gas fields. There is also the people to people relationship between Qatar and Iran dating back to time immemorial. The next attack of Iran by the US or Israel could escalate and spread the war to Qatar. Although the US managed to move its assets from Al Udeid to other locations in Qatar before Iran’s attacks last month, the question remains. What guarantees do Qatar have that in future Iran would not target those locations? There is a possibility that if attacked Iran will once again retaliate. What will happen then? The retaliatory attacks could go beyond a mere violation of Qatar’s airspace and sovereignty; it could also cost Qatari lives. The State of Qatar has to take serious decisions regarding Al Udeid if it wants to maintain its future relationship with Iran and other countries in the region. It must close Al Udeid. It has more valid reasons to do that now. The threat has morphed in the region. Consequently, new defence infrastructure needs to be considered by Qatar. Al Udeid presents more political and diplomatic challenges than opportunities.

The anti-migration regulations in Europe and the US against Africans continue to affect the sociopolitical and economic development of Africa. Thousands of Africans who apply for visas continue to have their applications rejected.

Moreover, most Africans are charged exorbitant non-refundable fees when applying for visas. Millions in foreign and local currencies are accumulated by European and US embassies in various African countries from visa applications annually. African visa applicants face more severe restrictions compared with applicants from other regions, resulting in a disproportionately high rejection rate.

In 2022, Africa topped the list of rejections with 30% or one in three of all processed applications being turned down, even though it had the lowest number of visa applications per capita. Africa accounted for seven of the top 10 countries with the highest Schengen visa rejection rates in 2022: Algeria (45.8%), Guinea-Bissau (45.2%), Nigeria (45.1%), Ghana (43.6%), Senegal (41.6%), Guinea (40.6%) and Mali (39.9%). The situation has become worse over the years as economic instability and conflicts continue to rage in most African countries.

Some African countries have started calling for visa reciprocity against travellers from Europe and the US. The US and most European countries do not require visas to enter African countries. According to Justice Malala, a South African political analyst, in May, Namibia unveiled measures to impose entry visa requirements to more than 30 countries that have not reciprocated its open visa regime. Nigeria has threatened to impose the same measures. In the run-up to the French election earlier in July, a Chadian official told France’s Le Monde newspaper that if incoming leaders block visas for Chadians, “we will apply reciprocity”.

Zambia’s President Hakainde Hichilema recently raised the issue of non-refundable visa fees in his country, demanding the rules on non-refundable fees be re-examined and the visa application fees be refunded to Zambians whose applications are rejected. If his demand is accepted, this must apply to all African countries. According to European states, most rejections are based on "reasonable doubts about the visa applicants’ intention to return home". Many Africans believe otherwise. They claim that African visa rejections are weaponised against Africans to deprive them of voices at critical political and socio-economic gatherings on global matters such as climate change, artificial intelligence, human trafficking in Europe and the US. These discussions eventually become policies that affect Africa. An increased number of leading Africans on these subjects continue to have their applications rejected. These do not sound like people who present “reasonable doubts about the visa applicants’ intentions to return home”.

African News reports that African governments are building partnerships with Europe across sectors, trade, education, and technology. But the barriers to movement stand in stark contrast to the rhetoric of cooperation.

The rise of right-wing politics in many parts of the world has also further complicated matters for African visa applicants. Pressure from far-right parties who are in power in half a dozen member states in Europe are outdoing each other in introducing tough anti-immigration measures.

US President Donald Trump has just imposed travel bans on 12 countries, of which seven are African — Chad, Congo-Brazzaville, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Libya, Somalia and Sudan. Travel restrictions will be imposed on people from Burundi, Sierra Leone, and Togo.
Even before this measure, Trump’s anti-migration political campaign and his subsequent extra-judicial expulsion of immigrants without due process now that he is in power has emboldened right-wing anti-migration politics throughout the world. The victory on Monday of the nationalist historian Karol Nawrocki in Poland's presidential election is one case in point. Nawrocki is an admirer of Trump who support by calling for tighter immigration controls and championing conservative social values in the EU.

The BBC reports that Trump's administration can temporarily revoke the legal status of more than 500,000 migrants living in the US, the US Supreme Court ruled recently. The ruling puts on hold a previous federal judge's order stopping the administration from ending the "parole" immigration programme, established by former president Joe Biden. The programme protected immigrants fleeing economic and political turmoil in their home countries. The new order puts roughly 530,000 migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela at risk of being deported.

It is not just the rejection of visa applications that is troubling; the non-refundable visa application fees continue to negatively affect applicants’ financial status. According to the London-based research and arts organisation LAGO Collective, African countries have lost an estimated $67.5 million in non-refundable Schengen visa application fees since 2024. Africans find themselves going against the tide in a globalised world where mobility equates to opportunity. They are finding themselves locked out “not because they lack intention or preparation, but because the system increasingly seems stacked against them”.
This matter deserves a wider discussion, preferably at the African Union.

The visa rejections of Africans are not only about Africans overstaying their allowed time in Europe and the US. It is about Europe and the US continuing with business as usual, particularly at multilateral level, where binding discussions without the involvement of Africans are taken. This is particularly the case regarding rare earth minerals and other metals essential to new technologies.