The war on Iran echoes across Africa

Since February 28, 2026, when the United States and Israel carried out coordinated strikes against sites inside Iranian territory, Africa has once again found itself caught in the fallout of a complex international crisis whose levers it does not control. By virtue of its deep integration into global trade networks and maritime supply chains, the continent has not remained a mere observer of a conflict unfolding in distant geography. It has quickly been drawn into its circle of direct consequences.

Africa’s geopolitical position at the crossroads of key maritime corridors linking the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea, and the Indian Ocean leaves its economies and markets acutely sensitive to any military escalation in these spaces. As the crisis deepens, the continent appears among the regions most exposed to its repercussions. Political, economic, and strategic pressures intersect across its landscape, threatening to weigh heavily on stability in the near and medium term.

Following the heavy strikes inside Iran and Tehran’s retaliatory attacks on American and Israeli targets in the Gulf, a clear division emerged among African capitals. At its core, the split reflected calculations of interest and alliance more than any shared principles or unified vision. The African Union voiced deep concern over the escalation, urging restraint, dialogue, and adherence to international law. Yet this collective stance quickly fragmented at the level of individual states.

The continent effectively divided between a camp that quietly condemned Iran while remaining silent about the American–Israeli strikes, and another that framed the crisis primarily through the language of international law. In the Horn of Africa, Somaliland, Ethiopia, and Kenya moved swiftly to condemn Iranian attacks on Gulf states while deliberately sidestepping Washington and Tel Aviv’s role in igniting the crisis. That alignment was hardly accidental. The Emirati-funded Berbera base in Somaliland, Israel’s recognition of the territory as a sovereign state, and the financial remittances sent home by millions of Ethiopians and Kenyans working in the Gulf have all shaped the political calculus of these governments.

Elsewhere, a different tone emerged. Pretoria and Dakar emphasized legal principles and global stability. South Africa stressed that “Anticipatory self-defence is not permitted under international law,” a clear critique of Washington’s position. Senegal’s prime minister Ousmane Sonko went further, warning that the situation is “extremely serious and the whole balance of the world that has been built over the last 50 years is compromised..”

The divergence reveals the fragility of a unified African stance under the weight of competing interests. Countries such as Nigeria and Ghana have instead opted for what might be called strategic hedging, calling for restraint without condemning either side.

As the war continues and its political and geographic scope widens, Africa finds itself confronting a familiar equation, though one with existential implications. A double shock looms, affecting producers and importers alike amid turbulence in energy markets, rising transport costs, and disrupted supply chains. The American-Israeli war against Iran has struck at the Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly 20–30 percent of global oil production passes.

The immediate result has been a surge in inflationary risk and a sharp rise in Brent crude prices, climbing between 8 and 13 percent to approach $82 per barrel and continuing to trend upward. Here lies Africa’s paradox: Oil-producing countries such as Nigeria and Angola may temporarily benefit from higher revenues, particularly as the price now exceeds Nigeria’s budget benchmark of $64.85 per barrel. Yet experts warn that such gains could prove short-lived, as global instability ultimately slows growth and dampens demand.

For oil-importing states the picture is far more painful. Countries such as Kenya, Rwanda, and South Africa face a wave of inflation. Higher fuel prices translate directly into increased transportation and food costs, worsening an already severe cost-of-living crisis. More troubling still is the disruption of supply chains. Threats from the Houthis in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait and from Iran in Hormuz have forced vessels to reroute around the Cape of Good Hope, extending travel times and driving up insurance and shipping costs. The burden ultimately falls on African consumers, who will pay more than ever for imported goods.

The crisis has revived questions about global alignments on the continent and hinted at a possible redrawing of influence and alliances among major powers that increasingly view Africa as one of the central arenas of geopolitical competition in a changing international order.

This war is not merely a limited military confrontation confined to the geography of the Middle East. It has also opened the door to intensified international competition across Africa. The crisis has revived questions about global alignments on the continent and hinted at a possible redrawing of influence and alliances among major powers that increasingly view Africa as one of the central arenas of geopolitical competition in a changing international order. In this unsettled context, the continent once again appears as an open space where power and influence are being renegotiated.

For Iran, which faces growing regional isolation and the pressure of Western sanctions, Africa represents a strategic outlet for expanding its economic and political room for maneuver. In recent years Tehran has sought to reinvigorate its diplomatic and commercial presence in several African states, taking advantage of the partial retreat of Western influence in some regions and the growing rhetoric of “diversifying partners” within many African capitals. In 2025, Iranian exports to the continent surged by nearly 85 percent, reflecting Tehran’s interest in cultivating Africa as both an alternative market and a potential political ally in the face of international pressure.

This Iranian outreach has taken on a clearer strategic dimension in the Sahel, where growing rapprochement has emerged between Tehran and the Alliance of Sahel States -- Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger -- following the gradual withdrawal of Western forces and the decline of their traditional influence in the region. The shift has been visible in reciprocal visits and security discussions, including Tehran’s reception of Burkina Faso’s defense minister in February 2026 to deepen military and security cooperation. Reports of possible Iranian interest in purchasing uranium from Niger have also raised concern in Western capitals, given the resource’s sensitivity in the context of nuclear energy and global strategic balance.

The United States, for its part, is seeking to preserve its military and intelligence foothold on the continent. It continues to rely on alliances with West African states and on a network of bases spread across East Africa and the Indian Ocean. American facilities in Djibouti, alongside logistical and security installations in Kenya such as the Manda Bay base, serve as key nodes for military operations and strategic surveillance across the Red Sea and the Horn of Africa. Yet using these bases within the context of a confrontation with Iran could turn host countries into potential targets for direct or indirect retaliation, whether through asymmetric attacks or wider regional escalation.

Once again Africa finds itself at the heart of great-power competition, where the interests of global actors intersect across its geography and strategic resources. As worldwide competition intensifies over critical minerals, particularly rare elements essential for advanced technological and military industries, the continent’s significance as a strategic reservoir of raw materials continues to grow. In such circumstances Africa risks becoming not merely a recipient of the conflict’s repercussions but one of its indirect arenas, where calculations of energy, security, and resources intertwine within a widening struggle for global influence.

Furthermore, more than 400,000 Kenyans work in Gulf countries, and the remittances they send home amount to billions of dollars that could vanish if workers lose their jobs or are forced to return because of the war. Disruptions to air traffic and the closure of Middle Eastern airspace have also affected major hubs such as Nairobi and Addis Ababa, whose airports have become congested with canceled or diverted flights.

Food security is equally at stake. Rising energy prices and the cost of imported food threaten the stability of states already grappling with limited resources. Strategic risks surrounding food supply, shipping lanes, and the network of military bases across the continent are increasing rapidly. At the same time, internal indicators of social tension are growing as economic pressures mount, prices rise, and purchasing power erodes.

The repercussions of the war have not been confined to politics and economics; they have also touched the religious and social fabric of several African societies.

Direct security threats may also emerge in the form of attacks against Western interests on African soil. The American military base on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, vital to U.S. operations, could draw attention in this context. Militant groups such as al-Shabaab and Boko Haram may seek to exploit the turmoil to recruit new members or stage attacks inspired by global jihadist narratives. In that sense history offers a sobering reminder: the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam in 1998 showed how conflicts rooted in the Middle East can reach far beyond its borders.

The repercussions of this war have not been confined to politics and economics; they have also touched the religious and social fabric of several African societies. The killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei sparked waves of protest and sympathy among some Shiite communities worldwide, and Africa experienced its share of these symbolic and political reverberations. In Nigeria, thousands of supporters of the Islamic Movement led by Ibrahim Zakzaky demonstrated across several northern states, including Gombe, Kano, and Bauchi. Protesters carried Iranian flags and chanted slogans denouncing the United States and Israel, bringing renewed attention to the political and religious presence of Shiite networks connected to the discourse of “resistance.”

These demonstrations alarmed Nigerian authorities, who warned against the danger of importing external ideological and religious tensions into the African context. Security measures were tightened around places of worship and religious gathering centers amid fears that protests could evolve into broader flashpoints. The concern has deep historical roots, as the Nigerian state has long viewed the activities of the Islamic Movement with suspicion, particularly after a series of violent confrontations between the group and security forces in past years.

These developments have raised notable concern among Nigerian authorities, who warned of the danger of “importing external ideological and religious tensions” into the African sphere. In response, security measures were tightened, including increased surveillance around places of worship and religious gathering sites, amid fears that the protests could evolve into broader flashpoints of unrest. The concern is rooted in a complex historical context, as the Nigerian state has long viewed the activities of the Islamic Movement with suspicion, particularly after a series of violent confrontations between the group and security forces in recent years.

The unrest is not confined to Nigeria. Growing signs of mobilization and polarization have appeared within Shiite communities in several West African countries, including Senegal, Guinea, and Niger, where religious and cultural networks maintain intellectual or symbolic links to the Iranian axis. As sectarian rhetoric intensifies globally in the wake of the war, these communities may find themselves drawn more deeply into symbolic conflicts that transcend local boundaries. Such developments risk introducing sectarian divisions into social spaces that historically have been less marked by confessional fault lines than many other parts of the Muslim world.

The danger is particularly acute in countries where the religious and social fabric is already fragile. Nigeria, for instance, sits at the intersection of potential sectarian tension and broader religious divisions between Muslims and Christians, compounded by long-standing ethnic and regional complexities. In such an environment, even a transnational ideological spark can quickly become a catalyst for domestic unrest, especially when coupled with mobilizing or polarizing rhetoric that draws upon historical grievances or perceptions of marginalization.

These charged conditions may also provide fertile ground for extremist groups operating across the Sahel and West Africa. Organizations such as Boko Haram, along with factions linked to al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, have long sought to exploit regional crises and militant religious discourse to expand recruitment and mobilization. A climate of sectarian polarization could offer precisely the narrative they seek, allowing them to frame global tensions as part of a broader ideological confrontation.

Africa thus emerges in this crisis not as a distant observer of a war unfolding elsewhere, but as a landscape increasingly exposed to its immediate and medium-term consequences. Some analysts warn of an even darker scenario: that the continent could become a new arena for geopolitical expansion in the aftermath of confrontation with Iran, especially as a continuation of a global system still shaped by the logic of American dominance.

In the face of this complex landscape, the African continent’s options appear limited and fraught with risk. The situation underscores the urgent need for deeper coordination, solidarity, and collective African action. In a world drifting back toward the logic of hard power and the erosion of cooperative international norms, a unified African stance and shared political will may represent the last line of defense capable of absorbing the shocks of rapid geopolitical change and shielding the continent from the storms that may lie ahead.