A not-so-random recognition by John Kato

Israel’s decision to recognize Somaliland as an independent state is less about Africa and more about Israel’s place in an increasingly fractured global order. It is a move that looks small on the map but loud in symbolism, a diplomatic act designed to send signals far beyond the Horn of Africa. Official explanations may gesture toward self-determination or pragmatic cooperation, but the real motives sit deeper, in geopolitics, insecurity, and a growing willingness to challenge long-standing international taboos.

At first glance Somaliland seems an unlikely focus. It is a relatively stable, self-governing region that has operated separately from Somalia since 1991, yet it has never received formal international recognition. For decades, the global consensus has been clear: Somalia’s territorial integrity must be preserved, even if the reality on the ground is messy. By breaking from that consensus, Israel is not merely recognizing Somaliland; it is questioning who gets to define legitimacy in a world where rules feel increasingly selective.

One motive is strategic geography. Somaliland sits along the Gulf of Aden, one of the world’s most critical maritime corridors. For Israel, which is deeply sensitive to threats along shipping lanes connecting Asia, Europe, and the Middle East, cultivating a friendly political entity in this region offers obvious advantages. Access, intelligence cooperation, and influence near the Red Sea all carry weight, especially as regional rivalries intensify and non-state threats proliferate.

Another layer is Israel’s ongoing diplomatic isolation in parts of the Global South. Many African and Middle Eastern countries have hardened their positions against Israel, particularly in light of recent conflicts. Recognizing Somaliland can be read as an attempt to create a new ally where none officially existed before, a calculated bet that a grateful, unrecognized state will offer unwavering support in international forums. It is diplomacy by asymmetry,  Israel offers recognition, Somaliland offers loyalty.

There is also a mirror effect at play. Israel itself is deeply entangled in debates over borders, recognition, and unilateral actions. By recognizing Somaliland, Israel implicitly normalizes the idea that de facto realities can outweigh inherited borders drawn by history or colonial compromise. This is not accidental. It reinforces an argument Israel has long made about its own contested territories: that permanence is created by control, governance, and time, not by international discomfort.

Yet this move is also performative. Israel is showing that it will no longer wait patiently for approval from multilateral institutions that it increasingly views as hostile or hypocritical. Recognition of Somaliland becomes a statement of defiance, a way of saying that international norms are negotiable, especially when they appear inconsistently applied. In this sense, the decision is less about Somaliland’s readiness for statehood and more about Israel’s frustration with the global system.

The backlash was predictable. African states fear the precedent such recognition sets, particularly on a continent where borders, however artificial, are treated as sacred to avoid endless fragmentation. Middle Eastern nations see another example of Israel acting unilaterally, reinforcing perceptions of exceptionalism. The European Union’s response, emphasizing Somalia’s territorial integrity, reflects anxiety about a rules-based order already under strain.

What Israel may be underestimating is the cost of symbolic victories. While the recognition may gain Israel a foothold in Somaliland, it risks deepening mistrust elsewhere. Countries that already suspect Israel of selectively invoking international law will see this as confirmation. It also complicates Israel’s relationships with partners who value stability over experimentation in fragile regions.

Ultimately, Israel’s recognition of Somaliland is a message wrapped in a map. It says that Israel is willing to redraw diplomatic lines when it suits its interests, even if it stands alone. It signals impatience with consensus and confidence in power politics. Whether this boldness translates into long-term gain or strategic overreach remains to be seen. For now, the move tells us less about Somaliland’s future and more about Israel’s evolving worldview: a state increasingly comfortable acting first, explaining later, and daring the world to catch up.

In that sense, the recognition is also a test balloon. Israel is watching who protests loudly, who stays silent, and who might quietly follow. It is measuring the elasticity of international outrage and the durability of old principles in a time of selective enforcement. Somaliland becomes the stage, but the audience is global. The real question is not whether Somaliland deserves recognition, but whether this act accelerates a world where recognition itself becomes just another tool of leverage, stripped of moral language and driven almost entirely by interest. That shift should worry everyone watching closely.