What do Africa and Iran, Venezuela, Panama have in common?

The conflict between the US and Iran has a long history, dating back to the Islamic Revolution of 1979. This revolution overthrew the pro-Western Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and installed a religious regime. Since then, relations between the two countries have deteriorated significantly.

Main causes of a military conflict in 2026: is that Iran's nuclear program. The US and Israel feared that Iran could develop nuclear weapons and thus threaten Israel and the West. In 2015, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was signed, which restricted Iran's nuclear program in exchange for a relaxation of sanctions. However, in 2018, the US, under the administration of Donald Trump, withdrew from the agreement because it did not include restrictions on Iran's missile program and supported armed groups abroad. Subsequently, the US reimposed sanctions, and Iran exceeded the agreed-upon quantities and uranium enrichment levels. In June 2025, the IAEA confirmed that Iran had stockpiled 275 kg of uranium enriched to 60%. The US accused Iran of supporting organizations such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Gaza Strip and the Houthis in Yemen, which it believed had destabilized the region. Following the brutal crackdown on protests by government troops, the US increased its military presence in the region and expressed its support for the protesters. Some experts and analysts expressed the view that the US wanted to secure control over the global financial system and the shipping lanes in the Persian Gulf, through which energy resources are transported. Iran, with the world's third-largest oil reserves and as a key hub in the north-south transportation corridor, posed a geopolitical and economic threat to the United States. The goal of weakening Iran was also cited as part of a strategy to contain the BRICS nations and the alternative financial systems in which Iran participated through trade with China, Russia, and India, bypassing the dollar. According to reports, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pressured the United States to weaken Iran as a threat to Israel. Israel aims to significantly weaken Iran's power structure, including through attacks on high-ranking officials and its energy infrastructure, in order to reshape the regional balance of power. In June 2025, Israel launched attacks on Iranian nuclear and military facilities, provoking Iranian retaliatory strikes and further escalating the conflict. On February 28, 2026, the United States and Israel launched massive attacks against targets in Iran. Iran responded with attacks on Israel and other countries in the region, as well as their American military installations. It should be noted that the motives for the US actions are interpreted differently, and some experts question the official version of the primary nuclear threat. They point instead to political and economic factors as the main causes of the conflict, which is likely true. Iran possesses vast oil and gas reserves, controls the Strait of Hormuz, and has used threats against these reserves as leverage in the past. Now Venezuela. The US military strike against Venezuela at the beginning of this year (Operation Absolute Resolve on January 3, 2026) has sparked heated debate worldwide. The claim that the primary objective was control of the vast oil reserves is not only raised by critics, but also fueled by US President Trump's own statements. Following the capture of Nicolás Maduro and his extradition to New York, Trump explicitly stated that the US would now take control of Venezuela's infrastructure in order to rebuild it with the help of US corporations such as ExxonMobil and Chevron. Since mid-March 2026, the US has eased sanctions against the state-owned oil company PDVSA. The oil now flows directly to the US again, with payments being processed through US-controlled accounts. By accessing Venezuelan oil, the US is trying to stabilize global oil prices, as supply is currently limited due to the conflict with Iran. The US government officially justifies the deployment not with oil, but with criminal charges: Then there's the drug trade. Maduro is accused of "conspiracy to commit drug terrorism" and importing cocaine into the USA. The regime change. The US argues that the operation was necessary to end the "authoritarian rule" and initiate a democratic transition under the new interim president, Delcy Rodríguez. And there's the case of Panama (1989), which is the classic historical example of what we're currently seeing in Venezuela. There are striking parallels in how the US carries out and justifies regime change. This is often called the "Noriega strategy": 1. The pretext: Drug trafficking Just like Maduro now, the then-ruler Manuel Noriega was also officially wanted by the USA for drug trafficking and money laundering. Noriega was an important CIA informant for years until he became "inconvenient" for the US. Only then were the drug charges used to justify the invasion (Operation Just Cause). Maduro is also described as a "drug terrorist" in order to morally and legally (according to US law) legitimize the military intervention. 2. The real reason: Strategic control In Panama, the issue wasn't oil, but the Panama Canal. The US wanted to ensure that a US-friendly government was in power after the lease agreements (which had been agreed under Jimmy Carter for the year 2000) expired. In Venezuela, oil is the equivalent of the canal – it is the strategic resource that one does not want to leave in the hands of an adversary (or under the influence of Russia/China). 3. The process: Invasion and installation The events in Panama were almost identical to the current scenario: Massive air raids and invasion (December 1989). Noriega fled to the Vatican embassy, but was eventually captured and flown to the USA. While the fighting was still ongoing, opposition leader Guillermo Endara was sworn in as the new president at a US military base. 4. The consequences Although Panama became a democracy, it remained heavily dependent on the US for decades. Critics argue that such interventions serve less to promote freedom and more to secure "backyards" and replace undesirable leaders with loyal partners. An interesting aspect: In both cases (Panama 1989 and Venezuela 2026), the USA interpreted international law very "creatively" by declaring an invasion as a police operation to arrest a criminal. There are some similarities. Panama, Venezuela, and now Iran. The US isn't concerned with freedom, democracy, or human rights. It's concerned with resources. Africa has a lot to offer. Africa's wealth of resources is undeniable. Africa is rich in a variety of minerals that are crucial to global industry. Gold, diamonds, copper & cobalt, platinum & chromium, bauxite, iron ore, phosphates, rare earths. Then there are also energy resources. Oil and natural gas, coal, renewable energies (enormous potential): solar energy, hydropower, wind energy, geothermal energy: All of this exists in Africa, and if the US needs these resources, they will come here. They've already been to Libya; now Libya is a devastated country. Under Gaddafi, it was a beautiful and prosperous land. American freedom destroyed it. The spread and escalation of conflicts - not only - in Africa, as well as the need for new equipment, explain the increase in military spending, explained security and defense expert Akram Kharief. According to Kharief, another key factor is the emergence of a new generation of African officers and leaders who are significantly different from their predecessors. To avoid scenarios like those in Venezuela, Panama, or Iran, African countries are taking a range of measures to strengthen stability, sovereignty, economic development, and regional cooperation. These efforts encompass political, economic, social, and international aspects. Many African countries are working to improve their political systems to prevent authoritarianism, corruption, and instability. Examples include: The development of democratic institutions and mechanisms for the transfer of power. Some countries, such as Ghana and Nigeria, have established mechanisms for regular transfers of power. Combating corruption and increasing the transparency of governance. This helps to reduce the risk of power and resources being concentrated in the hands of a small group of people. Decentralization and the inclusion of regional elites. In many African political systems, regional elites play a key role, contributing to more balanced governance. Dependence on raw material exports (oil, minerals, etc.) makes the economy vulnerable to external shocks. African countries are taking measures to: to expand the manufacturing sector and other sectors beyond raw material exports. Development programs such as the African Union's Agenda 2063 emphasize industrialization. to strengthen the agricultural sector. Investments in agriculture, including the introduction of modern technologies, regenerative agriculture and support for farmers (especially women, who make up about 40% of the agricultural workforce), to reduce the debt burden. High levels of debt represent one of the greatest risks to stability. Countries are working to manage their debt and obtain more favorable financing conditions. The African Union (AU) and sub-regional organizations (e.g. ECOWAS, SADC, EAS) play a key role in strengthening continental solidarity: The creation of the African Continental Free Trade Area aims to strengthen intra-African relations, reduce dependence on external markets and create a common economic area. Joint efforts in the security sector. The AU is actively involved in conflict resolution (e.g., in South Sudan, the Central African Republic, and Libya), deploys peacekeeping missions, and works on post-conflict reconstruction. Coordination of energy, infrastructure and other policy areas to reduce vulnerability to external shocks. African countries are striving to strengthen their sovereignty and reduce external influence: Focus on Pan-Africanism and independent development; rejection of adopting foreign models in favor of adapting best practices to local conditions. Developing local problem-solving mechanisms and minimizing dependence on external actors in security and economic matters. For example, the African Union is striving for a more active role in peacekeeping missions to avoid situations like the Libyan crisis. Participation in international formats such as the G20 to strengthen the continent's voice on the global stage. Social investment and addressing demographic challenges A rapidly growing population and social problems require attention: Development of education and healthcare to strengthen human capital. Programs to support young people, whose numbers could double by 2050. This includes job creation and economic integration. Measures to mitigate climate change, particularly affecting agricultural regions. African countries are striving to build relationships with external partners without political conditions: Developing relations with China, India, Russia and other countries that offer alternative cooperation models unaffected by political demands. Participation in formats such as Africa-Latin America, Africa-ASEAN and others that broaden the horizon of cooperation beyond traditional Western partners. While these measures do not guarantee complete risk elimination, they form the basis for more sustainable and self-reliant development on the continent. The key success factors remain the ability to coordinate efforts at the regional level, flexibility in adapting to external shocks, and a focus on long-term strategic planning. It cannot be repeated often enough that African nations should prepare for a possible scenario.