By: Nana Karikari, Senior Global Affairs Correspondent
A tit-for-tat deportation row between Ghana and Israel has cast a sudden chill over a relationship spanning more than six decades. Ghana’s swift reciprocal action, following the alleged “ill-treatment and unjustified deportation” of its citizens by Israeli authorities, signals a new firmness in Accra’s foreign policy approach to protecting its nationals abroad. While both sides have agreed to pursue an amicable resolution, the episode has exposed diplomatic fault lines that require careful handling.
Reciprocal Action Sends Clear Message
The immediate trigger was the deportation of three Ghanaian nationals from Israel’s Ben Gurion International Airport on December 7, 2025. This incident also saw four Ghanaian parliamentary delegation staff detained for over five hours. The deported Ghanaians included individuals traveling to attend an international cybersecurity conference and one on a pilgrimage. Ghana’s response—the expulsion of three Israelis who had just arrived in Accra—was an act of direct reciprocity, meant to underscore a demand for mutual respect.
Ghana’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, a member of the governing National Democratic Congress (NDC), was unequivocal. “The government of Ghana has been compelled to activate appropriate reciprocal action by deporting three Israelis who arrived in Ghana earlier today following the ill-treatment and unwarranted deportation of three Ghanaians,” he stated.
He later confirmed in a public statement, “We made it clear that Ghana will respond decisively to any unjustified treatment of our citizens.” This firm stance resonates with many ordinary Ghanaians, for whom the dignity of a passport is paramount. A Ghanaian citizen in Accra, speaking anonymously, noted, “It is good that the government is showing that we are not a weak country. They need to respect us, just like we respect their people here.”
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in announcing the decision, also confirmed the summons of the Chargé d’Affaires ad interim at the Embassy of the State of Israel, in the absence of the Ambassador. The Ministry called the actions of Israeli authorities “inhumane and traumatic,” condemning them as “extremely provocative, unacceptable and inconsistent with our friendly historical relations.”
Israel Urges Quiet Diplomacy
In Jerusalem, the response has been more guarded. An Israeli official, speaking to Myjoyonline, insisted the matter was merely a “consular problem” and denied any apology had been issued. The official stressed that such issues are typically resolved “quietly between two friendly and mature states.” This suggests Israel prefers discreet, established diplomatic channels over public exchanges.
The dispute highlights a growing friction point: immigration. Israel had allegedly claimed the deportations were linked to non-cooperation from the Ghanaian embassy in Tel Aviv, a claim Ghana’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs described as “totally untenable.” Israel’s pushback contrasts with Minister Ablakwa’s assertion that Israeli authorities had apologized and called for de-escalation, saying, “The Israeli authorities, through the attaché, have now apologized for the action they carried out and have called for de-escalation.”
Call for Strategic Restraint
The episode has prompted calls for restraint from Ghana’s main opposition party, the New Patriotic Party (NPP). The Ranking Member of the Foreign Affairs Committee of Parliament, Samuel Abu Jinapor, called for a more strategic and less public approach. “Any effort by the Government of Ghana to protect the interests and dignity of Ghanaians abroad should be welcomed,” he said, but cautioned, “It is important for the Minister for Foreign Affairs to take the path of quiet, calm and strategic diplomacy in dealing with these matters.”
Mr. Jinapor also described the conflicting accounts as concerning, adding that clarity is needed to preserve Ghana’s diplomatic credibility. He added that Ghana’s foreign policy response must be guided by sound judgement, prudence and measured engagement through the appropriate diplomatic channels. The divergent views on how to manage the crisis—public firmness versus quiet negotiation—reflect the delicate balance in foreign policy. While Minister Ablakwa believes a public show of strength is necessary to protect citizens, Mr. Jinapor emphasizes preserving Ghana’s long-standing diplomatic reputation.
The Path Forward for Bilateral Ties
Ghana and Israel have a history of cooperation dating back to 1958, shortly after Ghana’s independence. Ties were re-established in 1994 after a break, and the relationship has since deepened in areas like trade, technology, agriculture, and security. The current spat, however, comes amid existing differences, including Ghana’s recent critical stance on Israeli military operations in Gaza and its consistent pro-Palestinian voting pattern at the United Nations.
Ghana’s diplomatic move serves as a firm affirmation that a close, cooperative relationship must be built on a foundation of reciprocal dignity and respect. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs clearly stated: “Ghana deeply values our relations with all friendly countries and expects our citizens to be treated with dignity and respect in much the same way as other governments expect Ghana to treat their nationals.”
Following the reciprocal actions, the focus has now shifted entirely to diplomatic channels. The two nations now face the task of translating their public commitment to an “amicable resolution” into concrete action. For Ghana, the Government’s message is clear: “The Government of Ghana will continue to safeguard the dignity of its nationals and also that of other nationals.”
The challenge is to maintain this principled stand while ensuring the long-term, mutually beneficial relationship with Israel remains intact. The world, and particularly African and Israeli diplomats, will be watching closely to see if strategic diplomacy can successfully de-escalate this sudden and challenging test of friendship.
