In a world bracing for the implications of the short but devastating “Twelve-Days War” between Israel and Iran, one would expect the Chair of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to rise above the fray and offer clear and morally anchored leadership on behalf of its 57 member states. Yet, The Gambia—holder of the OIC chair since 2024—has fumbled this opportunity, revealing a troubling disconnect between the Presidency and the Foreign Ministry. The inconsistency is not merely cosmetic; it undermines our diplomatic credibility, diminishes our influence, and raises serious questions about who truly speaks for The Gambia on the world stage.
On June 21, 2025, Foreign Minister Dr Mamadou Tangara finally broke his silence on the war at the OIC Foreign Ministers’ summit in Istanbul, where he issued a strong condemnation of Israeli airstrikes on Iran. He described the attacks as “a blatant act of assault against a sovereign state” and went further to decry the worsening humanitarian crisis in Gaza. His statement, issued with his picture prominently displayed, echoed the traditional pro-Palestinian sentiment held by most OIC states and reaffirmed The Gambia’s support for a two-state solution based on 1967 borders.
However, just six days later, a second statement emerged, this time from the Office of the President and accompanied by President Adama Barrow’s image. It condemned Iran’s retaliatory missile strike on a US air base in Qatar, while conspicuously omitting any mention of the preceding Israeli strikes or the American role in bombing three Iranian nuclear sites, one of the principal escalatory triggers in the war.
This diplomatic schizophrenia—a tale of two voices from the same government on the same conflict—sowed confusion at home and abroad. Many Gambians, as well as our foreign allies, are left wondering whether The Gambia holds two foreign policies, one shaped by Dr Tangara and another by President Barrow, each acting in silos without coordination or a shared strategic vision.
The contradiction is stark and jarring. It undermines the very essence of collective responsibility in foreign affairs, especially when our country is expected to lead the Muslim world in moments of crisis.
To complicate matters further, the government has exhibited a pattern of treating foreign policy as a personal portfolio for Dr Tangara. When messages reflect positively on The Gambia’s international standing, they are almost always released under his name, often with no mention of President Barrow. On the contrary, when statements come directly from the President—such as the Qatar incident—Dr. Tangara and the Foreign Ministry seem entirely divorced from the content and presentation.
In a recent segment of West Coast Radio’s “Coffee Time” programme, the opposition leader and United Democratic Party (UDP) flagbearer Lawyer Ousainou Darbo pointedly criticised President Barrow’s passive and underwhelming response to the Israel-Iran war. While exonerating Dr Tangara, he laid the blame squarely at the President’s feet, suggesting that the head of state has failed to grasp or assert his role as the custodian of our foreign affairs—particularly at such a critical moment when we hold the symbolic gavel of the OIC.
This political finger-pointing exposes a wider dysfunction in The Gambia’s foreign policy architecture. When Dr. Tangara was in New York on June 20—during the peak of the Israel-Iran crisis—he was not attending the United Nations Security Council emergency session on the war. Instead, he chose to deliver a polished speech to the UN Peacebuilding Commission, extolling The Gambia’s post-Jammeh transition and praising multilateralism. While his words about national healing and accountability sounded ideal in isolation, they were painfully tone-deaf in context. The Middle East was on fire, and the chair of the OIC was nowhere near the frontline of diplomacy.
Those of us who have experienced the UN Peacebuilding Commission’s annual choreography know its routine perfectly well. It’s an ordinary annual side event marked by cordial praises, recycled speeches, obligatory group photos, and lavish receptions that overshadow any meaningful resolutions.
During my own tenure as Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN (2015‑2017), the ritual seldom deviated from script.
This episode echoed the late Vice President Badara Joof’s stinging rebuke at the 2022 Cabinet retreat, when he lamented that our foreign policy was being reduced to “travel and reports of successful meetings.” That rebuke now rings more urgent than ever.
If The Gambia aspires to be a credible voice for peace and justice—not just in press releases but in substance—it must begin by fixing the structural flaws in its own diplomatic machinery. Our foreign policy cannot continue to function as a dual-track system with competing authorship. We cannot afford to have our Foreign Minister speaking one language while our President speaks another, especially on matters as delicate and consequential as the Middle East conflict.
As the Head of State and de facto head of foreign policy, President Barrow must take command of the messaging, particularly during major international crises. His voice should not compete with, but lead, those of his ministers.
Dr Tangara must operate strictly within the broader framework of government policy, not as an independent actor. Any official foreign policy statement must reflect the consensus of the President’s cabinet.
All official communications on international affairs—especially during times of crisis—must be vetted through a centralized protocol, possibly led by a national foreign policy advisory committee. This will prevent conflicting statements and image-based turf wars.
The National Assembly should summon the Foreign Minister and the relevant presidential advisers for questioning on such discrepancies. A functioning democracy requires accountability in foreign affairs.
Furthermore, the government should regularly brief the public on foreign policy positions, especially during conflicts that implicate The Gambia’s international obligations and moral posture.
In conclusion, the credibility of The Gambia as OIC chair—and more broadly as a nation that claims to stand for peace, justice, and multilateralism—rests on our ability to speak with one voice. Our diplomats cannot afford to grandstand while our President remains detached. Nor can our head of state issue solo statements divorced from the machinery of his own foreign ministry.
The time to repair this fractured posture is now—before another international emergency finds us once again lost in our own echo chamber.
Retired Lt Colonel Samsudeen Sarr
