Uganda Commits 1,200 Troops as Burundi Weighs Gaza Deployment

Uganda is finalising plans to contribute around 1,200 personnel to an international security force for Gaza. Burundi is considering joining after senior military officials travelled to Israel for talks.

Military officials from Uganda and Burundi have visited Israel to discuss deploying troops to Gaza, potentially placing African soldiers at the centre of one of the world's most politically sensitive security missions.

Uganda is already moving ahead.

The East African country's parliament approved its participation earlier in August, and officials say Uganda is now finalising details of a contribution of approximately 1,200 personnel.

Burundi has not yet made a formal commitment.

But senior Burundian military officers joined the recent visit to Israel, where discussions were held over the proposed international force.

A Burundian military official told The Associated Press that the country appeared intent on participating, although no agreement has been finalised.

The developments raise a larger question for Africa.

Why are African militaries being drawn into the effort to secure Gaza?

What is the planned Gaza international force?

The proposed deployment forms part of an international security arrangement being developed around the fragile Gaza ceasefire.

The force is envisioned under the Board of Peace established by U.S. President Donald Trump and is intended to eventually include about 20,000 personnel.

Its planned responsibilities include helping monitor the ceasefire, securing the delivery of humanitarian assistance and training Palestinian police.

The force would also play a role as areas currently under Israeli military control are transferred to a Palestinian technocratic administration.

But assembling that force has proved difficult.

Uganda's proposed 1,200-person deployment would make it one of the largest contributors announced so far.

Morocco has committed up to 500 personnel.

Kosovo, Kazakhstan and Albania have together offered around 80.

Indonesia had previously indicated that it could send as many as 8,000 personnel, potentially making it the largest contributor, but later suspended those plans following U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran.

The force therefore remains well short of its intended strength.

Uganda is further ahead than Burundi

Uganda's involvement has already moved beyond preliminary diplomatic discussions.

Its parliament approved the troop contribution earlier this month, and Ugandan officials are working through the final details of participation.

A Ugandan military officer told AP that soldiers were already being selected for the mission.

Burundi remains at an earlier stage.

A delegation of senior Burundian military officials travelled to Israel alongside Ugandan officials to discuss the proposed operation.

One official involved in the talks said the two sides exchanged operational knowledge and that Burundi had expressed interest in the mission.

Neither the Ugandan nor Burundian military has publicly detailed the full terms under which their personnel could be deployed.

And one significant question remains unanswered.

What, if anything, would the two governments receive in return?

Why Uganda and Burundi?

Both countries have something international planners need: experience.

Uganda and Burundi have spent years contributing large numbers of soldiers to African Union security operations, particularly in Somalia, where their troops have fought the al-Qaida-linked militant group al-Shabab.

Those deployments have given both militaries experience operating abroad, participating in multinational missions and sustaining forces in difficult security environments.

That makes them credible candidates for a complicated mission such as Gaza.

But there may also be a strategic calculation for Kampala and Gitega.

Foreign military deployments can provide participating countries with access to funding, equipment, training and deeper relationships with international partners.

As the long-running African mission in Somalia evolves, governments that have built substantial military structures around overseas deployments may also be looking for new international missions.

Paul D. Williams, a specialist in African peace operations at George Washington University, told AP that Uganda and Burundi have demonstrated a willingness to maintain overseas military deployments even after suffering significant casualties.

Participation in Gaza could therefore represent both a security commitment and a new source of international military cooperation.

The Gaza mission carries major risks

Gaza, however, would not resemble a conventional African Union peacekeeping mission.

The territory has endured years of war and extensive destruction.

More than two million Palestinians live in Gaza, many of them displaced, while the political arrangements governing the territory's future remain contested.

Israeli forces also continue to control large parts of Gaza.

At the heart of the latest diplomatic plan is a proposed exchange: Hamas would disarm and Israel would withdraw its forces from the territory.

Progress remains difficult.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has resisted withdrawing Israeli forces before Hamas is fully disarmed.

That creates a fundamental problem for any international security force.

Peacekeeping is easiest when the political settlement comes first.

In Gaza, countries may be asked to prepare soldiers for deployment while crucial elements of that political settlement remain unresolved.

What would African troops actually do in Gaza?

This may become the most important question for Uganda and Burundi.

The proposed mandate includes monitoring the ceasefire, protecting humanitarian aid operations and helping train Palestinian police.

But the difference between peacekeeping and peace enforcement can become extremely important when troops enter an environment where armed groups remain active and political authority is disputed.

African personnel could find themselves navigating relations with Palestinian civilians, Hamas, Israeli forces, international aid agencies and the new Palestinian administrative structures envisioned under the plan.

Their rules of engagement would therefore matter enormously.

Would they simply observe violations?

Would they be permitted to use force?

Who would command them?

What would happen if the ceasefire collapsed?

And what would their responsibilities be if Israeli and Palestinian forces disputed control of a particular area?

These questions will determine whether the mission resembles traditional peacekeeping or something considerably more dangerous.

Africa's growing role beyond African conflicts

There is also a broader significance to Uganda and Burundi's possible deployments.

African military peacekeepers are hardly new.

For decades, African countries have provided personnel for some of the world's most difficult peace operations.

Ugandan and Burundian troops have served in Somalia. African soldiers have deployed across South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic, Sudan and other conflict zones.

But Gaza represents something different.

It would place substantial African military contingents inside a conflict at the centre of Middle Eastern politics and U.S. foreign policy.

Their governments would therefore be doing more than contributing soldiers to an international mission.

They would become participants in the political and security architecture being constructed for Gaza's future.

Morocco's involvement gives the plan an additional African dimension.

And if Burundi formally joins Uganda, African countries could constitute a significant share of the troops initially available to the force.

Burundi's decision could be the next signal

No final agreement has been reached with Burundi.

But the visit by senior military officials indicates that discussions have moved beyond abstract interest.

Uganda, meanwhile, is already preparing personnel.

Its roughly 1,200-person commitment would make it one of the largest confirmed contributions to the planned force so far.

The bigger challenge is that the international force itself remains a work in progress.

Thousands more personnel are needed.

The political arrangements governing Gaza remain unresolved.

And the countries volunteering their soldiers still need clarity over precisely what those soldiers will be expected to do.

For Uganda and potentially Burundi, Gaza could represent another international security deployment.

But it could also become something much larger.

It would place African troops inside one of the world's most scrutinised conflicts and test how far African governments are prepared to project military power beyond the continent in exchange for diplomatic influence, strategic relationships and a place in the international security system.

Source note: This story is based on reporting by The Associated Press published on August 24, 2026, with additional context and analysis by Africa Reporters Network.