Connect with us

World

BRICS Lacks Ambitious Economic, Trade Liberalization Agenda—Lissovolik

Published

on

Yaroslav Lissovolik BRICS economic agenda

By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh

As stipulated by the guidelines, Russia takes over the rotating chairmanship of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) from January 2024.

There are high hopes a lot more will change, especially towards widening its numerical strength and increasing support for the Global South.

In addition, there is also the expectation that BRICS will consolidate its role within the emerging geopolitical processes and global competition for Africa. China and Russia are currently making efforts to assert influence more aggressively, despite the challenges and obstacles, in cooperating with Africa.

According to authentic reports, a number of African countries such as Algeria, Angola, DR Congo, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal, Sudan, Tunisia, Uganda and Zimbabwe have expressed interest in joining BRICS. Egypt and Ethiopia have gained approval for full-fledged membership in BRICS during the last summit held in Johannesburg, South Africa.

In this insightful interview, our media executive, Kestér Kenn Klomegâh, attempted to find out more about the future evolutionary relationship of BRICS with Africa, and aspects of Russia’s policy towards Africa from Yaroslav Lissovolik, who is the founder of BRICS+ Analytics – a think-tank that explores the potential of the BRICS+ format in the global economy.

Lissovolik previously worked as chief economist and head of research at Deutsche Bank Russia, the Eurasian Development Bank as well and Sberbank. He also worked as an Advisor to Russia’s Executive Director in the International Monetary Fund. Here are excerpts of our wide-ranging discussion:-

As Russia prepares to take over the rotating chairmanship of the BRICS group in January 2024, what are some of the expectations?

The expectation is that Russia will likely pursue a broad agenda with closer connectivity of BRICS to Africa being one of its key items. One of the possible directions in Russia’s chairmanship may be the path of «integration of integrations» — the creation of a cooperation platform for the regional organizations of the Global South such as the Eurasian Economic Union and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) as well as BRICS.

This may be complemented by efforts to add more economic weight to the BRICS grouping by developing the payment mechanisms within BRICS to conduct settlements in national currencies. There may also be the continuation of the BRICS expansion process with possible further steps to expand the core as well as to create a group of BRICS partners from among the leading members of the developing world community.

Can China and Russia (both BRICS members) halt the current U.S. global dominance? What mechanisms are available for effecting this process?

Within BRICS both China and Russia will likely cooperate towards creating those financial and economic mechanisms that are lacking in the global economy. The purpose of BRICS is not to undermine any economy, but to create cooperative platforms for economic cooperation among developing countries. In fact, the BRICS  and BRICS+ formats may in the future be complemented by what I call the BRICS++ format which could include the participation of developed economies, regional blocs and their development institutions.

My view is that BRICS will develop along a path of becoming the most inclusive and open platform in the global economy that may serve as the basis for a revitalized and more sustainable globalization effort. Such a platform may with time include the participation of the Bretton Woods institutions and other key players of the global economy from the Western world.

Overall, there are not too many economic mechanisms created thus far by the BRICS — the main economic contribution of the BRICS has been the creation of the New Development Bank (NDB) and the BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA).

The BRICS NDB is set to expand its membership to include more developing economies. There are also plans within BRICS to widen the mandate of the BRICS CRA to make it more effective in supporting member countries.

What is lacking at this stage is a financial mechanism that would facilitate the payments in national currencies among the BRICS economies — discussions on the creation of such a mechanism (widely referred to as BRICS Pay) have been ongoing since at least 2017, but progress in this area has been moderate at best. Furthermore, the issue of the creation of a common currency or an accounting unit for all BRICS countries has also progressed slowly.

What are your views about the key challenges confronting BRICS in pursuit of leading the emerging reconfiguration and new political and economic architecture?

The main challenges facing the BRICS grouping have to do with a lack of an ambitious economic agenda. Thus far the strong momentum exhibited by BRICS on the international stage is mostly political/geopolitical as reflected in the sizeable number of developing countries expressing their desire to join the grouping.

This widening of the ranks of the BRICS bloc renders the attainment of consensus even more difficult — something that will be critical in adopting decisions on economic cooperation. And on the economic front there are still a lot of issues that are yet to be addressed — apart from the financial track related to the common payment systems and a potential common currency/accounting unit, another crucial theme is trade liberalization among the BRICS economies and across the economies of the Global South more broadly.

The BRICS need an ambitious trade liberalization agenda that would favour developing economies, especially Africa. At this stage, import tariffs in BRICS countries are relatively high, especially on agricultural products — there is significant scope for the BRICS economies to lower trade barriers to support the modernization of Africa and other regions of the Global South.

There has been much talk on the Global South, and Africa is geographically located there. What are Africa’s weaknesses and strengths in this emerging multipolarity?

One of the most significant strengths wielded by Africa on the international stage is its rising solidarity and rising coordination of the continent’s economies on the international stage. This is vividly exemplified by the rising prominence of the African Union (AU) in some of the key international fora. The AU in 2023 became a member of the G20, while also becoming increasingly active in international mediation efforts and discussions on economic cooperation with other regional blocs.

The AU has been also successful in advancing the project of Africa’s regional integration via the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). Again, the best way in which the BRICS could contribute towards the success of this regional integration project is via greater trade openness to African economies. The success of the AfCFTA would go a long way towards overcoming the limitations faced by Africa’s economy in terms of low intra-continental regional connectivity and trade.

Let’s finally talk about some specific tangible roles Africa could play in the geopolitical changes. Do you think the African Union also need some urgent reforms in order to perform effectively in these evolving processes?

In my view, Africa could play a crucial role in the coming years both at the level of the developing world and globally. In particular, the African Union given its membership in the G20 and South Africa’s presidency in the G20 in 2025 could launch important initiatives aimed at boosting the resiliency of the global economy.

 One such initiative could involve the creation of a platform for regional blocs such as the AU, MERCOSUR, ASEAN, EU and other blocs in which G20 countries are members. Such a platform for regional arrangements could be launched as a G20 engagement group, the R20 or regional 20 — in effect, it would represent a new level of global governance formed by regional integration arrangements and their development institutions.

Thus far, there is no mechanism for horizontal coordination of regional integration groups and their development institutions in the world economy.

A similar effort could be undertaken by the African Union within the realm of the Global South — the AU could lead the establishment of economic linkages with other regional blocs from the developing world, including MERCOSUR, SCO, EAEU and ASEAN. Such a platform could serve as a basis for an expanded BRICS+ circle that would encompass the majority of developing economies.

In the longer term, the AU could also participate in the reconstruction and the reform of the main global institutions and fora such as the WTO, the G20 and the UN Security Council.

With respect to the WTO, there may be a case for the African Union becoming a member of this organization, just like it did in the case of the G20 alongside the EU as a regional bloc.

In this scenario, the AU could represent the developing world in both the WTO and the G20 with initiatives countering protectionism and beggar-thy-neighbour policies that have become so prevalent over the course of the past decade.

As the role of the AU gains traction in the world economy, there may be a stronger case for Africa’s greater representation in the UN governing bodies such as the UN Security Council.

Overall, the main potential for Africa and the African Union in my view lies in pursuing the path of «integration of integrations, i.e. the building of cooperative linkages and platforms between Africa’s regional integration projects and development institutions with regional peers elsewhere in the world economy.

This process of greater cooperation among the regional integration blocs is only starting and the African Union could lead this important process that opens up new communication lines and possibilities for cooperation in the world economy.

Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

World

Ukraine Reveals Identities of Nigerians Killed Fighting for Russia

Published

on

russia ukraine war

By Adedapo Adesanya

The Ukrainian Defence Intelligence (UDI) has identified two Nigerian men, Mr Hamzat Kazeem Kolawole and Mr Mbah Stephen Udoka, allegedly killed while fighting as Russian mercenaries in the war between the two countries ongoing since February 2022.

The development comes after Russia denied knowledge of Nigerians being recruited to fight on the frontlines.

Earlier this week, the Russian Ambassador to Nigeria, Mr Andrey Podyolyshev, said in Abuja that he was not aware of any government-backed programme to recruit Nigerians to fight in the war in Ukraine.

He said if at all such activity existed, it is not connected with the Russian state.

However, in a statement on Thursday, the Ukrainian Defence released photographs of Nigerians killed while defending Russia.

“In the Luhansk region, military intelligence operatives discovered the bodies of two citizens of the Federal Republic of Nigeria — Hamzat Kazeen Kolawole (03.04.1983) and Mbah Stephen Udoka (07.01.1988),” the statement read.

According to the statement, both men served in the 423rd Guards Motor Rifle Regiment (military unit 91701) of the 4th Guards Kantemirovskaya Tank Division of the armed forces of the Russian Federation.

UDI said that they signed contracts with the Russian Army in the second half of 2025 – the deceased Mr Kolawole on August 29 and Mr Udoka on September 28.

“Udoka received no training whatsoever — just five days later, on October 3, he was assigned to the unit and sent to the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine,” the report read.

It added that no training records for Mr Kolawole have been preserved; however, it is highly likely that he also received no military training, but his wife and three children remain in Nigeria.

Both Nigerians, the report added, were killed in late November during an attempt to storm Ukrainian positions in the Luhansk region.

“They never engaged in a firefight — the mercenaries were eliminated by a drone strike,” UDI stated, warning foreign citizens against travelling to the Russian Federation or taking up any work on the territory of the “aggressor state”.

“A trip to Russia is a real risk of being forced into a suicide assault unit and, ultimately, rotting in Ukrainian soil,” the statement read.

In an investigation earlier this month, CNN reported that hundreds of African men have been enticed to fight for Russia in Ukraine with the promise of civilian jobs and high salaries. However, the media organisation uncovered that they are being deceived or sent to the front lines with little combat training.

CNN said it reviewed hundreds of chats on messaging apps, military contracts, visas, flights and hotel bookings, as well as gathering first-hand accounts from African fighters in Ukraine, to understand just how Russia entices African men to bolster its ranks.

Continue Reading

World

Today’s Generation of Entrepreneurs Value Flexibility, Autonomy—McNeal-Weary

Published

on

Tonya McNeal-Weary Today's Generation of Entrepreneurs

By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh

The Young African Leaders Initiative (YALI) is the United States’ signature step to invest in the next generation of African leaders. Since its establishment in 2010 by Obama administration, YALI has offered diverse opportunities, including academic training in leadership, governance skills, organizational development and entrepreneurship, and has connected with thousands of young leaders across Africa. This United States’ policy collaboration benefits both America and Africa by creating stronger partnerships, enhancing mutual prosperity, and ensuring a more stable environment.

In our conversation, Tonya McNeal-Weary, Managing Director at IBS Global Consulting, Inc., Global Headquarters in Detroit, Michigan, has endeavored to discuss, thoroughly, today’s generation of entrepreneurs and also building partnerships as a foundation for driving positive change and innovation in the global marketplace. Here are the excerpts of her conversation:

How would you describe today’s generation of entrepreneurs?

I would describe today’s generation of entrepreneurs as having a digital-first mindset and a fundamental belief that business success and social impact can coexist. Unlike the entrepreneurs before them, they’ve grown up with the internet as a given, enabling them to build global businesses from their laptops and think beyond geographic constraints from day one. They value flexibility and autonomy, often rejecting traditional corporate ladders in favor of building something meaningful on their own terms, even if it means embracing uncertainty and financial risk that previous generations might have avoided.

And those representing the Young African Leaders Initiative, who attended your webinar presentation late January 2026?

The entrepreneurs representing the Young African Leaders Initiative are redefining entrepreneurship on the continent by leveraging their unique perspectives, cultural heritage, and experiences. Their ability to innovate within local contexts while connecting to global opportunities exemplifies how the new wave of entrepreneurs is not confined by geography or conventional expectations.

What were the main issues that formed your ‘lecture’ with them, Young African Leaders Initiative?

The main issues that formed my lecture for the Young African Leaders Initiative were driven by understanding the importance of building successful partnerships when expanding into the United States or any foreign market. During my lecture, I emphasized that forming strategic alliances can help entrepreneurs navigate unfamiliar business environments, access new resources, and foster long-term growth. By understanding how to establish strong and effective partnerships, emerging leaders can position their businesses for sustainable success in global markets. I also discussed the critical factors that contribute to successful partnerships, such as establishing clear communication channels, aligning on shared goals, and cultivating trust between all parties involved. Entrepreneurs must be proactive in seeking out partners who complement their strengths and fill gaps in expertise or resources. It is equally important to conduct thorough due diligence to ensure that potential collaborators share similar values and ethical standards. Ultimately, the seminar aimed to empower YALI entrepreneurs with practical insights and actionable strategies for forging meaningful connections across borders. Building successful partnerships is not only a pathway to business growth but also a foundation for driving positive change and innovation in the global marketplace.

What makes a ‘leader’ today, particularly, in the context of the emerging global business architecture?

In my opinion, a leader in today’s emerging global business architecture must navigate complexity and ambiguity with a fundamentally different skill set than what was previously required. Where traditional leadership emphasized command-and-control and singular vision, contemporary leaders succeed through adaptive thinking and collaborative influence across decentralized networks. Furthermore, emotional intelligence has evolved from a soft skill to a strategic imperative. Today, the effective modern leader must possess deep cross-cultural intelligence, understanding that global business is no longer about exporting one model worldwide but about genuinely integrating diverse perspectives and adapting to local contexts while maintaining coherent values.

Does multinational culture play in its (leadership) formation?

I believe multinational culture plays a profound and arguably essential role in forming the kind of leadership required in today’s global business environment. Leaders who have lived, worked, or deeply engaged across multiple cultural contexts develop a cognitive flexibility that’s difficult to replicate through reading or training alone. More importantly, multinational exposure tends to dismantle the unconscious certainty that one’s own way of doing things is inherently “normal” or “best.” Leaders shaped in multicultural environments often develop a productive discomfort with absolutes; they become more adept at asking questions, seeking input, and recognizing blind spots. This humility and curiosity become strategic assets when building global teams, entering new markets, or navigating geopolitical complexity. However, it’s worth noting that multinational experience alone doesn’t automatically create great leaders. What matters is the depth and quality of cross-cultural engagement, not just the passport stamps. The formation of global leadership is less about where someone has been and more about whether they’ve developed the capacity to see beyond their own cultural lens and genuinely value differences as a source of insight rather than merely tolerating them as an obstacle to overcome.

In the context of heightening geopolitical situation, and with Africa, what would you say, in terms of, people-to-people interaction?

People-to-people interaction is critically important in the African business context, particularly as geopolitical competition intensifies on the continent. In this crowded and often transactional landscape, the depth and authenticity of human relationships can determine whether a business venture succeeds or fails. I spoke on this during my presentation. When business leaders take the time for face-to-face meetings, invest in understanding local priorities rather than imposing external agendas, and build relationships beyond the immediate transaction, they signal a different kind of partnership. The heightened geopolitical situation actually makes this human dimension more vital, not less. As competition increases and narratives clash about whose model of development is best, the businesses and nations that succeed in Africa will likely be those that invest in relationships characterized by reciprocity, respect, and long-term commitment rather than those pursuing quick wins.

How important is it for creating public perception and approach to today’s business?

Interaction between individuals is crucial for shaping public perception, as it influences views in ways that formal communications cannot. We live in a society where word-of-mouth, community networks, and social trust areincredibly important. As a result, a business leader’s behavior in personal interactions, their respect for local customs, their willingness to listen, and their follow-through on commitments have a far-reaching impact that extends well beyond the immediate meeting. The geopolitical dimension amplifies this importance because African nations now have choices. They’re no longer dependent on any single partner and can compare approaches to business.

From the above discussions, how would you describe global business in relation to Africa? Is it directed at creating diverse import dependency?

While it would be too simplistic to say global business is uniformly directed at creating import dependency, the structural patterns that have emerged often produce exactly that outcome, whether by design or as a consequence of how global capital seeks returns. Global financial institutions and trade agreements have historically encouraged African nations to focus on their “comparative advantages” in primary commodities rather than industrial development. The critical question is whether global business can engage with Africa in ways that build productive capacity, transfer technology, develop local talent, and enable countries to manufacture for themselves and for export—or whether the economic incentives and power irregularities make this structurally unlikely without deliberate policy intervention.

Continue Reading

World

Russia Expands Military-Technical Cooperation With African Partners

Published

on

Military-Technical Cooperation

By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh

Despite geopolitical complexities, tensions and pressure, Russia’s military arms and weaponry sales earned approximately $15 billion at the closure of 2025, according to Kremlin report. At the regular session, chaired by Russian President Vladimir Putin on Jan. 30, the Commission on Military and Technical Cooperation with Foreign Countries analyzed the results of its work for 2025, and defined plans for the future.

It was noted that the system of military-technical cooperation continued to operate in difficult conditions, and with increased pressure from the Western countries to block business relations with Russia. The meeting, however, admitted that export contracts have generally performed sustainably. Russian military products were exported to more than 30 countries last year, and the amount of foreign exchange exceeded $15 billion.

Such results provide an additional opportunity to direct funds to the modernization of OPC enterprises, to the expansion of their production capacities, and to advanced research. It is also important that at these enterprises a significant volume of products is civilian products.

The Russian system of military-technical cooperation has not only demonstrated effectiveness and high resilience, but has created fundamental structures, which allow to significantly expand the “geography” of supplies of products of military purpose and, thus strengthen the position of Russia’s leader and employer advanced weapons systems – proven, tested in real combat conditions.

Thanks to the employees of the Federal Service for Military Technical Cooperation and Rosoboronexport, the staff of OPC enterprises for their good faith. Within the framework of the new federal project “Development of military-technical cooperation of Russia with foreign countries” for the period 2026-2028, additional measures of support are introduced. Further effective use of existing financial and other support mechanisms and instruments is extremely important because the volumes of military exports in accordance with the 2026 plan.

Special attention would be paid to the expansion of military-technological cooperation and partnerships, with 14 states already implementing or in development more than 340 such projects.

Future plans will allow to improve the characteristics of existing weapons and equipment and to develop new promising models, including those in demand on global markets, among other issues – the development of strategic areas of military-technical cooperation, and above all, with partners on the CIS and the CSTO. This is one of the priority tasks to strengthen both bilateral and multilateral relations, ensuring stability and security in Eurasia.

From January 2026, Russia chairs the CSTO, and this requires working systematically with partners, including comprehensive approaches to expanding military-technical relations. New prospects open up for deepening military-technical cooperation and with countries in other regions, including with states on the African continent. Russia has been historically strong and trusting relationships with African countries. In different years even the USSR, and then Russia supplied African countries with a significant amount of weapons and military equipment, trained specialists on their production, operation, repair, as well as military personnel.

Today, despite pressure from the West, African partners express readiness to expand relations with Russia in the military and military-technical fields. It is not only about increasing supplies of Russian military exports, but also about the purchase of other weapons, other materials and products. Russia has undertaken comprehensive maintenance of previously delivered equipment, organization of licensed production of Russian military products and some other important issues. In general, African countries are sufficient for consideration today.

Continue Reading

Trending