Connect with us

Feature/OPED

South Africa BRICS Presidency: Challenges and Future Perspectives

Published

on

Cyril Ramaphosa South Africa BRICS Presidency

By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh

The next year 2023, South Africa, as per stipulated approved guidelines and rules, will hold the rotating presidency of BRICS, the organization of five emerging developing countries made up of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. This implies that South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has a lot more at hand, especially with the current global geopolitical changes to drum home, to consolidate the growing support underway for a few others to join BRICS.

Ramaphosa has already reminded us that South Africa will hold the BRICS rotating presidency in 2023. “That BRICS summit next year under the chairship of South Africa, the matter of expanding BRICS is going to be under serious consideration. A number of countries are consistently making approaches to BRICS members, and we have given them the same answer that it will be discussed by the BRICS partners, and thereafter a collective decision will be made.” the president said this December.

Russia’s Foreign Affairs Minister Sergey Lavrov told the gathering at the Primakov Readings forum held this early December that the quintet of BRICS economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) may turn into an organization of 15-17 countries, not just enthusiasm but if those wishing to join it are granted membership based on two principles: have the necessary conditions and the collective decision of the organization.

Lavrov, in his presentation, traced the historical establishment and development of the organization. “We all know that this format [RIC – Russia, India, China] paved the way for the BRICS Five, which currently enjoys great publicity and many countries line up seeking a full-fledged membership,” Lavrov said.

“If we meet all bids, then the ‘five’ will turn into about 15-17 countries as the BRICS summit in June, which was organized in a video conference format by our Chinese colleagues, showed us,” the foreign minister noted, and further stressed that the RIC remains an operational format and not only foreign ministers, but ministers of economy, energy and economic development as well, are meeting within the framework of this format.

“The RIC keeps thriving today, and not many know that this ‘trio’ continues holding meetings at the level of foreign ministers,” Lavrov continued. “Just a couple of months ago, we held such a meeting in the online format, and it was the 20th meeting of this kind since [ex-Foreign Affairs Minister] Yevgeny (Primakov) proposed to keep developing this format.”

“Besides the meetings of foreign ministers, there are meetings of energy, trade and economic development ministers as well as of numerous industrial members of the corresponding governments,” the Russian foreign minister added.

“We have real partners – BRICS, the SCO, the EAEU, and the CSTO, regardless of what is written about it,” Lavrov stated. The top diplomat stated that the RIC structure (Russia, India, China), a Primakov initiative, “spawned the BRICS five, which currently receives enormous attention.” Several states are lined up for full membership, and the five could expand to roughly 15-17 countries, Lavrov added.

Russia’s local Vedomosti reported that the number of BRICS members might triple during the Primakov Readings forum. According to the report, organizations such as BRICS are becoming an alternative against the backdrop of the weakness of the European Union. The emphasis on cooperation with non-Western states appears to be even more warranted in light of Europe’s current problems. The United States and its closest allies’ unjust policy toward key EU members.

Berlin and Paris do not have complete autonomy in international politics; thus, they deliberately cede some of their foreign policy functions to Washington, according to Alexander Kamkin, a Senior Researcher at IMEMO. The expert admits that the European countries are capable of taking the initiative in a few circumstances, but on the whole, they follow Washington’s lead.

According to Andrey Kortunov, Director General of the Russian International Affairs Council, BRICS can provide countries with an alternate partnership path to the EU that does not require a high admission threshold. According to him, the group is now developing along two avenues: by admitting new members and by strengthening cooperation.

In the second case, additional countries will not be admitted to BRICS, but each organization’s partner will be able to choose a convenient mode of cooperation within the BRICS+ structure. Kortunov noted that the EU is unwilling to seek strategic autonomy from the US not only due to the Ukrainian crisis but China’s ascent.

The possibility of expanding membership in the organization is still under discussion within the BRICS framework. Noteworthy to reiterate here that a decision was made at the five BRICS members summit on June 23-24 to launch a discussion for the purposes of determining the principles, standards, criteria and procedures of this process.

China and Russia have been pushing for the expansion of BRICS, soliciting support for the multipolar system of global governance instead of the existing rules-based unipolar directed by the United States. Often explained that a bigger BRICS primarily offers huge opportunities among the group members and for developing countries.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said at a plenary session of the Valdai International Discussion Club held on October 27 reaffirmed Russia’s unshakable support for Saudi Arabia joining BRICS. “Yes, we support it, but this requires a consensus of all the BRICS countries,” he said.

According to him, Saudi Arabia is a rapidly developing country, which is due not only to its leading position in the hydrocarbon market. “This is also due to the fact that the Crown Prince, the government of Saudi Arabia, has very big plans for diversifying the economy, which is very important. They have entire national development plans designed for this goal,” the Russian President said.

He expressed confidence that, given the enthusiasm and creativity of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud, these plans will be implemented. “Therefore, of course, Saudi Arabia deserves to be a member of major international organizations, such as the BRICS and such as the SCO. Most recently, we determined the status of Saudi Arabia in the SCO and will develop relations with this country both bilaterally and on multilateral platforms,” Putin added.

With the current global unstable and volatile situation creating skyrocketing uncertainties in global economic recovery, China has unreservedly shown its contribution to strengthening BRICS. For 16 years since its inception, China has offered the largest financial support for the BRICS National Development Bank and contributed tremendously to other directions, including health, education and economic collaboration among the group.

That is why BRICS has gained extensive recognition. More and more countries are willing and interested in becoming members of the organization, making joint efforts to overcome difficulties and challenges, and realising common development and prosperity. BRICS activities have expanded during the past few years. Countries participated in the Outreach and BRICS plus segments of the organization. But now, with the emerging new global order, BRICS seeks to expand its membership and consolidate its platform as an instrument for pushing against the existing rules-based order unipolar system.

BRICS activities have expanded during the past few years. Countries participated in the Outreach and BRICS plus segments of the organization. There are also a number of African countries, including Algeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria, and Senegal, that have also shown interest. Egypt has already been involved for a fairly long time. Last December 2022, Egypt, the decision on its accession to the New Development Bank was made by BRICS.

Russia has consistently advocated for deepening the organization’s interaction with the African continent, the diplomat stressed. In particular, President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin mentioned this at an expanded meeting of leaders of the five BRICS member-states in the BRICS plus format on June 24. It is, however, expected that this avenue of efforts will get an extra impetus during the presidency period of South Africa in 2023.

On May 19, China’s State Councillor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi chaired a video conference dialogue between foreign ministers of BRICS countries and their counterparts from emerging economies and developing countries. It was the first BRICS Plus dialogue at the level of foreign ministers. Participants in the dialogue came from BRICS countries as well as invited countries such as Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Argentina, Egypt, Indonesia, Nigeria, Senegal, United Arab Emirates and Thailand.

According to Wang Yi, the dialogue’s importance was to further expand cooperation between the BRICS countries and other emerging economies and developing countries. In addition, Wang Wenbin, during his weekly media briefing on October 20, explained that as the BRICS chair for this year, China has actively supported the BRICS in starting the membership expansion process and advanced the BRICS Plus cooperation.

During the 14th BRICS summit successfully held in June 2022, President Xi Jinping noted at the meeting that BRICS countries gather not in a closed club or an exclusive circle but in a big family of mutual support and a partnership for win-win cooperation. At the summit, BRICS leaders reached important common understandings about BRICS expansion and expressed support for discussion on the standards and procedures of the expansion.

“This has been well received in the international community, and many countries have expressed interest in joining the BRICS. China supports and welcomes this. Going forward, China will work with fellow BRICS members to steadily proceed with the BRICS expansion process and enable more partners to join this promising endeavour,” Wenbin said at the media briefing.

Despite its large population of 1.5 billion, which many have considered an impediment, China pursues admirable collaborative strategic diplomacy with external countries, and that has made it attain superpower status over Russia. A careful study and analysis monitored by this author vividly show that muscle-flexing Russia largely lacks public outreach diplomacy, Russia contributing towards its own ‘cancel culture’ policy, and this is seriously detrimental to the emerging new global order.

South Africa was a late minor addition to the group, to add a bridgehead to Africa, says Charles Robertson, Chief Economist at Renaissance Capital. All the BRICS countries are facing economic challenges that need addressing urgently. The BRICS is keenly aware of the importance of contributing to Africa’s development agenda.

“Therefore, it could expand because the BRICS are under-represented in the global financial architecture. Europe and the United States dominate institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, and to some extent many others,” explained Robertson in an emailed query.

According to him, “Russia and others in the BRICS would like to see larger power centres emerge to offer an alternative to that Western-dominated construct. That is reasonable enough – providing there are countries with the money to backstop the new institutions, such as China supporting the BRICS bank, and if the countries offer an alternative vision that provides benefits to new members.”

South African Ramaphosa has repeatedly said that BRICS as a dynamic group would usher in a new global development era that promises a system of more inclusive, sustainable and fair principles. BRICS group, in an expanded form, can support a sustainable and equitable global economic recovery.

For South Africa, Ramaphosa further believes that the BRICS is simply a highly-valuable platform fixed to strengthen ties with partner countries in support of South Africa’s economic growth for discussing global economic problems and challenges and, above all, strengthening the role of developing countries.

After his official visit to Saudi Arabia in mid-October, Ramaphosa said that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud had expressed the desire to join BRICS. “The Crown Prince did express Saudi Arabia’s desire to be part of BRICS. They are not the only country seeking membership in BRICS,” according to the local radio station ABC. That report said Argentina, Iran, Turkey and the UAE also voiced their intention to join the organization.

The BRICS embody a synergy of cultures and are a model of genuine multilateral diplomacy. Its structure is formed in compliance with the 21st century’s realities. Efforts within its framework are based on the principles of equality, mutual respect and justice.

Historically, the first meeting of the group began in St Petersburg in 2005. It was called RIC, which stood for Russia, India and China. Then later, Brazil joined and finally, South Africa in February 2011, which is why now it is referred to as BRICS. The acronym BRICS is derived from the member countries’ names in English. The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) collectively represent about 26% of the world’s geographical area and about 42% of the world’s population.

Feature/OPED

Guide to Employee Training That Reinforces Workplace Safety Standards

Published

on

Workplace Safety Standards

Workplace safety is not sustained by policies alone. It is built through consistent training that shapes daily behaviour, decision-making, and accountability across every level of an organisation. When employees understand not only what safety rules exist but why they matter, they are far more likely to follow them and intervene when risks arise. Effective safety-focused training protects workers, strengthens operations, and reduces costly incidents that disrupt productivity and morale.

As industries evolve and workplaces become more complex, employee training must go beyond basic orientation sessions. Reinforcing safety standards requires an ongoing, structured approach that adapts to new risks, changing regulations, and real-world job demands. A thoughtful training strategy helps create a culture where safety is a shared responsibility rather than a checklist item.

Establishing a Foundation of Safety Awareness

The first purpose of workplace safety training is awareness. Employees cannot avoid hazards they do not understand. Comprehensive training introduces common workplace risks, clarifies acceptable behaviour, and sets expectations for personal responsibility. This foundational knowledge empowers employees to recognise unsafe conditions before incidents occur.

Safety awareness training should be tailored to the specific environment in which employees work. Office settings require education on ergonomics, electrical safety, and emergency evacuation procedures, while industrial workplaces demand detailed instruction on machinery risks, protective equipment, and material handling. When training reflects actual job conditions, employees are more engaged and better equipped to apply what they learn.

Clear communication is essential during this stage. Using plain language and real examples helps employees connect training concepts to daily tasks. When safety awareness becomes part of how employees think and talk about their work, it begins to shape behaviour consistently across the organisation.

Integrating Safety Training into Daily Operations

Safety training is most effective when it is integrated into everyday work rather than treated as a one-time event. Ongoing reinforcement ensures that safety standards remain top of mind as tasks, equipment, and responsibilities change. Regular training sessions create opportunities to refresh knowledge, address new risks, and correct unsafe habits before they lead to injury.

Incorporating short safety discussions into team meetings helps normalise these conversations. Supervisors play a critical role by modelling safe behaviour and reinforcing expectations during routine interactions. When employees see safety emphasised alongside productivity goals, it reinforces the message that both are equally important.

Hands-on training also strengthens retention. Demonstrations, practice scenarios, and real-time feedback allow employees to apply safety principles in controlled settings. This experiential approach builds confidence and reduces hesitation when employees encounter hazards in real situations.

Aligning Training with Regulatory Requirements

Workplace safety training must align with applicable regulations and industry standards to ensure legal compliance and worker protection. Laws and regulations change frequently, making it essential for organisations to keep training materials updated. Failure to do so can expose employees to unnecessary risk and organisations to legal consequences.

Training programs should clearly explain relevant safety regulations and how they apply to specific roles. Employees are more likely to comply when rules are presented as practical safeguards rather than abstract mandates. Documenting training completion and maintaining accurate records also demonstrates organisational commitment to compliance.

Many organisations rely on support from compliance training companies to navigate complex regulatory landscapes and design programs that meet both legal and operational needs. These partnerships can help ensure training remains accurate, consistent, and aligned with evolving requirements without overwhelming internal resources.

Encouraging Participation and Accountability

Effective safety training depends on active participation rather than passive attendance. Employees should be encouraged to ask questions, share concerns, and contribute insights based on their experiences. When workers feel heard, they become more invested in maintaining a safe environment.

Creating accountability is equally important. Training should clarify individual responsibilities and outline the consequences of ignoring safety standards. Employees need to understand that safety is not optional or secondary to performance goals. Reinforcement from leadership ensures that unsafe behaviour is addressed consistently and constructively.

Peer accountability also strengthens safety culture. When training emphasises teamwork and shared responsibility, employees are more likely to watch out for one another and intervene when they see risky behaviour. This collective approach reduces reliance on supervision alone and builds resilience across the workforce.

Adapting Training for Long-Term Effectiveness

Workplace safety training must evolve alongside organisational growth and workforce changes. New hires, role transitions, and technological updates introduce risks that require refreshed instruction. Periodic assessments help identify gaps in knowledge and opportunities for improvement.

Data from incident reports, near misses, and employee feedback provides valuable insight into training effectiveness. Adjusting content based on real outcomes ensures that training remains relevant and impactful. Organisations that treat training as a dynamic process are better equipped to respond to emerging risks.

Long-term effectiveness also depends on reinforcement beyond formal sessions. Visual reminders, updated procedures, and accessible reporting tools help sustain awareness. When safety standards are supported through multiple channels, employees receive consistent cues that reinforce training messages daily.

Conclusion

Reinforcing workplace safety standards through employee training requires intention, consistency, and adaptability. Training that builds awareness, integrates into daily operations, aligns with regulations, and encourages accountability creates a safer environment for everyone involved. When employees understand their role in maintaining safety, they are more confident, engaged, and prepared to prevent harm.

A strong training program is not simply a compliance exercise. It is an investment in people and performance. Organisations that prioritise meaningful safety training protect their workforce while fostering trust, stability, and long-term success.

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

Debt is Dragging Nigeria’s Future Down

Published

on

more concessional debt

By Abba Dukawa 

A quiet fear is spreading across the hearts of Nigerians—one that grows heavier with every new headline about rising debt. It is no longer just numbers on paper; it feels like a shadow stretching over the nation’s future. The reality is stark and unsettling: nearly 50% of Nigeria’s revenue is now used to service debt. That is not just unsustainable—it is suffocating.

Behind these figures lies a deeper tragedy. Millions of Nigerians are trapped in what experts call “Multidimensional Poverty,” struggling daily for dignity and survival, while a privileged few continue to live in comfort, untouched by the hardship tightening around the nation. The contrast is painful, and the silence around it is even louder.

Since assuming office, Bola Ahmed Tinubu has embarked on an aggressive borrowing path, presenting it as a necessary step to revive the economy, rebuild infrastructure, and stabilise key sectors.

Between 2023 and 2026, billions of dollars have been secured or proposed in foreign loans. On paper, it is a strategy of hope. But in the hearts of many Nigerians, it feels like a gamble with consequences yet to unfold.

The numbers are staggering. A borrowing plan exceeding $21 billion, backed by the National Assembly, alongside additional billions in loans and grants, signals a government determined to keep spending and building. Another $6.9 billion facility follows closely behind. These are not just financial decisions; they are commitments that will echo into generations yet unborn.

And so, the questions refuse to go away. Who will bear this burden? Who will repay these debts when the time comes? Will it not fall on ordinary Nigerians already stretched thin to carry the weight of decisions they never made?

There is a growing fear that the nation may be walking into a future where its people become strangers in their own land, bound by obligations to distant creditors.

Even more troubling is the sense that something is not adding up. The removal of fuel subsidy was meant to free up resources, to create breathing room for meaningful development.

But where are the results? Why does it feel like sacrifice has not translated into relief? The silence surrounding these questions breeds suspicion, and suspicion slowly erodes trust.  As of December 31, 2025, Nigeria’s public debt has risen to N159.28 trillion, according to the Debt Management Office.

The numbers keep climbing, but for many citizens, life keeps declining. This disconnect is what hurts the most. Borrowing, in itself, is not the enemy. Nations borrow to grow, to build, to invest in their future. But borrowing without visible progress, without accountability, without compassion for the people, it begins to feel less like strategy and more like a slow descent.

If these borrowed funds are truly building roads, schools, hospitals, and opportunities, then Nigerians deserve to see it, to feel it, to live it. But if they are funding excess, waste, or luxury, then this path is not just dangerous—it is devastating.

Nigeria’s growing loan profile is a double-edged sword. It can either accelerate development or deepen economic challenges. The key issue is not just borrowing, but what the country does with the money. Strong governance, transparency, and investment in productive sectors will determine whether these loans become a foundation for growth or a long-term liability. Because in the end, debt is not just an economic issue. It is a moral one. And if care is not taken, the price Nigeria will pay may not just be financial—it may be the future of its people.

Dukawa writes from Kano and can be reached at [email protected]

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

Nigeria’s Power Illusion: Why 6,000MW Is Not An Achievement

Published

on

Nigeria Electricity Act 2023

By Isah Kamisu Madachi

For decades, Nigeria has been called the Giant of Africa. The question no one in government wants to answer is why a giant cannot keep the lights on.

Nigeria sits on the largest proven oil reserves in Africa, holds the continent’s most populous nation at over 220 million people, and commands the fourth largest GDP on the continent at roughly $252 billion. It possesses vast deposits of solid minerals, a fintech ecosystem that accounts for 28% of all fintech companies on the African continent, and a diaspora that remits billions of dollars annually.

If potential were electricity, Nigeria would have been powering half the world. Instead, an immediate former minister is boasting about 6,000 megawatts.

Adebayo Adelabu resigned as Minister of Power on April 22, 2026, citing his ambition to contest the Oyo State governorship election. In his resignation letter, he listed among his achievements that peak generation had increased to over 6,000 megawatts during his tenure, supported by the integration of the Zungeru Hydropower Plant. It was presented as a great crowning legacy. The claim deserves scrutiny, and the numbers deserve context.

To begin with, the context. Ghana, Nigeria’s neighbour in West Africa, has a national electricity access rate of 85.9%, with 74% access in rural areas and 94% in urban areas. Kenya, with a 71.4% national electricity access rate, including 62.7% in rural areas, leads East Africa. Nigeria, by contrast, recorded an electricity access rate of just 61.2 per cent as of 2023, according to the World Bank. This is not a distant or poorer country outperforming Nigeria. Ghana’s GDP stands at approximately $113 billion, less than half of Nigeria’s. Kenya’s economy is around $141 billion. Ethiopia, which has invested massively in the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam and is already exporting electricity to neighbouring countries, has a GDP of roughly $126 billion. All three are doing more with far less.

Now to examine the 6,000-megawatt, Daily Trust obtained electricity generation data from the Association of Power Generation Companies and the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission, covering quarterly performance from 2023 to 2025 and monthly data from January to March 2026. The data shows that in 2023, peak generation was approximately 5,000 megawatts; in 2024, it reached approximately 5,528 megawatts; in 2025, it ranged between 5,300 and 5,801 megawatts; and by March 2026, available capacity had declined to approximately 4,089 megawatts. The grid never recorded a verified peak of 6,000 megawatts or higher. Adelabu had, in fact, set the 6,000-megawatt target publicly on at least three separate occasions, missing each deadline, and later admitted the target was not achieved, attributing the failure to vandalism of key transmission infrastructure.

In February 2026, Nigeria’s national grid produced an average available capacity of 4,384 megawatts, the lowest monthly average since June 2024. For a country with over 220 million people, this means electricity supply remains far below national demand, with the grid delivering only about 32 per cent of its theoretical installed capacity of approximately 13,000 megawatts. To put that in sharper comparison: in 2018, 48 sub-Saharan African countries, home to nearly one billion people, produced about the same amount of electricity as Spain, a country of 45 million. Nigeria, the continent’s most resource-rich large economy, is a significant part of that embarrassing equation.

The tragedy here is not just technical. It is a governance failure with compounding human costs. An economy that cannot provide reliable electricity cannot competitively manufacture goods, cannot industrialise at scale, cannot attract the volume of foreign direct investment its endowments warrant, and cannot build the digital infrastructure that would allow it to lead on artificial intelligence, data governance, and the emerging critical minerals economy where Africa’s next great opportunity lies. Countries with a fraction of Nigeria’s mineral wealth and human capital are already debating those frontiers. Nigeria is still campaigning on megawatts.

What a departing minister should be able to say, given Nigeria’s endowments, is not that peak generation touched 6,000 megawatts at some unverified moment. He should be saying that Nigeria now generates reliably above 15,000 megawatts, that rural electrification has crossed 70 per cent, and that the country is on a credible trajectory toward the kind of energy sufficiency that unlocks industrial growth. That is the standard Nigeria’s size and resources demand. Anything below it is not an achievement. It is an apology dressed in a press release.

The power sector has received billions of dollars in investment across multiple administrations. The 2013 privatisation exercise, the Presidential Power Initiative, the Electricity Act of 2023, and successive reform promises have produced a sector that still, in 2026, cannot guarantee eight hours of reliable supply to the average Nigerian household. That a minister exits that ministry citing a megawatt figure that fact-checkers have shown was never actually reached, and that even if reached would be unworthy of celebration given Nigeria’s potential, captures the full depth of the problem. The ambition is too small. The accountability is too thin. And the country deserves better from those who are privileged to manage its extraordinary, squandered potential.

Isah Kamisu Madachi is a policy analyst and development practitioner. He writes via [email protected]

Continue Reading

Trending