Health
Why Russia’s Vaccine Diplomacy Failed Africa
By Kester Kenn Klomegah
In these difficult and crucial times, the strategic partnership with Africa has become a priority of Russia’s foreign policy, declared Sergey Lavrov, Russia’s Foreign Affairs Minister.
The difficult times understandably refer to both the COVID-19 pandemic and the current period when Russia’s own “special military operation” in Ukraine has shattered the global economy.
But why is Russia very quiet over its vaccine diplomacy in Africa? What have Russia-African Union relations brought to the health sector in Africa? Why Russia’s vaccine diplomacy could arguably be described as a failure for vulnerable groups and vaccinable people among the 1.3 billion population.
The Africa Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) estimated approximately 28 per cent of the entire African population was vaccinated over the past two years. South African President Cyril Ramaphosa and a few African leaders have vehemently accused European and Western countries with advanced pharmaceutical technologies of hoarding COVID-19 vaccines.
Russia was the first advanced country that came out with Sputnik V in August 2020, in fact, less than a year when coronavirus was declared an epidemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). But Sputnik V has never been approved by the WHO primarily because of a lack of transparency of Russian laboratories in addition to the fact that it was approved before going into compulsory phase III clinical trials, breached relevant international protocols and ruined its reputation from the outset, and further in Russia as demonstrated by a high degree of vaccine hesitancy.
The Sputnik V was developed by the Gamaleya Scientific Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology. It was later registered under the emergency use authorization procedure, according to the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) website.
The RDIF is Russia’s sovereign wealth fund established in 2011 to make equity co-investments, primarily in Russia, alongside reputable international financial and strategic investors. The Kremlin offered this agency the full-fledged task of managing and directing all aspects of COVID-19 vaccine production and distribution.
The RDIF has made a substantial contribution to developing and marketing Sputnik V, the first registered COVID-19 vaccine, in the world. Sputnik V was heavily promoted via a professional international marketing campaign and Russia obtained commercial contracts for close to 800 million doses of Sputnik V. Russia has only delivered 108 million doses, i.e. less than 15%.
In the first place, Sputnik V has little impact in Africa. Second, there is no African country manufacturing Sputnik V so far. In fact, Russia signed manufacturing agreements with no less than 23 countries to produce Sputnik V. However, only a few countries actually started production due to delays in the supply of raw materials. As one of very few countries, Russia stayed completely outside the COVAX Facility and it played no significant role in vaccine donations.
Holding the heck of the bumpy road during the pandemic period, Russia made progressive steps, resembling a substantial breakthrough to save human extinction. It swiftly registered the vaccine in many countries and often promised to establish manufacturing points in a number of countries, including Africa. But in critical assessment, we cannot skip the messy description, from various points of view, that Russia’s vaccine diplomacy has failed Africa. Certainly, that was the case with Russia’s diplomacy in Africa.
President Vladimir Putin has oftentimes praised the entire healthcare system, and particularly the hard-working team of scientists and specialists from different institutions for their efforts at research and creating a series of vaccines for use against the coronavirus both at home and abroad.
Russia’s Foreign Ministry reports indicated that the Sputnik V vaccine was registered in the following African countries: Algeria, Angola, Cameroon, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Mauritius, Morocco, Nigeria, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, Tunisia, the Republic of Congo (DRC) and Zimbabwe.
However, the majority of African countries where Sputnik V was registered could not get supplies to purchase as promised. Admittedly, Russia faces vaccine production challenges to meet the increasing market demand and to make prompt delivery on its pledges to external countries.
Russia’s drive to share the Sputnik V vaccine offers a chance to raise its image and strengthen alliances in Africa. It has made some vaccine deliveries by sprinkling a few thousands, but only to its preferred countries including North Africa (Algeria Morocco and Egypt), East Africa (Ethiopia), Southern Africa (Angola, Mozambique and Zimbabwe) and West Africa (Guinea). Media reports say, South Africa, a member of the BRICS group, categorically rejected the Sputnik V donation from Russia.
Furthermore, an official media release in mid-February 2021 said that the Africa Vaccine Acquisition Task Team – set up by the African Union (AU) to acquire additional vaccine doses so that Africa could attain a target immunization of 60% – received an offer of 300 million Sputnik V vaccines from the Russian Federation. It was described as a “special offer” from Russia. In the end, Russia never delivered the 300 million vaccines as contracted.
In the Situation Analytical Report on Russia-Africa, compiled by 25 Russian policy experts, headed by Sergei A. Karaganov, Honorary Chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, and was released in November 2021, pointed to Russia’s consistent failure in honoring its several pledges over the years. That report vividly highlighted contracts to supply Russian-made vaccines to Africa that were not fulfilled through the African Union. “Having concluded contracts for the supply of Sputnik V to a number of African states, Russian suppliers failed to meet its contractual obligations,” says the report.
Another report also compared Russia’s vaccine diplomacy with Europe, China and other external countries: (https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/vaccinating-world-between-promises-and-realities_en). The report says one and a half years after the start of the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, the European Union (EU) can be proud of what it has achieved to help vaccinate the world, and in particular low- and middle-income countries. The EU’s record stands in contrast to what China and Russia did beyond the bluster of their noisy “vaccine diplomacy” during these years.
In 2021, the subject was not only dominating the headlines but also at the centre of international relations, with major powers, in particular China and Russia, conducting active vaccine diplomacy to extend their global influence by promising to provide vaccines to the world. From the outset, the EU had chosen to act in a multilateral framework, by supporting the COVAX facility launched by the WHO to jointly purchase and supply vaccines to low and middle-income countries.
The report says, based on data collected by the multilateral institutions, the EU has actually been by far the largest exporter of vaccines in the world. With 2.2 billion doses supplied to 167 countries, we exported almost twice as many vaccines as China, three times as much as the United States and 20 times as much as Russia.
Of these 2.2 billion exported doses, 475 million were donated to 104 countries, of which 405 million via COVAX and 70 million bilaterally, particularly in the Western Balkans and the Eastern Partnership. In terms of donations, the United States did slightly more than the EU, with 542 million doses donated to 117 countries. But the EU has actually donated far more vaccines than China – with just 130 million to 95 countries – and Russia – with only 1.5 million doses to 19 countries.
The EU has not only exported and donated vaccines but also helped to develop vaccine production in Africa: last year, the EU with its member states and financial institutions committed over one billion euros to finance this development.
By 2040, the African Union wants that 60% of the vaccines used on the continent are manufactured in Africa and the EU fully supports that goal. This year already, two factories will be installed in Rwanda and Senegal and commercial production is set to begin in 2023. Close cooperation is also ongoing with South Africa’s Biovac Institute and partners in Ghana.
In these difficult and crucial times, Russian vaccine diplomacy has been a total failure and this was already the case before its “special military operation” in the former Soviet republic of Ukraine. In short, the vaccine diplomacy of these two countries, Russia and China, can be summarized as “great expectations – broken promises.”
The EU has a lot to be proud of, not only did it manage to vaccinate its own population against Covid-19 in a short period of time, but it has also been the world’s largest exporter of vaccines and the second largest donor to low- and middle-income countries. The EU has accomplished much more in this area than China and Russia together. Building on this solid track record, the EU will continue to support access to vaccines worldwide, particularly by helping with vaccine manufacturing in Africa.
Health
Malaria: SUNU Health Advocates Wider Adoption of HMO Plans
By Aduragbemi Omiyale
To achieve a malaria-free Nigeria, a leading Health Maintenance Organisation (HMO) with a robust nationwide presence, SUNU Health Nigeria Limited, has called for a wider adoption of HMO packages for citizens.
It stressed that managed care provides a critical safety net, ensuring families can access quality preventive services without the burden of immediate, high costs, adding that this structured approach transforms healthcare from an unpredictable expense into a manageable, guaranteed service.
The company, which officially unveiled a comprehensive strategic roadmap aimed at drastically cutting down on malaria-related deaths, emphasised that the disease can be eradicated if citizens and stakeholders adopt consistent preventive measures.
“Eradication is within our reach if we synchronise our efforts,” the chief operating officer of SUNU Health, Dr Faith Nwachi, said, noting that the tools for victory range from environmental hygiene to the consistent use of treated nets, which are easily accessible to every Nigerian.
The organisation noted that it came up with the latest framework to significantly reduce the disease burden that has historically hindered Nigeria’s productivity and public health stability.
The urgency of this intervention is underscored by concerning data from late 2025, which revealed a sharp upward trend in cases, it stated.
With over 24.5 million confirmed cases reported in the first nine months of last year alone, the 2026 landscape demands aggressive action. Currently, malaria remains a leading cause of mortality, responsible for approximately 30 per cent of child deaths and 11 per cent of maternal deaths annually.
A central pillar of the roadmap is a focus on preventative care. As of early 2026, according to the World Health Organisation, malaria still accounts for nearly 30 per cent of all hospital admissions in Nigeria.
By addressing the root causes and transmission cycles, SUNU Health seeks to drastically lower these statistics, ensuring Nigerians can lead more active lives without the constant threat of infection.
Dr Nwachi further underscored the economic necessity of this shift, stating that “prevention is significantly cheaper than cure.”
The financial toll on the Nigerian economy is staggering, with billions of Naira lost annually to treatments and diminished man-hours. For the average family, frequent bouts of illness lead to catastrophic out-of-pocket expenses that undermine financial security.
Health
AltBank, Partners Recommend Autism Care Financing Options, Others to Government
By Aduragbemi Omiyale
Plans are underway by the Alternative Bank (AltBank) to present a policy brief to relevant government ministries, recommending vocational pathways, autism care financing options, and a 12-month Lagos pilot across selected schools and primary healthcare centres.
The recommendations are from the inaugural Autism Stakeholders Roundtable and Policy Dialogue in Lagos, organised by the lender in partnership with the Private Sector Health Alliance of Nigeria (PSHAN), Eliakim Foundation, and Sterling One Foundation under the theme, It is How You Show Up.
The programme served as a critical platform to address the country’s fragmented autism support systems, with leading healthcare professionals, policymakers, and autism advocates in attendance, praising the financial institution’s decisive shift toward early intervention, systemic inclusion, and comprehensive capacity building for parents and caregivers.
The president of the Medical Women’s Association of Nigeria (MWAN) Lagos State Branch, Dr Ime Okon, stressed her group’s alignment with the bank’s initiatives.
“We recognise caregivers and families as central to the success of any intervention. We are showing up, holding their hands, to ensure they are never left to navigate this journey alone.
“For a physician, showing up means ensuring that a parent’s first concern is met with a strengthened, inclusive system rather than a clinical dead-end with no solution. The Alternative Bank has signalled a shift toward a high-level platform for national action,” she stated.
Validating this urgent need for systemic early response, the keynote speaker and founder of the Patrick Speech and Languages Centre (PSLC), Mrs Dotun Akande, advocated the integration of universal developmental screening into primary healthcare, stressing that Nigeria must transition from relying on parallel private centres to building a coordinated national response.
“What Nigeria must now build is a system where intervention happens early, equitably, and at scale, without depending on chance, geography, or privilege,” Mrs Akande noted, outlining the necessity of a caregiver support scheme that addresses both the financial and social needs of families navigating autism.
Answering this call to action, the Executive Director of Commercial and Institutional Banking (Lagos and Southwest) at The Alternative Bank, Mrs Korede Demola-Adeniyi, unveiled the financial institution’s concrete commitments to parent and professional training.
Noting that showing up in Nigeria has “too often meant showing up late,” she announced a robust three-pillar intervention agenda focusing on inclusive education, targeted training for caregivers and health professionals, and behavioural change advocacy.
As an immediate first step, Mrs Demola-Adeniyi announced the launch of a specialised capacity-building programme on Receptive Language Disorder, executed in collaboration with Eliakim Global Resources, which commenced on Sunday, April 26, 2026.
“Early recognition and sustained support depend on a workforce and caregivers who know what to look for, and what to do next,” she explained, emphasising that receptive language is a consequential developmental marker that is frequently missed.
The roundtable fostered dynamic discussions on practically designing and sustainably funding high-impact support programmes.
Health
Court Okays FCCPC to Regulate Consumer Protection in Healthcare
By Adedapo Adesanya
The Abuja division of the Federal High Court has delivered a landmark ruling reinforcing consumer protection in Nigeria’s healthcare sector, affirming the authority of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) to investigate complaints related to medical services, including alleged negligence.
Justice Emeka Nwite, who presided over the matter, delivered the judgment on April 15 in a suit filed by Life Bridge Medical Diagnostic Centre Ltd.
The company had challenged the FCCPC’s jurisdiction, arguing that the commission could not probe medical negligence cases without first establishing a formal arrangement with the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria (MDCN).
However, the court dismissed the claims, holding that healthcare providers operating as commercial entities fall squarely under the provisions of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA).
Justice Nwite ruled that services rendered for value, including medical diagnostics, are subject to consumer protection oversight.
In the decisive clarification, the court drew a line between professional regulation and consumer protection. It said that while disciplinary control of medical practitioners remains the responsibility of professional bodies such as the MDCN, the FCCPC retains authority over issues of service quality, fairness, and consumer satisfaction.
The court further held that Section 105 of the FCCPA, which encourages regulatory coordination, does not limit or delay the FCCPC’s statutory powers.
According to the ruling, the absence of a formal agreement with sector regulators does not invalidate the Commission’s authority to act.
Justice Nwite also addressed concerns around patient confidentiality, ruling that ethical obligations do not override lawful investigations carried out in the public interest and in compliance with due process.
Reacting to the judgment, FCCPC executive vice chairman, Tunji Bello, described the decision as a major step toward strengthening consumer rights across all service sectors.
He emphasised that the ruling underscores the principle that consumer protection and professional regulation can coexist without conflict.
-
Feature/OPED6 years agoDavos was Different this year
-
Travel/Tourism10 years ago
Lagos Seals Western Lodge Hotel In Ikorodu
-
Showbiz3 years agoEstranged Lover Releases Videos of Empress Njamah Bathing
-
Banking8 years agoSort Codes of GTBank Branches in Nigeria
-
Economy3 years agoSubsidy Removal: CNG at N130 Per Litre Cheaper Than Petrol—IPMAN
-
Banking3 years agoSort Codes of UBA Branches in Nigeria
-
Banking3 years agoFirst Bank Announces Planned Downtime
-
Sports3 years agoHighest Paid Nigerian Footballer – How Much Do Nigerian Footballers Earn
