World
China-India Conflict a Potential Threat to BRICS Association

By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh
The tension between China and India threatens to paralyse BRICS – the association of five major emerging national economies: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. While struggling to expand and influence on the global stage, China and India have locked horns over issues in their bilateral relations, ranging from border security to trade conflicts and information war.
The latest strains began in early May and culminated in hand-to-hand fighting in the Galwan Valley, a remote stretch of the 3,380-kilometre (2,100-mile) Line of Actual Control – the border established following a war between India and China in 1962 that resulted in an uneasy truce.
Punsara Amarasinghe, a former research fellow at the Faculty of Law, Higher School of Economics in Moscow, and now a PhD candidate in international law at the Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies in Pisa, Italy, argues that this tension is rather ironic given that in the past the two countries shared many civilisational values and both were victims of Western colonialism.
When India gained independence in 1947 from the British, its first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru built a rapport with Communist China by accepting the government of Mao Zedong with great anticipation that both China and India would become the stalwarts in the global campaign against Western imperialism. For example, it was Nehru’s idea that China should be granted a place in the non-aligned movement despite some of opposition from some members at the famous Bandung Conference in 1955.
However, the comity between the two nations was short-lived as China claimed the territory near Arunachal Pradesh whereas India adhered to the line of control known as the McMahon Line established by the British under the 1914 Simla Convention with the consent of Tibet. From the 1950s onwards, China showed its interest in the Aksai Chin area albeit its cordial relations with Nehru’s India. This long dispute finally ended in military escalation in 1962 and became known as the Sino-Indian War.
While acknowledging that some other issues have marred their relationship apart from the current border conflict, Amarasinghe told this article author that “both China and India have longed for global governance as emerging powers, and particularly, the influence expanded by China in South Asia has rapidly increased India’s doubt on China’s presence. Secondly, China’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative project has encircled India geopolitically, creating a plethora of doubts about India’s state apparatus.”
He added that the notion of nuclear weapon strategies and India’s affinity with the USA are the biggest dilemmas that China has persistently had in dealing with India. Moreover, India has been the sanctuary for Tibetan refugees, including the Dalai Lama.
As to the fundamental question of whether all these issues put together could reappear in future, Amarasinghe emphasized: “Having looked at the trajectories of the history of Indo-China conflict, one can ascertain that the India-China issue has always been imbued with a question of power. Both states are yearning for global governance. Yet India is ahead of the curve as the world’s largest democracy and a state with one of the strongest soft powers, making the Indian narrative stronger, whereas Beijing is known for its autocracy.”
On the other hand, he reminded, “We should not forget that the pact signed between China and India in 1996 clearly says that two states cannot use firearms in a border dispute escalation. However, there have been several events that have shown the acts of aggression in the Indo-China border conflict. The Chinese efforts to build a road in the Doklam area near the border created a tense situation in 2017. Three years after that event, the conflict erupted again.”
China’s Foreign Ministry stipulated measures that would be implemented to normalise the situation and prevent future armed conflicts. “The sides welcomed the developments of relations between defence agencies and the external affairs ministries, agreed to support such consultations in the future and implement agreements that were reached by the two sides during the talks between the border troops commanders, as well complete as soon as possible the process of frontline troop withdrawal,” read a ministry statement.
The Foreign Ministry noted that the sides also reached an agreement to implement measures to “prevent the reoccurrence of incidents which may influence the situation and peace in the border region.”
“The relationship of China and India underwent various trials and their progress towards modern development was not always swift. As had been recently demonstrated correctly, and at the same time incorrectly, by the recent incident in the western sector of the China-India border in the Galwan River valley, China will continue to assert its territorial sovereignty as well as peace and tranquillity in the border region,” according to the statement.
The sides expressed readiness to respect the agreements achieved previously by the heads of state, pay specific attention to the issue of state borders and prevent “disagreements from becoming conflicts.” The sides also confirmed their adherence to the earlier agreements on the state border and expressed readiness to implement measures to normalise the situation in the border region.
Sino-Indian geopolitical rivalry is certainly not new, but today it has multifaceted implications for developments in the South Asian region and most possibly for BRICS. For example, in email discussions, Dr. Zhu Ming of the Institute for Global Governance Studies at the Shanghai Institute for International Studies (SIIS), noted that while there have been several disagreements between China and India, some have been resolved within the framework of international law but others have remained without comprehensive solutions.
Within the context of geopolitical alliances and emerging challenges, Tahama Asadis, a graduate of Strategic Studies from the National Defence University in Islamabad, noted the changing alliances and power equilibrium among the United States, China, India and Pakistan that bear key implications for inter-state rivalry and the consequent crisis dynamics in South Asia.
China has so far been successful in influencing South Asia because of many factors. One of the major reasons is that China has managed to project itself as a neighbour that would not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, least of all, in the internal affairs of its friends and partners. In the light of its ‘Good Neighbour Policy’, China’s increased diplomatic and economic engagements in South Asia are aimed at enhancing its strategic influence in the region.
Professor Ian Taylor at the University of St Andrews in the United Kingdom explained that he did not see any long-term future for the BRICS as a coherent grouping on the world stage. According to Taylor, the China-India rivalry (as exemplified by border clashes) shows how shallow the alliance is. Furthermore, Brasilia has its own “Brazilian Trump” who sees alliance with the West as the way forward, not with other “developing countries”.
Originally, BRIC was a four-member alliance until South Africa officially became a member in December 2010, after formally being invited by China to join and subsequently being accepted by the founding BRIC countries. The group was renamed BRICS – with the “S” standing for South Africa – to reflect the group’s expanded membership. South Africa is a staunch member of the Southern African Development Community (SADC).
“South Africa is in terminal decline and was only admitted to the BRICS for politically expedient-politically correct reasons. Its membership damaged the group’s credibility. And of course, China will resist to the very end the notion that India be admitted to the UN Security Council as a Permanent Member,” Taylor explained, adding that so much for the vaunted “South-South solidarity” that the BRICS was supposed to represent and what all the noise was about when it was launched.
Zhu Ming holds conservative not so negative views on the future of BRICS amid India-China conflicts, giving two reasons. The first and most important is that Beijing is still keeping a low profile on this conflict. For instance, Chinese local media coverage of this conflict is still quite low, and Beijing has not revealed losses on the Chinese side in order not to form the impression of too huge a gap in losses between the two sides as to humiliate the Indian side. “Just imagine, if two people were fighting, the situation would be extremely hard to turn back to normal very soon. But if one side could keep relatively calm, the situation would be more optimistic.”
Secondly, the disputed land is not worthy of a war between the two countries. “However, the rising nationalist mood of India is a bit troublesome. BRICS is not nothing to New Delhi, it will not be a good option for India to quit BRICS. Since BRICS was formed jointly by five powers, China does not own BRICS,” he told this article author, adding, “It is a bit early to judge the prospects of BRICS. It is quite possible that the global and BRICS health governance system could be another rising cooperation field within the BRICS group after the forthcoming BRICS summit.”
“While there are no official claims from the Kremlin that Putin was brokering any negotiation between the two to reconcile the border dispute if Russia can make a good move in meddling with the Indo-China border conflict, I assume it will work to a greater extent. Given the history of Russia’s dominant role in South Asia since its Soviet past, Moscow has a greater capacity to play the role of mediator. Besides that, BRICS is a platform for emerging powers and its capacity cannot be discarded as a regional political talk shop. Thus, I believe BRICS would create some steps for a more amicable solution,” Amarasinghe concluded on an optimistic note.
Alicia Garcia-Herrero is Senior Research Fellow at the Brussels-based think tank Bruegel and Adjunct Professor at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, noted in her article headlined “China Continues To Dominate An Expanded BRICS” published by the East Asia Forum that China has been the leading proponent of expanding BRICS to BRICS+. The main reason for the expansion was to make BRICS more representative of the developing world and give it a stronger voice on the global stage.
But the six countries invited to join — which has become five after Argentina’s withdrawal — are quite heterogeneous. Some are net creditors (such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates), while others are net debtors and in a very weak financial position. Half of them are large exporters of fossil fuels (Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iran). Ethiopia and Egypt stand out as members from Africa, a continent that has become increasingly important for China’s and India’s foreign policy, according to Garcia-Herrero.
The BRICS countries are considered the foremost geopolitical rival to the G7 bloc of leading advanced economies, implementing competing initiatives such as the New Development Bank, the BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement, the BRICS pay, the BRICS Joint Statistical Publication and the BRICS basket reserve currency. But in practical reality, China has large control and uses the platform to widen its economic influence. Most of the trade growth has been China-centric, with contributions from the rest of BRICS remaining quite flat until recently. Russia, with its limited economic impact, only remains an excellent public relations organizer for BRICS.
The BRICS members are known for their significant influence on regional affairs, and all are members of the G20. Since its establishment in 2009, the BRICS nations have met annually at several summits, with South Africa having hosted the most recent 15th BRICS Summit in August 2023. Currently, Russia is heading the rotating in 2024 and plans to push forward significant issues, particularly the association’s expansion and transforming it into an anti-Western coalition. Reports indicate about 40 countries, the majority in Africa and Asia have expressed readiness to join BRICS from the Global South. The association has three areas of strategic partnership: policy and security, economy and finance, and cultural and educational cooperation.
Between now and until October when Kazan will host the 16th summit, Moscow has scheduled various activities including the BRICS Games, BRICS Foreign Ministers, BRICS Academic and BRICS Parliamentary meetings, these aim at showcasing BRICS geopolitical influence and increasing coalition for building a fairer, better and multipolar world. It also operates based on non-interference and equality with the hope of ensuring members get mutual economic benefits in the world. BRICS has received both praise and criticism from academics, researchers, politicians geopolitical analysts and writers around the world.
The origins of BRICS — a bloc comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa and, as of 2024, new members Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates — can be traced back to a 2001 publication by Goldman Sachs economist Jim O’Neill titled ‘Building Better Global Economic BRICs’. O’Neill argued that Brazil, Russia, India and China were poised to play an increasingly significant role in the global economy. BRIC was officially launched in 2009 and was renamed BRICS in 2010 when South Africa joined, and Russia will make history by admitting the largest ever in 2024.
The founding countries of Brazil, Russia, India, and China held the first summit in Yekaterinburg in 2009, with South Africa joining the association a year later. Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates joined on 1 January 2024 The five BRICS countries together represent over 3.1 billion people, or about 41 percent of the world population. The five nations had a combined nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of 18.6 trillion dollars and an estimated 4.46 trillion dollars in combined foreign reserves.
World
Pope Francis Dies at 88 After Protracted Illness

By Adedapo Adesanya
Pope Francis has died at the age of 88 after battling illness in the last couple of months.
The Vatican announced his demise on Monday morning, a day after Easter.
The pontiff, who was Bishop of Rome and head of the Catholic Church, became pope in 2013 after his predecessor, Benedict XVI resigned.
His death was announced by Cardinal Kevin Farrell in a statement released by the Vatican.
He said: “Dearest brothers and sisters, with deep sorrow I must announce the death of our Holy Father Francis.
“At 7.35am this morning, the Bishop of Rome, Francis, returned to the house of the Father. His entire life was dedicated to the service of the Lord and His Church.
“He taught us to live the values of the Gospel with fidelity, courage and universal love, especially in favour of the poorest and most marginalised.
“With immense gratitude for his example as a true disciple of the Lord Jesus, we commend the soul of Pope Francis to the infinite merciful love of the One and Triune God.”
The process for choosing a new pope – conclave – generally takes place between 15 and 20 days after the death of a pontiff.
Cardinals from around the world will gather in the Vatican and choose the new leader of the Catholic church.
World
Russia’s Business Integration and Geopolitics of Multipolar World

By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh
Popularly referred to as Roscongress Foundation, St. Petersburg International Forum (SPIEF) has been its main cornerstone. The SPIEF has, all these years, focused on charting dignified internal economic integration utilizing available resources, both natural and human capital and combined with financial capability, and the possibility of increasing exportable goods to make a better world.
Since its establishment by a decree of Russian President Vladimir Putin, it has marked chronological achievements in boosting and strengthening corporate investor networking and entrepreneurship. It has also taken several key initiatives to foster potential entrepreneurship, leveraging the vast opportunities and supporting the growth of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the Russian Federation.
According to reports, designing business brands, expand their objective reach to internal Russia’s landscape, and developing markets in neighboring Soviet republics and farther down in Africa, Asia, Europe, United States and Latin America. Ultimately, the SPIEF is unreservedly committed to providing the necessary support to enable both the state-to-state and the private sector to thrive. Building on the previous unerasable achievements, SPIEF’s mid-June 2025 edition will continue to serve as a solid platform, particularly for corporate networking, brainstorming and collaborating on strategies for potential business developments and their subsequent growth.
The architecture of the entire business programme on 18–21 June, has been fixed, and the theme designed as “Shared Values: The Foundation of Growth in a Multipolar World”, reflecting major shifts in international cooperation and the role of universal values in enabling sustainable economic development.
During the discussions, SPIEF participants will assess and review the effectiveness of measures taken, in the past years, to achieve Russia’s economic stability and progress, and concretely to determine further economic development trajectories in the Russian Federation and its footprints in different regions in the world amidst the current geopolitical challenges.
“We are witnessing tectonic shifts in the world. Not only is the economic map changing, but so too, in some sense, are the systems of economic activity and social relations in a number of countries and even intergovernmental blocs. The St. Petersburg International Economic Forum is becoming more than just a space for dialogue and the generation of ideas and solutions. It is turning into a platform where new meanings and even new practices emerge that can shape the contours of the future.
“It’s important not only to observe these changes, but to drive them and set their direction. And all of this must happen through a format of meaningful, trust-based and collaborative dialogue,” said Anton Kobyakov, Adviser to the President of the Russian Federation and Executive Secretary of the SPIEF Organizing Committee.
The business programme has been structured around four key thematic pillars, each revealing a different dimension of global and national transformation. The central pillar, “Development Economics: Ensuring Growth”, reflects the logic of new economic thinking. It covers two major areas. “The Global Economy: A New Platform for Global Growth” focuses on the resilience of macroeconomic models, investment strategies, the expansion of logistics routes, and the development of new markets.
Discussions will address the future of international trade and supply chain transformation, the role of small and medium-sized businesses, and the regional and sector-specific dimensions of economic policy. Another major area is “The Russian Economy: A New Level of Growth”, which explores the opportunities and challenges facing the Russian economy amid global shifts.
Topics will include building an effective new-cycle economic model, strengthening the resilience of domestic industries, and developing priority sectors such as manufacturing, agriculture, and high technology. This track will also cover Russia’s innovation potential, its integration into global economic processes, investment attraction strategies, and the strengthening of the domestic market.
These themes are directly linked to technological sovereignty and innovation. The “Technology: Pursuing Leadership” pillar will focus on key directions in technological development from AI and automation to independence in microelectronics, new materials, energy, and cybersecurity. At the core is the formation of a sustainable and competitive technological base capable of ensuring the long-term development of the economy and society.
Technological advancement is impossible without a stable value system and strong cultural identity. That’s why the third pillar, “The Living Environment”, will address information sovereignty, cultural identity, social cohesion, and international humanitarian cooperation. Participants will explore how meaning is shaped and communicated in the media landscape, the mechanisms of trust in the digital age, and the role of tradition and historical memory.
This naturally leads into the fourth pillar, “The Individual in a New World”, which will focus on quality of life, health, education, family well-being, urban development, and personal fulfilment. Special attention will be paid to youth and women’s participation in the economy, new employment formats, and managing human capital as a key resource for the future.
The programme will also include sector-specific and international events that have already proven to be essential gathering points for the professional community. Among them are the SCO and BRICS Business Forums, the B20 Forum, the SME Forum, the Creative Industries Forum, and the ‘Ensuring Drug Security’ Russian Pharmaceutical Forum.
The traditional format of business dialogues with representatives from China, India, Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, ASEAN, the CIS, and the EAEU will support the expansion of bilateral and multilateral ties, showcase investment projects, and explore industrial and scientific cooperation opportunities. Additional events will include business breakfasts with leaders of major companies, project presentations, public interviews, agreement signings, and an exhibition programme.
This year’s SPIEF will also host the General Assembly of the Organization of Asia-Pacific News Agencies (OANA), as well as the Day of the Future International Youth Economic Forum. The latter is supported by Friends for Leadership, an organization accredited by the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), which brings together young leaders, entrepreneurs and experts from over 100 countries. It was created by the Roscongress Foundation following the 19th World Festival of Youth and Students in 2017.
From the above discussion, reiterating that the theme, “Shared Values: The Foundation of Growth in a Multipolar World”, reflects profound shifts in the framework of international cooperation. Rapidly evolving economic and political processes are transforming the global landscape. The current changes demand broad expert discussion, and SPIEF, as one of the largest business forums, provides a platform for an open dialogue. In addition, it aims to become a space where new ideas are born, shaped into strategy, and transformed into real-world processes that can help shape the future.
The Roscongress Foundation was established in 2007 with the aim of facilitating the development of Russia’s economic potential, promoting its national interests, and strengthening the country’s image. One of the roles of the Foundation is to comprehensively evaluate, analyse, and cover issues on the Russian and global economic agendas. It also offers administrative services, provides promotional support for business projects and attracting investment, helps foster social entrepreneurship and charitable initiatives. The Roscongress Foundation was established in pursuance of a decision by the President of the Russian Federation.
World
Trump’s Tariffs, Russia and Africa Trade Cooperation in Emerging Multipolar World

By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh
With geopolitical situation heightening, trade wars are also becoming increasingly prominent. The 47th United States President Donald Trump has introduced trade tariffs, splashed it over the world. China, an Asian trade giant and an emerging economic superpower, has its highest shared.
South Africa, struggling with its fragile foreign alliances, is seriously navigating the new United States economic policy and trade measures, at least to maintain its membership in the African Growth and Opportunities Act (AGOA) which is going to expire in September 2025.
It is a well-known fact that AGOA waived duties on most commodities from Africa in order to boost trade in American market. The AGOA also offers many African countries trade preferences in the American market, earning huge revenues for their budgets. Financial remittances back to Africa also play mighty roles across the continent from the United States.
That however, the shifting geopolitical situation combined with Trump’s new trade policies and Russia’s rising interest in Africa, the overarching message for African leaders and business corporate executives is to review the level of degree how to appreciably approach and strengthen trade partnership between Africa and Russia.
The notion of a new global order and frequently phrased multipolar world, indicating the construction of a fairer architecture of interaction, in practical terms, has become like a relic and just as a monumental pillar. Even as we watch the full-blown recalibration of power, the geopolitical reshuffling undoubtedly creates the conditions for new forms of cooperation.
In this current era of contradictions and complexities we are witnessing today, we must rather reshape and redefine rules and regulations to facilitate bilateral and multilateral relations between African countries and Russia, if really Russia seeks to forge post-Soviet strategic economic cooperation with Africa.
In fact, post-Soviet in the sense that trade is not concentrate on state-to-state but also private – including, at least, medium scale businesses. The new policy dealing with realities of the geopolitical world, distinctively different from Soviet-era slogans and rhetorics of ‘international friendship and solidarity’ of those days.
Bridging Africa and Russia, at least in the literal sense of the word, necessitates partial departure from theoretical approach to implementing several bilateral and multilateral decisions, better still agreements reached at previous summits and conferences during the past decade.
Understandably Africa has a stage, Russia termed ‘the struggle against neo-colonial tendencies’ and mounting the metal walls against the ‘scrambling of resources’ across Africa. Some experts argued that Africa, at the current stage, has to develop its regions, modernize most the post-independence-era industries to produce exportable goods, not only for domestic consumption. Now the emphasis is on pushing for prospects of a single continental market, the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA).
This initiative, however, must be strategically and well-coordinated well, and here I suggest integration and cooperation starting at country-wide basis to regional level before it broadly goes to the entire continent, consisting 54 independent states.
These are coordinated together as African Union (AU), which in January 2021 initiated the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA). With this trading goals in mind, Africa as a continent has to integrate, promote trade and economic cooperation, engage in investment and development. In that direction, genuine foreign partners are indiscriminately required, foreign investment capital in essential for collaboration as well as their entrepreneurial skills and technical expertise.
For instance, developing relations with Asian giants such China and India, the European Union and the United States. A number of African countries are shifting to the BRICS orbit, in search for feasible alternative opportunities, for the theatrical trade drama. In the Eurasian region and the former Soviet space, Kazakhstan and Russia stand out, as potential partners, for Africa.
Foreign Affairs Minister Sergey Lavrov has said, at the podium before the staff and students at Moscow State Institute of International Affairs in September, that trade between Russia and Africa would grow further as more and more African partners continued to show interest in having Russians in the economic sectors in Africa. This provides greater competition between the companies from Western countries, China, and Russia. With competition for developing mineral resources in Africa, it is easier and cheaper for African colleagues to choose partners.
As far back in October 2010, Russian Foreign Affairs Ministry posted an official report on its website that traditional products from least developed countries (including Africa) would be exempted from import tariffs. The legislation stipulated that the traditional goods are eligible for preferential customs and tariffs treatment.
Thereafter, Minister Sergey Lavrov has reiterated, in speeches, trade preferences for African exporters, but terribly failed to honour these thunderous promises. Notwithstanding the above granting trade preferences, there prevailing multitude of questions relating to the pathways of improving trade transactions, and removing obstacles including those Soviet-era rules and regulations.
Logistics is another torny hurdle. Further to this, Russian financial institutions can offer credit support that will allow to localize Russian production in Africa’s industrial zones, especially southern and eastern African regions that show some stability and have good investment and business incentives.
In order to operate more effectively, Russians have to risk by investing, recognize the importance of cooperation on key investment issues and to work closely on the challenges and opportunities on the continent. On one hand, analyzing the present landscape of Africa, Russia can export its technology and compete on equal terms with China, India and other prominent players. On the other hand, Russia lacks the competitive advantage in terms of finished industrial (manufactured) products that African consumers obtain from Asian countries such as China, India, Japan and South Korea.
Compared to the United States and Europe, Russia did very little after the Cold War and it is doing little even today in Africa. On 27th–28th July 2023, St Petersburg hosted the second Russia-Africa summit. At the plenary session, President Vladimir Putin underscored the fact that there was, prior to the collapse of the Soviet, there were over 330 large infrastructure and industrial facilities in Africa, but most were lost. Regarding trade, Putin, regrettably, noted Russia’s trade turnover with the African countries increased in 2022 and reached almost US$18 billion, (of course, that was 2022).
Arguably, Russia’s economic presence is invisible across Africa. It currently has insignificant trade statistics. Until the end of the first quarter of 2025, Russia still has a little over $20 billion trade volume with Africa. Statistics on Africa’s trade with foreign countries vary largely.
For example, the total United States two-way trade in Africa has actually fallen off in recent years, to about $60 billion, far eclipsed by the European Union with over $240 billion, and China more than $280 billion, according to a website post by the Brookings Institution.
According to the African Development Bank, Africa’s economy is growing faster than those of any other regions. Nearly half of Africa is now classified as middle income countries, the numbers of Africans living below the poverty line fell to 39 percent as compared to 51 percent in 2023, and around 380 million of Africa’s 1.4 billion people are now earning good incomes – rising consumerism – that makes trade profitable.
Nevertheless, there is great potential, as African leaders and entrepreneurial community are turing to Russia for multifaceted cooperation due to the imperialist approach of the United States and its hegemonic stand triggered over the years, and now with Trump new trade tariffs and Washington’s entire African policy.
China has done its part, Russia has to change and adopt new rules and regulations, pragmatic approach devoid of mere frequent rhetorics. It is important discussing these points, and to shamelessly repeat that both Russia and Africa have to make consistent efforts to look for new ways, practical efforts at removing existing obstacles that have impeded trade over the years.
Sprawling from the Baltic Sea to the Pacific Ocean, Russia is a major great power and has the potential to become a superpower. Russia can regain part of its Soviet-era economic power and political influence in present-day Africa.
Certainly, the expected superpower status has to be attained by practical multifaceted sustainable development and by maintaining an appreciably positive relations with Africa. We have come a long way, especially after the resonating first summit (2019 and high-praised second summit (2023), several bilateral agreements are yet to be implemented. The forthcoming Russia – Africa Partnership summit is slated for 2026, inside Africa and preferably in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Kestér Kenn Klomegâh is a frequent and passionate contributor. During his professional career as a researcher specialising in Russia-Africa policy, which spans nearly two decades, he has been detained and questioned several times by Russian federal security services for reporting facts. Most of his well-resourced articles are reprinted in a number of reputable foreign media.
-
Feature/OPED5 years ago
Davos was Different this year
-
Travel/Tourism9 years ago
Lagos Seals Western Lodge Hotel In Ikorodu
-
Showbiz2 years ago
Estranged Lover Releases Videos of Empress Njamah Bathing
-
Banking7 years ago
Sort Codes of GTBank Branches in Nigeria
-
Economy2 years ago
Subsidy Removal: CNG at N130 Per Litre Cheaper Than Petrol—IPMAN
-
Banking2 years ago
First Bank Announces Planned Downtime
-
Sports2 years ago
Highest Paid Nigerian Footballer – How Much Do Nigerian Footballers Earn
-
Technology4 years ago
How To Link Your MTN, Airtel, Glo, 9mobile Lines to NIN