World
Impact of African Policies on Development of Infrastructure Projects, Emergence of Debt-Trap and Neo-Colonialism
By Kester Kenn Klomegah
In this interview taken by Kester Kenn Klomegah for Eurasia Review, Dr. Frangton Chiyemura, a lecturer in International Development at the School of Social Sciences and Global Studies, The Open University in the United Kingdom, discusses the impact of African policies on development and realization of infrastructure projects, the possible of running into “debt-traps” and the emergence of “neo-colonialism” in Africa. Here are the interview excerpts:
Early December, you held discussions and shared your research on how African leaders influence the modality of engagement and negotiation process with China. What were the key points you discussed with the audience and participants who attended?
First of all, I was invited to share my research findings with Oxford University China-Africa Network (OUCAN). OUCAN engages with researchers, think tanks, policy makers involved in Africa-China relations. My talk was part of this initiative to share research and evidence-based findings and conclusions on Africa-China relations.
My talk was based on my completed PhD research project where I investigated how the Ethiopian government exercised agency – defined as the ability to shape, control and influence, when engaging with the Chinese in the context of wind energy infrastructure. The key point was that the Ethiopian government was able to broker, negotiate, structure, implement and manage Chinese involvement in Adama 1 and Adama 2 wind farms.
The audience was quite engaging and wondered how the Ethiopian government was able to exercise agency as compared to other African governments dealing with the Chinese. There are several factors which make Ethiopia to have such clout when dealing with the Chinese as compared to other African countries. Such factors are not only limited to the governance and leadership model of the government especially under Meles Zenawi and Hailermariam.
Secondly, it relates to the geographic location of Ethiopia, which makes it a stabilising force in volatile East African region. Ethiopia, has a unique advantage, as it is the diplomatic hub of Africa – hosting the African Union (AU) and other international organizations. This adds weight to Ethiopia when negotiating with external powers.
What are the general perceptions and attitudes toward this kind of relations? How do the political and business elites, interpret the benefits of determining concrete directions of investment in Africa?
Both Ethiopian and Chinese governments see the relations as win-win. This comes at the backdrop of strong relations at the political party to party level. In the case of my research I conducted, I can confirm that the Chinese Communist Party has very strong relations with the then Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front. In fact, during my research, I found out that the corporate deals are informally negotiated at the party to party level before they are transferred to the government level for formalization. There seems to be a seamless connection between the ruling party and the government, and any decisions reached at the party level are by extension seamlessly binding on the government.
How would you explain neo-colonialism by foreign players in Africa? What is it and what foreign (external) countries are referred to as neo-colonisers, in your view?
Neocolonialism argument is present in Africa-China relations especially proposed so by scholars who come from a neo-Marxian epistemological grounding. Neocolonialism can be seen as a new form of domination, plunder and exploitation using clandestine and economic statecraft. Of course, there could be some hints or pointers to suggest neocolonial tendencies, but I believe such claims should be levelled on case by case basis, and there has to be concrete evidence to suggest that way. That said, I think we have to be careful to scrutinize where such claims of neocolonialism are coming from, and potentially scrap beyond the surface to establish the motivations and interests for spreading or proposing such claims.
In my opinion, I believe there is no free lunch in the world, African countries should enter into partnerships based on their strategic interests and an understanding of what the partners can provide or deliver. Secondly, every African country should do a comprehensive evaluation of the structure and, the terms and conditions of their engagements with foreign powers. By so doing, this will eliminate the chances for the emergence of claims of neocolonialism. Instead of extending the blame to someone elsewhere, Africa needs to do its homework especially on the implementation and monitoring aspects of the deals. Africa has some of the best regulations and standards, but the problem lies in implementation and monitoring.
Without doubt, Africa needs investment in infrastructure, agriculture and industry, and in many other sectors. Despite negative criticisms, what admirable roles is China playing here, we are talking about working towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Africa?
China is playing a huge role in infrastructure financing and development. For example, available evidence suggests that between 2000 and 2017, China provided about US$143 billion worthy of loans to African governments. This has come quite handy especially given the shortage of finance to build the much-needed infrastructure targeting the SDGs.
In terms of trade, China became Africa’s trading partner in 2009, and two-way trade volume reached its peak in 2014 at the value of US$215 billion. Further, in 2017, it was estimated to have reached about US$148 billion. Of course, trade transactions still remain unbalanced in favour of China. In addition, between 2000 and 2017, transport (US$38.1 billion), power (US$30.1 billion) and mining (US$19.1 billion) ranked respectively as top three sectors that have received the lion’s share of Chinese loans in Africa.
What is your interpretation of debt-trap most often discussed in various platforms and leveled accusations on China? But tangible infrastructure have been built with these loans in many African countries
Interestingly, I don’t believe in this debt-trap diplomacy. First of all, it does not make any business sense that the Chinese will design a project targeting ‘failure’ so that they can control or pull the strings of a particular country. Second, most of the so-called assets that the Chinese are poised to be targeting to run are very complicated, messy and at times quite straining for the Chinese to dirty their hands. Therefore, it doesn’t make any sense for me.
That said, I would not refer to it as ‘trap’ but as merely debt and the consequences associated with that. What that implies is that, for example, in the power sector, African requires on average more than 5 billion worth of investment per year for the next 10 years to address this challenge. Inevitably, part of the money will come from debt financing. For me, I am not really worried about ‘productive debt’ – defined as any money borrowed to invest in a project that has the ability to boost economic growth and at the same time, generate a revenue stream that will pay back the loan. I would be worried about countries that borrow to build, say, a presidential palace, a stadium, or to pay salaries. That type of borrowing for me is bad – its destructive and unproductive borrowing, and that must necessarily stop.
I have to disagree with the assertion that China is debt-trapping Africa. Of course, there are some African countries that are in debt distress situation, others have high risk of being in distress, but the contributions of Chinese finances towards that leave much to be desired. For example, countries such as Chad, Sao Tome and Principle, South Sudan are in high debt distress but the contributions of the Chinese towards that is very insignificant.
We also have some countries like Ethiopia, Cameroon and Ghana where the Chinese hold a substantial share of the debt, but those countries are not in debt distress, although they are high risk of debt distress. You will be surprised that according to World Bank, Africa’s debt to China is less than 23%, compared to what Africa owes to private lenders (32%), and multilateral institutions such as World Bank, IMF etc. (35%). Sometimes, I see the hypocrisy of the West – with whom Africa has substantial debt, demonizing the Chinese on debt-trap diplomacy.
In your expert view, what are the key challenges and problems facing Chinese investors in Africa, what are your suggestions how some aspects of the relations be improved between Africa and China?
Of course, like any other relations, Africa-China engagements have their own challenges which need to be worked on to ensure there is mutual benefit and win-win situation. Some of the challenges relate implementation of regulations and standards by African governments when dealing with the Chinese. The issues lie not in regulations, but for me in the implementation and enforcement. This is the first aspect that needs to be addressed by African governments, especially in the infrastructure sector.
The second challenge relates to peace and security. Some of the African countries are in conflict situation or are, at least, under terrorist threat. This threatens some of the Chinese businesses and enterprises.
Third, the unbalanced nature of trade between China and Africa create room for emergence of neo-colonial arguments and such needs to be addressed immediately. Some of the challenges are minor, these include language barriers, differences in culture and work ethics. These can easily be resolved.
The fourth and final is about in some African countries lack policy certainty and stability which negatively impact on Chinese long-term business planning. Such countries include Zimbabwe where there has been of note currency uncertainty, policy uncertainty and even regulatory uncertainty. This impacts on long-term Chinese business interest.
World
Russian-Nigerian Economic Diplomacy: Ajeokuta Symbolises Russia’s Remarkable Achievement in Nigeria
By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh
Over the past two decades, Russia’s economic influence in Africa—and specifically in Nigeria—has been limited, largely due to a lack of structured financial support from Russian policy banks and state-backed investment mechanisms. While Russian companies have demonstrated readiness to invest and compete with global players, they consistently cite insufficient government financial guarantees as a key constraint.
Unlike China, India, Japan, and the United States—which have provided billions in concessionary loans and credit lines to support African infrastructure, agriculture, manufacturing, and SMEs—Russia has struggled to translate diplomatic goodwill into substantial economic projects. For example, Nigeria’s trade with Russia accounts for barely 1% of total trade volume, while China and the U.S. dominate at over 15% and 10% respectively in the last decade. This disparity highlights the challenges Russia faces in converting agreements into actionable investment.
Lessons from Nigeria’s Past
The limited impact of Russian economic diplomacy echoes Nigeria’s own history of unfulfilled agreements during former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration. Over the past 20 years, ambitious energy, transport, and industrial initiatives signed with foreign partners—including Russia—often stalled or produced minimal results. In many cases, projects were approved in principle, but funding shortfalls, bureaucratic hurdles, and weak follow-through left them unimplemented. Nothing monumental emerged from these agreements, underscoring the importance of financial backing and sustained commitment.
China as a Model
Policy experts point to China’s systematic approach to African investments as a blueprint for Russia. Chinese state policy banks underwrite projects, de-risk investments, and provide finance often secured by African sovereign guarantees. This approach has enabled Chinese companies to execute large-scale infrastructure efficiently, expanding their presence across sectors while simultaneously investing in human capital.
Egyptian Professor Mohamed Chtatou at the International University of Rabat and Mohammed V University in Rabat, Morocco, argues: “Russia could replicate such mechanisms to ensure companies operate with financial backing and risk mitigation, rather than relying solely on bilateral agreements or political connections.”
Russia’s Current Footprint in Africa
Russia’s economic engagement in Africa is heavily tied to natural resources and military equipment. In Zimbabwe, platinum rights and diamond projects were exchanged for fuel or fighter jets. Nearly half of Russian arms exports to Africa are concentrated in countries like Nigeria, Zimbabwe, and Mozambique. Large-scale initiatives, such as the planned $10 billion nuclear plant in Zambia, have stalled due to a lack of Russian financial commitment, despite completed feasibility studies. Similar delays have affected nuclear projects in South Africa, Rwanda, and Egypt.
Federation Council Chairperson Valentina Matviyenko and Senator Igor Morozov have emphasized parliamentary diplomacy and the creation of new financial instruments, such as investment funds under the Russian Export Center, to provide structured support for businesses and enhance trade cooperation. These measures are designed to address historical gaps in financing and ensure that agreements lead to tangible outcomes.
Opportunities and Challenges
Analysts highlight a fundamental challenge: Russia’s limited incentives in Africa. While China invests to secure resources and export markets, Russia lacks comparable commercial drivers. Russian companies possess technological and industrial capabilities, but without sufficient financial support, large-scale projects remain aspirational rather than executable.
The historic Russia-Africa Summits in Sochi and in St. Petersburg explicitly indicate a renewed push to deepen engagement, particularly in the economic sectors. President Vladimir Putin has set a goal to raise Russia-Africa trade from $20 billion to $40 billion over the next few years. However, compared to Asian, European, and American investors, Russia still lags significantly. UNCTAD data shows that the top investors in Africa are the Netherlands, France, the UK, the United States, and China—countries that combine capital support with strategic deployment.
In Nigeria, agreements with Russian firms over energy and industrial projects have yielded little measurable progress. Over 20 years, major deals signed during Obasanjo’s administration and renewed under subsequent governments often stalled at the financing stage. The lesson is clear: political agreements alone are insufficient without structured investment and follow-through.
Strategic Recommendations
For Russia to expand its economic influence in Africa, analysts recommend:
- Structured financial support: Establishing state-backed credit lines, policy bank guarantees, and investment funds to reduce project risks.
- Incentive realignment: Identifying sectors where Russian expertise aligns with African needs, including energy, industrial technology, and infrastructure.
- Sustained implementation: Turning signed agreements into tangible projects with clear timelines and milestones, avoiding the pitfalls of unfulfilled past agreements.
With proper financial backing, Russia can leverage its technological capabilities to diversify beyond arms sales and resource-linked deals, enhancing trade, industrial, and technological cooperation across Africa.
Conclusion
Russia’s Africa strategy remains a work in progress. Nigeria’s experience with decades of agreements that failed to materialize underscores the importance of structured financial commitments and persistent follow-through. Without these, Russia risks remaining a peripheral player (virtual investor) while Arab States such as UAE, China, the United States, and other global powers consolidate their presence.
The potential is evident: Africa is a fast-growing market with vast natural resources, infrastructure needs, and a young, ambitious population. Russia’s challenge—and opportunity—is to match diplomatic efforts with financial strategy, turning political ties into lasting economic influence.
By Adedapo Adesanya
Africa Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank) has urged African governments to lean into structural tailwinds, warning that the global commodity landscape has entered a new phase of deepening split.
In its November 2025 commodity bulletin, the bank noted that markets are no longer moving in unison; instead, some are powered by structural demand while others are weakening under oversupply, shifting consumption patterns and weather-related dynamics.
As a result of this bifurcation, the Cairo-based lender tasked policymakers on the continent to manage supply-chain vulnerabilities and diversify beyond the commodity-export model.
The report highlights that commodities linked to energy transition, infrastructure development and geopolitical realignments are gaining momentum.
For instance, natural gas has risen sharply from 2024 levels, supported by colder-season heating needs, export disruptions around the Red Sea and tightening global supply. Lithium continues to surge on strong demand from electric-vehicle and battery-storage sectors, with growth projections of up to 45 per cent in 2026. Aluminium is approaching multi-year highs amid strong construction and automotive activity and smelter-level power constraints, while soybeans are benefiting from sustained Chinese purchases and adverse weather concerns in South America.
Even crude oil, which accounts for Nigeria’s highest foreign exchange earnings, though still lower year-on-year, is stabilising around $60 per barrel as geopolitical supply risks, including drone attacks on Russian facilities, offset muted global demand.
In contrast, several commodities that recently experienced strong rallies are now softening.
The bank noted that cocoa prices are retreating from record highs as West African crop prospects improve and inventories recover. Palm oil markets face oversupply in Southeast Asia and subdued demand from India and China, pushing stocks to multi-year highs. Sugar is weakening under expectations of a nearly two-million-tonne global surplus for the 2025/26 season, while platinum and silver are seeing headwinds from weaker industrial demand, investor profit-taking and hawkish monetary signals.
For Africa, the bank stresses that the implications are clear. Countries aligned with energy-transition metals and infrastructure-linked commodities stand to benefit from more resilient long-term demand.
It urged those heavily exposed to softening agricultural markets to accelerate a shift into processing, value addition and product diversification.
The bulletin also called for stronger market-intelligence systems, improved intra-African trade connectivity, and investment in logistics and regulatory capacity, noting that Africa’s competitiveness will depend on how quickly governments adapt to the new two-speed global environment.
By Modupe Gbadeyanka
A strategic partnership designed to accelerate worldwide enterprise adoption and monetisation of Network APIs has been entered into between Comviva and the global aggregator of standardised network APIs, Aduna.
The adoption would be done through Comviva’s flagship SaaS-based platform for programmable communications and network intelligence, NGAGE.ai.
The partnership combines Comviva’s NGAGE.ai platform and enterprise onboarding expertise with Aduna’s global operator consortium.
This unified approach provides enterprises with secure, scalable access to network intelligence while enabling telcos to monetise network capabilities efficiently.
The collaboration is further strengthened by Comviva’s proven leadership in the global digital payments and digital lending ecosystem— sectors that will be among the biggest adopters of Network APIs.
The NGAGE.ai platform is already active across 40+ countries, integrated with 100+ operators, and processing over 250 billion transactions annually for more than 7,000 enterprise customers. With its extensive global deployment, NGAGE.ai is positioned as one of the most scalable and trusted platforms for API-led network intelligence adoption.
“As enterprises accelerate their shift toward real-time, intelligence-driven operations, Network APIs will become foundational to digital transformation. With NGAGE.ai and Aduna’s global ecosystem, we are creating a unified and scalable pathway for enterprises to adopt programmable communications at speed and at scale.
“This partnership strengthens our commitment to helping telcos monetise network intelligence while enabling enterprises to build differentiated, secure, and future-ready digital experiences,” the chief executive of Comviva, Mr Rajesh Chandiramani, stated.
Also, the chief executive of Aduna, Mr Anthony Bartolo, noted that, “The next wave of enterprise innovation will be powered by seamless access to network intelligence.
“By integrating Comviva’s NGAGE.ai platform with Aduna’s global federation of operators, we are enabling enterprises to innovate consistently across markets with standardised, high-performance Network APIs.
“This collaboration enhances the value chain for operators and gives enterprises the confidence and agility needed to launch new services, reduce fraud, and deliver more trustworthy customer experiences worldwide.”
-
Feature/OPED6 years agoDavos was Different this year
-
Travel/Tourism9 years ago
Lagos Seals Western Lodge Hotel In Ikorodu
-
Showbiz3 years agoEstranged Lover Releases Videos of Empress Njamah Bathing
-
Banking7 years agoSort Codes of GTBank Branches in Nigeria
-
Economy2 years agoSubsidy Removal: CNG at N130 Per Litre Cheaper Than Petrol—IPMAN
-
Banking3 years agoFirst Bank Announces Planned Downtime
-
Banking3 years agoSort Codes of UBA Branches in Nigeria
-
Sports3 years agoHighest Paid Nigerian Footballer – How Much Do Nigerian Footballers Earn