Connect with us

World

Russia Contributes 35% of Global Arms Export to Africa—Envoy

Published

on

35% of global arms export

By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh

Russia has been accused of not doing enough for the growth of Africa, especially since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

It was observed that Russia-African diplomacy had been marked by several bilateral agreements that are yet to be implemented.

According to official documents, 92 agreements worth a total of $12.5 billion were signed during the symbolic African leaders’ gathering in late October 2019, and Russia has done little to implement them since then.

The joint declaration is a comprehensive document that outlines the key objectives and tasks required to elevate the entire relationship to a new qualitative level.

Long before the summit, there were mountains of promises and pledges that were never fulfilled. Several meetings of various bilateral intergovernmental commissions have taken place in both Moscow and Africa.

According to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, over 170 Russian companies and organizations submitted 280 proposals relating to various projects and businesses in Africa.

 As Russia prepares for the next summit, which will be held in St. Petersburg in July 2023, African leaders have indicated their willingness to actively participate, at the very least, to listen to rousing speeches, sign more new agreements, and finally pose for group photos.

However, many experts and top African diplomats question the substance of discussing additional opportunities and effective efforts to build and strengthen Russia-African relations.

The revival of Russia-Africa relations must address existing challenges while also taking a results-oriented approach to pressing African issues. Taking into account the views and opinions expressed by African politicians, businesspeople, experts, and diplomats about the situation in Africa is one of them.

In practice, while Russia reaffirms its desire to return to Africa, it has yet to demonstrate a visible long-term commitment to collaborating with appropriate institutions to advance sustainable development across the continent.

Professor Abdullahi Shehu, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to the Russian Federation with concurrent accreditation to the Republic of Belarus, delivered a lecture on “Africa-Russia Relations: Past, Present, and Future” to young diplomats and students of the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Federation in mid-October.

Ambassador Shehu talked a lot about African history. He focused on the effects of the times before, during, and after contact with European powers and the neo-colonization of African states that happened after that.

He also discussed Africa’s relations with the Soviet Union, which began in large part after the independence of several African states in the 1960s. He emphasized the contributions to Africa’s decolonization struggle, as well as the numerous areas of cooperation that have existed between Africa and Russia over the years.

Professor Shehu emphasized the existence of several bilateral agreements with African countries, saying between 2015 and 2019, Russia and African countries signed a total of 20 bilateral military cooperation agreements. Many Russian companies, including Lukoil, Gasprom, Rosatom, and Restec, are in Nigeria, Egypt, Angola, Algeria, and Ethiopia’s energy and power industries.

But on the other hand, Russia has performed dismally in Africa’s energy sector and many other important economic spheres over the years.

“Unfortunately, due to Rosneft’s lack of interest in doing business in Africa, these agreements have not materialized. Furthermore, Russia’s Rosatom has also signed nuclear energy agreements with 18 African countries, including Nigeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, and Rwanda, to meet those countries’ power needs but has not been successful in building nuclear plants in Africa.

“Despite the tidal wave of new Africa-Russian relations, there are still obstacles, as well as new economic conditions and geopolitical realities. Acceptance of these new realities is critical in order to properly manage Africa’s expectations from Russia, at least in the short term,” the envoy said.

On the indiscriminate export of arms and military equipment, Ambassador Shehu stated, “However, Russia’s increasing export of arms to the African continent may exacerbate insecurity and instability, as well as increase the level of crime and criminal proclivity. So, it is in Russia’s strategic interest to be very picky about which African countries it sells weapons to. The deployment of private Russian mercenary groups and other private military groups in African countries is of particular concern and strategic importance to Africa.”

Support for Africa’s democratic institutions and agencies will lead to a more stable Africa, which is in Russia’s overall long-term interest and positive image rather than immediate short-term economic and financial gain, he said in his lecture, adding that Russia contributes approximately 35% of global arms export to the African region.

Given the difficulties that most African countries face in providing adequate power and energy, the number of Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) signed by Rosatom, Russia’s nuclear power company, with at least 14 African countries, is encouraging. What will be more significant, however, is the extent to which the MOUs are implemented because, by definition, the construction and operation of nuclear plants are ventures with the potential for deepening long-term relationships, according to Nigeria’s top diplomat.

Brigadier General Nicholas Mike Sango, Zimbabwe’s ambassador to the Russian Federation, told me in an interview just before his final departure from Moscow that several issues could strengthen the relationship. Economic cooperation is an important direction. African diplomats have consistently persuaded Russian companies to use the Africa Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA) as an opportunity for Russian companies to establish footprints on the continent. This viewpoint has not found favour with them, and it is hoped that it will work in the future.

Despite the government’s lack of pronounced incentives for businesses to set their sights on Africa, Russian businesses generally regard Africa as too risky for investment. He stated that Russia must establish a presence on the continent by exporting its competitive advantages in engineering and technological advancement in order to bridge the gap that is impeding Africa’s industrialization and development.

“Worse, there are too many initiatives by too many quasi-state institutions promoting economic cooperation with Africa, saying the same things in different ways but doing nothing tangible,” he explained during the lengthy pre-departure interview. From July 2015 to August 2022, he represented the Republic of Zimbabwe in the Russian Federation. He previously served as a military adviser in Zimbabwe’s Permanent Mission to the UN and as an international instructor in the Southern African Development Community (SADC).

Many former ambassadors have made several similar criticisms. According to former South African Ambassador Mandisi Mpahlwa, Sub-Saharan Africa has understandably been low on post-Soviet Russia’s priority list, given that Russia is not as reliant on Africa’s natural resources as other major economies. The reason for this was that Soviet-African relations, based on the fight to push back the borders of colonialism, did not always translate into trade, investment, and economic ties that would have continued seamlessly with post-Soviet Russia.

“Russia’s goal of elevating its bilateral relationship with Africa cannot be realized without close collaboration with the private sector. Africa and Russia are politically close but geographically separated, and people-to-people ties remain underdeveloped. This translates into a lack of understanding on both sides of what the other has to offer. In both countries, there may be a fear of the unknown, “Mpahlawa stated in an interview after completing his ambassadorial duties in Russia.

Professor Gerrit Olivier from the Department of Political Science, the University of Pretoria in South Africa, noted that there had been unprecedented frequent official working visits to and from, but with little visible impact. Russian by its global status, ought to be active in Africa as Western Europe, the European Union, the United States and China are, it is all but playing a negligible role, and at present, its diplomacy is dominated by a plethora of agreements signed – many of which the outcomes remain hardly discernible in African countries.

Several agreements signed are impressive, but it remains how these will be implemented in practice. That, however, obstacles to the broadening of Russian-Africa relations should be addressed. Be that as it may, the Kremlin has revived its interest in the African continent, and it will be realistic to expect that the spade work it is putting in now will at some stage show more tangible results, he said with optimism.

“Russian influence in Africa, despite efforts towards resuscitation, remains marginal. While prioritizing Africa, Russia has to do more with a result-oriented investment like other players in the continent. The official working visits are mainly moves and symbolic, and have little long-term concrete results,” Professor Olivier, who served as South African Ambassador to the Russian Federation from 1991 to 1996, wrote in an email comment from Pretoria, South Africa.

Russia’s African policy is riddled with flaws. According to reports, more than 90 agreements were signed at the conclusion of the first Russia-Africa summit. Thousands of bilateral agreements are still in the works, and century-old promises and pledges to support sustainable development with African countries are authoritatively renewed. Russia is flashing its geopolitical headlights in all directions on Africa, like a polar deer waking up from its deep slumber.

According to Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs website, several top-level bilateral meetings, memorandums of understanding, and bilateral agreements have occurred in recent years. In November 2021, a policy document titled the ‘Situation Analytical Report’ presented at the TASS News Agency’s headquarters was harshly critical of Russia’s current African policy.

That policy document was prepared by 25 Russian experts headed by Professor Sergey Karaganov, Honorary Chairman of the Council on Defense and Foreign Policy. While the number of high-level meetings has increased, the proportion of substantive issues and concrete outcomes on the agenda has remained small. It explicitly highlights the inconsistency of approaches in dealing with many critical development issues in Africa. Russia, on the other hand, lacks public outreach policies for Africa. Aside from the lack of a public strategy for the continent, there is a lack of coordination among the various state and non-state institutions that work with Africa.

Associate Professor Ksenia Tabarintseva-Romanova of Ural Federal University’s Department of International Relations recognizes significant existing challenges and possibly difficult conditions in Africa-Russia economic cooperation. The establishment of an African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) is the most important modern tool for the economic development of Africa. This is unique in terms of exploring and becoming acquainted with the opportunities for business collaboration it provides.

She maintains, however, that successful implementation necessitates a sufficiently high level of economic development in the participating countries, logistical accessibility, and developed industry with the potential to introduce new technologies. This means that in order for the African Continental Free Trade Area to be effective, it must enlist the provision of long-term investment flows from outside. These funds should be used to build industrial plants and transportation corridors.

Tabarintseva-Romanova previously stated in an interview discussion that Russia already has extensive experience with the African continent, making it possible to make investments as efficiently as possible for both the Russian Federation and African countries. Potential African investors and exporters may also look into business collaboration and partnerships in Russia.

However, Russia must find effective exit strategies, abandon loud diplomatic rhetoric, and take the first steps toward strengthening economic engagement with Africa. It must go beyond the traditional rhetoric of Soviet assistance to Africa. Professor Abdullahi Shehu’s mid-October lecture at the Russian Diplomacy Academy suggested that Russia consider the following.

Professor Shehu proposed that Russia invest directly in Africa’s extractive and manufacturing sectors as a viable alternative and long-term option. As evidenced by the sanctions imposed on Russia by the United States and Europe, Africa holds a promising future for the viability and profitability of Russian manufacturing companies interested in relocating to Africa to take advantage of cheap African labour.

The establishment of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), the world’s largest of its kind, provides Africa with a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for intra-African trade, thereby empowering Africa’s own capacities and investments. Russia must broaden its view of the investment opportunities presented by this single continental market of 55 African countries with a combined population of over 1.3 billion people.

Professor Abdullahi Shehu also cited Joseph Siegle, the Director of Research for the African Centre for Strategic Studies, to back up his point that “Developing more mutually beneficial Africa relations necessitates changes in both substance and process. Such a shift would necessitate Russia establishing more traditional bilateral engagements with African institutions rather than individuals. These initiatives would prioritize trade, investment, technology transfer, and educational exchanges. Many Africans would welcome such Russian initiatives if they were transparently negotiated and implemented equitably.”

Despite setbacks in recent years, the search for effective project and business financing is still ongoing, according to official reports. “There is a lot of demanding work ahead,” Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said during a meeting of the Ministry’s Collegium. “Perhaps there is a need to pay attention to China’s experience, which provides its enterprises with state guarantees and subsidies, thus ensuring the ability of companies to work on a systematic and long-term basis.”

Previous meetings were a marketplace for fantastic ideas. Business leaders frequently discussed the lack of credit lines and guarantees as barriers, as well as a lack of knowledge of the business environment as a challenge. Lavrov stated in a message sent in mid-June that “In these difficult and critical times, Russia’s foreign policy has prioritized strategic partnership with Africa. Russia is encouraged by Africans’ willingness to expand economic cooperation.”

That is why Lavrov’s earlier suggestion, as early as 2019, of writing a chapter on China’s approach and methods in Africa is arguably important, particularly when discussing the issue of relationship-building in the context of the current global changes of the twenty-first century. Russia could follow China’s lead in financing various infrastructure and construction projects in Africa. Within the context of the emerging multipolar world and growing opposition to Western hegemony and neocolonialism, Russia must consider a broad-based approach to strengthening and sustaining impactful multifaceted relations with Africa.

In stark contrast to key global players such as the United States, China, the European Union, and many others, basic research findings show that Russia’s policies have little impact on African development paradigms. Russia’s policies have frequently ignored Africa’s long-term development concerns. Russia must adopt an action plan, a practical document that outlines concrete, substantive cooperation between summits. Finally, Russians must keep in mind that the African Union Agenda 2063 is Africa’s road map.

Dipo Olowookere is a journalist based in Nigeria that has passion for reporting business news stories. At his leisure time, he watches football and supports 3SC of Ibadan. Mr Olowookere can be reached via [email protected]

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

World

Russia, Tanzania Boost Bilateral Economic Ties

Published

on

Russia Tanzania

By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh

From Africa’s perspectives on attaining economic sovereignty, Tanzania, located in East Africa, has seriously begun showing the investment model as Russia pledges tremendous support during the meeting of the Russian-Tanzanian intergovernmental commission in Arusha, in mid-May 2026. Russia is undertaking various development projects as well as addressing bilateral issues relating to investment, trade and innovation on the African continent, and described Tanzania as the gateway to the broader East African region.

Step 1:  Gazprom is interested in implementing comprehensive gas projects in Tanzania, according to the report issued by the Ministry of Economic Development. It says Gazprom, in addition to selling natural gas, LNG, and petrochemical products, is ready to supply technologies and equipment for gas production, processing, transportation, and sales. It says Gazprom is continuing its work on a pilot project launched last year to supply two mobile gas tankers to Tanzania.

NOVATEK has also indicated its preparedness to participate in natural gas exploration and production projects in Tanzania, and for now, the staff are awaiting information on the date of the fifth round of license allocation for exploration blocks, as well as on the acquisition of blocks outside the tender process—specifically, at the Ntorya field. “Tanzania has significant resource potential, and the economy’s growing demand for electricity and fuel opens up significant opportunities for joint projects. The current situation in the Strait of Hormuz compels us to seek new solutions to ensure that it does not reduce economic growth on the African continent, and particularly in Tanzania,” said Maxim Reshetnikov, head of the Ministry of Economic Development, speaking at a meeting of the Russian-Tanzania intergovernmental commission in Arusha.

Step 2: Russia and Tanzania plan to sign a memorandum of cooperation in tourism in Moscow. In June, as part of the “Travel!” forum in Moscow (June 10-14), the Tanzanian delegation was already given the invitation to participate, noted Reshetnikov while further explaining that Russia is interested in launching direct air service between the two countries, which would “give a powerful boost to tourism development.”

Air Tanzania’s initiative to launch flights from Moscow to Dar es Salaam, with high hopes that Russia and Tanzania will complete the necessary procedures for the entry into force of the new air traffic agreement as quickly as possible. In particular, officials are awaiting notification from the Tanzanian side regarding the entry into force of this agreement.

Air Tanzania will begin flights from Dar es Salaam, Tanzania’s largest city, on May 28. According to the online flight information at the capital’s Vnukovo Airport, flights on this route will include a stopover on the island of Zanzibar. Flights will operate three times a week, on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. The program will run until October 24.

Step 3: Tanzanian President Samia Suluhu Hassan is expected on an official state visit to Russia in June, and that will boost bilateral trade and investment, and provide an additional impetus to developing mutual cooperation.

“In preparation for the upcoming high-level meeting, I propose discussing both promising areas and specific projects… and identifying key areas for further cooperation. In addition to trade, these include energy, transport, industry, agriculture, tourism, science, and education,” Reshetnikov said.

The Tanzanian delegation is expected to participate in the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, which will be held from June 3 to 6.  Usually, at the St. Petersburg forum, the African agenda is of great importance. The programme includes the Russia-Africa Business Dialogue, which, since 2016, has been the annual meeting place for representatives of Russian and African business and official communities. Roscongress Foundation organises it.

Continue Reading

World

AFC Backs Future Africa, Lightrock in $100m Tech VC Funding Bet

Published

on

Lightrock Africa

By Adedapo Adesanya

Infrastructure solutions provider, Africa Finance Corporation (AFC), has committed parts of a $100 million investment to fund managers—Future Africa and Lightrock Africa—to boost African tech venture backing.

The commitment to Lightrock Africa Fund II and Future Africa Fund III is the first tranche of a broader deployment, AFC noted.

The corporation added that it is actively evaluating a pipeline of additional Africa-focused funds spanning a range of strategies and stages, with further commitments expected in the near term.

This is part of its efforts to plug a persistent gap in long-term institutional capital on the continent, which constrains the development and scaling of high-potential technology businesses across the continent, especially with a drop in foreign investments.

“Through this commitment, AFC will deploy catalytic capital in leading Africa-focused technology Funds and, in particular, African-owned fund managers,” it said in a statement on Monday.

AFC aims to address the underrepresentation of local capital in venture funding by catalysing greater participation from African institutional investors and deepening local ownership within the ecosystem.

Despite some success stories on the continent, local institutional capital remains significantly underrepresented across many fund cap tables, with the majority of venture funding continuing to flow from international sources.

AFC’s commitment is designed to shift that dynamic, according to Mr Samaila Zubairu, its chief executive.

“Across the continent, young Africans are not waiting for the digital economy to arrive; they are seizing the moment — adopting technology, creating markets and solving real economic problems faster than infrastructure has kept pace. That is the investment signal.

“AFC’s $100 million Africa-focused Technology Fund will accelerate the convergence of growing demand, rapid technology adoption, youthful demographics and the enabling infrastructure we are building.

“Digital infrastructure is now as fundamental to Africa’s transformation as roads, rail, ports and power — enabling productivity, payments, logistics, services, data and cross-border trade, while creating jobs and industrial scale.”

Mr Pal Erik Sjatil, Managing Partner & CEO, Lightrock, said: “We are delighted to welcome Africa Finance Corporation as an anchor investor in Lightrock Africa II, deepening a strong partnership shaped by our collaboration on high-impact investments across Africa, including Moniepoint, Lula, and M-KOPA.

“With aligned capital, a long-term perspective, and a shared focus on value creation, we are well positioned to support exceptional management teams and scale category-leading businesses that deliver attractive financial returns alongside measurable environmental and social outcomes,” he added.

Adding his input, Mr Iyin Aboyeji, Founding Partner, Future Africa, said: “By investing in AI-native skills, financing productive tools such as phones and laptops, and expanding energy, connectivity and compute infrastructure, we can convert Africa’s greatest asset — its people — into critical participants in the new global economy. AFC’s US$100 million commitment is the anchor this moment demands.

“As our first multilateral development bank partner, AFC is sending a clear signal that digital is as fundamental to Africa’s transformation as agriculture, manufacturing and physical infrastructure. We trust that other development finance institutions, insurers, reinsurers and pension funds will follow AFC’s lead.”

Continue Reading

World

Africa ‘Reawakening’ In Emerging Multipolar World

Published

on

Gustavo de Carvalho

By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh

In this interview, Gustavo de Carvalho, Programme Head (Acting): African Governance and Diplomacy, South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA), discusses at length aspects of Africa’s developments in the context of shifting geopolitics, its relationships with external countries, and expected roles in the emerging multipolar world. Gustavo de Carvalho further underscores key issues related to transparency in agreements, financing initiatives, and current development priorities that are shaping Africa’s future. Here are the interview excerpts:

Is Africa undergoing the “second political re-awakening” and how would you explain Africans’ perceptions and attitudes toward the emerging multipolar world?

We should be careful not to overstate novelty. African states exercised real agency during the Cold War, too, from Bandung to the Non-Aligned Movement. What has actually shifted is the structure of the international system around the continent. The unipolar moment has faded, the menu of partners has widened, and a generation of policymakers under fifty operates without the inhibitions of either the Cold War or the immediate post-Cold War period. African publics, however, are more pragmatic than multipolar rhetoric assumes. Afrobarometer’s surveys across more than thirty countries consistently show citizens evaluating external partners on tangible outcomes such as infrastructure, jobs and security, rather than on civilisational narratives. China is generally associated with positive economic influence, the United States retains the strongest pull as a development model, and Russia, despite a louder political profile, registers a smaller and more geographically concentrated footprint. Multipolarity is not a destination Africans are arriving at. It is a working environment that creates more options and more risks at once.

Do you think it is appropriate to use the term “neo-colonialism” referring to activities of foreign players in Africa? By the way, who are the neo-colonisers in your view?

The term has analytical value when used carefully, and loses it when deployed selectively against whichever power one wishes to embarrass. Nkrumah’s 1965 formulation was precise: political independence accompanied by continued external control over economic and political life. The honest test is whether contemporary patterns reproduce that asymmetry, irrespective of the capital from which they originate. The structural picture is well documented. Africa still exports primary commodities and imports manufactured goods. Intra-African trade hovers around fifteen per cent of total trade, well below Asian or European levels. African sovereigns pay a measurable risk premium on debt that exceeds what fundamentals alone justify. Applied consistently, the lens directs attention to opaque resource-for-infrastructure contracts, security-for-mineral bargains, debt agreements with confidentiality clauses, and aid architectures that bypass African institutions. That description fits legacy French commercial arrangements in francophone Africa, Chinese mining concessions in the DRC, Russian-linked gold extraction in the Central African Republic and Sudan, Gulf-backed port and farmland deals along the Red Sea, and Western corporate practices that have not always met the standards their governments preach. Naming a single neo-coloniser tells us more about the speaker’s politics than about the structure.

How would you interpret the current engagement of foreign players in Africa? Do you also think there is geopolitical competition and rivalry among them?

Competition is real and intensifying, and the proliferation of Africa-plus-one summits is the clearest indicator. Russia has held two summits, in Sochi in 2019 and St Petersburg in 2023. The EU, Turkey, Japan, India, the United States, South Korea, Saudi Arabia and the UAE all host their own variants. Trade figures give a more honest sense of weight than diplomatic theatre. China-Africa trade reached around 280 billion dollars in 2023, United States-Africa trade sits in the 60 to 70 billion range, and Russia-Africa trade is roughly 24 billion, heavily concentrated in grain, fertiliser and arms. Describing the continent as a chessboard, however, understates how African states themselves are shaping these dynamics, sometimes through skilful diversification and sometimes through security bargains that entail longer-term costs. The Sahel illustrates the latter starkly. Between 2020 and 2023, Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger expelled French forces, downgraded their relationships with ECOWAS and the UN stabilisation mission, and welcomed Russian security contractors. ACLED data shows civilian fatalities from political violence rising rather than falling across the same period. Substituting providers without strengthening domestic institutions does not produce sovereignty. It changes the terms of dependence.

Do you think much depends on African leaders and their people (African solutions to African problems) to work toward long-term, sustainable development?

The principle is correct, and it is regularly weaponised in two unhelpful directions. External actors invoke it to justify withdrawing from responsibilities they continue to hold, particularly over financial flows and arms transfers that pass through their own jurisdictions. Some African leaders invoke it to deflect legitimate scrutiny of governance failings, repression or corruption. Genuine African agency requires more than rhetoric. The AU’s operating budget remains modest in absolute terms, and external partners still cover a significant share of programmatic activities, which shapes what gets funded. The African Standby Force, conceived in 2003, remains only partially operational more than two decades on. The African Continental Free Trade Area, in force since 2021, has rolled out more slowly than drafters hoped because the political will to lower national barriers lags the speeches. Long-term development depends on African leaders financing more of their own security and development priorities, on publics holding them accountable, and on a clearer-eyed view of what foreign forces can deliver. Whether the actors are Russian-linked contractors in the Sahel and Central African Republic, Western counter-terrorism deployments, or others, external security providers tend to address symptoms while leaving the political and economic drivers of insecurity intact.

Often described as a continent with huge, untapped natural resources and large human capital (1.5 billion), what then specifically do African leaders expect from Europe, China, Russia and the United States?

Expectations differ across the three relationships, and that differentiation is itself a marker of agency. From China, leaders expect infrastructure financing, sustained commodity demand, and a partnership that does not condition itself on domestic governance reforms. FOCAC commitments have delivered visible results in ports, railways and power generation, though Beijing itself has shifted toward smaller, more selective lending since around 2018. From Russia, expectations are narrower because the economic footprint is. Moscow’s offer is political backing in multilateral forums, arms transfers, grain and fertiliser supply, civilian nuclear cooperation in a handful of cases, and security partnerships, including those involving private military formations. The record of those security arrangements in the Central African Republic, Mali, Sudan and Mozambique deserves a sober assessment on its own terms, because the human and political costs are documented and uneven. From the United States, leaders look for market access through instruments such as AGOA, whose post-2025 future has generated significant uncertainty, alongside private capital, technology partnerships and a posture that treats the continent as more than a counter-terrorism theatre. The priorities across all three relationships are essentially the same: transparency in the terms of agreements, arrangements that preserve future policy space, and partnerships that build domestic productive capacity rather than substitute for it. The continent’s leverage in this multipolar moment is real, but it is not permanent. It will be squandered if used to rotate among external dependencies rather than reduce them.

Continue Reading

Trending