World
Russia’s Real Motives in Africa Causing Some to Worry—Gruzd
By Kester Kenn Klomegah
As preparations are underway for the second Russia-Africa summit planned for 2022, African leaders, politicians, academic researchers and experts have been discussing several aspects of the current state of Russia-Africa relations.
They, most often, compare it with a number of foreign countries notably China, the United States, the European Union, India, France, Turkey, Japan, and South Korea that have held such gatherings in that format with Africa.
Some have convincingly argued that Russia has moved away from its low-key strategy to vigorous relations, as shown by the first symbolic Russia-Africa summit in the Black Sea city of Sochi in October 2019.
Russia and Africa adopted a joint declaration, a comprehensive document that outlines the key objectives and necessary tasks that seek to raise assertively the entirety of relations to a new level.
Long before the summit, at least, during the past decade, several bilateral agreements between Russia and individual African countries were signed. Besides, memoranda of understanding, declaration of interests, pledges and promises dominated official speeches.
On the other side, Russia is simply invisible in economic sectors in Africa, despite boasting of decades-old solid relations with the continent.
Undoubtedly, Africa is opening up new fields of opportunity. The creation of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) provides a unique and valuable opportunity for businesses to access an integrated African market of over 1.3 billion people with a GDP of over $2.5 trillion. It aspires to connect all the regions of Africa, deepen economic integration and boost intra-African trade and investment.
Despite existing risks, challenges and threats, a number of external countries continue strengthening their economic footholds in Africa and contribute enormously towards the continent’s efforts to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Russia has to upgrade or scale up its collaborative engagement with Africa. It has to consider seriously launching more public outreach programmes, especially working with civil society to change public perceptions and the private sector to strengthen its partnership with Africa. In order to achieve this, it has to surmount the challenges, take up the courage and work consistently with both private and public sectors and with an effective Action Plan.
In this exclusive interview, Steven Gruzd, Head of the African Governance and Diplomacy Programme at the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA), discusses a few questions, highlights existing challenges and passionately offers some progressive suggestions regarding Russia-African relations and the fears over Russia’s real motives in Africa.
Steven Gruzd also heads the Russia-Africa Research Programme initiated this year at SAIIA, South Africa’s premier research institute on international issues. It is an independent, non-government think tank, with a long and proud history of providing thought leadership in Africa. Here are the interview excerpts:
What are your appreciations and fears for Russia returning to Africa?
Africa is becoming crowded, with many old and new actors actively involved on the continent. Apart from EU countries, China and the US, we have players such as Iran, Turkey, Israel, the UAE, Japan and others.
So, Russia’s renewed interest in Africa does not happen in isolation. It, of course, seeks to build on Soviet-era ties, and several African leaders today studied in the USSR or the Soviet sphere of influence. Russia has tended to focus on niche areas such as weapons sales, nuclear energy and resource extraction, at a much smaller scale than China.
Many leaders are welcoming the attention of Russia, but some remain wary of Russia’s hidden motives and intentions. Russia’s dealings are not transparent and open compared to China. The shadowy world of private military companies such as Russia’s Wagner Group is causing concern in unstable countries like the CAR, Libya and Mali. So, in fact, there is a kind of mixed picture, sentiments and interpretations are also varied here.
How would you argue that Russia engages fairly in “competition for cooperation” in Africa?
Africa is a busy geopolitical arena, with many players operating. Russia has to compete against them, and distinctively remain focused its efforts. Russia welcomes diplomatic support from African countries, and unlike the West, it does not demand good governance or advocate for human rights reforms.
Russia likes to portray itself as not interfering in local politics or judging African countries, even though there is mounting evidence that it has been involved in meddling in elections in Africa through disinformation, fake news and attempting to exploit fault lines in societies through social media.
Do you think, to some extent, Russia is fighting neo-colonial tendencies, as shown in Guinea, Mali, CAR and Sudan? Does it imply that Russia supports military leaders in Africa?
Russia uses the rhetoric of anti-colonialism in its engagement with Africa, and that it is fighting neo-colonialism from the West, especially in relations with their former colonies. It sees France as a threat to its interests especially in Francophone West Africa, the Maghreb and the Sahel.
Russia has invested resources in developing French-language news media, and engages in anti-French media activity, including through social media. I think Russia has its own economic and political interests in countries like Guinea, Mali, CAR and Sudan, even if it uses the language of fighting neo-colonialism. It explicitly appears that Russia supports several undemocratic African leaders and their regimes.
Some experts have argued that Russia’s diplomacy is full of bilateral agreements, largely not implemented, and gamut of pledges and promises. What are your views about these?
I would largely agree that there is a divide between what has been pledged and promised at high-level meetings and summits, compared to what has actually materialised on the ground. There is more talk than action, and in most cases down the years mere intentions and ideas have been officially presented as initiatives already in progress. It will be interesting to see what has been concretely achieved in reports at the second Russia-Africa summit scheduled for late 2022.
From the above discussions so far, what do you think are Russia’s challenges and setbacks in Africa?
Africa is a crowded playing field. Russia does not have the same resources and approaches as China, France, UK or US, so it has limited impact. The language barrier could be used as an excuse, but Russia has the great possibility to leverage into the Soviet- and Russian-trained diaspora. On the other hand, Russia feels it is unfairly portrayed in Western media, so that is another perception it seeks to change. It can change the perception by supporting public outreach programmes.
Working closely with the academic community, such as the South African Institute of International Affairs and similar ones throughout Africa, is one potential instrument to raise its public image. In places like Mozambique and the CAR, the Wagner Group left after incurring human losses – does Russia have staying power?
As it prepares to hold the second Russia-Africa summit in 2022, what could be the expectations for Africa? What to do ultimately with the first Joint Declaration from Sochi?
As already mentioned, there needs to be a lot of tangible progress on the ground for the second summit to show impact. It is worth reiterating here that African countries will expect more debt relief and solid investment from Russian businesses.
In terms of political support at places like the UN Security Council, there is close interaction between Russia and the African States, but as recent research by SAIIA shows, not as much as assumed. (https://saiia.org.za/research/walking-with-the-bear-russia-and-the-a3-in-the-un-security-council/). The relationship has to however deliver and move from words to deeds.
In conclusion, I would suggest that Russia has to take up both the challenges and unique opportunities and attempt to scale up its influence by working consistently on practical multifaceted sustainable development issues and by maintaining appreciable relations with Africa.
On the other side, African countries likewise have to devise viable strategies for engaging with Russia.
By Adedapo Adesanya
Credit ratings agency, S&P Global Ratings, has restored the African Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank) to investment grade, nearly 12 years after its last assessment, citing the entity’s countercyclical lending record and strong shareholder support.
The BBB+ rating with a stable outlook is one notch above Moody’s Baa2 and comes months after Afreximbank severed ties with Fitch Ratings.
The lender accused the agency of misjudging its mission, following a downgrade to junk status amid disagreements over the bank’s role in debt restructurings for Ghana and Zambia. Fitch subsequently withdrew its ratings entirely and flagged governance concerns.
S&P said in a statement on Thursday that Afreximbank’s record as a countercyclical lender and its substantial shareholder support served as rationale for its rating. Credit ratings often guide the costs of capital for a borrower.
The lender’s total assets, S&P noted, had expanded to $42.3 billion by the end of 2025, up from $7.1 billion in 2015.
S&P said it did not incorporate preferred creditor status into its assessment because Afreximbank provides almost 80 per cent of its loans to private-sector entities.
However, it acknowledged that Afreximbank, alongside other institutions, had experienced prolonged payment arrears in recent years, notably following the defaults and debt restructurings in Ghana and Zambia.
S&P noted that Afreximbank said in December that it had come to an agreement with Ghana on its $750 million loan, but that the lender had not announced a resolution with Zambia.
The agency warned that further sovereign restructurings could weigh on Afreximbank’s asset quality.
S&P’s assessment described Afreximbank’s governance and management as “adequate”, saying the inclusion of two independent directors and the African Development Bank (AfDB) as a permanent board member provided institutional oversight.
It noted that while increasing participation of private-sector investors through Class D shares could influence the bank’s risk appetite, Class A shareholders retained veto rights over big institutional changes, balancing potential risk.
By Adedapo Adesanya
Mr Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, is now a trillionaire as his SpaceX rose 11 per cent in its Nasdaq debut on Friday, lifting its valuation to about $1.96 trillion as investors piled into the world’s largest initial public offering (IPO).
The stock opened for trading at $150 compared with the IPO price of $135 per share.
The landmark listing cemented Mr Musk’s status as the first trillionaire ever and propelled SpaceX into the ranks of the world’s most valuable companies
The listing is being used as a benchmark of what is to come for the market ahead of forthcoming IPOs for AI heavyweights Anthropic and OpenAI.
The record IPO is a culmination of Mr Musk’s long-held ambitions in space and technology.
Most of Musk’s wealth now rests with SpaceX, where he holds a stake worth roughly $866 billion. Along with Tesla and the rest of his properties, his net worth will exceed $1.1 trillion when the stock begins trading on Friday.
At a quoted $75 billion, the deal’s proceeds were more than double those of Saudi Aramco’s record-setting 2019 IPO.
The valuation could rise further should underwriters exercise their right to sell additional shares, a decision typically made within 30 days after the offering.
Although SpaceX may have to wait for entry into the S&P 500, its expected fast-track inclusion in the Nasdaq 100 will soon make it a major holding for passive funds and ETFs that track the index, creating a fresh source of demand for its shares.
It will take about a month before it gets added to that index under Nasdaq’s new fast-entry rules, as opposed to a typical wait of as much as a year.
SpaceX said its market opportunity spans $28.5 trillion, a figure it called the largest in human history.
Mr Musk, 54, was born in Pretoria, South Africa, to a Canadian mother and South African father. He attended the University of Pennsylvania, graduating in 1997.
He took over as Tesla’s CEO in 2008. Beyond Tesla and SpaceX, Mr Musk has co-founded five other companies, including tunnelling startup The Boring Company and brain implant maker Neuralink.
By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh
Under the presidential decree, authorising an initiative to tap the best brains and professionals from abroad to integrate into Russian society, the Agency for Strategic Development plans to hold its first Bridge Awards, which honour the contributions of foreign citizens and repatriates who have made a definitive life choice in favour of Russia. The Bridge Awards was founded by entrepreneur Philip Hutchinson and public figure Guy Eames.
Launched in February 2026, the competition for the awards has attracted a lot of potential candidates from more than 40 countries competing for victory across 12 categories. The highest number of applications came from the United States, totalling 18. There are also a number of candidates from Europe, Asia, and Africa. The “Business” category proved to be the most geographically diverse, drawing applicants from 12 countries.
The Bridge Awards recognise the valuable contributions of foreign citizens and repatriates to the Russian society. It is also dedicated to raising awareness, recognising achievements, and building strong connections with the international community.
According to the official reports made available, among the winning applicants and world-renowned celebrities for the Business Category were Sammy Manoj Kotwani, President, Indian Business Alliance; President, SITA/Indian National Cultural Centre; President, Overseas Friends of BJP Russia; and Founder, Imperial Tailoring Company.
In this conversation, Sammy Kotwani talks about how he has lived and worked in Russia for more than three decades, his entrepreneurial achievements, and his contributions to Russian society. Here are the interview excerpts:
What really motivates you to participate in the first competition for Bridge Awards?
For me, the Bridge Awards are not only a competition. They are a recognition of a life journey. I have lived and worked in Russia for more than three decades. Russia gave me the opportunity to build my business, serve the Indian community, promote Indian culture, and create real business connections between India and Russia.
My motivation is very simple: I want to show that a foreign citizen can love Russia, respect its people, contribute to its economy, and at the same time remain deeply connected to his own roots and motherland.
Through the Indian Business Alliance, through cultural activities, through India–Russia business forums, through meetings with governors and regional leaders, my work has always been to build bridges — not only between governments, but between people, entrepreneurs, regions, cultures, and families.
So, when I heard about the Bridge Awards, I felt that this platform represents exactly what I have tried to do for many years: turn friendship into action, and respect into real cooperation.
You were selected by the Jury for the business category. What are the implications of this category?
Being selected in the business category is a very meaningful honour because business is where friendship becomes practical.
India and Russia already have strong political trust, historic goodwill, and a strategic partnership. But the real question today is: how do we convert this goodwill into trade, investment, joint ventures, logistics solutions, industrial cooperation, and regional development?
That is why the business category is important. It recognises those who are not only speaking about cooperation, but actually working on the ground to make it happen.
For me personally, it reflects the work of the Indian Business Alliance in connecting Indian entrepreneurs with Russian regions, supporting business missions, encouraging investment, discussing opportunities with governors, and identifying practical sectors such as textiles, pharmaceuticals, logistics, food processing, energy, technology, education, tourism, and skilled manpower.
This category is not only about personal achievement. It is about responsibility. It means we must continue to create platforms where Indian and Russian businesses can meet, trust each other, and build long-term partnerships.
Do you think the “Time to Live in Russia” programme has good future prospects for foreign citizens who choose to relocate and live in Russia?
Yes, I believe the “Time to Live in Russia” programme has strong future potential, provided it remains practical, transparent, and welcoming.
Many foreign professionals, entrepreneurs, investors, teachers, doctors, engineers, cultural workers, and skilled specialists are looking for countries where they can build a meaningful life. Russia has space, resources, education, culture, business opportunities, and strong regional potential.
But relocation is not only about visas or documents. A person who comes to Russia needs guidance, integration, language support, business orientation, community support, and confidence that he or she can build a stable future.
This is where such a programme can become very powerful. If it helps talented foreigners understand Russia better, settle smoothly, respect Russian society, and contribute to the economy, then it can become a serious instrument of international cooperation.
From the Indian perspective, I see strong potential. Many Indians are skilled in technology, medicine, education, trade, textiles, pharmaceuticals, engineering, hospitality, and entrepreneurship. If the right mechanism is created, India and Russia can benefit greatly from this human bridge.
How would you characterise the International Bridge Awards by the Agency for Strategic Initiatives and decreed by President Vladimir Putin?
I would characterise the Bridge Award as a timely and visionary initiative. In today’s world, countries need more than formal diplomacy. They need people who understand both sides, who can translate culture into trust, and trust into practical cooperation.
The Bridge Award gives recognition to such people — foreign citizens and repatriates who have chosen Russia not only as a place to live, but as a place to contribute.
For me, this award carries a very important message: Russia values those who sincerely work for its development, its international friendships, and its multicultural society.
The involvement of the Agency for Strategic Initiatives gives the award a serious institutional direction. It shows that this is not just a symbolic gesture, but part of a larger vision — to make Russia a place where international talent, entrepreneurs, cultural leaders, and public figures can participate in national development.
I believe this award can become a powerful platform for public diplomacy. It can show the world that Russia is open to sincere partners, serious professionals, and people who are ready to build, not just observe.
For me, as an Indian who has lived in Russia for many years, the word “bridge” is very personal. A bridge connects two banks. It allows people to cross, meet, understand, and build together. That is exactly what India and Russia need today—more bridges, more trust, more implementation, and more human connection.
-
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