Latest news with #SizoNkala
IOL News
3 days ago
- Politics
- IOL News
Africa in need of a robust strategy to mitigate conflicts
An Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) speed boat is sailing along the Persian Gulf during the IRGC marine parade to commemorate Persian Gulf National Day, near the Bushehr nuclear power plant in the seaport city of Bushehr, Bushehr province, in the south of Iran, on April 29, 2024. Dr Sizo Nkala The global shocks Africa has had to deal with have been coming fast and furious in recent years. The COVID-19 pandemic, the Russia-Ukraine war and the re-election of Donald Trump as the US President in 2024 are some of the external shocks that have had a massive impact on Africa's economic standing and prospects. As the continent was still trying to find its feet from the devastation caused by these geopolitical wrecking balls, another, potentially more devastating one, suddenly emerged on the horizon. On the 14th of June, the world woke up to the news of Israel's surprise attack on its long-time foe, Iran in the so-called Operation Rising Lion. The Jewish state deployed hundreds of its warplanes over the Iranian skies dropping bombs on the Islamic Republic's nuclear and other military facilities while also targeting key military leaders and nuclear scientists. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu justified his country's actions arguing that Iran was rapidly moving towards developing a nuclear weapon which would have presented an existential threat to Israel. Netanyahu said Israel was therefore carrying out pre-emptive strikes to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. As expected, Israel retaliated with a barrage of missiles striking different cities in Israel proclaiming the right to defend itself. The latest attacks mark a significant escalation of long-simmering tensions between the Middle East's two largest and most powerful militaries. The two countries exchanged limited attacks in April and October last year over Israel's assassination of the Hamas leader, Ismail Haniyeh, in Iran, the Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and the leader of the Iran Revolutionary Guard Council (IRGC) Abbas Nilforoushan. The United States also joined the war on the side of Israel after Donald Trump ordered the bombing of three nuclear sites in Iran on June 21. Although the three countries - the US, Iran and Israel have agreed to a ceasefire – it is not certain how long the ceasefire will last. A major war between the powerhouses in a region responsible for 26 per cent of global oil production is certain to have a catastrophic impact on the global economy from which no region, including Africa, would be spared. Immediately after the beginning of the conflict oil prices went up 7 percent because of the uncertainty over continued supplies from the Middle East. Following the US attack, the Iranian parliament approved a move to close the Strait of Hormuz. Iran's Supreme National Security Council had to make the final decision. The strait is a critical maritime chokepoint about 33 kilometers wide which connects the Persian Gulf to the Indian Ocean. About 20 per cent of the world's oil supplies – 20 million barrels – passes through the strait every day. Iran controls the north bank of the Strait of Hormuz while the south bank is in Omani territory. Major oil producers in the Middle East like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar depend on the Strait of Hormuz for their oil exports. While the world's oil supply has become significantly diversified ever since the development of the fracking technology which has seen the US become the world's largest oil producer, the closure or disruption of Hormuz chokepoint would have sent the oil prices through the roof. As a result, Africa's annual fuel import bill of approximately US$30 billion would have ballooned triggering a major economic fallout. The increase in consumer inflation would have put the price of basic commodities beyond the reach of many thus exacerbating poverty, food insecurity and the risk of instability. It is not only through the disruption of oil supplies that Africa would have suffered had Iran followed through on its resolve to close the Strait of Hormuz. About 20 per cent of global liquefied natural gas supplies go through the Strait of Hormuz. As LNG is a major input in the production of fertilizer, the decline in fertilizer supply would increase its prices with a negative impact on food production in Africa which imports 90 percent of its fertilizer consumption. Fertilizer prices have increased by almost three times since 2020 due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war which made the critical input out of reach for the majority of Africa's small-scale farmers. Another increase would have spelt disaster for the continent's struggling agricultural sector which would have worsened food shortages. Indirectly, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz would hit China the hardest as the Asian giant imports about 5 million barrels of oil per day through the strait. The economic damage this would cause in China would be felt in Africa as China is by far Africa's biggest bilateral trade partner. Approximately 20 per cent of Africa's exports are destined for China. Chinese demand for African exports would be drastically reduced further diminishing African countries' revenue generation. All this is counterfactual now because Iran did not follow up on its threat to close the Strait of Hormuz. And the world should be thanking its stars. However, it would be foolhardy to believe that the temporary truce between Israel and Iran will hold indefinitely. Should there be a re-escalation of hostilities, Iran's closure of the critical chokepoint cannot be ruled out especially if such a development can be spun as a consequence of Israel's act of aggression. It is important that Africa prepares for a worst-case scenario and enhances the resilience of its economy against the impact of global shocks. * Dr. Sizo Nkala is a Research Fellow at the University of Johannesburg's Centre for Africa-China Studies. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.
IOL News
15-06-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
Trump's Travel Ban: Perpetuating Discrimination Against African Nations
A protester making her voice heard on the first day of the Trump administration's full ban against travel from 12 countries and a partial ban on seven others, at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) on June 9, 2025 in Los Angeles, California. Image: AFP Dr. Sizo Nkala United States President Donald Trump proclaimed on June 4 that he was fully suspending the entry into the US of the citizens of 12 countries namely Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. A partial suspension was imposed on citizens of another group of 7 countries: Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela. This means that out of the 19 countries subject to full or partial suspension, 10 are in Africa. This proclamation was issued based on Executive Order 14162 published on January 30 which directed the US Secretaries of State and Homeland Security, the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence to identify countries around the world whose vetting and information-screening standards are poor to warrant a partial or full suspension on the admission of their nationals to the US. The official rationale for this as stated in the proclamation is to enable the US to protect its 'citizens from terrorist attacks and other national security or public-safety threats.' Trump reiterated these sentiments while introducing the proclamation saying that his administration 'will not allow people to enter our country who wish to do us harm, and nothing will stop us from keeping America safe." The new travel ban is a rehash of the bans imposed by the first Trump administration between 2017 and 2020. Of the 14 countries that were slapped with bans at that time, 7, namely Nigeria, Sudan, Tanzania, Chad, Somalia, Eritrea and Libya were in Africa. As such, Africa and the Middle East have always dominated the list of Trump's travel bans. The criteria used for placing countries on the banned list include lax vetting and information-screening standards, the prevalence of terrorism, and the rate of visa overstays among other things. The new proclamation has ordered the US Immigration Department to reject all visa applications from the concerned countries including those that were submitted before the ban was effected. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ There are some double standards because some countries like countries like France, Spain, and the United Kingdom individually have more visa overstays than Libya, Chad, Somalia, Sudan, and Eritrea combined. The African Union (AU) released a statement in response to the travel bans urging the Trump administration to make decisions in a 'manner that is balanced, evidence-based, and reflective of the long-standing partnership between the United States and Africa.' The statement further encouraged the US government to 'consider adopting a more consultative approach and to engage in constructive dialogue with the countries concerned.'The travel ban, which disproportionately affects African countries, is a continuation of the Trump administration's negative posture towards Africa. In the last six months, the Trump administration has liquidated the US Agency for International Development (USAID) which was distributing considerable amounts of aid in Africa and helping mitigate poverty. It has also indicated that it will withdraw its funding from Africa's premier multilateral development bank – the African Development Bank (AfDB). This will undermine the bank's efforts to fight poverty and underdevelopment in the continent. Moreover, Trump has also abolished the Presidential Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) which gave millions of African citizens infected by HIV access to critical medication. It is widely expected that Trump will not renew the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) when it expires in September. Since 2000, eligible African countries have been able to access the lucrative US export market duty-free. In this context, the travel ban is not surprising. It is a xenophobic and racist policy that unfairly shifts the blame for the US' security problems to foreigners from poor countries. Trump's campaign for office was partly based on the demonisation of immigrants as criminals and a threat to the US. It perpetuates a negative stereotype of African countries as failed states that are a threat to the United States without any concrete evidence. This is linked to his outlandish claims of a white genocide in South Africa which he has peddled without any shred of evidence. Such a characterization of Africa from the world's most powerful office greatly undermines the work that is being done to promote the continent as a safe investment destination. During his first term, Trump grotesquely described African countries as 'shithole' countries. His treatment of Africa shows that he has not changed his mind. He treats Africa with obvious disdain. It is important that Africa develops a common position and becomes more assertive towards the Trump administration. He may have targeted a few countries in the continent but the impact of his statements will be felt beyond those countries. * Dr. Sizo Nkala is a Research Fellow at the University of Johannesburg's Centre for Africa-China Studies. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.
IOL News
18-05-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
Russia's Growing Sahel Influence a Worry for Jittery West
SUPPORTERS of Burkina Faso's leader, Ibrahim Traore, demonstrate their support for Russia in Ouagadougou. The termination of the French and US missions in the Sahel countries was framed as an assertion of sovereignty and independence from erstwhile colonisers and contemporary neo colonial and imperial forces to make it more politically appealing to the citizens of these countries, says the writer. Image: AFP Dr. Sizo Nkala RUSSIAN influence in the Sahel region has been on the rise since the coup wave of recent years. The junta leaders in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger who seized power in 2021, 2022, and 2023 respectively, wasted little time in severing relations with their erstwhile colonizer, France, while embracing Russia. In 2022, Mali terminated the French-led Operation Barkhane, which saw about 2400 French troops withdrawing from the country as the Assimi Goita-led military junta argued that the operation had not been effective in its ten-year battle against the Islamist insurgency. His counterparts, Ibrahim Traore in Burkina Faso and Abdourahamane Tchiani in Niger followed suit kicking out French troops out of their countries in 2023 citing their failure to stamp out jihadist insurgencies. Public rallies were organized in Niger to add public pressure on the French troops. Rally attendees were waving Russian flags and chanting Russian affirmations. About 1000 US troops also stationed in Niger for counterinsurgency purposes withdrew from the country in 2024 at the instigation of the military junta. The termination of the French and US missions in the Sahel countries was framed as an assertion of sovereignty and independence from erstwhile colonisers and contemporary neocolonial and imperial forces to make it more politically appealing to the citizens of these countries. Seeing an opportunity to establish a geostrategic foothold, Russia, through its proxy mercenary outfit – the Wagner Group (now rebranded the Africa Corps) – swiftly moved to fill in the vacuum promising to deal ruthlessly with the jihadist insurgents riding on the back of its relative success in the Central African Republic (CAR) where it helped to defend the Faustin-Archange Touadera regime against the rebels. The African Corps is fully funded by the Russian state, which makes them an instrument of Moscow's foreign policy in Africa. Russia also relies on its history of supporting anti-colonial liberation movements in Africa to portray itself as a trustworthy partner compared to the West, which cannot shake off the coloniser tag. Moreover, facing Western isolation over the Ukraine war, Russia desperately needed diplomatic allies in Africa. Its active support of and military presence in the three Sahelian states is an attempt to project its power in Sub-Saharan Africa and show its commitment to the peace and security of the continent in the hopes of swaying more African countries to its side in its standoff with the West. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad Loading Apart from the diplomatic support, Moscow is also interested in establishing economic relationships with the Sahelian states which boast major reserves in gold (Burkina Faso) and uranium (Niger). Burkina Faso, which has been turning the screws on western mining companies operating in the country, recently granted a Russian firm, Nordgold, an industrial mining license to conduct operations in the Kourweogo province. About 1500 members of the Group arrived in Mali at the beginning of 2022 following an invitation from Assimi Goita to help repel the insurgents, who had wreaked havoc in the West African country since 2017. Goita and his allies had seized power on the promise that they would eliminate the rebels and stabilise the security situation in the country. Soon after it changed its name to Africa Corps, 100 members of the group landed in Burkina Faso to help Traore's government fight the insurgents in January 2024. Niger received its own contingent of Africa Corps a few months later with the same mandate. Thus, Russia has effectively replaced France and the US as an alternative security partner and political patron for the Sahelian states. In addition to the presence of its mercenary company, Russia has also become an important arms supplier for the three countries. Since 2021, Mali has received significant amounts of Russian military equipment including over 100 military vehicles, helicopter gunships, military jets and ammunition. Burkina Faso has received military instructors from Russia to train its security personnel. In a major diplomatic move, the foreign ministers of the three countries travelled to Russia early in April under the aegis of the Alliance of Sahel States (AES) to strengthen the alliance's relationship with Russia. Their meeting with the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov yielded a commitment by Moscow to support the 5000 strong joint force established by the three juntas to address the security challenges in the region. This force is founded on the mutual defence pact signed by the three countries in 2023. Ultimately, the utility of this new security partnership will be judged on its ability to contain and suppress the jihadist insurgents. Thus far, the new partnership has not made significant inroads in addressing the security situation. According to the Global Terrorism Index 2025 report, Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger are in the top 5 countries most affected by terrorism in the world. * Dr. Sizo Nkala is a Research Fellow at the University of Johannesburg's Centre for Africa-China Studies. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.
IOL News
12-05-2025
- Business
- IOL News
Challenging landscape awaits new AfDB leadership
Dr. Sizo Nkala THE search for the African Development Bank (AfDB)'s 10th president is on. The AfDB will hold elections for a new president on May 29 during its Annual Board of Governors Meeting. The current president, Akinwumi Adesina's second and final term as president of the Bank will lapse in August. Four candidates are in the race to replace him. These include Amadou Hott from Senegal, Samuel Maimbo from Zambia, South Africa's Swazi Tshabalala, and Sidi Ould Tah from Mauritania. The winning candidate will have to secure a double majority of the votes from the bank's 54 regional (African) members on the one hand, and the collective of regional and non-regional members will secure another majority from the regional and the 27 non-regional members combined. Among the bank's non-regional members are the United States, China, the Netherlands, Germany, France, and Saudi Arabia. The winning candidate will have to secure the support of some of the bank's largest shareholders in the regional list, namely Nigeria, Egypt, South Africa and the Ivory Coast, who by their significant shareholdings enjoy more voting powers. The US, Japan, Germany and Canada are among the largest shareholders in the non-regional list, which gives them a decisive influence on the outcome of the elections. Since its establishment in 1964, the AfDB has emerged as one of the premier African development finance institutions at the forefront of addressing the continent's development challenges by promoting economic growth and eradicating poverty. To that end, the Bank has played a critical role in mobilising finance and resources for infrastructure projects across Africa that are designed to foster regional integration and stimulate economic growth. The AfDB stands out as one of the few success stories of pan-African institutions, the majority of which have largely suffered a stillbirth. Boasting a modest capital of US$300 million when it was founded in 1964, the Bank now has a capital base of over US$300 billion. Its capital base has more than tripled since Adesina took over in 2015 – a testament to his prowess in mobilising capital and growing the bank's stature. It has also earned a triple-A ranking from international credit ratings agencies – a rare feat in the African context and something which has eluded the BRICS New Development Bank (NDB). In its 60-year history, the AfDB has granted loans for over 4400 projects and operations across Africa, including highways, railways, ports, plantations, oil pipelines, water and sanitation infrastructure, telecommunications, and power plants, to mention a few. In 2023 alone, the Bank approved 180 projects worth a total of US$10.8 billion, with transport, energy, finance and agricultural sectors attracting over 75 percent of the projects reflecting the Bank's High 5 Goals which include lighting up, feeding, industrializing, integrating, and improving the quality of life in Africa. Moreover, the AfDB has played a crucial role in providing technical services for development projects in African countries and also helping some countries navigate periods of debt distress and financial crisis. However, the candidate who will emerge victorious in this month's elections will have to confront several challenges facing the continent. Africa remains the poverty capital of the world, with over 400 million people still living in extreme poverty. Of all the world's regions, the continent has recorded the lowest performance in terms of the realisation of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The region will need to raise US$1.3 trillion to realise the SDGs by 2030, which is impossible in the current circumstances. Africa's infrastructure financing needs range between US$181 billion to US$221 billion for the period 2023-2030, but the financing is over US$100 billion as African countries have failed to mobilise capital for infrastructure projects. Further, Africa is facing a debt crisis with the amount spent on debt servicing having ballooned from US$17 billion in 2010 to US$74 billion in 2024, racking up 11 per cent of the total revenues. Such exorbitant debt servicing amounts end up starving critical sectors like education, health and water and sanitation of resources, thus worsening the poverty levels among the ordinary people. Moreover, the new president of the AfDB will have to find ways of revitalising and reinvigorating the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) project, which seems to be losing steam almost five years after its launch. Without trade and market integration envisaged under the AfCFTA it will be difficult for the Afdb itself to live up to its mission. Hence, the incoming president will have their work cut out for them. However, due to the work that has been done by their predecessors, they will have a solid base on which to build. Some of their priorities will include expanding the capital base of the bank, mobilizing finance from public and private sources, working with the more than a dozen debt-distressed countries escape their financial crises, and consolidating the African position in the Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors track of the G20 which is being presided over by South Africa. * Dr. Sizo Nkala is a Research Fellow at the University of Johannesburg's Centre for Africa-China Studies. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.
IOL News
27-04-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
International community's moral obligation to silence the guns
Dr. Sizo Nkala It has been over two years since civil war broke out in Sudan after the coalition partners of a military government – the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) led by Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary group led by Hamdan Hemedti Dagalo – could not find common ground on sharing power. The conflict has reportedly killed 20000 people and the actual number could be far higher, displaced more than 15 million people and left about 30 million people in need of humanitarian assistance half of which are children. On the 15th of April, the United Kingdom (UK) hosted a conference on Sudan co-chaired by Germany, France, the African Union (AU) and the European Union (EU) aimed at mobilizing humanitarian aid for the millions of suffering Sudanese. Also in attendance were officials from Kenya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). However, conspicuously absent were the representatives of the warring parties in Sudan. The conference, the second of its kind after the first one was hosted by France in 2024, managed to raise about US$800 million in aid pledges towards alleviating what has been widely described as the 'largest humanitarian crisis in the world'. This amount is significantly less than the over US$2 billion raised at the Paris Conference last year. A joint statement from the conference called for an immediate and permanent ceasefire while stressing the need to prevent the partition of the country. The statement also counselled against external interference in the conflict as it would complicate its resolution. While the conference was a welcome initiative bringing the much-needed spotlight back to what has been a largely forgotten disaster in the making, it also served as a reality check on how far the conflict is from being resolved. This after Egypt and Saudi Arabia who are the main backers of the SAF and Al-Burhan on the one hand and the UAE which is believed to be the main patron of the RSF on the other hand could not find a point of convergence on the wording of a draft communique. This resulted in the conference only producing a co-chairs statement rather than a joint communique. While this may seem like bean-counting over semantics – it is important to note that there is an important difference between a statement and a communique in the diplomatic world. While a statement is a report or declaration concerning an issue or an event, a communique is a more formal and official announcement which carries greater diplomatic weight. A communique is almost a policy statement and signifies a common understanding among those participating in its drafting about the plan of action on a particular matter or issue. While Egypt and Saudi Arabia wanted the communique to call for respecting state institutions and the government in Sudan, the UAE rejected this proposition out of hand and suggested an emphasis on civilian governance. Egypt and Saudi Arabia's language preference would have signified some support for the Sudanese government currently constituted by the SAF which they have supplied with weapons and intelligence throughout the war. The UAE's suggestion of civilian governance would have given the impression that the parties at the conference did not recognise the current government leaving an open question on the future of Sudan's governance. On the same day that the conference was taking place in the UK, the RSF declared the formation of the Government of National Unity in the areas falling under its control. In February the RSF and other groups signed a charter in Nairobi, Kenya, announcing plans to form a parallel government. The paramilitary group controls vast tracts of territory in the south-western part of Sudan stretching from the country's border with Chad to the outskirts of the capital, Khartoum. The SAF recently recaptured Khartoum from the RSF and is in firm control of much of the south and north-eastern areas of the country including the prized Red Sea coastline. Thus, the civil war in Sudan has effectively become a regional civil war with sponsors of the warring factions having vested interests in its outcome. This makes the war all the more difficult to resolve as the patrons on both sides of the conflict would want to see a return on their investment. Egypt supports the SAF because it believes it is the only institution with the potential to bring stability to Sudan which would stop the influx of Sudanese refugees into Egypt. The SAF is also a ready ally in Egypt's tussle over the control of the Nile waters with Ethiopia. On the other hand, the UAE is interested in exerting its control of the gold trade in Darfur which is largely under the control of the RSF and also gaining a foothold in the Red Sea to facilitate agricultural exports from Sudan. If the patrons do not find common ground, the partition of Sudan will become a more realistic outcome of the war. The international community must put pressure on Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the UAE to find a way of resolving their differences and bring the devastating proxy war in Sudan to an end.
