For more than two decades, Russia has been struggling to regain its Soviet-era economic influence, but such efforts have hit stumbling blocks which policy experts and Russian authorities themselves admittedly attributed to inadequate knowledge of investment and economic possibilities in Africa.
Quite recently, Keir Giles, an associate fellow (on the Russia and Eurasia Program) at Chatham House in London, wrote in an emailed query that “surely lack of knowledge about investment opportunities is one factor holding back economic engagement, but it is certainly not the only one. The problem remains that there are whole sectors of the economy where Russia is simply irrelevant – to take the most obvious example, consumer goods – and so their engagement will always be dwarfed by China.”
“The only exceptions are the traditional strengths of Russia (and the Soviet Union before it) – infrastructure, raw materials and energy. In effect, the lack of engagement is partly a consequence of the failure to develop and diversify since the end of the Soviet Union that is a fundamental challenge to the Russian economy,” the research associate further explained.
Giles recounted the earlier history that “economic collapse at the end of the Soviet Union affected Moscow’s engagement with Africa along with other regions. While Russia was finding its new place in the world, diplomatic representations abroad were cut back harshly and resources focused on those countries seen as essential.”
“Embassies across the continent which had previously been generously staffed were severely cut back or closed. At the same time, military, education and other aid programs for African nations were also cut, even if they never completely disappeared,” he said further in comments.
As a result, Russian expertise and engagement with Africa entered a hiatus, at exactly the same time as China started rapidly to increase investment and presence. Moscow’s recent efforts seek to redress this and catch up – in parallel with, for example, Russia’s return to Latin America – both to find and exploit commercial opportunities, and to foster support from third nations in Russia’s ever more intensive confrontation with the United States and Europe.
“The most conspicuous aspect of Russia’s involvement in Africa is its absence,” says John Endres, chief executive officer of Good Governance Africa from South Africa, adding comparatively that “whereas the Soviet Union was quite extensively engaged in Africa, Russia has almost entirely abandoned the field to other foreign players during the past two decades.”
Interestingly, Russia has more than 40 full-fledged diplomatic representations with competent staff, and has fixed special trade missions to facilitate trade and investment in a number of African countries. And yet economic engagement has faced difficulties down the years.
The Foreign Ministry published the text of deputy foreign minister Mikhail Bogdanov’s speech on its official website in July 2013 in which he highlighted the same old problems facing the development of Russia-African ties at a session of the Urals-Africa economic forum in Yekaterinburg. “One must admit that the practical span of Russian companies’ business operations in Africa falls far below our export capabilities, on the one hand, and the huge natural resources of the huge continent, on the other,” Bogdanov said assertively.
Of course, one of the obstacles has been insufficient knowledge of the economic potential, on the part of Russian entrepreneurs, needs and opportunities of the African region. “Poor knowledge of the African markets’ structure and the characteristics of African customers by the Russian business community remains an undeniable fact. The Africans in their turn are insufficiently informed on the capabilities of potential Russian partners,” Bogdanov stressed in his speech there without suggesting any possible solutions.
Re-echoing deputy minister Bogdanov, professor Irina Abramova, newly-appointed director of the Institute for African Studies under the Russian Academy of Sciences, has also explained thus: “as before, we cannot deny the insufficient knowledge of the Russian business structures specificity of Africa, its requirements, and other parameters. On the other hand, Africans are poorly informed about the possibilities of Russian partnership.”
Similarly, Lyubov Demidova, deputy chairperson from the Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Moscow region), wrote in an emailed response to media interview question that “the main obstacle is insufficient knowledge of the economic potential, on the part of Russian entrepreneurs, needs and opportunities of the African region.” For this, she hopes to help members of the business community of all African countries to address systematically issues of effective cooperation.
“The main task is to shift to a more comprehensive approach, using the extensive territorial network of the Russian Chamber of Commerce. Russia’s business should be provided with full information on economic development in African countries and their needs in order to establish an ongoing Russian-African mutually beneficial business dialogue,”she suggested.
For the past years, only a few of those Russia’s efforts at reviving economic cooperation have been made public. “Russian media write very little about Africa, what is going on there, what are the social and political dynamics in different parts of the continent. Media and NGOs should make big efforts to increase level of mutual knowledge, which can stimulate interest for each other and lead to increased economic interaction as well,” said Fyodor Lukyanov, editor-in-chief of the journal Russia in Global Affairs. Lukyanov is also a member of the State Council on Foreign and Defense Policy.
“To certain extent,” Lukyanov said, “the intensification of non-political contacts may contribute to increased interest. But in Russia’s case, the main drivers of any cooperation are more traditional rather than political interests of the state and economic interest of big companies. Soft power has never been a strong side of Russian policy in the post-Soviet era.”
For the dearth of vital economic information, Russian Foreign Ministry, Department of Press and Information could grant media accreditation to, at least, a few African journalists to work in Russia. That could help bridge the business information gap. Most often, African political leaders and corporate business directors have to depend on western media reports about developments in Russia, according to the views of many policy experts.
O. Igho Natufe, PhD (McGill), research professor at the Centre for Studies of Russian-African Relations and Foreign Policy of African Countries, whose book “Russian Foreign Policy in Search of Lost Influence” published recently, explained that in order to improve overall relationship, Russia has to review its policy strategies and one surest way is to employ the soft power in dealing with Africa. Russian authorities have to acknowledge that the media has a huge role to play, thus frequent exchange of visits by Russian and African journalists as well as regular publications of economic and business reports could help create public business awareness and further raise to an appreciable levels the relationship between the two countries.
Olga Kulkova, a research fellow at the Center for Studies of Russian-African Relations, Institute for African Studies in Moscow, also noted in her opinion article that “in the global struggle for Africa, Russia is sadly far from outpacing its competitors. In terms of stringency of strategic outlook and activeness, the country is seriously lagging behind China, US, EU, India, Brazil.”
For example, at the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) meeting, both China and Africa have fixed a “China-Africa Press Exchange Center” in China to encourage exchanges and visits between Chinese and African media, and China already supports frequent exchange of correspondents by media organizations of the two sides. Most probably, Russian authorities both in the Kremlin and in the Foreign Ministry have to learn from some of these China’s policy directions with Africa!
Kulkova suggested strongly that “Africa needs broader coverage in Russian media. Leading Russian media agencies should release more topical news items and quality analytical articles about the continent, on-the-spot TV reports in order to adequately collaborate with African partners and attract Russian business to Africa. More quality information about modern Russia should be broadcast in African states. Indisputably, it would take a lot of money and efforts, but the result will pay off.”
Russia ought to take that into account if it wants to improve the chances for success in Africa. All the leading foreign countries have been doing that quite efficiently for a long time, Kulkova noted. But is anybody listening to all these?
Besides other factors hindering Russia’s move to Africa, Maxim Matusevich, director of the Russian and East European Studies program at Seton Hall University in New Jersey, says it seems that there are few areas of mutual economic interest between the Russian Federation and sub-Saharan African states. Ironically, many African nations suffer from the same affliction that has negatively impacted western investments in Russia: unfriendly investment climate/s/, unpredictable and capricious regimes, rapacious elites and a lack of rule of law.
Trade experts have also been looking at ways to improve trade relations and economic cooperation with Africa. For instance, Andrey Efimenko, an expert at the Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry said in an exclusive interview with me that CCI of Russia has closely monitored the activities of Russian companies in Africa.
“Unfortunately,” Efimenko regrettably pointed out, “some large Russian companies operating on the African market, has managed to establish itself negatively in a number of countries. This is primarily due to ignorance of cultural peculiarities of the region, the lack of social responsibility, failure to completely fulfill contractual obligations. These cases damage the image of Russia and Russian companies with further entering the African market.”
Russian researchers have their own explanations too. “Until recently, Africa was poorly represented in macro-economic forecasting and research, especially in terms of Russian-African relations,” wrote Professor Aleksei Vasiliev and Evgeny Korendiasov both from the Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of African Studies (IAS). Professor Vasiliev, a former presidential envoy to African countries and Korendiasov, a former Russian ambassador to the Republic of Mali and Burkina Faso.
They both authored an article published in June 2013 that Russia has officially declared promoting relations with Africa a priority goal. Assurances made by Russian officials in their statements that Africa is “in the mainstream of Russia’s foreign policy” have not been substantiated by systematic practical activities, and the development of relations between Russia and Africa has so far nothing to boast about.”
Without doubts, Russia’s major lines of Russia-African partnership in the long-term perspective include developing investment cooperation, widening Russian companies’ presence in the African markets through increased deliveries of industrial and food products, enhancing Russia’s participation in driving the economic development of Africa. On the other hand, access to Russian market for African countries should also be simplified.
Official statistics on trade and investment are hard to find. Internet search simply found out that Russia’s trade turnover with the countries of sub-Saharan Africa for the period from January to December 2015 was only estimated at US$ 3.3 billion.
Armed Bandits: The Novel Security Threat in Nigeria
The shrinking of Lake Chad which has led to competition between farmers and herders over scarce resources coupled with Boko Haram insurgency in northeast Nigeria has rendered the Lake Chad region—which comprises areas bordering Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad, and Niger—one of the most volatile regions in Africa. Extreme deprivation, food insecurity, and rampant disease outbreaks have produced a humanitarian catastrophe with more than2.5 million people internally displaced in the four states with contiguous borders. And, to worsen the case, with the coronavirus pandemic, mobility has been constrained which, in turn, limits the flow of food and other basic necessities of life to refugee camps and communities within the region.
Nigeria is the epicentre of most of the security challenges in the region. A lot is known of Biafra separatism in the southeast, oil militants in the Niger Delta, street touts in the southwest, farmers and herders in the northwest, and Boko Haram (the West African Province of the Islamic State) in the northeast. However, little is known of the armed bandits—variously known as the motorcycle bandits due to their employment of motorbikes for terrorist attacks—in the northwest, particularly in states such as Niger, Katsina, Zamfara, Kaduna, Sokoto, Kogi, and Kebbi. This is partly because of the fact that the destructions and devastations perpetrated by the armed bandits are concentrated mostly in villages and rural areas than in the major urban spaces.
These lethal bandits operate out of abandoned forest reserves in the northwest and central states to abduct villagers, ransack shops, steal livestock and grains, and murder anyone who tries to flee the attacks thereby terrorising the denizens of the affected communities. In the course of the current coronavirus crisis, the bandits attacked rural dwellers who had received food from the government and other non-governmental organisations. Over 8,000 persons have lost their lives to these gory attacks. Because these attacks have been carried out in the rural areas of the concerned states, they have not gained traction in international media despite the brutalisms and devastations they have rained on myriad lives, families, and property.
The identity of the bandits are largely unknown but local sources and the police posit that they are an outgrowth of existing ethnic clashes between farmers and herders in the region which saw the rise of vigilante groupstake up arms to defend themselves. Thus, the local bandits are seemingly an admixture of criminal gangs and aggrieved Fulani herdsmen who have resorted to violence not only to shield themselves but also to profit from the lucrative trade of kidnapping for ransom which is pervasive in parts of Nigeria. In consequence of the fact that the bandits attack both farmers and herders—both groups reproach each other for instigating the attacks in a region renowned for the deep-seated animosities amongst different ethnic groups—their identity is difficult to pinpoint.
Surely, the reason for the emergence of this peculiar group lay in the governance crisis of Nigeria with the decades of corruption, mismanagement, ethnic animosity, and youth unemployment since its independence from Britain. Despite the huge oil reserves that contribute to the country’s federal revenue, Nigerian citizens have largely remained impoverished with—according to estimates from a 2018 report from the World Poverty Clock—about 86.9 million living in extreme poverty. And there are further projections from the World Bank and other international financial institutions that by the end of the current era of coronavirus pandemic—if does not become endemic—the Nigerian economy will be shattered and consequently plunged it into recession.
With the number of Nigerians living in abject poverty expected to increase to 110 by 2050, it is unlikely that Nigeria will achieve the UN sustainable development goals by 2030 not least because the Nigerian government now invests more in curbing its security conundrums than in education, health, and development. In the wake of the recent violent attacks on rural areas, the government has committed money to eradicating the bandits in the forest reserves wherefrom they carry out attacks, but this also meant that other sectors are side-lined with doctors threatening to go on strike in the middle of the coronavirus pandemic due to the malfunctional state of the health sector and the unfavourable working conditions of healthcare workers.
Perhaps the greatest anxiety about the bandits’ attacks is a potential alliance with Boko Haram— another fierce insurgent group in the northeast that has wreaked havoc on communities in the north east for over a decade. In a new video, Abubakar Shekau the leader of Boko Haram invited these bandits to join them in fighting for a good cause which is establishing an Islamic State in Nigeria. As he categorically put it “We call you to join us to institute Sharia globally. When you come, we will accept you according to (Shari’ah) law, and we (will) worship Allah as He commands us.” Such admonition has the potency of rallying the armed bandits to contribute to Boko Haram’s cause of creating an Islamic state in the region—the sort of state that abolishes western education, discards any notion of gender equity, and construes Shariah law as the preponderant law that must orientate politics and public life. In the Lake Chad region which is a confluence of cultures and peoples from different walks of life, this is an affront to democracy and freedom of expression.
A further alliance between the motorcycle bandits and Boko Haram would not only be catastrophic for rural denizens in the northern parts of Nigeria but will unleash further misery to the vulnerable within the Lake Chad region who have not only been forced to flee their homes and abandoned their means of livelihood but have also lost friends, relatives, and loved ones to the gory attacks. Curtailing the potential alliance between these two ferocious terror groups must be one of Nigeria’s major priority in addition to building a strong economy and accountable democratic institutions to check on corruption and mismanagement by public officials.
Somalia: An American Media Pundit, Exaggerates and Weaponizes International Aid
Recently, after the Somali parliament removed prime minister, Hassan Ali Kheyre, in an overwhelmingly no-confidence vote, it didn’t only raise my eye borrows but it made me startled to read an opinion article on the matter in the Washington Examiner by Michael Rubin whose writings I usually find quite utopian and unbalanced. The piece titled, The State Department spent $1.5 billion on Somali democracy and built a dictatorship, was full of chunks of inconsistencies, bending the truth, and calumny attacks on the sovereignty of my home country, Somalia, in the disguise of having the right to express an opinion.
Before we delve into the essence of my observations of Mr. Rubin’s article, let me briefly explain why prime minister, Hassan Ali Kheyre, was ousted by the parliament. However, to safe the reader a boring monologue on why and how the prime minister was sacked, I have to go to the point with brevity; the prime minister lost his job after indirectly sabotaging a one-man, one-vote election legislation he was a part of creating it, so that the Somali citizens can directly elect their leaders, a right they lost decades ago, whose opposite is to go back to electing parliament through clan based picks by traditional elders, then the parliament elects the speaker and the president, then the president nominates a prime minister to be confirmed by the parliament, a process tainted with corruption and vote buying, coupled with dangerous foreign interests; the prime minister preferred that old process, but to say the least, the prime minister was a competent figure who did a great job for the public while he was in office, and in his resignation speech, although he did not like how the no-confidence vote was conducted, he left with dignity and a unifying message.
The trick to hoodwink readers Mr. Rubin used in the title of his article was to combine all aid received by Somalia from all sources, even from the United Nations, as a single one of 1.5 billion given by the US State Department alone, which is not the case, and he claimed it as an example for being implicitly one-time payment. Then, he wrote:
“Consider first the sheer scale of the United States’s investment in Somalia: The U.S. has spent tens of billions of dollars on Somalia in recent decades.” But in the title of his article, he tied together the 1.5 billion and what he called building a dictatorship in Somalia in which the reader cannot escape the inference that the US built in Somalia a president Farmaajo dictatorship with 1.5-billion-dollar aid money, a downright lie to discredit Somalia’s resolve not to cave in foreign interference in its affairs, as contrarily evidenced by the weak Somali governments prior to president Mohamed Abdullahi Farrago’s administration. On the other hand, what is so surprising if not disgusting is that Mr. Rubin wrote the following as he cites a biased website that Somali leaders embezzled, a website apparently run by Somalia’s self-proclaimed republic of Somaliland to disseminate anti-Somali news and propaganda; he wrote incoherently as he inserts links, making it an issue, for instance, the international debt relief Somalia deserved so much because of its transparence and good governance, which the international donors praised:
“Under Ambassador Donald Yamamoto, aid to Somalia more than doubled. Over the last year, not only did USAID contribute near $500 million, but Yamamoto successfully advocated debt forgiveness that forced American taxpayers to write off $1 billion in Somali debt, much of which was embezzled by some of the same figures with whom the U.S. now partners. Yamamoto wanted to give Somalia even more.”
Finally, I would say that Somali president, Mohamed Abdullahi Farmaajo, despite his government’s term coming to an end, will nominate a new prime minister, and the new prime minister will be confirmed by the parliament. Somalia will not go back to the corrupted, old system of election. Somalia will succeed and hold a one-man, one-vote election. The sovereignty of Somalia is stronger under president Farmaajo leadership, and as Somalis, we will not let our sovereignty to be compromised by foreign actors. And, Mr. Rubin, I resect your opinion no matter how distorted it can be, but I don’t think the United States government, or the international donors agree with you!
Developments in Russia’s Humanitarian Policy in Africa
Yevgeny Primakov, the Russian politician, and journalist has been appointed the head of Rossotrudnichestvo, an agency promoting Russia’s humanitarian policy, following a decree signed by Vladimir Putin. Primakov is the successor to Eleanora Mitrofanova, who led the department since December 2017. Future changes in humanitarian policy embodied by Rossotrudnichestvo are thought to create a more favorable regime for Russia in the world arena along with more solidarity.
In order for that to be the case, Russia’s humanitarian policy needs a fundamental review. In recent years, trends that may serve as an impetus for necessary future changes have emerged. The first innovation concerns the functioning of organizations promoting Russia’s international policy and the assessment of their performance. The second determines their regional focus.
As for the revision of the functional features of Russian institutions of humanitarian policy, the necessity to work with NGOs on the ground and use digital technologies seems crucial. Firstly, clarification of the country’s priorities in the field of humanitarian policy could turn useful. Drawing attention to modern power diffusion from state actors to non-state ones, Russian institutions may concern themselves with Russian humanitarian projects’ effectiveness and motivate Russian donors and actors to be more focused on practical work “on the ground.” A shift from only international level cooperation to cooperation on supranational and subnational levels could ensure Russia’s influence and, as a result, a more favorable treatment.
The further issue is effectiveness. With specific humanitarian projects, this means that institutions could improve the situation of the population, communities, and households — only such an effect can and should be a criterion for the effectiveness of the humanitarian policy. Along with official channels, the implementation of this mission requires a more active involvement stemming from the non-governmental sector, namely the media community, and Russian business companies conducting foreign economic activity. It is a search for common ground, universal themes, and areas of interaction in which public opinion abroad (non-governmental organizations, communities) in the future could become a decision-making center for the development of joint dialogue and mutual understanding. In conditions of high uncertainty, digital technologies could have a positive effect on more efficient work.
When it comes to reorienting the regional foreign policy of humanitarian diplomacy institutions, the African continent appears as a priority. The humanitarian policy includes the promotion of humanitarian values. Historically, Russia defends such humanitarian values as peace preservation and justice. Considering the current power transition among states (and it’s moving from West to East and stronger cooperation North-South), Russia could be perceived in international affairs as a guarantor of peace. Consequently, the second apparent humanitarian policy shift is developing more adequate approaches in several areas and regions. The most relevant policy directions for Russia are the countries of the former USSR, the Middle East, the Asia-Pacific region, Africa, and South America. The last two are considered to be resource centers as well as business hubs that if successfully overcame (concerning Africa) problems such as mass hunger and the spread of diseases, could become a field of activity for Russian companies’ interest, and contribute to the development of humanitarian initiatives. These humanitarian initiatives should not be taken as a thing-in-itself, initiatives just for existing initiatives, but rather as a useful tool, providing new employments, further education, and better life opportunities.
The change in the humanitarian agenda is visible on the example of topics within the SPIEF. The SPIEF is an annual Russian business event in the economic field, which has been held since 1997. The Forum’s key mission is to be a practical tool for business, allowing to overcome the barriers that divide Russia and other countries, both geographical and informational. If we look at the previous discussions’ development in relation to the humanitarian agenda, the movement toward the shifts has already begun. Further analysis covers humanitarian issues discussed at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum 2017-2019. The Forum has been attended by senior officials of international organizations, representatives from around 140 countries.
Since 2017, the Forum has been showing the need for interaction with NGOs. The topics of discussion of the Forum 2017 covered corporate social responsibility programs, the implementation of humanitarian initiatives, and the public sector’s cooperation with NGOs. The two messages leading the meeting were: any investment project needs a humanitarian component. The costs borne by the state will primarily lead to an improvement in other’s people lives, their health and safety.
The SPIEF-2018 was more focused on “work on the ground initiatives,” as well as with their performance evaluation. In this regard, coordination at the international level alongside the public sector’s active participation in overcoming the obstacles of the agricultural sector of countries is necessary. Going beyond the scope of symbolic activities, corporations make a significant contribution to the implementation of programs aimed at improving the social situation, the quality of life, the provision of humanitarian and medical care services, as well as combating epidemics. Moreover, the state and business’s interaction reduces the risks of natural disasters, but the market underestimates the effectiveness of investments in security. In this regard, state bodies should provide new conditions for beneficial cooperation with the entrepreneurs.
The SPIEF-2019 brought to the surface the digitalization and the level of women’s participation in solving global problems. The topic diversified more into humanitarian cooperation of the state and business on healthcare, culture, education, and digitalization. For the first time, the African continent became more active as representatives from some African countries attended SPIEF. The parties expressed the necessity to develop joint educational programs in education globalization and the labor market. Participants concluded that the digital economy provides women with more opportunities for self-realization. However, to popularize a successful woman’s image and create comfortable working conditions for women, there is still a lot of work to do.
The African direction from 2019 is becoming predominant. Hence why the regional movement of the Russian humanitarian mission is primarily aimed at the South. It is also worth highlighting the Russia-Africa dialogue. Over the past 20 years, African countries have improved cooperation significantly. The problems identified during the discussion are as follows: underdeveloped infrastructure in Africa’s transport, energy, and finance; the African economic overdependency on natural resources; and insufficient level of business interests in Africa. The participants concluded that it is necessary to stimulate cooperation and raise business awareness of the African and Russian markets’ possibilities.
The development of relations between Russia and Africa is officially recognized as a priority. The problem of mutually beneficial Russian-African cooperation is highly multifaceted, far-reaching and essential to ensure Russia’s interests in the international arena. The expansion of Russian presence now results from an increase in the supply of industrial and food products, development of investment cooperation, expanding Russian participation in the development of the economics of the African continent.
Russian-African relations have enough opportunities to play a prominent role in efforts to promote Russia’s humanitarian policy. Russian humanitarian policy needs a fundamental revision at the functional and regional levels. At the operational level, this is expressed in closer cooperation with NGOs and digital technologies to work more effectively on the ground. Through interaction with the regions, the importance of Africa has increased. For Russia, this is a promising area for promoting humanitarian values such as peace preservation and justice.
In this regard, Rossotrudnichestvo is perhaps the primary tool for implementing Russian humanitarian policy. Federal Agency for the Commonwealth of Independent States Affairs, Compatriots Living Abroad, and International Humanitarian Cooperation (Rossotrudnichestvo) was established in 2008 and today operates in 80 countries. As for Africa, the Russian centers of science and culture (RCSC) are open in Egypt, Zambia, the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville), Morocco, Tanzania, Tunisia, and Ethiopia; Agency representative works at the Russian Embassy in South Africa.
Thus, changes in Russia’s humanitarian policy abroad are expected with the appointment of the new head of Rossotrudnichestvo. Humanitarian policy needs to be revised both functionally and in interaction with the regions. Russia has historically promoted such values as peace preservation and justice. Based on the tendencies and intentions of Mr.Primakov, there is a potential for cooperation with local NGOs. After analyzing the discussions on the humanitarian topics of the SPIEF for 2017-2019, two more trends are emerging. In addition to working closely with the community, there is a need to use digital technologies. This will allow Russia to work not from organization to organization, but from organization to individual. The coronavirus pandemic has pushed Russian education towards cyberspace, which will allow more to receive it. These are precisely life, health, safety, the level of women’s participation in solving global problems that are the goals of humanitarian policy, Russia can and knows how to work on them. In connection with the strengthening of interaction in the Russia-Africa direction, this region is clearly coming to the fore for Russian work. It is the region, like no other, that needs peace preservation and justice. So why shouldn’t Russia satisfy the external demand having the resources to do so?
From our partner RIAC
The political inertia of the EU in the South Caucasus becoming a serious problem for the West
The geopolitical panorama in the South Caucasus, which has strategic importance for Europe, has changed dramatically in recent years. Different...
China Replacing Russia as the Boogeyman in the U.S. Presidential Campaign
During the 2016 U.S. Presidential bid, Russia was picked as a scapegoat to justify the loss endured by the Democratic...
Armed Bandits: The Novel Security Threat in Nigeria
The shrinking of Lake Chad which has led to competition between farmers and herders over scarce resources coupled with Boko...
AfDB presents findings of the Angola Green Mini-Grid Market Assessment
The African Development Bank hosted a webinar to present the findings and recommendations of the Angola Green Mini-Grid Market Assessment...
Ten Years to Midnight: Four urgent global crises and their strategic solutions
The world has 10 years to solve its urgent challenges or it will be too late. In his new book, TEN...
Refugees In The Outbreak Of The Pandemic
The COVID-19 today is having an adverse impact on our lives although it has brought exceptional changes in climate and...
Between Missiles and Flour: The Inside-Outside Game of Hezbollah in Lebanon
The Hezbollah is armed. Gunfire of Hezbollah and Amal supporters became audible on Beirut’s streets on early Sunday morning on...
Intelligence2 days ago
ISIS and the Militant Jihad on Instagram
South Asia3 days ago
One year Siege of Kashmir
Southeast Asia2 days ago
What Indonesia Can Do to Prevent Nuclear Arms Race in Asia Pacific?
Economy3 days ago
Decoding European Union’s Economy
Eastern Europe1 day ago
The long-term threat of Armenian nationalism
Africa2 days ago
Somalia: An American Media Pundit, Exaggerates and Weaponizes International Aid
EU Politics2 days ago
EU-Vietnam trade agreement enters into force
Newsdesk3 days ago
Amid COVID-19 Pandemic, Liberia Has a Chance for a Robust Recovery