Connect with us

Economy

Russia’s Grain Export Restrictions Could Affect Africa

Published

on

With Russian government announcement on March 14 to temporarily halt exports of wheat rye, barley and maize abroad, a number of importing African countries are experiencing rising prices. The Russian government decision was directed at saving domestic (internal) shortages as Western and European sanctions are broadened against Russia for its special military operation it began February 24.

As the United States and the European Union (EU) tighten their sanctions on Russia due to special military operation, demilitarization and denazification in Ukraine, Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin signed an order banning the export of white and raw sugar until Aug. 31, and banning wheat, rye, barley and maize exports to neighbouring Eurasian Economic Union states until June 30. The measures were adopted “to protect the domestic food market in the face of external constraints,” the government statement said.

Many external countries would be affected by the exports suspensions, but would keep on providing special export licences to traders within its current quota. Russia is the world’s largest wheat exporter with Egypt and Turkey among the main buyers. It competes mainly with the European Union and Ukraine. European wheat prices rose after Interfax news agency reported on Russia’s bank on grain exports. It did not initially mention the exclusions from the ban.

With the Russian government slapped restrictions on exports, a number of African countries risk possible shortage of wheat and fertilizers due to Russia-Ukraine crisis. For instance, the Mozambican government has warned that the country could experience a shortage of wheat and fertilizers as a direct result of the crisis between Russia and Ukraine, one of the main producers of these materials.

In an interview with Dr. Chtatou Mohamed, Senior Professor of Middle Eastern politics at the International University of Rabat (IUR) and Mohammed V University in Rabat, Morocco, explains that the outlook for African countries is bleak in the wake of the war in Ukraine. The cessation of exports of cereals, including wheat, and other agricultural inputs, will hit most of them hard, as they are already facing a structural food crisis (climatic disturbances, conflicts) or have been considerably weakened by price increases and stock market speculation on essential products.

This is a concern for the African continent, which is a net importer of wheat and sunflower oil. In addition, there are concerns about drought in some parts of the continent. The disruption of shipments of essential commodities would only add to the general concern about food price inflation in a region that imports wheat.

Citing statistical figures, Professor Chtatou says Moscow and Kiev account for 34% of trade in wheat, a commodity that has increased by 70% since the beginning of the year. The countries around the Mediterranean are suffering greatly. For Egypt, this represents 80% of imports. It is the largest importer of wheat in the world (12 million tons). Agricultural trade between the continent’s countries and Russia and Ukraine is significant

He finally concluded that Russia and Ukraine are major players in the global commodity market. Russia supplies about 10% of the world’s wheat, while Ukraine produces 4%. Collectively, this represents almost the entire wheat production of the European Union. This grain is intended for domestic consumption and export markets. Together, these two countries account for a quarter of global wheat exports; in 2020, they amounted to 18% for Russia and 8% for Ukraine.

According to Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, Celso Correia, this could result in higher prices for these products and their derivatives. He was speaking at the official launch of the rice harvest campaign in Regadio do Baixo Limpopo, Gaza province. Minister Correia took advantage of the opportunity to reiterate that the country hoped, by 2030, to attain self-sufficiency in rice production, while in the meantime reducing imports of the cereal as much as possible.

Writing for The Conversation, Wandile Sihlobo, Senior Fellow, Department of Agricultural Economics, Stellenbosch University, says that wheat and other grains are back at the heart of geopolitics following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Both countries play a major role in the global agricultural market. It is very important for African leaders to pay attention to the current situation and related trends.

Russia is the world’s leading exporter of fertilizer materials in value terms , followed by China, Canada, the US, Morocco and Belarus. These fertilizer mixtures include minerals or chemicals ranging from nitrogen to phosphorous and potassium. Fertilizer constitutes a significant share in the growth of agricultural commodities and crops across the world, and substantial share of input costs. In South Africa, fertilizers account for about 35% of grain farmers’ input costs in South Africa.

Widely popular Russian media, Rossiyskaya Gazeta on March 10 reported that the global food crisis which began during the pandemic is compounded by the suspension of the export of wheat and sunflower oil from Russia and Ukraine. While this problem might not significantly affect Russia, the European Union is already concerned over the lack of products.

Signs of a food crisis were already obvious before the special military operation in Ukraine, says Evgenia Serova, Director for Agricultural Policy of the Higher School of Economics. The price hike was triggered not only by the pandemic but also by the EU-US switch to biofuel, which began draining the volume of crops used as food products, the expert said.

Besides logistics problems, due to the aggravated geopolitical situation, the world market may be negatively impacted by the suspended export of Russian fertilizers. The Russian Industry and Trade Ministry recommended this move amid the sabotage of carriers refusing to transport Russian products. Russia ranks among the top three global exporters of mineral fertilizers. Freezing this export would only spark a price hike, the expert noted, and predicted further that “for at least the next couple of years we will have to live under the conditions of galloping food products inflation.”

During the previous years, Russia raised its exports aiming for revenue and get foothold on the foreign markets. Director General of the Institute for Agricultural Market Studies Dmitry Rylko considers that exports initiative to be promising, though Russian products are not very popular abroad. He thinks that promoting exports will not only help raise awareness of the marketed goods on international markets but also improve their quality. “The issue is about promoting premium-segment products, which will also foster tourism internationally,” Rylko said.

There is still a lot that is not known about the geopolitical challenges that lie ahead. But for African countries there are reasons to be worried given their dependency for grains imports. In the near term, countries are likely see the impact through a surge in prices, rather than an actual shortage of the commodities.

According to research reports, African countries imported agricultural products worth US$4 billion from Russia in 2020. About 90 percent of this was wheat, and 6 percent was sunflower oil. Major importing countries were Egypt, which accounted for nearly half of the imports, followed by Sudan, Nigeria, Tanzania, Algeria, Kenya and South Africa.

Similarly, Ukraine exported US$2.9 billion worth of agricultural products to the African continent in 2020. About 48 percent of this was wheat, 31 percent maize, and the rest included sunflower oil, barley, and soybeans.

Long before the February 24 crisis, Russia indicated strong preparedness and high interests to broaden cooperation in trade and in the economic sectors in Africa. It is difficult to predict now. In the meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered to restrict or prohibit import and export of certain products and raw materials from Russia in 2022, according to the decree on special foreign economic measures aimed to ensure Russia’s security.

“Ensure implementation of the following special economic measures until December 31, 2022: export and import ban of products and/or raw materials in accordance with lists to be defined by the government of the Russian Federation,” the document says, adding that a separate list will define goods, whose export and import will be restricted. The decree becomes necessary in order to ensure Russia’s security and uninterrupted operation of agriculture and industry.

According to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the preparations for the Russia-Africa summit are in the active stage. The dates of the summit have not been determined yet. The first Russia-Africa summit took place in October 2019, and it was co-chaired by Russian and Egyptian Presidents, Vladimir Putin and Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. The next summit is scheduled for autumn 2022.

MD Africa Editor Kester Kenn Klomegah is an independent researcher and writer on African affairs in the EurAsian region and former Soviet republics. He wrote previously for African Press Agency, African Executive and Inter Press Service. Earlier, he had worked for The Moscow Times, a reputable English newspaper. Klomegah taught part-time at the Moscow Institute of Modern Journalism. He studied international journalism and mass communication, and later spent a year at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations. He co-authored a book “AIDS/HIV and Men: Taking Risk or Taking Responsibility” published by the London-based Panos Institute. In 2004 and again in 2009, he won the Golden Word Prize for a series of analytical articles on Russia's economic cooperation with African countries.

Continue Reading
Comments

Economy

The Waning Supremacy of the Petrodollar Economy

Published

on

Since the 1970s, the US dollar has been the undisputed reserve currency around the globe. Agreements with Saudi Arabia (and many other Middle Eastern countries) cemented the global oil trade in the greenback currency. Trading oil and gas futures denominated in the US dollar solidified the position of the United States as the hegemon of Global trade – a shift from the traditional gold standard. While the Euro surfaced as a strong contender in the 90s, the dollar-denominated finance still flourished. And economies like China and Russia had no choice but to hold US Treasury securities and accumulate massive dollar reserves. However, multiple geopolitical and economic factors are now turning the tide against the supremacy of the US dollar. Rapid globalization was already a ticking bomb situation for the greenback. But now, China’s rise as the next potential powerhouse and Russia’s exclusion from the dollar-embedded SWIFT system is catalyzing this historic transition.

The tread towards de-dollarisation is not exactly a novel phenomenon. The infamous drift to exclude the US dollar originally spurred in Latin America in the 90s. In response to US sanctions, Venezuela attempted to shift away from the status quo by opting for oil payments in yuan over the US dollar. Chile resorted to Consumer Price Index (CPI) indexation to attract foreign investments in local securities over US Treasuries in the secondary market. However, due to weak supplementary monetary policies and crippling economic crises, the trend of de-dollarisation steeply reversed during the 2008 financial crisis. Since then, no significant development has threatened to derail the dominance of the US dollar. Yet, the booming Asian markets and the implicit rift between the United States and Saudi Arabia could be the next bad omen.

Saudi Arabia is the world’s largest Crude exporter, amounting to about 17.2% of the Global Crude oil exports (by value). Over decades, Saudi Arabia has been one of the core allies of the United States in the Middle East. Economically, the kingdom has served as the largest Crude supplier to the United States. Moreover, as Saudi Arabia leads the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the United States has enjoyed a sway over Global oil prices. Since the oil trade is denominated in the US dollar, it has allowed successive US governments to run massive trade deficits without any budgetary concern. Geopolitically, the Saudi kingdom has been a US proxy in the Middle East to counter its arch-rival Iran. After the landmark Iranian revolution in 1979, Saudi Arabia further climbed the ladder of US preference in the region. However, with a shift from Republicans to Democrats, the two allies have inched apart to a certain extent.

Over the years, the United States has relented its dependence on imported oil by building its own strategic reserves. For example, the US imported an estimated 2 million barrels per day of Saudi Crude in the 1990s. That figure fell to mere 500,000 barrels per day in 2021 – a drop of 75% in a couple of decades. On the political front, the Saudi royalty has been particularly dissatisfied with Biden’s policy in the Middle East. Biden’s decision to unilaterally withdraw support for Saudi Arabia in the Yemen war distanced the kingdom from the US administration. A subsequent spree of Houthi attacks on Saudi oil facilities has further incensed the royalty. To add oil to the fire, Biden’s desperation to salvage the outdated Nuclear Deal with Iran has virtually alienated the kingdom to the point of indifference.

The implications are not complex to spot. Since Russia launched its onslaught against Ukraine in February, Saudi Arabia has actively refused to pay heed to Biden’s calls to expand Crude supply quotas and suppress Global oil prices. Instead, the OPEC+ alliance – OPEC members, Russia, and other allied producers – stuck to its original plan to modestly raise the June output target by 432,000 barrels per day. The brutal indifference to the Western calls has an underlying reason besides the concurrent row with the United States. The reason is the growing China-Saudi cooperation. Over the past few years, Saudi’s structure of the international oil trade has undergone a fundamental change. That is predominantly due to increasing cooperation of China which is not just limited to the energy sector. Under the hood of its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), China has also objectively expanded its potential presence in the kingdom through bilateral cooperation in infrastructure, trade, and investment.

According to the American Enterprise Institute’s China Global Investment Tracker, cumulative Chinese investments in Saudi Arabia reached $43.47 billion in 2021. According to data released by the Chinese General Administration of Customs (GACC), China imported an estimated 542.39 million tons of Crude oil in 2020 – comprising more than 25% of the kingdom’s total Global oil exports. Sources from Saudi Arabia’s top securities regulator suggest that the kingdom’s Sovereign Wealth Fund may soon start investing in Chinese companies after years of limiting its overseas holdings in the US and Europe. Official sources suggest that Saudi oil giant Aramco is in talks to strike a partnership with the Chinese petrochemical consortium. Recently Aramco also finalized a $10 billion deal with Chinese petroleum companies. All the factors unambiguously point in a single direction – Saudi Arabia is leaning away from the US to China. Naturally, the de-dollarisation of trade and investments would facilitate bilateral relations with China.

There are, however, some drawbacks to the petroyuan when compared to its counterpart. While China’s financial markets have exponentially grown over the past few decades, they are still relatively illiquid compared to the US capital markets. Moreover, the massive $13.4 trillion eurodollar market extensively facilitates trade in European markets. Meanwhile, trades in yuan would be limited to China and subject to manipulation from the People’s Bank of China. Thus, trades settled in yuan would be an inconvenience to the smooth operation of trade and short-term deposits. However, these problems could be resolved if petroyuan is used as a barter for investments in China.

Like Saudi Arabia, economies like Russia and Iran have also inched closer to Asia. Russia, for instance, has consistently voiced its propensity to shift toward the Cross-Border Interbank Payment System (CIPS) – a transaction system clearing international settlements and trade in the Renminbi – to trade its oil in Asia under western sanctions. India has openly defied the US pressure by purchasing roughly 15 million barrels of oil from Russia since the invasion of Ukraine. The Russian Crude now accounts for about 17% of Indian imports – up from less than 1% before invasion. The rudimentary reason is cheaper oil in Roubles, especially when Europe is still weighing an embargo on Russian oil. Even Iran has notoriously traded Crude with China under US sanctions by abandoning the US dollar for settlements.

Some economists may argue that even combined, the effect of de-dollarisation would be gradual and uneconomical. But we need to understand that the historical context is skewed, and ground realities today are comparatively different. Firstly, the economies in Asia are significantly less dollarised than the emerging economies of Latin America discussed in the existing literature. Secondly, the Asian economies – particularly China and India – are much more significant in terms of size and monetary policy. Even a shift towards semi-dollarisation could upend the clout of the United States and significantly reduce the power of US sanctions.

The US lawmakers are understandably irked by the defiance of the OPEC+ alliance. Recently, a US Senate Judiciary Committee passed the No Oil Producing or Exporting Cartels (NOPEC) bill to amend the US antitrust law. If passed by the full Senate and House, the US Attorney General would gain the authority to expose OPEC+ countries to lawsuits for possible collusion, bypassing the sovereign immunity guaranteed to OPEC+ nations. While similar motions have been filed and failed over the past two decades, the notable highlight is the US desperation in the face of helplessness. Saudi Arabia already warned the US lawmakers in 2019 that such a bill, if passed, would force its move to trade oil in different currencies. Today, with Europe’s belated timeline to phase away from Russian Crude to China’s expanding influence in Eurasia, it seems the inevitable transition from the petrodollar may strike sooner than initially expected – if expected at all!

Continue Reading

Economy

Chinese Maritime Strategy: Further Expansion and Progress

Published

on

The Belt and Road Initiative represents a shift in China’s global perspective as well as an update to its role and status in the international system, as announced by Chinese President Xi Jinping. Reviving the Silk Road as a means of connecting China with the rest of the globe was the biggest initiative so far. This initiative will connect China with the Arab Gulf states and the Mediterranean through Central Asia. The maritime silk road will connect China’s coast with Europe by way of the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean. It will also connect China’s coast with the South Pacific by way of the South China Sea.

The “string of pearls” strategy, which refers to a network of Chinese military and commercial facilities and relations on the length of the sea lines of communication, which extend from the Chinese mainland to the Horn of Africa, was used to secure Beijing’s global vision of military protection, diplomatic networking, and economic cooperation.

Some scholars believe that this would be a major threat to Britain which relies on the Commonwealth, China is gaining more influence in South Asia through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and the loan diplomacy, which weakens British influence in the Indian ocean. It also challenges Britain in the strategically important Malacca channel.

Experts mention that a state may only be considered powerful when it completely dominates its geographical surroundings. Aside from its strategic location on the international trade route, where 40 percent of all trade passes through the South China Sea and 30 percent of all oil traded globally. Beijing places a high value on the security of China’s regional environment.

China has overtaken the United States to become the world’s largest naval force – but experts believe that the mere comparison of the number of ships neglects many crucial elements that define the efficacy of any naval power.

The United States maintains, so far at least, a huge edge in many naval capabilities, as it has 11 aircraft carriers compared to China’s two. It also excels in the numbers of submarines, destroyers, cruisers, and huge nuclear-powered vessels. But it is projected to considerably enhance the size of the Chinese fleet.

Former Chinese People’s Liberation Army colonel Zhou Bo, currently at Tsinghua University in Beijing, says it is “extremely necessary” for China to build its navy in order to confront the maritime dangers it faces. He particularly says that “the largest challenge we are experiencing is what we regard as US provocations in Chinese territorial seas.” The US Navy expects that the total number of warships owned by the Chinese Navy would expand by 40 percent between 2020 and 2040.

Controlling waterways is a priority for Beijing. Attempts will be made to broaden its maritime presence outside the Indian Ocean, if possible. It is clear from this that China is interested in building strategic fulcrums around the world, such as huge ports equipped with sea cables and digital networks, as well as superior logistics services that might be used for military purposes if necessary.

Continue Reading

Economy

China and the Indo Pacific Economic Framework

Published

on

Image: Twitter@POTUS

The Indo Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) signed by a total of 13 countries, on May 23, 2022, in Tokyo is being dubbed by many as a means of checking China’s economic clout in Asia and sending out a message that the US is keen to bolster economic ties with its allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific.

Many Chinese analysts themselves have referred to the IPEF as ‘Economic NATO’. China has also been uncomfortable with the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) which consists of US, Australia, Japan and India , and has referred to Quad as an ‘Asian NATO’ – though members of the grouping have categorically denied that Quad is an ‘Asian NATO’

Countries which joined the US led IPEF are Australia, Brunei, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. These countries together account for 40% of the global GDP. The four key pillars of the IPEF framework are;  supply-chain resilience; clean energy, decarbonisation and infrastructure; taxation and anti-corruption; and fair and resilient trade.

While launching the plan, US President, Joe Biden said:

‘We’re here today for one simple purpose: the future of the 21st Century economy is going to be largely written in the Indo-Pacific. Our region,’

US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo while commenting on the IPEF said that it was important because it provided Asian countries an alternative to China’s economic model.

A few points need to be borne in mind. First, many of the countries — Australia, Brunei, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam – which have signed the IPEF are also part of the 15 nation Region Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) trade agreement of which China is a key driver (Indonesia, Phillipines and Myanmar have not ratified RCEP). RCEP accounts for 30% of the world’s GDP. Trade between China and other member countries has witnessed a significant rise, year on year in Q1 of 2022.

Second, many of the countries, which are part of the IPEF, have repeatedly said that they would not like to choose between China and US. The Singapore PM, Lee Hsien Loong  who was amongst the first to hail the IPEF, has emphatically stated this point on a number of occasions. In an interview to Nikkei Asian Review on May 20, 2022, Lee Hsien Loong reiterated this point. In fact, Lee Hsien Loong even pitched for making China a part of the Comprehensive and Progressive Partnership for Trans Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) (TPP the precursor to the CPTPP was a brain child of the US). Said the Singapore PM:

‘We welcome China to join the CPTPP,’.

Here it would be pertinent to point out, that China had submitted an application for joining the CPTPPIN September 2021. In the interview, Lee Hsieng Loong did state that countries in Asia needed to have good relations with US, Japan and Europe.

 Indonesia’s Trade Minister Muhammad Lutfi who attended the signing of the IPEF on behalf of the President Joko Widodo stated that he did not want to see IPEF as a tool to contain other countries.

One of the reasons why many countries are skeptical about the IPEF is the fact that it does not have any trade component. A number of ASEAN member states have pointed to the IPEF making no mention of tariffs and market access as one of its major draw backs. At the US-ASEAN Summit, held earlier this month Malaysian Foreign Minister, Ismail Sabri Yaakob had referred to this point. Like many other countries, Malaysia has welcomed the IPEF, but in the immediate future sees RCEP as a far greater opportunity.

US President Joe Biden has not deviated significantly from the policies of his predecessor, Donald Trump, with regard to trade and the US is unlikely to return to the CPTPP at least in the immediate future.  Biden and Senior officials in his administration have spoken about the need to check China’s growing economic influence, specifically in Asia, and to provide an alternative model. While the US along with some of its Indo Pacific partners has taken some steps in this direction (only recently, leaders of Quad countries during their meeting at Tokyo announced that they would spend USD 50 billion, in infrastructural aid and investment, in the Indo Pacific.

 Given his low approval ratings, and diminishing political capital it is unlikely that he is likely to change his approach towards trade significantly. US Trade Representative Katherine Tai said the TPP was ‘fragile’, and that there was no domestic support for the same.

 In conclusion, while the IPEF does have symbolic importance it is important to bear in mind that many signatories themselves have close economic relations with China and would not like to get trapped in competition between US and China. Unless the US re-examines its approach towards trade, which is highly unlikely, and unless countries which are part of the Indo-Pacific vision are able to strengthen economic cooperation, China is likely to dominate Asia’s economic landscape – even though there is growing skepticism with regard to the same.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Southeast Asia4 hours ago

Will Indonesia Repeat the History of Population Mobility in Borneo?

Borneo is now in the spotlight due to the Indonesian government’s impending massive migration. Since the Indonesian government announced capital...

Middle East6 hours ago

‘Protracted political impasse’ further polarizing Libya

Despite UN efforts, political, economic and security deadlock continues in Libya, the UN political affairs chief told the Security Council...

Africa8 hours ago

Time is short for Sudan to resolve political crisis

Time is short for Sudan to reach a solution to its protracted political crisis, the Special Representative for the country...

World News10 hours ago

African nations leading the way on ‘food systems transformation’

African countries are at the vanguard of a vital transformation of food systems to simultaneously address food security, nutrition, social...

Defense12 hours ago

AUKUS: A Harbinger to Nuclear Race between India and Pakistan

In the latter half of the 2021, Washington initiated strategic trilateral defence pact with the UK and Australia, colloquially called...

Middle East14 hours ago

Israel admits involvement in the killing of an Iranian army officer

Col. Sayad Khodayee, 50, was fatally shot outside his home in Tehran on Sunday when two gunmen on motorcycles approached...

South Asia16 hours ago

Economic And Political Reform Is Needed In Sri Lanka, Not State Violence

Sri Lanka’s worst economic crisis since independence has highlighted years of political and economic mismanagement and a reliance on state-sanctioned...

Trending