
AFC chief pushes to unlock billions from African pension funds
LONDON: The Africa Finance Corporation said it was accelerating efforts to mobilise the continent's money for investments and tapping investors in the Middle East and Asia, as developing nations grapple with seismic shifts in geopolitics and funding flows.
Samaila Zubairu, chief executive of the AFC - a development finance institution owned by Nigeria's central bank and other African financial institutions - said in an interview the lender was ready to weather a world in which the United States and Europe cut financial aid and turn increasingly inward.
"The only thing we want ... to change, is to get domestic capital more available for investment within the continent," Zubairu said.
"We would accelerate our initiatives to mobilize domestic capital from African pension funds, African institutional investors, to invest domestically," he said, adding that in the long term, some $15-$20 billion could come from domestic pension funds.
U.S. President Donald Trump's America First agenda and cuts in U.S. aid money could drain billions from projects in Africa. European countries are also slashing aid funding, with Britain redirecting much of it to boost defence spending.
Africa's low savings rates and shallow markets have stymied efforts to mobilise local pools of cash.
FUND ALLOCATION
Zubairu said the AFC, which deploys $2.5-$3 billion each year, would scale up fund allocation "prudently" by choosing projects other backers could pile into.
It launched the pilot project InfraCredit to support pension fund investments in much-needed infrastructure projects, with oil-rich Nigeria's sovereign wealth fund providing guarantees on local currency debt.
The project has mobilised some 230 billion naira ($152 million), including investments from 21 pension funds, which previously invested almost exclusively in government debt.
Zubairu said he expected to launch similar programs as early as this year in Botswana, Angola and Kenya.
"This is the kind of program that we think needs to be replicated at scale," he said. "If we do programs like this, then you see a lot more billions available for investment."
Pension funds had also placed money in the Infrastructure Climate Resilience Fund, boosting a $52 million commitment from the European Investment Bank, he said.
Investors from the Gulf and Europe are also looking to place money in other AFC projects, such as ARISE Integrated Industrial Platforms which designs and finances industrial projects.
RETHINKING RESERVES
Trump has yet to publicly signal his plans for U.S. investment in the Lobito Corridor, a railway project linking resource-rich Democratic Republic of Congo with Zambia and Angola's Atlantic port of Lobito.
Former U.S. President Joe Biden visited the site in December, during his only trip to Africa.
Zubairu said he was confident Trump would see the value in backing the corridor, though it was a strong, bankable framework that would move forward regardless.
Longer-term, African countries should rethink how they view reserves, focusing less on how many months of import cover they provide and more on how they can leverage them for investment and growth in a capital stock.
"How are we utilizing our savings? How are we ensuring that our savings work for our economies?" he said, adding governments needed to be "very intentional" about capitalizing financial institutions.
The AFC is also eyeing bond more sales in the Middle East - after their first sukuk issue last month- and in China, after securing AAA credit ratings from S&P Global (China) Ratings and China Chengxin International Credit Rating Co.
"We're expanding the frontiers of financing sources available for Africa," he said.
($1 = 1,510.0000 naira) (Reporting By Libby George and Karin Strohecker, editing by Clelia Oziel and Bernadette Baum)
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Gulf Today
8 hours ago
- Gulf Today
Outrage over Trump's electric vehicle policies is misplaced
Ashley Nunes, Tribune News Service Electric car subsidies are heading for the chopping block. A tax bill recently passed by House Republicans is set to stop billions in taxpayer cash from being spent on electric vehicle purchases. If embraced by the Senate and signed into law by President Donald Trump, the bill would gut long-standing government handouts for going electric. The move comes on the heels of another climate policy embraced by Republicans. Earlier this year, Trump announced plans to roll back burdensome rules that effectively force American consumers to buy electric, rather than gas-fueled, cars. The Environmental Protection Agency has called that move the 'biggest deregulatory action in US history.' Not everyone sees it that way. Jason Rylander, legal director at the Center for Biological Diversity's Climate Law Institute, assailed Trump's efforts, noting that his 'administration's ignorance is trumped only by its malice toward the planet.' Other similarly aligned groups have voiced similar sentiments arguing that ending these rules would 'cost consumers more, because clean energy and cleaner cars are cheaper than sticking with the fossil fuels status quo.' Backtracking on EV purchasing mandates seems to have hit Trump haters particularly hard. That mandate — established by President Joe Biden — would have pushed US automakers to sell more EVs. Millions more. Electric cars currently account for 8% of new auto sales. Biden ordered— by presidential fiat — that figure to climb to 35% by 2032. If you believe the hype, the result would be an electric nirvana, one defined by cleaner air and rampant job creation. I'm not convinced. For one thing, cleaner air courtesy of electrification requires that EVs replace gas-powered autos. They're not. In fact, study after study suggests that the purchase of EVs adds to the number of cars in a household. And two-thirds of households with an EV have another non-EV that is driven more — hardly a recipe for climate success given that EVs must be driven (a lot) to deliver climate benefits. Fewer miles driven in an EV also challenges the economic efficiency of the billions Washington spends annually to subsidise their purchase. Claims of job creation thanks to EVs are even more questionable. These claims are predicated around notions of aggressive consumer demand that drives increased EV manufacturing. This in turn creates jobs. A recent Princeton University study noted, 'Announced manufacturing capacity additions and expansions would nearly double US capacity to produce electric vehicles by 2030 and are well sized to meet expected demand for made-in-USA vehicles.' Jobs would be created if there were demand for EVs. Except that's not what's happening. Rather, consumer interest in EVs has effectively cratered. In 2024, 1.3 million EVs were sold in the United States, up from 1.2 million in 2023. This paltry increase is even more worrying given drastic price cuts seen in the EV market in 2024. Tesla knocked thousands of dollars off its best-selling Model 3 and Model Y. Ford followed suit by cutting prices on its Mach-e. So did Volkswagen and Hyundai. Despite deep discounts, consumer interest in electrification remains — to put it mildly — tepid at best. So, when people equate electrification with robust job creation, I'm left wondering what they are going on about. Even if jobs were created, EV advocates are coy about how many of those jobs would benefit existing autoworkers. Would all these workers — currently spread across large swaths of the Midwest — be guaranteed jobs on an EV assembly line? If not, how many workers should expect to receive pink slips? For those who do, will they be able to find new jobs that pay as much as their old ones? Touting job creation for political expediency is one thing. Fully recognising its impact on hardworking American families today, another. Some Americans may decry Trump's actions on climate, but they have only themselves to blame. Many of the pro-climate policies enacted, particularly during the Biden era, deliver little in the way of climate benefits (or any benefit for that matter) while making a mockery of the real economic concerns businesses and consumers have about climate action. No more. In justifying climate rollbacks, the president says many of his predecessor's policies have hurt rather than helped the American people. He's right and should be commended for doing something about it.


Middle East Eye
9 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Trump-Musk fight creates unprecedented elite power struggle in the US
It is hard to find a historic or contemporary precedent for the battle raging between Donald Trump, the president of the United States, and Elon Musk, the world's richest man. There may be a couple of examples that come close, but nothing that quite captures the current moment. For instance, in 2017, Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman rounded up his profligate cousins and businessmen at the Riyadh Ritz-Carlton for a royal shakedown. They got into line quickly. And almost two decades before, Russian President Vladimir Putin managed to bend the oligarchs who got rich off post-Soviet capitalism to his will. On its surface, the Trump-Musk feud seems to be over policy. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The Tesla chief and former head of DOGE attacked Trump's tax bill this week as a 'disgusting abomination'. Musk was channelling the concerns of deficit hawks in the US, who worry the bill will add trillions to the US debt pile at a time when the dollar has weakened and demand for more US debt is looking stretched. Trump, who has positioned the bill as a do-or-die piece of legislation, said on Thursday during a meeting in the Oval Office with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, that 'I'd rather have Elon criticise me than the bill,' adding later, 'Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will anymore.' Then it got nasty. Within hours, Musk was on X calling for Trump's impeachment, to be replaced by Vice President JD Vance. The vice president himself was catapulted to power in part by Peter Thiel, a billionaire tech entrepreneur who mentored and groomed Vance's career in politics. He threatened to form a new political party and stop ferrying Nasa astronauts into space. He said Trump would have lost the US presidential election without his endorsement. And for good measure, insinuated that Trump was linked to convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. Trump fired back. He suggested Musk was attacking the bill, not out of patriotic fervour, but because he had snatched away perks for electric vehicles from which Tesla benefits. 'Elon was wearing thin,' Trump said. 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts. I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it!' Trump said in another post on Thursday night, threatening to leverage the power of the presidency against Musk's business empire, which includes Tesla and SpaceX. Tesla shares dropped about 14 percent on Thursday amid the spat. According to Bloomberg's billionaires index, Musk's net worth plunged $34bn that day. Tesla was trading up around five percent on Friday. Silicon Valley vs 'America First' nationalists The Trump-Musk feud is a decidedly American affair - partly performative, very populist, and made for social media. And on that note, Musk has been posting on X, the social media platform he bought before the US election, and Trump has been posting on Truth Social - owned by Trump Media & Technology Group - that was purposely built as a right-leaning competitor to X before Musk bought it. Of course, the US is no stranger to elite power struggles capturing the public's attention, particularly during its rambunctious, early years as a republic. Aaron Burr, a former vice president, famously killed Alexander Hamilton, the one-time treasury secretary, in a dual in 1804. A century later, Teddy Roosevelt rode a populist 'trust busting' wave that pitted him against the gilded elite, making men like JD Rockefeller his foe. But the Trump-Musk feud has key differences. JD Vance's mentor co-founded company that helps Israel generate 'kill lists' of Palestinians in Gaza Read More » The two men had forged an unprecedented alliance that, to a point, symbolised a broader one between Silicon Valley tech entrepreneurs and crypto bros on one side, and working-class "America First" nationalists on the other. While some media reports say that allies of the two men are urging both to reconcile, the standard bearers of "America First" nationalism appear to be egging Trump on and savouring Musk's fall from grace. Steve Bannon, a former Trump advisor whose podcast WarRoom advocates for "America First" positions, called on Trump to seize Musk's company SpaceX and examine the billionaire's immigration status. Musk was born in South Africa. Bannon himself was critical of Trump's tax bill, but he was one of the few supporters who called for tax hikes on the wealthy. 'You're going to have a few of the tech bros and the crypto crowd stick with Elon because you have the cult of Elon. But MAGA will 100% back Trump. You aren't going to have a person in MAGA who will buy a Tesla,' Bannon said. But Musk donated over $250m to Trump's 2024 campaign and has made clear he has no qualms about deploying his cash against those who turn on him within the Republican Party. On Thursday night, Musk wrote, 'some food for thought as they ponder this question: Trump has 3.5 years left as President, but I will be around for 40+ years…' Do Musk and Trump have options? Trump has a history of engaging in brutal public spats, only to mend fences later. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vance both lambasted Trump during his 2016 run for the White House. But the key difference here is that neither of these men had the deep pockets of the world's richest man to endure a battle with the president. To an extent, Musk is a country unto himself. His technology, like Starlink, is hovering over battlefields in Ukraine, while his company ferries Nasa astronauts into space. The knowledge he has gained of Trump's family and the inner workings of the White House would make him a valuable catch for any foreign leader, including US allies. More broadly speaking, the feud is likely to reaffirm a perception among American friends and foes that something within the US system is cracking. In less than one day, the president of the US threatened on social media to use the power of his office against a comrade-turned-foe, while the world's richest man called for his impeachment. Elon Musk: How a tech nerd became Trump's 'first buddy' Read More » Many observers said the bonhomie between Trump and his former 'first buddy' was bound to implode eventually, given both men's power and outsized egos. Musk also felt his investment in Trump's campaign wasn't paying off, reports suggest. In May, The Wall Street Journal reported that Musk tried to block OpenAI from building one of the world's largest artificial intelligence data centres in Abu Dhabi. Trump and his aides rejected Musk's bid to cancel the deal in favour of his AI company. On Wednesday, Jared Isaacman, a tech billionaire friend of Musk, suggested Trump pulled his nomination to run Nasa because of his ties to Musk. Things could get ugly if the feud refuses to die down, and the president has several institutions that could be weaponised against Musk and his businesses. Trump has not been shy about using state leverage to settle old scores since his return to power. However, Musk has pockets deep enough to make mid-term elections an uphill battle for Trump and his loyalists. If the gloves come off, the world will have a front row seat to an unprecedented battle between the world's most powerful politician and the world's richest man, as it all plays out in real time on social media.


Arabian Post
11 hours ago
- Arabian Post
Willem Blijdorp: Building a Global Business Empire
Willem Blijdorp initially set his sights on a career in tourism. From 1970 to 1975, he studied at the Hotel Management School in Maastricht, the Netherlands. However, upon graduation, he chose an unexpected path. He decided to become the organizer of the now-legendary 'Butterfahrten'. This marked the beginning of an entrepreneurial journey that continues to this day. The Butterfahrt Concept During a business trip to Germany, Blijdorp was struck by how popular Butterfahrten were among Dutch tourists. These day trips involved boarding a ship that quickly sailed beyond national waters. Once in international territory, passengers could shop duty-free to their heart's content. ADVERTISEMENT Sensing a unique opportunity, Blijdorp introduced the concept to the Dutch market in 1975. Operating out of Eemshaven, he launched daily Butterfahrten for Dutch tourists. Blijdorp's success lay in offering more than just tax-free shopping. His cruises delivered a memorable experience, blending commerce with entertainment. Passengers were encouraged to shop, but they also enjoyed a full day of games, music, quizzes, and small lotteries. This unique combination of retail and entertainment struck a chord with the Dutch public. In 1976, Blijdorp began working part-time for shipping company Kamstra, whose mini-cruises were booming. That same year, he received a full-time offer from Marriott Hotels in the United States. Simultaneously, Kamstra also offered him a permanent role. Although he originally intended to pursue a career in the hotel industry, he took the leap into entrepreneurship. On the condition that he could acquire shares in the company, he accepted Kamstra's offer and came on board full-time. Blijdorp's talent for business soon became evident. He built strong relationships with German suppliers, securing exclusive deals available only to Butterfahrt passengers. These arrangements not only kept customers coming back but also laid the groundwork for his later venture: B&S. The Rise of B&S In 1985 Blijdorp founded B&S, a company focused on the distribution of duty-free products. What began as a clever cruise concept soon transformed into a serious business. While the European unification brought significant economic advantages, it also marked the end of duty-free sales within the EU. As a result, the Butterfahrten ceased in 1999. Nevertheless, B&S remained focused on the duty-free market, which meant that B&S continued to grow. What began as modest boat trips from Eemshaven evolved into a global tax-free distribution empire. The experience, relationships, and business acumen developed during the Butterfahrten years became the foundation of B&S's growth into a market leader. Expanding the Business Today, he is also an active investor with a particular interest in startups and social ventures. He is involved in companies such as Mercatum Medical Care – a medical wholesaler, SocialDatabase – a data-driven marketing platform, and Advion -a distributor of cleaning and sanitary addition, he is committed to social initiatives like the Papageno House, a residence that supports children with autism. He also contributes to international projects that provide clean water and sanitation in underserved communities, such as those in Ghana. Also published on Medium. Notice an issue? Arabian Post strives to deliver the most accurate and reliable information to its readers. If you believe you have identified an error or inconsistency in this article, please don't hesitate to contact our editorial team at editor[at]thearabianpost[dot]com. We are committed to promptly addressing any concerns and ensuring the highest level of journalistic integrity.