AfDB at 60: Time to reclaim the zeal of its visionary reformers
The leadership contest we are witnessing now happens as the continent again faces tightening liquidity, dwindling concessional resources and escalating debt service costs.
These pressures mirror earlier shocks: the post‑Cold‑War aid squeeze of the early 1990s, the commodity price slump of 1998‑2002 and the global financial crisis of 2008‑2009. Each episode forced Africa's premier development institution to redefine its mandate, strengthen its balance sheet and, crucially, protect its credit standing.
Those lessons remain highly relevant as the Bank prepares for its next resource mobilisation and as African policymakers debate how the institution can best serve a $3-trillion (R53.53-trillion) continental economy that still falls short on infrastructure, climate resilience and industrial diversification.
Ndiaye (president, 1985-1995) led the Bank through one of its most consequential transformations. A consummate Senegalese technocrat and diplomat, Ndiaye secured the 1987 general capital increase that tripled ordinary resources to $23.3bn (R415.2bn) and brought newly admitted non‑regional shareholders behind a common agenda. He went on to champion pan‑African institutions that outlived his mandate, Afreximbank, Shelter Afrique and Africa Re, enlarging the bank's footprint in trade finance, housing and risk transfer. His ability to persuade Eritrea and Ethiopia, Namibia and South Africa to subscribe simultaneously attested to his diplomatic reach.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Eyewitness News
19 minutes ago
- Eyewitness News
Ramaphosa says Putin called him about his meeting with Trump
CAPE TOWN - President Cyril Ramaphosa said he's been briefed in a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin about his meeting with US President Donald Trump in Alaska on Friday. That meeting ended with Trump saying 'great progress' had been made to quell Russia's war in Ukraine, but no mention was made of a ceasefire. In a brief statement from the Presidency on Monday, Ramaphosa said Putin expressed his satisfaction with the manner in which talks with Trump proceeded and their alignment on the peace process. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is headed for the White House today following the dressing down he received from Trump in the Oval Office in February after Trump accused him of being ungrateful for the assistance his country had received from the US. It's been more than two years since Ramaphosa travelled to Ukraine with other African leaders in an attempt to chart out a peace plan. READ: Zelensky says Russia must end war, after Trump pressures Ukraine Presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said Ramaphosa and Putin have again agreed to maintain open lines of communication and to continue their cooperation on issues of bilateral interests. "President Ramaphosa appreciated the briefing from President Putin. The president underscored the need for more compromise on key issues for lasting peace to be attained between Russia and Ukraine." Meanwhile, the White House said Trump has invited European leaders to join his meeting with Zelensky later today.
The South African
an hour ago
- The South African
Vladimir Putin briefs Cyril Ramaphosa on chat with Donald Trump
Cyril Ramaphosa has been briefed by Russian President Vladimir Putin on the outcome of his recent meeting with US President Donald Trump. Image: Ramil Sitdikov / RIA NOVOSTI / AFP Home » Vladimir Putin briefs Cyril Ramaphosa on chat with Donald Trump Cyril Ramaphosa has been briefed by Russian President Vladimir Putin on the outcome of his recent meeting with US President Donald Trump. Image: Ramil Sitdikov / RIA NOVOSTI / AFP President Cyril Ramaphosa has received a briefing from Russian President Vladimir Putin on the outcome of his recent meeting with United States President Donald Trump in Anchorage, Alaska. In a statement on Monday, The Presidency said President Putin expressed satisfaction with the manner in which his talks with President Trump proceeded and the emerging alignment on the peace process. 'President Ramaphosa appreciated the briefing from President Putin. The President underscored the need for more compromise on key issues for lasting peace to be attained between Russia and Ukraine. 'Both leaders once again pledged to maintain open lines of communication and to continue their cooperation on issues of bilateral interests,' the Presidency said. South Africa has maintained its non-aligned position on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, calling on all parties to pursue negotiations as the only viable path to resolving the war. In June 2023, President Ramaphosa led a delegation of African leaders to Kyiv and St. Petersburg in a peace mission aimed at encouraging direct engagement between Russia and Ukraine. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
Eyewitness News
17 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
Trump's performance politics and the cost to South Africa
Charles Matseke 15 August 2025 | 11:31 Donald Trump Racism Foreign policy FILE: US President Donald Trump Donald Trump's political fabric has always been woven with threads of populist theatrics, racial grievance politics, and an impulse-driven approach to governance. Nowhere is this more evident than in his treatment or lack thereof of South Africa. From the start of his presidency, Trump displayed neither a coherent foreign policy for Africa nor an appreciation of South Africa's strategic role on the his engagement was dominated by misinformation and disinformation, most notably his amplification of the so-called 'white genocide' narrative raising the question: was this ignorance, calculated malice, or simply a lack of diplomatic interest?For Trump, foreign policy toward Africa has never been a matter of strategic planning but rather a stage for identity politics and symbolic gestures aimed at his domestic base. His failure to engage meaningfully with President Cyril Ramaphosa particularly during the controversy over farm killings was not just a scheduling oversight. It was a symptom of a deeper perception problem: Trump does not see African leaders as equal political counterparts deserving of diplomatic caution or respect. This mindset reflects his white nationalist worldview, where Black-majority nations are viewed not as strategic partners but as geopolitical traditional U.S. foreign policy, South Africa occupies a vital position as the gateway to African markets, a regional security partner, and a voice within multilateral forums such as BRICS, the African Union, and the G20. Under Trump, however, this relationship shifted from engagement to neglect. His administration largely abandoned Africa-focused policy frameworks in favor of ad-hoc interventions, driven more by ideological posturing than geopolitical calculus. The 'Prosper Africa' initiative ostensibly aimed at boosting U.S. trade and investment barely touched South Africa meaningfully, while Trump's transactional worldview reduced diplomacy to short-term deals, ignoring long-term strategic vacuum allowed domestic and foreign actors to weaponize disinformation. Afrikaner nationalist groups such as AfriForum, with strong networks in the U.S. conservative ecosystem, saw Trump's impulsiveness as a strategic opportunity. Drawing from Melissa Steyn's analysis in Whiteness Just Isn't What It Used to Be, these groups have long grappled with the erosion of white political dominance in post-apartheid South Africa. The 'white genocide' narrative provided them with an emotional hook appealing to Trump's base and bypassing nuanced diplomatic understand why such narratives find resonance, one must examine the historical architecture of Afrikaner nationalism. As T. Dunbar Moodie argues in The Rise of Afrikanerdom, Afrikaner nationalism was more than a political movement it was a quasi-religious civil religion, sanctifying racial separation as divine mandate and framing political dominance as a sacred duty. This belief system provided the moral and ideological scaffolding for apartheid and still echoes today in pockets of Afrikaner society, where victimhood narratives are deployed as political capital. Similarly, Dan O'Meara in Forty Lost Years shows how the National Party meticulously engineered a political order that consolidated Afrikaner economic and cultural power from 1948 to 1994. While apartheid's political edifice collapsed, the psychological and institutional residues of this power-seeking ideology survived. The mobilization of the 'white genocide' discourse in U.S. conservative circles is not a spontaneous phenomenon, it is a strategic continuation of this long tradition of using fear, identity, and international lobbying to protect white minority while Trump amplified the plight of white farmers, he never once addressed the existence of Orania, a whites-only enclave in South Africa, a relic of apartheid's ideology of 'separate development.' Orania is the physical embodiment of white privilege and autonomy in a Black-majority democracy, yet it escapes both U.S. diplomatic scrutiny and international condemnation. That such a place exists without sustained challenge from Washington underscores the selective outrage in U.S. foreign policy where white victimhood narratives are amplified, while systemic racial privilege is 'white genocide' discourse is not merely rhetorical it aligns with potential economic objectives. By casting South Africa as a country hostile to white farmers and foreign investors, it creates diplomatic pressure to dilute Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) policies, opening the door for U.S. linked tech and infrastructure projects tied to white economic networks. One cannot ignore that projects like Starlink championed in conservative U.S. circles could benefit from a South African policy environment stripped of its transformation South Africa, the Trump era offers sobering lessons. First, the U.S. even as a self-styled global moral leader is not immune to racialized foreign policy. Second, populist leaders will readily sacrifice diplomatic consistency for domestic political theater, especially when racial narratives resonate with their base. Third, foreign disinformation campaigns, particularly from well-organized minority interest groups, can gain traction when amplified by a superpower's head of response must be more assertive. It should challenge the weaponization of racial narratives by foreign actors and call out selective U.S. outrage. Domestically, it must engage Afrikaner nationalist organizations both at home and abroad on the reality that South Africa is a constitutional democracy belonging 'to all who live in it,' and those seeking preferential treatment on the basis of race have no legitimate diplomatic disregard for South Africa is not simply an extension of domestic U.S. polarization, it is a demonstration of how identity politics now shapes global diplomacy. In this paradigm, facts are subordinate to ideology, and policy is subordinate to populist performance. For South Africa, engaging with such a superpower requires both strategic communication and an unflinching commitment to safeguarding its sovereignty against racialized policy interference. Trump's South Africa 'policy' was never about policy at all it was about politics. And in that theatre, the truth was not a casualty of war; it was an afterthought in a performance aimed not at Pretoria, but at Pennsylvania, Texas, and Florida. Charles Matseke (MPhil in Politics and International Relations) is a researcher and writer with a keen interest in contemporary political dynamics. His research focuses on electoral politics, foreign policy analysis, and international relations, with a particular emphasis on the Global South and Africa's role in global affairs.
