logo
Africa and the path to self-reliance

Africa and the path to self-reliance

Arab News26-04-2025

https://arab.news/jsrkd
For decades after gaining independence, many African nations subsisted on a development model dependent on foreign aid and external support despite mixed results. Aid inflows might have helped build schools and clinics, but they also fostered a culture of dependence and complacency.
Now, as donors increasingly pull back, this arrangement is crumbling amid turbulent global geopolitics, coupled with a new generation of African leaders who are questioning the old reliance on handouts.
In 2015, Kenya's president at the time, Uhuru Kenyatta, warned that the future of the continent could no longer be left to the good graces of outside interests, with foreign aid considered an acceptable basis for prosperity and freedom.
A decade later, his words ring more true than ever. In the past few years, several seismic shifts have rendered the status quo untenable. Now, global trade wars are escalating, not so long after the supply chain shocks of the COVID era, and coupled with the ripple effects from the war in Ukraine. In most cases, Africa ends up bearing a disproportionate brunt of disruptions elsewhere.
Now, however, the world that enabled Africa's aid addiction is vanishing, forcing the continent to finally confront the hard business of self-reliance.
The US, for a long time a major aid donor, has slashed or rerouted funding due to partisan politics and voter fatigue over perpetual development projects abroad. European aid budgets are under pressure, strained by shifting domestic priorities and the growing costs of crises brewing closer to home. Meanwhile, remittances from a sprawling diaspora, often a lifeline for African economies, remain fickle, booming in good times but drying up whenever global recession hits or inflation bites into migrants' incomes.
The security environment has also changed dramatically. France, the former colonial guardian of the Sahel, for instance, has wound down its presence after years of fighting militants in Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso. The French, once welcomed by beleaguered governments, were shown the door by new juntas and ceaseless protests, resulting in the tricolor being lowered at bases across the Sahel, signaling the end of 'Pax Gallica' in Africa.
Meanwhile, the future of the US military's Africa Command looks uncertain, with Washington preoccupied by great-power showdowns elsewhere. After all, Africa's conflicts and security vacuums rank low on the Pentagon's list of priorities, even though US special forces and drones remain active in the Horn of Africa and the Sahel. But for how long? If a more isolationist mood prevails in successive US administrations, Africa could experience an even greater strategic vacuum.
That vacuum is already beckoning opportunists. In places such as Mali and the Central African Republic, gun-for-hire outfits have swept in to replace departing Western troops, trading security services for mining concessions and geopolitical leverage. Their encroachment is a sobering reminder that if Africa does not resolve its own security problems, someone else — possibly far less benevolent or benign — will.
China, too, has shifted from being a mere investor to a strategic operator on the continent. Beijing remains Africa's biggest trading partner and a major builder of its infrastructure, but it has grown more hard-nosed. Chinese loans are drying up after debt crises in Zambia and Ethiopia, even as Beijing secures long-term control of strategic ports and key mines. The People's Liberation Army Navy now frequents the waters off Africa's coasts, and a naval base in Djibouti signals that, for China at least, Africa is no longer only a business destination.
Africa's aid addiction is vanishing, forcing the continent to finally confront the hard business of self-reliance.
Hafed Al-Ghwell
The upside of these external shifts is a renewed continental resolve to become self-sufficient. Across Africa, a slogan long confined to speeches — 'African solutions to African problems' — is finally gaining some traction. The African Union and other regional organizations are spearheading ambitious initiatives designed to reduce external dependencies.
Top of the list is the African Continental Free Trade Area, which was launched in 2021 to knit together 54 African countries into the world's largest free-trade zone. The idea is simple: tear down the internal barriers that make it easier for an African country to trade with Europe or Asia than with its next-door neighbors. Only about 15 percent of Africa's trade is intracontinental, a pitiful figure compared to nearly 70 percent with Europe.
The free-trade zone hopes to change that through the elimination of most intra-African tariffs and standardization of trade rules. If fully implemented, it could unlock economies of scale, boost industrial supply chains across borders, and create a truly regional market of 1.4 billion consumers. In practice, progress has been halting — negotiating schedules and customs regulations is painstaking work — but a start at least has been made.
The momentum is there: Ghana has exported its first shipment of goods to Kenya under free-trade provisions, which is symbolic of the new possibilities. As of 2023, nearly every member of the African Union had signed up to the zone, and more than 45 have ratified membership. Africa's leaders now routinely talk of 'trade not aid,' reflecting a shift in mindsets at the highest levels.
Likewise, there is a continental push for industrialization, to finally break out of the colonial pattern of exporting raw materials and importing finished goods. Countries such as Ethiopia and Rwanda have crafted industrial policies to attract manufacturing, and the free-trade zone is intended to support this by ensuring that once a factory is set up in, say, Kenya it can easily sell its products across borders to Nigeria or South Africa, for example, without prohibitive tariffs or red tape getting in the way.
Another pillar of the self-reliance agenda is the digital economy. Africa missed previous industrial revolutions but it is determined not to lose out on the ongoing tech revolution. The continent is already a global leader in some areas of financial technology; mobile money services, born out of Kenya's M-Pesa system, now handle more than a trillion dollars in transactions annually across Africa. By 2022 there were more than 780 million mobile money accounts on the continent, nearly half of the global total, providing financial access for tens of millions of people who never had bank accounts.
Underpinning all of these efforts is a philosophical shift: an embrace of self-reliance not as isolationism but as pragmatic empowerment. This does not mean Africa is shutting itself off; foreign investment and partnerships are still welcome and needed. Rather, it means Africans are asserting control over their development priorities, beginning with negotiating tougher trade terms by insisting on local content and addition of value.
For perhaps the first time since the 1960s, there is renewed pride in the idea of standing on one's own two feet. This is captured in the African Union's Agenda 2063, which envisions a continent that is integrated, prosperous, and self-determining. This is lofty rhetoric for now — the organization is infamous for grand visions that go unrealized — but the difference is that circumstances are forcing action.
With the life raft long provided by donor support shrinking, Africa will either learn to swim or it will sink.
• Hafed Al-Ghwell is a senior fellow and executive director of the North Africa Initiative at the Foreign Policy Institute of the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, DC.
X: @HafedAlGhwell

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump-Musk Showdown Threatens US Space Plans
Trump-Musk Showdown Threatens US Space Plans

Asharq Al-Awsat

time6 hours ago

  • Asharq Al-Awsat

Trump-Musk Showdown Threatens US Space Plans

SpaceX's rockets ferry US astronauts to the International Space Station. Its Starlink satellite constellation blankets the globe with broadband, and the company is embedded in some of the Pentagon's most sensitive projects, including tracking hypersonic missiles. So when President Donald Trump threatened on Thursday to cancel Elon Musk's federal contracts, space watchers snapped to attention. Musk, the world's richest person, shot back that he would mothball Dragon -- the capsule NASA relies on for crew flights -- before retracting the threat a few hours later. For now, experts say mutual dependence should keep a full-blown rupture at bay, but the episode exposes just how disruptive any break could be. Founded in 2002, SpaceX leapfrogged legacy contractors to become the world's dominant launch provider. Driven by Musk's ambition to make humanity multiplanetary, it is now NASA's sole means of sending astronauts to the ISS -- a symbol of post–Cold War cooperation and a testbed for deeper space missions. Space monopoly? The company has completed 10 regular crew rotations to the orbiting lab and is contracted for four more, under a deal worth nearly $5 billion. That's just part of a broader portfolio that includes $4 billion from NASA for developing Starship, the next-generation megarocket; nearly $6 billion from the Space Force for launch services; and a reported $1.8 billion for Starshield, a classified spy satellite network. Were Dragon grounded, the United States would again be forced to rely on Russian Soyuz rockets for ISS access -- as it did between 2011 and 2020, following the Space Shuttle's retirement and before Crew Dragon entered service. "Under the current geopolitical climate, that would not be optimal," space analyst Laura Forczyk told AFP. NASA had hoped Boeing's Starliner would provide redundancy, but persistent delays -- and a failed crewed test last year -- have kept it grounded. Even Northrop Grumman's cargo missions now rely on SpaceX's Falcon 9, the workhorse of its rocket fleet. The situation also casts a shadow over NASA's Artemis program. A lunar lander variant of Starship is slated for Artemis III and IV, the next US crewed Moon missions. If Starship were sidelined, rival Blue Origin could benefit -- but the timeline would almost certainly slip, giving China, which aims to land humans by 2030, a chance to get there first, Forczyk warned. "There are very few launch vehicles as capable as Falcon 9 -- it isn't feasible to walk away as easily as President Trump might assume," she said. NASA meanwhile appeared eager to show that it had options. "NASA is assessing the earliest potential for a Starliner flight to the International Space Station in early 2026, pending system certification and resolution of Starliner's technical issues," the agency said in a statement Friday to AFP. Still, the feud could sour Trump on space altogether, Forczyk cautioned, complicating NASA's long-term plans. SpaceX isn't entirely dependent on the US government. Starlink subscriptions and commercial launches account for a significant share of its revenue, and the company also flies private missions. The next, with partner Axiom Space, will carry astronauts from India, Poland, and Hungary, funded by their respective governments. Private power, public risk But losing US government contracts would still be a major blow. "It's such a doomsday scenario for both parties that it's hard to envision how US space efforts would fill the gap," Clayton Swope, deputy director of the Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told AFP. "Both sides have every reason to bridge the disagreement and get back to business." Signs of a rift emerged last weekend, when the White House abruptly withdrew its nomination of e-payments billionaire Jared Isaacman -- a close Musk ally who has twice flown to space with SpaceX -- as NASA administrator. On a recent podcast, Isaacman said he believed he was dropped because "some people had some axes to grind, and I was a good, visible target." The broader episode could also reignite debate over Washington's reliance on commercial partners, particularly when one company holds such a dominant position. Swope noted that while the US government has long favored buying services from industry, military leaders tend to prefer owning the systems they depend on. "This is just another data point that might bolster the case for why it can be risky," he said. "I think that seed has been planted in a lot of people's minds -- that it might not be worth the trust."

Pentagon watchdog investigates if staffers were asked to delete Hegseth's Signal messages
Pentagon watchdog investigates if staffers were asked to delete Hegseth's Signal messages

Arab News

time15 hours ago

  • Arab News

Pentagon watchdog investigates if staffers were asked to delete Hegseth's Signal messages

WASHINGTON: The Pentagon's watchdog is looking into whether any of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's aides were asked to delete Signal messages that may have shared sensitive military information with a reporter, according to two people familiar with the investigation and documents reviewed by The Associated Press. The inspector general's request focuses on how information about the March 15 airstrikes on Houthi targets in Yemen was shared on the messaging app. This comes as Hegseth is scheduled to testify before Congress next week for the first time since his confirmation hearing. He is likely to face questions under oath not only about his handling of sensitive information but also the wider turmoil at the Pentagon following the departures of several senior aides and an internal investigation over information leaks. Hegseth already has faced questions over the installation of an unsecured Internet line in his office that bypassed the Pentagon's security protocols and revelations that he shared details about the military strikes in multiple Signal chats. One of the chats included his wife and brother, while the other included President Donald Trump's top national security officials and inadvertently included The Atlantic's editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg. Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson had no comment Friday, citing the pending investigation. The inspector general's office would not discuss the details of the investigation but said that when the report is complete, their office will release unclassified portions of it to the public. Besides finding out whether anyone was asked to delete Signal messages, the inspector general also is asking some past and current staffers who were with Hegseth on the day of the strikes who posted the information and who had access to his phone, according to the two people familiar with the investigation and the documents reviewed by the AP. The people were not authorized to discuss the investigation and spoke on the condition of anonymity. Democratic lawmakers and a small number of Republicans have said that the information Hegseth posted to the Signal chats before the military jets had reached their targets could have put those pilots' lives at risk and that for any lower-ranking members of the military it would have led to their firing. Hegseth has said none of the information was classified. Multiple current and former military officials have said there is no way details with that specificity, especially before a strike took place, would have been OK to share on an unsecured device. 'I said repeatedly, nobody is texting war plans,' Hegseth told Fox News Channel in April after reporting emerged about the chat that included his family members. 'I look at war plans every day. What was shared over Signal then and now, however you characterize it, was informal, unclassified coordinations, for media coordinations and other things. That's what I've said from the beginning.' Trump has made clear that Hegseth continues to have his support, saying during a Memorial Day speech at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia that the defense secretary 'went through a lot' but 'he's doing really well.' Hegseth has limited his public engagements with the press since the Signal controversy. He has yet to hold a Pentagon press briefing, and his spokesman has briefed reporters there only once. The inspector general is investigating Hegseth at the request of the Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, and the committee's top Democrat, Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island. Signal is a publicly available app that provides encrypted communications, but it can be hacked and is not approved for carrying classified information. On March 14, one day before the strikes against the Houthis, the Defense Department cautioned personnel about the vulnerability of the app. Trump has said his administration targeted the Houthis over their 'unrelenting campaign of piracy, violence and terrorism.' He has noted the disruption Houthi attacks caused through the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, key waterways for energy and cargo shipments between Asia and Europe through Egypt's Suez Canal. The Houthi rebels attacked more than 100 merchant vessels with missiles and drones, sinking two vessels and killing four sailors, between November 2023 until January this year. Their leadership described the attacks as aimed at ending the Israeli war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

Pentagon watchdog investigates if staffers were asked to delete Hegseth's Signal messages
Pentagon watchdog investigates if staffers were asked to delete Hegseth's Signal messages

Al Arabiya

timea day ago

  • Al Arabiya

Pentagon watchdog investigates if staffers were asked to delete Hegseth's Signal messages

The Pentagon's watchdog is looking into whether any of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's aides were asked to delete Signal messages that may have shared sensitive military information with a reporter, according to two people familiar with the investigation and documents reviewed by The Associated Press. The inspector general's request focuses on how information about the March 15 airstrikes on Houthi targets in Yemen was shared on the messaging app. This comes as Hegseth is scheduled to testify before Congress next week for the first time since his confirmation hearing. He is likely to face questions under oath not only about his handling of sensitive information but also the wider turmoil at the Pentagon following the departures of several senior aides and an internal investigation over information leaks. Hegseth already has faced questions over the installation of an unsecured internet line in his office that bypassed the Pentagon's security protocols and revelations that he shared details about the military strikes in multiple Signal chats. One of the chats included his wife and brother, while the other included President Donald Trump's top national security officials and inadvertently included The Atlantic's editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg. Neither the Pentagon nor the inspector general's office immediately responded to Friday requests for comment on the investigation. Besides finding out whether anyone was asked to delete Signal messages, the inspector general also is asking some past and current staffers who were with Hegseth on the day of the strikes who posted the information and who had access to his phone, according to the two people familiar with the investigation and the documents reviewed by the AP. The people were not authorized to discuss the investigation and spoke on the condition of anonymity. Democratic lawmakers and a small number of Republicans have said that the information Hegseth posted to the Signal chats before the military jets had reached their targets could have put those pilots' lives at risk and that for any lower-ranking members of the military it would have led to their firing. Hegseth has said none of the information was classified. Multiple current and former military officials have said there is no way details with that specificity, especially before a strike took place, would have been OK to share on an unsecured device. 'I said repeatedly, nobody is texting war plans,' Hegseth told Fox News Channel in April after reporting emerged about the chat that included his family members. 'I look at war plans every day. What was shared over Signal then and now, however you characterize it, was informal, unclassified coordination, for media coordination and other things. That's what I've said from the beginning.' Trump has made clear that Hegseth continues to have his support, saying during a Memorial Day speech at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia that the defense secretary 'went through a lot' but 'he's doing really well.' Hegseth has limited his public engagements with the press since the Signal controversy. He has yet to hold a Pentagon press briefing, and his spokesman has briefed reporters there only once. The inspector general is investigating Hegseth at the request of the Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, and the committee's top Democrat, Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island. Signal is a publicly available app that provides encrypted communications, but it can be hacked and is not approved for carrying classified information. On March 14, one day before the strikes against the Houthis, the Defense Department cautioned personnel about the vulnerability of the app. Trump has said his administration targeted the Houthis over their 'unrelenting campaign of piracy, violence and terrorism.' He has noted the disruption Houthi attacks caused through the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, key waterways for energy and cargo shipments between Asia and Europe through Egypt's Suez Canal. The Houthis attacked more than 100 merchant vessels with missiles and drones, sinking two vessels and killing four sailors, between November 2023 until January this year. Their leadership described the attacks as aimed at ending the Israeli war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store