The world is cruel but Africa can learn to be great: former UN Security Council president
However, the continent could learn from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), an economic block of 10 Southeast Asian economies: Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines, Brunei, Vietnam, Indonesia, Myanmar, Laos, Malaysia and Cambodia.
The grouping, established in 1967, was instrumental in turning its member states from low-income economies to a combined GDP of $3.6-trillion (R64.07-trillion) in 2022, enough to make the bloc the fifth largest economy globally.
Mahbubani said for Africa, replicating this model has gone from possible to critical.
He was speaking at the Africa Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank) AGM in Abuja, Nigeria, on Thursday. His address comes amid trade fragmentation, protectionism and geopolitical tensions punctuated by war in Ukraine and the Middle East and US President Donald Trump's tariffs.
'In where we go from here and what the prospects are, I emphasise the cruel world. We haven't seen the sharper edges of the geopolitical competition that is coming, partly because the US has been trying to focus on China.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
a day ago
- Daily Maverick
If BEE goes, how do we address racialised inequality?
The past few months have seen an unprecedented attack on Black Economic Empowerment. Strangely, the voices that you would expect to defend it have been oddly muted. If we accept that BEE has too many problems to work properly, it is time for a proper national debate on what could replace it. As predicted several months ago, Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) is now under intense fire. This is partly because the ANC has been dramatically weakened, partly because the DA is now in government, and partly because of the Trump administration's attacks on it. Last week, even The Economist opined that it was time for our country to stop BEE. On Tuesday, Deputy President Paul Mashatile said in an answer to a parliamentary question that BEE was 'not discriminatory'. While he was trying to defend BEE, he clearly missed the point. BEE is absolutely discriminatory. That is why we have it. To reduce our racialised inequality. But, in a comment by Professor William Gumede that has been widely quoted, BEE has cost around R1-trillion and yet most black people have not benefited from it in any substantive way (this is likely to be hugely contested). BEE is intensely controversial. Not just because a small group of people have been made rich, but because of what it is: A deliberate attempt to empower one group of people at the expense of another group. No matter the moral legitimacy of such an aim, in any society, to take from one group to give to another leads to huge arguments. This is one of the reasons tax policy can be hugely controversial. The cost of scrapping As a starting point, it may be important to ask: if there is no BEE and no other measure of race-based redress, what would happen? The economy would probably grow a little more quickly than it is now. Companies could simply scrap all the measures they take to qualify for BEE points. This might make them, and their owners, richer. But there would be a huge cost. For example, some of the big banks insure the geysers of people they grant mortgages to (this is to protect the value of the property they are lending money against). As a BEE measure, they then use a long list of black-owned suppliers to repair those geysers if they break down. The big banks would probably find it much more efficient to use one big company to fix all these geysers. These suppliers, usually the first in their families to own a small business, would lose out dramatically. Most would probably have to close. The consequence of this is that all these people, and their extended families, who they support, would lose faith in the democratic project. This would be just one example of how inequality, both racialised inequality and general inequality, would be re-entrenched. That would lead to greater demands for political and economic change, and perhaps, more calls for some kind of radical, or even revolutionary change. The impact test The tools that the state has to really make a change for one group, but not for another, are essentially quite limited. And each tool would have to satisfy certain tests. The first is, would it work? In other words, does the policy really make a substantive difference for a large number of people? This is the test that BEE arguably fails. Another test is whether such a tool would be both legitimate and fair. Legitimacy is absolutely vital. It means you essentially have to convince white people that they must be treated differently from black people. It seems unlikely that even Siya Kolisi and Eben Etzebeth could convince most white people to accept this. There are alternatives to BEE, all of which have serious problems. Government could decide to radically change the tax system and essentially try to tax white people more than black people. One of the main arguments against that, apart from the fact that it would lead to intense debates about racial designations, is that there are obvious examples of some white people who were born into poorer homes than some black people. That would fail the fairness test. There could be other strategies. Government could decide that our geography, still defined by apartheid in so many ways, provides a proxy for race. Thus, as a deliberate strategy, the Basic Education Department could decide to spend more money per child in rural and township schools than on children in suburban schools. While this might seem unfair, the argument could be that communities in suburbs can just increase the contribution they already make to the education of their children (through what are often called 'Governing Body Teachers' – teachers paid by the parents, not government). Although that would be staggeringly unfair to black parents who have made huge sacrifices to get their children into these schools, and to keep them there. There are other problems, too. At least one would be that we would not know whether it had been effective for a full generation. Which might defeat the purpose, which is to show that there is a measure of race-based redress that actually works. From BEE to BIG? There are other ways to look at this problem. They could be controversial in themselves. It might be seen as legitimate by the vast majority of voters to remove the idea of race-based redress in favour of a different measure to help improve the lives of millions of the poorest people in our country. So, for example, BEE could be removed at the same time a substantive Basic Income Grant (BIG) is introduced. In other words, there would be a deal (sort of). Businesses would no longer have to comply with BEE, which would allow them to be more efficient and make more profit. Those profits would, in turn, help to fund a BIG that would make a real difference to the lives of millions of people. While there appears to be no public polling on this, it might be worth asking if the millions of people who receive the R370/month Social Relief of Distress Grant would prefer that money in their pockets to retaining the current model of BEE. Considering that these people clearly need more help than most of those who currently benefit from BEE, there may be a compelling moral argument in this direction. But that might be creating a false binary. And it would not satisfy the demand for race-based redress, although it would help to reduce inequality. The attacks on BEE will not stop. But the intensity of our inequality, as racialised as it still is, demands measures to address it. A window is now opening for a proper debate on what might be more effective. It's vital that we grab it. DM
IOL News
a day ago
- IOL News
BRICS+ Series: Thailand's Economic Integration with BRICS
Effective January 1, 2025, Thailand became a BRICS Partner Country, a culmination of a decade of strengthening economic and bilateral ties through strategic partnerships in trade, investment, infrastructure development, and regional integration, solidifying its role as a vital Southeast Asian representative within the BRICS bloc. Image: / Effective January 1, 2025, Thailand became a BRICS Partner Country, a culmination of a decade of strengthening economic and bilateral ties through strategic partnerships in trade, investment, infrastructure development, and regional integration, solidifying its role as a vital Southeast Asian representative within the BRICS bloc. China: Thailand's Largest Trading Partner and Strategic Investor China stands as Thailand's most significant BRICS partner, a position it has held as Thailand's primary trading partner for over ten years. In 2023, the trade between the two nations reached US$135 billion, representing more than 18% of Thailand's total trade volume. Thailand's key exports to China include rubber, electronic components, processed food, and agricultural goods, while its main imports consist of machinery, electronics, and steel. In 2022, China invested 77.4 billion baht in Thailand's automotive, electronics, and renewable energy sectors. The China–Thailand High-Speed Rail, part of BRI, will connect Bangkok to the Laos-China Railway, supporting Thailand's EEC strategy to become an innovation hub. Thailand has actively collaborated with China on initiatives aimed at digital economy integration and facilitating e-commerce. Through joint efforts between the Thai Ministry of Commerce and Alibaba Group, thousands of small and medium-sized Thai enterprises (SMEs) have gained access to the Chinese market via cross-border platforms. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading India: Rising Trade and Investment Connectivity Within BRICS, India stands out as a key economic partner for Thailand. Bilateral trade between the two countries reached US$17.7 billion in 2023, a significant increase from US$14.9 billion in 2021. Thailand's primary exports to India include electronics, gems and jewelry, chemical products, and automobiles, while its imports are mainly composed of refined petroleum, machinery, and pharmaceuticals. India and Thailand participate in the India-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement and are negotiating a CEPA. Indian businesses are increasing investments in Thailand's manufacturing and food processing, with Tata Group expanding its automotive operations, making Thailand a regional hub. Strong air connectivity and cultural connections also bolster commercial ties. In 2024, more than 1.8 million Indian tourists visited Thailand, significantly boosting the local economy and strengthening the people-to-people bonds that often pave the way for increased trade. Russia: Trade, Energy, and Agri-exports In 2023, Thailand-Russia trade reached US$1.5 billion. Thailand exports processed foods, rubber goods, and automotive components to Russia, while importing fertilizers, metals, minerals, and energy products. Thailand is also a key agricultural exporter to Russia, supplying rice, seafood, and tropical fruits. Energy cooperation between Thailand and Russia is expanding, with Russian energy companies showing interest in investing in Thailand's LNG infrastructure. This aligns with Thailand's strategy to diversify its energy sources. Additionally, both nations are discussing the use of national currencies for trade settlements, which would further strengthen financial cooperation within the BRICS framework. Tourism forms another crucial economic connection. In 2024, Russian visitors to Thailand surpassed 1.5 million, significantly boosting revenue for local businesses and the hospitality sectors, especially in popular destinations like Phuket, Pattaya, and Krabi. Brazil: Agribusiness, Machinery, and Biotech Bilateral trade between Thailand and Brazil, reaching US$5.3 billion in 2023, demonstrates a complementary relationship focused on food and industrial inputs. Brazil's primary exports to Thailand include soybeans and poultry feed, while Thailand reciprocates with electronics, rubber, and automobiles. Thailand and Brazil are increasing collaboration in agritech and biotechnology, focusing on sugarcane biofuel, food safety, and agricultural machinery, aligning with Thailand's food security and energy resilience goals. A 2024 MoU between Brazil's Embrapa and Thailand's NSTDA will boost biotechnology research cooperation. South Africa: Gateway to Africa Within Sub-Saharan Africa, South Africa is Thailand's most important economic partner. In 2023, the two countries' bilateral trade volume reached US$1.1 billion. Thailand primarily exported electronics, motor vehicles, rice, and plastics, while South Africa's main exports were minerals, wine, and fruits. Thailand is utilising its connection with South Africa to gain entry into the larger African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), a market encompassing over 1.3 billion individuals. Thai conglomerates such as CP Group and SCG are actively seeking collaborations and investment prospects in Southern Africa, particularly in the sectors of logistics, agro-processing, and retail distribution. Thailand is keen on expanding trilateral cooperation with BRICS nations in Africa. There's an expectation that South-South infrastructure financing, particularly through the New Development Bank (NDB), will significantly increase from 2025 onwards.
TimesLIVE
4 days ago
- TimesLIVE
Nigeria's Tinubu targets 7% economic growth by 2027
Nigerian President Bola Tinubu has set a target of 7% annual economic growth by 2027, aiming to lift millions out of poverty and expand the economy to four times its current size by 2030. Since coming into office in 2023, Tinubu has ended petrol and electricity subsidies and twice devalued the naira currency to boost Nigeria's decade-long sluggish output. However, those steps triggered the worst cost-of-living crisis in a generation and have yet to deliver faster growth. Nigeria's economy grew by 3.13% in the first quarter, boosted by a rebasing its gross domestic product. The exercise raised the size of the economy to 372.82-trillion naira (R4.28-trillion), but the growth was slower than expected. Addressing the federal cabinet, Tinubu said the reforms had bolstered macroeconomic stability and investor confidence, but flagged low public savings as a constraint on growth. Public investment accounts for just 5% of gross domestic product, he added.
