Daybreak, Politics, Entertainment, Sport

Category: Opinion

You can add some category description here.

  • ADSW 2026: How President Tinubu’s focused leadership showcased Nigeria’s wins

    ADSW 2026: How President Tinubu’s focused leadership showcased Nigeria’s wins

    By Rep Sir Sam Onuigbo

    TWO things made Nigeria’s attendance at this year’s Abu Dhabi Sustainability Week Summit (ADSW 2026) very remarkable. One, it showed how the sequence of actions by the Nigeria’s leader, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, undergirded his determination to pave a promising future for the country’s energy transition agenda.

    Secondly, the fact of the President’s consistent attendance, which made it easy for him to attract the hosting of Investopia 2026 to Nigeria, and the unveiling of the Nigeria’s Carbon Market Framework, combined to make the country the cynosure of all delegations at the seven days event.

    The Investopia, which is expected to be co-hosted by Nigeria and the United Arab Emirates, in Lagos in February, this year, will showcase Nigeria as an investors’ haven, especially its pedigree as home to over 250 million persons and Africa’s most populous nation. Bouyed by its significant population of well-educated youths and easy access to ECOWAS and the rest of Africa, Nigeria indeed is the go-to place as far as access to market and networking is concerned.

    Although it came at a great personal cost, I was happy I made it to the Abu Dhabi meet, where the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) Assembly preceded the talks on the Sustainability Week. As I sat through the President’s address, I quickly recalled his 2025 observations. The President had declared at the ADSW2025: “The fight against Climate Change is not merely an environmental necessity, but a global economic opportunity to reshape the trajectory of our continent and the global energy landscape.” Further, he stressed that “to succeed, we must innovate, collaborate and decisively collaborate as a global community.”

    I recalled also, how in the course of his inaugural address at the Eagle Square, Abuja, on May 29, 2023, the President had stated: “Our government shall also work with the National Assembly to fashion an omnibus jobs and prosperity bill. This bill will give our administration the policy space to embark on labour-intensive infrastructural improvements, encourage light industry and provide improved social services for the poor, elderly and vulnerable.”

    At every turn in the activities of the ADSW 2026, it was evident that President Tinubu’s consistent push for environmental renewal undergirded his belief that energy transition was the key to future prosperity. That could explain why during his 2024 Budget Speech in November 2023, he declared that “we have strategically made provisions to leverage private capital for big-ticket infrastructure projects in energy, transportation and other sectors.

    “This marks a critical step towards diversifying our energy mix, enhancing efficiency and fostering the development of renewable energy sources…” Of course, knowing that here was a President who signed into law the Electricity Bill barely eight days after taking office, made me recall the rigours the House of Representatives and I, under the efficient leadership of Speaker Femi Gbajabiamila, went through to deliver Nigeria’s signature law, the Climate Change Act 2021.

    So far, the Nigerian leader has continued to build on that foundation to catapult the country’s profile in the emerging global energy economy. And, all that showed during the ADSW 2026.

    By assenting to the Electricity Act of 2023, the President dismantled decades of suffocating centralised control over power and invited states and the private sector to finally build. It was the first tangible signal that this administration might approach its promises as a blueprint, not a bromide.

    What is more, as Nigeria approached the COP28 climate summit, the directive to relevant agencies was sharp and singular: secure substantial international funding and partnerships to bolster the national energy transition plan. The mandate was to move from advocacy on the global stage to securing concrete, actionable commitments.

    At the Abu Dhabi Sustainability Week, therefore, the President reinforced my conviction that Nigeria’s prosperity depends on a fundamental shift to clean, reliable energy. ADSW showed that indeed, the polished global conversation had finally moved from declarations to the gritty mechanics of delivery.

    Verging on the core of this progressive conversation is the continuing search for how nations are building on their ambitious promises. Nigeria’s leader did not disappoint. President Tinubu was there live, not as a passive potentate, but as a leader actively involved and leading the charge, providing directions and proffering workable strategies.

    The fact of his 2025 and 2026 consecutive physical presence did much to impact on the atmosphere in a way no policy paper could. It signaled to every investor, diplomat, and executive present that Nigeria’s energy transition is not a side project managed by mid-level officials, but a top priority owned and driven from the very highest level of government.

    “Nexus to Next: All Systems Go,” that was the theme of the ADSW 2026. To Nigeria, that phrase carried a particular, almost painful, weight. Our systems—the grid, the financial architecture, the regulatory environment energy, human capital—have infamously not been “going” for a long time. Our message was that we are finally, seriously, rewiring them, and we are using the global green transition as the master blueprint for this overhaul.

    We came forward with proofs and specifics: That the 2023 Electricity Act is no longer just a landmark legislation. It is the thriving legal bedrock, which allows a company to construct a solar mini-grid for a hospital in rural Abia, Nasarawa, Borno, etcetera without pleading for federal permission. We are talking about a decisive shift from theoretical potentials to practical, on-the-ground projects.

    In plain terms, it could be seen that Nigeria was particular about energy financing. Our pitch was built for the financial pragmatists in the room. We did not ask for aid or concessionary pity; we presented a business case, complete with the instruments we had already built and tested.

    A Sovereign Green Bond, oversubscribed by 82 per cent, was cited as proof that the market was listening. A five-hundred-million-dollar Distributed Access through Renewable Energy Scale-up (DARES) was highlighted as capital that is well established, managed, and ready to deploy. A seven-hundred-and-fifty-million-dollar programme with the World Bank, already in motion, aims to bring clean electricity access to over seventeen million Nigerians.

    The takeaway from ADSW 2026 for other countries is that Nigeria has progressed from making pledges to creating the financial machinery to fulfil them. The country has clearly set the structure for global connectivity and revenue inflow.

    The gamechanger
    It was a bang: The signing of the Nigeria-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA), came through as the gamechanger. Here was a hard negotiated, and ratified trade deal. The UAE will eliminate tariffs on over seven thousand Nigerian products, and Nigeria will do the same for about six thousand UAE products. This agreement also signals the creation of qualitative jobs, particularly for Nigeria’s young population, in agriculture real estate, digital banking, retail and infrastructure financing. Can you beat that? Consider what that means for a moment.

    To a furniture manufacturer in Lagos, a certified cocoa processor in Ondo, or an assembler of electronics in Nnewi, one of the most significant barriers to entering one of the world’s most affluent and connected markets has just been dismantled.
    This is the most decisive policy push for a post-oil, industrialised economy I have witnessed in a generation. It will masterfully transform Nigeria’s green transition from an internal development goal into a compelling global trade and investment opportunity.
    In the conference hall, you could almost see the recalibration happening in real-time behind the eyes of the assembled investors and partners.

    Yet, amidst this powerful forward thrust, the most intellectually resonant moment for me was one of direct and necessary challenge: President Tinubu turned to the custodians of global development finance, reminding them that their prevailing model has become fundamentally flawed. He argued persuasively that shackling developing nations with ever more sovereign debt to build the very solar grids, climate-resilient agriculture, and infrastructure the whole world needs is neither morally fair nor operationally sustainable.

    President Tinubu’s proposal for innovative blended finance was, in essence, a clarion call to rebalance the scales of risk. It framed the conversation not as a plea for concessionary terms, but as a strategic renegotiation of the partnership between global capital and emerging economies.
    The audacity of this position carried significant weight precisely, because of the groundwork he had just laid. For the preceding hour, his presentation had systematically dismantled the old narrative. He had not outlined a list of needs; he had catalogued a portfolio of ready opportunities, established governance frameworks, and concrete financial instruments. He had demonstrated that Nigeria arrived at the table not as a supplicant, but as a serious and credible counterparty, fundamentally changing the context of the tasks that followed.
    Lessons

    Nigeria’s presence at the ADSW 2026 had rich lessons. First, credibility is a currency minted through consecutive, verifiable action. Nigeria’s voice carried an unfamiliar weight in those rooms because it was backed by a trail of veritable policies: The Climate Change Act, the Electricity Act, the oversubscribed green bonds, the National Climate Change Fund, our Pilot Electric Mobility Project, National Carbon Market Activation Policy, etcetera. The President’s personal stewardship on that global stage was the final, unmistakable stamp on that currency.

    Second, true progress lies in deliberate connection. We are finally, seriously attempting to systematically link power generation to job creation, our vast rare earth minerals to domestic manufacturing, and foreign investment to the development of local skills. This is the integrated, forward-thinking industrial strategy we disastrously failed to build during the oil boom. The green transition, ironically, is our nation’s second chance to get it right.

    Finally, and most importantly, there is more crucial work to be done. If Abu Dhabi was the international exhibition hall where we displayed the blueprint and the prototypes, our country has become the workshop floor where we must now manufacture the future at scale.

    The landmark trade deal with the UAE is a paper victory if our businesses cannot innovate, scale, and produce goods of competitive quality to seize the opportunity. The billion-dollar funds are empty vessels without a robust, transparent pipeline of professionally managed, bankable projects to absorb the capital.

    To me, as the sponsor of the Nigeria’s Climate Change Act 2021, leaving the fine city of Abu Dhabi my mind revolved around challenges the country faces in ensuring that we meet the lofty expectations the global energy community has come to place on due to President Tinubu’s highwater offerings.

    With the President’s commitment and determination, we can rest assured that come COP31, the world will be pleased to learn how far Nigeria and its energy transition advocate, President Bola Tinubu, have doubled down on its successes.

    They call it “All Systems Go”. From my vantage point in Abu Dhabi, it seems Nigeria has, against considerable odds and history, managed to get its key systems to the Launchpad, and begun the ignition sequence.

    President Tinubu’s closing statement, “Let me close by reassuring the international business community that Nigeria is ready for business,” captures the mind of a leader that is confident of his strategies. A bright future awaits.

    Rep Sir. Onuigbo, a member of Governing Board of the North East Development Commission (NEDC), attended the ADSW2026 in Abu Dhabi

  • Dogara Steps Into the Spotlight as Nigeria Seeks Unity

    Dogara Steps Into the Spotlight as Nigeria Seeks Unity

    Since independence in 1960, Nigeria’s politics has been shaped by the constant negotiation of balance between North and South, Muslim and Christian, majority and minority. The unwritten rules of power-sharing have often determined the stability of governments and the legitimacy of leadership. The 2023 elections reignited debates when the ruling party opted for a same-faith presidential ticket, sparking widespread discourse about fairness, unity, and the secular character of the state.

    It is against this backdrop that Yakubu Dogara’s name has resurfaced in national conversations. A Christian from Bauchi State in the North-East, Dogara embodies both regional and religious balance. His legislative career, capped by his tenure as Speaker of the House of Representatives, has positioned him as a figure of credibility and institutional discipline.

    Dogara’s political ascent began with his election to the House of Representatives in 2007. His election as the 14th Speaker in 2015 placed him at the helm of one of Nigeria’s most powerful institutions. As Speaker, Dogara was tasked with navigating a fractious House, balancing competing interests, and ensuring that legislative processes remained credible. His tenure was marked by efforts to strengthen parliamentary independence, enhance transparency, and assert the legislature’s role as a co-equal branch of government.

    Among his most positive legislative achievements were landmark bills that reshaped Nigeria’s governance landscape. The Petroleum Industry Governance Bill (PIGB) was passed under his leadership, aiming to reform the oil and gas sector by improving transparency, efficiency, and accountability in Nigeria’s most critical industry. Dogara also presided over the passage of the Not-Too-Young-To-Run Bill, which lowered the age limits for elective offices, thereby opening the political space to Nigeria’s vibrant youth population. This decision was widely celebrated as a progressive step toward inclusivity and democratic deepening. Equally significant was the North-East Development Commission Bill, which established a commission to rebuild and rehabilitate communities ravaged by insurgency. For a leader from Bauchi in the North-East, this was not only symbolic but also practical, ensuring that legislative action addressed the humanitarian and developmental needs of his region and the country at large.

    Supporters argue that these decisions demonstrate Dogara’s capacity for nation-first leadership, his ability to push through reforms with long-term impact, and his sensitivity to both national and regional needs. His respect for parliamentary procedure, coalition-building skills, and pragmatic advocacy for balance underscore his suitability for higher office.

    In recent months, APC support groups from the North-East have publicly endorsed Dogara as a preferred deputy to President Tinubu. Their communiques emphasize his legislative experience, regional identity, and advocacy for balance. These endorsements reflect a growing narrative that positions Dogara not just as a politician, but as a symbol of stability in a polarized environment.

    While politics remains fluid, Dogara’s record as Speaker strengthens his case. His legislative achievements—spanning governance reform, youth inclusion, and regional development—set him apart as a leader with proven impact. In a nation searching for equilibrium, Dogara’s emergence underscores the enduring importance of leaders who can bridge divides, uphold constitutional standards, and deliver reforms that resonate across Nigeria.

    By Festus O. Olubodun, Lagos

  • Trump says China doesn’t use wind power: Here are the facts

    Trump says China doesn’t use wind power: Here are the facts

    By Michael Onjewu

    During his address at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Wednesday, U.S. President Donald Trump claimed that China does not meaningfully use wind power, asserting that while the country manufactures most of the world’s wind turbines, it has few to no operational wind farms of its own and instead sells them to other nations. He described China as “smart” for avoiding reliance on wind energy domestically.

    This claim is inaccurate and contradicted by extensive data on China’s renewable energy sector. China has led the world in installed wind power capacity for 15 consecutive years, according to official statements from its National Energy Administration and Foreign Ministry, as well as international reports.

    By the end of November 2025, China’s cumulative installed wind power capacity exceeded 600 gigawatts (GW), equivalent to 600 million kilowatts. This figure comes directly from Chinese government sources and has been widely cited in response to Trump’s remarks.

    For context: This makes China’s wind capacity significantly larger than that of any other country. For comparison, the United States, which ranks second, had around 157–200 GW in recent years, with China holding roughly three times more in some 2024–2025 estimates and continuing rapid additions.

    This installed capacity translates to enormous generation potential. China’s wind farms are not merely symbolic; they actively contribute to the national grid.

    In the first 11 months of 2025, wind power generated nearly 950 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity, with high utilisation rates above 94%.

    China widens wind power lead with new generation record

    To illustrate the scale: 600 GW of wind capacity could theoretically power approximately 500 million homes, based on average household electricity consumption figures (though actual output depends on capacity factors, typically 20–40% for wind due to variable wind speeds).

    This highlights the massive role wind plays in China’s energy mix, even as coal remains dominant overall. China’s wind power leadership extends beyond domestic use; it dominates global manufacturing and exports, but the idea that it avoids using the technology at home does not align with the facts.

    The country has aggressively expanded renewables, with wind and solar combined surpassing coal capacity in 2025 for the first time, marking a key shift toward cleaner energy. Trump’s statement appears to overlook or misrepresent these developments, which position China as the undisputed global frontrunner in wind energy deployment.

    Michael Onjewu is an Abuja-based journalist

  • NSCDC: A Force for Security or a Source of Corruption?

    The tenure of Ahmed Abubakar Audi as Commandant General of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) is a stark reminder of the dangers of unchecked power and the devastating consequences of institutional deca and corruption. The allegations against him paint a picture of a leader who allegedly prioritized personal gain over the welfare of his officers and the security of the nation.

    His scandalous era as commandant of the NSCDC has been marked by excessive centralization of power, commercialization of posting, death of professionalism among others as would be highlights below:

    A general embarassing situstion thst has eveloped the Corps since his assumption of office is the shameless and now entrenched practice of the  Commercialization of Postings and Training.

    Audi’s administration is accused of turning postings and training into a lucrative business, with officers allegedly paying up to N10 million for desirable positions. This not only undermines the professionalism of the force but also creates a culture of corruption, where those who pay the most are rewarded with plum assignments.

    Centralization of Power.

    The concentration of power in Audi’s hands, reportedly including the involvement of his spouses in issuing directives to State Commandants, is a recipe for disaster. This has allegedly led to a culture of fear and sycophancy, where officers are more concerned with currying favor than performing their duties.

    Neglect of Welfare and Infrastructure 

    The alleged neglect of officer welfare, including unpaid allowances and poor working conditions, has demoralized the force and undermined its effectiveness. The lack of investment in infrastructure, including the failure to build new state command buildings, is a stark contrast to the lavish spending on personal projects, such as the alleged N20,000 compulsory training fee.

    Undermining Professionalism and Morale 

    The cumulative effect of these allegations is a force that is ill-equipped, demoralized, and lacking in professionalism. The NSCDC, once a proud institution, is now reportedly struggling to perform its core functions, with officers more focused on survival than serving the nation.

    Accountability is Key 

    The allegations against Audi and his administration are serious and demand a thorough investigation. If true, they represent a catastrophic failure of leadership and a betrayal of the trust reposed in the NSCDC. It’s time for accountability and for those responsible to face the music. The NSCDC must regain its credibility as a professional and effective security agency, and that starts with rooting out corruption and restoring the dignity of its officers. BACKWARD The tenure of Commandant General Ahmed Abubakar Audi is widely regarded within the Corps as a period of unprecedented Institutional regression, one that many officers argue reversed decades of professionalisation and dragged the NSCDC back into a volunteer-era mindset. The cumulative effect of alleged financial impropriety, administrative arbitrariness, welfare neglect, and infrastructural decay has left the Corps weakened, demoralised, and structurally hollowed out. 

    1. Training, an essential pillar of any disciplined security Institution, was effectively commercialised. Officers, both senior and junior, must pay compulsory training fees of N20,000, with no corresponding provisions from management. This practice, represents not capacity building but the monetisation of professional development, shifting the burden of institutional responsibility onto already overstretched personnel. De4spite this was adequately budgeted. 

    2. Serious questions trail the alleged engagement of the Commandant General’s brother to develop a “curriculum” reportedly costing millions of naira. Four years later, this curriculum remains neither mainstreamed nor publicly implemented, raising concerns of conflict of interest, waste, and diversion of resources with no tangible benefit to officers’ career progression. 

    3. Postings, particularly to lucrative State Commands, are widely a common cash-and-carry transactions, in NSCDC with figures ranging between N5 million and N10 million reportedly exchanged before appointments were approved. This practice institutionalise corruption at the highest levels, rewarding financial muscle over competence and integrity. 

    4. Financial recklessness allegedly became normalised. State Commandants and Component Commanders are variously and normally compelled to convert compulsory monthly remittances into foreign currency before submission through designated conduits. This alone raises grave red flags bordering on 

    financial crimes and currency manipulation. In NSCDC Hard Copies for CG means forex converted. S. Governance within the Corps under Audis watch collapsed into personalised control. The spouses of the Commandant General were reportedly installed as informal power centres across State Commands, issuing directives that State Commandants were compelled to obey under threat of instant removal, an arrangement that represent institutional capture by proxy. Almost all Audis wives are junior staff yet they ride senior officers roughshod to no fault. 

    6. Staff welfare deteriorated sharply. Election duty allowances were either unpaid or reduced to a token N10,000.00 across board, despite extensive deployments. During Ondos election it was the Commandant General of Amotekun that bailed NSCDC Officers in Ondo state to the chagrin of onlookers. This atmosphere of disdain and neglect has directly contributed to declining morale, discipline, and commitment to duty. 

    7. Infrastructural decay under the administration of Audi is staggering. Officers note that not a single new State Command building can be credibly attributed to the Audi administration, in sharp contrast to predecessors. A visit to the NSCDC headquarters and state commands reportedly reveals a level of infrastructural neglect that betrays the Corps’ expanding mandate. 

    8. Basic functionality collapsed. Power supply at headquarters was reportedly dependent on the physical presence of the Commandant General, forcing departments to work in darkness, rely on personal generators, or conduct operations remotely. A national security institution, officers argue, cannot function on “my neighbour’s generator.” 

    9. The scale of decadence could be seen as many atimes and severally, AEDC has had to severe the NSCDC from the national grid due to unpaid debt thereby causing untold embarrassment to the Corps and a major blow to the psyche of staff at the HQ. 

    10, Management itself allegedly ceased to exist. There were reportedly no regular management meetings, no advisory council, and no collective decision-

    brother during his tenure as Vice Chancellor of Nasarawa State University, Keffi, prioritising personal affiliations over national security needs. 

    The Core Issue Taken together, these allegations paint the picture of an administration that allegedly: a. Commercialised postings and training b. Centralised power without accountability c. Neglected welfare and infrastructure d. Undermined professionalism and morale e. Exposed the Corps to reputational and operational decline These are not minor grievances. They are systemic failures that demand independent investigation, forensic auditing, and institutional reckoning. If the NSCDC is to regain credibility as Nigeria’s lead agency for Critical National Assets and Infrastructure protection, the era of silence must end, and accountability must begin. 

    Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

  • The United States Loses, China Wins in Co-opting Canada into the New World Order Project

    The United States Loses, China Wins in Co-opting Canada into the New World Order Project

    By Prof Sheriff Ghali Ibrahim

    It is universally acclaimed that economic power builds a nation and brings prosperity to the world. The economy builds a strong Army, institutions, knowledge, infrastructure, buys more allies and places a state within the corridors of power.

    The U.S. is what it is today due to economic strength as the first-largest economy, which by extension gives it more leverage over states and nations, especially looking at military power. The United States has abused its economic strength by indulging in the so-called interventionist foreign policy, which led to the Iraqi invasion, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, Venezuela, and its ambitious moves to invade Cuba, Colombia, Greenland and re-wage war against Iran. These have weakened the popularity of the United States, decimated its global influence and distanced its friends from its sphere of control and influence.

    The U.S. has threatened its best friends in history: it threatened Canada of annexation, threatened Mexico, the European Union, China, Africa and many more significant entities within the framework of international economy and politics.

    Some of the American allies, like Canada, had initially antagonised China to appease the U.S., but emerged as victims of absolute loyalty and obedience to the United States. The rift was initiated when Canada arrested Huawei’s Chief Executive, Meng Wanzhou, on a US warrant related to the company’s business dealings in Iran. When Canada imposed tariffs on China, China announced retaliatory tariffs on Canadian agricultural and food products last March, hurting Canadian farmers and effectively shutting Canada’s second-largest market for the crop.

    The most annoying part of Trump’s tyrannical tendencies was the campaign to annex Canada and make it an integral part of the American States, which angered Canada and pushed it to look for alternative means of survival. That alternative means, if you may, is the People’s Republic of China. This has led to a political and economic rapprochement between Canada and China. Carney is the first Canadian Prime Minister to visit China in nearly eight years.

    Prime Minister Mark Carney hailed a new “strategic partnership” with China during a meeting with President Xi Jinping on Friday, 16th January, 2026, as the US ally took steps to reset ties with Beijing in the face of historic friction with Donald Trump. Canada would ease tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles and expects China to significantly reduce tariffs on Canadian canola seed later this year.

    Trump loses an ally, an immediate neighbour and an integrating partner under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), for being one who creates a strained international system.

    This was openly posited by Carney while speaking to Xi in Beijing’s Great Hall of the People on Friday morning. Carney described the countries’ “new strategic partnership” as one that could work to improve a strained international system, and a move to a “new international order.”

    Canada also opposes the American global dictatorship and hegemonic disposition and supports China’s Global Governance Initiative when Prime Minister Carney emphasised that the deepening partnership would “help improve” the multilateral system, which “in recent years had come under great strain.”

    The United States loses, and China wins, as Canada revealed that it will allow up to 49,000 Chinese electric vehicles (EV) into the Canadian market per year, with the most-favoured-nation tariff rate of 6.1%. The move rolls back what had previously been an irritant in their relations: a blanket 100% tariff on the goods imposed by Canada in tandem with the US in 2024.

    Canada also expects China to reduce its tariffs on Canadian canola seed to about 15% by March 1, a significant drop from the roughly 85% levels that had been imposed on the entry of the good into China, where it makes up a $4 billion market. Other products like lobsters and peas would also see tariffs lifted on that timeline, according to Canada.

    This portends that Trump’s Tariff war, Trade War and ineptitude break a longstanding relationship with American allies by bringing them closer to China. Carney and Xi discussed increasing two-way investment in clean energy and technology, agri-food, wood products and other sectors as part of a bid to elevate exports to China by 50% by 2030.

    It also reveals that Western states have been misguided and misled by the U.S. in its bid to contain China, but now they are waking up from their slumber and rediscovering the lost path to national dignity and self-respect. They all know that China is not a threat, as once declared by Canada, but ignoring that to please the United States. It is clear what the U.S. is in its critical moment of Chinaphobia, which needs only the understanding that the U.S. must accept the realities of natural laws and evolutionary etiquette before it frees itself from the shackles of envy and strategic narcissism.

    The repercussion of Canada’s move is that Trump may develop narcissistic outrage against Canada or China to convince himself that he is still in control. He may turn his anger on to Columbia, Cuba or Iran. Trump may decide to turn his anger on Nigeria or the entire continent of Africa due to the psychological trauma of losing Canada to China.

    In conclusion, China does not fire any shots at Trump or the United States; China does not threaten the U.S. or campaign against it, but its kindness is being felt and acknowledged. This has continued to make China rise. The world should also not be oblivious of the fact that China is a global industrial hub, a great market and a tool for global integration, not a military machine that intends to destabilise the world for selfish economic or political interest.

    Prof Ghali is the provost, ICPC’S Anti-Corruption Academy of Nigeria (ACAN), and Head of Contemporary China-Africa Research in Nigeria

  • Geopolitical Balancing Strategy, China, Iran and the Donroe Doctrine

    Geopolitical Balancing Strategy, China, Iran and the Donroe Doctrine

    By Prof Sheriff Ghali Ibrahim

    The twilight of the Second World War had widened up ideological confrontation, geopolitical rivalry, alliances and divisions around the world. The Harry Truman Doctrine has antagonised the spread of socialist structures and communist expansionism clearly exhibited in the American policy of containment.

    The United States sees such states as foes where Russia, China, North Korea, Cuba and all other states within the socialist league have been categorised as enemies of the American ideology which strategically defines the American National Interest. Some of these states have been stereotyped as “Axis of Evil” primarily due to their stance against injustice, domination and breach against universal values.

    The American Empire which in its global dominance has waxed to its peak and engendered the renaissance of a multipolar international order informed by the emergence and re-emergence of stronger states, is gradually sewing the seeds for its self-destruction. The aggression in Trump’s foreign policy is not new, but a resurgence of the American founding fathers’ strategic posture differently exhibited by Trump in his fixated psychological imbalance, by carrying out regime change not for the good of the people, but for his personal idiosyncracies.

    Geopolitical balancing strategy as I coined, envisages socio-economic, political and security bandwagoning in order to avoid or deter enemies’ moves, quest for conquest, domination or possession of geographical values, which may transcend the boundaries of natural resources, but cooption of regional states into a particular alliance system. The control of certain regions in the world may grant absolute powers; the ability to ally certain regions and states provides protection and economic gains. Consequently, the American military build up and bases all-over around the world which signifies not only hegemony, but geopolitical conquest of our time.

    The rise of China is inevitably rebalancing the great powers power politics, reshaping geopolitics and political alliances around the world. Unlike the United States, China seeks peaceful international relations, global development, international security, mutual learning among civilizations, dialogue against confrontation, fairness, equity, multilateralism and rules-based international order.

    The turbulent international system needs to be understood clearly, where global governance needs only sane people to govern the international system with commitment to international law, multilateralism, people-centredness and solutions to global problems, not creating more problems to the world, not asserting conflict resolutions on the other side creating more problems.

    It should be noted that while China rises, the United States has continued to impede such rising, by affecting Chinese businesses, friends and interest around the world. The U.S. has failed to understand that it cannot continue to rule the world forever, as many stronger Empires had risen and declined. The U.S. has failed to see cooperation as more vital than confrontation, it has failed to see more states emerging stronger, but believes only the United States can make or mar the rise of states.

    It should also be undesrtood that China does not interfere in the internal affairs of independent states and it should be embraced the fact that China needs more friends and allies as it has been sustaining its fruitful relations especially with the developing world. China holds a significant partnership with Iran which is a 25-year cooperation journey signed by the Chinese and Iranian Foreign Ministers on 27 March, 2021, in Tehran. This partnership deals with a comprehensive strategic partnership between the two partners. China salvages the Iranian economy as the only state among few that can circumbent U.S. sanctions and Tariffs and do businesses with Iran, at the same time supply to Iran some essentials which are not obtainable from the west or elsewhere. The argument here is that, China stood with Russia in its most difficult times, China should also continue to stand with Iran as always as it faces the most threatening challenge to its national security and survival.

    The Donroe Doctrine is a replication of the Monroe Doctrine attached to the name of President Donald Trump, bowing not to allow European influence or any other power’s influence within the western hemesphere. This was justified by Trump when he deposed Maduro of Venezuela and also justified in his claims on Greenland. It is a time in which the United States has designated China a potential threat, which cannot be deregistered, but for China to live on the contemporary realities of international politics. Allies need to be strengthened, friends need to be aided to withstand global injustice, tyranny and barbarism like the world experiences today with Donal Trump.

    China does not seek to be the police of the world, China does not seek hegemony and China does not envisage regimes change. China seeks peace even in its reunification bid with Taiwan. When China advocates Global Governance Initiative, the United States especially under Trump does not fit into that framework as there is no use of force on sovereign entities. In ensuring collective security framework as promoted by the United Nations, the world must come together to stop Trump’s drive to international anarchy, global instability and universal dictatorship, a move which China has to strategically lead, not by violence, but by building a global community with a shared future where no power can dislodge universal values, distort international order or threaten states that are strong enough to shield their borders.

    In conclusion, however, it is unequivocal that the only reality that states must embrace within the framework of contemporary international system is the acquisition of strength. This as an abstract, suffices the wise to internalise the epistemological interpretation of the concept of strength in all ramifications. This can be achieved unilaterally based on technological advancement or achieved cohesively and collectively through balance of power in order to avoid unjustified regime change, invasion and pulverization of the international order.

    Prof Ghali is the provost, ICPC’S Anti-Corruption Academy of Nigeria (ACAN), and Head of Contemporary China-Africa Research in Nigeria

  • THE END OF MORAL AUTHORITY: HOW AMERICA’S LAWLESS POWER GRAB IN VENEZUELA STRENGTHENS CHINA’S GLOBAL GOVERNANCE VISION

    THE END OF MORAL AUTHORITY: HOW AMERICA’S LAWLESS POWER GRAB IN VENEZUELA STRENGTHENS CHINA’S GLOBAL GOVERNANCE VISION

    By Prof Udenta O Udenta

    When U.S. Marines stormed Caracas in early January 2026 and seized President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores, the world paused. A sitting head of state was abducted, flown out of his country, and put on trial in a U.S. court. Washington framed it as an anti-“narco-terrorism” operation. Internationally, it was a seismic rupture as well as a brazen assault on sovereignty and the principle of non-intervention that has anchored global stability since 1945.

    FLAGRANT VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

    The UN Charter is explicit: Article 2(4) forbids force against any state’s territorial integrity or political independence, except in self-defense or with Security Council authorization. Neither condition applied. There was no imminent threat to U.S. security, and the UN granted no mandate. Abducting a head of state, shielded by sovereign immunity, is a flagrant violation of law and diplomatic protocol.
    The 1970 UN Declaration on Friendly Relations describes such acts as “aggression,” while Resolution 3314 identifies the abduction of leaders as unlawful coercion. This was not law enforcement. It was lawlessness masquerading as virtue. History repeats itself: in 1989, the U.S. invaded Panama, captured General Noriega, and flew him to Miami. International condemnation followed. Venezuela is the latest theatre of the same imperial reflex.

    TRUMP’S GLOBAL TEMPER TANTRUM
    Trump’s foreign policy increasingly resembles a global temper tantrum. Open threats to Iran, Mexico, Colombia, the Greenland gambit, and even self-proclamation as acting president of Venezuela reveal a reckless pattern. These actions destabilize regions and undermine U.S. credibility. The Western bloc must speak with one voice to restrain this lawlessness.
    Behind the bravado lie familiar motives: greed, resource control, and global influence. Venezuela’s oil reserves make it a strategic prize. The U.S. now insists on controlling up to fifty million barrels of crude and compelling Caracas to buy U.S.-made goods; a form of economic domination masquerading as liberation.
    What makes this morally incoherent is the refusal to press for immediate free and fair elections. By delaying the electoral process, the U.S. can consolidate gains and shape a compliant political apparatus. Liberation becomes prolonged oversight, and sovereignty becomes subordinate to Washington’s strategic and commercial interests.

    THE NIGERIAN “CHRISTIAN GENOCIDE” NARRATIVE
    Trump’s rhetoric about a “Christian genocide” in Nigeria illustrates manipulation of moral narratives for political gain. The 2025 Christmas Day strike in Sokoto targeted terrorist cells, yet U.S. media framed it as anti-Christian violence. Investigations revealed extremists responsible for kidnappings and killings cut across religious lines.
    Nigeria, Africa’s largest economy with vast oil reserves and the continent’s largest workforce, is more than a security concern. Framing internal violence as religious persecution simplifies reality and serves U.S. political and economic objectives: galvanizing evangelical support, justifying intervention, and pressuring Abuja on oil-sector policies favourable to Washington.
    The narrative obscures Nigerian agency and side-lines regional solutions through ECOWAS and the African Union. In short, moral pretexts conceal strategic designs.

    CHINA: PARTNERSHIP OVER COERCION
    While the U.S. flexes military muscle, China builds partnerships. Its Global Governance Initiative (GGI) emphasizes cooperation, respect for sovereignty, and shared development.
    Beyond GGI, China’s diplomacy is tangible. Angola benefited from post-war rail and power reconstruction; Kenya expanded renewable energy and tech cooperation; Mali and Niger received mediation support; Nigeria and Congo gained financial support and transport infrastructure; South Sudan stabilized after decades of conflict with Chinese support.
    China’s approach contrasts sharply with the U.S.: no sanctions, no ultimatums, just engineers, planners, and patient collaboration. Its initiatives promote peace, economic growth, and multilateralism. Whether motivated by altruism or interest, China fosters interdependence, not intimidation.

    COERCION VERSUS COOPERATION
    The world is witnessing two visions of global order. Trump’s America seeks dominance through fear and unilateralism. China invests in infrastructure, dialogue, and cooperation.
    The GGI is more than a framework; it embodies a worldview where global problems such as poverty, climate change, disease, and conflict, require multilateral solutions. Trump’s “America First” approach revives imperialist logic under a modern guise.
    Across Africa, from Ethiopia to Angola, China’s presence is tangible: railways, hospitals, industrial zones. The difference is clear: the U.S. imposes conditions; China builds capacity. Its diplomacy reinforces stability, peace, and equitable growth.

    A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT
    By abducting Venezuela’s president, the U.S. revives the Noriega precedent of 1989. If a powerful nation can seize another’s leader under the guise of law enforcement, no state is fully sovereign.
    This sets a chilling standard. International institutions are weakened. Law is subordinated to might. If force dictates legitimacy, the world risks returning to pre-modern power dynamics where the strong dominate and the rule of law becomes optional.

    CALL FOR GLOBAL RESILIENCE
    The abduction of Venezuela’s president is a moral tragedy. It tears at global order, revives conquest-era ethos, and exposes systemic fragility.

    If the UN Charter and sovereignty still hold value, this act cannot pass unchallenged. Collective governance, where nations cooperate as equals, must take precedence over unilateral crusades.


    The ultimate question: will law restrain power, or will the world once again bow to the ruthless logic of tyranny?

  • U.S. Foreign Policy Shifts and Their Implications for Global Geopolitics

    U.S. Foreign Policy Shifts and Their Implications for Global Geopolitics

    By Michael Onjewu

    In an era where multilateralism is increasingly vital for addressing transnational challenges like climate change, food insecurity, and human rights violations, the United States’ recent foreign policy decisions have raised alarms across the international community.

    As of early 2026, under the current administration, the U.S. has pursued a series of actions that prioritize national interests over global cooperation, including withdrawals from key international frameworks, stringent visa restrictions on several nations, and threats of unilateral military interventions.

    These moves, while framed as protective of American sovereignty and security, carry significant risks not only for the directly affected regions like Africa but also for the broader geopolitics and the rules-based international order.

    One of the most contentious aspects of recent U.S. foreign policy is the withdrawal from international organizations, conventions, and treaties deemed inconsistent with American interests. This approach echoes past patterns, such as the U.S. exit from the Paris Climate Agreement in 2017 (later rejoined) and the Iran nuclear deal, but has intensified in 2025-2026 with targeted pullouts from frameworks supporting global development and humanitarian efforts.

    For instance, the U.S. has scaled back or withdrawn support from entities like the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) initiatives and certain World Health Organization (WHO) protocols, citing inefficiencies or biases against U.S. agricultural and pharmaceutical industries.

    These decisions have direct repercussions for Africa, a continent already grappling with acute vulnerabilities. Africa’s food security is precarious, with over 20% of its population facing hunger according to recent UN reports. U.S. withdrawals from treaties like the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture could limit access to shared seed banks and technologies, exacerbating famine risks in drought-prone regions such as the Sahel. Similarly, on climate change adaptation, the U.S. retreat from funding mechanisms under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) hinders Africa’s ability to build resilient infrastructure against rising sea levels and extreme weather, which disproportionately affect sub-Saharan nations.

    Moreover, the safeguarding of marginalized groups’ rights is at stake. Pullouts from human rights conventions, such as selective non-compliance with aspects of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities or refugee protocols, signal a diminished U.S. commitment to global norms. In Africa, where conflicts and displacement affect millions, particularly women, children, and ethnic minorities, this creates voids that authoritarian regimes or non-state actors might exploit, leading to increased instability.

    From a geopolitical lens, these withdrawals project poor optics by portraying the U.S. as an unreliable partner. Historically, America has positioned itself as a champion of the liberal international order, promoting democracy and collective problem-solving. However, such unilateralism fuels accusations of “America First” isolationism, alienating allies in Europe and Asia who rely on these frameworks. This erosion of soft power weakens the international order, as it encourages other nations to similarly cherry-pick commitments, leading to a “might makes right” paradigm where global challenges like climate change go unaddressed.

    Compounding these issues are the U.S. imposed restrictions on visa applications for citizens of Nigeria and 18 other countries, primarily in Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America. Announced in late 2025, these measures expand on previous travel bans, citing security concerns, economic reciprocity, and immigration control. For Nigerians, this has resulted in prolonged processing times, higher denial rates, and requirements for additional documentation, creating substantial travel difficulties for students, business professionals, and families.

    While the U.S. justifies these as necessary for national security, the policy has sparked widespread criticism for potential discriminatory undertones. Many of the targeted countries have Muslim-majority populations or histories of conflict, raising questions about whether the restrictions disproportionately affect certain ethnic or religious groups. Human rights organizations, including Amnesty International, have highlighted how such policies echo the 2017 “Muslim Ban,” which was ruled unconstitutional in parts, and could violate international norms under the UN’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

    The human impact is profound. Nigerian entrepreneurs face barriers to U.S. markets, students miss educational opportunities at American universities, and diaspora communities endure family separations. Economically, this stifles bilateral trade; Nigeria, Africa’s largest economy, relies on remittances and tech collaborations with the U.S., which could decline amid these hurdles.

    Geopolitically, this policy exemplifies bad optics by reinforcing narratives of U.S. hypocrisy. America promotes itself as a beacon of opportunity and inclusivity, yet these restrictions suggest a fortress mentality that alienates emerging powers. In Africa, it bolsters anti-Western sentiment, making it easier for rivals to portray the U.S. as xenophobic. This could erode alliances, such as those in counterterrorism efforts against Boko Haram in Nigeria, and contribute to a fragmented international order where visa diplomacy becomes a tool for coercion rather than cooperation. As global mobility becomes key to economic integration, such isolationist stances risk positioning the U.S. as a pariah, diminishing its influence in forums like the African Union or G20.

    Perhaps the most alarming development is the U.S. signaling of potential additional strikes in Nigeria if violence against Christian communities persists. This stems from escalating attacks by Islamist militants and herdsmen in Nigeria’s Middle Belt and North, which have claimed thousands of lives in recent years. In 2025, the U.S. conducted limited drone strikes under the guise of counterterrorism, but recent statements from U.S. officials indicate readiness for escalation if the Nigerian government fails to curb the violence.

    Analysts stress that any further U.S. military engagement must secure explicit consent from Abuja to respect national sovereignty. Without it, such actions could be seen as violations of international law, reminiscent of past interventions like those in Iraq or Libya, which led to prolonged instability. Nigeria, as West Africa’s powerhouse and a key oil producer, views its security as a sovereign matter; unilateral U.S. strikes might inflame anti-American protests, empower extremists, or even strain relations with ECOWAS.

    The optics here are particularly damaging. By threatening intervention framed around protecting Christians, the U.S. risks appearing to engage in selective humanitarianism—intervening based on religious affiliations rather than universal principles. This could alienate Muslim-majority nations and fuel perceptions of a “clash of civilizations,” undermining U.S. efforts in global counterterrorism coalitions. Geopolitically, it signals a return to unilateral militarism, eroding the post-World War II order built on UN Security Council consensus and respect for borders. In Africa, it might encourage other powers, like France or Turkey, to pursue their own interventions, leading to proxy conflicts and a breakdown in regional stability. Ultimately, without Nigerian buy-in, such moves could backfire, portraying the U.S. as an imperial actor rather than a partner, thus weakening its moral authority on the world stage.

    Collectively, these U.S. policies paint a picture of retrenchment that harms American interests in the long term. They project bad optics by highlighting inconsistencies: a nation that lectures on human rights while restricting access, champions multilateralism while withdrawing from it, and advocates for sovereignty while threatening interventions. This hypocrisy erodes trust, making it harder for the U.S. to rally coalitions against shared threats like pandemics or great-power rivalries.

    In geopolitics, the fallout is a more multipolar world where middle powers like Nigeria pivot toward alternatives. This fragments the international order, reducing collective action on pressing issues and increasing the risk of conflicts. For Africa, the continent risks becoming a battleground for influence, with its development goals sidelined.

    To mitigate this, the U.S. must recommit to diplomacy, seeking inclusive reforms in international bodies rather than exits, and ensuring policies align with professed values. Failure to do so not only isolates America but accelerates the decline of the rules-based system it helped build. As global interdependence grows, such isolationism is not just bad optics, it’s a strategic misstep with lasting consequences.

    Michael Onjewu is a journalist based in Abuja, Nigeria

  • Beyond Rituals: Inside China’s Africa First Diplomacy

    Beyond Rituals: Inside China’s Africa First Diplomacy

    By Charles Onunaiju

    The tradition of choosing Africa first in China’s diplomatic work in which the foreign minister visits the region at the start of every year, in the past 36 years is neither a hollow ritual nor a safari. Facts have proven over the years that the consistent pattern of the diplomatic outreach which is rooted in the history of China-Africa cooperation has enabled one of the world’s most pragmatic and productive partnerships, in contemporary international relations.

    The tradition did not jump out of the magic box but is rooted in the shared history of anti-colonial struggles and the solidarity built from it. From the 14th of December 1964 to the 4th of February 1964, China’s affable Premier Zhou Enlai made the famous visit to ten African countries –Egypt, then (United Arab Republic), Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Ghana, Mali, Guinea, Sudan, Ethiopia and Somalia, spending a total of 55 days in Africa, the longest of any visiting foreign leader to the region in all her post-colonial history.

    Significantly, before his scheduled arrival to Accra in Ghana, an assassination attempt on the then, Ghanaian leader, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, nearly marred the visit but the legendary Premier insisted on the visit to demonstrate the unbreakable bond of friendship between China and Africa, for which even an unforeseen circumstance cannot vitiate.

    Premier Zhou Enlai, went on, in Ghana to announce the historic Eight Principles of assistance to Arab and African countries which among them is the iconic “self-reliance”, in which it was explicitly stated that “the purpose is to help recipient countries embark on the road to self-reliance and independent development, not to make them dependent on China”. The spirit of the Eight principles has traversed the historic trajectories of China –Africa cooperation up to now with adaptations and modifications to the changing times. Beijing’s Africa first diplomatic outreach at the start of every year in the past 36 years is a bold affirmation and testament that no matter how China grows in influence, wealth and power or even however, the world changes, China would remain trustworthy and reliable friend of Africa and true to her essential historic features.

    This important bit of history is necessary to disclaim any notion that contemporary China-Africa cooperation is transactional or opportunistic. While the course of the partnership as evident in the tradition of Chinese foreign Minister first visit to Africa at the start of the year, drew from history, it is not a mere tribute to historical memory. It is practical and aligns with strategic contributions to the core concerns of Africa including, support to narrow or even close the historical deficit in infrastructure connectivity, that for long hobbled the vision of the region’s integration and Pan-Africa unity. The Belt and Road Initiative, a framework for International cooperation has delivered and still delivering on the critical requirements of Africa that not only enables connectivity within Africa but with the rest of the world.

    The significance of the BRI is best illustrated that Africa is the region of the world with the largest number of partner countries. From Nigeria’s first ever deep seaport; Lekki Deep sea port to Mombasa –Nairobi to standard gauge railway , Ethiopia- Djibouti’s first electrified railway and many others, the state of infrastructure connectivity is nearing the bold vision for African industrial and infrastructure integration outlined in the historic Lagos plan of Action, decided in 1980 by African leaders meeting under auspicious of the special session of the organization of Africa Unity (OAU) held in Lagos, Nigeria with prior consultations with organized labour movement and other popular non-groups, including the intelligentsia and women. The pragmatism and tangible outcomes embedded in the follow-up process of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) which are further reinforced in the Africa first tradition of Chinese Foreign Minister’s visit to the region has help established a predictable frame work of long term engagement.

    On the 70th anniversary of China’s diplomatic relation with Africa starting Egypt’s Abdel Nasser outreach to the then, young People’s Republic of China in 1956; Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s visit to Ethiopia, Somalia, Tanzania and Lesotho is significant, not only because it conforms to the continuity of a tradition already well known to the world but more importantly for the year under review. In the spirit of the traditional format of consultations and consensus, the Chinese and African leaders declared the 2026 as “China-Africa Year of People-to-People Exchanges”, a deliberate calibration to people-centric engagement because a historic partnership of China-Africa proportion is not only more secure in the intimate bosom of the people but should better flourish at the people’s conscious ownership of its process.

    At Ethiopia during the visit of Foreign Minister Wang Yi and other high officials including the African Union chairperson, Mr. Mahmoud Ali Youssouf, Co-Chair of FOCAC, Mr. Jean-Claude Gakosso who is also the Foreign Minister of the Republic of Congo, Ethiopian President, Taye Atske Salassie the “China-Africa Year of People-to People Exchange” was launched with clarion calls for the two civilizations to deepen dialogue and play pivotal roles in the global dialogue among civilizations.

    President Xi Jinping in his congratulatory letter to the occasion expounded on the significance of mutual learning among civilizations in adding momentum to China-Africa modernization. He further outlined the direction and principles of people-to-people and cultural cooperation, which demonstrated deep reflections on human history and civilization and provided important guidance for building an all-weather China-Africa community with a sacred future for the Era. He added that facts have buttressed that people-to-people exchanges form the most solid foundation of China-Africa friendship; even as mutual learnings stand as solid platform on which the cooperation would continue its upward trend.

    The “iron clad” nature of China-Africa cooperation is not built on a shared historical memory of solidarity in the anti-colonial and anti-imperialist struggles alone but in the vision of building resilient economies and political stability with the social dividends of peace and improved living conditions for their respective peoples. In their respective national construction, China and African countries have outlined critical sphere of engagement; mutual learnings and experience sharing in governance, thereby expanding the value-chain of engagement, in addition to a solid and credible track record of cooperation in critical areas as trade and investment, industrial and production capacity cooperation, infrastructure cooperation which have already endeared a revolutionary landmark with impacts in across Africa.

    Furthermore, the international consensus on “One-China Principle”, an irreducible minimum of China’s international outlook underlining her sovereignty and territorial integrity have enjoyed its most high profile affirmations in Africa, where the occasional tantrums of the “Taiwan independence” trouble markers and its few foreign collaborators are staunchly rebuked and reprimanded. At Addis Ababa, the AU headquarters, during Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s Visit, the regional body reaffirmed the “One-China Principle”; stressing unequivocally that there is but one China in the world, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China’s territory and that the government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government representing the whole of China and that the AU firmly supports all efforts by the Chinese government to achieve national unification.

    The Belt and Road Initiative despite been the world’s biggest public goods, represent for Africa a major turning point because it objectively aligns with the region’s historic requirement to open the path to sustainable and inclusive development. Throughout its nearly 13-year history, Africa has not only closely associated with it, but many countries in Africa has deliberately tailored their respective policy to engage with the Belt and Road Initiative. And in the current stage of high quality development, its reputation for sustainability and quality delivery on schedule, continues align the urgency of clising the infrastructure connectivity gaps in Africa.

    In the context of Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s visit to the countries in Africa, each were addressed to their specific needs with ramifications for regional economies of scale. Whether it is the revitalization of Tanzania-Zambia railway for which China offered her support during the meeting between the Tanzanian leader and foreign Minister Wang Yi, the protocol for enhanced trade through the zero-tariff treatment for African products entering Chinese market, the engagements between Africa and China continues in the trajectories of tangible outcomes and mutually respectful dialogues.

    In the world in which the U.S President Mr. Donald Trump has boasted that he is not restrained or constrained by international law or rules but by what he called his private morality, China and Africa should step up in more strategic engagement, accumulating more strategic aggregates for both resilience and credible deterrence, while playing constructive roles in building an international governance architecture that is both broad and inclusive, an effective antidote to any bully. Inherent in the roaring and grandstanding of a bully is the mortal fear of the unity of its so-called perceived adversaries and despite the arrogance of the sole hegemon, it is far weaker that it can imagine, especially when standing alone. Despite that geo-political landscape is fraught with uncertainties and even prospective disruptions, China and Africa and the greater South-South should consolidate itself as a stable pole of international rule of law, certainty and stability.

    With the Belt and Road framework on international cooperation delivering tangibles to the respective partnership countries, including in Africa, it enhances their capacities and contributes to their strategic resilience. The honorings of the 36-year tradition of visiting Africa first at the start of every year injected more certainty and assurances that no matter, how the world might change, some practices would endure.

    The zero tariff treatment extended to almost all the African countries by China also guarantees measure of certainty in a rapidly changing world, where major developed capitalist countries in the West are retreating from the trends of globalization. The zero-tariff treatment would not only enhance and guarantee a stable international market for African countries but would support the structural transformation of most Africa national economies from their mono-structural orientation of dominant single commodity, (a legacy of colonial domination) but would also enhance the long desired diversification in their respective economies with a stable export market for varieties of their products.

    The visit of Foreign Minister Wang Yi in honor of a 36-year-old tradition, where Africa is the first destination for any Chinese Foreign Minister, is not much a renewal but a vital new historic starting point, when Africa-China cooperation is no longer at a luxury that both sides can conveniently afford but an imperative and clarion call to duty, because an increasingly desperate would surely need the certainty and sure-footedness in cooperation model that both sides exemplifies.

    Mr. Charles Onunaiju, Director, Centre for China Studies, (CCS) Abuja, Nigeria.

  • China’s 2026 Africa Tour: Strategic Significance, Outcomes and the Road Ahead

    China’s 2026 Africa Tour: Strategic Significance, Outcomes and the Road Ahead

    By Michael Onjewu, Abuja

    In a ritual that has become as predictable as it is symbolically potent, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi embarked on his first overseas trip of 2026 to Africa, visiting Ethiopia, Tanzania, and Lesotho from January 7 to 12.

    This marks the 36th consecutive year that a Chinese foreign minister has chosen the continent as their inaugural destination, a tradition that began in 1991 and demonstrates Beijing’s unwavering commitment to Africa as a cornerstone of its global diplomacy.

    The itinerary, which included a stop at the African Union (AU) headquarters in Addis Ababa to launch the China-Africa Year of People-to-People Exchanges, comes at a time of heightened geopolitical tensions, economic uncertainties, and shifting alliances. As the world grapples with U.S. policy volatility, Wang’s visit signals China’s intent to position itself as a reliable partner for African nations navigating an increasingly fragmented international order.

    The choice of Ethiopia, Tanzania, and Lesotho this year reflects a calculated mix of historical sentiment and forward-looking strategy.

    Ethiopia, as the seat of the African Union (AU), served as the stage for the official launch of the 2026 China-Africa Year of People-to-People Exchanges. By starting in Addis Ababa, Beijing reaffirmed its support for African integration and the AU’s “Agenda 2063.” Ethiopia’s role as a newly minted BRICS member further positions it as a bridge for China into the Horn of Africa.

    Tanzania, on the other hand, represents the historical soul of the partnership. As the two nations celebrate the 70th anniversary of diplomatic ties this year, the focus has shifted toward the revitalisation of the TAZARA Railway, a monumental project from the 1970s that is now being reborn as a “Prosperity Belt” through high-tech modernisation and green logistics.

    Lesotho’s inclusion demonstrates China’s “no country left behind” philosophy. By visiting one of the continent’s smaller, landlocked nations, Wang Yi demonstrated that China’s interest extends beyond resource-rich giants to include partners focused on agricultural modernisation, energy transition, and human capital development.

    Wang’s tour is not merely ceremonial; it embodies China’s Global Governance Initiative, emphasising UN-centric multilateralism and development-oriented partnerships in an era of great power rivalry.

    This trip is the first major follow-up to the 2024 FOCAC Beijing Summit, serving as a “road test” for the ambitious Ten Partnership Actions for modernization. The underlying consideration is clear: China aims to prove that its “All-Weather” friendship can withstand global turbulence. Amidst rising protectionism in the West, China is doubling down on Africa as a partner in “inclusive economic globalization.” By engaging with nations in the Horn of Africa and the South, China is positioning itself as a mediator and a stabilizer, emphasizing sovereignty and territorial integrity, a message that resonates deeply with African leaders wary of external interference.

    In Ethiopia, both sides agreed to expand cooperation into emerging areas such as the digital economy, artificial intelligence and green energy. Ethiopia reaffirmed its adherence to the one-China principle, while China expressed support for Ethiopia’s independent development path and regional connectivity in the Horn of Africa. In Tanzania and Lesotho, discussions focused on aligning development strategies, upgrading trade through China’s zero-tariff policies, and advancing high-quality Belt and Road projects in infrastructure, energy and other productive sectors.

    As of 2025, bilateral trade between China and Africa reached a record high of nearly $300 billion, supported by China’s landmark policy of granting zero-tariff treatment to 100% of tariff lines for products from 53 African nations. China has provided over RMB 130 billion in financial support and RMB 140 billion in insurance to African nations, translating into infrastructure marvels like the Lekki Deep Sea Port in Nigeria, Bagamoyo Port in Tanzania, the Chad-Sudan Railway, the high-speed Mombasa-Nairobi railway in Kenya, the Djibouti-Ethiopia railway, Ethiopia’s light rail, TAZARA’s refurbishment in Tanzania and various digital 5G networks transforming local economies from analog to digital. Other tangible outcomes include debt restructuring under the G-20 framework, and military grants worth RMB 1 billion to bolster African armed forces, alongside training for 6,000 personnel.

    People-to-people exchanges have flourished through the “Cultural Silk Road,” with initiatives in education, cultural exchange, health and biodiversity protection.

    In September 2025, the Chinese Embassy in Nigeria commissioned its 15th Chinese Corner at Government Secondary School, Nyanya, Abuja, as part of efforts to strengthen education, cultural exchange, and people-to-people diplomacy between the two countries.

    The embassy hosted a variety of people-to-people exchange programs in 2025. Some of these include: China-Nigeria Singing Competition, China-Nigeria Wushu Championship, China-Nigeria Culture and Tourism Festival, International Day for Dialogue Among Civilizations, and International Chinese Language Day Celebration, among others.

    The 2024 FOCAC summit in Beijing pledged $51 billion in credit and funding over three years in green initiatives, agriculture, and digital economy, areas that have already seen breakthroughs, such as Huawei’s role in Ethiopia’s telecom sector and solar projects in Lesotho.

    To maximise mutual benefits, China and Africa should prioritise areas where synergies align with the continent’s Agenda 2063: infrastructure resilience, green energy transitions, digital infrastructure, and agricultural modernisation. Continent-wide, Beijing could expand BRI projects to include climate-adaptive railways and solar grids, while fostering trilateral partnerships with Western donors to mitigate debt risks.

    Capacity-building programs, such as training 6,000 military personnel and joint biodiversity research, should be scaled to empower African institutions like the AU in global governance. Ways to achieve this include establishing dedicated FOCAC working groups for monitoring outcomes and leveraging zero-tariff policies to boost intra-African trade under the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).

    For Nigeria (China’s second-largest trading partner on the continent with trade volume surpassing $22.3 billion in 2025), cooperation should deepen in energy, mining, digital economy, and cultural exchanges under the 2024-2026 three-year plan. To enhance ties, Nigeria could negotiate technology transfers for green energy projects, such as solar farms and electric vehicle assembly, creating jobs and reducing oil dependency. In infrastructure, expanding Chinese financing for rail and ports would integrate Nigeria into regional supply chains.

    Agricultural collaboration, including mechanization and agro-processing, could address food security, while space programs like NigComSat should evolve into joint satellite ventures for climate monitoring. From Nigeria’s perspective, diversifying beyond trade by attracting FDI in manufacturing and promoting cultural diplomacy would foster balanced growth. China, in turn, could support anti-terrorism efforts with equipment and training, aligning with Nigeria’s security needs.

    In conclusion, Wang Yi’s 2026 African odyssey reaffirms China’s role as a steadfast ally, offering a model of cooperation that prioritises shared prosperity over hegemony. As global dynamics evolve, this partnership could redefine Africa’s place in the world if both sides seize the moment with bold, innovative steps.

    Michael Onjewu is a Nigerian journalist based in Abuja.