International

By Uzair Adam

Families worldwide are grappling with the effects of high prices, according to the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Ms. Kristalina Georgieva.

Speaking at the IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings in Washington, D.C., Georgieva highlighted the ongoing challenges facing the global economy, which she described as being on a trajectory of slow growth and rising debt.

“The global economy has held up well, and inflation is gradually decreasing thanks to central banks’ coordinated efforts and easing supply chains,” Georgieva said during the Global Policy Agenda 2024 briefing.

“However, people’s optimism about their economic prospects remains low. Families are still hurting from high prices, and global growth remains sluggish.

“We project a 3.2 percent growth rate this year, slowing to an annual 3.1 percent over the next five years,” she added.

According to Georgieva, while trade has traditionally driven economic growth, it is no longer the powerful engine it once was.

The IMF report warned that the world economy risks being trapped in a cycle of lower growth, high debt, reduced government revenues, and constrained resources to support families and climate change initiatives.

The Global Policy Agenda 2024 report further indicated that the global economy is resilient, with a potential for a soft landing as inflation moderates.

However, significant uncertainty looms, with risks skewed to the downside. Public debt levels are at historic highs, projected to approach 100 percent of GDP by 2030, and geoeconomic fragmentation threatens to reverse decades of progress from cross-border economic integration.

The report also points to transformative shifts—such as the green transition, demographic changes, and digitalization, including AI—that present both challenges and opportunities for global economies.

As a response, Georgieva emphasized the importance of a policy shift aimed at escaping the cycle of low growth and high debt.

She called for monetary policies that ensure inflation stabilizes at target levels and fiscal policies that pivot toward consolidation to build resilience and maintain debt sustainability.

By Hajara Abdullahi

The long reoccurring war between Israel and Palestine spans decades which can be traced to the Balfour Declaration of 1917  that led to the creation of a national home in Palestine for the Jewish people fleeing the Nazi Holocaust in Europe. After the creation of the zionist state in 1948, the Arab states went to war with Israel, which led to the first Nakba (Catastrophe) that led to the killing of hundreds of Palestinians and thousands of others fled their homes. Israel won the war, and the reality surfaced that the Zionist state had come to stay, especially with unwavering support from allies like the US, France, Germany and other European countries.

Since the creation of Israel, Palestinians have been subjected to the worst form of apartheid and dehumanisation, as well as the forceful annexation of their lands to establish Jewish settlements, which the U.N. have described as illegal under international law. Peace accords and diplomatic efforts have done little to address this decade-long conflict from Camp David to Oslo.

On October 7 2023, Hamas launched an unprecedented attack on Israel that led to the loss of about 1,139 lives, while about 250 were kidnapped, according to the BBC. This attack sparked rage worldwide, considering the strong support Israel enjoys from powerful allies like the U S and the U.K. This attack had led to the launch of a full-scale wall on the besieged Gaza Strip that has claimed the lives of at least 45,000 people, and almost 100,000 have been injured. It has also led to the displacement of nearly the entire population of 2.3 million, a hunger crisis and a genocide case at the World Court. Even the occupied West Bank is not spared, as IDF have carried out airstrikes and shellings that have killed civilians and displaced thousands. The U.N. has described 2024 as the deadliest year for Palestinians in Gaza, with the IDF offensive reducing the enclave to rubble.

Since the outbreak of the conflict, The U.N., E.U., U.S. and other world leaders have condemned the Hamas act and called for restraint to avoid escalation. Diplomatic efforts have been put in place after months of fighting with Iran-backed resistant groups Hezbollah and Houthi launching solidarity attacks against Israel. On October 18 2023, U.S. President Joe Biden visited Tel Aviv to make a peace deal between the warring parties. Similarly, the G7 leaders also met in Tokyo in June to push forward for a ceasefire to avoid a wider regional conflict.

On May 31, U.S. President Joe Biden announced a three-phase proposal to the U.N. Security Council to end the war in the Gaza Strip. He called, first, for a temporary ceasefire tied to partial withdrawals of Israeli forces, limited hostage exchanges, and an influx of aid. Negotiations would then begin and, if successful, lead to the second phase, involving a permanent cessation of hostilities tied to total withdrawals and complete hostage exchanges. The final phase would see reconstruction efforts being set up, but Israel’s refusal to accept the conditions witnessing the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza a total setback amidst protests by families whose relatives are held as hostages in Gaza. However, the ceasefire plan was short-lived when Israel, with the assistance of intelligence support from the U.S., launched a deadly attack that led to the killing of at least 200 Palestinians while  4 Israeli captives held in Nuseirat camp in Central Gaza were rescued, according to the BBC.

Hopes were lit when U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, in his 11th trip to the Middle East on August 15 to avert a wider conflict after the killing of top Hamas leader by Israel, told a gathering of reporters while departing Tel Aviv that the ball is in the court of Hamas to accept the conditions as Israel has accepted the bridging proposal for the ceasefire to work. Unfortunately, Hamas said it won’t be part of a new proposal, saying it will only accept the initial proposal put forward by President Biden.

While Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vehemently opposes the release of Palestinian prisoners held in Israel in exchange for captives held in Gaza, the withdrawal of IDF from Gaza while Hamas has not been dismantled, as well as leaving the strategic Philadelphi corridor  ditched the last hope of the ceasefire which two key mediators Egypt and Qatar have been working on.

Marwan Bishara, a senior political analyst with Aljazeera, said, “Both parties understand that they cannot achieve in diplomacy what they couldn’t achieve in war” This implies that the Israelis won’t get the captives back on a platter of gold, neither would Hamas get Gaza free of Israeli soldiers free of charge.

The  Wall Street Journal, in an exclusive article it published on September 20 2024, said it’s unlikely for a ceasefire to be reached in Gaza, citing top-level officials in the White House, State Department and Pentagon without naming them while explaining two obstacles will make it difficult: Israel’s demand to keep forces in the Philadelphi corridor between Gaza and Egypt and the specifics of an exchange of Israeli hostages for Palestinian prisoners held by Israel. In the recently concluded 79th session of the UNGA, world leaders called for restraint in Lebanon as tension heightened.

In the end, diplomatic efforts may produce little or no results because, as Tim Marshall explained in his book Prisoners of Geography, the map of the region is being redrawn in blood, and the current fault lines emerged from the artificial lines drawn by Europe. Therefore, the U.N., U.S, Arab League and other world leaders must work hand in hand for a two-state solution agreed upon in the Oslo Accord of 1993, as well as press Israel and Hamas to accept the conditions laid down for the ceasefire to work which will ensure a peaceful coexistence in the Middle East region as well as prevent a wider regional conflict the region risk facing with the recent clash between Hezbollah and Israel on the Lebanese southern border.

Hajara Abdullahi wrote from the Dept of Mass Communication, Bayero University Kano.

By Muhammed U. Hong

Nearly six decades ago, the practice of external borrowing for many developing countries could be linked to two major International Financial Institutions (IFIs): The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). These institutions became the most significant source of finance for many third-world economies, particularly in Africa, where countries owe both institutions a large portion of their external debts. However, towards the end of the 1990s and the beginning of the 2000s, the IMF experienced a decline in lending activities in the region. 

The institution was becoming almost irrelevant as most countries were reluctant to borrow from it due to its policies and programs, notably the Structural Adjustment Program, which worsened economic and social conditions rather than improving them. As a result, the IMF’s reputation was severely damaged, and countries began to seek alternatives.

In the last two decades, China emerged as a major bilateral lender, gaining prominence for its infrastructure and economic development projects in African countries through three of its most prominent institutions: The China Exim Bank, China Development Bank, and China Agricultural Bank. This led to the rise of many other private sector entities that helped cater to the fiscal needs of developing countries.

Between 2013 – 2022, African countries’ total external public debt stock, as reported by the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA), rose from US$109.63 billion in 2013 to US$223.74 billion in 2022. China disbursed loans over the same ten-year span, increasing from US$24.11 billion in 2013 to US$62.89 billion in 2022. As of March 2022, 34% of Africa’s total external debt was owed to multilateral creditors, such as the World Bank’s IDA and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), while 23% was linked to bilateral creditors, including China and Germany. Private creditors, like Bondholders from the United Kingdom, accounted for the remaining 43%.^[1] Only a modest portion of Africa’s total external debt stock is owed to China.

External or foreign borrowing is not inherently negative for countries, including African ones. It is widely understood that virtually no country can sufficiently fund its budget by relying solely on its yearly revenue. Thus, governments resort to public debt to fulfil fiscal obligations, especially when running a deficit or intending to spend more than their revenue. In Africa, external borrowing has served as a necessary tool to fund critical domestic infrastructure projects that aim to generate developmental and social gains.

However, the criteria for borrowing—such as the type of debt, its purpose, repayment terms, currency of repayment, and borrowing conditions—play a crucial role. One key metric that lenders assess is the Public Debt-to-GDP ratio, which indicates what a country owes in relation to what it produces and thereby reflects its ability to repay the debt. The higher the Debt-to-GDP ratio, the greater the risk of default. The World Bank established that a threshold of 64% for emerging markets (such as African countries) and 77% for developed economies is where public debt may begin to impact economic growth negatively. ^[2]

Interestingly, some of the world’s leading economies, including Japan, the United States, and the United Kingdom, have the highest public debt-to-GDP ratios—241%, 114%, and 79%, respectively—while African nations such as Cabo Verde, South Africa, and Nigeria have ratios of 117%, 47%, and 20%. ^[3] This demonstrates that African countries adhere more strictly to their public debt-to-GDP limits than their Western counterparts. Nonetheless, high public debt does not necessarily indicate weak economies, as some countries can rely on other sources of revenue to offset their liabilities.

So, why does Africa find China more attractive as a lender than IFIs? The World Bank and IMF initially offered loans with favourable terms to African countries in need but came with high interest rates and stringent conditions. African governments were often required to implement reforms designed by these institutions, and the loans were subject to strict environmental, social, and governance standards. Not all African countries were willing or able to comply with these requirements, which diminished their appetite for loans from IFIs and increased their interest in China’s concessional loans, which had fewer conditions. Their “no strings attached” model made Chinese loans more accessible and did not require adherence to governance or environmental standards while offering prospects for debt moratoriums.

For example, new data shows that China’s total lending to Zambia stands at $5.05 billion, equivalent to 30% of Zambia’s external debt. About 80% of China’s loans come from low-interest, concessional finance from China’s development banks, like the China Exim Bank, with the remaining $948 million held by commercial entities such as ICBC and Huawei.^[4]  However, there are widespread reports of opacity in Chinese lending practices. African governments have been largely silent about whether loans are used for capital or recurrent expenditures, which makes it difficult for citizens to determine the health of their countries’ debt paths.

This lack of transparency raises concerns about inflated project costs, kickbacks, or the financing of white elephant projects ahead of crucial elections. The China-Africa Research Initiative (CARI), a Washington-based team of independent researchers, is one of the few reliable sources for data on Chinese loans, as it gathers information from loan contracts, interviews, and its global network.

Why do some believe Chinese loans are different from IFI loans and are designed to trap low-income countries into surrendering their natural resources? 

Public-private partnership (PPP) arrangements and the Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) model, in which Chinese firms manage projects without fully taking over, have been common in Chinese contracts. However, African countries have begun to default on their loan commitments, leading China to adopt the more controversial resource-backed lending model. This model has been used in Africa as a fundamental way to finance many economic and social infrastructure projects like railways, telecoms, mining, construction, power, etc. 

The principle behind the resource-backed lending or resource-financed infrastructure (RFI) model, as they call it, is to allow the borrower country to commit its future revenues derived from the sale of its natural resources to pay for loans provided by the Chinese creditors. Under the RFI model, Chinese lenders have financed an average of 71 projects per year in Africa, at an average value of US$ 180 million since 2010. Between 2000 and 2019, only 26 per cent of Chinese lending in Africa has been tied to the future revenue from natural resources, with Angola taking a sizeable portion of 18 per cent alone. The remaining 8 per cent is evident in loan commitments of US$ 500 million made to Nigeria for its Abuja light rail project in 2012 and 2011 to finance new phases of its airport projects and the Lekki Port’s Free Trade Zone. Others have been used for the US$ 475 million loan in 2011 for the Addis-Ababa light rail project, and in Egypt, for a US$ 1.2 billion loan for their light rail projects.^[5] The primary risk of the RFI model is that commodity prices are volatile, which could undermine debt sustainability. 

According to CARI, in 2019, Chinese borrowings to African governments began classifying the countries that were perceived as ‘less risky’ due to concerns about debt sustainability. This is because most countries borrowing heavily from China have been identified to have histories of IMF bailouts, making new such borrowings from China unsustainable. CARI examined the situation in 17 African countries that are either in debt distress or at high risk of debt distress due to the high lending volume, which has forced China to address the issue of debt sustainability. 

Countries like Ethiopia, Mozambique, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Djibouti were all denied fresh loans in 2019. Others like Kenya, Cameroon and Zambia were given relatively small loans. Angola, the continent’s largest borrower of Chinese loans, with an average of US$ 4 billion per year between 2010 – 2018, experienced a decline to about US$106 million in 2019. This is despite securitising Angola’s future revenue from its oil exports. Nigeria, which surpasses as the continent’s largest crude oil exporter with a history of debt sustainability since 2000, had only been granted a loan commitment of around US$500 million. ^[6]

The issue of debt sustainability gained further attention during the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to widespread calls for debt relief. China responded by offering debt relief packages (debt cancellation) and an (undisclosed) deferment of interest payments due to the pandemic. In 2020, China joined the G20 to create the Debt Service Suspension Initiative (DSSI) framework to alleviate the economic suffering imposed by the Coronavirus pandemic on African countries. By the following year, China was reported to have suspended debt worth over US$1.3 billion for 23 countries, out of which 16 are African countries.^[7] In a similar vein to tackling the Coronavirus pandemic, the IMF was also reported to have approved $500 million to cancel six months of debt payments for 25 countries, with 19 of them in Africa – which is almost one-third of what China had been able to offer to African governments.^[8]

According to Jubilee Debt Campaign UK, now referred to as Debt Justice, a UK campaign organisation to end exploitation of debt by more affluent countries, China remains the largest suspender of debt with a whopping $5.7 billion in debt repayment). ^[9] The China Development Bank – which is a major lender to African countries – had also since 2021 provided US$1.168 billion in debt relief to these countries as a way of cushioning the impact of the pandemic.^[10]

What makes China engage in “debt-trap diplomacy” with its African borrowers? — An allegation that Chinese firms intentionally lend to financially irresponsible governments that will be unable to repay loans to take possession of assets.

Many unsubstantiated claims about the Chinese takeover of major state assets in developing countries exist. The most cited case for reference is the Hambantota port in Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan government secured 2007 finance from China’s Export-Import (EXIM) Bank to develop the port. In 2015, however, Sri Lanka had to arrange a bailout from the IMF even though the Chinese loans only accounted for some 10% of the debt. The government sought to raise cash by privatising state-owned assets, including a significant stake in Hambantota port. Then, a Chinese company got wind of it and successfully bided and bought 70% of the shares. The Sri Lankan government used the proceeds to pay for Chinese loans and other debt services. ^[11] However, no definitive evidence suggests a similar practice is prevalent in Africa.^[12]

Ultimately, it is hard to think that Chinese loans to Africa are meant to inextricably trap them for their rich oil and other natural resources. Over the past decades, Africa’s growing need for infrastructure has led China to fill the void created by Western financial institutions, offering easier access to capital with fewer stipulations. 

Although the African continent has managed its debt well, there are still significant risks and challenges associated with Chinese loans, particularly in governance and transparency. It is also true that China’s approach to lending has evolved from being more lenient to becoming more cautious, especially in response to concerns about debt sustainability. This is why it tries to mitigate the risk of defaulting by primarily resorting to the resource-backed financing model, and this has only been linked to a meagre percentage of all its loan commitments to the continent– with the exception of Angola. While resource-backed lending seems pragmatic, it is not necessarily predatory or equate to an intent to exploit or trap countries, especially given China’s history of debt relief. China’s participation in debt relief efforts is consistent with its broader strategy of maintaining long-term relationships with African countries rather than exploiting them.

Africa must halt the practice of raising money at the Eurobond markets—where a range of investors trade bonds—because these bonds come at steep commercial rates and are subject to the dictates of the international financial markets. African countries must also be discouraged from seeking bailouts from financial institutions like the IMF and World Bank to offset existing loans, which excessively pile up debts that lead to unsustainable liabilities. 

African governments must ensure prudent financial management while refraining from depleting their foreign currency reserves to pay high interest on those loans. The utilisation of these loans for their intended purposes, whether in infrastructure, social or economic, is crucial for Africa to foster sustainable development, bolster its revenue growth, and improve the quality of life for its citizens. Loans that yield commensurate economic benefits.

Muhammed U. Kong wrote via muhammedu.hong@gmail.com.

By Fatimat Ibrahim Abedoh,

In 2022, Crystal Asige, a visually impaired woman, was nominated to the 4th Senate in Kenya’s 13th Parliament to represent people with disabilities and special interest groups. Picked by the Orange Democratic Party (ODM), she was sworn in alongside 66 other Senators on September 8, 2022. 

Despite her disability, Asige was seen for her potential and allowed to thrive, becoming a role model for many in similar circumstances. She has been excelling ever since. In contrast, Nigeria has a significant population of about 35 million people with disabilities, yet they are still mistreated, shunned, and disregarded. 

No public space, transit system, or infrastructure in Nigeria is designed with PWDs in mind, reflecting the height of their struggles. It is no secret that life in Nigeria is challenging, but for PWDs, it is twice as difficult.

PWDs in Nigeria face numerous challenges and barriers to full inclusion and participation in society, issues that are not discussed enough. Individuals, private organisations, and public institutions are often unwelcoming, making it difficult for PWDs to thrive in all aspects of life. 

This lack of accessibility constrains their potential and strips them of the platform to live and contribute meaningfully to society—whether in education, politics, employment, or social activities.

Their fundamental human rights are severely violated, as being disabled often equates to being treated as less than human. This is why many PWDs resort to begging for survival. But they need more than a pity party; they deserve respect and inclusion.

Recently, a PWD faced discrimination at an eatery. Adebola Daniel, son of former Ogun State Governor Gbenga Daniel, recounted his humiliating experience at the KFC outlet in the Murtala Muhammed Airport via his X handle (@DebolaDaniel). A wheelchair user, Daniel described the incident as the worst public humiliation he had ever faced. 

He explained that due to the out-of-service lift to the airport lounge, he decided to wait at the KFC outlet with his wife and three brothers. However, this simple choice turned into a “colossal mistake,” as he put it.

His tweets partly read: “Being disabled often rolls over my spirit, leaving behind a trail of shattered dignity and forgotten humanity. Nowhere more so than in Nigeria. To be disabled in Nigeria is to be undesirable, unwelcome, and unaccepted… Today, I faced the worst sort of public humiliation that I have ever experienced. To think that this happened at an international brand, KFC, at an international airport – Murtala Muhammed Airport, Lagos – is unthinkable.”

Daniel’s case gained public attention, mainly because of his family background, prompting the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) to shut down the outlet and demand an apology. But what about the millions of other PWDs who have faced similar or worse situations? Who listens to them, and who takes action on their behalf?

Since Asige entered the Senate in Kenya, she has been able to sponsor three bills that the Kenyan government has enforced, all tailored to the interests and welfare of persons with disabilities. These are the Persons with Disabilities Bill 2023, the Kenyan Sign Language Bill 2023, and the Startup Bill 2022. 

She continues to work in the interest of Kenyan youths and those across Africa. In Nigeria, former President Muhammadu Buhari passed the Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities (Prohibition) Act into law in 2018. Yet, six years later, it has not been fully implemented.

Adequate funding for education, assistive technology, and other essential resources for PWDs is urgently needed. Nigeria practices representative democracy, and PWDs deserve to be heard, seen and listened to. They need representation in the Senate or the House of Representatives to amplify their voices. 

PWDs are capable of much more than their disabilities, and no one can represent them better than one of their own.

Fatimat Ibrahim Abedoh is a fellow at PR Nigeria’s Young Communication Fellowship.

By Abdullahi Mukhtar Algasgaini

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu congratulates Dr Zainab Shinkafi-Bagudu, a renowned paediatrician with a distinguished career in public health and former First Lady of Kebbi State, on her election as President of the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC).

The President underscores the historic significance of Dr. Shinkafi-Bagudu’s election on October 8 as the first African and the fifth woman to lead the global cancer control organisation.

The President notes that her election attests to her competence and character and affirms the enormous talents that abound in Nigeria.

President Tinubu describes Shinkafi-Bagudu’s ascension in the organisation as a landmark achievement and a testament to Nigeria’s growing influence in global health leadership.

President Tinubu recalls Dr Shinkafi-Bagudu’s invaluable services to Kebbi state and the country, for which Nigeria is deeply grateful. He lauds her stewardship as Chairperson of the First Ladies Cancer Initiative and her contributions to establishing the Kebbi State Strategic Plan for Cancer Control during her tenure as the First Lady of Kebbi State.

Zainab Shinkafi-Bagudu founded the Medicaid Cancer Foundation. She is also a Senior Advisor to the Coordinating Minister of Health and Social Welfare and Vice Chair of Nigeria’s National Taskforce on Cervical Cancer Elimination.

Through the Federal Ministry of Health and international partnerships, Nigeria has successfully vaccinated 12 million girls against the Human Papillomavirus (HPV), a leading cause of cervical cancer. The administration has allocated N37.4 billion to the Federal Ministry of Health’s Oncology Initiative.

This initiative will facilitate the establishment of six cancer centres across the country within two years, located in teaching hospitals in Benin, Zaria, Katsina, Enugu, Jos, and Lagos.

President Tinubu expresses confidence in Dr. Shinkafi-Bagudu’s ability to use her new office and leadership to improve cancer control and global health.

The Geneva-based UICC was founded in 1933 and has more than 1100 member organisations in over 170 countries and territories.

By Abdullahi Mukhtar Algasgaini 

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan called on Tuesday during his speech at the UN General Assembly for an alliance to stop Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.  

He also accused the UN of not intervening in what he described as “barbarism” in Gaza. He said, “They share the shame of being guilty of this brutality.”

He asked, “What are you waiting for to stop the series of massacres that endanger the lives of your own citizens along with those of the Palestinian people?” 

Erdogan lamented that more than 41,000 Palestinians have been killed since October 7, and over 17,000 children have been targeted by Israeli bullets and bombs.

By Uzair Adam

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) has extended its deepest gratitude to the Federal Government of Nigeria as it celebrates its 64th anniversary.

Speaking on the occasion, the OPEC Secretary-General Haitham Al Ghais acknowledged the significant role Nigeria has played in the organization since its membership began in 1971.

He commended Nigeria for its unwavering support in maintaining a stable and balanced global oil market.

Reflecting on the historic meeting in Baghdad 64 years ago, Al Ghais emphasized the foundational agreement signed by the five original members: Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela.

He stated that, “This event marked the inception of OPEC and a new era of international energy collaboration.”

Al Ghais recognized the leadership of Nigerian officials, including President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Minister of State for Petroleum Resources Heineken Lokpobiri, Ambassador Gabriel Tanimu Aduda, and National Representative Mele Kyari.

He also highlighted the contributions of all OPEC member countries, past and present, including heads of state, ministers, governors, and the dedicated staff at the Secretariat.

As September 14, designated as OPEC Day, is observed, Al Ghais called for reflection on OPEC’s journey and anticipation of its future prospects.

He expressed confidence that the organization’s most significant achievements are yet to come and encouraged continued participation in shaping its future.

The message concluded with a heartfelt wish for a happy OPEC Day to all members and partners.

By Uzair Adam 

The global internet user base has grown consistently in recent years, with countries with larger populations leading the charge. 

However, some smaller nations also boast impressive online activity.

According to Exploding Topics, here are the ten countries with the largest number of internet users:

1. China – 1.05 billion: With its massive population, China tops the list with an estimated 1.05 billion internet users, accounting for 74.36% of its population.

2. India – 692 million: India ranks second, with 692 million people online, representing 49.15% of its population.

3. United States—311.3 million: The U.S. has 311.3 million internet users, which translates to a high penetration rate of 93.79%.

4. Indonesia – 212.9 million: Indonesia has 212.9 million people online, with a penetration rate of 77.76%.

5. Brazil – 181.8 million: Brazil has 181.8 million internet users, covering nearly 85% of its population.

6. Russia – 127.6 million: Russia follows with 127.6 million users, almost 90% of its population.

7. Nigeria – 122.5 million: Nigeria ranks seventh globally, with over 122.5 million internet users, more than half of its population.

8. Japan—102.5 million: Japan has 102.5 million internet users, which is more than 80% of its population.

9. Mexico – 100.6 million: Mexico has 100.6 million people online, with nearly 80% penetration.

10. Pakistan – 87.35 million: Pakistan rounds out the top 10 with 87.35 million internet users, despite only 40% of its population being connected.

By Uzair Adam

Former President Donald Trump struggled to maintain his composure as Vice President Kamala Harris confronted him on key issues during their first debate.

The discussion, marked by sharp exchanges, centered around topics like abortion rights, Trump’s legal challenges, and his overall fitness for office, as both candidates sought to gain an edge in the close race.

Harris, a former prosecutor, managed to unsettle the 78-year-old Trump, who responded with several inaccurate statements. One particularly tense moment occurred when Harris criticized Trump’s rallies, suggesting that attendees often leave due to “exhaustion and boredom.”

She also accused Trump of lying and insulting American women through his policies, particularly regarding abortion.

Harris condemned Trump for supporting abortion bans that provide no exceptions, even in cases of rape or incest, and highlighted the real-life consequences these laws have on women’s healthcare, particularly for those facing miscarriages or other emergencies.

In response, Trump defended his role in the appointment of three Supreme Court justices, which led to the reversal of Roe v. Wade, and insisted that the issue was better handled at the state level.

He also repeated the false claim that Democrats support the execution of babies after birth, a statement Harris rebuked as “insulting to the women of America.”

When asked about his position on a national abortion ban, Trump avoided a direct answer and shifted the conversation to student loans.

By Dr. Abdulkadir Lawan

A putatively held belief is that the banditry and crime in the Zamfara region of Nigeria cannot be unconnected to the politics of gold and other natural resources mining. But something deadlier than politics, a stealthy by-product of crude extraction methods at the core of gold mining, might have played a leading role in the increase in crime we are witnessing today in the region. 

In the early 2000s, possibly due to the recent change in rule from a military to a democratic one, a renewed gold interest in Zamfara resulted in a mini gold rush. Women and men in the villages would dig out rock ore and extract the gold through crushing and grinding; the resulting dust was contaminated with lead. Some even brought this newfound work to their homes, contaminating their food, water, clothes, and, most dangerously, children. What followed in child deaths from lead poisoning created an unintended raucous through polio vaccination outreach and ended up inviting several efforts to clean up the areas and treat the surviving children.

It is well known that lead is dangerous, even in small doses. It mimics calcium in the body and can be stored in bones, continuing to poison the body even years after initial exposure. The brain is the most sensitive organ to lead. It basically blocks the release of neurotransmitters, which causes headaches and memory loss, and children are especially susceptible. There is no doubt among scientists that lead exposure can cause permanent learning disorders and behavioural problems.

Studies on baby teeth showed that even lead exposure well below the “safe” level results in delayed learning, decreased IQ and increased behavioural problems. There was a direct correlation between lead in children and the inability to graduate from high school in the US. While the CDC has since lowered the acceptable levels of lead in children’s blood from 60ug/dL to 3.5ug/dL over the years, there is no safe lead level as far as it is known today.

Globally, about 65% of all unexplained intellectual disability are believed to be caused by lead. Many countries have monitored the levels of lead exposure in their children over time. In Nigeria, we have little to no data nationwide. A particular US data, however, shows troubling correlations. 

Violent crimes steadily rose from the 1970s to the 1990s before abruptly declining. The troubling part? A graph of average preschool blood lead levels looked strikingly similar to crime levels roughly twenty years apart. The question was whether kids exposed to higher levels of lead grew up to commit more crimes.

The same pattern appears in Britain, Canada, and Australia. In another study, the lead concentrations in the blood of those arrested for violent and anti-social behaviour could not have been more correlated with their behaviour. This shows that lead is at least very likely responsible for some of the increase in crime. 

Whatever the reason for the resurgence of artisanal gold mining in Zamfara in the early 2000s, children raised in that period were in their early teens and 20s when the country began to witness an upsurge in bandit activities at the start of 2010. Thankfully, considerable clean-up efforts and community sensitisation mean there is an unlikely recurrence of lead poisoning effects on this scale around the region. A decline in violent activities can only then be hoped for. 

Glissading along the same line, the biggest source of lead pollution worldwide was the tetraethyl lead compound that was added to gasoline to make leaded fuel. Nigeria completely phased out leaded gasoline in 2004, as did all other countries between 1986 (Japan) and 2021 (Algeria). Nigeria witnessed a record period of civil violence from the 1970s until about the early 2000s. The current crop of our, in my opinion, clearly cognitive-declined politicians was the most exposed to vehicular lead poisoning in the same generation as the perpetrators of multiple violent religious and ethnic crises.

The dangers of lead had already been known for hundreds of years. In 1786, Benjamin Franklin remarked that lead had been used for far too long considering its known toxicity – “This, my dear friend, is all I can at present recollect on the subject. You will see by it that the opinion of this mischievous effect from lead is at least above sixty years old. And you will observe with concern how long a useful truth may be known and exist before it is generally received and practised on.” 

Scientists decided to add lead to fuel one hundred and fifty years later (i.e., after Benjamin Franklin’s speech). Almost one hundred years after that, the juveniles among our (Nigerian) citizenry were exposed to lead, leaving a nation to wonder why there is so much crime in our time.

Dr. Abdulkadir Lawan wrote via abdullwn@gmail.com.