Africa

By Ahmed Usman

In the years following independence, Northern Nigeria stood at the forefront of the country’s economic progress. The region’s agricultural output, symbolised by the famous groundnut pyramids of Kano and by thriving cotton production across the savannah belt, powered employment, export earnings, and real-sector development. For a time, Northern Nigeria was not only a major driver of Nigeria’s economy but also one of the most economically vibrant regions on the African continent. Today, however, the region finds itself at a critical crossroads.

Over the past two decades, Northern Nigeria has faced a combination of security, economic, and structural challenges that have slowed its development trajectory. The rise of insurgency in the North-East, banditry and cattle rustling in parts of the North-West, and persistent farmers–herders conflicts have disrupted livelihoods, weakened agricultural production, and discouraged investment. These crises have inflicted enormous human and economic costs not only on the region but also on the Nigerian economy as a whole.

Yet security challenges alone do not explain the region’s economic difficulties. The deeper problem lies in the failure to convert the region’s extraordinary demographic and natural advantages into sustained economic growth.

Northern Nigeria possesses some of the most significant development assets in the country. The region accounts for more than 60 per cent of Nigeria’s population and contains over 80 per cent of the country’s arable land. It also receives abundant sunlight, suitable for solar power generation, and hosts numerous dams capable of supporting large-scale irrigation and energy production.

Despite these advantages, the region continues to record some of Nigeria’s most troubling development indicators. Poverty levels remain among the highest in the country. Youth unemployment is widespread. The region also accounts for about 20 million out-of-school children, one of the highest figures worldwide. Internally generated revenue in many northern states remains low, limiting the fiscal capacity needed to finance development.

This paradox of abundant resources alongside persistent poverty highlights the urgency of a new development strategy to transform its demographic advantages into a true demographic dividend.

At the heart of the solution lies the revival of the real sector. For too long, Nigeria’s growth model has leaned heavily on the service sector and oil revenues, sectors that generate limited employment relative to the country’s rapidly expanding workforce. Each year, millions of young Nigerians enter the labour market, yet the economy struggles to create sufficient productive jobs. Sustainable and inclusive growth will require renewed investment in sectors capable of generating large-scale employment. Agriculture, agro-processing, manufacturing, and renewable energy stand out as areas where Northern Nigeria holds a natural comparative advantage.

Agriculture in particular offers a powerful pathway for economic transformation. With vast fertile land and favourable climatic conditions, the region has the potential to become Nigeria’s primary agricultural hub once again. Expanding irrigation farming, adopting modern agricultural technologies, improving access to inputs, and strengthening agricultural value chains could dramatically increase productivity while generating millions of rural jobs. But agriculture alone will not be enough. The next stage of development must focus on building strong agro-industrial linkages. Processing agricultural products locally rather than exporting raw commodities can significantly increase value addition, stimulate rural industries, and expand export opportunities.

Infrastructure will be critical to unlocking these opportunities. Reliable electricity, modern road networks, efficient storage systems, and improved logistics are essential for connecting farmers, manufacturers, and entrepreneurs to national and global markets. The region’s extensive dam infrastructure already provides enormous potential for irrigation agriculture and renewable energy if properly utilised.

Equally important is the need to invest in human capital. Northern Nigeria’s youthful population represents one of the region’s greatest assets, but only if young people are equipped with the education, skills, and opportunities needed to participate in a modern economy. Expanding access to quality education, strengthening vocational training, and promoting the development of technical skills must become central pillars of the region’s development strategy.

Yet economic progress ultimately depends on the strength of institutions. Transparent governance, accountable public institutions, and a regulatory environment that encourages private investment are essential for sustainable development. Reducing bureaucratic barriers, strengthening property rights, and improving the ease of doing business will be critical for attracting both domestic and foreign investment.

History shows that development trajectories can change when policy direction aligns with economic potential. Northern Nigeria once played a central role in powering Nigeria’s economic progress. There is no reason it cannot do so again.

The challenges facing the region are significant, but they are not insurmountable. With strategic investments, stronger institutions, and a renewed focus on the real sector, Northern Nigeria can unlock the immense potential of its land, its resources, and most importantly, its people. The region’s future should not be determined by the weight of its challenges but by the boldness of its choices. If those choices are made wisely, Northern Nigeria could once again emerge as one of the most powerful engines of economic growth in the country and perhaps on the continent.

By Haroon Aremu,

In a vox pop, when they asked a simple question on the streets of Europe and America: “Which country is the poorest in the world?” The answers came quickly, confidently, and shockingly wrong.

“Africa.” “Africa is the poorest.” “Africa.” Not one voice hesitated. Not one voice paused to rethink. And therein lies the tragedy not of Africa, but of global ignorance because Africa is not a country. Africa is a continent. And more dangerously, Africa is not poor.

The birth of lies of how Africa became a Global stereotype. For decades, Africa has been reduced to a single, distorted image: poverty, hunger, conflict, corruption, and helplessness.

In global media narratives, Africa is often portrayed as a land of endless crises children with distended bellies, dusty villages, and hopeless economies. These images have travelled faster than facts, shaping how the world perceives the continent.

But stereotypes are not truths. They are shortcuts of ignorance. The reality is far more complex and far more powerful. Nigeria, Africa’s most populous nation and largest economy, is often caricatured as a land of scams, insecurity, and chaos.

Yet Nigeria is also one of Africa’s biggest economy by GDP, global hub of music, film, and tech innovation, home to billion-dollar startups and Africa’s largest film industry (Nollywood), and one of the world’s leading producers of oil and gas. Nigeria’s problem is not poverty of resources it is poverty of governance.

Ghana is frequently portrayed as a quiet, underdeveloped state. But Ghana is one of Africa’s most stable democracies, a major producer of gold and cocoa, a growing tech and fintech hub, and a country with rising middle-class influence and strong diaspora impact. Ghana is not poor. It is strategically under-recognised.

South Africa is often stereotyped as a crime-ridden society haunted by racial inequality. But in reality South Africa is also Africa’s most industrialised economy. It is a home to advanced infrastructure and global corporations and also one of the world’s largest producers of platinum, gold, and diamonds. Its challenge is inequality, not lack of wealth.

Kenya is a “Tech Savannah Ignored”. Kenya is often reduced to safaris and wildlife documentaries. But Kenya is East Africa’s innovation capital, home to M-Pesa, one of the world’s most revolutionary digital payment systems. Kenya is a regional hub for startups, logistics, and global investment. Kenya is not backward. It is digitally ahead of many Western economies.

Countries like Sierra Leone and Benin Republic are often dismissed as “poor African states.” But Sierra Leone has rich mineral resources, including diamonds and iron ore. It is a growing post-war economy and youthful innovation sector.

Benin Republic has strategic trade routes and ports with a vibrant informal economy and cultural influence across West Africa. Their struggles are historical and structural—not natural. 

Here is the irony the world refuses to confront, Africa holds an enormous share of the world’s natural wealth. The continent possesses about 30% of the world’s mineral resources, including gold, diamonds, cobalt, platinum, and uranium. Africa is home to vast reserves of oil, gas, rare earth minerals, and agricultural land that the world depends on. 

One of the most persistent and misleading stereotypes about African countries is the belief that Africans are largely uneducated, technologically backward, and incapable of innovation without foreign intervention. This narrative suggests that modern ideas, digital skills, and scientific breakthroughs are imported into Africa rather than created within it.

Yet this claim collapses under reality: African youths are building global tech startups, engineers are designing fintech systems used by millions, filmmakers are reshaping global entertainment, and researchers are contributing to science and medicine across continents. 

The problem has never been a lack of intelligence or creativity; it has been the lack of global recognition and supportive systems to amplify Africa’s homegrown brilliance. 

If wealth were measured by resources alone, Africa would not be poor. It would be unbeatable. So why does the world think Africa is poor? Because poverty is not just economic, it is political.

Africa is not poor in resources. Africa is poor in systems, leadership accountability, and equitable distribution of wealth. And that is not the fault of ordinary Africans.

The truth is painful, Africa is rich, but Africans are made poor by mismanagement. Africa is powerful, but its power is fragmented by borders and politics. Africa is wealthy, but its wealth is exported cheaply and imported expensively.

The vox pop passers-by responded to is a classic case of when ignorance meets reality. When people on Western streets say, “Africa is the poorest country,” they are not entirely guilty. They are victims of narratives created by western media framing, historical colonial distortions, and Africa’s own failure to tell its story convincingly.

The real question is not why foreigners think Africa is poor. The real question is why has Africa allowed the world to believe a lie? Imagine if Africa were one country. What if Africa was not divided into 54 countries? What if Africa spoke with one voice, traded with one currency, and defended its interests collectively?

Even in its current fragmented state, Africa remains the world’s most resource-rich continent. If united, it would not beg. It would dictate.

Africa is not poor, Africa is plundered. Africa is not the poorest place on earth. Africa is the most misunderstood. Africa is not lacking in wealth. Africa is lacking in systems that protect its wealth. Africa is not a burden to the world. Africa is the world’s hidden backbone.  

Until African governments rise to prove this reality, not with speeches, but with structures, the lie will continue to travel faster than the truth.

But history has a way of correcting lies. And when Africa finally tells its story in its own voice, the world will discover a shocking truth: The poorest continent was never Africa. The poorest thing about Africa was how the world chose to see it.

Haroon Aremu Abiodun is a Nigerian writer and wrote in via exponentumera@gmail.com.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

China has lifted import tariffs on goods from 53 African countries. The new policy grants duty-free access to almost all nations on the continent, except Eswatini.

The measure took effect on Friday. It applies to African countries that maintain diplomatic relations with Beijing. Eswatini remains the only country left out because it has formal ties with Taiwan, which China considers part of its territory.

China had earlier removed tariffs on products from 33 least-developed African countries in December 2024. The latest move adds 20 more countries to the arrangement. According to Global Times, these nations will enjoy preferential duty-free access until 30 April 2028.

The Chinese Ministry of Commerce said the decision would boost the competitiveness of African exports in its market. Products expected to benefit include cocoa from Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana, citrus and wine from South Africa, as well as coffee and avocados from Kenya.

Officials also said the policy could support the growth of processing industries across Africa and attract more investment into the sector.

Lin Jian, a spokesperson for China’s foreign ministry, described the move as an “expression of China’s willingness to voluntarily expand openness and assume more international responsibilities”.

“It aims to share opportunities with Africa and achieve common development,” he said.

China remains Africa’s largest trading partner. In 2025, it imported goods worth more than £90 billion from the continent. This represents an increase of 5.4 per cent compared to the previous year. Total trade between both sides reached £255 billion.

The chairperson of the African Union Commission, Mahmoud Ali Youssouf, welcomed the development. He said the policy was “very timely” as African economies face global economic challenges and rising protectionist measures.

“I would like to express, on behalf of the African Union Commission, our sincere gratitude for this very brotherly gesture that all Africans appreciate,” he said.

The tariff removal forms part of China’s broader economic plan under its 15th Five-Year Plan covering 2026 to 2030. The plan focuses on expanding market access and strengthening trade and investment ties.

Lauren Johnston, a research fellow at the AustChina Institute, said the expanded access could increase agricultural exports. She noted it may also “help elevate rural incomes, improve rural productivity, and ultimately reduce hunger and poverty”.

However, some experts believe tariff cuts alone may not solve Africa’s trade challenges. Jervin Naidoo, a political analyst at Oxford Economics Africa, said that “many African economies still face structural constraints such as limited industrial capacity, weak logistics, and reliance on raw commodity exports, which tariff reductions alone cannot address”.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Nigerians residing in South Africa have urged the Federal Government to take firm measures to safeguard their lives and businesses amid rising xenophobic tensions in the country.

The call was made by the President of the Nigerian Citizens Association in South Africa (NICASA), Rev. Frank Onyekwelu, in a statement issued on Sunday. His appeal comes as anti-foreigner protests intensify across several South African cities, with demonstrators reportedly targeting businesses owned by foreign nationals and demanding their expulsion.

The Nigerians in Diaspora Commission (NiDCOM) had earlier advised citizens in South Africa to temporarily shut down their businesses and remain indoors for safety. The commission’s spokesperson, Abdur-Rahman Balogun, said the directive followed a notice from the Nigerian Consulate-General in Johannesburg.

NiDCOM disclosed that protests in areas such as East London, Cape Town, Durban, and KwaZulu-Natal have turned violent. Incidents of looting, property damage, and injuries have been reported. The commission also warned of planned demonstrations in Gauteng province between April 27 and 29. It noted that foreign-owned businesses are often the main targets during such unrest. Nigerians were therefore advised to close their shops on April 27, which marks South Africa’s Freedom Day, and possibly remain closed until April 29.

According to Daily Trust, despite the advisory, many Nigerians have criticised the Federal Government on social media. They argued that asking citizens to stay indoors does not address the root of the problem or guarantee their safety.

Meanwhile, Ghana has taken diplomatic steps over a related incident involving one of its citizens. Authorities in Accra summoned South Africa’s acting High Commissioner, Thando Dalamba, after a viral video showed a Ghanaian being harassed. Ghana’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that the victim was a legal resident and condemned the act. The country’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Samuel Ablakwa, also announced plans to relocate the victim, Emmanuel Asamoa, at government expense. The move followed direct engagement with South African authorities, which led to official apologies and diplomatic discussions.

In its statement, NICASA expressed strong concern over what it described as a growing pattern of hostility against Nigerians and other African nationals in South Africa.

Onyekwelu said, “We are alarmed by the increasing normalisation of hostility, manifested through inflammatory rhetoric by certain political actors, unlawful intimidation, and discriminatory enforcement practices by some law enforcement personnel.

“These actions not only undermine human dignity but also threaten the long-standing bonds of African solidarity.”

The association called for immediate high-level diplomatic engagement between Nigeria and South Africa. It also demanded a clear system for reporting and addressing cases of harassment, abuse, and xenophobic attacks. NICASA further requested accountability for security personnel found guilty of misconduct and urged the Nigerian government to reassure its citizens of their protection abroad.

The group warned that xenophobia contradicts the vision of African unity and called for a coordinated response through the African Union and regional bodies.

Reacting to the situation, the spokesperson for Nigeria’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Kimiebi Imomotimi Ebienfa, said the government is awaiting updates from its missions in Pretoria and Johannesburg. He stated, “[We are] waiting for updates from our Missions in Pretoria and Johannesburg”.

Diplomatic experts have also weighed in on the development. A former President of the United Nations Human Rights Council, Ambassador Martin Ihoeghian Uhomoibhi, condemned the attacks and urged Nigeria to respond decisively.

He said, “The Federal Government should take strict action.

“You cannot go to sleep when you are being publicly attacked. Nigeria should act and act very simply and promptly.”

Uhomoibhi dismissed suggestions that Nigerians should leave South Africa, adding, “That is not the solution. You [Nigeria] should take diplomatic action.”

“The game of diplomacy is reciprocity. You slap me, I slap you back. In diplomacy. If you keep quiet, you portray yourself as a sleepy dog or something or a nobody.”

On his part, former Nigerian ambassador to Sudan, Côte d’Ivoire, and Angola, Suleiman Dahiru, said Nigeria’s options are largely limited to diplomatic engagement.

He explained that while the attacks are “totally misplaced,” addressing them remains the responsibility of South African authorities.

“Nigeria has engaged South Africa on so many occasions. This is a diplomatic issue, and it is being handled diplomatically,” he said.

Dahiru also rejected claims that Nigerians are responsible for job losses in South Africa, describing such arguments as baseless.

“They are not working for any state government in South Africa. They are not working for any local government. So, to blame them for taking away jobs that should normally go to them is totally wrong,” he said.

He added that most African migrants operate private businesses and should not be blamed unfairly. “Nobody has stopped South African blacks from doing what other Africans are doing. Let them set up their own businesses and get their own people to patronise them,” he said.

However, Dahiru advised migrants to be mindful of how they are perceived. He noted that displays of unexplained wealth could create suspicion among locals.

By Amir Abdulazeez

Several decades into the global modern era, Africans, Asians and Latin Americans continue to be held hostage by their colonially indoctrinated inferior mindsets engineered by the blackmail and mythology of Western moral supremacy. This error is not in observing Western virtues, many of which are real. The error is in the uncritical veneration that renders their vices invisible and their judgements unchallengeable. It is evident from the events of the last three decades alone that the so-called saner climes of Europe and North America are the primary architects of global chaos and instability of nations, all in the name of injecting sanity into ‘less sane’ societies.

The ongoing US-Israel war on Iran, launched in the midst of Ramadan, is a typical doctrine of the saner climes, exhibited in its most naked form. Iran’s Foreign Minister had said three days before the war was declared that a nuclear agreement was ‘within reach’ after a third round of indirect talks in Geneva. 

The IAEA itself confirmed there was no evidence of a structured Iranian nuclear weapons programme at the time of the attack. Yet, the surprise assault assassinated Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, killed his family members and damaged schools, hospitals and even UNESCO-recognised cultural heritage sites. This is a typical catalogue of barbaric war crimes for which the West has condemned others across generations. 

The Donald Trump administration, whose seemingly rude, dishonest and arrogant officials, has offered a menu of rationalisations and a handful of conflicting justifications for the war. However, when Amnesty International confirmed that the United States was responsible for a strike that killed at least 160 primary school girls, the US officials chose arrogance through denials instead of remorse. 

In fact, the Head of the Federal Communications Commission simultaneously intimidated his own press, threatening the withdrawal of broadcast licenses of American news outlets whose war coverage he deemed unfavourable. Another trademark saner-climes mythology, muzzled in a way only a few non-saner climes can imagine. 

Meanwhile, in all these, it is the ‘lunatic’ Iran that is supposed to apologise and do nothing while it is attacked. The Iranian Regime, branded as autocratic on the premise that it compels women to cover their hair in public, is being lectured by leaders of societies whose women go out naked in the name of civilisation and whose governments topple, kill and abduct Heads of state of other countries for recklessly greedy reasons. 

Now imagine if the erratically behaving Donald Trump were the leader of any African Country, the West would have since declared him incoherent and unstable to deal with or labelled his citizens stupid for voting for him. Worse still, imagine if the Epstein scandal happened in Asia or Latin America. All these contradictions reveal with crystal clarity that Western principles are instruments of convenience. 

To understand the foundations of all these, let us revisit some history. Britain’s Industrial Revolution was fertilised by the profits of the transatlantic slave trade and the systematic plunder of India, a country whose share of global GDP fell from about 25% at the onset of colonial rule to barely 4% at independence. 

France financed much of its republican grandeur on the forced labour of West Africa and the Caribbean. Belgium’s King Leopold II transformed the Congo into a private abattoir, severing the hands of Africans who failed to meet rubber quotas, leaving behind a traumatised country that still bleeds today. 

To speak of the sanity of those climes without acknowledging that they were partly built from organised insanity inflicted elsewhere is to ignore the background to what we are witnessing today.

In the last fifty years alone, the so-called saner climes have unleashed a level of violence and destabilisation that would shame any regime they have ever deemed fit to condemn. The United States, the self-acclaimed sentinel of the free world, has engineered irrational regime changes in Chile (1973), Iran (1953 and subsequently), Guatemala (1954), Nicaragua, Panama, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria, among others. The 1973 CIA-backed coup against a democratically elected socialist president of Chile, Salvador Allende, installed Augusto Pinochet, under whose reign thousands were tortured, disappeared, or executed. Henry Kissinger, the American architect of that atrocity, received the Nobel Peace Prize from his fellow saner clime comrades. 

The French Government, through its notorious Françafrique policy, maintained a neocolonial empire across West and Central Africa long after the 1960s, propping up murderous dictators and conducting military interventions to protect economic interests, with a consistency that made a mockery of every democratic principle France professed to uphold.

The invasion of Iraq in 2003 by Western Governments is perhaps the most consequential act of manufactured catastrophe of the modern era. The war resulted in the deaths of an estimated 200,000 to one million Iraqi civilians, the obliteration of the country’s infrastructure, the rise of ISIS from the ashes of a disbanded Iraqi army and the triggering of a refugee crisis that continues to destabilise the Middle East. No one was held accountable. George W. Bush and Tony Blair are living happy lives in their saner countries. The International Criminal Court, which has indicted multiple African heads of state on much lesser crimes with considerable alacrity, found no jurisdiction to examine any of them. Meanwhile, the people of Iraq, Syria and Libya who were dismantled in the name of liberation still live in the ruins and pains of what the saner climes call democracy.

While the West was busy bombing the Middle East, Africa, the so-called backward continent, was largely attending to its own affairs of conflict resolution with a remarkable degree of maturity. The African Union mediated crises in Burundi, the Gambia and Lesotho without firing a single bullet. ECOWAS brokered peace agreements in Sierra Leone and Liberia and deployed peacekeeping forces with genuine multilateral mandates, without the casual trigger-happiness of Western powers. 

Western attitude towards violence is shamelessly selective. When Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, the Saner Clime’s response was swift, comprehensive and morally unambiguous: sanctions, weapons, diplomatic isolation and a media chorus of civilizational solidarity. This response was appropriate anyway. But the problem is its stark contrast with the Western posture toward other invasions. When Saudi Arabia launched its war on Yemen in 2015, the United States and the United Kingdom did not merely decline to intervene; they allegedly supplied the bombs, refuelled the warplanes and provided intelligence for strikes that killed thousands of Yemeni civilians and engineered one of the worst humanitarian crises on earth. 

Many argue that the actions of Western governments do not accurately reflect what their citizens stand for. This is debatable, especially when one examines certain incidents. During the Obama presidency, Edward Snowden revealed that the US National Security Agency was conducting mass, warrantless surveillance of American citizens and foreign governments, including the personal telephone of former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in flagrant violation of constitutional protections and international diplomatic norms. The response was not accountability but exile for Snowden and a classification of his revelations as treason. 

The United States has the largest prison population on earth, both in absolute numbers and per capita, administered under a system in which Black Americans are incarcerated at five times the rate of their white counterparts, in conditions that the United Nations has described as cruel. Since 1968, gun violence has claimed more American lives than all of America’s foreign wars combined. One might be inclined to believe that these controversies are ones ordinary Western citizens may not approve of.

Climate change is another damning indictment of Western moral authority in the twenty-first century. The Industrial activities enriching Europe and North America still depend on burning carbon at a scale the planet has never experienced. The United States, historically the world’s largest cumulative emitter of greenhouse gases, withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement under Donald Trump. 

Australia, another clime reputed to be considerably saner than most, has built its prosperity on coal exports and resisted meaningful emissions reduction. Some Pacific Island nations face sea submersions within this century as a consequence of decisions made in saner capitals. When these nations’ leaders speak at the United Nations with tears in their voices, the saner climes offer symbolic but empty sympathy before later returning to preserving their industrial prerogatives. 

The Western Media’s tactical twisting of narratives regarding other climes is another issue. For example, CNN may not run primetime documentaries on the Swiss banking system’s complicity in laundering the proceeds of African kleptocracy, but will rather concentrate on the primary kleptocrats. The BBC does not lead with investigations into the role of British arms dealers in sustaining African conflicts. The New York Times does not dedicate its front page to the tax avoidance schemes through which Western corporations drain billions of dollars annually from African economies (more than the continent receives in foreign aid).

In addition to all this, there is something more worrisome. The bulk of support received by these saner climes comes from their victims in the third world. In Nigeria, for instance, the blind sympathy for religious affiliations drives people to support the brazen oppression and cruel injustices perpetrated by the West. Our solidarity should be among ourselves, not with those who see and treat us as worthless humans and more like animals because of their superior moral hypocrisy. 

Additionally, our bootlicking governments, which are considered close to valueless in the International arena or even insane just like us, must stop intimidating their own citizens who decide to speak up against Western double standards. Let’s remember, the phrase “saner climes” is a moral verdict and a devastating condemnation of everywhere else except Europe and North America. Africans and all peoples of the marginalised world are owed the intellectual inheritance of critical discernment.

The world does not need more or fewer saner climes; it needs a more honest accounting of what sanity actually requires. It requires consistency: the same rules applied to the powerful and the powerless alike. It requires humility: the acknowledgement that no civilisation holds a monopoly on wisdom. 

And it requires accountability: not the selective justice of indicting the weak and glorifying the mighty, but the universal application of standards that do not bend before a Security Council veto or the impulse of a self-serving superpower. Until that accounting arrives, the presumption of Western moral authority deserves not deference, but fearless interrogation; the kind that the so-called saner climes have always claimed to celebrate and so rarely been prepared to receive.

By Kamal Alkasim

It began with hope. Like many young Nigerians chasing a better life, Sulaiman Abubakar left Kano with dreams of greener pastures. But four years after crossing into Algeria illegally, his journey has become a nightmare — one of arrest, detention, and silence that has left his loved ones pleading for help.

Sulaiman Muhammad, a native of Kano, fled his hometown’s rising cost of living and crossed into Algeria illegally. After four years abroad, he was arrested and has been detained there for more than four months.

In an interview with The Daily Reality, his fiancée Khadija Abubakar, 20, shared the untold story:

“I met him before he left for Algeria. The hardship at home forced him to go. We lost touch for a long time,” she said.

“When we reconnected, he sent ₦1 million to my family so my parents could buy marriage materials (Lefe) and prepare our wedding. A month later, back in Kano, he returned to his business, and I haven’t heard his voice since.”

Her words, spoken with sorrow, highlight the human cost of irregular migration.

His Kindness and Impact on My Life

“He is generous and very good to me. If I marry him, I know he will be a supportive partner. He sent me money as capital to grow my business, and in every situation he has never failed to support me. He always told me that if he had enough capital, he would return to Kano, start his own business, and stay home rather than travel again. Missing him is a great loss to me.”

“After he went missing, I contacted his boss on WhatsApp. We spoke, and he told me to stay calm and promised to do his best to rescue him. He thought the police might have arrested him. We talk every day, but the story remains the same. I don’t know what to do.”

A Mother’s Plea

Sulaiman’s mother, Aishatu Abubakar, who asked not to be photographed, shared her anguish: “My son is one in a million. He’s obedient. If I lose him, they will finish me. He always takes on my responsibilities. The whole family is proud of him. He promised to finish building my home. This tragedy ends that hope for me. But in my body, I feel my son will escape soon.”

Final Call for Help

“I called on people who can help me to rescue him,” Khadija said. His mother, Aisha Abubakar, added, “I call on anyone who can do anything to help us. We are ready to join hands.”

What Algerian law says about illegal immigration

Algeria’s main rule for people who enter the country without a visa or proper documents is set out in Law No. 08-11 of 25 June 2008 on the conditions of entry, residence and movement of foreign nationals. The law makes “illegal entry” a punishable offence, and once caught, migrants can be detained, fined, and then deported. 

In practice, authorities often place undocumented migrants in administrative detention centres while arranging removals, and they may also issue re-entry bans. Human rights bodies have repeatedly urged Algeria to decriminalise irregular migration and to use detention only as a last resort, but the 2008 law remains the legal basis for treating unauthorised entry as a criminal matter.

By Abdulhameed Ridwanullah

This week, the article titled “Something Big Is Happening” was published on X by AI entrepreneur Matt Shumer. It became viral with around 80million views, 36k retweets, 105k likes and 5.7k comments at the moment of this writing. The virality stems from the central thesis of the post – AI disruption of white-collar jobs within years. Days later, the CEO of Microsoft AI, Mustafa Suleyman, while granting an interview to the Financial Times, claimed that the tasks undertaken by white-collar workers will be automated within 12 to 18 months (watch the details in the video). Previously, Dario Amodei predicted that up to 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs would be automated within one to five years in his January 2026 essay.


All week, the debate has been whether AI will take your job. The discourse is loud. Spoiler alert! The discourse is almost entirely about the West. The Global South is often an afterthought. So, when I read Shumer say, “the experience everyone else is about to have,” or Suleyman say, “most tasks fully automated in 18 months”, I ask: Whose experience? Automated for whom?


The West debates whether AI will take their jobs. Much of Africa is still waiting for the jobs AI is supposedly coming to replace.


Most importantly, studies have shown that automated AI moderation barely works in the Global South (read the CDT study by Mona Elswah and her colleagues here). In my PhD research, I study how AI content moderation systems fail in Nigerian languages. The failures are systematic, not incidental. Moreover, there are over 2000 languages in Africa. AI moderation seldom works in 3 major Nigerian languages. There is a wide gap between what Silicon Valley promises about AI and the deliverables to the world population. That is the story.


Moreso, this doomsday discourse about new technology is not new. The pattern is real. Connor Boyack’s rejoinder (AI isn’t coming for your future. Fear is) beautifully captures by invoking Bastiat’s insight about the “seen and unseen” changes brought by new technology. The debate all week has been focused on the “seen”, but the “unseen” invoked by Boyack are the new industries and possibilities that emerge when technology reduces costs and eliminates drudgery. No doubt, every major technology disruption has eventually created more than it destroyed. If anything, Africa’s unofficial content creation economy is a pointer to such an opportunity. 


However, the challenge is that the benefits are never evenly distributed. They are concentrated where infrastructure exists, languages are resourced, and capital flows. The boom and doom are not the same for a worker in London or Boston and someone in Cape Town, Lagos, Kano or Nairobi. One pays $20 ChatGPT subscription and enlists AI as a co-pilot. But the other is faced with the unseen failure of AI moderation, wreaking havoc in their community. This inequality runs in both directions: who benefits from AI’s capabilities and who is harmed by its failures.


So, the future of AI is not one story. It is two. While professionals in well-resourced economies leverage, adapt, upskill and thrive, billions of people in low-resource economies remain in the blind spot of a technology that was never designed for them.  


The real question is not whether AI will take your job. It is whether AI will equally serve everyone or continue to perpetuate historical inequality.
This is the conversation we should all be having.

Abdulhameed Ridwanullah is a doctoral researcher working on AI and platform studies in Nigeria at Media for Empowerment and Impact Lab, Northeastern University, Boston. He can be reached at olaitanrido@yahoo.com

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Chinese President Xi Jinping announced on Saturday that Beijing will remove tariffs on imports from nearly all African countries starting May 1, according to state media reports.

Currently, China maintains a zero-tariff policy for imports from 33 African nations. However, last year, the government pledged to extend the policy to all 53 of its diplomatic partners on the continent.

From May, the zero-tariff arrangement will apply to every African country except Eswatini, which continues to maintain diplomatic relations with Taiwan.

Xi highlighted the move during the annual African Union summit in Ethiopia, describing it as a significant boost for development across Africa.

“This will undoubtedly provide new opportunities for African development,” he said, underscoring China’s role as Africa’s largest trading partner.

The country has been a major supporter of infrastructure projects across the continent through its expansive “Belt and Road” initiative.

African nations are increasingly turning to China and other international partners for trade, following the imposition of steep tariffs by US President Donald Trump last year.

The zero-tariff policy is expected to strengthen trade ties between China and Africa, giving African exporters greater access to Chinese markets while encouraging economic growth in the region.

By Iranloye Sofiu Taiye

The world has entered a phase in which power no longer feels compelled to wear moral disguises. From Eastern Europe to the Middle East, from East Asia to Latin America, coercion has re-emerged as an acceptable instrument of statecraft, and sovereignty has become increasingly conditional, least respected when convenient and violated when costly restraint disappears.

The Russia–Ukraine war, China’s posture towards Taiwan, Israel’s war in Gaza, and the long-standing pressure campaign against Venezuela are not isolated crises. They are symptoms of a systemic transition: the erosion of post–Cold War restraint and the reassertion of raw power politics in a crowded, mistrustful, and increasingly multipolar international system.

For Africa, this moment is not abstract. It is existential. The same forces reshaping Europe, Asia, and Latin America are already present on the African continent through resource competition, security outsourcing, debt diplomacy, sanctions regimes, proxy alignments, and political conditionality. The difference is that Africa often confronts these forces without a unified strategy, relying instead on appeals to history, morality, or international goodwill. That approach is no longer sufficient.

Realist theory, as articulated by thinkers such as Hans Morgenthau and John Mearsheimer, offers a brutally honest diagnosis of the international system. It reminds us that global politics is characterised by anarchy, not law; that survival, not virtue, motivates states; and that power, not rhetoric, ultimately determines outcomes.

Recent conflicts confirm realism’s core claims: Russia acted in Ukraine not because of moral failure but because it perceived a narrowing window to secure its sphere of influence. China’s pressure on Taiwan is driven less by ideology than by long-term assessments of capability, timing, and strategic opportunity. Israel’s conduct in Gaza reflects the logic of overwhelming deterrence in an insecure regional environment. The United States’ treatment of Venezuela illustrates how economic warfare substitutes for direct military intervention in an era of reputational constraints.

In each case, capability trumped legality, and vulnerability invited pressure. Yet realism, while accurate in diagnosing power behaviour, becomes dangerous when treated as destiny. Taken to its logical extreme, it suggests that weaker states have only three options: submission, alignment, or destruction. This is analytically lazy and politically paralysing.

History and current global practice demonstrate that survival is not reserved for the strongest but for the most strategically positioned. The key distinction between states that withstand pressure and those that collapse is not moral standing but strategic architecture.

Ukraine did not survive Russia’s invasion because it matched Moscow militarily. It survived because it transformed a bilateral war into a multilateral stake. By embedding its security dilemma within NATO, the EU, and global norms, Ukraine increased the cost of Russian victory beyond the battlefield.

Taiwan’s resilience lies not only in its arms but also in its economy. Its centrality to global semiconductor supply chains converts any military action into a worldwide economic crisis. Invasion becomes irrational not because it is impossible, but because it is prohibitively disruptive.

Palestine commands unprecedented global sympathy yet remains structurally vulnerable. Without credible security guarantees, economic leverage, or institutional power, moral legitimacy alone has not translated into sovereignty.

Venezuela’s leadership adopted confrontational rhetoric without building defensive alliances, diversified economic networks, or institutional shields. The result has been isolation, sanctions, and internal fragility, confirming that outrage without insulation invites coercion. The lesson is stark: states do not survive because they are right; they survive because they are costly to dominate. Afghanistan’s resilience is a case study. 

Africa today occupies a paradoxical position. The continent is: Central to the global energy transition (critical minerals), demographically pivotal, geopolitically courted by rival powers, and numerically powerful in multilateral institutions; alas, Africa remains strategically fragmented. Most African states still approach global politics through the language of gratitude, alignment, or moral appeal rather than through calculated leverage. The continent’s diplomatic posture is often reactive rather than anticipatory.

This is dangerous in a world where: aid is weaponised, debt is politicised, sanctions are normalised, and security assistance comes with strategic strings. Africa risks becoming the quiet theatre of the next great-power contest, not because it is weak, but because it is insufficiently coordinated.

What Africa requires is neither idealism nor cynicism, but strategic realism with agency a doctrine that accepts power politics while refusing subjugation.

Such a doctrine would rest on five pillars.

1. Strategic Indispensability: Africa must move beyond raw resource exportation toward value-chain centrality. Countries that control processing, logistics, and industrial ecosystems are harder to coerce than those that merely supply inputs.

2. Networked Sovereignty: Sovereignty in the 21st century is not isolationist. It is embedded on favourable terms through regional blocs, trade regimes, and security compacts that dilute unilateral pressure.

3. Institutional Power, Not Institutional Faith: Africa must stop treating international institutions as moral referees and start using them as arenas of contestation. Voting blocs, agenda-setting, and procedural leverage matter.

4. Strategic Non-Alignment, Not Passivity: Non-alignment must evolve from rhetorical neutrality into active hedging, diversifying partnerships, avoiding dependency traps, and exploiting multipolar competition without becoming a proxy.

5. Continental Coordination: No African state, regardless of size, can negotiate effectively alone in a hardened global system. Continental coherence in economic, diplomatic, and security-related is no longer aspirational; it is existential.

Conclusively, power will not wait for Africa to be ready; the defining feature of the emerging world order is not chaos, but selective constraint. Power will be exercised where resistance is weak, fragmented, or sentimental and restrained where costs are high, and consequences diffuse. Africa cannot afford another century of learning this lesson too late. The continent must abandon the illusion that shared history, moral standing, or international sympathy will shield it from coercion. Those narratives did not protect Ukraine, Palestine, or Venezuela. They will not protect Africa.

What will protect Africa is a strategy: the ability to anticipate pressure, restructure vulnerability, and convert relevance into leverage. In a world where power has shed its disguises, survival belongs not to the loudest protester, but to the most strategically prepared.

Iranloye Sofiu Taiye is a policy analyst and wrote via iranloye100@gmail.com.

By Hadiza Abdulkadir

Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the son of Libya’s former leader Muammar Gaddafi, has been killed in the western Libyan town of Zintan, according to local authorities and sources close to the family.

He was reportedly shot after armed men stormed his residence, disabling security cameras before opening fire. The circumstances surrounding the attack remain unclear, and no group has claimed responsibility so far.

Once seen as his father’s political heir, Saif al-Islam became a central and controversial figure following the 2011 uprising that ended the Gaddafi regime. He was captured that year, later sentenced to death in absentia for war crimes, and released in 2017 under an amnesty law.

In recent years, he had sought a return to politics, including an unsuccessful attempt to run in Libya’s postponed presidential election.

Libya’s Attorney General has announced an investigation into the killing. Analysts say his death could have political implications in a country still struggling with deep divisions and instability more than a decade after the revolution.