Harris has been in Ghana from March 26 to 29, and will be in Tanzania from March 29 to 31. Her final stop is Zambia, where she will be from March 31 to April 1. She will meet the three countries’ presidents and plans to announce public and private sector investments. 

An invitation from the U.S Embassy in Ghana

The U.S. Embassy Ghana was honored to announce the visit of Vice President of the United States of America, Kamala Harris to Ghana. We were pleased to extend a special invitation and request to have you in attendance at her keynote address.

The program was scheduled for Tuesday morning, March 28, 2023, from 8:00am to 11:00am (TBC) at Black Star Gate, adjacent to Independence Square at Osu in Accra.

The Embassy believes that this would provide you an excellent opportunity to learn firsthand about US. foreign policy and initiatives across Africa, as well as a chance to be part of a historic visit.

Credit: Mark-Anthony Johnson

“The undeclared goal of the successive waves of illegal immigration is to consider Tunisia a purely African country that has no affiliation to the Arab and Islamic nations,” he said. “Hordes of illegal immigrants from sub-Saharan Africa are still arriving, with all the violence, crime and unacceptable practices that entails.”

Two days later, as he called on Tunisia’s interior minister to crack down on irregular migration, the 65-year-old leader denied accusations from human rights groups that his hateful comments were racist, and claimed those accusing him of racism “want division and discord and seek to damage our relations with our brothers”.

He, however, did not renounce his unsubstantiated claim that migrants from sub-Saharan Africa are arriving in Tunisia as part of a plot to alter its demographics.

The estimated number of Black African migrants in Tunisia today, including those without proper documentation, is just 21,000. Given the country’s 12 million-strong population, they don’t have anywhere near the numbers necessary to alter Tunisia’s demographic composition. The elaborate plot to end Tunisia’s “affiliation to the Arab and Islamic nations” is clearly just a figment of Saied’s imagination.

Nevertheless, the president’s provocative remarks unleashed a wave of discrimination and violence against sub-Saharan Africans in Tunisia.

Hundreds were arbitrarily arrested, dismissed from work, evicted from their homes and violently assaulted.

“In my neighbourhood, Black people were sought out, chased, raped, and their homes looted by Tunisians,” a university student who was voluntarily repatriated to Guinea told the AFP news agency.

In Tunis, scores of migrant families who were left homeless as a result of Saied’s crackdown set up camp outside the headquarters of the International Organization for Migration.

The African Union swiftly and firmly rebuked Saied’s divisive comments and, in response to the consequent government crackdown and racist attacks against sub-Saharan nationals, indefinitely postponed a conference it was due to hold in Tunis in March.

The AU must move to protect Africa from the populist nationalism and racism of the likes of Saied. Without unity, the 2063 Pan-African agenda is doomed to fail. It’s high time the AU demonstrates its authority and brings in line African leaders who attempt to divide us along racial lines.

Credit: Mark-Anthony Johnson

Prime Minister Abiy has been compared to notable leaders like Barack Obama, the first black American president, the late Nelson Mandela of South Africa who is also credited with having led the African people in South Africa in a successful fight against apartheid and Former President of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev who is credited for his openness and reorientation of the Soviet strategic aims which led to the end of the cold war, among others.

Abiy who was born in western Ethiopia, joined the resistance movement against the regime of the former leader Mengistu Haile Mariam as a teenager before enlisting in the army where he quickly rose to the rank of lieutenant-colonel. He later served at the cyber-intelligence service before getting into politics and rising through the ranks of the Oromo faction of the EPRDF.

His achievements in only five months are not only unprecedented at least in the region in Africa where peace and stability has been elusive for many decades but also commendable for a young Democracy like that of Ethiopia. His pacifistic leadership style that has been hailed both at home and abroad has given optimism and a renewed hope to a region once ravaged by war.

The 41 year Old Abiy took over a country that was in the brink of a major economic catastrophe on April 2 2018 from Hailemariam Desalegn Boshe who resigned surprisingly after a series of protests by various interest groups mainly led by the youth who represent about 70% of the population and who have been desperate for a paradigm shift from the repressive leadership that has seen the country degenerate to become one  of  the poorest and least economically capable of giving jobs to its mainly young population some of whom have  graduated but  are without jobs.

He quickly embarked on one of the most ambitious reform agendas ever with a remarkable speed and scale starting with the release of thousands of political prisoners including a British national by the name Andargachew Tsege who was on death row for four years for alleged terrorism charges and apologising for heavy handedness and torture by the government officials and promising change for the better.  He proceeded to fire the head of prison services after allegations of torture on the prisoners. He also removed the names of three opposition parties from the list of terrorist organisations. Abiy further lifted the unpopular state of emergency which earned him favour and eased discontentment especially among the youth and other political opponents who were feeling disenfranchised by the limitations to freedom. He has also liberalised the media which had been stifled by the previous regimes for fear of criticism.

On the economic front, he has begun the privatisation of major government owned cooperations  including state owned Ethiopian Airlines  and state run telecoms which will be open to private domestic and foreign investment. Many other sectors such are meant to follow suit except for the finance sector which may be privatised only after the country stabilises and comes out of its current volatile situation partly caused by a severe foreign currency shortage which almost brought the country to its knees.

The situation has however been improved by an intervention by Abiy after he secured a 3 billion Dollar aid package from the AUE, part of which (1 billion) has already been injected into the economy to ease the shortage. He has also made a remarkable and bold move of extending a hand of peace to the neighbouring countries, notably Eritrea with whom Ethiopia has had a 20 year diplomatic stand off after a two-year war between the two countries that killed at least two thousand people and injured a score of others.

All these reforms have not been popular with the entire nation, especially the peace deal with Eritrea which has caused a lot of the minority groups such as the Irob people who are unhappy about the decision to normalise relationships with people they see only as enemies. Infact the botched terrorist attack on the 23rd of June 2018 at a pro Abiy rally at the vast Meske Square in Addis Ababa at which 2 people died and many others were injured was allegedly carried out by hardliner minority who are discontent with some of the reforms he has put in place.

The recent incident which took place in Shashemene , in which a person was hung upside down from a tree by a local mob after rumour circulated that he had carried a bomb at a rally to mark the return to Ethiopia of activist Jawar Mohammed  and the killing of 23 people following ethnic violence targeting minorities in Oromo heartland on the outskirts of Addis Ababa are clear signs of rising ethnic tensions which have  drawn criticism from  many quarters  who see Abiy’s failure to address security challenges and sectarian violence as something that might hinder his efforts for reconciliation, inclusion, national unity and healing.”

Even the large aid package from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has been seen by some critics as a wrong move that would amount to Abiy not only siding with Saudi Arabia and its allies in the Gulf crisis, but also subscribing to some form of participation in the power game in the region which may taint the image of the country and compromise his role as one of the most Democratic and independent leaders in Africa. With only five months in power, one can only hope that he will finish what he has started and become the true face of a new Democratic Africa lead by young visionary leaders that will steer Africa to achieve its full potential and reclaim its titled that has long been denied, “the richest continent on planet earth.” This dream however may be dead on arrival if Ethiopians of good will from all ethnic groups do not rally behind him to form a unified and all-inclusive Ethiopia.

Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and his counter President Isaias Afwerki of Eritrea, agreed to restore a cordial relationship, open Embassies in both countries and also restore flight services between the two countries as well as allow the use of the Eritrean port by Ethiopia.

“The march toward peace might have been a long time coming but we have faith in the love and solidarity of our people,” said Abiy Ahmed, “we can now imagine a future where we see no national boundaries or high walls dividing us. The people of our region are joined in common purpose.”

Scores of Ethiopians and Eritreans took to the social media immediately after the signing to express their excitement. One Samson Haileysus wrote on Facebook, “The events of these past days between Ethiopia and Eritrea are like the fall of the Berlin Wall. Only amplified 1,000 times.”

The peace deal also marked the lifting of a ban on the telecommunication line between the two countries which was celebrated by citizens of both countries who started calling immediately from across the two countries to talk to their relatives and friends marking the beginning of a new era of freedom.

The UN secretary-general, Antonio Guterres who was at the time visiting Ethiopia also hailed the peace agreement saying that the resumption of relations between the two countries was a sign of a new wind of hope that is sweeping across Africa.

In the back drop of the cross border hostility that is far from over, it might be too early to celebrate. The two sides must see this as the beginning and not the end. They must work hard so that this peace that has been so elusive for so long does not once again slip through their hands as this would mean that they lose all the gains brought about by one of the most peace loving prime ministers in the region. What is left to be seen is whether President Abiy will be smart enough to contain the discontentment among the minority groups such as the Irob people who are against the peace deal and will try to do everything to derail it.

In the film, Mazrui shows how European colonialism destroyed Africa’s ability to make its own things- a trick he termed as Predatory capitalism.

He gives the example of the Balunda, the Baluba and the Basanga people of what is today the DR Congo, who used clay produced by termites to smelt copper from which they made all manner of farming implements, weaponry and even decorations.

However, the coming of Western imperialism through predatory capitalism and appropriation of resources killed local industries.

“…and then the Europeans came. Did they want to learn from the technology they found here? Oh no! At least the Baluba and the Balunda had consulted the technology of the termites and benefited from it. But European technology was more arrogant more self-confident and less compromising. It abolished the old technological order and in its wake it left new forms of desolation in Africa.”  Mazrui said.

As Africa is now too good to ignore, global economic giants such as China, United States, France and the United Kingdom scramble for its share.

Among the four, China is coming out strong just like the European technology.

A case in point is two months ago when Investors at the Nairobi Securities Exchange incurred a loss of Sh118.7 billion as a result of tension in global trade, sparked by looming trade war between the U.S. and China.

According to Kenyas Central Bank Weekly statistical bulletin,  all indices and market capitalization declined, slowing post dividend growth momentum when the bourse recorded an equity turnover growth of 46.82 percent. 

So how and why, are they doing it?

A story is told in the Financial Times of how China set its foot in Africa way back in the 15^th century when shipwrecked sailors from the fleet of Zheng landed in an island off the northern coast of Kenya Pate Island.

The Chinese explorers reached the east coast 500 years ago swapping Chinese treasures with African exotica such as Ivory Ostriches and Zebra’s.

The contact was later consolidated under Mao Zedong with anti-colonial solidarity and the construction of engineering works, notably the 1,860km Tanzam railway linking Zambia with the Tanzanian coast.

Fast forward to today, the Asian economic powerhouse is undertaking the China Belt and Road Initiative to connect Asia, Africa and Europe.

It is a state-backed project for global dominance aimed at connecting China to 65 other countries that account collectively for over 30 percent of global GDP, and  62 percent of the world population.

Monetary-wise, Chinas debt held by Africa stands stands at $143 billion up from $50 billion in 2006 atleast according to Kenyas Standard Media.

This is exclusive of the $60 billion China’s President Xi Jinping pledged to African governments during the recently held Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) summit in Beijing.

The pledge is to be given as $20 billion in new credit lines, $15 billion in foreign aid: grants, interest-free loans and concessional loans, $10 billion for a special fund for development financing and $5 billion for a special fund for financing imports from Africa.

Jinping also urged Chinese private companies to invest not less than $10 billion in Africa in the next three years.

According to data from the China Africa Research Initiative, China has disbursed loans to atleast 48 African countries. Angola is the top recipient of the Chinese loans, with $42.8 billion disbursed over 17 years.

Ethiopia follows in second position with $13.7 billion, Kenya is third at $9.8 billion.

The East African nation currently owes the Asian country $5.5 billion slightly below debt to World Bank that stands at  $5.8 billion.

The two lenders alone now account for about one fifth of Kenya’s total public debt load, which has already crossed the $50 billion mark.

In fourth and fifth position is the Republic of Congo and South Sudan owing the Chinese $7.42 and $6.49 billion respectively.

A majority of the lending is used for infrastructure development.

Sri Lanka Example

It is said that when a deal is too good, we should think twice.

This is exactly where Africa, once labelled a dark continent by the West is. Its sweet-sour position has seen some of its countries surrender its precious assets to repay the debts.

For instance, In December 2017, Sri Lanka formally handed over Hambantota Port to China on a 99-year lease after struggling to pay loans from the Chinese nation.

Reports by the New York Times, noted that Sri Lanka politicians said the Hambantota deal valued at $1.1 billion, was necessary to chip away the debt estimated to be more than $8 billion.

Word on the streets early last month was that China, famous for its iconic great wall would lake over Zambia’s National electricity supplier- ZESCO as a guarantee to its debt.

However the Edgar Lungu led Nation has since denied the rumors.

Even as China continues to play santa clause to desperate African Nations, the United states considered Africa’s largest donor is not becoming uncomfortable.

In August, US Senate raised concern about high infrastructure debt issued to developing countries by China under the Belt and Road Initiative. It termed Chinese funding as ‘predatory’.

A letter dated August 3, posted on Georgia senator David Perdue’s website, the senate raises concern about China’s debt trap diplomacy and negative effects of BRI to developing countries which latter turn to IMF for bailouts.

“We write to express our concern over bailout requests to the International Monetary Fund by countries who have accepted predatory Chinese infrastructure financing. The financial crisis illustrates dangers of China’s debt trap diplomacy to countries and security threats to US,’’ the letter said in part.

According to the letter, 23 out of 68 countries currently hosting BRI funded projects are at risk of debt distress while future BRI related financing in eight of those countries raises concerns about sovereign debt sustainability.

CARI reveals that the US disbursed $12 billion just to Sub-Saharan Africa in 2017, and $250 million to North Africa.

However Deborah Brautigam, CARI director says that “This could change under the Trump administration’s budget cuts.”

On the other hand, in her visit to Africa in August, UK Prime minister Theresa May pledged pledged $5.2 billion in support for African economies, to create jobs for young people.

In addition she pledged a shift  in aid spending to focus on long-term economic and security challenges rather than short-term poverty reduction.

Data from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development shows that UK direct investment in Africa was $55.51 billion compared with $57.59 billion from the US.

As the scramble continues, the rest of the world can only watch if African Nations and its leaders will resist the easy to get Chinese loans or (just like T’challa in the fiction movie Black panther) it will rally its muscles and release full power of Black Panther to defeat its foes and secure the safety of its people.

This crisis is the starting point of any conversation around the historic summit of Abidjan-Côte d’Ivoire between the African Union (AU) and the European Union (EU). From this ambivalent sea, which unites and divides at the same time with its businesses and its open wounds of colonialism, with the fragile Arab springs and the danger of Islamic radicalism that has become a terrorist threat in Europe. Starting from this unique moment in European history and trying to understand if and how a sustainable balance will be found between two areas of the world that need greater cohesion and understanding of each other’s needs in order to create opportunities.

Changing Perceptions

The summit that took place in the economic capital of Ivory Coast has brought a number of innovations, a sign of good will; of great importance, the European Union and the African Union sat together at the negotiating table. This was a step forward as opposed to the past four summits where Africa was not represented in a unitary way by a continental organization. Another new feature was the main theme and tittle of the meeting that stated, “Investing in young people for a rapid and inclusive growth and for sustainable development”. It is mostly the young people that are fleeing Africa for Europe. It is therefore important to invest in them in order to start the virtuous circle that both continents would benefit from. It is a change – hopefully a shifting one, that came at the end of a 2017 during which the relations between the two shores of the Mediterranean became more intense. The idea is not only to tackle the immigration question, but also create partnerships with African countries to avoid being undercut by the Chinese investment in the continent, “we are not just looking at what we can do for Africa but also what we can do with Africa, together”, Federica Mogherini, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security, said in May 2017; when he was presenting the proposals for a strategic partnership with the continent. The same was echoed by the European Council President Donald Tusk in the final press conference of the Abidjan summit: “The European Union is the main partner of Africa and its closest neighbour. It is also the largest investor, the main trading partner, the largest donor of humanitarian aid and development and provides the most important contribution to peace and security. This summit demonstrated our determination to further strengthen our partnership “.

Statements of intent or concrete actions?

Did the summit bring forth something concrete beyond the statements by Tusk or just statements of intent? At the end of the meeting the participants signed a joint declaration containing the priorities of the partnership between Europe and Africa in four fundamental areas namely the economic opportunities for young people, peace and security, mobility and migration and cooperation in the field of governance. In particular, the new EU External Investment Plan the first and main topic of the summit was presented. The European Commission will provide € 4.1 billion to enable € 44 billion of sustainable investments by 2020 in five main areas: Energy sustainability and connectivity: investments in renewable energy, energy efficiency and energy in transport ; Financing of medium and small companies and micro-enterprises: these companies represent the main employers; Sustainable agriculture, rural entrepreneurship and agribusiness: aims to facilitate access to finance for small landowners, cooperatives, and small, medium and micro enterprises in the agricultural sector, to address the issue of food security; Sustainable cities: activate investments in sustainable urban development, in municipal infrastructures including mobility, water, health, waste management and disposal, renewable energy; Digital for development: to promote the development of innovative digital solutions that respond to local needs, the demand for financial inclusion and job creation.

The hope is that from words you can move on to the facts, to give a signal of real change in the approach between the two shores of the Mediterranean, which in Gibraltar, drew very close but not close enough.

The trend does not seem destined to change in the near future, considering the fertility rate of the European populations (under 2.1 between 2010 and 2015) compared to that of the African populations.  Still according to the surveys conducted by UNDESA, in the five-year period 2010-2015, 22 countries had a birth rate of more than five children per woman, 20 of these were African countries. Even considering a downward alignment of the birth rate of emerging countries, population projections see Europe fall from 742 million in 2017 to 716million in 2050 and to 653 in 2100, Africa double from 1.266 billion in 2017 to 2,528 billion in 2050 and again at 4,468 billion in 2100.

Whether Europe likes it or not, it will continue to be the destination of migratory flow from Africa in the coming years. The solution can no longer be an emergency, in an attempt to block or control these flows. The African continent must be seen as an opportunity for growth, a market still to be developed, almost completely; something the Chinese have long realised. Compared to China, Europe has been rather late to this realization. However, the historical links shared since antiquity and geographical proximity are an advantage that Europe still maintains over China, with regard to trade. According to the European Commission’s Directorate General for Trade, 36% of Africa’s trade takes place with Europe against 15% with China. The figures for 2016 of the European Union indicate an overall trade exchange between the two continents of over 260 billion euros, 116 of imports from Africa and 145 of exports to Africa; 82% of imports and about 88% of exports are on industrial products.

The migration issue is the most topical issue. Many European countries are worried, especially those bordering the Mediterranean directly, such as Spain and Italy, which have witnessed an unprecedented flow of migrants. But, if we look carefully, beyond the contingent urgency, this problem has been existent for several years: at least a decade, and the representatives of the two sides have been discussing it for a long time, without reaching a lasting and effective solution.

Adopted for some years now, the European approach to the migrant problem is to make the Maghreb states a sort of containment zone for those fleeing sub-Saharan nations. In other words, the Maghreb countries have been asked to become “gendarmes” instead of their European counterparts, in exchange for some symbolic financial aid. Even if some European countries have not spared the European funds allocated for this project, reality shows day by day that the migration phenomenon cannot be stopped by the mere installation of detention centres or pure repressive measures . The migration flow is so far reaching that the resources available to the Maghreb countries are not adequate to counter it effectively, bearing in mind that the situation in Africa continues to deteriorate. In simple terms, it’s like trying to empty the ocean with a spoon!

Algeria has tried everything possible to stop illegal immigration. Highly expensive rejection operations; long and often unsuccessful negotiations with the embassies of the countries from which migrants flee, clustering centres, strengthened border controls, especially after the deterioration of the situation in the Sahel, but still the migration flow has never been as serious as in recent times. As transit countries for sub-Saharan migrants, the Maghreb states have themselves become a host country, with thousands of irregular migrants, who move and who work illegally, often exploited.  And, in addition to sub-Saharan citizens, it has also become the homeland of Maghreb migrants. From Morocco alone, there are about 250,000 migrants who have come to look for job opportunities across the border. Algeria has so far paid about 100 million dollars to manage this problem, but without managing to stop the flow of migrants or preventing the boats of death from heading to the south of Europe. It is clear that under such circumstances, the problem cannot be reduced to a matter of public order and police, because this will never be a solution. On the contrary, the development policies for sub-Saharan Africa, which give these economic immigrants the hope of a substantial improvement in their lives and of greater dignity, are suitable and therefore, most welcome.

The second pending issue is the security situation in the Maghreb and its neighbouring territories. Even here, despite bilateral cooperation agreements, there are still differences between Europeans and Africans. Issues like the French military intervention in Libya and in the north of Mali, and also the refusal of Algeria, for example, to intervene militarily outside its borders, both in Libya and in Mali, and the initiatives taken, outside of the African Union (UAE) and the European Union (EU) agreements, by some countries contribute in a certain way, to maintaining this climate of mutual distrust.

On the other hand, the efforts made by Algeria for the peaceful resolution of the Mali crisis through long and difficult discussions between the warring factions were short-circuited by the French military intervention. Also the project for the creation of an inter-forces major state of the Sahel countries, based in Tamanrasset, in southern Algeria, was placed in the closet by the creation, from Paris, of a G5 Sahel force. In this context Algeria, which had provided over $ 100 million in aid to the countries of the region, as part of the fight against terrorism, and which provided many training sessions for the benefit of its officers in the field, still refuses to be part of the African force created by France.

Finally, the economic question. The Maghreb countries expect even more from the European Union, especially in terms of direct investments, while now only trade exists between the two economic areas. European investments in this region of Africa are at their lowest according to these countries, who are eager to pull their economies out of their dependence on old systems that keep them at the mercy of fluctuations in global markets. The Maghreb countries dream of having their industrial fabrics able to create jobs and wealth, in order to give hope to their youth. They also dream of seeing their products placed on European markets: in particular, agricultural products that could provide them with some foreign currency.

The aforementioned “win-win” partnership is not yet on the agenda. The Maghreb is still perceived as a small market for European products which may only be appropriate as an alternative for European companies in difficulty.

Kenya has had various presidential petitions challenging an election since it held the multi-party election of 1992 and the courts on technicalities have thrown all of them out. In that year, when the then president, Daniel Arap Moi defeated the opposition, a total of six petitions were filed at the High Court, however, all of them apart from the one by one Mr. Kenneth Matiba, were thrown out on procedural grounds. Nevertheless, in 2017’s August 8 presidential contest, the sitting President, Mr. Kenyatta’s main challenger and Opposition leader Raila Odinga filed a petition at the Supreme Court, the country’s apex court, challenging his win.

According to the electoral agency, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC), Kenyatta garnered 8.2 million votes, representing 54.2 per cent of valid votes cast beating his rival National Super Alliance’s (Opposition) Raila Odinga who had 6.8 million votes. Mr. Odinga would later contest the results in the Court of Appeal on a number of grounds. He argued that the results were manipulated to give his fiercest rival, Kenyatta, a win.

He even in one instance, went live on two different television channels, Qatar based Al Jazeera and BBC to claim that his rival colluded with IEBC technology experts to tamper with the results. Mr. Odinga also maintained that he would only participate in another election if the electoral body was restructured to have the official who he said had tampered with the vote resign.

Based on these grounds, a historical ruling and a first in the continent African continent saw the country’s Supreme Court nullify the re-election of President Kenyatta and ordered a new vote to be conducted within 60 days. It was a momentous time for Kenya, one of Africa’s most populous nations, and for democracy in general. Previously, the country’s disputed presidential election in 2007 set off bloodshed that left at least thousands dead and 600,000 more displaced around the country. But this time, figures across the Kenyan political landscape, including the President whose victory was wiped away, appeared to accept the decision and called on supporters to do the same.

The ruling also offered a potent display of judicial independence on a continent where courts often come under intense pressure from political leaders. Fresh elections were initially set for October 17 but later rescheduled for the 26 of the same month.

Opposition’s Odinga made good his threat to boycotted the repeat exercise if no proper changes were not made in the country’s election body IEBC before the second round of elections. The electoral body argued that there was minimal time to make the reforms the Opposition had called for. It instead, asked its chairman, who had been adversely mentioned by Odinga as the mastermind of the flawed election, to step aside and let the other officials conduct the exercise.

IEBC, nevertheless, went ahead to conduct another election without Mr. Odinga. There were however, other candidates in the repeat poll. The incumbent was once again declared the winner having garnered 7,483,895 votes out of the 7,616,217 valid votes cast (98 percent).

Three Kenyans contested the results but Kenyatta’s victory was this time around upheld after the evidence adduced lacked merit. This attracted a mixed reaction from various parts of the country with Kenyatta’s supporters taking to the streets to celebrate the decision while Opposition supporters coming out in protest.

The opposition leader has however maintained that he would have his own swearing in as the ‘Peoples President’ and proceed to implement the opposition manifesto, and true to his word, Mr. Odinga was swore himself in on the 30^th of January in a ceremony witnessed by thousands of his supported, an event that saw to the closure of Kenya’s key media houses so that they would not transmit it, further throwing the country into a deeper political crisis. It is not clear what the opposition has up its sleeve while the Uhuru government is yet to give any solid reaction to these events. It is therefore a wait-and-see situation in Kenya at the moment.

According to the minister, international Development Cooperation must become a pillar for relations between Italy and the African states. Thus, Italy must increase its International Aid budget, with the aim of bringing it to 0.5% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), just like Germany. The minister however, pointed out that the Italian government should not only peg its investments in the development of the continent to ethical and moral issues but also to economic ones, so that the Italian system can realize its full potential in the world.

He emphasized that this is the real ultimate bet that Italy must be willing to take in order to change the quality of its relations with Africa, so as to trigger the spark of a balanced and sustainable economic development and not only a buffer to poverty. The exports of Italy’s mechanical industry are worth more than the those of food, fashion and design put together; and Africa needs Italy if it is to start any serious industrialization process, however it is also important to train those who will use the machines, said the minister, to underline the potential of these markets.

It is also important for the European Union (EU) to open up and be willing to change its approach in the way it relates with Africa. The funds allocated by the EU budget to internal Cohesion (the funds for the less developed European regions, such as Southern Italy for example) should, according to the minister, be gradually moved to external cohesion, or to bolster the economies of the states neighbouring the European Union. According to the minister, in order to promote the development of the African continent, EU agricultural subsidies and protectionism should be reduced to encourage the arrival of more African products in Europe.

In 2012 Italy allocated 0.14% of the GDP to the International Development Cooperation. This percentage rose to 17% in 2013, to 0.19% in 2014, to 0.22% in 2015, to 0.26% in 2016 and now, according to the commitments made by the government, it should reach 0.27%. % in 2018 and 0.3% in 2020. The funds allocated for 2018 amount to about 5 billion, however, a substantial part of the funds will remain in Italy for use in the management of migrants. In 2017, as much as 40% of the funds earmarked for international cooperation was utilized on migrants.