After a series of coups, one country after another is moving to expel the traces of former empires
Africa is the cradle of human civilization and the planet’s richest continent in terms of natural resources. But according to Captain Ibrahim Traore, the president of Burkina Faso, younger generations cannot understand why, despite its riches, Africa continues to be the poorest region of the world. Across the continent we have seen uprisings and armed rebellions by anti-colonialist military leaders who have sought to reclaim their sovereignty from European imperialist powers, particularly France. Guinea, Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger are just some of the countries that make up the collective of former French colonies in West Africa. They have long served as the key source of natural resources for France and other European powers. Niger supplies 15% of the uranium needed for French nuclear reactors. Burkina Faso is a key exporter of gold, while Guinea is a crucial entry and exit point for trade between France and its former colonies. Mali is another major exporter of gold, and has been a battleground where the government has fought various armed Islamist groups. The map of West Africa began to change radically in 2021. Like dominos, pro-French regimes began to fall to military uprisings, starting with Mali in May 2021 and the coup led by Assimi Goita, who immediately demanded that the French military leave the country. The Central African Republic also expelled French troops in June 2021. This was followed by the military takeover in Guinea by Mamady Doumbouya, a former French legionnaire, in September 2021. One year later, Traore became the world’s youngest president after seizing power in Burkina Faso, and he proceeded to expel the French military in January 2023. Finally, the military rebellion in Niger on July 26 led by Abdourahamane Tchiani, now assuming the presidency, also expelled French forces and banned the export of uranium to France. The case of Burkina Faso and Traore is particularly interesting. During his recent trip to St. Petersburg for the Russia-Africa summit, Traore gave a speech in which he called Russia part of the African family. He condemned the looting of the continent by European powers, and ended with the slogan “Homeland or death! We shall win!” – echoing the words of Ernesto Che Guevara and the national motto of Cuba. Many have compared Traore to Thomas Sankara, the revolutionary leader of Burkina Faso from 1983 to 1987, who was also called the “African Che Guevara.” Sankara likewise expelled French forces, nationalized the country’s resources, and implemented socialist policies of redistribution, before being assassinated in a pro-French coup. So, what are France and its partners likely to do now? The United States and Britain have already cut all aid to Niger and its allies in response to their ban on exports of uranium to France. On July 30, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), a confederation that includes many of France’s former colonies, issued an ultimatum to Niger – Tchiani had one week to step down or a military intervention would begin with the backing of France. Nigeria, a key French ally in the region and the leader of ECOWAS, was chosen as the launchpad for a possible military intervention. However, the senate of Nigeria rejected the demand of the highly unpopular president, Bola Tinabu, to authorize military action against its neighbour. The ultimatum has since expired, and Niger proceeded to close its airspace to any commercial aircraft. The presidents of Burkina Faso and Mali have responded that any military intervention in Niger will amount to a declaration of war against them. But the African states also have an ace up their sleeve – their long-time friendship with Russia. Delegations from 49 African countries attended the recent Africa-Russia summit in St. Petersburg. Russian President Vladimir Putin declared support for Africa’s battle against neo-colonialism, stating that Moscow had written off a total of $23 billion in African debt and confirming that more than 50,000 tons of grain will be delivered free of charge to the continent. The friendship between the peoples of Africa and Russia stretches back to the 18th century. The story of Abram Gannibal, the African general in the service of the Russian Army and the great-grandfather of the legendary poet Alexander Pushkin, is among the most fascinating parts of the lore of Russian-African relations. Brought as a child slave to Peter the Great from Constantinople, he was freed from servitude and educated at the tsar’s palace. He would rise not only to become a high-ranking military officer in the Russian Army, but also a tutor to a young Alexander Suvorov, the famed general who defeated the Ottoman Empire in two wars, among other accomplishments. In the twilight of the scramble for Africa, only one nation stood independent among the sea of colonial conquests – Ethiopia. The attempted Italian invasion and subjugation ended in a catastrophic failure for the colonizers, with Russia providing crucial assistance to the Ethiopian nation fighting for its sovereignty and independence. The Soviet Union became the “armory of the oppressed” for many young nations of Africa seeking their independence from their colonial masters, as arms and ammunition produced in USSR were delivered to the many revolutionary and anti-colonial forces in the region, such as the MPLA in Angola, the ANC in South Africa, the PAIGC and its leader Amilcar Cabral in Guinea-Bissau, and many others. The memory of this solidarity is still fresh in the minds of many Africans, young and old. The support and admiration for Russia echoes across the African continent, beyond the former colonies of France. During the mass rally of the Economic Freedom Fighters of South Africa, the group’s leader, Julius Malema, condemned the actions of France on the continent and proclaimed: “We are Putin, and Putin is us! And we will never support imperialism against President Putin!” A true sense of change seems to be sweeping across Africa, away from the old European colonizers and towards a new multipolar world. By Denis Rogatyuk, a Russian-Australian journalist and writer based in Latin America, international director of El Ciudadano media platform, one of Chile’s largest independent media sources
On July 29, Nigerian Afrobeats superstar Wizkid performed in front of a sold-out Tottenham Hotspur Stadium in London, becoming the first African artist to earn that title. With 45,000 fans in attendance, the Grammy winner kicked off the European leg of his “More Love, Less Ego” tour. He joins Beyoncé and The Red Hot Chili Peppers as the only other musical acts to perform at the stadium so far this year. After the show, he also became the first African artist to receive the BRIT Billion award for reaching 1 billion music streams in the UK. This is the second time Wizkid has made live performance history in the UK; in 2021, he sold out London’s O2 Arena for three dates – the first African artist to do so. Afrobeats continues to skyrocket in popularity around the world. In 2024, the Grammy Awards will also feature a new category: Best African Music Performance, which “recognizes recordings that utilize unique local expressions from across the African continent,” the organizers said in a statement earlier this year. Wizkid’s recent show is the latest in a run of historic performances by some of the genre’s biggest stars this year – including Burna Boy, who became the first African artist to headline a sold-out stadium show (London Stadium) in the UK in June, and then a US stadium (Citi Field in New York) in July. Along with Tems and Rema, Burna Boy also brought Afrobeats to center stage at the NBA All-Star Game halftime show in February. Later this year, Tiwa Savage – often called the “Queen of Afrobeats” – is slated to become the first female artist from the popular genre to headline at OVO Arena Wembley in the UK, with a scheduled performance on November 26.
Cogent criticisms have been made about the ability of the doctrine of comparative advantage to deal with the obvious global disadvantage of developing countries. The concern here is that ‘in a world of uneven development free trade, or even trade per se, may be inherently unequalising. There is a range of economic arguments that explain why the doctrine of comparative advantage may be unable to deliver its promised welfare benefits to developing countries. One of the important general arguments in this context is that comparative advantage is created and cumulative, rather than natural, being based on historical development processes, acquired skills, cultivated industry patterns or “first mover” benefits, so it can change over time, can be shaped by governments or industry leaders and can decay through neglect. If this is so, then the cumulative comparative advantage of developed countries will ensure either that inequalities remain or that they take an unacceptably long time to disappear. Another important school of economic thought postulates perpetual inequalities as a consequence of free trade. According to this argument, where there is low elasticity in demand for the exports of a country but high elasticity in domestic demand for imports, then export prices relative to import prices will result in a continuous trade deficit. As this tends to describe the terms upon which at least some developing countries export their primary products and import manufactured products, it is argued that under free trade conditions these developing countries will remain trapped in a trade deficit preventing them from realising the welfare gains promised by free trade doctrine. These are not, of course, the only explanations for the current trade deficit and retarded economic development suffered by developing countries. It is certainly the case that the adverse economic position of developing countries has been exacerbated by the fact that they have been denied comparative advantages that they might have otherwise enjoyed. In this respect two factors, in particular, are worthy of note. The first is that the requirements for the global protection of intellectual property rights, the large scale benefits of which are overwhelmingly enjoyed by undertakings based in the developed world, deny to developing countries any comparative advantage that they may have accrued in the processes or imitation of certain manufactured goods and in incremental innovation. To place this in context, it is essential to understand that many of today’s developed countries once placed extensive economic reliance on the unfettered ability to copy manufactured goods emanating from other more developed economies. Secondly, the trading position of many developing countries is adversely affected by the fact that developed countries have continued to protect their domestic markets for certain primary products and manufactured goods exported from developing countries. However, the extent to which the opening of developed country markets to such exports would alleviate the trade deficits of developing countries remains a matter of debate amongst economists. The protectionism of developed countries is a response to what is perceived as a potential flood of ‘cheap imports’ from the developing world. It is not uncommon for industries in developed countries to argue that, in order to survive, they need protection from such imports, which are made on the back of low labour costs in developing countries. From the free trade point of view, this argument denies to developing countries their legitimate comparative advantage. In economic terms, some questions have been raised about the validity of this free trade argument given that many of the employers of low- cost labour in the developing world are multinational corporate interests, which marry high technology with low cost labour in order to achieve an advantage that gives little in the way of welfare benefits to the host developing country. In addition to this, it is not clear that the developed world market for cheap manufactured imports from developing countries functions in quite the way that classical free trade economists postulate. Theoretically, the comparative advantage of the developing country will be realised when developed world consumers purchase the cheaper imports rather than more expensive domestic products. However, increasing numbers of consumers in the developed world eschew the products of low-cost labour on ethical grounds. This not only shows the limits of economic theory but also indicates that the debate about free trade should transcend arguments about the validity in solely economic terms of the doctrine of comparative advantage. Ethical concerns about the exploitation of labour, whether by multinational corporate interests or by domestically based interests, are one of a number of non- economic arguments that may be made about an unfettered free trade regime. What these arguments have in common is the rejection of wealth maximisation as the ultimate measure of human happiness and attainment. As Keynes famously wrote: “If it were true that we should be a little richer, provided that the whole country and all the workers in it were to specialise on half- a dozen mass-produced products, each individual doing nothing and having no hopes of doing anything except one minute, unskilled repetitive act all his life long, should we all cry out for the immediate destruction of the endless variety of trades and crafts and employments which stand in the way of the glorious attainment of this maximum degree of specialised cheapness? Of course we should not – and that is enough to prove the case for free trade . . . has left something out. Our task is to redress the balance of the argument”. The critique of free trade based upon the rejection of wealth maximization draws stark attention to the difficulty in attempting to divide the political and the economic. The decision to embrace a free trade regime is not, and can never be, a purely economic one. Rather, it is a political choice involving, amongst other things, economic considerations. Joseph Stiglitz underlines the significance of this point: “There are important disagreements about economic and social policy in our democracies. Some of these disagreements are about values, how concerned should we be about our environment (how much environmental degradation should we tolerate, if it allows us to have a higher GDP); how concerned should we be about the poor (how much sacrifice in our total income should we be willing to make, if it allows some of the poor to move out of poverty, or to be slightly better off ); or how concerned should we be about democracy”. Overall, the debate on the non-economic merits and de-merits of the comparative advantage doctrine is one that even the most thoughtful modern proponents of free trade. In this, as in so much else, modern free trade theorists appear to be embracing a type of intellectual foreclosure that dates back to the work of Adam Smith. Adam Smith postulated non-economic effects of free trade, both positive and negative. On the positive side, both he and Ricardo cited cosmopolitanism and international harmony as a non- economic benefit of free trade. However, Smith saw that the pursuit of material wealth had less desirable effects.
The Ethiopian Ministry of Foreign Affairs traces the relationship between Finland and Ethiopia to the 1950s when Finnish missionaries first came to Ethiopia. In the late 50s, the duo also signed agreements to establish diplomatic relations. Fast forward, 60 plus years, the relations are as lively as they have ever been. The long term partnership has been evident in progresses registered in the country, both in the economic development as well as in the education and water sector. Finland, through its development cooperation for the years 2021–2024, has channeled funds totaling EUR 75.2 million for bilateral development cooperation mainly to supporting rural economic development and improving water services as well as developing the quality of inclusive basic education. The resources are also said to be directed towards improving the operational capacity of private sector operators. Cognizant of the significant relations between the two countries, Capital got in touch with Ambassador Outi Holopainen, Finland’s Ambassador to Ethiopia and the African Union for in depth insights on the cooperation. Excerpts;
Capital: What are the major priority areas in the Finland-Ethiopia relations? Amb. Outi Holopainen: Our bilateral relationships stem from different sectors and at different levels. For instance, we enjoy great political relations which entail our political engagement with Ethiopia at different levels. A little before I started my term here in November 2019, there was an official visit of the President of Finland. That of course is a highlight of the highest possible level of interaction between the two countries. Our other priority agenda includes economic relations. That has however been slightly hampered in the last three years primarily by COVID, but we are on pace to strengthen our economic ties even further to benefit both countries. Last but certainly not least, is on the development cooperation sphere. For us, Ethiopia is one of the biggest partners in development cooperation in the whole world and our bilateral programme in Ethiopia is the largest that we have in Africa.
Capital: Since 2018, there have been a lot of political changes and reforms in Ethiopia. How would you best describe the political relations between the two countries, before 2018 and now? Amb. Outi Holopainen: Our countries have had long standing successful relations for more than half a century. Of course, each phase is different from the other in terms of political relation but nonetheless we have enjoyed fluid relations. Just like weather, sometimes it is rainy, sometimes it is cloudy and sometimes it is sunny. For us, no matter the political weather, we want to keep up our relationship, and diplomatic engagement. We see Ethiopia as a partner in addressing the global issues. When we talk about climate change or pandemics, or any other global problems, we want to work together to realize best results for the greater good.
Capital: What are your thoughts on the impact of the war in the northern part of Ethiopia in view of the bilateral relations of the two countries? Amb. Outi Holopainen: We were following with great concern the developments and it is an unhappy situation for everybody when violence breaks out causing so much damage. Of course we were not in any way involved in the in the conflict, but we were following with concern specially from the point of view of the civilians that were in the midst of the conflict and in trying to find ways to encourage the parties towards a peaceful solution.
Capital: Over the last three years that you have served in this diplomatic mission as ambassador, what are the areas that the Embassy has worked on with regards to promoting economic cooperation between the two countries? Amb. Outi Holopainen: The last three years of course have had its ups and downs. The global pandemic for the last couple of years had created some practical hindrances for people in form of business or other fields of life as well. Additional to that was the conflict in the Northern part of the country which gained a lot of visibility worldwide with international media creating some kind of negative picture. To this end, we have been in contact with Finnish companies, giving factual information on the areas affected by the conflict and giving briefs of peaceful and safe areas of doing business. As you well know, apart from the Northern region, the other regions were peaceful and their business environments had huge potential for a thriving business, and that is what we explained to all our prospect Finnish investors. For our established Finnish businesses here which were facing difficulties in their business environments, we served as a conduit of information exchange whereby we relayed the challenges to the Ethiopian government in order to come up with suitable tailored solutions. So the Embassy primarily served as a mediator, with our main objective being to deepen and broaden our economic ties.
Capital: How many Finnish companies would you say are here? How much is the trade balance between the two countries? Amb. Outi Holopainen: It is less than 20. There are a few big ones, there are some smaller ones and then we have some companies that are just coming for some projects within a stipulated timeline. With these interactions, we have clearly seen that there is huge business potential to be done in this country. Regarding trade balance, it’s difficult to say the exact numbers because there is a lot of change.
Capital: Finland is one of the global leaders in terms of delivering the best education. In this regard, how are you working to support Ethiopia’s education sector? Amb. Outi Holopainen: This is something that is at the core of our activities across our global relations. We have seen firsthand how a good inclusive education system can transform a country, as Finland went from a very poor, rural, agrarian country to a very successful and prosperous nation. That’s why we are happy to share this example and to also promote inclusive quality education in other countries as well. Moreover, education is one of the three main pillars of our development cooperation with Ethiopia. At the policy level, we promote quality education by not only bringing the kids to school, but also in making sure that they really have the possibility to excel. We also put the needs first and uphold the rights of children with disabilities in education. To this end, Finland has been facilitating arrangements where children with disabilities can go to school with necessary equipment and facilities. Furthermore, many Ethiopian teachers have been educated in Finland for this inclusive education. In addition to working at the policy level with regards to inclusive education, we are also very active in the WASH sector such as providing WASH services to the schools, so that it would be also more convenient for girls to participate in school. The other dimension is also delivering education access in emergency settings such as IDP camps and IDP sites. The Finland embassy to this end has been working with UNICEF in promoting education in situations where families have left their homes and their communities and are forced to stay for a longer time at the IDP sites. In such situations, children often find themselves most affected but that should not mean they should lack quality education and at the moment we are working to make sure that education is accessible to those in need in Tigray region and some parts of Amhara.
Capital: Finland is one of the global leaders when it comes to technology and digitalization. Since Ethiopia is in its way to digitalization, how is Finland working with the country on this development goal? Amb. Outi Holopainen: Well there is a very practical example on ground at the moment. When the Telecom sector was opened up, with Safaricom Consortium winning the first license; the Finnish technology company, Nokia Networks Company, was awarded a contract to build part of the network for Safaricom. So to this regard, we are actively involved on the ground by building quality networks to promote the digitalization or the possibilities for digitalization in the society.
Capital: Have you had any project in gender equality? Amb. Outi Holopainen: Gender equality is mainstreamed in everything that we do, be it the WASH sector or education or rural livelihoods. Gender equality is always in our agenda and there are many things that we do to uphold this. One example, where we think that we have been very successful recently on the basis of the Finnish initiative, is that we launched a system of digital land right registration, so that people who live in rural areas and those who don’t own the land, but have the right to use the land get to do so. So there is now a system where the land rights are registered in a digital system. And that was created under a Finnish project. This project which is also supported by the World Bank and some other big donors has now developed a whole system which can cover the likes of the rural areas in all parts of the country. The special focus is on those women who have land under their disposal and who are cultivating land and when they land right is registered, they will have more security of the land. As a result, they can then also use the land and the right as collateral or can even rent it or give inheritance to their children. We also financially support many women’s rights organizations. There are many Finnish organizations that come here and cooperate with Ethiopian counterparts. I always say that gender equality is a real integral part of what we do here at our diplomatic mission, in all of our projects.
Capital: Does the Finnish government provide humanitarian aid in Ethiopia? Amb. Outi Holopainen: Yes, we do. We achieve this partly through UN organizations and UN agencies like the World Food Programme as well as through many Finnish NGOs that are active both on humanitarian aid and development, and issues such as gender and equality.
Capital: Your embassy is actively involved in WASH programmes in the country. Can you shed light on the recent progresses and success made thus far? Amb. Outi Holopainen: I am happy to talk about that because that is something that has been ongoing already for the past 20 or 30 years. The foundational idea is building sustainable water points in the rural areas so that rural communities can have access to fresh water near their houses, so that the children and women don’t need to go for such a long way every morning to fetch fresh water. The ownership of the project is within the community. So when the water point is built, it is actually the community that takes responsibility for that. We fund these projects in cooperation with the local authorities who are involved in creating the conditions and giving the materials to building the water points. However, the community bears the responsibility and ownership and the maintenance that comes after. This has led to the youth to become innovative and start-up companies where they supply let’s say like spare parts to the module pumps and that kind of value chain which makes it also sustainable. And these projects are in different regions and different Woredas. Through these projects so far 4.5 million Ethiopians have gotten access to fresh water.
Capital: Do you have any project on agriculture? Amb. Outi Holopainen: Yes, we focus on use sustainability. This is about giving the farmers the opportunity to use better seeds and by also helping them to make business for themselves. When doing these all project weather rural, the agricultural livelihoods, education or the WASH projects special focus is also on the rights of people with disabilities. So it is an inclusive project overall.
Capital: One of the missions of embassies is to promote cultural ties between the two countries. What have you done and or are doing to this end? Amb. Outi Holopainen: Well, I’m happy to say that these cultural links exist even without the efforts of the embassy. For example, the Ethiopian Jazz is very well received in Finland. My country has a very lively Jazz culture. For a long time these Jazz communities from both countries have known each other very well. But then of course, I think for many Ethiopians, Finland is just something that they don’t know anything about. So we try to promote our cultures through small events and wherever we go, we try to share the cultures of Nation and fact about our country, and sometimes we do so together with other European Union member states. We also have an annual film festival. But I think that many things happen without the efforts of the embassy.
Capital: As an ongoing ambassador, what are some of the things that have fascinated you, for the last three years? Amb. Outi Holopainen: First, I must say that it has been hugely interesting and the diversity in this country is just fascinating. And unfortunately due to the security reasons I have not been able to cover each and every part of the country. But I have been able to do some travelling and especially visit our projects in different parts of the country. It is so overwhelming to see the nature and the friendly people in different parts of the country. That is something that really, really touches me and I have really learned a lot about this country. I think it is difficult to say one individual topic that would be above other things during the three years, but I would generally say that the engagement with people.
Capital: How would you describe Finland’s relation with the African Union? Amb. Outi Holopainen: In our mission here, we have our bilateral relationship with Ethiopia and also are accredited to the African Union. I would mention one sector that really interests us is the African Free Trade Area. In Europe we have profited a lot from the free trade area and the economic integration of the continent. It has really made a difference for us. So that’s why we always say nice words about economic integration to our African partners because we think there’s huge potential for all African countries. Of course it takes some time to create the systems and to make everything work on a practical level like customs and everything. But there’s a huge opportunity for Africa. So, economic integration is one aspect that we support the AU with. I’m sure it also attracts more and more foreign investors who can also then profit from the huge African market. With the AU, we have long standing relations, and we look forward to even more drawn and deep relationships. The Finland government is now a new government but the previous government also adopted the Africa strategy and it is exactly about diversifying our relationship. That is both economic development cooperation and of course people to people relationships.
Capital: Is there anything you’d like to add? Amb. Outi Holopainen: I think mainly what we are doing in this country together with Ethiopia’s authorities are really important elements for Finland. And we see the value in our own country and that’s why we are happy to promote it also elsewhere because we think that might give both our countries’ foundation for the future as well. May our relations continue to flourish!
