Trump’s Trade Tariffs: Evidence of American Aggression and Unreliability

In what many described as not surprising but still shocking, on Monday 10th February, the President of the United States of America (U.S), Donald J. Trump announced that Washington was slapping 25% tariffs on all aluminium and steel imports accessing the U.S market.

Speaking from White House where he made the announcement, Trump reasoned these tariffs are meant to reshape international trade. Without facts, America’s whining “tariff man” claimed global trade is unfair to the U.S and American workers. He proclaimed that his unorthodox use of tariffs was “the greatest thing ever invented” as he boasted calling it “the beginning of making America rich again.”

Despite stressing that these tariffs will apply to “all countries with no exemptions, no exceptions,” scholars and analysts contend that Trump’s 25% tariffs will largely affect Washington’s immediate neighbours like Mexico and Canada. The American Iron and Steel Institute lists Canada, Brazil, Mexico and South Korea as America’s major sources of steel and aluminium products.

Canada and Mexico, both America’s closest neighbours and trading allies are already under Trump’s pressure with the leaders of the two countries having agreed with Trump to pause his 25% tariffs levy on Canada and Mexico for 30 days after last minutes negotiations with “tariff man.”

For China, her products entering into the U.S are already facing a 10% levy announced by Trump on February 10th. Beijing has since then reciprocated with a similar percentage levy onto U.S exports into China. Trump is already threatening with a round of reciprocal tariffs. Such reciprocal tariffs would follow 25% levys Trump announced on aluminum and steel products and his additional 10% levy on Chinese goods. Despite criticism by several analysts, Trump insists “the long-term it’s going to make our country a fortune.”

While Trump is describing his use of tariffs against other countries as “the greatest thing ever invented,” and calling it “the beginning of making America rich again,” if critically analysed, his tariffs are not only likely to create negative impacts to targeted countries but will equally hurt the American Economy.

This week’s Statisticts from The U.S Bureau of Labor Statisticts shows that wholesale prices in the U.S have already jumped by 3.5% while consumer prices rose by 3%! Projections for U.S economy bears no good news. Ernst and Young’s chief economist, Greg Daco contends that in 2025 alone, America’s Growth Domestic Product (GDP) is likely to contract by 1.5% and 2.1% in 2026 with inflation rising by about 0.7%.  A deep analysis of this gambling method means that in a typical Donald Trump style – projecting toughness and being wise, “tariff-man’s” use of  tariffs as many analysts argue is an own goal and recipe for slowing America’s economy and will increase inflation which will hurt the very people Trump claims wants to save by forcing companies to work in the U.S and create jobs as a way of dodging his tariffs.

While Trump claims tariffs are meant to safeguard the U.S from the so-called  drugs, illegal immigrants as he noted for the case of Mexico and Canada, and ending what he called unfair trade with China, analysing Trump’s speeches and remarks on these tariffs makes one thing clear. President Trump is an Isolationist who thinks the U.S can be a perfect closed economy. Of course, this is far from reality.  For example, while announcing 25% now paused tariffs on Canada and Mexico, Trump was categorical telling Americans “we don’t need the products they have. We have all the oil you need. We have all the trees you need, meaning the lumber.”

It is not surprising that the Wall Street Journal’s (WSJ) 31st January 2025 editorial entitled “The Dumbest Trade War in History” argued that Trump’s tariffs are “for no good reason” and that all reasons advanced by Trump “make no sense.”

From multinationalism perspective, weaponizing trade at a time when the world is faced with economic recovery challenges partly caused by the Covid19 pandemic, and aware that free trade and uninterrupted global chain supply is key for the world to realise United Nations’ agenda 2030, one can conclude that under President Trump, the U.S is now openly selfish and cannot be relied on as a responsible member of global community.

A sign that reads ‘Buy Canadian Instead’ is displayed on top of bottles at a B.C. Liquor Store, in Vancouver, on Feb. 2.Chris Helgren/Reuters

Whereas Trump maybe boasting with his dumbest trade war hopping to reshape global trade on his terms, the scars will not be felt by targeted countries alone but also his voters who as of now Trump seems not to care much about. They already voted for him and he will not be seeking another term. Again, with his 23rd Jan. 2016 “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters, OK?”, Trump knows his suppoters are fanatics who can simply sell lies and blame another country say China and accuse it for their suffering should his trade war effects be devastating to American final consumers as many analysts predict!

While for geopolitical reasons some war hawkers in Washington may argue that Trump’s tariffs will slow China’s economic growth, at the end, the U.S will lose more than China.  It is important to note while his rhetoric is more against China, Trump is also targeting America’s closest neigbours and trading partners like Canada and Mexico. The message from this is clear. As Bernard Lewis taught us, “it’s risky to be America’s enemy, but it can be fatal to be its friend.” With this, geopolitically, while the U.S is always driven by Washington’s libido dominad – a latin phrase for the desire to dominate others, with Trump’s tariffs targeting “all countries with no exemptions, no exceptions,” the beginning of the end of America’s hegemony is closer than ever. It is now clear than ever before that what matters to Washington is not how close you’re to them. It is not their so-called “our shared values, good governance or human rights or democracy” as they normally claim. It is simply America’s interests that takes  precedence. This idea can best be understood from the words of U.S’ founding father, George Washington who in his 1976 farewell speech observed that; “No nation is to be trusted farther than it is bound by interest; and no prudent statesman or politician will venture to depart from it…unless both [nations’] interests happen to be assimilated.” 

 The writer is a senior research fellow at the Development Watch Centre.

 

 

 

Trump’s Global Aid Pause: A path to a New World Order

The world especially the global South anticipated Trump presidency and after his inauguration the world was excited by his many executive orders (EO). The President in Botswana summarized the mood, he said at a press conference that the world was more peaceful during Trump’s first term. In his own way as President elect he influenced Anthony Blinken’s State department to bring about a ceasefire in Gaza.

As time has passed the reality of Trump 2.o has set in, the world has a glimpse of what his world is going to look like, his Secretary of defense broadened the picture of how Washington is to operate. During the Congressional hearing to approve Pete Hegseth nomination, it turned out he can’t name a single country in South East Asia, something that is telling about Great Power Competition between Beijing and Washington.

For global South, Trump presidency is was denoted with his stroke of a pen on January 20th 2025, that issued an EO pausing foreign development assistance for 90 days to foreign countries, NGOs, international organizations and contractors. By 5th February almost all employees that run the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) were prepared to be laid off.

At the height of Cold war in 1961, US President J.FKennedy created USAID to be the USA’s vehicle for all nonmilitary foreign aid with the aim of containing communism, it was also the US’s moral responsibility and economic obligation as a rich country to assist others especially during the post world war. For six decades the USAID has propel America’s soft power across the world especially in places like Africa.

Trump 2.o largely happed because during the campaigns the Republicans promised to cut all wasteful spending and that is being led by Elon Musk in the new government agency called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) that advised the slashing of USAID and it’s operations move under the State Department and in the process taking away US Soft power.

The term soft power was introduced by Joseph Nye in 1990 in his book “Bound to lead, the changing nature of American Power” and also further broadened in his  “The means to success in world politics” in (2004). He described soft power as a country’s ability in achieving its international goals through attraction and persuasion rather than through coercion. A country with substantial soft power influences others by projecting an attractive culture, political values, and foreign policies that are considered legitimate and morally appealing and this was the basic idea of President J.F Kennedy when establishing USAID.

According to Council on Foreign Relations (cfr) USA has been able to spread her wings through humanitarian assistance and disaster relief and it’s through such models that President G.Bush’s President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) was operated. The Secretary of State Marko Rubio has said it was waived to go on but that has proved to be untrue because USAID systems were it’s back bone.

cfr also ascertains that USAID was a pillar to US’s development projects that are aimed at economic stability and capacity building to bring about America’s image as a promoter of progress and prosperity. USAID has also been a key vehicle in the promotion of democracy and human rights agenda by Washington for the last 6 decades. At the end of the day the agency has been at frontier of American diplomacy according to Jay Caspian Kang’s America’s Soft Power Retreat in the New Yorker published on February 7th 2025.

In Uganda USAID through PEPFAR has been providing antiretroviral therapy to 1.2 million people and credited for reduction in HIV prevalence since the early 2000s, under the same 28 million nets were distributed to fight malaria, the Feed the Future that benefits 2.8 million farmers is a product of USAID, in the 2021 elections 10,000 observers of the process were trained by USAID resources. USAID has also provided funds used for micro loans through its private partners since 2015 helping about half a million Ugandans.

It’s now clear that even after the 90 days set in motion by the President Trump’s EO pausing U.S. foreign development assistance, all the above will be no more. This creates a gap that needs to be field by the Private sector that was already contributing 40% of USAID annual budget according to the organization’s former chief Samantha Powers and known US diplomat.

The global South will be looking at Europe that has a war going on. The Gulf Nations that have soft power agendas that come into play but most importantly the Trump has created a vacuum organizations like the BRICS can seize and shape the new world order that is desired.

In a tweet Marko Rubio said he would not travel to South Africa for the G20, in the 2024 summit in Brazil the global South dominated the forum and it’s time for China and also other middle Powers like South Africa, Indonesia, Brazil, from each region to garner others to ogfer Solutions from the perspective of the global South.

In the last decade 2013-2023 China contributed 45% of direct aid to Africa, and Beijing’s model is the best to bring about self sufficiency because it’s not free like America’s. The global South needs aid that is tied to infrastructure projects in terms of consensual loans that have to be paid back the moment the projects are up and running. There is a likelihood China will offer affordable alternatives to Africa’s health sectors, and already the African Center for Disease Control (CDC) in Addis Ababa is fully funded by China and was not affected by Washington’s revisions of foreign aid.

The Global South can better develop with transactional aid tied to economic returns, these returns can then be used to fund areas like education and health, there is no harm in aid being tied to Geopolitical interests as China will need the political backing from the global South at the United Nations and other multilateral organizations that desire reform to create a just world that may not have the concept of foreign aid in the long run because most countries would have the ability to achieve real wealth.

The fast changing dynamics in global aid that are gravely impacting the most poor and underdeveloped countries create a situation that needs solutions and an opportunity for organizations like BRICS, African Union and the G20 with withdrawn United States to reshape the world order.

The writer is a research fellow at the Sino-Uganda Research Centre

China Expands Africa’s International Trade Potential

Any country’s development plays out based on its participation in international trade. Countries with higher participation in global trade are comparatively wealthier than those with lower participation. Therefore, for African countries to develop, they must increase their business involvement with other countries on the international market. Several factors determine this. One of those is the availability of cheap long-term financing for infrastructure that supports production such as roads, dams, etc.

Chinese lending in Africa can be observed to increase the participation of borrowing countries, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, in international trade. Whereas other major funders in Africa such as the World Bank concentrate their resources on social sectors like education and health, which are equally important, China focuses more extensively on infrastructure, particularly transport, energy and communications.

Research shows that funding towards these sectors which China is keen on achieves practical, significant results for African countries by increasing their potential to share in global value chains.

Over time, Chinese funding for roads, railways and hydropower dams in Africa can be seen to immensely reduce trade costs for African countries while at the same time enhancing their connection to international markets by linking landlocked areas to the coast and connecting seaports.

Since African countries are still limited in their manufacturing capacities, it is difficult for them to have an immediate advantage over more developed countries in the entire value chain of international goods. Those developed countries have centuries of efficient production techniques under their belt. However, by enabling Africa to access markets, China pushes us one step towards competitively playing in the international market.

Of course, we cannot avoid contrasting the disparity in approach between Western funders and China. I think as a recent comer to the scene of developed countries, China has a more practical appreciation of what developing countries need to spur development. It also has a fresh memory of poverty, which aligns its development experience closer to Africa’s. therefore, whereas Western funders are hellbent on dictating moral environments upon African societies as a pre-requisite for their funding, and stage-managing the results, which are often smaller than they are projected and reported to be, China on the other hand is culturally less arrogant but more practical on making results.

Chinese development finance institutions like China Development Bank and China Export-Import Bank (Eximbank) can be observed to respond to African countries’ industrialization agendas. They fund public infrastructure that supports value-added production and international trade.

This funding comes both through Chinese Development Lending (particularly concessional loans) and from China’s Belt and Road Initiative under which China directly builds infrastructure that removes trade inefficiencies like slow production and costly transportation of goods often caused by poor transport and communication networks.

Efficient transport infrastructure is very important for African countries to access the international market. Research shows that each day a good spends in transit translates into a taxation cost based on the value of the good. We should avoid unnecessary delays of our goods in transit if we are to compete better.

African countries also produce mostly raw materials and trade more in parts and components rather than final products. Such goods are much more affected by time delays than final goods. Therefore, for African countries to benefit more in international trade and reduce costs, efficient transport and communication infrastructure is fundamental.

Another area supported by Chinese funding is domestic industrialization in various African countries. Uganda is a key example, with several industrial parks established with China’s support, such as Mukono Industrial Park, Shandong Industrial Park, and Sino-Uganda Industrial Park in Mbale. By supporting the industrial capabilities of Africa, China helps us reduce imports and increase value-added exports, thus transforming our economies toward upstream positions in international production networks.

Additionally, having strong domestic industrial capacities lowers Africa’s need to import inputs used in the production of exported goods. It also reduces our dependence on foreign industries for goods which sometimes are unavailable or become very expensive due to production disruptions. We cannot forget that during the COVID-19 pandemic, we suffered “vaccine discrimination” while most countries hoarded tons of vaccines. That was a crisis we must never suffer again. We must therefore invest in our industries and also enhance the production of domestic value-added goods, which will buy us a higher place in the global value chain.

With the support of non-politicized Chinese funding, we can mitigate liquidity constraints which often limit our exporting capacity since exporters usually need the push of external capital to enter foreign markets. Africa’s weak financial institutions can never reasonably support our development because they are very risk-averse. We need to complement the little funding they are willing to provide with China’s generous, long-term credit.

Lastly, educating our children and youth is very important if we are to compete in the highly innovative and competitive international world. African governments should invest in a highly educated labour force to increase their chances to access global markets and participate more in higher value-added activities. Only by investing in innovation can African States help domestic producers meet the international standards required by global buyers.

The author is a senior research fellow at the Development Watch Center.

The Kampala “EFRIS” Strike; Why Traders Should Reconsider Chinese Stance

In a poster that was circulating online and in Kampala malls and arcades for the past couple of days, a section of Kampala City traders, under a relatively unknown umbrella body the “Federation of Uganda Traders Association” was making  a clarion call for all traders within the business district to close their shops on the 8th of April.  This was to protest what they called the unfair tax regime of the Uganda Revenue Authority  and other trade related grievances. What stood out for me at first glance on this poster was a declaration; “LET THE CHINESE GO BACK TO FACTORIES”.

I am no trade expert but I do have a number of business interests within the city and more importantly; an education in foreign relations to know how damaging such a statement can be. Kampala is the thriving metropolis it is today because of its cosmopolitan origin. Perhaps most traders may not be aware of this but Kampala was never a capital city by design, it is too down south to be central in Uganda’s geography, too hilly for proper defense (one may argue all previous coups that have happened in Kampala clearly had the defending forces at a disadvantage). The Colonial government invested heavily in making Entebbe City, and later Jinja city  the locus of Urbanization. However none of these two could ever compare to the melting pot of cultures that was Kampala. That is who we are.

A lot of traders in Kampala seem to have been misled into believing that the Chinese businessmen in Kampala are the cause of most of their woes which, when investigated closely is far from the truth. A casual walk through downtown Kampala would acquaint the keen observer to the fact that the Chinese are not anywhere close to the top 5 demographics doing business in Kampala. To put it bluntly, there’s simply too few Chinese businesspeople in Kampala for them to pose a significant threat to the business of the average a Ugandan trader. If anything most of the Chinese businesses in Kampala are wholesale shops which are designed to sell goods affordably to the Ugandan traders which they in turn sell to the Ugandan consumer for a profit. This is a system that was developed out of a need to bring affordable quality manufactured products from China closer to the average Ugandan trader who didn’t have the ability to import in bulk.

I personally purchase artificial flowers for my flower shop from a Chinese wholesale shop downtown at a fraction of what it would cost me if I was to import the flowers myself. I know quite a number of traders within my same line of work doing the  same and who’s businesses would collapse if the Chinese wholesalers in Kikuubo closed shop. This is why many of us suspect that this narrative of “let the Chinese go back to the factories” could simply be a ploy by different players in the import sector to monopolize the market. Otherwise, since the Chinese operate an open market economy and we now have Ugandan importers getting goods right from Guangzou and Beijing it is hard to fathom why they are unable to have healthy competition with their Chinese counterparts and instead seek to instigate the small scale traders who’s businesses rely on these imports against them.

Additionally, there shouldn’t be anything wrong with Chinese factories having outlets and selling points within Kampala and other major economic hubs. For any manufacturer to stay relevant on the consumer market they should have contact with at least some of their clients to keep up with the changing trends and preferences. Many Ugandan companies do this, large brands like Jesa Diaries and Lato milk have got shops in almost all economic hubs across the country. It is actually more relevant for the Chinese companies to have representatives in all trading hubs so that they can better understand the local market and produce relevant products.

Looking at the bigger picture, China is perhaps our most significant trade partner outside of East Africa..Uganda’s exports to China surpassed $50M in 2022 and it’s very easy for this figure to have doubled by the end of 2024. In contrast Uganda’s exports to the United States of America through the AGOA(Africa Growth and Opportunity Act) initiative were only worth about $8.2M in the same period. This underscores the value of China as an important trade and development partner. On top of this the People’s Republic of China has got a Zero Tariff policy on 98% of the taxable goods produced in Uganda.

From this light it is clear to see that what some people are trying to market as a “Chinese problem” in Uganda is actually a Chinese opportunity. Instead of trying to push legitimate Chinese business representatives out of the capital our leaders should instead be lobbying the Chinese embassy in Kampala to set up trade hubs where Ugandan traders can get more information on the goods required by the Chinese market, the quantities needed and how to get them there. They can also set up backwards linkages directly from Chinese suppliers for goods needed in Uganda so that they do not need to worry about “competition” from the Chinese..

It is possible that the traders have got some genuine grievances that need to be aired out. It is in the best interest of all stakeholders for them to find common ground and hopefully a consensus is reached in the upcoming meeting they have got with the Head of State. However it is on the best interest of traders to look past hoarding the local market of 47 million people to explore the opportunity of 1.4 billion in China. Let’s not throw the baby with the bath water; with  98% of the goods to China tax exempt, while there maybe other concerns Ugandan traders need to worry about Chinese traders should not be one of them. They are helping in growing our economy, this in all ways is necessary.

The writer is a senior research fellow at the Development Watch Centre.

The Multilateral Trading System: The U.S Should Stop Undermining Global Practice

The Multilateral Trading System: The U.S Should Stop Undermining Global Practice

By Alan Collins Mpewo

It is not in doubt that the United States of America (US) has is always doing their best to stabilize global economy through various measures for selfish gains. Indeed, the US was among the spearhead as of what has popularly in recent times to be known as the Multilateral Trading System that has wide reception globally. This game after the second world that had seen an increase in various shortfalls especially during and shortly after the Cold war with the Soviets. The inception of this system lead to a finality of the General Arrangement on Tariffs and Trade. The Multilateral Trading System also saw the birth of the Uruguay Round sometime in 1980. Because of the growing conflict in the economies of scale between the competing blocs of the West and the Eastern globe there was need to set up formal rules to follow during international trade and business. Because of this, the United States was one of the founding members of the World trade organization and consequently part of the formulation committee over the World trade organization rules that would later bind all existing partners States at the time and those that would later in the near future adopt and assent to the World trade organization. Countless achievements have been since achieved by the World Trade Organization due to the recognizable leadership over the United States of America. It therefore goes without saying that the United States of America has made its solid contribution to the growth and periodic stabilization of the world’s economy.

Most important under the World Trade Organization rules was and still remains the dispute resolution mechanisms that have constantly been explored by the various parties whenever conflicts arise. The United States of America has without a doubt being on the forefront of always making sure that no more devastating consequences arise which would greatly affect majority of the global stakeholders in dangerously unimaginable levels. It should therefore be understood That’s that the United States of America has made various contributions as aforementioned herein, it has also in equal measures benefitted from the Multilateral Trading System. It is therefore safe to state that the system has been important in elevating various economies globally. The role played by the United States of America remains pivotal given that it is the world’s leading economy and ranks among the top three investment Nations in the world. Understanding that comes with major implications on how it exercises its dominance and authority in the various circles to which it trades and has power.

It is not bad for any Nation to come up with policies that seek to put it first ahead of other global key players’ interests. The United States of America in 2017 also came up with a major slogan and policy formulation along that line of “America first.” However, while it is a noble thing to do, friction and antagonism has since ruptured between the United States of America’s internal policies and the aspirations of other global actors under the Multilateral Trading System. The U.S has constantly deviated from the very ideas to which it was a founding state. Its trade protectionist policies have rather been hurting other trade stakeholders by closing the windows to trade information and active participation on the American soil. From commencing with ideas of globalization, the Multilateral Trading System has now come into an uncertain trade abyss and now every country does as it wishes under the current structures of global economics.

Among other things that explain the above State of affairs is the constantly unchecked bullying through its hegemonic tendencies that are used to exert unwarranted sanctions and dominance through the guise of “National Security.” In other instances, depending on how it chooses to act or react to other countries, it uses the connotation of “Human Rights.” It has been seen with the Middle East and due to the sanctions and blockages there has been deprivation of equity, debt, and investment in many countries because trade diplomacy ends up as a victim. Additionally, dispute resolution and settlement mechanisms have also been greatly undermined by the United States of America. An example can be cited before 2022 when the United States of America blocked the requisite appointments of the new members to the Appellate body. That alone has paralyzed the various efforts by concerned countries in trying to resolve the different disputes that have been arising on an appeal point of view. The United States of America holds a very important vote and by December 2022, it has refused the outcries from the other members of the World Trade Organization to have the Appellate body constituted for purposes of dispute resolution. While Article 17.2 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding gives the legal reception for the appointment of the members to the Appellate body, enforcement has been stalled by the United States of America. By February 2023, 29 appeals are still pending as a consequence of US’s actions.

Some other practices have included, offending export control, often undermining other members’ legitimate industrial policies, unwarranted sanction measures, economic coercion, disrupting industrial and global supply chains, among many other. Other strong economies and lead actors like China and Mexico and the World Trade Organization have constantly called out the United States of America over the above practices but the endeavors have met unresponsiveness. And therefore, while the U.S’ reaction remains an impediment, if unchecked, the once booming Multilateral Trading System is a route of demise.

Alan Collins Mpewo, is a Law and Senior Research Fellow, Development Watch Centre.

China’s BRI and a formidable AfCFTA in the face of Globalisation

After many years of planning, discussion and negotiations on the 1st day of 2021, the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) came into existence. Now the basis for a free trade area is free movement of people and free movement of goods and commodities across countries’ borders. This whole process revolves around transportation. There is talk that “it’s easier to fly to France than fly directly to West Africa from East Africa” because there is barely any infrastructure to support intra African travels.

The Trans African highway system can easily come off as a myth if you looked at the figures for Intra-African trade.  For example, in East Africa, Kenya Exports about $ 1 billion worth of goods to the United States and $ 500 million to EU but it only exports $ 69 million to Ethiopia who they share a land border with. Of course, we can’t water down the impact of tariffs amongst African countries but there is need for ground infrastructure to foster an African free trade area.

We are yet to see the benefits of AfCFTA but in the last 10 years, there is something that has sprang up and it’s a remarkable vehicle for the African Free trade area. In September 2013 China’s President Xi Jinping put in place his grand political-economic project and in it came the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and at the moment it links about 155 countries and 32 International organisations. AfCFTA on paper brings together 55 markets of 1.2 billion people with a total GDP OF $ 2 trillion. The BRI project at the moment has 52 African countries out of its total 155 worldwide.

A close look at the BRI, one will understand how much China is subconsciously putting in an African Free trade area that benefits the European Union more since Exports to Africa stand at 36% against China’s 9%, EU imports from Africa including uranium for their weapons and energy are at 33% against China’s 5% but its China that is blamed to over invest in Africa’s infrastructure. One would say China uses its Silk Road history to link to Europe and maximise the African supply chain but then that would fit the definitions of Globalization which is the future.

In China’s bid to facilitate free movement of goods and services Beijing set up $ 3.3 billion in the Nador Med West industrial port in Algeria and it’s said that route is the North African link to West Africa through the Trans-Saharan Highway. In West Africa we have witnessed China set its foot on projects like the Abuja-Kaduna railway line that was done by China Civil Engineering Construction Company (CCECC) as Africa’s giant embarks on setting up a standard gauge across the country. In 2023, we saw China sign a deal that would see oil pipeline in Niger and set up an industrial park.

The El Hamdania Central Port is one of the largest in Africa and its part of the BRI in Algeria on top of it China has done a 750 mile East-West road that connects Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia. At the peak of the resent Ethiopian civil war, the Addis Ababa-Djibouti Railway was a source of contest but no one ever mentioned that it was a BRI by-product that links Landlocked Ethiopia to the Sea and the Ethiopia-Djibouti Water Pipeline all financed by EXIM Bank.

 

There is a 10,228 KM road that starts from the many ports of Egypt and ends in Cape Town. The great Trans African Highway. This route is full of Chinese projects that are bettering transportation and industrial infrastructure. It’s said Egypt could be the most important part of the BRI with projects like the Chinese Industrial zone in the Gulf of Suez, the electric train system for Egypt’s new capital. Of course, geopolitically, Egypt has always been a prize for world powers and China is not being left behind. Apart from the African Cup of Nations there, nothing that has made Egypt more active in African affairs like the AfCFTA.

Down The great Trans African Highway in Sudan, China has been part of the rehabilitation of railway lines by the Chines Company CRRC Ziyang. China is at the forefront of the oil industry in Sudan and it has promised to have a nuclear power station be set up in future.

Along the great Trans African Highway is the East African Community and the BRI has seen the development of the Mombasa-Nairobi Standard Gauge Railway and also Kenya’s biggest infrastructure project since Independence that spans 470 km in 4 hours and half, boosting the GDP by 1.5% and creating about 40,000 jobs for Kenyans. In Tanzania, the BRI has put in place a 2,561 km line that links Dar es Salaam to Mwanza on Lake Victoria and will further go to Burundi, Rwanda and Democratic Republic of Congo. In Uganda, there is the Entebbe-Kampala Expressway that connects Uganda to the world in a shortened time.

The BRI could be China’s plan to speed up trade with Africa but at the end of the day chokepoints are eliminated they in turn benefit the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) since there is this new mix of rail, road and water transport infrastructure being put in place. As China tries to reach more so called less developed countries, Africa is being opened up for Intra-African trade. Then AfCFTA will be able to lift 30 million African from poverty in no time.

Musanjufu Benjamin Kavubu is a Junior Research Fellow at Sino-Uganda Research Centre.