Connect with us

POLITICS

Better Reform ECOWAS Than Embark on Military Adventures in West Africa

Published

on

Spread the love

By Kester Kenn Klomegah

The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the 15-member West Africa’s main regional bloc, is seemingly loosing its decades-old credibility in attempts to reinstate Niger’s ousted president, Mohamed Bazoum. The overarching combined narratives of the growing crisis, mass demonstrations in support for the military and the uncoordinated plan for military intervention are explicit signs of weaknesses on the side of ECOWAS.

Several narratives further pointed to the fundamental facts that the crisis has the potential to escalate into either a conflict across West Africa, and Niger, situated in the Sahel region, occupies a pivotal position not only in terms of terrorism and violent extremism within western Africa but also within a continent that has emerged as a global focal point for terrorist activities and Islamic extremist violence.

Narratives further described ECOWAS poor knowledge and acceptance of the main objectives of and reasons for the military’s appearance in political scene in the Republic of Niger, a West African States controlled by the United States and France. Ultimate failure to comprehend the neocolonial goals of foreign powers has deep created cracks in ECOWAS.

Abdulsalami Abubakar headed the regional bloc and travelled to Niamey for diplomatic talks to resolve the crisis amicably, but was unsuccessful, but only reiterated it could resort to military intervention as a last resort. Subsequently, Niger has now severed ties with Nigeria, Togo, France, its coloniser, and the United States.

Within the context of the changing political situation, the emerging new order or appropriately the taking just a glimpse of the evolutionary processes and trends, many external leaders have called of modern forms of resolving the crisis, but through military intervention. Besides that, in the academic circles, political scenes and civil society organizations have together strongly condemns ECOWAS’ belligerence in the region.

In the spectrum of Africa’s population,  and of course are still talking the restoring the democracy, about returning civilian head government, about constitution that stipulates the governing principles. These groups of political thoughts have simultaneously condemned the Abdourahamane Tchiani-led coup d’état in Niger that toppled the constitutionally-elected government under the leadership of President Mohamed Bazoum.

Throughout these several years ECOWAS has failed the entire West African region. It is manipulated by external powers and ordered by Washington and what is more executing instructions and directives from imperialists-minded powers who have, so far, imposed their own rules. Instead of waging and further deepening conflicts, the executive leadership of ECOWAS has to focus on its original and core mandate of economic development, regional integration and poverty eradication in West Africa. The region needs sustainable peace, social and economic development and stability.

The West African regional bloc has imposed stringent sanctions, finding a peaceful solution to the deepening crisis, yielded little with no clarity on the next steps. Burkina Faso, Guinea and Mali, supported by Algeria, though mot a member of regional bloc, stand defiantly against any military moves to restore the previous government. France, the United States and other European nations have poured hundreds of millions of dollars into shoring up Niger’s army and the coup has been seen as a major setback.

“ECOWAS and the rest of the international community want to restore President Bazoum and the junta is not on this agenda,” said Seidik Abba, a Nigerien researcher and Sahel specialist and president of the International Center for Reflection for Studies On the Sahel, a think tank based in Paris, France. “The next step will be military confrontation … What we don’t know is when this confrontation will take place, how it will go, and what the consequences will be,” he said.

An in-depth analysis show us that the interim leader Gen. Abdourahmane Tchiani and newly appointed Prime Minister  Ali Mahaman Lamine Zeine have put forward the proposal to administer Niger for the next three years, a period within which to deal with urgent pressing issues, and possibly do some ‘house-cleaning’ and adequately prepared for handling over. It was, abruptly and fiercely rejected by the ECOWAS.

In a televised address to the nation, General Abdourahamane Tiani re-indicated absolute openness to dialogue, would consult on a transition back to democracy within three years, echoing lengthy timelines proposed by other coup leaders, such as Burkina Faso and Mali, in the Sahel region.

In connection with above points, experts are discussing, offering their view points. Transitions for Niger’s multiple previous coups were shorter, so a three-year timeline is unprecedented said Aneliese Bernard, a former U.S. State Department official who specializes in African affairs and is now director of Strategic Stabilization Advisors, a risk advisory group. “What we’re seeing in the region is the emergence of trends just to military rule,” she said.

“Democracy is what we stand for and it’s what we encourage,” Nigeria’s Chief of Defence Staff, General Christopher Gwabin Musa said at the start of the two-day meeting in Accra. “The focus of our gathering is not simply to react to events, but to proactively chart a course that results in peace and promotes stability.”

“We are ready to go any time the order is given,” Abdel-Fatau Musah, Сommissioner for Political Affairs and Security at the ECOWAS Secretariat, said on August 18 after the military chiefs’ meeting in Accra, capital of the Republic of Ghana in West Africa. Abdel-Fatau Musah also said 11 of its 15 member states have agreed to commit troops to a military deployment, saying they were ‘ready to go’ whenever the order was given.

Russia and the United States have urged a diplomatic solution to the crisis. The regional bloc has already applied trade and financial sanctions while France, Germany and the United States have suspended aid programmes. The regional bloc’s troops have previously intervened in other emergencies since 1990 including in wars in Liberia and Sierra Leone. We have mentioned that Benin, Côte d’Ivoire and Nigeria are expected to contribute troops, but little detail has emerged over a potential Niger operation.

Notwithstanding all that, Burkina Faso has joined voices with Mali and claimed that any intervention in Niger would be a declaration of war on Mali and Burkina Faso. In light of Russia’s increasing influence in west Africa, it is worth noting that Burkina Faso itself had a coup in January 2022 and since then has requested France to fully withdraw its troops while hailing Russia as a strategic ally, thus increasing speculations about Russian presence and influence. In the same vein, Algeria, known for its strong loyalty to Russia, announced its opposition to any intervention in Niger.

In another related development, Mali’s military leader Assimi Goita had spoken on the phone to Russian President Vladimir Putin about the situation in Niger. Putin stressed “the importance of a peaceful resolution of the situation for a more stable Sahel,” according to transcript posted to Kremlin’s website.

Foreign Affairs Ministry’s website says “ECOWAS takes steps to restore constitutional order in Niger through a political and diplomatic dialogue with the new Nigerien authorities. That a military approach to settling the crisis in Niger risks leading to a protracted standoff in the African country and a sharp destabilization of the situation in the Sahara-Sahel region as a whole.”

Putin has called for a return to constitutional order in Niger, while Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin welcomed the coup. Prigozhin looks to strike business there as massive support for Russia has appeared to surge in Niger since July 26 coup, with junta supporters waving Russian flags at several rallies.

The Kremlin has used the Wagner Group since 2014 as a tool to expand Russia’s presence in Africa. A video in July apparently showed Prigozhin in Belarus but he was photographed on the sidelines during the second Russia-Africa summit in St. Petersburg. While difficult to verify the authenticity of reports, foreign media and Russian social media channels said Prigozhin was recruiting for Africa and also inviting investors from Russia to put money through its cultural affiliate Russian House.

With reference to Russia’s position as indicated above, some experts still pointed to this complexities: while the United States and Europe particularly support the restoration of the democratic government, Russia carries its anti-Western position and anti-imperialist stand and fiercely encouraging military infiltration into politics in Africa.

With Russia’s support for the emerging military power in the region, Burkina Faso and Mali showing the leeway and offer noticeable sign of encouragement for other to follow such steps aim at kicking out France. In the Russia-Africa summit joint declaration, Russia indicated, as one of its strategic objectives, unreserved and unflinching support for African States to deal drastically with growing United States and Western/European political influence and dominance across Africa.

The African Union’s Peace and Security Council, so far backed sanctions but it rejects the use of force, maintain the position that there are few grounds under which ECOWAS could claim legal justification. Under the circumstances, the main challenges facing Niger and for the matter the entire West African region, and also presents useful lessons for Africa are in two specific areas: politics and economics.

Consider politics in the sense that democracy is threatened, and economics as Niger and other African States have to protect exploitation of resources. The latest flash-points in the struggle by the imperialist powers. Across the West African region, it is a battle between between the Anglophone and the Francophone. But then, there is also the controversial question concerning the construction of the Trans-Saharan pipeline from Nigeria through the region to Europe. Besides that Niger is a landlocked but well known to be a major uranium producer and has 80% impoverished population.

John P. Ruehl, an Australian-American journalist living in Washington, and a Contributing Editor to Strategic Policy, argues in his article titled “Private Military Companies Continue To Expand In Africa” that in the wake of the July 26 coup in Niger, the world’s spotlight has once again turned to the expansion of private military and security companies (PMSCs) across Africa.

As the Sahel region continues to grapple with instability and conflict, the strengthening of PMSCs, both domestic and foreign, will continue to reshape Africa’s security in profound and unpredictable ways. Russia has found an unconventional and effective way to assert influence in Africa’s security landscape, he wrote in the article.

Nonetheless, this raises questions about sovereignty, a recurring issue in a continent where it has consistently been violated since African countries won their independence. As the Nigerien government grapples with its situation, Wagner could again act as a Kremlin surrogate, safeguarding Russia’s interests by filling the security vacuum left by the ousted French military. But Prigozhin’s ongoing role in Africa suggests the Kremlin is relying on smoke and mirrors to obscure its true motivations, according to John Ruehl.

Through similiar microscopic glasses, M.K. Bhadrakumar, a former Indian diplomat writing in the Indian Punchline media, highlighted the deep-seated existing problems in the region and in Africa: while poor governance, rampant corruption, escalating poverty and insecurity have created conditions for the coups in Sahel region, a deeper factor is the geopolitics of resource access and control. Foreign powers are competing to explore and control the abundant mineral resources of West African nations.

Bhadrakumar wrote that the ascendant tensions in Niger and the wider subregion are no doubt exacerbated by the geopolitical and economic rivalry between the East and the West. The spectre that haunts West Africa is that the proxy war between Russia and the US can easily creep into Africa, where Russian mercenaries and Western Special Forces are already stationed for new assignments.

Dr. Scott N. Romaniuk, an International Newton Fellow at the University of South Wales’ Faculty of Life Sciences and Education  and Dr. János Besenyő, Professor at the Óbuda University, Donát Bánki Faculty of Mechanical and Safety Engineering (Hungary), and Head of the Africa Research Institute, both in an opinion article explained the worsening of existing security challenges, and the emergence of new internal and regional threats.

In the framework of what we see as a coup at the crossroads of a potential regional war, a nascent proxy conflict, and the neocolonial goals of foreign powers, at least five possible consequences of the coup and its accompanying events can be postulated.

These are: firstly, there is the possibility of a decline in democratic governance in the region, which is supported by divisions among ECOWAS members and a negative attitude towards the political and economic union of West African states, especially in Niamey, where Nigeriens denounce ECOWAS’ involvement.

Secondly, it is plausible that other governments within the central Sahel region may succumb to the influence of military juntas or experience state failure.

Thirdly, the socioeconomic repercussions of sanctions – a playbook from the Western strategy towards Russia in the wake of Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine – are likely to have a significantly negative impact on the quality of life for those who live in Niger.

Fourthly, the present conditions may contribute to a schism between Nigeriens’ desire for change and those who would prefer to maintain the current military junta, both of which may manifest through military intervention and the involvement of external actors such as Wagner mercenaries and other foreign forces.

Fifthly, Niger, under the governance of a fragile military junta, might potentially become a breeding ground for extremist activities. This may occur either due to involvement by Western powers with neo-colonialist motives or, conversely, in the absence of Western troops if their absence is perceived as an opportunity to establish operational bases within the nation.

ECOWAS  sanctions will only bite ordinary impoverished millions. The African Union supports all that sharply divides the continent, moving forth and back without any suitable solutions. Both are watching their traditional external forces. Burkina Faso has also agreed to restore civilian rule next year, while Guinea shortened its transition timeline to 24 months. With a flurry of sanctions since the coup, it only goes piling economic pressure on one of the world’s poorest countries.

Niger shares distinctive borders with Burkina Faso and Mali, as well as Chad and Algeria in Sahel region. These States have pledged their support to Niger, as the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) continually looks for mechanisms to resolve the crisis. The regional bloc has come under criticisms, it slackens on its primary responsibilities and some have called for staff changes attributing to inefficiency. The bloc’s reputation has been at stake, and most probably, needs new dynamic faces at the Secretariat in Abuja, Nigeria.

The military has been in power since July 26. Mohamed Bazoum’s election in 2021 was a landmark in Niger’s history, ushering in its first peaceful transfer of power since independence from France in 1960. Niger is a landlocked nation located in West Africa and well known to be a major uranium producer but has 80% impoverished population. Niger remains one of the poorest countries in the world, regularly ranking at the bottom of the UN’s Human Development Index.

Kester Kenn Klomegah is an independent researcher and writer on African affairs in the EurAsian region and former Soviet republics.


Spread the love
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

POLITICS

Israel’s Expansion in Gaza: A Turning Point in the Conflict and the Future of Palestinian Territory

Published

on

By

Spread the love

Baba Yunus Muhammad

In an alarming escalation, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz has announced the “capture of large areas” of the Gaza Strip to be permanently integrated into Israeli “security zones.” This declaration, made on April 15, 2025, signals a dangerous and irreversible shift in the decades-long Israeli occupation: the transition from occupation to de facto annexation.

Israeli airstrikes continue to pummel Khan Younis and Rafah, killing dozens, including women, children, and the elderly. Gaza’s Health Ministry reports over 900 people killed in recent days alone — many of them children. The cumulative death toll now exceeds 50,000, with more than 110,000 injured, many maimed for life. The majority are civilians.

In the most chilling development this week, a mass grave was uncovered in Khan Younis containing the bodies of 15 Palestinian rescue workers — bound, shot, and buried. These were not combatants, but medics and volunteers. The execution-style killings speak to a deepening moral crisis that now grips the conflict.

Strategic Expansion: Occupation Masquerading as Security

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has recently confirmed Israel’s intentions to create a “second Philadelphi corridor,” effectively carving Gaza into disconnected territories. This would further divide and control the population, while seizing critical border areas along the Egypt-Gaza frontier.

Human rights organizations, including Israel’s own Gisha, warn that Israel has already seized 62 square kilometers of Gaza — nearly one-fifth of the territory — under the guise of “buffer zones.” These so-called zones increasingly resemble permanent annexations. What began as a war is morphing into a land grab, executed under the fog of military necessity.

As one analyst told The Islamic Economist: “This is not just about dismantling Hamas. It is about redrawing the map of Gaza, erasing Palestinian sovereignty, and engineering a demographic reality where Palestinians are forced to leave or live under siege indefinitely.”

Trump Administration and the Shift in American Policy

Under the current Trump administration, Israel enjoys unprecedented diplomatic latitude. Former President Biden opposed any moves to reoccupy Gaza or expel its residents, insisting on a political solution. President Trump, however, has openly spoken of Gaza as a potential “Riviera” and suggested relocating Palestinians to Egypt or Jordan — ideas widely condemned as ethnic cleansing.

Simultaneously, the Israeli government has quietly launched a bureau for the “voluntary transfer” of Gaza’s population. But with Gaza reduced to rubble, its hospitals shut down, bakeries burned, and humanitarian aid blocked, what appears voluntary on paper is, in reality, coerced displacement.

The UN and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) have warned that such transfers violate international law, potentially amounting to war crimes. But with a muted response from key Western capitals, including Washington, the machinery of occupation continues unabated.

Deliberate Starvation as a Tool of War

Since January, Israel has imposed a near-total siege on Gaza. Water systems have been destroyed. Fuel is forbidden. Wheat reserves have run out. The United Nations World Food Programme says all bakeries are now closed. Only a few humanitarian kitchens remain — and they too are on the verge of collapse.

The result: Gaza is now facing famine. Children are dying from dehydration and starvation, not just bombs. Diseases are spreading through overcrowded shelters and makeshift camps. The siege is not a byproduct of war — it is the strategy itself.

By making Gaza uninhabitable, Israel appears to be pressuring its civilian population to flee. As history has shown — from the Nakba in 1948 to today — displacement is not a side effect. It is the plan.

Hostages and the Politics of Delay

Israel continues to justify its campaign by citing the 59 hostages held by Hamas since the October 2023 attack, which killed 1,200 Israelis. But as families of the hostages grow increasingly vocal, many accuse the government of sacrificing their loved ones for political and territorial gains.

Polls show that the Israeli public now favors a ceasefire deal that brings the hostages home, even if it means withdrawing from Gaza. But the Netanyahu government — emboldened by far-right coalition partners and a sympathetic White House — refuses to halt the offensive.

Hamas, meanwhile, demands a permanent ceasefire and the right to remain in power. Israel insists on total military victory and Hamas’s destruction. The resulting deadlock is costing lives — every day.

A Moment of Reckoning for the Muslim World

The silence from many Muslim capitals is deafening. While some countries have condemned the atrocities, few have taken tangible steps — whether diplomatic, legal, or economic — to halt the carnage. The Ummah watches in horror, but action remains limited.

Yet this is not just a Palestinian issue. It is a moral and existential test for the Islamic world. Gaza is not just being destroyed — it is being erased. If this moment passes without consequence, the precedent will be set: that under the right geopolitical conditions, a people can be displaced, their land seized, and their history rewritten — with impunity.

The Muslim world must ask: what kind of future are we building, if the soil of the Holy Land can be soaked in blood and the world simply watches?

Conclusion: Toward Justice, Not Just Ceasefire

This is not just a war. It is a transformation of Gaza’s geography, identity, and people. The Palestinian struggle is no longer about borders — it is about survival.

The Islamic world, together with all people of conscience, must raise its voice against this unfolding injustice. Ceasefire is no longer enough. What is needed is an international movement — legal, economic, political, and moral — to end the occupation, prevent annexation, and restore dignity and self-determination to the Palestinian people.

Gaza may be small in landmass. But in the story of justice, it has become a vast battlefield for the soul of humanity.


Spread the love
Continue Reading

POLITICS

The Battle for Khartoum: Tracking Sudan’s War over Two Years

Published

on

By

Spread the love

After nearly two years of brutal fighting, Sudan’s civil war is at a critical juncture: the Sudanese Armed Forces announced it has regained control of the capital Khartoum from its rivals, the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces. It’s yet to be seen if this signals a break in the war or is simply another phase in the fighting. In this article, Kagure Gacheche tracks the conflict since it began in 2023.

Sudan has been engulfed in brutal conflict since 15 April 2023, when tensions between the country’s two most powerful military factions erupted into civil war.

The conflict stems from a long-standing power struggle over military control and integration. Fighting between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces began in the capital, Khartoum, and quickly spread across the country. International efforts to broker peace since have largely failed.

The conflict, which has been going on for two years now, has created one of the world’s worst humanitarian emergencies. An estimated 30 million Sudanese civilians are in need of aid. Brutal attacks, looting and destruction of infrastructure have become commonplace. Millions of people lack access to essential medical care. Food shortages and economic collapse have worsened the suffering. The war has also triggered a massive displacement crisis, with more than 14 million people forced to flee their homes. Many have sought refuge in neighbouring countries, while others remain trapped in dangerous conditions within Sudan.

As the conflict drags on, the toll on Sudan’s people continues to grow. Estimates of those killed vary widely, from 20,000 to 62,000, but the actual figure could be much larger. With no clear resolution in sight, Sudan’s crisis is one of the most urgent and devastating conflicts in the world. At The Conversation Africa, we have worked with academics who have tracked the conflict since 2023.

Weapons flow

Early on, it was clear that both the Sudanese army and the paramilitary force had a sufficient supply of weapons to sustain a protracted conflict. The country was already awash with firearms. It is ranked second – after Egypt – among its regional neighbours in total firearms estimates. Khristopher Carlson, part of a research project tracking small arms and armed violence in Sudan, noted that the two Sudanese forces might have different fighting methods but were adequately equipped to trade fire. The army’s superiority was its air force and heavy arsenal on the ground. The paramilitary force relied on nimble mobile units equipped primarily with small and light weapons.

External interference

This proliferation of weapons has been compounded by financial and military support from external states. Various foreign players – Chad, Egypt, Iran, Libya, Qatar and Russia – have picked a side to support. However, the influence of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates has been particularly problematic. Political scientist Federico Donelli explained that the two nations viewed Sudan as a key nation because of its location. Following President Omar al-Bashir’s ouster in 2019, the two monarchies bet on different factions within Sudan’s security apparatus. This external support exacerbated internal competition. Riyadh maintained close ties with army leader Abdel Fattah al-Burhan. Abu Dhabi aligned itself with the head of the Rapid Support Forces, Mohamed Dagalo, or Hemedti.

Regional dynamics

The support from international players in Sudan’s war has had a damaging effect on regional dynamics. The Sudanese army recently accused the United Arab Emirates of supplying the Rapid Support Forces with weapons through Chad. At a ceremony for an officer killed in a drone strike carried out by paramilitary forces, a senior army official said Chad’s airports would be “legitimate targets” should retaliatory action become necessary. This heightened the risk of a spillover of the Sudanese conflict. Sudan shares borders with seven countries in an unstable region, including Chad, South Sudan, Eritrea and Ethiopia. Economics professor and legal expert John Mukum Mbaku warned that a spillover of the fighting could devastate the region economically, socially and politically.

Protecting civilians

The conflict has put millions of civilians in Sudan in the crossfire. A UN report in September 2024 called for an independent force to protect civilians; Sudan’s officials rejected the proposal. However, peace talks have yet to achieve a lasting ceasefire. Sudan had a peacekeeping force between 2007 and 2020, followed by a UN-led political mission that exited in February 2024. Since then, there has been no security presence in Sudan responsible for protecting civilians. Peacekeeping researcher Jenna Russo noted the need for a regional or international peace force that could create “green zones”. This would help protect areas where displaced persons were sheltering and facilitate humanitarian aid.

What’s been missing?

High-level peace talks brokered by the African Union and the UN to negotiate a ceasefire have largely been unsuccessful, putting civilians at constant risk. Talks held in Switzerland and Jeddah have had little impact. Philipp Kastner, a peace scholar, highlighted that the countries hosting or supporting these talks were pursuing competing interests in Sudan, which affected their impartiality. Progress to negotiate an end to the war would be unlikely if external military support to the warring parties continued unabated. Civilians would continue to pay the price.

Kagure Gacheche is the commissioning Editor, East Africa.

Courtesy: The Conservation


Spread the love
Continue Reading

POLITICS

Russia-Ukraine War: A Delicate Pause Amid Geopolitical Maneuvering

Published

on

By

Spread the love

B.Y. Muhammad

In a surprising development, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has agreed to a mutual pause in attacks on energy infrastructure with Russia for 30 days, marking a potential step toward a broader cease-fire. The agreement, facilitated through a phone conversation with former U.S. President Donald Trump, underscores the shifting dynamics of international involvement in the ongoing conflict.

The Cease-Fire Agreement: Tactical or Strategic?

While the 30-day truce is being framed as a diplomatic breakthrough, there are indications that the Kremlin has not deviated from its broader objectives in Ukraine. Russia’s agreement to pause strikes on energy infrastructure, participate in prisoner exchanges, and discuss security in the Black Sea has been presented as a concession. However, these elements align with longstanding Russian interests, making it unclear whether the Kremlin has genuinely altered its stance or is simply buying time.

Zelensky, while agreeing to the deal, expressed skepticism regarding Russia’s commitment, emphasizing the need for U.S. monitoring. “Just the assertion and the word of Putin that he will not strike energy sites is too little,” he remarked, underscoring the deep mistrust between Kyiv and Moscow.

Russian Strategy and Western Concerns

Western analysts argue that the Kremlin’s approach remains fundamentally unchanged. Putin’s overarching demand—a complete cessation of foreign military and intelligence support for Ukraine—would, if met, leave Kyiv vulnerable to Russian dominance. While Trump denied discussing aid with Putin, the Kremlin’s statement suggested otherwise, raising questions about the true nature of their discussions.

This development has heightened fears that Moscow is merely playing for time, anticipating that the U.S. may eventually disengage from Ukraine. The timing of this cease-fire agreement, coupled with Russia’s battlefield momentum and growing Western fatigue, suggests that Moscow might be maneuvering for a strategic advantage rather than pursuing genuine peace.

U.S. and Russian Diplomatic Calculations

Trump’s involvement in the negotiations signals a potential shift in U.S. policy. The former president has historically expressed skepticism toward Ukraine’s strategic importance, and his willingness to engage with Putin could indicate a broader recalibration of Washington’s stance. Russia, in turn, appears eager to leverage this opportunity to normalize relations with the U.S. without making significant concessions on Ukraine.

Moscow has already floated the prospect of economic cooperation with American firms, particularly in the rare earth metals and energy sectors. Additionally, discussions have included cultural engagements, such as a proposed U.S.-Russia hockey tournament—seemingly trivial, yet indicative of Russia’s broader attempt to reframe its relationship with Washington beyond the Ukraine conflict.

Implications for Ukraine and the Global Order

For Ukraine, the stakes remain high. While a temporary cessation of hostilities on energy infrastructure provides some relief, the country remains in a precarious position. The prospect of losing its principal backer, the U.S., could force Kyiv into unfavorable compromises that undermine its sovereignty.

For the broader international community, the Russia-Ukraine conflict continues to reflect a contest not only between two nations but between geopolitical blocs vying for influence. Russia seeks to restore its sphere of control, while the West struggles to maintain a unified front in supporting Ukraine. Meanwhile, the Islamic world, with its historical ties to both Russia and Ukraine, watches closely, balancing economic interests and diplomatic relations in a rapidly evolving global landscape.

While the 30-day cease-fire offers a temporary reprieve, it is far from a definitive step toward peace. The agreement highlights the ongoing complexities of diplomacy in wartime, the strategic calculations of global powers, and the uncertain future of Ukraine’s sovereignty. As negotiations continue, the world waits to see whether this pause will serve as a bridge to lasting peace or merely as a tactical interlude in a protracted conflict.

 


Spread the love
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 Focus on Halal Economy | Powered by Africa Islamic Economic Forum