It appears that Peter Obi, the Labour Party presidential candidate in the  2023 election, has finally overstepped his bounds. He has been going around the country creating problems for the government, causing food scarcity and making Nigerians not to appreciate all the good work President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is doing.

So far, the liberal, people-oriented government of Tinubu has looked away from Obi’s many mischiefs. All that may be coming to an end now, as Obi’s offenses are becoming insufferable, and big brother can no longer watch him lead millions of innocent Nigerians into temptation.

The warning late last week, by Bayo Onanuga, the incredible, anti-government-yesterday, pro-government-today veteran and adviser on information and strategy to President Bola Tinubu, that Obi should be held responsible for any protest against escalating hunger and economic hardship by Nigerians, confirms what many people have always suspected, that Obi is responsible for their empty barns and pantries.

The case against Obi is indeed multiple and compelling. He has been sowing seeds of discord all over the country. Among other crimes, Obi has single-handedly caused the value of naira to be in free fall since mid-2023, just because the Independent National Electoral Commission [INEC] refused to declare him winner of the presidential election earlier that year.

Usually reliable sources, which served Onanuga quite well during his days of pro-democracy confrontation with military regimes, reportedly confirmed to the government he now serves with his full chest, as Nigerians will put it, that Obi is manipulating the exchange rate. Anyday the former governor wakes up from the wrong side of the bed and remembers that somebody else was declared President instead of him, he normally meets with leaders of bureau de change operators, after which the value of the naira will take a tumble.

Obi’s negative impact on the value of the naira has been a source of concern to the Tinubu government, which has been watching him closely.

There is even a report that Obi is responsible for doctors and nurses in Nigeria abandoning their lucrative jobs at home, to relocate abroad in droves. According to information available to the government and its master strategist, Bayo Onanuga, the LP presidential candidate works in deceptive and mysterious ways to lure doctors away from their high-paying jobs in Nigerian hospitals.

As the government investigation found out, any time Obi donates his personal money to health and social development institutions, such as he did recently in Kogi State, where he gave N10 million to the Grimard College of Nursing Sciences at Anyigba, or when he gave N20 million to Faith Foundation Mission Hospital in Nsukka, Enugu State, or when he donated N2 million to an Abuja Primary Healthcare Centre, or with the N10 million he donated to the Federation of Muslim Women’s Associations [FOMWAN], etc, it is always a ploy to induce otherwise well-remunerated doctors and nurses in Nigerian hospitals to flee the country. In fact, it has been reliably gathered that Obi uses such visits to healthcare institutions to collect the names of doctors and nurses for subsequent placement in hospitals in Europe and America.

As if Obi’s negative activities in the area of healthcare were not grievous enough, he turned his attention to the agricultural sector a few months back, succeeding within a short time in driving up the prices of garri, yam, beans, rice, potato, onions and even pepper, all of which are now beyond the reach of ordinary and not-so-ordinary Nigerians.

In markets across the land, from the produce markets of Ketu, Mile 12 and Oyingbo in Lagos, over to Dugbe in Ibadan, and from Ochanja in Onitsha, Ogbete in Enugu and Diobu in Port Harcourt, Obi has held market women and men in his palms, deploying his uncommon capacity to influence them to arbitrarily increase the prices of food items, in spite of the Tinubu government’s lauded agricultural policy. To imagine that Obi is causing all this food scarcity and hunger in the land just because he was not declared President! The good thing though is that Tinubu is aware of the pains of Nigerians. He is barely restraining himself from confronting Obi, the evil genius causing food scarcity in Nigeria.

It is obvious that Onanuga was being very matured and circumspect with sensitive information available to his high office, if not he would have released more details to Nigerians last week, of the many treasonable offenses of Obi. For instance, the last time Obi was seen in the northern part of the country, not many people knew that he traversed Kano, Kaduna, Plateau, Benue, Taraba and Kebbi, just to convince farmers to abandon their farms and stop supplying yam, beans, potato, onion and whatever they produce, to markets across Nigeria, just because he was not declared President in 2023. This much was established by the government’s strategist.

Fortunately, Tinubu understands the suffering Nigerians are going through.

The government has allowed Obi to be, simply because it is respecting his fundamental human rights, seeing that the Tinubu government subscribes to key international treaties, including the recent Samoa Agreement. Yet, for all the magnanimity of the government, this same Obi went about prompting the Muslim ummah and Christian faithful, alongside civil society organisations (CSOs) to rise against the Samoa Agreement, an agreement that has potential of attracting over $500 million or thereabouts, to Nigeria. If Obi is not bitter because he was not declared President in 2023, why should he influence Christians, Muslims and CSOs, to oppose a harmless treaty, just because the Agreement latently promotes the right of men to answer women and vice versa? If not for Obi, would the religious bodies have opposed the treaty? 

The patience of the Tinubu government is, however, running out on the LP presidential candidate, especially with the concrete evidence available to Onanuga, that Obi recently incited Senator Ali Ndume, a staunch member of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Chief Whip of the senate, until recently, to declare publicly, that there was hunger in Nigeria. How could Ndume have made such a critical comment, if he was not under the influence of Obi? Ndume must have met Obi before he spoke out about hunger in the land. Only Obi can convince Nigerians that they are hungry, when indeed, the government has made life abundant for them.

Yet, for all of Peter Obi’s pervasive influence and activities, Nigerians do not seem to understand how dangerously impactful he is. That is what worries the government. The decision last week, by the special adviser on Information and Strategy to the president, to alert Nigerians that Obi is capable of causing more rainfall in the days ahead, is a very sane and patriotic duty. Nigerians need to know. Now they know! So, parents should properly advise their children. Any time they cry out that there is no food in the house, all patriotic parents have a duty to inform their children that Obi is the name of the man responsible for scarcity of food in the land.

By the same token, manufacturers and sundry consumers of foreign exchange, should always remember, when they are confronted with shortage of foreign exchange, occasioned by the sluggish gyration of the value of the Naira, that Obi is said to be responsible for their woes. He is the man government has identified as responsible for the collapse of the local currency. It is also important to note that Obi is causing all these problems because he was not declared winner of the presidential election in 2023. There is no need to ask what the declared winner of the said election is doing in the face of Obi’s protestant activities.

If Obi has not been a confirmed rain maker and a certified magician, the curious allegations against him, as being responsible for everything that the government should be responsible for, would have been dismissed as vacuous. But Obi is who he is and it does not appear that he intends to change.

Nicholas Leighton

Key Takeaways

• You can use many different pricing strategies to drive revenue.
• Assessing competitors and industry standards is crucial for setting pricing strategies.
• Transparent pricing builds customer trust and fosters positive relationships.

Since reaching a peak of over 9% in 2022, inflation appears to finally be cooling for the average consumer. As costs rose over the last two years, companies across the globe have worked to protect their profit margins by increasing prices. For new small business owners, this has created several challenges, and many consumers are still facing the pressures as wages haven't kept pace with inflation rates. As a result, consumers are more cautious than ever about each dollar they spend.

Many companies realize they need to be more competitive with their pricing to retain and attract new customers. For small business owners, defining the right pricing strategy can feel overwhelming. Here are some tips to help you find the right pricing balance.

How to price your product or service

Pricing your product is one of the most critical business decisions you can make. Although you can always adjust, setting your price correctly early on will greatly impact your revenue — especially if you're a new business, working on a side hustle or bringing an entirely new product to market. Before you set your price, consider the following factors.

Determine your value

Within any market, it's essential to analyze how valuable your product is compared to others. For instance, did you use better materials, or are you solving a problem that no other product can? If so, your value may be higher than any other brand can offer, so you might be able to set a higher price. Some companies will use a formula to determine a specific value.

Review your customer base

Knowing who your customers are is an essential function of any business, and it's particularly important for pricing. For instance, are you catering to people who purchase high-end goods? Are you targeting people who are more likely to value a bargain? By performing customer research, you'll know how to set prices better.

Evaluate pricing potential

It's important to determine exactly how much you could charge for any product. This doesn't mean you will charge that amount, but by considering factors including your customer base, your competition and the cost to produce your product, you can determine the high end of your pricing potential.

Determine a price range

You'll need to know the minimum price you can charge for a product and still make money — the low end of your range — as well as the high point based on customer research. Once you've determined a range, you can adjust your prices based on peak buying seasons, discount opportunities and other factors.

Evaluate the competition and industry

Your competition can provide guidance when it comes to pricing strategies. Within each industry, there are standard markups or profit margins that are typically recognized as normal ranges. Evaluating these can help small business owners understand if their costs are too high or low relative to their sales price. But it's important that you don't price your product by simply copying your competitors. While your competition's pricing might help determine if you are within the acceptable ranges of the market, picking an arbitrary number is a losing strategy.

Gather feedback from customers

The sales volume you generate will give you insight into if you're pricing fairly, but if you need more data, it's always wise to talk to your customers. By providing opportunities for surveys, reading reviews or conducting direct outreach, you'll better understand what matters to your customers and if they see value in your product.

Be transparent

Consumers often want to support companies they believe are trustworthy. Shady pricing and hidden fees can damage a relationship with your customers, so it's best to be upfront and transparent about your product pricing. If sharing your price scares away customers, it's a good indication that you need to revisit your pricing strategy or do a better job of demonstrating the product's value.

Types of pricing strategies

Cost-plus pricing

This strategy refers to a relatively straightforward markup formula. Businesses determine how much it costs to produce a product (including materials, labor and overhead) and add a fixed percentage to that price to meet their desired margin.

Premium pricing

Selling your product at a premium means deliberately pricing it higher than your competitors. Typically, premium pricing aims to convince would-be customers that your product is of a higher quality than any other on the market and, therefore, worth shelling out more money. This strategy can be risky, as it may lead to a decline in sales.

Economy pricing

Some businesses use the "economy" tactic of setting lower prices than competitors to increase their sales volume. This tactic often attracts customers, but to guarantee their profit margins, businesses reduce product costs (and create a lower-quality product) when using economy pricing.

Competitive pricing

One way to set prices is to monitor competition. With competitive pricing, companies essentially set their prices relative to what their rivals are doing. This commonly happens in a market where a product has existed for a long time, and there's consensus about what it should cost.

Price skimming

When a company launches a new product, it may initially set the price high before gradually reducing it over time. This practice, called price skimming, lets businesses cater to different types of customers. Some people will be willing to shell out more money to have the latest version of a product, while others will purchase only once the price drops.

Penetration pricing

Companies that are new to a well-established market may use penetration pricing to attract an early volume of customers. With this strategy — sometimes called loss-leader pricing — a business sets prices extremely low to lure customers away from other brands. However, keeping prices low is often not sustainable, and customer loyalty may be hard to build as prices ultimately rise.

Psychological pricing

The practice of psychological pricing comes in many different forms. In short, it refers to a strategy in which a business convinces customers they're spending less. It's the reason many products are listed for, say, $4.99 instead of $5. The one-cent difference can make a big impact on a customer's mind. Psychological pricing also commonly appears with short-term sales, which makes customers think they need to purchase something in the moment or they'll miss out on savings.

Value-based pricing

When businesses have a new product they'll often rely on value-based pricing to determine how much they think a customer will be willing to pay for it. Instead of applying a standard markup (like cost-plus pricing), the price is set based on how potential customers perceive the product's value.

Keystone pricing

With keystone pricing, companies set the price of a product to double its cost to produce. So, if it costs $20 to produce the product, you would list it for sale at $40. Retailers often use this strategy.

Subscription pricing

With a product that requires repeated sales, many businesses choose to introduce some form of recurring or subscription pricing. This not only helps keep revenue flowing into your business but also provides long-range visibility into your anticipated revenue. This is helpful for both strategic planning and securing better financing through investors or a bank line of credit.

Flexible or tiered pricing/dynamic

Most businesses serve a wide range of customers. Offering flexible or tiered pricing can increase revenue by enabling businesses to reach a wider range of customers. Tiered pricing also supports a sales strategy known as price anchoring. By offering three or more pricing tiers, businesses can position their premium options as the best value, encouraging more upsells.

Entrepreneur

Nigeria's central bank on Tuesday raised its benchmark interest rate for the fourth time this year, as inflation surged to a 28-year high and the naira came under renewed pressure on both the official and parallel markets.

Central Bank of Nigeria Governor Olayemi Cardoso said the rise in the bank's main lending rate to 26.75% from 26.25% was needed to tackle inflation.

"While monetary policy has been moderating aggregate demand, rising food and energy costs continue to exert upward pressure on price development," Cardoso told a press conference.

Tuesday's decision by the bank's Monetary Policy Committee to hike the rate by 50 basis points comes after increases of 150 bps in May, 200 bps in March and 400 bps in February, its largest in around 17 years.

Analysts polled by Reuters had predicted a 50 bps hike, as inflation rose for the 19th straight month in Africa's most populous nation to 34.19% in annual terms in June.

"For now, we think that today's decision marks the final act in this hiking cycle," David Omojomolo, Africa economist at Capital Economics, said.

"But there's clearly a risk that further inflation surprises prompt the (central bank) to tighten monetary conditions further, either through outright rate hikes or by tweaking liquidity provision," he said, adding that rate cuts were unlikely until next year.

Last week, President Bola Tinubu's government agreed to raise the minimum wage to 70,000 naira ($44) a month after asking lawmakers to approve 6.2 trillion naira in additional spending to plug shortfalls in this year's budget, possibly stoking inflation further.

Price pressures have been spurred by Tinubu's administration slashing petrol and electricity subsidies and devaluing the local naira currency.

Cardoso has indicated that rates will stay high for as long as needed to bring down inflation.

The International Monetary Fund in May maintained its growth forecast of 3.3% for Nigeria's economy for 2024, up from 2.9% last year, citing a pick up in services and trade sectors.

It has welcomed central bank's recent rate hikes to curb galloping inflation and called for a data-driven approach to further rate tightening while urging the bank to build up its forex reserves.

($1 = 1,585.0000 naira)

Reuters

The Central Bank of Nigeria's (CBN) decision, yesterday, to hike its benchmark interest rate to 26.75%—the fourth such increase this year—highlights a persistent adherence to conventional economic models that fail to address the unique underlying factors driving inflation in Nigeria. Despite the CBN's efforts, inflation has surged to a 28-year high, exacerbating the economic challenges faced by ordinary Nigerians.

Governor Olayemi Cardoso justified the rate hike by emphasizing the need to tackle rising inflation, which has now reached an alarming 34.19% in annual terms as of June. The governor acknowledged that while monetary policy has aimed to moderate aggregate demand, rising food and energy costs continue to exert upward pressure on prices. This perspective, however, oversimplifies the complex realities of Nigeria's inflationary environment.

Firstly, the notion of "too much money chasing too few goods" largely stems from the actions of the government at various tiers. Boosted Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) revenues, primarily driven by exchange rate gains from significant Naira devaluation, have put substantial amounts of Naira into the hands of government entities. This increased liquidity has not been matched by a corresponding rise in productive capacity, thereby fueling inflation.

Secondly, the core driver of inflation in Nigeria today is food inflation, which is intricately linked to issues of insecurity and currency depreciation. Insecurity has hindered farmers' ability to produce optimally, reducing food supply. Simultaneously, the devaluation of the Naira has made it more profitable for traders to sell scarce food supplies to neighboring countries, further depleting local availability and driving prices up.

Furthermore, rampant corruption and extravagant expenditures on luxury items by state actors have diverted resources away from productive uses. This misallocation not only fuels inflation but also erodes public trust in governance and economic management.

High energy costs and import duties also play significant roles in driving inflation. Increased energy prices impact production and transportation costs, which are then passed on to consumers. Similarly, high import duties raise the cost of imported goods, which constitute a substantial portion of Nigeria's consumption basket.

The cumulative effect of these factors is an inflationary environment that cannot be effectively tackled by interest rate hikes alone. In fact, these hikes may worsen the situation by increasing the cost of borrowing for businesses and consumers, thereby stifling economic activity and growth. Ordinary Nigerians, already struggling with high costs of living, are left to bear the brunt of these policy decisions.

The CBN's approach to combating inflation must evolve to consider these unique challenges. A data-driven, multifaceted strategy that addresses the root causes of inflation—such as insecurity, corruption, and structural inefficiencies—is essential. Monetary policy should be complemented by robust fiscal measures aimed at boosting productivity, enhancing security, and ensuring that government spending is both efficient and transparent.

In conclusion, the relentless cycle of interest rate hikes by the CBN, grounded in conventional economic thinking, fails to address the true drivers of Nigeria's inflation. Without a comprehensive approach that tackles these underlying issues, the burden of economic hardship will continue to fall disproportionately on ordinary Nigerians, undermining both economic stability and social well-being.

Amnesty International has urged President Bola Tinubu's administration to avoid threatening Nigerians who plan to protest against the prevailing hardship and hunger in the country. The global human rights organization emphasized that it is unlawful to threaten peaceful protesters, noting that Nigerians have a constitutional right to protest.

Reports indicate that some youths are organizing a nationwide protest from August 1 to 15 to voice their discontent with the rising cost of living and economic challenges. In response, Tinubu's media aide, Dada Olusegun, issued a stern warning to potential protesters, promising they would face strong resistance if they proceed with their plans.

In a post on X, Olusegun stated that those who elected Tinubu would fiercely oppose the protest. "Those who want to burn the country down under whatever guise will meet the strongest resistance of their lives. Not from security agencies, but from the silent majority that gave their mandate to President Bola Tinubu for four years in the first instance. We are waiting," he tweeted.

Amnesty International condemned these threats, asserting that they constitute a clear attack on the freedom of assembly, a right enshrined in both international law and Nigeria's 1999 Constitution. "Threatening peaceful protesters is unlawful. It is a clear attack on freedom of assembly — which is guaranteed by international law and Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution. Nigerians must not be denied the constitutionally and internationally guaranteed right to peaceful protest through veiled threats of violence and false insinuations," the organization stated.

Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar has criticised the Federal Government and its agencies for trying to abort the planned August 1 protest across the country.

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Presidential candidate in the last election said it is also ironical that those who protested against the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan in 2012 are the ones trying to stifle other peoples rights to protest.

States across the federation have been unsettled by the ongoing plan by some youths to begin a 10-day nationwide hunger and hardship protest to draw the federal and state governments’ attention to the worsening plight of the citizens.

According to the organisers, “this hunger is too much.”

In a post on his verified Facebook page on Tuesday, Atiku said it was the right of citizens to protest, saying it is guaranteed by the constitution.

He added that what government needs to do, is to ensure a safe and secure environment for citizens to exercise their constitutionally guaranteed rights to peaceful protest.

The opposition leader said, “For the avoidance of doubt, the rights of citizens to protest are ENSHRINED in the Nigerian Constitution and AFFIRMED by our courts. Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution (as altered) unequivocally guarantees the right to peaceful assembly and association.

“Chasing shadows and contriving purported persons behind the planned protests is an exercise in futility when it is obvious that Nigerians, including supporters of Tinubu and the ruling APC, are caught up in the hunger, anger, and hopelessness brought about by the incompetence and cluelessness of this government.

“It is deeply ironic that those who now seek to stifle these rights were themselves leading protests in 2012. A responsible government must ensure a SAFE and SECURE environment for citizens to exercise their constitutionally guaranteed rights to PEACEFUL PROTEST.

“Any attempt to suppress these rights is not only unconstitutional but a direct affront to our democracy,” he said.

Daily Trust

President Bola Tinubu has asked those planning to protest against his administration’s policies to shelve their plan.

Addressing State House reporters after a meeting with the President on Tuesday, the Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, declared that the President asked him to communicate to Nigerians, especially the youths, that he has listened to all their concerns, adding measures are already ongoing to address the challenges.

The Minister said, “We also discussed the issue of the country generally and Mr President has asked me to again inform Nigerians that he listens to them, especially the young people that are trying to protest.

“Mr President said he listens to them and takes what they say seriously; and he is working assiduously to ensure that this country is good not just for today but also for the future. The issue of the planned protest, Mr President does not see any need for that, he asked them to shelve that plan and he has asked them to await government’s response to all their pleas, he has listened to them.”

The Minister said a lot is happening already, saying “Only today the NASS has expeditiously passed the bill on National minimum wage. You can see how the President is working. The bill was transmitted only yesterday and today it has been passed. A lot of other interventions that the President has put in place are also going to be looked at expeditiously in the interest of Nigerians, so there is no need for strike {protest}.

“The young people out there should listen to the President and allow the President more time to see to the realization of all the goodies he has for them.”

Highlighting other policies aimed at cushioning the effect of hardship Nigerians are facing, the Minister said the government approved grains and rice for state governments, which was delivered to them, adding, “Like I said that time it is just the necessary first step, government is going to continue in that direction supporting them and assuring that whatever intervention the Federal Government has put in place go to those that should benefit, it is very important that is being put out.”

Daily Trust

Israel tanks advance deeper in southern Gaza as more ceasefire talks expected

Palestinian residents of eastern neighbourhoods of Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip fled their homes on Tuesday as Israeli tanks advanced deep into the area after Israel ordered the population to evacuate.

The tanks pushed into the Khan Younis town of Bani Suhaila and several districts nearby were bombed for a second day, forcing tens of thousands of civilians to seek refuge elsewhere.

Israel said its action - the latest in a series of major assaults in recent weeks in parts of Gaza where it had long since claimed to have rooted out Hamas - was intended to prevent the militant group's fighters from regrouping.

Gaza health officials said Israeli military strikes since Monday killed at least 80 Palestinians in the Khan Younis area - adding to a death toll of more than 39,000 in nearly 10 months of warfare, according to Gaza authorities' figures.

The Israeli military said Hamas and other groups used those areas to renew attacks, including firing rockets.

Many of the newly displaced families said they had to spend the night in the streets as they searched in vain for a space as western Khan Younis and central Gaza areas were overcrowded. Some of them said they had to flee under Israeli fire.

"For us, the most basic of essentials in our lives are not available," a woman, Ibtihal Al-Breim, told Reuters in Khan Younis. "Basic needs (like) water which we had to carry, the electricity, of course, is cut off, food is cut off, let alone the expensive prices, and there's no work."

"And then suddenly you're told now you have to leave. Without prior warning, suddenly rockets began falling on us. We had to leave and I wasn't intending to leave - but then there were quadcopters and aircraft, we saw the tanks with our own eyes," she added.

U.N. officials described scenes of despair on Tuesday as Israeli airstrikes hit the area.

"The situation is impossible," the U.N.'s Palestinian refugee agency UNRWA said on X.

In a later post, it said there was nowhere safe to go in Gaza.

"People are exhausted from the continuous displacement and unlivable conditions & they are trapped in increasingly small & overcrowded areas," it said.

The Israeli military said dozens of militants had been killed in Khan Younis by its tanks and warplanes or in close-quarter combat. Weapon caches and tunnels used by the militants had been destroyed, it said.

Palestinian medics said one person was killed in an Israeli airstrike in the area on Tuesday. The Gaza health ministry does not distinguish between combatants and non-combatants. Health officials have said most of those killed have been civilians.

Residents in Khan Younis said tanks remained stationed deep inside Bani Suhaila, east of downtown Khan Younis. Soldiers were seen searching inside the town's main cemetery, while others commandeered roofs of high-rise buildings, firing their guns toward the western areas from time to time, residents said.

In the Bureij camp in the central Gaza Strip, where six Palestinians were killed by an Israeli airstrike on a house, some residents said they had received calls from Israeli security officers ordering them to leave their homes. Some families headed towards the Nuseirat camp to the west.

Later on Tuesday, residents said Israeli forces had blown up several homes in Rafah, where Israel said its operation since May aimed to dismantle the last Hamas battalions.

CEASEFIRE HOPES

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is in Washington this week, told families of hostages held in Gaza that a deal that would secure their release could be near.

Hamas-led fighters triggered the war on Oct. 7 by storming into southern Israel, killing 1,200 people and taking 250 captives, according to Israeli tallies. Hamas and other militants are still holding 120 hostages; Israel believes around a third of them are dead.

Netanyahu was in Washington and is expected to meet U.S. President Joe Biden later this week after making an address to Congress. Speaking in the U.S. capital on Monday to families of hostages, he said: "The conditions (for a deal) are undoubtedly ripening. This is a good sign."

Months of efforts mediated by Egypt and Qatar to reach a ceasefire gained momentum in recent weeks under a proposal outlined by Biden in May.

"Unfortunately, it will not take place all at once; there will be stages. However, I believe that we can advance the deal," Netanyahu said.

Senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters there was nothing new in Netanyahu's stance.

"Netanyahu is still stalling and he is sending delegations only to calm the anger of Israeli captives' families," he said.

An Israeli negotiation team is due on Thursday to resume talks that would include hostages being released in return for Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails. According to two Egyptian security sources, Israel informed Egypt that an Israeli delegation would arrive in Cairo on Wednesday evening.

Reuters

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Poll says 32% of Ukrainians open to territorial concessions for quick peace

Nearly a third of Ukrainians would accept some territorial concessions to Russia for a quick end to the war, a more than three-fold increase over the past year, although most still oppose giving up any land, a poll showed on Tuesday.

The Kyiv International Institute of Sociology said its poll of 1,067 people on Ukrainian-held territory from May 16-22 found that 32% would agree to some form of territorial concessions, up from just 10% a year earlier and 19% at the end of last year.

It said 55% of Ukrainians remain opposed to making any territorial concessions.

Nearly 29 months since its full-scale invasion, Russia occupies around 18% of Ukrainian territory, including the Crimean peninsula it seized in 2014. Kyiv's troops have been on the back foot this year facing a Russian offensive after their counteroffensive failed to make significant gains last year.

The survey did not ask those polled what territorial concessions they would be open to or how large they should be. KIIS said those polled did not necessarily see concessions as equating to recognising the territory as Russian.

"For example, some people are ready to postpone the liberation of certain territories until the future at a better time," KIIS said in a statement with its findings.

Russia in 2022 unilaterally declared it had annexed the Ukrainian regions of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, which it partially controls.

In remarks published alongside the survey, KIIS's executive director, Anton Hrushetskyi, said Ukrainians remained against the idea of reaching a peace settlement with Russia at any cost.

"It's ... important that in the context of possible 'concessions', Ukrainians are against 'peace on any terms'," he said.

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Iskander strike targets foreign instructors in Ukraine

A missile strike has destroyed a temporary deployment point housing Western instructors and mercenaries, the Russian Defense Ministry reported.

The Russian Defense Ministry has shared a video apparently showing a missile strike on a temporary deployment center near the city of Kharkov in Ukraine that supposedly housed Western “instructors and mercenaries.”

Some 50 foreigners are said to have been killed in the ballistic missile strike, which was conducted using an Iskander-M system, the ministry said, noting that the facility was located in Dergachi, a town in Kharkov region.

The strike comes as Moscow has repeatedly warned that any foreign military personnel operating in Ukraine are considered legitimate targets for Russian strikes and would be relentlessly eliminated.

Last month, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov reiterated the threat as France hinted at officially sending its soldiers to Ukraine. “The fact is that any instructors who are involved in training the military of the Ukrainian regime do not have any immunity,” Peskov told reporters at the time, noting that “it doesn’t matter whether they are French or not.”

Earlier this month, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) declassified a report in which an agent claimed the French army was “concerned about the increased number of Frenchmen killed in the Ukrainian theater of military operation.”

Moscow’s forces had reported destroying another temporary deployment center for foreign fighters in Kharkov in January, killing what Paris reportedly estimated to be “dozens” of French citizens.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has also recently stated that Western military trainers have “long been present” in Ukraine “under the guise of mercenaries” and has emphasized that they represent a legitimate target for Russia’s armed forces.

Reuters/RT

Nigeria and South Africa account for one-third of Africa’s economic production and have also spearheaded many of the continent’s peacemaking efforts over the past three decades, including the establishment of the African Union (AU). As I noted in my 2023 book The Eagle and the Springbok, Africa’s security and development rest heavily on the leadership of these two regional powers.

Nowadays, however, both countries are too preoccupied with domestic economic challenges and political turmoil to represent Africa’s interests effectively on the world stage. In Nigeria, President Bola Tinubu’s first year in office has been marked by a currency crisis and reports of the president’s ill health. In South Africa, the ruling African National Congress recently lost its majority for the first time since 1994, forcing President Cyril Ramaphosato form a unity government with the ANC’s main political rival.

As Africa’s most influential powers, Nigeria and South Africa have a relationship that is both cooperative and competitive. This partly reflects their distinct cultural identities. Nigeria, home to the world’s largest black population, is the continent’s most linguistically diverse country; South Africa is its most Westernized.

Although both countries remain beset by corruption and crime, their growth trajectories have diverged considerably in recent years. South Africa is set to become the continent’s largest economy this year, while Nigeria – which held the title as recently as 2022 – is projected to fall to fourth place, behind Egypt and Algeria.

Instead of reversing Nigeria’s economic decline, Tinubu’s “Renewed Hope Agenda” has accelerated it. Having inherited a struggling economy with a national debt of $113 billionand 33% unemployment, Tinubu’s decision to remove fuel subsidies that kept gasoline prices low has triggered a massive cost-of-living crisis. Moreover, his administration’s attempt to float the naira by devaluing it has led the Nigerian currency to depreciate by roughly 70%against the US dollar over the past year.

These disastrous “shock therapy” policies, a misguided attempt to embrace economic orthodoxy, were initiated without much consultation or planning. After gasoline prices nearly tripled, inflation skyrocketed to 33%, and labor unions took to the streets, the government quietly reintroduced fuel subsidies.

Fearing widespread labor unrest, Tinubu’s administration also announced cash transfersof $54 over three months to the country’s poorest households. But with 40% of the population living in extreme poverty, and bread prices nearly doubling since 2023, these payments fell far short of what was needed.

To be sure, Nigeria lacks the funds to do much else. The government currently spends more than 90% of its revenue on servicing the national debt – six times what it spends on health and education – and the reintroduced fuel subsidies are projected to consume half of its annual oil revenues. Compounding these challenges, the country loses 400,000 barrels of oil per day to theft and vandalism.

At the same time, while the naira has depreciated by 40% against the dollar in the first half of 2024 – making it the world’s worst-performing currency – devaluation has failed to achieve the government’s stated goal of attracting foreign investment. Instead, multinationals like GlaxoSmithKline and Procter & Gamble have exited the country.

Tinubu’s struggles extend to his foreign policy. As chair of the Economic Community of West African States in 2023, Tinubu threatened to intervene in Niger following the country’s military coup, vastly overestimating Nigeria’s military capabilities. This resulted in an embarrassing retreat after Niger’s junta defied his ultimatum and, together with Mali and Burkina Faso, withdrew from ECOWAS.

Shortly after assuming office, Tinubu unveiled his “4D” foreign-policy doctrine: democracy, development, demography, and diaspora. But this framework seems to be more about alliteration than action. In September 2023, as part of his foreign-policy overhaul, Tinubu recalled all of Nigeria’s ambassadors. Ten months later, many of these posts remain vacant.

Despite Nigeria’s declining economic weight and political influence, many Nigerians continue to cling to the outdated notion of the country as the “giant of Africa.” Meanwhile, the kleptocratic political elite shows blatant disregard for the plight of ordinary citizens, imposing austerity measures while continuingto spend lavishly.

By contrast, South Africa seems to have adopted a more measured approach. Following the election’s stunning outcome, the ANC has formed a coalition government with the business-friendly Democratic Alliance (DA), which won just 4% of the black vote. Confronting an external public-debt burden of $158 billion and the world’s highest income inequality, Ramaphosa’s administration is rightly focusing on addressing the country’s electricity crisis, infrastructure challenges, and corruption.

But tensions are already emerging. While many within the ANC want to boost social-welfare spending, the DA has consistently opposed the ANC’s welfare policies. Indeed, many ANC leaders would have preferred a coalition with two left-leaning ruling party offshoots: former President Jacob Zuma’s uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK) and Julius Malema’s Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF).

As political commentators have repeatedly warned, the “markets” – meaning South Africa’s white-dominated corporations and foreign investors – would punish any coalition that included the MK and EFF, owing to both parties’ support for nationalizing financial institutions and land expropriation. Moreover, the fact that the ANC has been in power for three decades without shifting to the left suggests that such a move was unlikely.

Having garnered 15% of the national vote, the 82-year-old Zuma remains a powerful political player. Notably, MK won Zuma’s home province of KwaZulu-Natal with 45% of the vote, while support there for the ANC dwindled to 17%.

In an unexpected twist, the ANC, DA, and the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) managed to form a coalition, effectively excluding MK from the provincial government. Considering that MK won nearly as many seats as the next three largest parties combined, its exclusion could fuel instability in the traditionally volatile province, which is home to Sub-Saharan Africa’s largest port.

With Islamist terrorism on the rise and the United States, Russia, France, and China expanding their respective military footprints in Africa, the continent urgently needs strong leadership. But Nigeria and South Africa are unlikely to provide it. Constrained by domestic crises, Africa’s major powers have become hobbled hegemons.

Project Syndicate