Chris Westfall

Passive-aggressive leaders specialize in hiding their true feelings, and making you question your own. Instead of taking a direct approach, and fostering clarity, passive aggressive leaders lack the courage (or the interpersonal skills) to confront workplace challenges. In a report from the Harvard Business Review, researchers identified passive-aggressive leadership as a key factor in low employee engagement and reduced organizational performance. PwC says that a passive-aggressive organizations will suffer from an inability to execute, experiencing ineffective decision making and an “information disconnect” - something that no one can afford in the age of AI. Rather than addressing issues head-on, and offering clear guidance, passive-aggressive leaders turn to sarcasm, dismissal, denial, ambiguity and other tactics that are found under the heading of “horrible communication strategies”.

As a communications coach to executives and entrepreneurs all over the world, I’ve seen the team-building challenges that passive-aggressive organizations face. Toxic leadership, as defined by Dr. Jean Lipman-Blumen in The Allure of Toxic Leaders, includes behaviors that destroy morale, damage relationships, and impede progress—qualities found in passive-aggressive leadership. Learning to eliminate passive-aggressive leadership, and how to respond to it, can transform your organization from the inside out. Consider these common passive-aggressive phrases:

1. “If you think that’s best, then go ahead.” The verbal equivalent of giving someone enough rope so that they can hang themselves, this phrase lets you know that you are on an island. On the surface, passive aggressive communication looks like support and agreement - but underneath, there’s a subtle disapproval from the leader. You are being set up to fail. The antidote for this kind of toxic leadership is to explore the idea of support, and what happens if this initiative goes sideways. Will your boss back you up? Or leave you stranded on a passive-aggressive island, where you are the only resident?
2. “Sure, I’ll get to that when I can.” Usually used as a response to your request for a promotion, new initiative or raise, this empty non-committal approach is another sign that you don’t have the support of your leader. The key here is to explore that timeline further - remembering that the passive-aggressive leader has more wishy-washy responses waiting for you, disguised as lame excuses or other covert responses. Try to stay neutral in the conversation, and seek out agreement around a realistic date for a response. Can you reach agreement around the importance of the initiative? What happens if approval isn’t granted or if a review doesn’t take place? Explore the costs of inaction from the entire team’s perspective.
3. “I didn’t realize that was such a priority for the team” Superficially, this statement looks like an acknowledgement of your priorities - but actually, your boss may be saying that your focus is out of whack. Or unimportant. Marlene Chism is the author of of From Conflict to Courage. In her work she suggests that employees can often disarm passive-aggressive leaders by seeking clarity through questions, which forces the leader to communicate more transparently. The question of focus begs more questions, to clarify the leader’s true expectations - not veiled disappointments.
4. “I’m sure you tried your best” - the passive-aggressive leader is the master of the backhanded compliment. Other examples include, “You look so much nicer when you smile,” which implies that you do not look nice - and also smells of sexism. By the way, why are we talking about how someone looks? Unless you are photographer trying to coax a particular expression, maybe it’s best not to comment on someone’s smile? Saying “I’m sure you tried your best”, after a recent failure, is not a compliment. It suggests that the effort was inadequate. Real leaders offer clear and constructive feedback, and have the courage to hold people accountable. The effective communicator gives feedback that fuels greater understanding, not some cryptic and disguised response...expecting your team to smile more while you hear it.
5. The Silent Treatment - passive aggressive individuals will hide their anger instead of expressing it directly, according to Psychology Today. Some subtle but insidious kinds of passive aggression are diminished eye contact, persistent forgetting, and ignoring the targeted individual during a group conversation. Silence when a response is warranted can be a sign of passive-aggressive behavior. Are you being ignored in group meetings, on Zoom, or in other situations? An objective third-party opinion can help make a difference, according to Berit Brogaard, PhD, a professor at the University of Miami. Someone (not you) that can give the leader a gentle nudge, and explore other options. However, if the passive-aggressive leader is not working with a coach (or open to feedback) don’t expect the silent treatment to stop anytime soon.

“Almost every problem that has escalated can be traced back to a conversation that should have happened but didn’t,” Marlene Chism tells USA Today. Passive-aggressive communication is a subtle but harmful form of toxic leadership. It erodes trust, damages collaboration, and stifles productivity. Organizations that allow passive-aggressive behaviors to persist will see a drop in morale, creativity, and overall performance, according to HBR, PwC, and your own personal experience. Employees can protect themselves by addressing the behavior professionally, from a neutral place of inquiry and curiosity. Moreover, teams (and team leaders) can gain new insights from coaching programs, articles like this one, and individual guidance on leadership. Passive aggressive choices are a misuse of imagination for leaders that don’t see other options. It’s an old adage, but still true today: honesty is the best policy. And high-performing leaders understand how to enable that approach.

Forbes

Aliko Dangote’s recent call for the removal of the petrol subsidy, based on the specious comparison between fuel prices in Nigeria and Saudi Arabia, is not only misleading but also reveals a deeply selfish agenda that disregards the economic realities of ordinary Nigerians. Dangote's attempt to justify a petrol price hike by claiming that fuel is cheaper in Nigeria than in Saudi Arabia, while ignoring the vast disparity in minimum wages between the two countries, is both disingenuous and dangerous.

While petrol may indeed be 60 percent cheaper in Nigeria than in Saudi Arabia, Dangote conveniently overlooks the fact that the minimum wage in Saudi Arabia is 26 times higher than in Nigeria. The average Nigerian worker earns the equivalent of just $42 per month, compared to $1,080 in Saudi Arabia. For Dangote to suggest that ordinary Nigerians, already burdened by inflation and economic hardship, can shoulder higher petrol prices without severe consequences is an affront to the very people whose daily struggles he has long exploited for profit.

Dangote's hypocrisy becomes even more glaring when one considers the immense subsidies and government support his business empire has enjoyed for decades. From pioneer status benefits and tax waivers to concessionary foreign exchange rates, Dangote has thrived on a system that has showered him with privileges far beyond the reach of ordinary Nigerians. Yet, this same man, who has built his fortune on the back of state largesse, now advocates for policies that will further impoverish millions, all while ensuring that his refinery profits at the expense of the people.

By pushing for the removal of subsidies, Dangote is essentially laying the groundwork for his refinery to sell petrol at prices even higher than those of imported fuel. This is not an act of patriotism or fiscal responsibility; it is a calculated move to protect his bottom line, no matter the cost to Nigeria's struggling citizens and small businesses. His advocacy for subsidy removal is not about helping the government save money—it’s about maximizing his profits under the guise of economic reform.

What Dangote fails to acknowledge is that much of his refinery’s output will be consumed by the very Nigerians he seeks to further burden with higher fuel prices. These are the same Nigerians who, in his hour of need, rallied to support him against the chokehold of the corrupt Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL). Yet now, Dangote seems willing to sacrifice their well-being for the sake of his own profit margins. This is not just morally wrong; it is a short-sighted business strategy that will ultimately backfire as the purchasing power of consumers is eroded.

Dangote’s argument that fuel smuggling and porous borders justify subsidy removal also rings hollow. The problems of smuggling and border control are the result of government inefficiencies and corruption—issues that should be addressed through better enforcement and regulation, not by punishing ordinary Nigerians with higher fuel prices.

In calling for the removal of petrol subsidies, Dangote is not only advocating for an anti-people policy but also revealing the depth of his greed. He appears willing to push millions of Nigerians further into poverty to protect his financial empire, all while hiding behind the rhetoric of economic reform. His disregard for the hardship faced by the average Nigerian is evident in his tone-deaf suggestion that the country follow the example of wealthier nations like Saudi Arabia, without considering the vast gulf in living standards.

Nigeria does need economic reform, but Dangote’s brand of reform—one that benefits the wealthy at the expense of the poor—is not the solution. The government must reject his self-serving calls for further subsidy removal and instead focus on policies that uplift the millions of ordinary Nigerians who continue to suffer under a broken system.

It is high time that Nigeria's leaders recognized the difference between genuine reform and the corporate greed of oligarchs like Dangote, who are all too willing to sacrifice the common good for personal gain. In this case, further hike in petrol prices would not only hurt the people but also expose the country's leadership to accusations of complicity in perpetuating an exploitative system that benefits the few at the expense of the many. If Nigeria is to move forward, it must do so with policies that prioritize the needs of its people, not the profit margins of its billionaires.

The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has increased the Monetary Policy Rate (MPR) from 26.75% to 27.25%, marking a 50 basis points hike. The MPR serves as the benchmark for interest rates in Nigeria, and the adjustment is aimed at further curbing the country’s persistently high inflation. The decision was announced by CBN Governor Olayemi Cardoso on Tuesday after the Monetary Policy Committee’s (MPC) 297th meeting in Abuja.

Cardoso explained that the rate hike is part of the CBN’s ongoing efforts to control inflationary pressures, even as Nigeria’s inflation rate slightly eased. According to data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), the inflation rate fell to 32.15% in August 2024, marking the second consecutive decline this year. Despite this, inflation remains a key concern for policymakers.

In addition to the MPR increase, the MPC retained the asymmetric corridor at +500 and -100 basis points around the MPR. The cash reserve ratio (CRR), the amount of funds banks must hold in reserve, was also raised from 45% to 50%, while the liquidity ratio was kept unchanged at 30%.

Cardoso noted that the committee acknowledged improvements in exchange rate stability, attributing this to the bank’s tight monetary policies. He stated that this stability would enhance confidence among economic actors, facilitating better long-term planning.

However, the governor cautioned that much more needs to be done to achieve the CBN’s objective of price stability. While headline inflation has moderated due to easing food prices, core inflation—driven by rising energy costs—remains stubbornly high. The MPC stressed the importance of continued collaboration with fiscal authorities to tackle the upward pressure on energy prices, a key driver of inflation.

Analysis of the Rate Hike

The CBN’s decision to raise the interest rate to 27.25% underscores its determination to rein in inflation, which has remained persistently high despite recent declines. The rate hike, alongside the increase in the cash reserve ratio to 50%, signals a more aggressive tightening stance aimed at reducing excess liquidity in the financial system. This approach is expected to make borrowing more expensive, thereby dampening consumer demand and reducing inflationary pressures.

However, the continued high levels of core inflation, particularly driven by energy costs, suggest that monetary policy alone may not be sufficient to address Nigeria’s inflation problem. The central bank’s tight monetary policies are having some impact, as evidenced by the improved exchange rate stability, but the inflationary impact of rising energy prices remains a critical challenge.

Furthermore, the CBN’s emphasis on closer collaboration with fiscal authorities is a recognition that structural issues—such as fuel and electricity costs—are major contributors to inflation. Without addressing these root causes, rate hikes may only have a limited effect in bringing inflation under control.

In the short term, the rate hike will likely slow economic activity as businesses and individuals face higher borrowing costs. This could dampen investment and consumption, potentially constraining growth. However, if inflation remains unchecked, it could further erode purchasing power and destabilize the economy. Thus, the CBN’s move represents a delicate balancing act: curbing inflation without stifling economic recovery.

Going forward, the effectiveness of this policy will depend heavily on how well it is complemented by fiscal measures that address Nigeria’s structural inflation drivers, particularly in the energy sector.

Airtel Nigeria has revealed that it spends N28 billion monthly on diesel to power its over 15,000 sites across the country. The telecom giant is set to embark on a sustainability drive aimed at reducing its reliance on diesel and lowering its carbon footprint.

Femi Adeniran, Airtel Nigeria’s Director of Corporate Communications and CSR, shared this during a media roundtable in Lagos. He noted that the company currently consumes 22 million litres of diesel each month, which contributes significantly to environmental degradation. However, collocation, a practice that allows telecom operators to share infrastructure, has helped reduce potential higher costs.

“We are committed to minimizing our environmental impact. Transitioning to grid power and solar energy will significantly cut down diesel consumption and mitigate climate change,” Adeniran said, adding that the company’s sustainability efforts will also contribute to Nigeria’s climate goals.

Harmanpreet Dhillon, Chief Technical Officer at Airtel Nigeria, highlighted the company’s shift towards using lithium-ion batteries over traditional ones. This move will help reduce Airtel's carbon footprint, as lithium-ion batteries are more energy-efficient and environmentally friendly.

Additionally, Dhillon explained that Airtel is adopting outdoor-operable telecom equipment that can withstand extreme conditions like heat, humidity, and dust without the need for indoor air-conditioned spaces. This will further lower power consumption, reducing reliance on diesel generators while boosting the adoption of solar power and lithium-ion battery technologies.

Kemi Ariyo, Airtel Nigeria’s Director of Information Technology, also shared that the company is set to introduce green technologies, starting with its data center, which is expected to be operational by 2027. This center will enhance the company’s operational capacity while supporting its sustainability objectives.

Airtel’s push towards greener energy solutions reflects the broader industry trend of adopting eco-friendly technologies to both cut costs and mitigate environmental impacts.

The presiding judge in the trial of Nnamdi Kanu, detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Binta Nyako, has recused herself from the trial.

On Tuesday, Nyako withdrew from the trial after Kanu made an oral submission accusing her of non-compliance with the orders of the Supreme Court.

Kanu had ordered his counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, to sit down while he took up submission to the court after the lawyer tried to appeal to the judge to suspend the trial to enable his client prepare adequately for his defence as the date was too close.

Kanu shouted from the dock, “Sit down! I say you should sit down!”

“My lord, I have no confidence in this court any more and I ask you to recuse yourself because you did not abide by the decision of the Supreme Court,” he submitted.

“I can understand it if the DSS refuses to obey a court order, but for this court to refuse to obey an order of the Supreme Court is regrettable. I am asking you to recuse yourself from this case,” Kanu stated.

Though the prosecution counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo, pleaded with the court to proceed with the trial, Nyako said she wanted to recuse herself from the case.

“I hereby recuse myself and remit the case-file back to the Chief Judge,” she held.

Nyako had been presiding over the trial of Kanu since he was first arrested in 2015 for agitations for creation of a Biafra Republic from Nigeria.

The judge had in June 2017 granted Kanu bail alongside his co-defendants but he escaped the country after a military operation at his Afara-Ukwu, Umuahia family compound in Abia State where several of his supporters were killed.

Following Kanu’s rearrangement after his rendition from Kenya in 2021, Nyako also dismissed seven of the 15-count charges brought against him by the federal government bordering on treasonable felony for lack of sufficient evidence.

Daily Trust

Amid Israel-Hezbollah strikes, Lebanon says only US can stop fighting

An Israeli airstrike on Beirut killed a senior Hezbollah commander on Tuesday as cross-border rocket attacks by both sides increased fears of a full-fledged war in the Middle East and Lebanon said only Washington could help end the fighting.

Hezbollah early on Wednesday confirmed senior commander Ibrahim Qubaisi was killed by Israeli airstrikes on Tuesday on the Lebanese capital as Israel announced earlier. Israel said Qubaisi headed the group's missile and rocket force.

Israel's offensive since Monday morning has killed 569 people, including 50 children, and wounded 1,835 in Lebanon, Health Minister Firass Abiad told Al Jazeera Mubasher TV.

The new offensive against Hezbollah has stoked fears that nearly a year of conflict between Israel and the militant Palestinian group Hamas in Gaza is escalating and could destabilise the Middle East. Britain urged its nationals to leave Lebanon and said it was moving 700 troops to Cyprus to help its citizens evacuate.

The U.N. Security Council said it would meet on Wednesday to discuss the conflict.

"Lebanon is at the brink. The people of Lebanon – the people of Israel – and the people of the world - cannot afford Lebanon to become another Gaza," U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres said.

At the U.N., which is holding its General Assembly this week, U.S. President Joe Biden made a plea for calm. "Full-scale war is not in anyone's interest. Even if a situation has escalated, a diplomatic solution is still possible," he said.

Lebanon's Foreign Minister Abdallah Bou Habib criticized Biden's address as "not strong, not promising" and said the U.S. was the only country "that can really make a difference in the Middle East and with regard to Lebanon." Washington is Israel's longtime ally and biggest arms supplier.

The United States "is the key ... to our salvation," he told an event in New York City hosted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

In Beirut, thousands of displaced people who fled from southern Lebanon were sheltering in schools and other buildings.

At the Technical Institute of Bir Hassan, volunteers brought water bottles, medicine and other supplies for the new arrivals.

In one classroom, 11-month-old Matila slept on a mattress while children elsewhere stood on chairs to pass time by scribbling on a whiteboard. Rima Ali Chahine, 50, said the shelter provided diapers, pastries and milk for the children.

"It's a lot of pressure for grownups and children. They're exhausted and stressed. They could not sleep," she said. "The kids - they are living through terrible conditions."

Early on Wednesday, an Israeli strike hit the seaside town of Jiyyeh, 75 km (46 miles) north of the border with Israel, two security sources said.

HEZBOLLAH WEAKENED, SAYS ISRAEL

Half a million people are estimated to have been displaced in Lebanon, said Bou Habib. He said Lebanon's prime minister hoped to meet with U.S. officials over the next two days.

The U.S. and fellow mediators Qatar and Egypt have so far been unsuccessful in their efforts to negotiate a ceasefire in the nearly year-old war in Gaza between Israel and Hamas, a Hezbollah ally.

Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian, whose country and Israel are arch-enemies, told the U.N. General Assembly the international community must "secure a permanent ceasefire in Gaza and bring an end to the desperate barbarism of Israel in Lebanon, before it engulfs the region and the world."

Israel's military said its airforce conducted "extensive strikes" on Tuesday on Hezbollah targets across southern Lebanon, including weapons storage facilities and dozens of launchers that were aimed at Israeli territory.

Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant said the attacks had weakened Hezbollah and would continue. Hezbollah "has suffered a sequence of blows to its command and control, its fighters, and the means to fight. These are all severe blows," he told Israeli troops.

He accused the U.N. of shirking its responsibility to prevent Hezbollah's attacks into Israel.

Hezbollah said it launched rockets at the Dado military base in northern Israel and attacked the Atlit naval base south of Haifa with drones, among other targets.

Suspected Israeli missiles were also launched at the Syrian port city of Tartous and were intercepted by Syrian air defences, Syrian army sources said. The Israeli military declined to comment on the report.

Since the Gaza war started in October, Israel has intensified a years-long air campaign targeting Iran-aligned armed groups and their weapons transfers in Syria.

Funerals were held on Tuesday for people killed in Lebanon by Israel's bombardment. In the coastal city of Saksakiyeh, Mohammed Helal was defiant as he mourned his daughter Jouri.

"We are not afraid. Even if they kill, dissect and destroy us," he said.

Reuters

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Russia strikes apartment block in Ukraine's Kharkiv, three killed, 34 injured

Russia hit a high-rise apartment block and a bakery in Ukraine's northeastern city of Kharkiv with guided bombs on Tuesday, killing at least three people and injuring 34, with others feared trapped under rubble, authorities said.

Russian forces also launched a fresh attack further south on the city of Zaporizhzhia, the target of a series of strikes in recent days. Seven people were injured.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, writing on X, said of the Kharkiv attacks: "The targets of the Russian bombs were an apartment building, a bakery, a stadium. In other words, the everyday life of ordinary people."

The strike took place as world leaders, including Zelenskiy, gathered in New York for the United Nations General Assembly.

"There is much discussion now at the UN General Assembly about collective efforts for security and the future. But we just need to stop the terror. To have security. To have a future," Zelenskiy said.

Kharkiv Mayor Ihor Terekhov, writing on Telegram, said the Russians had hit four city districts with guided bombs. Some of the bombs hit an open area and caused little damage.

Regional governor Oleh Syniehubov said a 17-year old was among the injured. Four people were in serious conditions.

Images from the site showed a hole blown through the nine-storey apartment block, several floors of it totally destroyed. The building was hit directly, officials said.

Terekhov earlier said the building had previously been attacked by Russia at the start of its 2022 invasion.

"It was almost repaired, windows were installed, it was insulated, and prepared for the heating season. The enemy hit it a second time," Terekhov said, adding that the section of the building that suffered most damage was housing 82 people.

Kharkiv, Ukraine's second largest city, and the surrounding region regularly come under Russian attacks. Moscow's troops extensively use highly destructive guided bombs that Ukrainian air defences struggle to intercept.

Russian forces also used guided bombs in their latest attack on Zaporizhzhia, regional governor Ivan Fedorov said.

Several private homes were destroyed in the strike and four of the seven injured were in hospital. One person was killed in an overnight strike on the city.

Kyiv, which is pressing allies to allow deep strikes into Russia, says the most effective means of reducing the attacks is to target not the bombs but planes and airfields hosting them.

Russia denies targeting civilians, although it has killed thousands during more than 2 1/2 years of war.

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Ukraine's failed attacks, losses: situation in Kursk Region

Four Ukrainian servicemen have been captured as a result of a failed enemy attempt to attack Malaya Loknya and Obukhovka in the Kursk Region, the Russian Defense Ministry said.

Ukraine lost more than 360 troops over the day. In total, the enemy has lost over 16,700 servicemen since fighting began in the region.

TASS has gathered the key news about the unfolding situation.

Operation to neutralize Ukrainian forces

- Over the day, the Russian military repelled enemy attempts to attack Malaya Loknya and Obukhovka.

- They also repelled five Ukrainian attempts to break through the border towards Medvezhye and Novy Put.

- The Russian military struck Ukrainian formations near Lyubimovka, Daryino, Novy Put, Nikolayevo-Daryino and Plekhovo.

- Russian jets struck Ukrainian reserves in the Sumy Region.

Ukraine’s losses

- Over the day, the enemy lost more than 360 servicemen and 13 armored vehicles, including an infantry fighting vehicle and 12 armored fighting vehicles, as well as four artillery pieces, two multiple rocket launchers, three electronic warfare stations and 11 other vehicles. Four Ukrainian servicemen were captured.

- Since the beginning of hostilities in Russia's borderline region, Ukraine's losses have amounted to more than 16,700 servicemen, 127 tanks, 61 infantry fighting vehicles, 95 armored personnel carriers, 809 armored combat vehicles, 508 vehicles, 136 artillery pieces, 31 multiple rocket launchers, including eight HIMARS and six US-made MLRS, eight anti-aircraft missile launchers, five transport and loading vehicles, 35 radar stations, eight counter-battery radars, two air defense radars, 18 pieces of engineering equipment, including 11 engineering demolition vehicles and one UR-77 demining unit, as well as an armored repair vehicle.

Alaudinov's statements

- The Ukrainian armed forces are abandoning their positions in the Kursk Region en masse, Deputy Chief of the Main Military-Political Directorate of the Russian Armed Forces, Commander of the Akhmat special forces, Major-General Apty Alaudinov said.

Reuters/Tass

The rising cost of living in Africa has triggered a wave of protests in recent months, underscoring the disproportionately higher economic and social costs of inflation on a continent with persistent widespread poverty and heightened vulnerability to global volatility. The world, it seems, is now living through a tale of two inflations.

Initially, the current inflation cycle – a product of pandemic supply shocks and escalating geopolitical tensions – affected developed and developing countries alike. But inflationary pressures have become less synchronous over time. While price growth has fallen sharply in advanced economies, it remains stubbornly high – and, in some cases, rising – in Africa. And even though inflation in many developed countries is trending down to central banks’ 2% target, it has hit double digits in nearly one-third of African countries (a ratio that is even higher when excluding CFA franc countries, where the euro peg has contributed to monetary stability).

For example, the annualized inflation rate in Nigeria, one of Africa’s largest economies, hit 34% – a 28-year high – in May, and is forecast to remain elevated in the second half of the year, largely owing to soaring food inflation, which accelerated to 40%. This stands to reduce household purchasing power and raise the risk of food insecurity even more, especially for Nigeria’s growing rank of poverty-stricken and most vulnerable citizens. The country has the world’s largest population living in poverty after India. Meanwhile, government reforms, including the sharp devaluation of the naira – which has lost 70% of its value against the dollar since June 2023 – to attract foreign investors, have only made matters worse for a country that relies heavily on imports of food and other essentials.

In August, protests against the resulting economic hardship spread across several large Nigerian cities. They followed weeks of riots in Kenya against the government’s finance bill, which proposed tax hikes on basic goods such as oil, bread, and sanitary pads, even as millions were already struggling to make ends meet. Dozens of demonstrators in both countries were killed during official attempts to quell the uprisings.

Food-price inflation affects low-income households more than their high-income counterparts because they spend a greater portion of their budget on necessities. Consider that food costs account for 16% of consumer spending in advanced economies, but around 40% in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). This difference in the composition of spending explains the more regressive nature of inflation in SSA, which is home to 60% of the world’s extreme poor, and why inflation there carries a greater risk of political upheaval.

The lack of formal employment opportunities has also exacerbated Africa’s cost-of-living crisis. To be sure, the wages of low-income workers with formal jobs are not keeping pace with price increases. But informal sector activities – a disguised form of unemployment and constraint on shared prosperity – account for roughly 85% of total employment on the continent, and these workers must also deal with income volatility and unexpected components of inflation, further tightening the squeeze on households.

Recent research assessing the distributional effects of the inflation cycle on households in the United States found a phenomenon known as “inflation inequality”: prices have risen more quickly for those at the bottom of the income distribution than for those at the top. The spread of protests across Africa suggests that a similar dynamic is at work on the continent, where the disproportionately higher food prices caused by positive exchange-rate pass-throughs have dramatically increased the welfare costs of this inflation cycle.

Government policies have also heightened the cost-of-living crisis. Instead of supporting vulnerable groups through targeted interventions, African governments have indiscriminately raised taxes and cut spending to meet external liabilities. Interest payments on sovereign debt now consume around one-third of Kenya’s revenue and more than two-thirds of Nigeria’s. In both countries, procyclical fiscal policy and austerity measures have had a knock-on effect on prices, stoking inflation and worsening the cost-of-living crisis.

But in response to the protests, governments are reversing some of their procyclical policies or implementing complementary measures to mitigate their impact. Kenyan President William Ruto dismissed his entire cabinet and withdrew the controversial finance bill, which was expected to raise $2.7 billion in additional revenue to meet fiscal targets set by the International Monetary Fund. In Nigeria, the government has announced a 150-day suspension of import duties for certain foods to alleviate the pressure on struggling households.

Nonetheless, more must be done to close the gap between actual and potential growth and expand opportunities for young people. Africa is the world’s most natural-resource-rich continent, yet Africans face bleak futures in countries that lack sufficient engineers and political will to transform these resources, create enough well-paying jobs, and expand prosperity. Africa’s excessive reliance on imports as an alternative to expanding aggregate output has sustained external imbalances and hollowed out the jobs market, causing more people to fall into destitution.

To meet the aspirations of young populations, African governments should rethink constraints on public spending and overcomethe recurrent balance-of-payments crises that have long shaped economic policy across the continent. Increased investment in building a workforce that is fluent in emerging technologies is critical to spurring industrialization. This, in turn, would bolster Africa’s manufacturing sector, which in other parts of the world has long served as a social escalator and growth accelerator, catalyzing convergence with high-income countries. The transformation of African economies will also drive the development of regional value chains, bolster intra-African trade (and thus mitigate the region’s exposure to global volatility), and build large national buffers to wean the region off debilitating aid dependency.

Africa’s policymakers must not only invest in human capital to move their countries up the value ladder in a global economy where technology has become a key driver of growth. They must also strive to equalize access to opportunities and achieve shared prosperity to strengthen the concept of the nation-state and enhance national security. To quote Samora Machel, the first president of Mozambique, “For the nation to live, the tribe must die.” For too long, a tribal approach to governance has undermined national development, perpetuating intergenerational poverty and exacerbating inflation inequality.

Project Syndicate

Being a great leader is not only about charisma or communicating the right way. It's about building a personal connectionand earning the respect of others. There is no surefire recipe for success, but the following seven habits can help you increase your influence:

1. Cultivate self-belief.

Having confidence in yourself is a basic requirement for being seen as a leader. Not only will you be more effective in trying to present your vision, but it will also make you more likable, encouraging others to trust and follow you. Confidence is a powerful tool for inspiring others.

2. Treat others with respect.

Respect is a common currency of relationships. Treat everyone with dignity, and not simply those above or below you in position. And remember that by treating people respectfully, you earn their trust and make them more loyal employees.

3. Show genuine interest.

Good leaders are curious and empathetic--they genuinely care about other people. Listen to what others say, ask clarifying questions, and care about the people around you.

4. Communicate effectively.

Be a clear communicator. Avoid industry jargon. Be concise. Make your words easy to digest. Use positive language and be upbeat.

5. Smile and be approachable.

A smile can open doors and make people feel at ease. Be approachable and willing to engage. You're going to feel even more likable and influential when you're friendly.

6. Be helpful and supportive.

A leader who offers help and support is a valuable asset on any team. Look for opportunities to assist others and be prepared to lend a hand when asked. This will convey your concern for your people.

7. Be authentic.

Above all, be authentic--say what you think and do what you say. People respond to leaders they can believe in.

If you focus on practicing these seven habits, then you will become a truly magnetic leader. And remember, influence is built on respect, trust, and authenticity. So, the more you are able to model those behaviors, the more influence you will have.

Inc

Once again, Nigeria’s electoral process has descended into a grotesque spectacle, as witnessed in the recent Edo State governorship election. What transpired on September 21, 2024, was not an election in any democratic sense, but rather a shameless transaction, where votes were auctioned to the highest bidder. Olumide Akpata, the Labour Party candidate, aptly described the event as a "bidding war" for votes between the two dominant parties, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). This "election" is yet another confirmation that Nigeria’s democracy has been hijacked by political entrepreneurs who have mastered the art of manipulating poverty to serve their insidious ends.

In Edo State, voters were not exercising their democratic right to choose a leader, but were instead coerced into selling their future for a few thousand naira. Both the APC and PDP, with their respective access to state coffers, engaged in a flagrant display of ill-gotten wealth to buy votes, thereby reducing the electoral process to nothing more than a marketplace of corruption. According to reports, the APC's candidate, Monday Okpebholo, who was declared the winner, secured 291,667 votes, while his closest rival, Asue Ighodalo of the PDP, garnered 247,274. Akpata, who finished third with 22,763 votes, was clear in his condemnation: what occurred in Edo was a "show of shame."

The irony of this situation is inescapable. Both the APC and PDP, entities that have presided over Nigeria’s deepening economic misery, are the very forces perpetuating the cycle of poverty and poor governance that traps the electorate. The weaponization of poverty has become their most effective tool. In a country where many struggle daily to survive, it is no wonder that vote-buying schemes are so effective. The people of Edo were not just buying into a politician’s manifesto; they were buying into the illusion that the few naira in their hands could alleviate their suffering, even if only temporarily.

This political charade was further exposed by the civil society organization Yiaga Africa, which noted that the election failed the integrity test, pointing to inconsistencies in the collation process and widespread voter intimidation. Akpata went as far as to accuse his own party agents and some supporters of participating in this disgraceful "cash-and-carry" approach to politics. His refusal to engage in such practices came at a great personal cost, as even his own polling unit was lost—an indictment of a system that rewards corruption and punishes integrity.

Peter Obi, the Labour Party’s presidential candidate in the 2023 general election, voiced his outrage over the Edo election, calling it a blatant example of "state capture" that continues to undermine Nigeria's democratic process. He rightfully pointed out that any nation whose leadership recruitment process is so deeply flawed is doomed. Obi’s critique cuts to the heart of the matter: Nigeria’s political system, as it stands, cannot produce the kind of leadership needed to move the country forward.

What we are witnessing in Edo and across the country is not an anomaly—it is the system working exactly as it was designed to, by those in power. The APC and PDP have become indistinguishable in their shared commitment to looting the country’s resources and exploiting its citizens. Elections have become a mere formality, a ritual in which the outcome is predetermined by who can afford the largest bribe. It no longer matters which party wins; the result is the same: misrule, corruption, and the entrenchment of poverty.

As Akpata pointed out, the consequences of this broken system are dire. The governor-elect in Edo will not serve the interests of the people, but rather the interests of the godfathers and power brokers who financed his campaign. Edo State, like much of Nigeria, will continue to suffer from underdevelopment, resource misallocation, and governance that serves a select few at the expense of the many.

The current electoral system in Nigeria is beyond reform. It is a deeply entrenched mechanism of state capture, designed to preserve the power of a corrupt elite. What is needed is a radical overhaul—an entirely new system built from the ground up, one that prioritizes accountability, transparency, and the will of the people. This is the conversation that Nigeria’s intelligentsia, its civil society, and its few remaining ethical leaders must begin in earnest.

The time for half measures and cosmetic reforms is over. If Nigeria is to have any hope of a brighter future, it must abandon this failed system and build one that truly represents the aspirations of its people. Until then, elections like the one in Edo will remain nothing more than hollow transactions, ensuring that the cycle of poverty, corruption, and bad governance continues unchecked.