Nairobi, Kenya – Former Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Amolo Odinga, a towering and indefatigable figure in Kenya’s political landscape, has died at the age of 80, family sources told Ndiho Media.
Mr. Odinga passed away on Wednesday at Devamatha Hospital in India after suffering a cardiac arrest during a morning walk. Doctors said he was unresponsive to resuscitation efforts and was declared dead at 09:52 local time.
A master political strategist, Odinga was both admired and polarizing — a lifelong crusader for democracy, social justice, and national unity. Born in western Kenya, he was the son of Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, Kenya’s first vice president. His political life was defined by resilience and sacrifice, including years spent in detention under Daniel Arap Moi’s regime for opposing one-party rule.
Odinga ran for president five times, each race leaving a mark on the country’s democratic journey. His 2007 election dispute with Mwai Kibaki plunged Kenya into its worst post-independence crisis, which ended with a power-sharing deal that made him Prime Minister. His 2017 legal challenge led to the historic annulment of a presidential election — a first in Africa.
He was affectionately called “Baba,” “Agwambo,” and “Tinga” by his loyal supporters, revered as both a symbol of resistance and a father figure to Kenya’s pro-democracy movement.
President William Ruto and former President Uhuru Kenyatta led tributes, calling him a statesman whose death “leaves a silence that echoes across our nation.” Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi hailed him as “a cherished friend of India.”
Raila Odinga is survived by his wife, Ida Odinga, and their children. His passing leaves a deep void in Kenya’s public life — a reminder of a man who embodied the country’s long, unfinished journey toward democracy.
Ethiopia and Eritrea are once again walking a dangerous line between fragile peace and open conflict. In a letter to UN Secretary-General António Guterres, Ethiopian Foreign Minister Gedion Timothewos accused Eritrea of “actively preparing to wage war” and collaborating with armed groups opposed to the government in Addis Ababa. Eritrea has not commented publicly, but the accusation marks the sharpest deterioration in relations between the two countries since their 2018 peace deal.
“No shots have been fired, at least not yet,” I said in a recent analysis. “But the rhetoric has hardened, the positions have deepened, and the specter of war is once again haunting a region that has already endured decades of bloodshed.”
The roots of this tension go deep. After a 30-year struggle, Eritrea gained independence from Ethiopia in 1993. The joy of liberation quickly gave way to border disputes, culminating in a brutal war from 1998 to 2000 that killed tens of thousands. The Algiers Agreement brought an end to fighting, but the border remained unsettled. For nearly two decades, both countries lived in a cold peace—neither allies nor enemies.
That changed in 2018 when Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed reached out to Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki. The two men signed a landmark peace agreement, reopening embassies and borders. “I remember people boarding Ethiopian flights and meeting loved ones on the tarmac,” I recalled. “For a moment, it felt like the region had finally turned a page.” Abiy went on to win the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts.
But peace in the Horn of Africa can be fleeting. Just a year later, Ethiopia was engulfed in civil war with the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF). Eritrea, once an enemy, became Abiy’s ally. The conflict claimed hundreds of thousands of lives and left deep scars. Eritrean troops were accused of some of the worst atrocities, particularly in the ancient city of Aksum. Although a peace deal in 2022 halted major fighting, Eritrea was not a party to the agreement, and tensions soon resurfaced.
At the center of the current dispute is Ethiopia’s desire for access to the sea. Landlocked since Eritrea’s independence, Ethiopia relies on Djibouti for its trade. Abiy has argued that his country has a “right” to Red Sea access, calling it a matter of national survival. Eritrea, which controls the ports of Assab and Massawa, sees that language as a direct threat. “From Asmara’s point of view, Ethiopia’s talk of accessing the Red Sea is not diplomacy—it’s an existential threat,” I said.
If this fragile peace collapses, the consequences could be devastating. The Horn of Africa, already strained by wars in Sudan and Somalia, could face another wave of displacement and instability. The Red Sea, a vital global shipping route, could also become a new front line.
“The Red Sea doesn’t have to become a battlefield,” I said. “It could be a bridge—a shared artery of trade and connection. But that will only happen if both sides stop seeing each other as threats and start seeing themselves as neighbors with intertwined destinies.”
Paul Ndiho is a multimedia journalist and founder of Ndiho Media, covering African innovation, politics, and global affairs.
Artificial Intelligence and Big Data are no longer buzzwords reserved for Silicon Valley. They’re reshaping industries everywhere—from healthcare and finance to education and agriculture. For the continent of Africa, they represent more than just new technology; they are an opportunity to leapfrog development hurdles and carve out a competitive niche in the global economy. Few people understand this potential better than Dr. Momar Dieng, Dean of the School of Business at the African Leadership University in Kigali, Rwanda. A mathematician by training, with a PhD from the University of California at Davis, Dieng also spends summers lecturing at Harvard University on African politics, election statistics, and quantitative methods. His passion lies in helping Africa harness data and technology to address its most pressing challenges.
Speaking to Ndiho Media, Dieng explained how generative AI is already changing the world. “The emergence of generative AI tools like Bard, from Google, and ChatGPT from OpenAI, backed by companies like Microsoft, has changed the way we think about AI in many ways,” he said. “These tools, especially for young people, are essential to master, as they are going to revolutionize the world and the way we work.”
However, while these tools offer enormous promise, Dieng cautioned that Africa has considerable ground to make up, as most AI systems rely on vast amounts of data. Most of what’s available online originates from Western sources. That leaves African languages, cultures, and knowledge poorly represented. “One of the things where Africa will have to really invest more energy is to make sure that we have more content online,” he noted. “Most African languages are not well represented, which creates a natural bias. We need to document and catalog our indigenous knowledge so it can contribute to the global corpus of knowledge that’s going to find its way into these generative models.”
The challenge, in his view, is not only technical but cultural. Many African societies rely heavily on oral traditions, meaning that vital knowledge in areas such as medicine, agriculture, and history often goes unrecorded. For AI to work for Africa, that must change. Digitizing local languages, encouraging research and publishing, and investing in content creation across disciplines are all crucial steps.
At the same time, the rise of AI is expected to shake up the job market. Some professions may vanish, while others will be completely redefined. Dieng says we should not be worried but prepared. “AI will free people from repetitive tasks so they can focus on higher-level, creative work. The key is retraining and upskilling our workforce.” He pointed out that tasks like summarizing information or drafting basic reports—once standard training exercises in schools—are quickly being taken over by machines. The question for African educators is straightforward: what should young people be taught instead?
For Dieng, the answer lies in creativity, innovation, and critical thinking. “We are going into a world where being average is not going to cut it anymore,” he said. “AI models will be able to do everything average before. That’s why innovation and excellence must become the standard.” At the African Leadership University, he and his colleagues are developing programs to prepare students for careers in data science, programming, and AI—fields that will remain essential even as technology continues to evolve.
Policy and regulation, Dieng added, are just as important as education. He pointed to elections as one area where AI could be both transformative and dangerous. Chatbots, for example, can help political parties stay connected to voters at a fraction of the cost of traditional campaigning. But the same tools can also spread misinformation and create realistic deepfakes that threaten democracy. “AI tools are going to revolutionize how politics is done—not just in Africa, but everywhere,” he said. “But we must also guard against risks like disinformation and deepfakes, which could inflame conflicts in fragile societies. Regulation is not optional—it’s essential.”
That regulation, he argued, cannot be left to individual countries alone. Most African states are too small to influence global technology companies independently. “Individual countries are still small markets with limited bargaining power,” he said. “To influence global platforms and technology providers, Africa must speak with one voice through regional or continental frameworks.”
Despite the challenges, Dieng is profoundly optimistic. Africa has the world’s youngest population, a growing talent pool, and an opportunity to leapfrog into the future. “With this fourth industrial revolution, we have a chance to reset the clock,” he said. “Young Africans no longer need to leave the continent to access world-class knowledge. With focus, ambition, and investment in education, we can leapfrog and compete globally. The next 20 to 30 years will be critical—and I strongly believe this century can be Africa’s century.”
By Ndiho Media Rwanda has received the first group of seven migrants deported from the United States—part of a controversial agreement that could see up to 250 people resettled in Kigali. The Rwandan government confirmed the mid-August arrival but withheld nationalities. Four deportees will remain in Rwanda, while three opted to return to their home countries. Rights groups warn that deporting people to “third countries” where they have no ties could breach international law, especially if those countries lack strong human rights protections. Gatebuke’s Warning: “Commodifying Human Beings”
Claude Gatebuke, a survivor of the 1994 Rwandan genocide and executive director of the African Great Lakes Action Network, told Ndiho Media that Rwanda’s role in such agreements fits a troubling pattern. “Rwanda has been used as a partner in deals where unwanted migrants or asylum seekers are sent not back to their home countries, but to Rwanda,” he said. Gatebuke called the practice “legalized human trafficking,” arguing that it commodifies people while lining the pockets of Rwanda’s ruling elite. He pointed to past deals with Israel and the UK that he says left deportees vulnerable to extortion and abuse. “It’s less about humanitarianism and more about money and political protection,” he added. Szlavik’s Defense: “Not a New Precedent” Joseph Szlavik, Partner at Scribe Strategies & Advisors and a participant in negotiations, rejects Gatebuke’s characterization. “This isn’t the first time the United States has deported people to a third host country,” Szlavik told Ndiho Media. “There are preexisting treaties and policies—like ‘Safe Third Nation’ agreements with Canada and Mexico. President Trump is not setting a new precedent here.” Szlavik stressed that the deportees are not ordinary migrants but “hardened criminals—people convicted of murder, rape, and other serious crimes.” He argues the deal is both lawful and diplomatic: “It demonstrates Africa rising as an international partner and taking part in solution-oriented approaches beyond aid.” Monda’s Rebuttal: “A Dumping Ground for America’s Rejects” David O. Monda, a journalist and professor at CUNY–Guttman Community College, disagrees sharply.
“All three countries—Rwanda, South Sudan, and Eswatini—are small, landlocked, and poor, with unstable political systems and human rights concerns,” Monda said. “It’s an elephant-and-ant situation where the U.S. holds all the leverage.” Monda warned that deporting people with no ties to Africa risks turning the continent into “a dumping ground for America’s rejects.” He pointed out that larger African states such as Kenya and Nigeria have rejected similar proposals, suggesting that the burden falls on nations least able to push back. The Legal Gray Zone International law permits transfers to third countries only if the destination is considered safe and individuals can contest their removal. In 2023, the UK’s Supreme Court blocked the UK’s Rwanda plan due to concerns about safety. And here in the U.S., a district court temporarily halted an Africa-bound deportation flight in May, before the Supreme Court allowed it to proceed without ruling whether South Sudan was “safe.” What This Means for Rwanda—and Africa Supporters argue that Rwanda is seizing an opportunity to raise its diplomatic profile. Critics say the deal reinforces damaging stereotypes of Africa as a convenient solution for Western problems. Gatebuke’s bottom line: “Development money does not erase repression. What Africa needs is justice and accountability—not to be treated as a convenient destination for those the West doesn’t want.” Szlavik sees pragmatic diplomacy. Monda sees exploitation. Rwanda’s role in this debate is likely to shape not only its image, but also Africa’s place in the broader conversation on migration, sovereignty, and human rights.
By Ndiho Media The Trump administration’s agreements with Rwanda, South Sudan, and Eswatini to accept deportees labeled as dangerous criminals have drawn both praise and criticism. Supporters see them as a diplomatic breakthrough that strengthens U.S.–Africa ties, while critics warn they raise serious legal and ethical questions under international law. Joseph Szlavik, Partner at Scribe Strategies & Advisors and a key figure in behind-the-scenes negotiations with these African governments, says the arrangements are rooted in long-standing policy. “This isn’t the first time the United States has deported people to a third host country. There are preexisting treaties and policies—like the ‘Safe Third Nation’ agreements we have with Canada and Mexico. President Trump is not setting a new precedent here,” Szlavik told Ndiho Media. Szlavik explains his program as fixing a logistical issue: some countries of origin will not repatriate citizens, especially at moments of strained diplomatic relations, like with Cuba or Venezuela. He specifies that those being rescreened are “hardened criminals—people convicted of murder, rape, and other serious crimes” and not ordinary migrants. For Szlavik, they also provide an ample diplomatic opportunity. “Under President Trump, embassies are quickening their response to U.S. queries. It demonstrates Africa rising as an international partner and taking part in solution-oriented approaches beyond aid,” he said. However, David O. Monda, who is a journalist as well as a professor at City University of New York – Guttman Community College, does not concur. In his argument, he asserts that arrangements risk violating U.S. constitutional protections, together with the non-refoulement rule at international law, where individuals cannot be transferred to states where they will not enjoy their rights or safety. “All three countries are small, landlocked, and poor, with unstable political systems and human rights concerns,” Monda said. “It’s an elephant and ant situation—an asymmetrical power dynamic where the U.S. holds all the leverage.” Monda challenges the morality of dispatching people who have not been to Africa to countries where they do not have connections. “It creates the perception that Africa is becoming a dumping ground for America’s rejects,” he noted, adding that larger African countries like Kenya and Nigeria have rejected similar proposals. Though Szlavik points out that the Supreme Court upheld the legality of the program and African governments’ willingness to cooperate, Monda warns against circumventing due process.
The Trump administration’s agreements with Rwanda, South Sudan, and Eswatini to accept deportees labeled as dangerous criminals are being praised by those familiar with the process, who say the deals are legal, strategic, and strengthening U.S.–Africa partnerships.
Speaking exclusively to Ndiho Media, Joseph Szlavik, Partner at Scribe Strategies & Advisors, revealed that he has been heavily involved in behind-the-scenes negotiations with these African governments to make the arrangements possible.
“This isn’t the first time the United States has deported people to a third host country. There are preexisting treaties and policies—like the ‘Safe Third Nation’ agreements we have with Canada and Mexico. President Trump is not setting a new precedent here,” Szlavik explained.
The program addresses a logistical problem: some nations refuse to take back their citizens, particularly when relations with the U.S. are strained, as with Cuba and Venezuela. In such cases, African partners have stepped in.
“South Sudan took in eight people, including Cubans with serious criminal records, because returning them to Cuba was impossible,” Szlavik said.
He stressed that those deported under these deals are not ordinary migrants.
“These are hardened criminals—people convicted of murder, rape, and other serious crimes. There’s not a lot of sympathy for them,” he said.
Beyond security, Szlavik views the agreements as part of a broader diplomatic and humanitarian strategy. His direct involvement in discussions has helped persuade African governments to see these arrangements as mutually beneficial.
“Under President Trump, requests to process deportees are taken seriously. Embassies are more responsive, and it shows Africa stepping up as a global partner,” he said.
Szlavik also underlined that diplomacy is often conducted discreetly.
“Foreign policy is not negotiated on live television. These talks were legal, went to the Supreme Court, and the court confirmed they’re fully within the law,” he said.
The deals align with Trump’s “trade, not aid” approach to Africa. Szlavik pointed to the administration’s efforts in advancing peace talks—such as between Rwanda and the DRC—and encouraging political transitions in countries like Guinea and Gabon.
“President Trump has taken a personal interest in Africa. He likes building one-on-one relationships with leaders. When there’s respect and direct dialogue, good things happen,” Szlavik said.
For supporters, these deportation deals are not just about immigration—they’re about reshaping U.S.–Africa relations and treating African nations as equal partners in solving global challenges.
World leaders gathered in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, at the end of July, for the UN Food Systems Summit Stocktake (UNFSS+4), where a UN report highlighted a concerning trend: while global hunger is decreasing, Africa’s situation is worsening. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2025 (SOFI 2025) report indicates that 673 million people, or 8.2% of the global population, faced hunger in 2024, an improvement from 8.5% in 2023 and 8.7% in 2022.
Global progress in addressing hunger conceals increasing regional inequalities. Maximo Torero, Chief Economist of the FAO, highlighted that Africa’s hunger situation is worsening, while South America and Asia, particularly India, have seen improvements. In South Asia, hunger rates dropped from 7.9% in 2022 to 6.7% in 2024, and in Latin America, undernourishment decreased from 6.1% in 2020 to 5.1%. Conversely, Africa faces a severe crisis, with 307 million people undernourished—over 20% of its population. If trends persist, nearly 60% of the world’s hungry will be in Africa by 2030. Alvaro Lario, President of IFAD, emphasized the alarming food insecurity in Africa, where 59% of people are affected, significantly exceeding global averages. Rising food prices have critically impacted poor, rural households.
In Chad, the food crisis is severe, with over 3.3 million people facing acute food insecurity due to drought, floods, rising prices, and conflict from Sudan. However, there are signs of resilience. IFAD’s Crisis Response Initiative (CRI) is assisting farmers in Amlibis, near N’Djamena, by providing food aid, drought-resistant seeds, and essential infrastructure like a grain storage warehouse. This initiative has also trained local farmers in post-harvest handling and risk preparedness.
As talks in Addis Ababa focus on reforming global food systems, the SOFI 2025 report highlights Africa’s critical situation. Without coordinated international action, the hunger gap between Africa and the rest of the world will widen. Rural communities like Amlibis need more than temporary aid—they require investment, infrastructure, and long-term support to help families, farmers, and children survive.
The 2025 Rugby Africa Cup has brought Kampala to life with high-octane rugby action, as eight of the continent’s finest clash for glory—and a coveted spot in the 2027 Men’s Rugby World Cup. The tournament features Zimbabwe, Algeria, Namibia, Kenya, Senegal, Côte d’Ivoire, Uganda, and Morocco, all battling it out in front of roaring fans at Mandela National Stadium and Wankulukuku Stadium.
“This year’s tournament has been absolutely electric,” said David Monda, a Pan-African writer and rugby enthusiast covering the event on the ground. “Matchday two was stacked—Uganda played Morocco, Zimbabwe clashed with Kenya, Namibia took on Algeria, and Côte d’Ivoire faced off with Senegal. The competition has been fierce.”
Uganda, the host nation, has faced an uphill battle. “The loss to Morocco shocked everyone,” Monda admitted. Morocco entered as the lowest-ranked team, having been newly promoted from the second tier. For them to beat Uganda on home soil? That’s a wake-up call.”
He pointed out a clear divide forming in the tournament: “You can see the top four—Namibia, Zimbabwe, Kenya, and Algeria—are operating at a higher technical level. But Senegal, Côte d’Ivoire, Uganda, and Morocco are fighting hard and showing moments of brilliance.”
Monda also highlighted how the Cup is impacting Uganda’s international profile. “Hosting back-to-back tournaments is huge,” he said. “It puts Uganda on the map for sports tourism and diplomacy. But it also brings scrutiny—especially when the home team underperforms.”
Looking ahead to the final on Saturday, July 19, Monday believes Namibia remains the favorite. “They’ve got the experience and a psychological edge. But don’t count out Zimbabwe—they’re hungry, and they’ve already beaten the UAE in a friendly. If they don’t win the final, they still have a shot through the repechage.”
Beyond the scorelines, Monda emphasized the need for deeper investment in African rugby. “We need better funding, stronger player welfare, and more regional competitions,” he said. “If Africa’s going to compete globally, we have to build from the grassroots up.”
As finals weekend approaches, Uganda finds itself in a fight for both pride and survival. A loss to Côte d’Ivoire could see the Cranes relegated to tier two.
Nigeria has bid farewell to one of its most consequential and controversial leaders. Former President Muhammadu Buhari was buried Tuesday at his private residence in Daura, Katsina State, two days after he died at age 82 in a London clinic.
His body was flown back to Nigeria aboard a presidential aircraft and received by President Bola Tinubu at the Umaru Musa Yar’Adua Airport in Katsina. From there, a somber procession carried the late leader’s remains to Daura, where hundreds gathered for Islamic funeral prayers at the town’s central mosque.
Buhari was then laid to rest in the grounds of his home, in a simple ceremony attended by dignitaries including President Tinubu, Guinea-Bissau’s President Umaro Sissoco Embaló, former Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo, and members of the late leader’s family and inner circle.
The ceremony capped off a day of national reflection, as Nigeria observed a public holiday and entered the second day of a seven-day mourning period declared in honor of Buhari.
But the burial also marked a moment of reckoning.
“He meant well for Nigeria—but the system around him failed him,” said Sir Leonard Anyogo, a constitutional lawyer and political analyst based in Abuja, in an exclusive interview with Ndiho Media. “He was a disciplined man, a patriot, but his cabinet was riddled with scandals he didn’t address. That’s part of his legacy too.”
Buhari, who initially ruled as a military leader in the 1980s and later returned to power to win democratic elections in 2015 and 2019, was seen by many as a symbol of integrity and honesty. Others viewed his presidency as a missed opportunity.
“Even in death, Buhari’s journey raises questions,” Anyogo added. “He died in a foreign clinic—despite leading a resource-rich nation with brilliant medical professionals. Why couldn’t we build a hospital in Nigeria good enough for our own presidents?”
While his tenure was marked by bold infrastructure projects, such as the Second Niger Bridge and new rail lines, it was also marred by rising insecurity, economic hardship, and persistent institutional weaknesses.
“Leadership in Nigeria isn’t just about good intentions,” Anyogo noted. “It’s about building systems that work—even after you’re gone.”
U.S. President Donald Trump this week hosted a pivotal working lunch at the White House with five West African leaders: Senegal’s President Bassirou Diomaye Faye, Guinea-Bissau’s President Umaro Sissoco Embaló, Mauritania’s President Mohamed Ould Ghazouani, Liberian President Joseph Boakai, and Gabon’s President Brice Oligui Nguema. The gathering signaled a proposed shift in U.S. engagement with the region, focusing less on aid and more on trade and investment.
During the meeting, President Trump described the visiting nations as “very vibrant places with valuable land, minerals, oil, and wonderful people,” reflecting a brand-new strategy framing Africa as a partner in economic development.
The African leaders emphasized that Africa’s long-term growth depends not just on extraction, but on local processing and industrialization—areas where U.S. investment could play a transformational role.
President Brice Oligui Nguema told U.S. President Donald Trump during Wednesday’s meeting at the White House.
“We are not poor countries. We are rich in raw materials, but we need partners who will support us and help develop those resources through win-win partnerships.”
Behind the polite welcome, however, a sensitive proposal was reportedly raised: U.S. officials urged these nations to temporarily host deported third-country migrants while their asylum cases move through the American system—a deportation strategy sparking concern in diplomatic circles.
To provide further clarity, Ndiho Media interviewed Melvin P. Foote, founder of the Constituency for Africa and a seasoned policy strategist.
“If you were to say we’re going to change [USAID] and improve it—I’ve got a whole laundry list of ideas,” Foote said. “But to throw it away? I’m not sure how that works out for Africa—or even for us here in the United States.”
He warned that long-standing tools of U.S. influence, such as Voice of America, Peace Corps, and NGO partnerships, are being devalued.
“Why would we give up our leverage? The Peace Corps is taking a hit. Many of the programs that helped build trust between Africans and Americans are vanishing.”
Foote also challenged the transactional tone of the administration’s new focus:
“All I hear is: how can we squeeze something out of Africa? Not how we solve problems together—health care, climate, governance.”
Yet, Foote remained optimistic about the continent’s future, especially youth-driven initiatives like the Young African Leaders Initiative (YALI).
“YALI created a generation of empowered leaders. Future ministers, presidents, innovators—it’s one of the best things we’ve ever done.”
Finally, Foote emphasized the importance of diaspora engagement:
“When you call yourself African American, you’ve got to love both Africa and America. And we need to start acting like partners—not patrons.”
Against the backdrop of shifting geopolitics and rising global competition, Melvin Foote argued that U.S.–Africa relations must be rooted in trust, mutual respect, and long-term vision, not just transactional deals.
Ndiho Media,LLC. 