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.
Malawians went to the polls yesterday in a crucial general election that many believe is about more than just politics—it’s about survival. With inflation rising, food prices soaring, and fuel shortages becoming the norm, voters are seeking more than just promises; they want real solutions. “This election is different,” said Lameck Masina, a freelance journalist based in Blantyre. “People aren’t voting for personalities. They are voting based on issues, especially the economy. It’s about who can really turn things around.” At the heart of this political showdown are two familiar rivals: incumbent President Lazarus Chakwera and former President Peter Mutharika. Both men have led the country in the past, and both now claim they can fix the economy. President Chakwera, who took office in 2020 after a historic court-ordered rerun, is seeking a second term under the Malawi Congress Party banner. He has touted infrastructure projects and reform efforts, but critics point to a worsening economic situation under his leadership.
His challenger, Peter Mutharika of the Democratic Progressive Party, served from 2014 to 2020. His tenure, although also marked by economic woes, is remembered by some as more stable in terms of financial management. Mutharika is now seeking a political comeback, banking on public frustration with the current administration. Masina described the contest as “a rematch,” adding, “It’s like people are choosing between three paths: go back to the old system, stick with the current one, or try something completely new.” Indeed, the ballot features 17 presidential candidates, including another former president, Joyce Banda. But despite the crowded field, the race is centered on Chakwera and Mutharika. For voters, the stakes couldn’t be higher. “Some people were literally coming from fuel queues to join voting lines,” Masina reported. “It’s queue to queue—fuel to ballot. That’s how deep the crisis runs.” Malawi’s economy has been hit hard by a combination of global shocks and domestic mismanagement. COVID-19, the war in Ukraine, and extreme weather events have all contributed to the situation. But voters aren’t letting leaders off the hook. “Yes, the president admits global issues have affected Malawi,” said Masina. “But people are saying, ‘We need local solutions, and we’re not seeing them.'” Corruption is another primary concern. Chakwera once earned praise for appointing an anti-corruption czar known as the “Iron Lady,” but her efforts were reportedly stifled. “When you fight corruption in Malawi, it fights back,” said Masina. “That’s what happened to her.” Logistical problems at polling stations were minimal but not absent. Some voter verification machines malfunctioned, forcing election officials to revert to manual methods, slowing down the process. With no clear frontrunner expected to clinch more than 50% of the vote, a runoff seems likely. The Malawi Electoral Commission has eight days to announce official results, but partial returns may begin to emerge within 48 hours. Regardless of the outcome, Malawians are hoping for more than political change—they’re hoping for economic relief. “People are tired,” Masina emphasized. “They’ve tried hope before. Now, they want results.”
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 South Africa’s public health system has become the battleground of a growing national conflict. Operation Dudula, a vigilante movement, has been accused of blocking foreign nationals from public clinics and hospitals. Members claim undocumented migrants are draining scarce resources, while human rights organizations argue the campaign is unconstitutional, xenophobic, and risks sparking a wider health crisis. Ndiho Media spoke to Dr. Maropeng Mpya, a legal and political analyst based in Johannesburg, to unpack these tensions. He reminded us that migration into South Africa is not new. “Migration started in the 1800s during the gold rush. Mozambicans, Zimbabweans, and Swazis came in, and it has always been tied to South Africa’s labor market,” Mpya explained. Operation Dudula insists it is targeting undocumented migrants, not all foreign nationals. But Mpya questioned their approach. “The people whom the Dudula movement is primarily chasing away are illegal foreigners. But asking for IDs at clinics is not dignified. That should be the role of the state, not vigilantes.” On the question of whether foreigners showing up at a clinic or hospital is criminal, he was clear: “It is not the action of an undocumented foreigner to go to a criminal hospital. The Constitution provides for them to get medical care. You heal them first, because person first — then you can deal with their immigration status.” He warned of the dangers of denying care to the vulnerable. “I put myself in the position of a young mother in labor pains, being told I must go away, where I cannot even get help. What type of uncivilized behavior is that?” While acknowledging frustrations, Mpya said the real problem lies elsewhere. “Youth unemployment is around 40%. People feel the system is failing them. But blaming migrants is not the solution. The real problem is government incompetence and failure to manage borders.” For Mpya, the way forward is clear: “Chasing people away in pain will never solve our problems. The solution lies in better governance, stronger regional cooperation, and respecting the dignity of every person who seeks help.”
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.
Ivory Coast’s political landscape has been thrown into fresh turmoil following President Alassane Ouattara’s announcement that he will run for a controversial fourth term in October’s presidential election. At 83, Ouattara says the move is aimed at preserving national stability — but critics argue it’s a dangerous consolidation of power that risks plunging the country into renewed chaos.
“For him to run again, we were not surprised. There were signs,” said Dr. Gnaka Lagoke, Associate Professor of History, Philosophy, and Religion at Lincoln University, in an exclusive interview with Different Perspectives. “Yes, the 2016 constitution made some amendments — but it’s a political smokescreen. It’s not legally justified.”
Ouattara’s 2020 re-election already stirred controversy, as he reversed his earlier pledge to step down. Now, with key opposition figures — including former President Laurent Gbagbo, Guillaume Soro, and Tidjane Thiam — barred from running, the field is effectively being cleared for a one-person race.
“How do you justify excluding all your major opponents?” Lagoke asked. “They’re using the institutions of the state to sideline any real competition. This isn’t democracy — it’s political engineering.”
Lagoke warns that such tactics could stir unrest reminiscent of the 2010–2011 post-election violence that killed over 3,000 people. “Ivory Coast never had true reconciliation after that conflict. Many voices were silenced, some were imprisoned, others died in exile.”
When asked about the credibility of this year’s election, he didn’t hold back: “It’s like playing football on a tilted field where one team has their hands tied behind their backs and the referee works for the other side. That’s not a fair game.”
While the Ouattara government touts economic growth and infrastructure development, Lagoke calls it a mirage of prosperity. “Yes, there are nice roads and bridges. But who owns them? Multinational companies. Meanwhile, the people still import rice and basic goods. That’s not sovereignty. That’s dependency dressed up as development.”
Lagoke says many Ivorians feel powerless. “At least 50% of the population is against this move, but with major opposition candidates disqualified and protests banned, what democratic options are left? Even people within his own party are uneasy.”
Civil society and religious groups have raised concerns over growing political polarization. Yet institutions like ECOWAS, the African Union, and the United Nations have remained largely silent.
“These bodies rush to condemn military coups but go mute when democracy is dismantled through legal trickery,” Lagoke said. “What’s happening in Ivory Coast is a constitutional coup, and it’s not unique. We’ve seen similar attempts in Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, and elsewhere.”
He added, “Ivory Coast is just one example of a broader crisis of leadership across Africa. Many Africans want change, accountability, and Pan-Africanism — not leaders who serve foreign interests while silencing their own people.”
As the October vote looms, the stakes are high. “Ouattara may believe he’s securing stability,” Lagoke concluded, “but silencing dissent, jailing opponents, and suppressing protests — that’s not peace. That’s fear. And fear doesn’t last.”
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. 