Despite calls for a ceasefire, Putin ups his military offensive in Ukraine. President Ruto returns with goodies from China and the Ivory Coast Presidential race takes shape.
Table of Contents
Here in Kenya: President Ruto returns from China.
President Ruto returned from his five-day visit to China with new trade and business deals for Kenya. Ruto’s trip was initiated with a central goal of negotiating partnership agreements with the Chinese government and private business partners. More than 20 trade agreements were signed during the visit to China.
President Ruto was officially welcomed to China with a 21-gun salute at the grounds of Beijing’s Great Hall of the People. Later, he would witness the signing of several trade and infrastructural financing agreements alongside Chinese President Xi Jinping.
The meeting between President Ruto agreed to finance the expansion of the SGR railway from Naivasha to Malaba. The Chinese government also agreed to partly finance the dualing of the Nairobi-Nakuru-Mau Summit- Malaba highway, the Kiambu-Northern Bypass, the Eldoret Bypass and the Nithi Bridge.
These projects are to be financed through a collaborative partnership between the Chinese government and private Chinese investors.
In addition to financing several infrastructural projects, the agreements are also tailored to increase investment in health, ICT, agriculture and education sectors.
Ruto also embarked on an expansive tour of China’s Fujian Province, a key economic and manufacturing hub in China. All along during the tour, the Kenyan message was evident: to encourage more Chinese investment in the country.
As stated during last week’s weekly review, President Ruto’s visit to China on an invitation from the Chinese President was a strategically calculated move. China wishes to position itself as the new global partner, particularly for the developing world, in the wake of the United States’ new wave of mercantilism. Trump’s move to impose tariffs on US imports has made the United States a less favourable trading partner, which plays to the positioning of China as the head of a new, emerging global economic order.
China views Kenya as a close trading ally in the region and intends to make the most of its partnership with the country to expand its influence in the region.
On the other hand, Kenya’s economy is showing signs of struggling following years of mismanagement and the accumulation of arduous debt. Whilst attracting new investment from China may appear viable on paper, Kenya may first need to address its problems in spending efficiency before taking up any more external debt.
Despite these challenges, Kenya is still an attractive prospect for private investors, and especially those who also wish to expand into the region.
Closer to home, former President Uhuru Kenyatta came under fire for his call to young people to ‘come out and stand up for good governance’.
Kenyatta was speaking at Makerere University’s Guild Leaders Summit held in Kampala, Uganda, on Thursday, April 24, 2025.
Kenyatta spoke in reference to the ‘Gen Z’ uprising in Kenya, terming it as an ‘independent moment’. He highlighted the youthful demographic advantage of the continent, stating that young people possessed ‘the numbers, the time and the energy’ to stay involved in government affairs. He also urged the youths to ’embrace merit-based governance, where policies serve long-term national interests’.
Kenyatta also encouraged young people to embrace unity, the spirit of Pan-Africanism, hard work, innovation and collective action to achieve prosperity, not just for themselves but for the African continent as a whole.
Kenyatta had also paid a courtesy visit to Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni, where he briefed him on his speech at the Summit. Museveni, in a statement given soon after the two leaders met, echoed Kenyatta’s message on the youth’s role in the four principles of Patriotism, Pan-Africanism, Socio-economic Transformation, and Democracy, and how they are crucial for their prosperity.
Kenyatta has been taking a more activist approach, openly stating that he stood up for the interests of the Kenyan youths, especially since the outbreak of the ‘Gen-Z protests’ last year. He has faced his fair share of backlash, particularly from leaders in William Ruto’s government, for urging the youths to stand up for their rights.
The Ruto-allied politicians and fanatics can call out Uhuru as much as they want, but he was not the one sending out armed policemen and militias to murder the innocent youths peacefully protesting in the streets.
Read More: The Misunderstood Revolution: Gen Z’s 2024 Protests and Their True Significance
Global Events: Trump to Putin, ‘STOP!’
Following the end of Putin’s self-imposed easter ceasefire, Russian forces in Ukraine resumed a barrage of missile strikes targeted at the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv.
A missile attack on Thursday, April 24, on a residential building in the Svyatoshynskyi district of Ukraine claimed the lives of 12 people and injured 70 more. This follows another deadly missile attack on the city of Sumy, which claimed 32 lives and injured 117 more.
Both Russia and Ukraine have resorted to extensive use of drones and missiles across enemy lines, as fighting on the frontlines seems to have ground down to an uncomfortable stalemate. In fact, the use of drones and missiles has been so effective in the Ukrainian frontlines (for both parties) that it has been borrowed into other militarised conflicts, especially in Africa.
On the other hand, Donald Trump’s administration has sought to establish itself as a broker for peace in the war. In his campaign rallies, Trump promised to broker a peace in the war within his first 24 hours in office. However, it is now over 100 days into his administration and peace in Ukraine still remains distant.
Trump has continued to raise his frustrations over delays in the peace process and has blamed both Ukraine and Russia for prolonging the war.
However, Trump is also not the impartial peace broker that he claims to be because, much like in Gaza, he is evidently picking sides.
Trump has fronted a peace deal that offers favourable terms to Russia. He has offered to let Russia keep some of the Ukrainian land that it has conquered, especially the Crimean peninsula, in exchange for ending its military campaign in Ukraine. Despite multiple concerns over the unfairness of the deal raised by both Ukraine and Europe, Trump has proceeded to forcibly try and shove the deal down Ukraine’s throat.
Trump has threatened the withdrawal of US military aid should Ukraine not agree to his peace deal.
However, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has proven resolute in standing up for his country. He has been adamant that a favourable deal sees Russia exit Ukraine completely and contains assurances that Russia would not invade Ukraine again.
Ukraine has been pushing for a ceasefire first, before any negotiations can be initiated with Russia.
On the other hand, Russia feels that its cause has been bolstered, especially in the dawn of a Trump administration that is more favourable towards it. Putin has been adamant that his end goal is the full conquest of Ukraine, and with Trump acting in his favour, he views it as a probable outcome of this invasion.
At the very least, Russia would want to keep the Ukrainian land that it has conquered so far, including Crimea. Trump’s deal appears to lean more towards helping Putin in achieving this.
That said, Ukraine seems to acknowledge that a peace deal might require some territorial concessions. Ukraine has highlighted its occupation of land in the Kursk region as a potential bargaining chip in its peace deal with Russia.
Trump says that the deal needs to happen fast, to bring an end to the deaths of civilian lives in Ukraine. He had given both parties a two-week ultimatum to find a peace deal. His Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, stated the importance of both Russia and Ukraine making headway in finding peace since the US ‘cannot continue to dedicate time and resources to this effort if it’s not going to come to fruition.’
Of the two parties, Ukraine appears more open to negotiations. Russia, true to its role as the aggressor, continues to exact unsolicited attacks, even against Ukrainian civilians.
Trump, too, appears to have realised that Russia may not be willing to negotiate after all. Trump raised these sentiments upon meeting the Ukrainian leader on the sidelines of the Pope’s burial on Saturday.
Trump and Zelensky had not met eye-to-eye since the infamous Oval Office fallout on February 28.
The two leaders appeared to have had a fruitful discussion. In a statement following the meeting, Trump said that;
There was no reason for Putin to be shooting missiles into civilian areas, cities and towns, over the last few days. It makes me think that maybe he doesn’t want to stop the war, he’s just tapping me along, and has to be dealt with differently, through “Banking” or “Secondary Sanctions?” Too many people are dying!!!
Posted by Donald Trump on his Truth Social account, Apr 26, 2025, 4:35 PM
This is perhaps Trump’s most open criticism of Putin’s role in aggravating the war. Nonetheless, Trump has yet to condemn Putin for breaking numerous international and humanitarian laws. In the same post, he also justified his reasoning for allowing Russia to keep Crimea, which it illegally annexed from Ukraine in 2014.
The reality of the matter is that Russia’s invasion is the only reason why there’s a prolonged conflict in Ukraine. Putin should be treated like the aggressor that he is, and his indiscriminate actions should not be tolerated.
Elsewhere in the Region: A familiar face in Ivory Coast’s Presidential Elections.
For a country that lived through a long tenure of stable, yet autocratic leadership following its independence to a period of internal strife and civil war, Ivory Coast has quite the story behind it.
Félix Houphouët-Boigny was the country’s president from 1960 until his death in 1993. Unlike most of his dictatorial compatriots, Houphouët-Boigny was a moderate leader who favoured a ‘milder’ form of autocratic rule. His style of leadership was named a ‘unique brand of paternalistic authoritarianism’ – in which he was more a father figure to the nation than he was a repressive ruler. Whilst the country was not a democracy per se, it was more open and tolerant as compared to the rest of post-colonial Africa.
Consequently, his stable leadership, bolstered by a robust system of governance, a strong agricultural sector and close ties with the West (especially with France) resulted in better economic fortunes for his country. His death in 1993 left a power vacuum that would not be adequately filled, resulting in a series of civil wars in the country from 2002 to 2011.
The First Ivory Coast Civil War erupted following the killing of Robert Guei on 19 September 2002. Guei had taken over in a coup d’état staged against Henri Konan Bedie on December 24, 1999. Bedie had assumed power following Houphouët-Boigny’s death in 1993.
Guei led the country in a military junta until the October 2000 elections, in which he vied as an independent candidate against Laurent Gbagbo. Gbagbo soundly defeated Guei, although he was the only candidate allowed to run against Guei. Other candidates, such as Alassane Ouattara and the former deposed president Bedie, were barred from vying.
Despite his defeat, Guei refused to relinquish the seat until unpopular street protests forced him to flee shortly after the elections. Gbagbo promptly installed himself as president. However, his repressive antics and the reprisal of political opposition resulted in a prolonged civil war that divided the country into the rebel-controlled north and the government-controlled south.
Gbagbo’s presidential tenure expired in 2005, but he continually took advantage of the country’s precarious political system to hold on to power. Elections were initially postponed to 2008 and eventually, in 2010.
During the 2010 General Elections, Gbagbo lost to his long-standing political opponent Alassane Ouattara. However, Gbagbo refused to concede defeat, and the country plunged into another civil war that ended in Gbagbo’s arrest on April 12, 2011, with more than 3,000 people dead. Ouattara consequently assumed the presidency, and Gbagbo was extradited to the International Criminal Court to face various charges of crimes against humanity.
Nonetheless, Gbagbo was acquitted of these charges in 2019.
Ouattara instituted a range of reforms aimed at transforming the country’s fortunes, including instituting reconciliation and dismantling the Ivorian doctrine from Ivorian national politics. The Ivorite doctrine was a faux-nationalist principle instituted by Gbagbo, Guei and Bedie to foster the exclusion of minority and immigrant groups living in the country. It had been instituted to bar candidates such as Ouattara, who is of supposed non-Ivorian descent, from vying for political positions in the country.
However, it was used by Gbagbo’s regime for more extremist ends, such as the mass murder of many northern populations in the country.
That said, Ouattara’s regime has resulted in increased stability within the country. In the spirit of reconciliation, he has welcomed political dissidents, including Gbagbo, back into the country. Ouattara’s government has also demonstrated commitment towards addressing corruption in the country, improving transparency, media and civil society freedom.
The results of his leadership have been tangible. Since 2011, the Ivory Coast economy has grown at a rate of 5% year-on-year.
The October 2025 elections are shaping up to be quite the test for the country’s democratic institutions. Several long-standing political figures, such as Gbagbo, have declared an intention to vie in the elections. Gbagbo is barred from running following a conviction for looting the Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO) during the post-election crisis of 2011.
President Ouattara has also hinted a running for what would be his fourth consecutive term. A constitutional court had ruled that the 2016 constitutional revision had reset the term-limit clock, allowing him to run for two more terms. Ouattara’s party, the Rassemblement des houphouëtistes pour la démocratie et la paix (RHDP), is still quite popular in the country and could still forward a frontrunning candidate should he choose not to run. Possible candidates could be Adama Bictogo, the President of the National Assembly, or Cisse Bacongo, Governor of the Autonomous District of Abidjan.
Guillame Soro, an ex-rebel leader and former Prime Minister, has also announced his intention to vie in the elections. He has, however, been in exile from the country since 2019, following a fallout between him and President Ouattara. In 2020, he was sentenced to 20 years in absentia for ‘complicity in embezzlement of public funds in Côte d’Ivoire.’ In 2021, his sentence was commuted to life imprisonment for ‘endangering the security of the State.’
Soro led the rebel movement that fought against Gbagbo throughout the First Ivory Coast Civil War and retained control over the northern half of the country from 2002 to 2007. He was initially appointed as Prime Minister under Gbagbo’s government, a position he served up until Ouattara’s tenure in April 2012, when he resigned. He served as the President of the National Assembly until 2019.
Other candidates expected to vie in the elections include former Ivorian Prime Minister Pascal Affi N’Guessan and Simone Gbagbo, ex-wife of Laurent Gbagbo.
Tidjane Thiam, a front-running candidate against the ruling party, was barred from vying in the elections as his name was removed from the country’s electoral roll. An Abidjan court found that he had lost his Ivorian nationality when he registered as a voter in 2022.
Thiam had gained French citizenship in 1987, which he denounced in March of this year in order to vie for the Presidency. As per the Ivorian constitution, one is not eligible for the presidency if they are a dual citizen.
All in all, the October 2025 elections have the makings of an intense political undertaking that will ask questions of the robustness and effectiveness of the country’s democratic systems.
Leave a Reply