African investors pitch Trump tumult as potential turning point
BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. — African investors see opportunity in the chaos of President Trump's return to the White House, despite the pain caused by his foreign aid cuts and whiplash tariff decisions.
That was the message from Vice Adm. Issah Adam Yakubu, the former chief of staff of Ghana's navy, who spoke at the Milken Institute Conference in Los Angeles this week.
'I have coined a term: Acquired Aid Addiction Syndrome,' Yakubu told a packed room for the panel titled 'Securing Africa's Future.' He said foreign charity was not the answer to Africa's challenges.
'That never will help us. What we need is trade — fair trade. Aid does not make us resilient, it kills our resilience. … It's like a virus eating you up.'
While the continent is reeling from the termination of billions of dollars in U.S. assistance for health, education, social and life-sustaining programs, investors pitching the crowd at Milken tried to shift the narrative — talking about new partnerships and opportunities for growth.
Yakubu wants to educate the next generation of Africans about professional opportunities at sea, and as a first-time attendee to the conference, is looking to make connections to help grow his nonprofit think tank, the Gulf of Guinea Maritime Institute.
The Milken confab draws a tony crowd. Some access fees start at $25,000, in exchange for an opportunity to mingle among a group of high-powered CEOs, government officials, philanthropists, scientists, investors, nonprofit leaders — and members of the media.
'The most important is networking to be able to meet people, particularly those who can support our initiatives,' Yakubu told The Hill in a short interview.
'What I want to get from the conference is to have a global view of what to expect in the next 2-3 years so that we can prepare ourselves for that.'
The uncertainty surrounding the Trump administration's economic agenda was a center point of conversations at the conference.
Treasury Department Secretary Scott Bessent tried to calm nerves in the crowd Tuesday, explaining the administration's three goals — trade, tax cuts and deregulation — were mutually reinforcing and increase the strength of capital for American businesses.
Africa, like the rest of the world, is under Trump's 10 percent global tariff. But Lesotho, Madagascar and South Africa, in particular, are in the crosshairs of Trump's 'reciprocal' tariff policy, which is temporarily paused. Those countries are facing 50 percent, 47 percent and 30 percent tariffs, respectively, unless new trade deals are struck.
The mood at Milken was optimistic.
Chidi Blyden, who served as deputy assistant secretary of Defense for African affairs during the Biden administration, recently opened Culturally Bound, a strategic consulting firm advising on development, security and investment in Africa.
'We got the message that we can still go and invest in Africa, and I still will go and invest in Africa, from its talent to critical minerals,' Blyden said in an interview with The Hill on the sidelines of the summit. 'But what I've done now is I've created a small business to go out and provide advisory services in the private sector.'
Blyden was most recently the CEO of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) — the U.S. government agency known for its infrastructure projects that promoted economic growth, which the Trump administration shut down.
She argued the MCC was one of the best tools to deepen U.S. ties with African countries with the potential to expand abroad, and box out China economically.
'It's not clear right now how the average small business can get into the spaces, I am optimistic that this administration will create funnels and opportunities,' she said.
There are 54 countries on the continent, all with distinct opportunities and challenges. It's also a massive and growing workforce and retail market — by 2050, 1 in 4 people on the planet will be African.
Yet there remain enormous barriers to entry for foreign businesses and investment, from corruption to lack of infrastructure, stalled or slow economic growth, violence and humanitarian crises.
Comfort Ero, president and CEO of the International Crisis Group, cautioned that economic dealmaking would not resolve some of the entrenched conflicts facing the continent.
'If I thought you could use a mineral deal to end decades of war, then there's lots of countries that I imagine would have been fixed already,' Ero said on the African panel at Milken.
She was referring to a potential deal between Washington and the Democratic Republic of Congo, looking to trade mineral wealth for security guarantees. Just last week, Washington inked the framework of a minerals deal with Ukraine, though avoided making any firm commitments on security.
The Congo deal is being formulated as a way to end fighting in eastern Congo with the M23 rebel militia, backed by Rwanda — although a mix of rebel groups are active in the region. Last month, Secretary of State Marco Rubio convened the foreign ministers of Congo and Rwanda to sign a declaration of principles expressing intent to come to a resolution.
Ero said the movement toward peace talks is an important step.
'What it doesn't address is why we've got excessive back-and-forth fighting in the east of the Congo. What it doesn't address is disarmament of militias. What it doesn't address is the insecurity concerns of Kinshasa. And it doesn't address the insecurity concerns of Kigali as well,' she said.
'So I think you can strike a deal that takes out the resources of the country, but if it doesn't deal with the fundamentals, then that's a problem.'
One executive attending the conference, who was granted anonymity to offer a personal view, described a 'disconnect' between developments in Washington and the tone in California.
'I found the voices at Milken to be very booster-ish and far more positive than the mood in Washington to me. There felt like a real disconnect,' the executive said.
'I don't discount what I was hearing at Milken. It was, to me, quite useful as a little bit of a level-set. … People are just, keeping on, keeping on.'
While U.S. aid may not be the answer for Africa's economic future, the executive noted there are 'a lot of lives depending' on continued humanitarian support. Rubio has insisted lifesaving programs will continue despite deep cuts to the United States Agency for International Development.
Trump's cuts to foreign aid for the continent — in particular for HIV/AIDS prevention programs, the suspension of the Prosper Africa initiative and the likely termination of the African Growth and Opportunity Act — are likely to strain ties with the continent. The U.S. also plans to cut $555 million in funding to the African Development Bank.
The administration has not signaled it's going to end support pledged during the Biden administration for the Lobito corridor — a major infrastructure project to move mined minerals from the Congo through Zambia to Angola's Atlantic coast.
One African investor, who asked for anonymity because he did not want to speak on behalf of his company, said the U.S. aid cuts were a gut punch to African leaders and communities.
'I spend a lot of time with authorities across Africa, what all of them were saying … every time they get in the room with the U.S., there was some sort of almost deference to the U.S. because of what the U.S. was doing in terms of programs. … Wll of them are now wondering how are they going to be able to fill the gap,' the investor said.
But the investor said a global economic downturn would be more damaging in terms of his work, which includes philanthropy.
'We know as trade goes down, then there's a chance that the global economy will also slow down, and that will have an implication on commodity prices, and Africa is seen as a commodity exporter,' they said.
'African assets might look less attractive just based on that.'
Laura Kelly received a complimentary press pass to the conference.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
33 minutes ago
- USA Today
Why did US bomb Iran? In Trump's vibes war, it's impossible to trust anyone.
At least the last time a Republican president got America involved in a military quagmire in the Middle East he had the decency to cook up a bunch of phony reasons beforehand. The day after President Donald Trump launched attacks on Iranian nuclear sites and swept an unprepared nation into another Middle-Eastern conflict, Vice President JD Vance said the most ludicrous thing imaginable. Asked if he and Trump trust the U.S. intelligence community and its assessments, which had been that Iran was not close to developing a nuclear weapon, Vance replied: 'Of course we trust our intelligence community, but we also trust our instincts.' Your instincts? Trump and Vance just marched America into a potential war because the vibes felt real nuclear-weapon-y? Trump didn't even take time to lie to Americans before bombing Iran At least the last time a Republican president got America involved in a military quagmire in the Middle East he had the decency to cook up a bunch of phony reasons beforehand. These guys just hauled off and dropped bombs and now want us to sit back and trust their hunch that it was the right move. In 2003, former Secretary of State Colin Powell went to the trouble of holding up a blue-capped vial of fake anthrax before the U.N. Security Council to back up the Bush administration's claims that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was producing weapons of mass destruction. (Spoiler alert: Nope!) All we got from the Trump team was a lie that the president was going to ponder the bombing option for a spell, and then a stupid Truth Social post saying the bombing had happened. No congressional approval. No case made to the American people. Just bombs away, then a bunch of people known for their dishonesty trotting out and saying, 'Trust us, this was a good thing.' Trump just bombed Iran. We deserve to know why, but don't count on the truth. | Opinion Marco Rubio, like much of the Trump administration, hates intelligence Pressed on CBS' 'Face the Nation' to explain what intelligence led the administration to think bombs needed to be dropped, a frustrated Secretary of State Marco Rubio uttered three words that perfectly encapsulate President Trump, his cabinet and the entire MAGA movement: 'Forget about intelligence.' They should put that on hats. Vance swears Americas is only a little bit at war with Iran Vance continued to stumble about during his June 22 interviews, telling NBC News: 'We do not want war with Iran. We actually want peace.' Because nothing says 'we want peace' quite like firing a couple dozen tomahawk missiles at a country before walloping it with more than a dozen 30,000-pound bombs known as 'Massive Ordnance Penetrators.' On ABC, the duplicitous Mr. Vance made this whiplash-inducing claim: 'We are not at war with Iran, we're at war with Iran's nuclear program.' So we don't want war, we want peace, but we're at war with Iran's nuclear program, but we're not at war with Iran. That's starting to sound a bit like, 'I want to love you but you keep making me drop bombs on you, so it's all your fault.' Opinion: From massive protests to a puny parade, America really let Donald Trump down Of course this Age of Stupidity brought us a war based on vibes And in the same NBC News interview, he barfed out this gem: 'I empathize with Americans who are exhausted after 25 years of foreign entanglements in the Middle East. I understand the concern, but the difference is that back then we had dumb presidents.' Buddy, right now we have a dumb president. We have a president who still hasn't accepted he lost the 2020 presidential election, one who misspelled his own name in a June 22 social-media post that read: 'The GREAT B-2 pilots have just landed, safely, in Missouri. Thank you for a job well done!!! DONAKD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!' Thank you, Donakd! We have a president who, just hours after his Defense secretary said the Iran mission 'was not, has not been about regime change,' posted this: 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' MIGA? Those are the words of a dumb president. And he's the same president who in his previous term took the word of Russian President Vladimir Putin over information from America's intelligence community. Choosing who to trust here is nearly impossible So what are the Russians who Trump trusts saying about America's bombing of Iran? Russian Security Council deputy chairman Dmitry Medvedev said it didn't accomplish much and the nation's nuclear sites suffered only minor damage. 'The enrichment of nuclear material – and, now we can say it outright, the future production of nuclear weapons – will continue,' Medvedev said on social media. 'A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads.' So who do we trust? The Russians, who Trump apparently trusts? Rubio, the guy telling us to forget intelligence? Vance, the guy who wants us to roll with the vibes? Trump, the guy who seems deathly allergic to honesty? If you elect liars, you're going to get lied to It's simple: We can't trust anyone in this administration. They're liars and sycophants from top to bottom, either too lazy or too full of themselves to even pretend they can present a clear case for this risky military action. If Trump's bombing of Iran proves successful – and I, of course, hope it does – it'll be dumb luck. But if it leads to disaster, it'll be exactly what anyone paying attention to these reckless hucksters predicted. Follow USA TODAY columnist Rex Huppke on Bluesky at @ and on Facebook at You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
The Hill
34 minutes ago
- The Hill
Pakistan nominates Trump for Nobel Peace Prize, then condemns strikes on Iran
Pakistan on Sunday condemned U.S. strikes against Iran, one day after Islamabad announced it had nominated President Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize for his mediation of a ceasefire between Pakistan and India last month. Pakistan said the U.S. attacks violated norms of international law and voiced support for Iran's right to retaliate in self-defense. 'Pakistan condemns the US attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities which follow the series of attacks by Israel. We are gravely concerned at the possible further escalation of tensions in the region,' the Pakistani Foreign Ministry said in a statement. 'The unprecedented escalation of tension and violence, owing to ongoing aggression against Iran is deeply disturbing. Any further escalation of tensions will have severely damaging implications for the region and beyond.' Pakistan on Saturday announced it was nominating Trump for a Nobel prize for the president's 'decisive diplomatic intervention and pivotal leadership during the recent India-Pakistan crisis.' The government praised Trump for 'pragmatic diplomacy and effective peace-building' and added that Islamabad was hopeful the president would also resolve ongoing crises in the Middle East, including humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip and 'the deteriorating escalation involving Iran.' Trump has lamented not getting a Nobel prize during his first term. On June 20, he posted a long missive on Truth Social listing different diplomatic actions from his first term and some from his second term that he 'won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for doing.' 'No, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do, including Russia/Ukraine, and Israel/Iran, whatever those outcomes may be, but the people know, and that's all that matters to me!' he wrote.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' is getting more expensive as the world's attention is on Iran
The long-awaited summer collision course for President Trump's economic agenda is here and now competing for attention with geopolitics. The competing storylines are playing out — just in parallel — after a weekend where the president's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" saw a new higher price tag and the removal of key provisions in developments that were fully overshadowed by a weekend attack on Iran. Trump's priorities for taxes and the debt ceiling — not to mention tariffs — still face key deadlines in the weeks ahead even as foreign affairs takes center stage. On Saturday evening, shortly after the attacks on Iran commenced, Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) even released an analysis that made official how recent changes to Trump's tax-cut bill in the Senate are likely to increase the package's price tag by hundreds of billions of dollars. The group found that Senate's changes on the tax front — once economists untangled a key budget gimmick — mean the bill will potentially add about $4.2 trillion to the deficits in the years ahead if passed as is. The bill is also undergoing a close examination by the Senate parliamentarian who is moving section-by-section and has already deemed some provisions — such as a defunding of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) as well cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) — are not in line with Senate reconciliation rules. And more changes are likely coming this week that could increase the price tag and political pressure even further as key Republicans are still saying they will vote no, throwing into doubt a GOP goal of final votes within days. It all could also have near-term economic impacts. Brian Rehling, Wells Fargo head of global fixed income strategy, said in a recent Yahoo Finance Live appearance that developments in the bill could be 'more consequential' to things like interest rates for the time being over even signals from the Federal Reserve. These developments come just weeks before Trump and the Republican's self-imposed deadline to get the bill signed into law by July 4. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has said that means the Senate will need to pass this bill this week to keep the timeline on pace. The weekend's Joint Committee on Taxation analysis was focused specifically on the Senate Finance Committee's tax proposals and offered a headline number that would appear to be good news for fiscal hawks: It found the projected cost of the revised bill comes to about $441 billion over the coming decade. But that calculation came using an accounting maneuver known as a "current policy" baseline that allows the bill to be calculated assuming current tax levels stay the same. That means Congress can say the cost of extending expiring provisions in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is free, at least for accounting purposes. Republicans defend the practice, with Senate Finance Committee chair Mike Crapo offering that it 'more accurately reflects reality.' But the bottom line is that these zeroed out tax extensions are projected to add about $3.8 trillion to the national debt — versus the scenario of Congress doing nothing. "Ignore the $441 number, which is both trying to hide the cost of extensions and gimmick some specific policies to make them look cheaper," offered Marc Goldwein of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget following the release. Andrew Lautz of the Bipartisan Policy Center also offered a detailed breakdown of the differences brought by the assumptions — such as how it makes the approximately $2.1 trillion in costs from extending individual tax rates cuts look instead like they instead come to $83 billion. Both Goldwein and Lautz and others say the full price tag that should be considered is a total impact to the nation's debt of $4.2 trillion over the next decade. The new price tag projections also come as the Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, is going through the bill line by line to see if it complies with the Senate's strict reconciliation rules. It's part of a wonky Senate process — known colloquially as a 'Byrd bath' after a rule enshrined by Robert Byrd of West Virginia — that sets limits of what can be fast tracked and what is subject to the normal 60-vote threshold. MacDonough has already analyzed the Banking and Commerce and Judiciary and Homeland Security committee portions of the bill and found a series of provisions must be taken out. Pieces that appear set to be removed from the bill so far include one that would have placed a funding cap on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) as well as others that cut the SNAP program. The apparent removal of cuts to the SNAP program around state matching funds could have a significant fiscal impact, with those provisions previously estimated to save roughly $128 billion. One other closely watched provision by the tech community — to cut broadband funding for states that regulate artificial intelligence — has been allowed to stay in but still faces political opponents pushing to have it struck from the package. It's a series of rulings that Republicans contend aren't yet final but appear set to change the makeup of the overall package. "The Byrd Rule is enshrined in law for a reason, and Democrats are making sure it is enforced," said top Democratic Senator on the Budget committee, Oregon's Jeff Merkley, in a statement. And even more significant changes could be coming in the days ahead with the parliamentarian scheduled to next take a pass as the Senate Finance committee's portion of the bill. That where the biggest ticket items reside like tax provisions as well as Medicaid cuts. Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices
