Introduction
Building upon the foundational discussions in this series, where Article 1 delineated the composition and evolution of BRICS and the West, Article 2 explored their internal dynamics and tensions, and Article 3 examined the historical context of their engagements with Africa amid the continent’s colonial legacy, this instalment shifts focus to the contemporary stakes for Africa. As global power structures evolve, African nations find themselves at the intersection of competing influences from BRICS—a grouping now expanded to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates alongside its original members—and Western entities, primarily the United States and European Union (EU) member states. This article analyses the economic, political, and strategic implications of these engagements from an African perspective, emphasising the continent’s agency in navigating these relationships to advance sovereignty and development goals as outlined in Agenda 2063 and the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).
This article, drawing on data from the African Union (AU), World Bank, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), among others, underscores Africa’s push for self-reliance while acknowledging the opportunities and challenges presented by both blocs. By 2025, with the global economy recovering from recent disruptions, Africa’s GDP growth is projected at 3.5%, positioning the continent as a pivotal arena for international investment and cooperation. However, the implications of alignment with either bloc extend beyond immediate gains, influencing long-term trajectories in trade, governance, and security.
Economic Stakes
Africa’s economic landscape is profoundly shaped by its interactions with BRICS and Western powers, each offering distinct models of engagement. BRICS countries, representing approximately 40% of global GDP and 49.5% of the world’s population by 2025, provide avenues for diversified trade and investment that align with Africa’s aspirations for industrialisation and value addition. The bloc’s expansion in 2024 has amplified its economic footprint in Africa, with new members like Egypt and Ethiopia enhancing intra-African ties within a broader Global South framework. For instance, China’s Belt and Road Initiative has funnelled over USD 200-billion into African infrastructure since 2013, facilitating projects in transport and energy that support Agenda 2063’s connectivity goals. Similarly, India’s pharmaceutical exports and Russia’s agricultural investments offer alternatives to Western markets, potentially reducing dependency on commodity exports.
However, these engagements are not without risks. BRICS investments often prioritise resource extraction, raising concerns about debt sustainability and environmental impacts. The 2025 BRICS Summit in Brazil emphasised poverty eradication and climate action, projecting that member countries could contribute 58% of global GDP growth between 2024 and 2029. For Africa, this translates to opportunities in green technologies and consumer markets, but also potential trade imbalances if local industries remain underdeveloped.
In contrast, Western engagement focuses on conditional aid and market access, with the EU and US providing approximately USD 50-billion annually in development assistance by 2025. Initiatives like the US’s Prosper Africa and the EU’s Global Gateway aim to boost private sector involvement, targeting sectors such as digital economy and renewable energy. The World Bank forecasts that economic activity in Western and Central Africa will accelerate to 4.3% by 2026-2027, driven partly by increased private consumption and investment from these sources. Yet, this comes with strings attached, including governance reforms and environmental standards that some African states view as intrusive.
The AfCFTA, operational since 2021, serves as a counterbalance by fostering intra-African trade, projected to increase by 52% by 2035 and lift 68-million people out of poverty. It enhances Africa’s bargaining power with both blocs, encouraging diversified partnerships that align with regional value chains. A comparative table illustrates key economic indicators:
Political Stakes
Politically, BRICS promotes a multipolar world order that resonates with Africa’s emphasis on sovereignty and non-interference, as enshrined in the AU’s constitutive act. The bloc’s non-ideological approach allows African nations to pursue independent policies, evident in South Africa’s dual alignment with BRICS and Western institutions. The 2024 BRICS expansion has bolstered Africa’s voice in global forums, with Ethiopia’s membership amplifying advocacy for reforms in institutions like the UN and WTO. This aligns with Agenda 2063’s aspiration for a peaceful and secure Africa, fostering diplomatic ties that counterbalance Western influence.
Conversely, Western engagements often prioritise democratic governance and human rights, influencing political processes through aid conditionality. The US’s 2024 elections and subsequent policies underscore a focus on countering authoritarianism, with implications for African states facing democratic reversals. In West Africa, the dissolution of the Alliance of Sahel States (AES) from ECOWAS in 2025 highlights tensions, where Western sanctions on coup-affected nations like Mali and Niger have pushed them towards BRICS alternatives. This has fragmented regional bodies, complicating collective bargaining.
Africa’s agency is evident in initiatives like the AU’s Silencing the Guns by 2030, which navigates these dynamics by promoting homegrown solutions. Political implications include enhanced multilateralism via BRICS, but also risks of polarisation if alignments deepen divisions within the continent.
Strategic Stakes
Strategically, BRICS offers partnerships in security and resource management that emphasise mutual benefit. Russia’s military cooperation in the Sahel and China’s peacekeeping contributions under the UN framework provide alternatives to Western-led interventions. The bloc’s focus on energy and minerals, as discussed at the 2025 Summit, positions Africa as a key player in global supply chains, with BRICS nations controlling leading green technologies. This strategic depth aids Africa’s quest for technological sovereignty.
Western strategies, meanwhile, centre on counterterrorism and maritime security, with US AFRICOM and EU naval operations in the Gulf of Guinea. Emerging trends show a shift towards economic diplomacy, as seen in the US-Africa Business Summit in 2025, aiming to secure critical minerals amid global competition. However, perceptions of neo-colonialism persist, particularly in light of historical legacies discussed in Article 3.
The strategic landscape is further complicated by great power rivalries, where Africa’s non-alignment allows it to extract concessions. Agenda 2063’s emphasis on peace and security underscores the need for balanced engagements to mitigate risks like proxy conflicts.
Implications for African Self-Reliance
Central to these stakes is Africa’s drive towards self-reliance. The AfCFTA mitigates external dependencies by boosting intra-continental trade, while Agenda 2063 provides a roadmap for integrated development. Engagements with BRICS and the West should complement these, as over-reliance could undermine sovereignty. For example, BRICS’ de-dollarisation efforts align with Africa’s push for financial autonomy, but Western tech transfers are crucial for digital advancement.
Conclusion
The economic, political, and strategic stakes for Africa in engaging with BRICS and the West are multifaceted, offering pathways to growth alongside challenges to sovereignty. By prioritising African-led initiatives, the continent can harness these relationships for equitable development. Future articles in this series, including one on the geopolitical contest, will delve deeper into these dynamics.
