An article in The EastAfrican entitled “The ‘hidden’ East African workers redefining Nairobi’s vibrant beauty sector” describes how, in the blaring, buzzing, beautifully chaotic heart of Nairobi, a quiet revolution is unfolding, not in parliament or the boardrooms of Upper Hill, but in the soft-lit corners of salons, nail bars, and street corners.

Here, migrants from across East Africa — Rwandans, Congolese, Burundians, Tanzanians, Ugandans — are reshaping the city one wig, one manicure, one handmade necklace at a time.

Take Michael, a Rwandan nail technician who arrived in Nairobi at 20. Back home in Kigali, the idea of a man styling nails was greeted with scoffs and sideways glances.

“Men don’t do that, it is a woman’s job,” they said. But in Nairobi, he found space not just to work, but to thrive. Now, eight years later, he attends to more than 20 clients a day, his art splashed across Instagram, and his reputation sealed. Michael is not a statistic. He is a craftsman. And Nairobi? That’s his gallery.

Then there’s Evans, a Congolese jewellery hawker who landed in the city in 2010 with a duffel bag and little Kiswahili beyond “safari”. Today, he mixes Sheng like he was born on River Road and sells custom pieces across the City in the Sun.

And this wave of migrant ingenuity isn’t confined to beauty parlours and open-air markets, nor Kenya. It’s a small part of a bigger East African — and indeed African — tale.

Away from Kampala, in Uganda’s Nakivale Refugee Settlement, Enock Twagirayesu, a Burundian refugee, watched as his community’s search for firewood gnawed away at the environment. So he did what migrants often do — he innovated.

He co-founded the Nakivale Green Environment Association and led the planting of over 460,000 trees. Migration, in this case, wasn’t about seeking aid. It was about giving back—about becoming stewards of land that didn’t originally claim them.

Meanwhile, in Rwanda’s Mahama Refugee Camp, home to more than 60,000 people, mostly Burundians, the displaced haven’t just endured, they’ve built. From schools and health centres to shops and social systems, Mahama pulses with the buzz of community-building. The camp is no longer a stopgap; it’s a semi-urban society, proof that even those cast out can be architects of new worlds.

Migration is reshaping palates too. In Kigali’s leafy enclaves, Kimihurura, Kacyiru, Nyarutarama, you will find Eritrean chefs ladling fragrant stews, Congolese cooks turning goat into gold, and Burundian bakers crafting croissants fit for Kigali’s elite.

Many of these chefs are former refugees or hustling migrants, and they’re transforming the culinary landscape with flavours that tell stories of exile and endurance. Their menus are more than meals — they are passports to memory.

And even in Dar es Salaam, which, to those who don’t know it well, isn’t famous for being a buzzing cultural melting pot, the migrant current runs through the creative sector. Jean, a Congolese filmmaker, arrived in the city with a second-hand camera and a head full of unspoken stories.

Today, his short films — raw, poetic, politically tinged — have found regional acclaim. His lens captures the grit of Kariakoo, the humour of dala-dalas, and the quiet dignity of everyday people. His work, born of movement, has made the city his canvas.

Over in Kampala, the neighbourhood of Kansanga is a scene of diasporic imagination. Here, Eritrean families have built enclaves that echo with language, food, and faith. Follow the scent of tsebhi through narrow alleyways, or the sound of Tigrinya hymns on a Sunday morning, and you’ll find communities that have not just survived exile — they’ve turned it into culture. Restaurants double as living rooms. Hair salons hum with political debates.

Together, these stories form a constellation of courage, creativity, and contribution. These are not anomalies. They are patterns.

Migrants are not “integrating” — they are infusing. They are not asking to be allowed in — they’re already inside, rebuilding, remixing, and bringing pizzazz to the very societies that once might not have welcomed them with open arms.

Of course, it’s not always a warm welcome. Paperwork delays. Language hurdles. Xenophobia dressed up as nationalism. Still, like dandelions cracking concrete, East Africa’s migrants find a way to bloom.

We forget, sometimes, that East Africa’s borders are younger than our grandparents. That our histories are already braided, linguistically, culturally, historically. What we call migration is simply East Africa returning to its oldest rhythm: Movement. Trade, refuge, marriage, education.

The real question isn’t why people move. It’s this: Why not make that movement easier, safer, more fruitful?

Imagine a Dar where Nairobi poets jam with Bujumbura drummers. A Kigali where murals blend Kinyarwanda and Kiswahili. A Kampala where a Somali chef shares a kitchen with a Congolese tailor. A Mombasa wedding where five ethnicities share one dance floor. In such a future, multiculturalism becomes the playlist in the matatu.

Let Tanzanians trade in Kigali. Let Burundians teach in Nairobi. Let Congolese artistes film in Dar. Let the movement continue — not as a crisis to manage, but as a resource to harness.

A more open East Africa is not a borderless anarchy. It’s border-smart solidarity. Systems that allow talent to flow while keeping dignity intact. Policies that respect sovereignty, but prioritise people. A federation of hustlers, healers and dreamers, crossing frontiers not to flee, but to build.

So next time you find yourself in a Nairobi salon, a Kigali bistro, or a Kansanga café , pause. Look around. You might just be witnessing Africa’s quietest, boldest uprising: Migration as innovation.

Karibu sana to the East Africa we’ve quietly been becoming all along. If you live in a city where you’ve never met a woman who told you, “I have my Congolese tailor,” then you are not in an East African city.

Charles Onyango-Obbo is a journalist, writer, and curator of the “Wall of Great Africans”. X@cobbo3

What some of us ageing journalists find out on retiring — and we kick ourselves for not seeing the obvious earlier — is that the best information we craved does not reside with politicians, but with businesspersons.

For the real movers and sometimes even initiators of political deals are businesspeople, who even have more details than the politicians. The less the politician knows of implementation details the safer for everyone.

Politicians don’t haggle over prices; they don’t procure supplies nor negotiate, even with their enemies. Businessmen do that for them. And businessmen don’t go shooting off their mouths like politicians, who sometimes fire without aiming. It takes a clumsy and reckless politician to get into the nitty gritty of the deals.

So, it is not only classical economists who swore by specialisation as a means of promoting efficiency — the world of power also works like that. It can, therefore, get tricky when the politician tries to take on the businessman’s role. And it gets even trickier when the businessman chooses to take over the politician’s role.

Could the most powerful nation on earth, for instance the United States of America, experiment with a businessman being in command of the Commander-in-Chief? How America manages that would be indicative if it is a viable model.

Incidentally, Africa has tried that and modern political scientists can examine how it has worked on this continent. Many African leaders at different levels are businessmen at heart, and some even join politics to further capitalise their businesses with public resources.

Some business-oriented African leaders have done well for their countries. Some, however, have mixed their personal business and state resources, to the peril of their countries whose economies were still fragile, and this can also fan political disenchantment.

You have probably heard the anecdote of a man who took power in a naturally well-endowed African country, looted it day and night, and when implored to lend it some money, as it was no longer creditworthy with international lenders, he retorted that he too doubted the country’s capacity to pay him back.

Another “African” businessman-turned-politician from Britain called Cecil Rhodes did a “better”job by building wealth and infrastructure, but didn’t score highly on human rights. He became Prime Minister of Cape Colony, using his position to promote British interests and expansion in Africa and finally created his own country called Rhodesia, pursuing his dream to design a powerful economy “from Cape to Cairo”.

Independent African leaders and thinkers still dream of what the racist Rhodes wanted to implement, but in favour of the British Empire.

To the other “Africans of Europe” – so called because of their ease of relating with neighbours and including welcoming uninvited visitors to pasta dinner —the Italians had a media mogul become prime minister multiple times, with some critics arguing that he used his position to benefit his own companies.

In Thailand, a telecommunications tycoon became prime minister and some critics said he used his position to promote his businesses.

In America itself, New York City, whose GDP is bigger than all but nine countries on the globe, legendary business leader Michael Bloomberg sought election and served as mayor for over 10 years. It would be interesting to critically examine if some policies he implemented benefited his businesses.

That is New York, whose metropolitan area commands a per capita GDP of $130,000, only lower than Luxembourg’s $132,000, but in total GDP at $2.3 trillion, NY state alone is 26 times bigger than Luxembourg’s.

So, what happens when a businessman manages to buy himself a seat in an African parliament? What happens when an African businessman gets (re)elected to the presidency?

If it has worked well for African countries, then maybe America too can go ahead by placing the Commander-in-Chief under the command of a businessman for four years. At the end, both Americans and the world will use the results to see how or if the skills kit of a trader can enhance presidential performance.

Buwembo is a Kampala-based journalist. E-mail:[email protected]

I attended the third annual Mwalimu Nyerere National Creative Writing Award a couple of Saturdays ago. Celebrating Kiswahili literature and through it celebrating Tanzanian creatives is great fun and, every year, I come out with an evening’s worth of things to think about that revolve around language.

Kiswahili emerged from cultural encounters between various people over time. I usually phrase this differently, but there is a surprising number of Tanzanians who get super sensitive about what is said about our national language.

It was a pleasure to be reminded by this year’s special guest Prof Ibrahim Noor of the Sultan Caboos University in Muscat, Oman, about the importance of having some knowledge of the history and culture of a language to understand it. I sat there and grinned, enjoying how such an innocuous-sounding statement in a roomful of Africans was a grenade.

Kiswahili owes its existence to a complicated history. Behaving otherwise is a waste of one’s intellect, and it makes life complicated by limiting one’s horizons. Let’s take the emergence of new immigrant “minority” communities.

Recently, there has been strident coverage of Chinese nationals setting up businesses in the main markets, including Kariakoo. Some have been engaging in petty trading, which is what really made some people mad. How dare they “take our jobs!” Worst of all is how fast Chinese immigrants learn Kiswahili if they want to. Apparently, this is extra-infuriating to a certain kind of nationalist.

It is funny because we’re not inclined to see the hypocrisy in our xenophobic tendencies. The young men who tell me of grand schemes to “sink” into South Africa or the magical land of plenty known as “Abroad” — where their wealth is apparently hiding — are the same ones who are deeply offended at the sight of an immigrant becoming a boda driver, or hawking plastic toys on the street, or cooking chipsi-mayai for pedestrians.

It is sad because this is the way the unspoken global economic hierarchy of race intrudes into our society. The offence caused by Chinese immigrants is the same one being committed by African immigrants to Europe and America. Being the “wrong”person for the job at hand, whether it’s flipping potato omelettes or being a company CEO with a country club membership. Belonging becomes a discussion. Who gatekeeps? And who gatekeeps the gatekeepers?

In a post-colonial country that is still fighting for to realise itself, discussions of identity and immigration are compromised. The regulation of the movement of people in Tanzania is a difficult topic outside of the permitted zones of “refugee camps” and government or MNC-level foreign direct investments.

Nonetheless, this is one those “nation-building” things, and we should debate it more openly for our own good. If we’re not careful, we could allow ourselves to become comfortable and set in our ignorance of our place in the world.

Is this what we really want for future generations? We’ve a language that challenges static notions of identity, citizenship and meaningful work. A language born out of cultural encounters and so carries both a way to understand and honour our colonial experiences, and to start mitigating the effects on our lives — including immigration and labour policies. We might as well use it well.

Elsie Eyakuze is an independent consultant and blogger for The Mikocheni Report; E-mail: [email protected]

In a dramatic and unprecedented gesture on April 11, 2019, at the end of a spiritual retreat he hosted for the political leaders of South Sudan, Pope Francis knelt at the feet of President Salva Kiir and Vice-President Riek Machar, imploring them to give peace a chance and to be worthy fathers of the nation.

“The purpose of this retreat is to stand together before God and to discern His will,” the Pontiff said. “It is to reflect on our own lives, the common mission the Lord has entrusted to us, to recognise our enormous shared responsibility for the present and future of South Sudan, and to commit ourselves—reinvigorated and reconciled—to the building of your nation.”

Though they were not physically present, the same plea could have been addressed to the warring factions in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where relentless violence continues to devastate innocent lives.

It is a tragic irony that Pope Francis died without seeing the peace in our region that he so fervently yearned for.

In a world increasingly defined by division and discord, the legacy of moral clarity and compassion he left behind should have served as a rallying point for our collective conscience.

Yet the deliberate defiance of his peace overtures does not merely represent a missed opportunity for unity — it reflects a deeper, more troubling trend: The loss of our moral compass.

Throughout his tenure, the Pontiff spoke unwaveringly of forgiveness, reconciliation, and the sanctity of human life. He urged nations and individuals alike to lay down arms, embrace dialogue, and pursue the common good. His calls were not grounded in political expediency, but in timeless truths that transcend creed, culture, and nationality. And yet, his voice — echoing from the pulpit of moral authority — was ignored.

This defiance is not just a matter of political stubbornness or ideological division. It is emblematic of a society that has grown deaf to conscience, where values are routinely sacrificed on the altar of power, pride, or profit.

When peace is offered and war is chosen, when compassion is preached and cruelty prevails, we are not merely rejecting a message — we are rejecting our own humanity.

What does it say about us when even the moral authority of a spiritual leader cannot stir the hearts of those in power? Have we become so desensitised to suffering, so entrenched in our narratives, that we no longer recognise truth when it’s spoken with clarity and love?

To ignore a man who spent his life advocating for the least among us is to silently declare that such values no longer hold sway. And that should terrify us.

Now, more than ever, we need leaders — and citizens — willing to listen to conscience, to history, and to each other. Because, if the voice of peace can be drowned out by the roar of indifference, then what kind of future are we building?

The world did not need to agree with every word Pope Francis spoke. But to ignore the heart of his message — our shared duty to peace, justice, and love — is not merely a political failure. It is a moral one. And that is the greater tragedy.

At current budget estimates, the African Union Support and Stabilisation Mission in Somalia (Aussom) will need nearly $1 billion to avert a complete security collapse in the Horn of Africa nation.

The AU also needs $96 million to clear arrears of the previous mission, African Union Transition Mission in Somalia (Atmis).

There is one problem, though. No one knows for sure where this money will come from. The usual donors are backing away, hesitant to commit or just speaking in vague terms.

This sums up the outcome of Friday’s Extraordinary Summit of Heads of State, the ministerial session that preceded it, as well as meetings of senior officials and military chiefs from countries that contribute troops to peacekeeping missions in Somalia.

Read: EAC ministers meet in Arusha to address security challenges, cash crunch

It’s a stalemate, and not helped by the fact that in the lead up to the summit held at State House Entebbe, Uganda, the AU dropped some sobering numbers to soften the hearts of key donors, to pledge cash and avert the colossal funding crisis that Aussom faces, to no avail.

Towards the end of his presentation, US Ambassador to Uganda William W Popp asserted that Washington DC would not fund Aussom, not under the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 2719 and not even under a hybrid arrangement.

“The US position on Aussom financing remains the same as it has been over the past year,” he said, attracting silent stares and effectively killing the earlier appeal by AU chief Mahmoud Ali Youssouf, that UNSC Resolution 2719 “remains our best bet”.

“US will not support the application of [UNSC Resolution] 2719 framework to Aussom as we do not believe Somalia is the right context for this application. We also will not support the hybrid model of the 2719 framework as we believe it undercuts the spirit and intent of the resolution,” Mr Popp explained.

Read: Trump snubs Aussom funding as threats from Somalia rise

The representatives of the key donors – US envoy, UK High Commissioner to Uganda Lisa Chesney and the EU Head of Delegation to Kampala Jan Sadek – all spoke after a short presentation by Bankole Adeoye, the AU Commissioner for Political Affairs, Peace and Security.

Grim reality

In just five slides, Adeoye laid bare the grim reality that the mission faces. Since its deployment on January 1, 2025, Aussom has an unpaid $45 million bill for the January-March period, and a similar figure for the April-June period before its mandate begins in earnest on July 1, 2025.

“We need $15 million per month. That’s the fact. And we do not have that money currently,” he told Foreign and Defence ministers at the Mestil Hotel in Kampala, where the TCCs ministerial session was held.

He explained that $15 million is needed to cover troops’ salaries in Somalia. But the AU has only $16.7 million for one year. “This is the arithmetic that we must deal with as AU member states, and of course, the troop and police contributing countries.”

According to the AU Peace and Security Council, Aussom has a total cash requirement of $190 million for this year, but has only $16.7 million – the bulk of which is what the AU Peace Fund has in its coffers, and a committed $3 million and $1 million from Japan and China respectively.

This covers just 8.7 percent of the need.

That is not all. The previous force, Atmis, has arrears of $96 million for the 2022-2024 period, most of it racked up when Somalia requested “technical pause” to delay the force drawdown.

“This is because of the consistent extension of the drawdown, authorised by the Peace and Security Council of the AU and endorsed by the UNSC,” Adeoye explained.

In total, for the five-year Aussom budget and Atmis arrears, the AU needs $1.046 billion. The bulk of the budget covers troop allowances at the rate of $1,000 per person per month, while death and disability compensation and mission subsistence allowance for troops, police and civilian staff account for the rest of the costs.

Read: AU, Somalia agree on troop numbers for new mission

As it stands, the AU pins hope on the outcome of the Independent Strategic Report of the United Nations Support Office in Somalia (Unsos), which could operationalise Resolution 2719. But the continental body is also betting on the donors’ conference in Doha, Qatar – scheduled for April on a date yet to be confirmed.

Amid limited options, another throw of the dice is the UN-AU combined mission for Somalia led by AU special envoy Donald Kaberuka, who is currently in Washington DC, seeking additional sources, with an urgent remit to report to Addis before end of this month.

With the Aussom mandate officially kicking off on July 1, time is now of essence. Next month, the donors, convened by the UK, will meet to resolve their final position on Resolution 2719, and update the UNSC.

The EU envoy to Uganda Jan Sadek says that however complex the path, the TCCs and all Somalia partners must recognise that new thinking and funding arrangements are needed to enable equal burden-sharing between long standing and new donors.

Brussels, the largest funder of the previous AU-led missions, in which it spent about €2.7 billion ($3.07 billion), favours the hybrid implementation of Resolution 2719 as the only viable pathway to sustainable and predictable funding for Aussom.

The EU explains that its member states already contribute a quarter of all UN assessed contributions, and welcomes the strategic review and restructuring of the Unsos as part of preparations for the implementation of Resolution 2719 as requested under Resolution 2767.

Read: EU seeks ‘fair’ burden sharing in Somalia peace mission

Addressing TCCs for the first time in his capacity as AUC Chairperson since being elected to the position in February, Youssouf Ali appealed to the international community to come to Somalia’s aid or to sit back and witness the Horn of Africa explode into a regional security nightmare.

“In order to consolidate recovery of territories, the transition from Atmis to Aussom must not fail. Yes, the mission is confronted to financial challenges. There are still reluctances to implement Resolution 2719. We at the Commission are working very hard to make it happen,” he said.

Somalia has a 3,000km shoreline that straddles strategic trade routes linking Asia, Africa and Europe. In 2010 and 2011, Somali pirates seized ships for fun in the Gulf of Aden – offshore of Somalia – which cost insurance firms and shipowners in the world close to $7 billion.

At a time when al-Shabaab is resurgent and allegedly building bases near Mogadishu, the AUC boss argues it is not far-fetched for the extremist militants to exploit the potential security vacuum in Somalia, offer protection to pirates and abet the vice in the region’s high seas.

Read: Somali President Mohamud: Shabaab have made six attempts on my life

“Today, we are asking for Aussom only $190 million over the course of this year, without taking into account arrears. The stability and security of Somalia is beneficial to global peace,” Youssouf said.

Soipan Tuya, Kenya’s Cabinet Secretary for Defence, said the TCCs are already overburdened by having to sustain troops outside the Atmis arrangement, as the current six-month period remains unfunded,

“Any extra requirement would place an unsustainable financial burden on the troop contributing countries,” she said, warning that while UN has supported logistics, and the EU contributed to troop allowances, “it is evident that we are faced with donor fatigue”. 

Without unanimity on UNSC Resolution 2719 of 2023 – which proposes funding of the mission up to 75 percent through UN-assessed contributions and seeking the remainder from partners -- Aussom may continue to struggle.

British Foreign Service officials told The EastAfrican that there is an unspecified pledge from the UK, which is the penholder on Somalia at the UNSC, but details remain scanty, further raising questions of the predictability and adequacy of the funding, and whether London – in the absence of the US and a reluctant EU – would singlehandedly support Aussom till 2029.   

Indeed, Ms Chesney did not divulge any figures in her submission but observed “the funding gap is real” and there “is no quick fix”, adding that burden sharing and finding additional donors will be key.

She however, hinted that the AU should find out the remaining issues relating to the composition and the laydown of financing.

The April 23-25 summit was agreed at State House, Entebbe during the official visit of Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud to his Ugandan counterpart Yoweri Museveni on February 7, 2025, to address the funding crisis but also establish a political oversight body to ensure liberation of Somalia. 

For the first time, Egypt joined the TCCs -- Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti. Egypt replaces longtime contributor Burundi, which exited after a dispute with Mogadishu over troop allocation numbers.

Ahmed Moallim Fiqi, Somalia’s Foreign Affairs Minister, reminded the donors that the Horn of Africa country’s greatest challenge remains security: combating the terrorist Al Shabaab group and stabilising liberated areas. 

“This is where Aussom remains indispensable. Yes, the Somali National Army is growing stronger but we are not yet at the point where we can finish this fight alone,” he said.

In recent weeks, al-Shabaab has intensified attacks particularly in Middle Shabelle and Lower Shabelle regions, as well as mortar fire in Mogadishu, reminding the governmentthat terr orism remains a persistent threat not only to Somalia but to regional stability. 

Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) have agreed to refrain from providing state military support to each other’s non-state armed groups within and across their borders, in a declaration of principles signed under the auspices of a US-brokered agreement on Friday.

The agreement, signed in Washington and facilitated by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, opens the door to a possible peace deal between the two countries, which have long traded accusations of backing each other’s rebels.

Both countries agreed to “commit to explore the establishment of a joint security coordination mechanism to counter non-state armed groups and criminal organisations that threaten the Participants’ legitimate security concerns,” according to part of the agreement.

In the deal, which is seen as a way to halt hostilities in the restive eastern DRC region, both countries also pledged to “mutually acknowledge each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and commit to a pathway to resolve their disputes by peaceful means grounded in diplomacy and negotiation rather than hostile force or rhetoric.”

The agreement comes two days after a Qatar-mediated face-to-face dialogue between AFC/M23 rebels and the DRC government, which resulted in both parties agreeing to a ceasefire.

Read: Hope and frustration: Congo, M23 rebels agree ceasefire in Qatar

Rwanda has been widely accused of backing the M23 rebels, who have overrun and captured two major cities in eastern DRC – Goma and Bukavu – in the past three months and showed no signs of slowing down.

The latest development is seen as a major reprieve, especially for the people of eastern DRC, who have known no peace for years, with hundreds of thousands living in internally displaced camps.

As part of the Declaration of Principles, the two sides also committed to facilitating the safe and voluntary return of internally displaced persons to their original places of residence in eastern DRC, as well as Congolese refugees.

The DRC and Rwanda also committed to drafting a peace deal by May 2, a goal that now seems within reach given the recent thawing of hostilities and rhetoric from all parties.

“Today marks not an end but a beginning, a necessary step towards peace taken with resolve and purpose. This moment carries particular weight for the Democratic Republic of the Congo,” said DRC Foreign Affairs Minister Therese Kayikwamba Wagner after signing the declaration.

“In Goma, in Bukavu, and beyond, the reality of displacement, insecurity, and hardship continues. For us, the urgency of this initiative is not theoretical, it is human.

“We are clear in the Great Lakes region: peace must come first, followed by the rebuilding of trust, and then — only when conditions are right — the careful reopening of a path to meaningful bilateral cooperation. Too many past efforts have failed because sequencing was ignored and accountability postponed,” she added.

Rwanda’s Foreign Affairs Minister Olivier Nduhungirehe noted that the agreement marks an important step towards addressing the region’s existing security concerns, which, if tackled, could unlock its economic potential.

“Today, we are talking about the real issues, the root causes that must be addressed to achieve a lasting peace in our region. Those include, first and foremost, security, as well as the return of refugees.

“In addition, and very importantly, we are discussing how to build new regional economic value chains that link our countries, including with American private sector investment. Our goal is a secure region, free of violent ethnic extremism, which is well-governed. Working together, our region can be an engine of prosperity for all our peoples, and indeed Africa as a whole,” said Mr Nduhungirehe.

Securing the eastern part of the DRC is expected to unlock significant investment opportunities, “including those facilitated by the US government and US private sector, aimed at transforming the regional economy to the benefit of all participating countries.”

The US recently signed a minerals deal with the DRC and is reported to be pursuing a similar agreement with Rwanda. Addressing the hostilities in the mineral-rich region — home to resources such as tantalum and gold — is seen as key to securing US government investments and interests in the Great Lakes region.

Belgium said on Friday that while it still considers Rwanda a key player in the region and well-placed to resolve the conflict in eastern Congo, it cannot be complacent about Rwanda’s violation of Congo’s territorial integrity.

Maxime Prévot, Belgium’s Vice-Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs, European Affairs and Development Cooperation, said this during a meeting with Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni.

While the Belgian official sought President Museveni’s tact in defusing the crisis in eastern Congo, it is also understood that the meeting was double-barrelled, seeking the veteran Ugandan leader’s reach to mend relations between Belgium and Rwanda.

In his own words, Mr Prévot described President Museveni as “a very valuable go-between in diplomatic contacts.”

At a press conference in Kampala, Mr Prévot, who is on a tour of Uganda, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), said he had met Mr Museveni first to tap into his knowledge of the region and the respect he commands among his peers — qualities Belgium views as key to resolving the conflict in eastern Congo and fostering rapprochement between Belgium and Rwanda.

The Belgian foreign minister’s itinerary skips Rwanda, following the recent diplomatic fallout between Kigali and Brussels, which saw Kigali sever ties with Belgium.

“Unfortunately, it is at this stage no longer possible for me to visit Rwanda following its decision to break down our diplomatic relations. I explained to President Museveni that there is a lot of disinformation about this situation. A breakdown of diplomatic relations is not a solution to divergent views,” Mr Prévot said.

Read: Rwanda and Belgium expel each other’s diplomats over Congo conflict

The two leaders discussed the current state of the conflict in eastern DRC, a situation that remains extremely precarious, with the local population paying the price every day. They agreed there is urgent need to act.

“During the meeting, I also underlined that the root causes of the conflict must be addressed in order to break the cycle of violence,” he added.

The Belgian official explained that respecting the territorial integrity of all countries in the region, promoting regional economic integration, resolving refugee issues, ending the threat posed by the FDLR, combating hate speech targeting specific communities, and improving governance and respect for human rights would help de-escalate the conflict and the tension between the DRC and Rwanda.

FDLR is the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda, a Hutu rebel group that includes perpetrators of the Rwandan genocide and is active in eastern Congo.

On relations with Kigali, Mr Prévot said Brussels believes there is always room for dialogue and a better understanding of each other’s perspectives, noting that even with the Russian Federation under sanctions after Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine, Belgium has maintained diplomatic relations, albeit at a more limited level.

However, the Belgian chief diplomat said his country cannot be complacent about Rwanda’s violation of the DRC’s territorial integrity, although Belgium is not seeking an escalation of the situation.

Belgium said it welcomed the announcement by the DRC and rebel group M23/AFC to work towards a truce and a ceasefire leading to dialogue to restore lasting peace in the mineral-rich and conflict-plagued eastern Congo.

At the same time, a further boost of positive news came from Washington, where the foreign ministers of the DRC and Rwanda signed a declaration of principles under the auspices of the US, which recently struck deals with Kinshasa to help end the crisis in eastern Congo.

Brussels says these are crucial steps towards ending the violence, and also hails the mediation efforts of Qatar, the African Union, and regional blocs East African Community and Southern African Development Community.

A close coordination of these initiatives is of the utmost importance, the Belgian embassy in Kampala said in a statement issued after the meeting between Mr Prévot and President Museveni.

“The Belgian position will continue to be anchored in respect for international law, human rights and the rule of law,” the statement added.

Tanzania has lifted a ban on imports of agricultural produce from Malawi and South Africa, it said late on Friday, days after imposing it in retaliation for similar measures imposed by the two southern African nations.

Tanzania Plant Health and Pesticides Authority (TPHPA)’s director general, Joseph Ndunguru, said that Tanzania was lifting the ban effective immediately to allow for “a diplomatic ministerial discussion.”

The two countries had reached out separately seeking to resolve the trade dispute through dialogue, he said.

On Wednesday Tanzania’s ministry of agriculture banned imports of all agricultural produce from Malawi and South Africa and also banned exports to Malawi of Tanzanian fertiliser, which Malawi relies on. The ban on fertiliser exports to Malawi has now also been lifted.

Read: Tanzania bans agriculture imports from South Africa, Malawi

The three countries all belong to a regional economic bloc, the Southern African Development Community (SADC).

South Africa’s Minister for International Relations and Cooperation Ronald Lamola welcomed Tanzania’s move to lift the ban, saying it underscored the strong relations between both nations.

“This outcome demonstrates that the diplomatic route remains the most effective path to resolving challenges... cooperation and mutual understanding can unlock shared opportunities,” he was quoted as saying in a statement.

Malawi had recently banned imports of Tanzanian agricultural commodities like maize flour, rice, ginger, and bananas, among other products, while South Africa has also stopped imports of bananas shipped by Tanzania.

The death of Pope Francis is a blow to the 1.4 billion Catholics around the world, and to those who believe in a more compassionate human society.

In a world where progress in a country is measured by the number of millionaires and billionaires, the Pope preached upliftment of the poor.

While the World Bank and International Monetary Fund churn out statistics showing economic growth rates, the Pope shone a light on millions of poor people left behind by the so-called growing economies.

In his homilies, the Pope always called for nations to remember the poor in their countries and in other regions. When Europe was building fortresses to keep out the poor from other regions, the Pope urged compassion and tolerance.

The Pope also spoke out against cultural divides within countries. In his travels around the world, he held audiences with the marginalised in society — women, youth, and ethnic and religious minorities. He embraced HIV/Aids patients and washed the feet of prisoners. He took delight in having disabled musicians and singers perform in front of him.

By doing these things, he was shining a light on parts of our society we trend to ignore.

Pope Francis was from Argentina, and grew up observing the poverty and strife in Latin America caused by dictatorship. As pontiff, he called on authoritarian regimes to be tolerant of dissent and build democratic institutions.

He urged an end to wars raging around the world – from Ukraine to the Middle East to eastern Congo. He seemed to believe deeply that even the worst of enemies could reach deep into their humanity and find common ground. He did not preach the supremacy of Catholicism over other denominations and religions. Rather, he called for understanding between faiths.

In 2015, the Pope visited Kenya. He made an impassioned plea to the leadership to end corruption. At that time, thievery under the Jubilee administration had reached crisis proportions. So alarming was the corruption that ambassadors of the European Union in Kenya took the step of releasing a harsh joint statement condemning the wanton plunder.

When Pope Francis arrived, he spoke to the same crisis, saying thievery causes poverty. The pontiff decried the teargassing of Lang’ata Primary School pupils by police for protesting the stealing of their school field by a senior official in the administration.

What would he say about the murder of Gen-Z critics and the teargassing of Butere girls?

As we mourn Pope Francis, we must reflect on the values of his papacy and his leadership style. I have argued before that Africa will never solve its crisis of development until it solves the crisis of leadership. We must strive to end a leadership that deliberately weakens institutions so as to maintain a patronage system of governance.

We must end leadership whose major propose is accumulation of wealth for itself and its acolytes. We must bring to an end leadership motivated by self-aggrandisement and megalomania.

Tee Ngugi is a Nairobi-based political commentator.

In a dramatic and unprecedented gesture on April 11, 2019, at the end of a spiritual retreat he hosted for the political leaders of South Sudan, Pope Francis knelt at the feet of President Salva Kiir and Vice-President Riek Machar, imploring them to give peace a chance and to be worthy fathers of the nation.

“The purpose of this retreat is to stand together before God and to discern His will,” the Pontiff said. “It is to reflect on our own lives, the common mission the Lord has entrusted to us, to recognise our enormous shared responsibility for the present and future of South Sudan, and to commit ourselves—reinvigorated and reconciled—to the building of your nation.”

Though they were not physically present, the same plea could have been addressed to the warring factions in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where relentless violence continues to devastate innocent lives.

It is a tragic irony that Pope Francis died without seeing the peace in our region that he so fervently yearned for.

In a world increasingly defined by division and discord, the legacy of moral clarity and compassion he left behind should have served as a rallying point for our collective conscience.

Yet the deliberate defiance of his peace overtures does not merely represent a missed opportunity for unity — it reflects a deeper, more troubling trend: The loss of our moral compass.

Throughout his tenure, the Pontiff spoke unwaveringly of forgiveness, reconciliation, and the sanctity of human life. He urged nations and individuals alike to lay down arms, embrace dialogue, and pursue the common good. His calls were not grounded in political expediency, but in timeless truths that transcend creed, culture, and nationality. And yet, his voice — echoing from the pulpit of moral authority — was ignored.

This defiance is not just a matter of political stubbornness or ideological division. It is emblematic of a society that has grown deaf to conscience, where values are routinely sacrificed on the altar of power, pride, or profit.

When peace is offered and war is chosen, when compassion is preached and cruelty prevails, we are not merely rejecting a message — we are rejecting our own humanity.

What does it say about us when even the moral authority of a spiritual leader cannot stir the hearts of those in power? Have we become so desensitised to suffering, so entrenched in our narratives, that we no longer recognise truth when it’s spoken with clarity and love?

To ignore a man who spent his life advocating for the least among us is to silently declare that such values no longer hold sway. And that should terrify us.

Now, more than ever, we need leaders — and citizens — willing to listen to conscience, to history, and to each other. Because, if the voice of peace can be drowned out by the roar of indifference, then what kind of future are we building?

The world did not need to agree with every word Pope Francis spoke. But to ignore the heart of his message — our shared duty to peace, justice, and love — is not merely a political failure. It is a moral one. And that is the greater tragedy.

Very often, an argument is engaged, and the ante keeps rising for some time as it looks like something “is gonna give,” until one day it does. It was exactly that kind of feeling about Thursday, April 26, 2025, when the main Tanzanian opposition party Chadema’s chairman, Tundu Antipass Lissu was scheduled to be produced before a court of law to answer a number of charges, including treason.

That is a very serious charge, which even in liberal judicial systems attracts severe sentences and is often unbailable. In our state of affairs it is unbailable, period. So when one is slapped with such a charge, one expects to sit in the cooler for quite some time.

When such a figure is thus held with the prospects of electoral fights slated for later in the year, one knows that there is going to be some talk on both sides — or more — of the argument. In this case, it did not disappoint, with all the political commentators taking this or that point of view on the propriety of the charges and what the process itself might portend for the elections at the end of the year.

Even in Tanzania, which is used to its opposition leaders being hauled before courts of law to answer this or that other serious charge — the past chair of this party Freeman Mbowe spent eight months in remand on charges of “terrorism” — there was the usual speculation and widely divergent views.

For instance, was this a gambit sprung by Samia Suluhu Hassan, a contestant in the election, to make sure, come election day, there is absolutely no challenge from the opposition?

Read: Tanzania 2025 election countdown: Tension as state cracks down on opposition

Also, why were there restrictions on the number of people allowed in to visit Lissu? It was known that long queues were forming at the prison holding him and that maybe only three or four were let in daily.

Then there was the news that Lissu had been moved from the prison where he had been taken after his last court appearance, and the question was whether such an act was not tantamount to breaching a court order concerning the facility mandated to hold the remandee.

Legalistically, was it possible to commit treason on one’s own? Doesn’t that offence require the substantiation of a conspiracy?
These and many more questions occupy the talking heads in Da es Salaam, and social media platforms were a treasure trove of suggestions, conjecture and pseudo analyses.

But then D-day came, and a few people showed up at the courthouse, encouraged by the CDM leadership, to show solidarity with their leader and record faithfully what was going down, and that is when the police swung into action, stopping people on the roads, pulling them from court grounds, beating them and even abducting others to distant places they had not planned to visit.

There were social media posts showing CDM members in places as far off as 60 kilometres away in sorry states showing they had been beaten and with broken limbs, pleading for help.

This violence was, to say the least, unconscionable, and provided the occasion for one of the regional observer’s on the scene, Kenyan advocate and political bigwig Martha Karua, to ask if following court proceedings has become a crime in Tanzania!

Of particular worry was the unannounced detention of CDM’s secretary-general John Mnyika and vice-chair John Heche, who were incommunicado all day, only to be released at night, having been taken to various places around the city on a guided tour they had not requested. Very worrisome, indeed, and to think the election campaigns have not even been flagged off!

Now, that is sombre enough, but into that mix add something even stranger: In all that saga, somebody in Arusha came up with a novelty by unfurling the “Star of David” in a prominent place in his town to signify his support for Israel.

This country has earned itself the reputation of a pariah in the world for practising genocide against the Palestinians and its practice of apartheid. What was this in aid of, in view of Tanzania’s long-standing solidarity with the people of Palestine?

Just where does Tanzania stand on this thorny issue which Julius Nyerere, our recognised founding father, spent a lot of energy to teach about, and about, and which we seem to be inexplicably and dangerously backsliding?

Can a country really claim to be a nation when it no longer remembers its political moorings, ethos, and traditions? What kind of country would that be, except a collection of disparate groupings of tribespeople wandering in the wilderness of their forgetfulness?

The imagery in that act was allowed to pass unchallenged. Since October 7, 2023, more than 50,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli military. Is the suggestion being made here that those who oppose our rulers will meet the same fate?

On the issues relating to April 26, Lissu will no doubt be heard of some more, but that need be the fate of a man whose only fault is to state that there should not be elections without the requisite reforms needed to make the elections credible. Was the police violence really necessary?

Again, watch this space.

Ulimwengu is now on YouTube via jeneralionline tv. E-mail: [email protected]