US President Donald Trump stated on Monday that Ukraine must ensure a return on America’s $300 billion in aid through its rare-earth minerals. Speaking at the White House, he called for “equalization,” hinting at a deal involving these resources. It is not clear whether he was proposing a free supply or a discounted sale.

Rare-earth minerals – 17 elements valued for their magnetic and electrochemical properties – are used in smartphones, EV batteries, and cancer treatment.

Last week, Trump suspended all USAID programs, a US agency that funds global projects through humanitarian aid. The move halted numerous initiatives in Ukraine.

“We have enough rare-earth metals, but Russia has occupied our lands since 2014,” Zelensky said on Tuesday in Kiev, responding to Trump. “We are open to them being developed by our partners who help us defend the land, push back the enemy with their weapons, presence, and sanctions. And this is absolutely fair.”

He went on to say that he raised the issue of Ukraine’s mineral wealth with Trump in past meetings, warning that if Russia controls these resources, companies from other nations will exploit them.

A 2024 World Economic Forum report highlighted Ukraine’s potential as a key supplier of raw materials vital for defense, aerospace, and green energy. Ukraine’s total mineral wealth was estimated at over $14.8 trillion in 2023, according to Forbes.

Before the 2022 escalation of the Ukraine conflict, the country had Europe’s largest reserves of titanium and lithium, which are not rare-earths, but are critical for military industries, batteries, and capacitors. Around $7 trillion of Ukraine’s total mineral wealth is in its former Donbass regions of Donetsk and Lugansk, according to Forbes.

Most of these territories came under Russian control after Donetsk and Lugansk voted to join Russia in 2022. Both declared independence in 2014 from Ukraine after the Western-backed Maidan coup in Kiev.

Russian President Vladimir Putin cited the protection of people in Donbass as a key reason for launching the military operation in Ukraine. Resources in these territories are a major factor in the support of NATO member states for Kiev, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov claimed in October 2024. “Their discourse revolves around territory and resources that they require in America,” he said. “Our concern is not territories, but people.”

The assessment of Nigeria as the ninth partner state in BRICS marks a significant milestone in the history of this group. It’s not merely a change of status; it represents a profound evolution in global economic and political cooperation dynamics. With Nigeria as a partner country, BRICS enhances its geographical and economic diversity, allowing for better representation of the interests of developing countries, particularly those in Africa. 

As of today, full membership of BRICS, along with Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, is held by Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, the UAE, and Indonesia. The status of a BRICS partner state, along with Nigeria, has been acquired and confirmed by Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Thailand, Uganda, and Uzbekistan. 

Strengthening diversity within BRICS

Nigeria, one of the largest economies in Africa, brings considerable value to the composition of BRICS. Its demographic and economic diversity enriches the group, enabling a more equitable representation of the concerns and needs of developing nations. By collaborating with Nigeria, BRICS positions itself not only as an economic bloc but also as a forum where African voices often marginalized in other international spaces can be heard.

This diversity is crucial as it fosters a better understanding of the challenges faced by developing countries. The current geopolitical readjustments led by the Russian Federation and President Vladimir Putin make this representation essential, as countries in the Global South seek to increase their influence in the face of traditional imperialist powers.

Increasing economic influence

As the group’s partner, Nigeria could strengthen its trade relations and attract foreign investments. With a population of over 200 million, Nigeria is the most populous country in Africa and possesses abundant natural resources, notably oil, which accounts for about 90% of its exports. Nigeria could benefit from more direct access to the markets of other members, particularly China, which is already its main trading partner, with bilateral trade reaching $20 billion in 2022.

Partnership with BRICS could also boost Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). In 2021, Nigeria attracted about $3.5 billion in FDI, but this figure could significantly increase through economic cooperation initiatives and infrastructure projects supported by BRICS countries. For example, investments in transportation and energy infrastructure could reduce logistical costs and improve productivity.

Moreover, partnership with the group could enhance Nigeria’s position in global economic governance. The country could participate in discussions on issues such as the reform of international financial institutions, allowing it to advocate for its interests and those of African countries. With BRICS, Nigeria could catalyze sustainable economic growth, promote infrastructure development, and strengthen its position on the international stage, while providing opportunities for economic diversification and job creation for its population.

Strengthening South-South dialogue

Another essential aspect of Nigeria’s collaboration with the BRICS is the strengthening of South-South dialogue. This concept, which advocates for cooperation among developing countries, is particularly relevant in the current context of globalization, where nations in the Global South seek to support one another. 

Nigeria has already developed several economic, technological, and cultural partnerships that could be amplified within the framework of BRICS. These synergies would facilitate the exchange of best practices, technology sharing, and enhanced public policy effectiveness among members. South-South dialogue thus offers valuable opportunities for innovation and the search for solutions tailored to the unique challenges these nations face.

Opportunities for Nigeria

For Nigeria, becoming a BRICS partner state presents multiple strategic interests, and this can be highlighted with concrete figures and facts. 

Nigeria will gain access to BRICS markets, which comprise about 42% of the global population and nearly 25% of global GDP. Increased access to these markets represents a unique opportunity to boost its exports. In 2022, Nigeria exported approximately $50 billion worth of products, primarily oil. A strengthened partnership with other BRICS members could potentially double these exports in certain categories, particularly in the agricultural and manufacturing sectors vital to the Nigerian economy.

Additionally, there are FDI opportunities, as BRICS countries, particularly China, are key sources of FDI. By aligning with BRICS, Nigeria could attract additional investments, potentially tripling its investment through joint projects in infrastructure, energy, and technology. For instance, Chinese investments in railway and energy infrastructure in Nigeria have already exceeded $10 billion, and these figures could increase significantly in the coming years.

Another beneficial sector for Nigeria is economic diversification. The country heavily relies on oil revenues, which account for about 90% of its exports. Partnership with BRICS could promote the diversification of its economy. By developing sectors such as agriculture, digital technologies, and manufacturing, Nigeria could reduce its dependence on oil. In 2020, the agricultural sector contributed 22% to Nigeria’s GDP, and with BRICS support, this figure could grow significantly in the coming years. 

Moreover, Nigeria would benefit as a BRICS partner by strengthening its diplomatic power. With BRICS, Nigeria would have a stronger voice in international discussions on crucial issues, allowing it to advocate for its interests while forming strategic alliances. 

Future perspectives: Towards full membership?

It is quite plausible some countries that have recently acquired partner status in BRICS may seek to become full members in the future. Several reasons justify this potential trend.

The convergence of economic interests among members could strengthen the desire for integration. If Nigeria and other partners can demonstrate that their membership will bring mutual benefits, the race towards full membership could accelerate.

Furthermore, the establishment of joint projects, whether commercial or technological, can also encourage countries to formalize their position within the group. The more fruitful the interactions, the more evident it becomes that formalizing these relationships is necessary.

Global geopolitical developments, particularly the need for alliance diversification, make participation in BRICS increasingly attractive. As geopolitics evolves, countries seek to build strategic alliances to enhance their influence. Nigeria’s integration as a partner state in BRICS represents a significant evolution that could transform not only the internal dynamics of the group but also the global economic and political landscape.

Through increased cooperation, economic opportunities, and better representation of African interests, Nigeria positions itself as a key player on the international stage. In an increasingly interconnected world, this evolution paves the way for unprecedented opportunities for sustainable development, economic prosperity, and peace.

Nepal’s current total energy demand is around 1,900 MW during peak hours. Due to a lack of energy, however, Nepal’s industrial sectors have limited production from eight to ten hours a day. And the culprit is its neighbor to the south, India.

According to the Nepal Electricity Authority (NEA), the problem will grow in the coming dry season from February to April. NEA spokesperson Chandan Kumar Ghosh said energy may become more scarce due to reduced energy production. “Our production is reduced by one-third during the dry season, out of the total capacity,” Ghosh told RT. “So, this year we may have to struggle with various issues.”

According to NEA data, Nepal has a capacity for energy production of 3,403 MW during the monsoon. However, during the winter, production suffers. In 2024, Nepal lost major hydropower capacity due to floods. The Upper Tamakoshi, with 456 MW, is an example of a plant that fell short in fulfilling production requirements.

Energy flows

India is a key trade partner of Nepal. According to the Ministry of Commerce and Industry in New Delhi, India accounted for 64.1% of Nepal’s total trade, around $8.66 billion in Nepal’s financial year 2022-23. Part of that trade is in energy.

During the monsoon, Nepal exports energy to India – while in the winter and dry seasons, Nepal imports energy from India. In previous years, Nepal received around 600 MW of energy per day. This year, however, India did not export energy to Nepal during peak hours.

“This year, Nepal and India could not reach an agreement to export energy from India to Nepal during peak hours, so we are facing challenges. We hope this problem won’t persist next year. We have provided energy to consumers during peak hours by reducing energy supply to industries,” Ghosh said. “We have managed our energy so far.”

Nepal cannot easily engage in energy trade with countries such as China, as there is no infrastructure – firstly, transmission lines. Besides, China and Nepal have geographical challenges in constructing transmission lines. Nepal is surrounded by Indian territory on the west, east, and south, leaving no opportunity to trade energy with other countries without India’s consent.

In October last year, Kathmandu, Dhaka, and New Delhi signed a trilateral pact to facilitate exports of 40 MW of energy from Nepal to Bangladesh between June 15 and November 15 for five years via India’s grid.

On November 15, energy officials from the three countries jointly inaugurated the power flow. “This historic occasion marks the first trilateral power transaction which has been carried out through the Indian grid,” New Delhi said in a statement. However, officials in Nepal anonymously say that the actual implementation of the energy sharing arrangement is in doubt due to various factors, from political, as a result of a change of government in Dhaka, to technical: Nepal’s power generation has not been sufficient.

India’s role

Nepal currently has 3,403 MW of energy production capacity. According to various studies, Nepal’s hydropower capacity is about 42,000 MW. Currently, projects with a total of 11,218 MW potential capacity have received construction licenses from the department of electricity development. Among them, 8,000 MW of projects are held by Indian companies, including the 900 MW capacity Upper Karnali, undertaken by the Indian GMR group for 14 years.

India is looking at other significant hydro projects in Nepal, having proposed projects with a capacity of 1,030 MW (Upper Arun), 762 MW (Tamor), and 1,902 MW (Mugu Karnali).

According to media reports, India has played a role in delays regarding the 1,063 MW Upper Arun project, which would be Nepal’s largest hydropower project so far, with an estimated cost of $1.8 billion. The World Bank was seen as the primary financier of the project; however, reports suggest it is likely to withdraw.

Sources in the Nepal government suggest that India, which is systematically obtaining permits for the construction of large hydropower projects on Nepal’s rivers through state-owned companies, aims to bring the Upper Arun project under its control.

A government official who wished to not be named suggested that India, which has been “pressuring Nepal in the electricity trade,” is “blocking the entry of electricity generated in Nepal during the rainy season into its market by imposing quotas.” He also claimed that India’s reluctance to sell the electricity needed during the winter months is disrupting Nepal’s power supply system.

India’s changing policies, dictated by geopolitical realities, also seem to impact Nepal’s hydropower sector. In 2018, New Delhi issued Guidelines for Import/Export (Cross-Border), which aims to prevent the purchase of power produced via the investment of nations with which it does not have a “bilateral agreement on power sector cooperation.” This effectively means Indian cannot buy hydropower produced by Chinese-funded or Chinese-built plants.

Due to this, several Chinese investors and companies have reportedly withdrawn from Nepal. Reuters reported last year that since India’s power purchasing policy shift, Nepal has removed Chinese developers from six hydropower projects and given four hydro contracts to Indian companies.

Energy self-reliance for Nepal?

Former NEA managing director Hitendra Dev Shakya said Nepal’s energy security has become weak. “The key lies with India,” he claimed. “India does not accept Nepal’s energy during the monsoon when Nepal has a surplus, and likewise, during the dry and winter seasons, India does not export energy to Nepal. Additionally, India does not agree to investments from other countries in Nepal’s energy sector.”

For the past few years, Nepal’s surplus energy during the monsoon has gone to waste due to insufficient energy import by India. NEA data shows that a maximum of about 900 MW was exported to India.

Ghosh acknowledged the waste. “This is a serious concern. We have lost a significant amount during the monsoon,” he said. However, he does not agree that Nepal’s energy security is entirely dependent on India. “We need to develop storage projects and increase production. If we do the necessary work, there is no need to blame others.”

Energy experts echo his sentiments. They believe Nepal should increase energy consumption capacity, develop storage projects, use energy storage techniques, and invest in expanding transmission lines.

Ram Prasad Dhital, the chairman of the Electricity Regulatory Commission, says Nepal needs to amplify transmission lines and provide energy to industries. “Nepal’s industrial sector is facing energy scarcity,” he said. “If we can provide them [energy], it will be better. During the dry season, we must develop storage projects that can provide energy during peak hours.”

READ MORE:
Sewage slaves: Millions in India still make a living cleaning human waste with bare hands

Hitendra Dev Shakya suggested reducing energy prices for the industrial sector and domestic consumers, as well as investing in storage technology, which would be cheaper than wasting energy during the monsoon.