At the Kigali Convention Centre during the Africa CEO Forum, Rwandan President Paul Kagame delivered a pointed critique of the structural foundations of the global economy.
Addressing more than 2,800 business leaders, heads of state, and decision-makers, Kagame characterised the competition for Africa’s resources as an extension of colonial-era exploitation, masked by Western moral rhetoric.
Kagame’s rhetoric targeted what he termed the economic coercion of global powers, particularly under the current United States (US) administration, as the international scramble for critical minerals reaches a fever pitch.
His words exposed a deep-seated continental frustration: despite possessing the world’s most sought-after geological treasures, Africa remains, in Kagame’s words, “rich in everything except leverage.”
The Rwandan leader took direct aim at the extractive nature of foreign engagement, accusing powerful states of using pressure, sanctions, and coercive tactics to secure access to Africa’s strategic wealth.
“It is a situation where the powers that be are holding a whip in their hands, using a stick to beat up whoever they want to beat up. They are not even hiding it; it’s out in the open,” Kagame told the audience.
“These powers you see that come here lecturing people on democracy and human rights, they are doing it with one arm, and with the other, they are just taking away everything that people own.”
His remarks came at a crucial stage in global economic developments.
The world is undergoing a major energy transition, moving away from fossil fuels toward renewable energy and electrification.
The global change toward green energy, semiconductor manufacturing, and advanced defence technology has turned once-obscure minerals into vital 21st-century national security assets.
Elements like cobalt, lithium, tantalum, tungsten, and rare earths are not merely just commodities; they are essential to the modern digital and green economy.
This paradigm shift has ignited an unprecedented scramble for critical minerals, materials essential for Electric Vehicle (EV) batteries, solar panels, wind turbines, semiconductors, and advanced defence systems.
As this shift intensifies, Africa has become a primary focus for global powers.
The Geopolitics of Critical Minerals
To understand the significance of Kagame’s statements, it is necessary to recognise the substantial value of Africa’s mineral resources and how they shape global competition.
Critical minerals such as cobalt, lithium, tantalum, tungsten, and rare earth elements are the building blocks of the 21st-century economy.
Without them, the global transition to green energy and the advancement of digital technology would grind to an abrupt halt.
Africa commands a considerable share of these resources.
The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) alone produces over 70 per cent of the world’s cobalt.
Zimbabwe and Namibia are emerging as prominent players in the global lithium market, while Zambia and South Africa boast immense reserves of copper and platinum group metals.
To the East, Mozambique, Tanzania, and Rwanda also boast significant deposits of rare earths, graphite, and tantalum.
This extensive geological wealth has prompted intense competition among multiple global powers.
For over two decades, China, which is by far the biggest producer of EVs, accounting for over 70 per cent of global EV production, has secured a dominant grip on African mineral supply chains.
It does this by investing heavily in infrastructure-for-minerals deals and controlling most of the processing capacity.
Terrified of this monopoly, the US and Europe have aggressively sought to pivot back to the continent, deploying diplomatic pressure, strategic partnership agreements, and alternative infrastructure projects such as the Lobito Corridor to bypass Beijing’s grip.
Against this backdrop, Kagame observed that diplomatic interaction is often accompanied by assertive, deliberate efforts.
He described a scenario where powerful countries arrive “holding a whip in their hands,” lecturing African nations on democracy and human rights with one arm, while “just taking away everything that people own” with the other.
“We cannot simply wait to be exploited by those with greater power and cunning. We must be able to say no,” he noted.
The Complicated Web of Rwanda-US Relations
Kagame’s critique of Western influence cannot be separated from the current, highly sensitive state of diplomatic relations between Rwanda and its longest-standing Western ally, Washington.
For decades following the 1994 genocide, Rwanda enjoyed favoured-nation status in the US capital.
It was celebrated as a disciplined security partner, a major contributor to global peacekeeping missions, and a model of economic efficiency.
However, that relationship has suffered a severe strategic rupture.
In March 2026, the US Treasury Department imposed direct financial sanctions on the Rwanda Defence Force (RDF) and four senior commanders, including Chief of Staff Vincent Nyakarundi and Chief of Defence Staff Mubarakh Muganga.
Washington accused the Rwandan military of actively supporting, training, and fighting alongside the M23 rebel movement in eastern DRC, whose territorial advances have triggered a catastrophic human rights and displacement crisis.
Rwanda has consistently and vehemently denied accusations that it supports the M23 rebellion.
A claim, M23 leader Bertrand Bisimwa echoed in early February 2026, noting the cooperation between the militia group and Kigali was not about political or military support but about security.
He further accused the Kinshasa government of supporting armed groups like the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) against Congolese civilians and neighbouring countries.
“I admit Rwanda supports us. Why? Because we are neighbours. At the border, you will find many Congolese crossing into Rwanda and Rwandese crossing into Congo to do business,” he told journalists at the time.
Instead, Kigali argues that the international community, including the US, routinely ignores its legitimate security concerns.
It points out the presence of the FDLR, a militia founded by individuals linked to the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi, operating freely across the border in the DRC.
Economic variables further complicate this conflict.
Independent analysts and United Nations (UN) reports have long pointed out that eastern Congo’s lawless borders allow billions of dollars in gold and coltan to be funnelled into Rwanda for processing and legal re-export, fueling Kigali’s mineral revenues while starving Kinshasa of tax resources.
Addressing sanctions, Kagame stayed firm, characterising them as part of the same pattern of pressure.
He suggested that such punitive measures are often applied hypocritically, used as tools of economic coercion rather than moral correction.
“If [the US] knows they will extract more from a certain place, they will be more favourable to that place, even if they are the ones in the wrong,” he said.
When pressed on whether international pressure would force his hand, he replied simply: “I never capitulated in a war situation. I’ve become immunised to shocks.”
Even so, the relationship between Kigali and Washington remains complex.
The sanctions were a blunt effort to enforce the US-brokered Washington Accords, signed in late 2025.
However, critics note a paradox in Washington’s policy: while the US sanctions Rwanda’s military leadership, it also maintains strong economic ties with Kigali.
Just months before the diplomatic fractures, the US State Department signed a letter of intent with Trinity Metals, a major mining firm operating in Rwanda, to secure a steady supply of tin and tantalum for the US market.
Furthermore, the US remains Rwanda’s largest bilateral aid donor, pouring hundreds of millions of dollars annually into health, development, and trade.
The Risks and Rewards of Foreign Investment
The main challenge facing Rwanda and its neighbours is how to utilise their immense natural wealth without repeating past mistakes.
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Africa’s extractive industries presents both opportunities and risks.
Capital-intensive mining operations require billions of dollars in infrastructure, technology, and distribution expertise, resources that many African governments currently lack.
When administered responsibly, foreign investment can create jobs, build vital infrastructure, and generate essential tax revenues for governments.
On the other hand, the risks associated with the prevailing investment model are considerable.
Historically, foreign investment in African mining has been characterised by capital flight, environmental degradation, and the displacement of local communities.
Furthermore, by exporting minerals in their raw state, African countries forfeit the massive economic windfalls generated by higher up the value chain.
As Amir Ben Yahmed, founder of the Africa CEO Forum, noted:
“Every time, Africa pays the price… Either we keep paying the price of other people’s crises, or we decide to build the scale we need to have leverage.”
A Wider Continental Awakening: Pan-Africanism Revisited
Kagame’s fiery rhetoric echoes beyond Kigali, mirroring a growing continental sentiment among many African leaders on foreign involvement in resource extraction.
Kagame’s so-called “Rwanda Doctrine,” which rejects exploitative and unequal economic arrangements, is intended to challenge the deterministic theory of the Resource Curse.
For decades, economists have used this term to explain why nations with abundant non-renewable natural resources tend to have lower economic growth, less democracy, and worse development outcomes than countries with fewer natural resources.
“We must refuse the notion of the so-called resource curse,” Kagame has frequently argued, insisting that poverty in the presence of wealth is a failure of policy, institutional design, and sovereignty, not an inevitability of geography.
This refusal lies at the very heart of modern Pan-Africanism, the intellectual and political movement aimed at unifying Africans globally to achieve self-reliance and structural emancipation.
Kagame’s message scales this philosophy from historical dialogue into a hardline economic strategy.
It also aligns perfectly with the African Union’s Agenda 2063: The Africa We Want, the continent’s master plan to transform Africa into a global economic power.
For decades, the dominant economic model in Africa has been fundamentally extractive: raw materials are mined and exported at low prices, only to be processed abroad and sold back as expensive manufactured goods.
During his address, Kagame pointedly praised nations like Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Ghana for recently rejecting lopsided bilateral deals with foreign powers.
These are deals that sought to trade broad mineral rights or private data for healthcare programs or short-term financial relief.
“It is not so difficult to say no,” Kagame asserted. “In fact, it costs you more to say yes to the wrong thing.”
This push for resource sovereignty is gaining momentum. Across the continent, governments are increasingly pushing back against traditional export models.
Several countries have introduced export bans on raw minerals, requiring foreign mining companies to establish local processing plants to capture more value in the domestic economy.
This collective dissatisfaction with the past exploitation of African resources indicates that Kagame’s call for a united negotiating front articulates a broader regional sentiment.
In that sense, his argument aligns strongly with the African Union’s Agenda 2063.
Yet translating Pan-African ideals and Agenda 2063 blueprints into a unified negotiating bloc remains a monumental challenge.
In contrast to OPEC, which coordinates a unified global oil market, Africa’s mineral wealth is divided by national borders, divergent political interests, and urgent short-term development needs.
While one nation might demand strict local value-addition rules, a cash-strapped neighbour may undermine them by offering tax holidays to secure immediate foreign capital.
Weak domestic governance, institutional fragility, and elite capture have historically meant that local populations bear the environmental destruction caused by open-pit mining while financial profits bypass local treasuries entirely.
To break this cycle, African states will need to enforce true regional integration.
Refining raw lithium or cobalt into electric-vehicle battery components requires massive capital, stable energy networks, and specialised engineering skills that single nations can rarely afford on their own.
The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) offers a legal framework, but it requires political will to build cross-border processing hubs, such as the joint DRC-Zambia battery minerals initiative, rather than fighting over the scraps of raw extraction.
Kagame’s address at the Africa CEO Forum called attention to the main challenge of Africa’s 21st-century modernisation: as passive compliance declines, achieving genuine resource sovereignty requires more than mere rhetorical declarations.
Unless Africa develops the industrial capacity to process its own resources, it will stay a focal point for global superpowers and struggle to convert its geological wealth into meaningful economic leverage.
Moving Beyond Extraction: The Way Forward
If Africa is to liberate itself from its longstanding role as a mere supplier of raw materials, the continent must urgently pivot toward processing, manufacturing, and value addition.
This is a monumental task, but the foundation is already being laid.
The vision articulated by Kagame and other leaders emphasises the important role of the African private sector, which Kagame aptly described as “hustlers,” in developing transnational corporations capable of competing globally.
Establishing domestic lithium and cobalt refineries, investing in battery precursor manufacturing, and ultimately building electric vehicles on the continent are vital steps toward economic independence.
Furthermore, attaining genuine leverage requires a united African front.
No single African nation, regardless of its mineral wealth, can withstand the concentrated economic and diplomatic pressure of the United States, China, or the European Union indefinitely.
However, if African countries can realistically develop a unified negotiating position, perhaps facilitated by frameworks like the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), they could dictate the terms of engagement.
They could insist on technology transfers, domestic processing quotas, and impartial equity stakes as uncompromisable prerequisites for access to their resources.
President Kagame’s address works as both a warning and a model as the geopolitical scramble for critical minerals is already defining the 21st century. The question is no longer whether the world needs Africa’s resources, but whether Africa will finally demand its rightful share of the wealth those resources generate.
As Kagame succinctly stated, the era of accepting the status quo must come to an end.
For the continent to secure its economic destiny, it must look inward, build its leverage, and, when faced with exploitation disguised as partnership, find the collective courage to simply say no.
