Dr. Gerard Lyons is chief economist and group head of global research, Standard Chartered Bank. The views expressed are his own.

The world is witnessing a shift in the balance of power, from the West to the East. This shift will take place over decades, and the winners will be:
- Those economies that have financial clout, such as China
- Those economies that have natural resources, whether it be energy, commodities or water, and will include countries, some in the Middle East, some across Africa, Brazil, Australia, Canada and others in temperate climates across, for instance, northern Europe
- And the third set of winners will be countries that have the ability to adapt and change. Even though we are cautious about growth prospects in the U.S. and UK in the coming years, both of these have the ability to adapt and change.

China is at the center of this shift.

The scale and pace of change in China is breathtaking. Against this backdrop of dramatic change, let me look at China’s impact on the global economy, especially in the aftermath of the financial crisis.

It is now clear that the financial crisis was a result of three key factors: an imbalanced global economy; a systematic failure of the financial system in the West; and a failure to heed the many warning signs.

The world needs to move towards a more balanced economy. But that will take years. The imbalanced nature of the world economy led some to point the finger of blame at the savers, such as China. The 1944 Bretton Woods agreement placed no obligation on savers, countries with current account surpluses. The obligation to change was put on those countries with the deficits. This has to change.

Whilst China and other savers may not be the main source of the recent problem, they are part of the solution.

To move to a balanced global economy, the West, or at least countries like the U.S., the UK and Spain, need to spend less, save more. In contrast, regions like the Middle East and Asia need to save less and spend more. It sounds easy. It is not. It requires a fundamental shift in China and in Asia’s growth model.

At the recent Asian Development Bank (ADB) meeting in Bali, the President called for Asia to rebalance its economy by: expanding the social safety net; providing assistance to small and medium-sized enterprises; and deepening bond markets.

Amongst those present, I detected more enthusiasm for the social safety net than for further financial sector innovation. One of the lessons of the 1997-98 Asian economic crises was the need to open up the financial sector at a speed best suited to domestic needs. One speed does not fit at all. Yet, it is important that if Asia is to see a shift in its growth model it needs to see a reduction in savings and this will be achieved sooner by deepening and broadening its capital markets.

This involves many changes, such as increased personal finance and allowing people to borrow against future income. It requires deep and liquid corporate bond markets, shifting the region’s culture away from equities, and giving firms alternative sources to bank lending and, in China particularly, reducing corporate savings, possibly through higher dividends.

China will play an important role in this process. It has already helped regional integration, building on the Chiang Mai Initiative, and it has engaged in a number of bilateral swap arrangements with countries around the world.

Another important global impact is the importance of China in helping world trade, investment and financial flows. Over the last decade the three words seen most regularly were “Made in China”. Over the next decade the three most common words might be “Owned by China”. China’s stock of overseas direct investment is one-thirtieth of that of the USA. The stock of foreign direct investment in China far exceeds the total amount China has invested overseas. Last year, China’s investment overseas was $50 billion. Now this is changing. Chinese firms are taking advantage of a strong renminbi and of strategic backing from Beijing to expand overseas purchases.

The impact of China on global commodities is already evident. China’s rapid growth and its strategic needs saw it accumulating increasing amounts of commodities. For instance, it accounts for about one-third of global demand for aluminum and copper, and as much as 38 per cent for zinc. In the first half of this year there has been stockpiling by China of a range of commodities. This stockpiling could be explained by many factors, including the strength of the Chinese yuan and the weakness of commodity prices. In future years one would expect this to continue. And it will not just be metals. Demand for food and soft commodities will be important. As incomes rise, food tastes will change.

Furthermore, 28 per cent of Europe’s land is arable, while this figure is 19 per cent for the U.S., but for China it is only 10 per cent. As a result, China will not only buy commodities, but it will also invest in countries producing commodities. This will reinforce the new corridors of increasing trade and investment flows between China and Africa, Latin America and the Middle East.

China’s purchase of commodities has a direct link into the inflation outlook globally. In previous years, CPI figures around the world could have been renamed China Price Indices, as China exported deflation. In the next few years, if there is an inflation issue it is likely to be through higher commodity prices, with China’s demand exerting a key influence.

China will have a big bearing on the dollar. There is a slow burning fuse under the dollar. Even if the U.S.’s economic power were to wane, it is important to stress that the U.S. is still the world’s major economy. There are no credible alternatives to the dollar. Long after the UK ceased to be the world’s major economy a century ago, sterling remained the world’s reserve currency for some time. During this crisis it was noteworthy that, despite much negative sentiment towards the dollar, in the time of trouble the depth and liquidity of U.S. financial markets helped support the dollar as a safe haven.

Furthermore, it would not be a surprise if - as a result of this crisis – more countries learned the lesson of Asian economies after their crisis, and decided to accumulate foreign exchange reserves. During this crisis those countries with high FX reserves were afforded an additional degree of protection. Of course, not all reserves need be in dollars. Even now, countries with large reserve holdings do not actively want to sell the dollar. It is not in their interests to do so. Instead of this active diversification – or outright selling of U.S. assets - there is what I call “passive diversification”, whereby a smaller but still sizeable proportion of their net new reserves are allocated to dollars.

For its reserve currency status the dollar needs to retain its status as the medium of exchange and as a store of value. Interestingly, China and Brazil recently agreed to pay each other in their own currencies, not in dollars as is the norm, whilst the pressure China has put on America regarding the dollar’s value highlights the concern some have over its future value.

China still has a huge balance of payments: its surplus reached 9.6 per cent of GDP last year. The authorities have kept the yuan stable versus the dollar, although this has meant it has appreciated on a trade weighted basis. The Chinese are also, it seems, encouraging trade settlement in Chinese yuan. Yet the reality is the Chinese yuan needs to become fully convertible for it to challenge the dollar and that is not going to happen any time soon. In the future I would expect to see more countries manage their exchange rate against the currencies of the countries with which they trade. This, plus the new trade corridors I mentioned earlier, and the likelihood of increased investment flows into emerging economies with higher growth rates, may all suggest downward pressure on the dollar. But this is likely to be a slow process.

On the global stage, China’s rise is also leading to the rise of State Capitalism. A couple of years ago we looked at this in the context of Sovereign Wealth Funds. Add in large foreign exchange reserves, government pension funds and state owned enterprises, and the role of the state has become far more important.

Finally, China’s influence on global policy forum is important. Already this crisis has seen a shift, with the G20 (Group of Twenty) taking a prominent role. The Chinese took a pro-active role ahead of the London Summit, which was welcome, and is perhaps a sign of things to come. One wonders, however, whether it is the G2 of the US and China that might emerge as the real power. Earlier this year President Obama signaled a shift from the Strategic Economic Dialogue, to the Strategic and Economic Dialogue. This extra word “and” signals perhaps a significant change.

-Arvind Ganesan is the Director of the Business and Human Rights Program at Human Rights Watch. The opinions expressed are his own.-

Equatorial Guinea is a tiny country of about half a million people on the west coast of Africa, but is the fourth-largest oil producer in sub-Saharan Africa.

Most of the investment in the country’s multi-billion dollar oil industry comes from the United States. ExxonMobil, Hess and Marathon are all there. Right now, the U.S. imports up to 100,000 barrels of oil a day from Equatorial Guinea, or about a quarter of the country’s oil production.

Oil money gives the country the means to be a model for development and human rights. The economy is nearly 130 times as big as it was when oil was discovered in 1995. But as a report released by Human Rights Watch today details, the government has squandered or stolen much of the money at the expense of its people.

It is a sad contrast, since the country has a per capita income comparable to Spain’s or Italy’s and development indicators more like Afghanistan’s. For just one sad example, infant and child mortality actually has increased — from an already-dismal 103 deaths per thousand in 1990 to 124 per thousand in 2007. Similarly, under-5 mortality rates increased from 170 per thousand in 1990 to 206 per thousand in 2007.

The president and his family are doing just fine, though. They lead lavish lifestyles while most people live in crushing poverty.

A series of corruption scandals involving government officials and their families will give you some idea of how bad it is.

In 2004, a U.S. Senate investigation into the country’s dealings with the now-defunct Riggs Bank detailed how President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo used the country’s oil wealth to finance numerous personal transactions, including spending $3.8 million to buy two mansions in a suburb of Washington, D.C. That investigation led to one of the largest fines against a bank in U.S. history, and ultimately the bank’s takeover.

Obiang’s eldest son, Teodorin, bought a $35 million property in California in 2006. In 2004, he spent about $8.45 million for mansions and luxury cars in South Africa. His only known income was a $4,000 monthly salary as a government minister. His $43.45 million in spending on his lavish lifestyle from 2004 to 2006 was more than the $43 million the government spent on education in 2005.

The people of Equatorial Guinea have no way to hold their government accountable. Obiang has been in power since 1979, when he deposed his uncle in a coup. The government severely curtails press freedom and independent civil society, and the political opposition is weak and faces constant government harassment, intimidation, and arrests. In the most recent parliamentary elections in May 2008, Obiang and his allies won 99 out of 100 seats.

The government has joined the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), an effort to make natural resources benefit everyone by setting a global standard for openness in oil, gas, and mining. However, the government has been very slow to implement the initiative’s standards. The danger is that EITI may give the government a veneer of legitimacy even while it stifles its critics and opposes real scrutiny.

Perhaps the best prospect for reform lies with the Obama administration since most of the investment in Equatorial Guinea’s oil comes the US. There are in fact things the administration can do now to break the cycle of corruption in a place like Equatorial Guinea. It should hold the government accountable for human rights and insist that it rigorously enforce anti-corruption laws. Under the Bush administration, that did not happen.

The same month in 2006 that Obiang’s son bought a $35 million Malibu mansion, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met with Obiang in Washington and called him “a good friend” at a news conference.

Unless the Obama administration makes it clear to Equatorial Guinea’s leaders that they must share the oil wealth with the country’s people , the human cost of the oil that the US imports from that country will continue to be staggering.

-- John Simon was recently U.S. Ambassador to the African Union and former Executive Vice President of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.  He is currently a Visiting Fellow at the Center for Global Development in Washington DC. The views expressed are his own. --

President Obama's trip to Ghana highlights one of Africa's leading success stories - a country that has held five consecutive democratic elections, recently transferring power peacefully to the opposition after it won a razor thin victory.

Ghana is not alone. Sub-Saharan countries made tremendous progress in the past decade. Freedom House ranks seven out of ten of Sub-Saharan countries as free or partly free. Through 2007, Africa experienced 10 years of uninterrupted economic growth, the last five at rates above 5 percent. Foreign capital inflows increased from only $7 billion in 2002 to $53 billion in 2007.

Yet continued progress is not inevitable.  If Africa is to realize its potential, the hard work Africans have exerted over the past decade to improve the continent's governance and economic policies must continue, and despite the myriad of pressing issues elsewhere, engagement by the international community in general, and the United States in particular, cannot flag.

Supporting Africa’s progress is not just about providing additional aid.  Aid is an important element for financing Africa’s development, but aid flows to Sub-Saharan Africa have nearly tripled since 2000 and will quadruple by 2010 if donor commitments made at the Gleneagles G-8 Summit are met.  More important now are efforts to help Africa increase its trade, solidify democratic norms through its own institutions, and resolve its remaining conflicts.

The United States can lead the world to provide an immediate benefit to Africa through trade.  The stalling of the Doha Development Round of trade talks is a missed opportunity that would have been worth billions of dollars for Africa.  Yet all is not lost - the United States could agree to implement those aspects of the Doha package that will benefit Africa now without waiting for a final deal with all WTO members.

This means eliminating domestic agricultural subsidies. The U.S. has held out on conceding these economically unjustifiable programs for a comprehensive deal, which would offer our farmers greater access to emerging markets like China and India.  But with deficits exceeding $1 trillion, we can no longer afford these $20 billion programs that mostly benefit fewer than 200,000 large farms at the expense of millions of poor farmers across the globe.  Acting now will counter the impact on Africa of the global financial crisis, which threatens to stop Africa’s economic progress in its tracks, and give us standing to insist the EU follow by opening up its massive market to African agricultural products.

Now is a critical time for African democracy as well.  In 2009, sixteen African countries went or will go to the polls for presidential or parliamentary elections.  The African Union (AU) intends to monitor them all.  Ensuring the AU has the resources and staff to not only validate the results on election day, but to do the pre-election assessments that encourage a level playing field will raise the standards for democracy on the continent and make likely more examples of the peaceful transfer of power most recently witnessed in Ghana.

Finally, the U.S. needs to use its voice in the United Nations to increase support for peacekeeping on the continent.  Done right, peacekeeping can lead to dramatic successes, as has been the case in Liberia and Sierra Leone.  Liberia initially had 17,000 peacekeepers for a population of 3 million people, giving the peacekeepers enough firepower to dissuade any “spoilers.” 

Compare that to the Democratic Republic of Congo, where a similar number of peacekeepers are seeking to stabilize a country of 66 million people 21 times the land area of Liberia; or Somalia, which currently only has slightly more than 4,000 peacekeepers for a country of more than 7 million. In such instances, spoilers can outgun the peacekeepers and gain prestige by attacking them. Many will argue that peacekeeping budgets are limited, which is true, but the cost of new funding for peacekeeping pales beside the cost of failing to keep the peace.

Africa has achieved much in the last ten years.  If this decade is to be a precursor of sustained development success in the future instead of a temporary hiatus from the steady decline of the past, its friends need to act now to support Africa’s leaders and institutions in establishing peace and security, raising democratic standards, and integrating the continent into the global economy.

-Michael Keating is director of the Africa Progress Panel. The opinions expressed are his own.-

After a decade of solid progress Africa is now facing the daunting task - at a time of economic crisis - of maintaining stability, economic growth and employment, addressing food security and combating climate change. No country on the continent is escaping the impact of volatile fuel and commodity prices, the drop in global demand and trade.

The global economic crisis, however, is serving as a wake-up call for both African leaders and their international partners. The Africa Progress Panel’s 2009 report, launched Wednesday in Cape Town by panel members Kofi Annan, Graca Machel and Linah Mohohlo, argues just this.

Africa is rich in potential and there is an, often overlooked, opportunity to be seized. More investment is needed in Africa’s real economy, particularly infrastructure, renewable energy, agriculture and communications. The explosion of mobile telephony and spread of financial services to the poor have shown the potential for innovative development models.

There is also an opportunity to set a low carbon growth and development agenda, investing in the Africa’s vast solar, hydro, wind, thermal and biomass resources. A continental “green growth” strategy might attract the financial and technological support of richer countries, not least as Africa can contribute solutions to the global climate change challenge. Investment in such initiatives will not only generate jobs and boost trade in Africa, but also create markets for the world.

To cope with crisis and to seize these opportunities, Africa needs determined and accountable leadership at the national level and concerted presence and negotiation capacity on the global stage. Sceptics see both in short supply and fear that crisis will unravel progress on governance and accountability.

But this does not mean that the rest of the world can walk away. Whilst the primary responsibility rests with African leaders, businesses can play a key role, as can Africa’s trading and donor partners.

Many of Africa’s problems, including financial instability and rising temperatures, have been imported. Her partners share responsibility for tackling them. They also have an interest to do so: social tension and political instability in Africa have clear international costs and consequences. One way they can offer their support is by ensuring that global deals, whether on trade, climate change, health, migration or financial regulation, take Africa’s development needs into account.

Additionally, at a time when other financial flows are faltering, more and more predictable aid can help governments meet urgent social needs and reinforce practical capacities, including to attract investment, strengthen fiscal and accountability systems, including for revenues from the extractive industries.

International organizations can catalyse public-private partnerships to fast forward infrastructure and clean energy projects that create jobs, strengthen market access and intra-regional trade. Governments can also do much more to put policies and incentives in place to encourage entrepreneurship.

While progress depends upon partnerships, shared responsibility and responsible use of revenues, the critical ingredient is leadership. A number of countries, including some emerging from conflict, have shown what is possible. But can these individual examples be replicated? The future of Africa may depend on it.

Dean Wright is Global Editor, Ethics, Innovation and News Standards. Any opinions are his own.

Kidnapping isn't funny.

Neither are extortion, hijacking or murder threats.

So why have some in the media been laughing—or at least winking—at people who have been doing precisely that—the criminals who have been hijacking ships and crews off the Horn of Africa and holding them for ransom?

I think it has something to do with what we've chosen to call them: pirates.

Perhaps we in the media have all seen too many cartoonish films with Johnny Depp portraying the charming and engaging Jack Sparrow. Or maybe we remember an earlier era when Errol Flynn played a charming and engaging Geoffrey Thorpe who fights for commerce and his country (England) and the affections of a Spanish princess.

Maybe we need a break from the mostly grim coverage of the financial crisis and evaporating savings, continuing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a tide of gun violence and unrest around the world.

The day after the crew of the Maersk Alabama kept control of their ship after the attack by pirates who later held Capt. Richard Phillips, the front-page headline in the New York Post was: “Yo, Ho, D’oh.”

A Google News search over the past month shows 414 stories with references to “ahoy,” 150 to “avast,” 76 to “walk the plank,” 61 to “Davy Jones,” and 165 to varying spellings of “arrgh.”

The White House press corps was not immune. As the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank wrote (sprinkling his piece with references to Davy Jones, walking the plank and scallywags), “ …the discussion of an American shipping captain’s successful rescue from pirates over the weekend brought the rare sensation of adventure on the high seas to the White House briefing room yesterday—and everybody seemed to enjoy the diversion.”

Maybe we do need the diversion, but this is deadly serious business and I wonder if we’re calling the Somali “pirates” something they aren’t.

At the risk of being accused of splitting hairs (oh, let’s split hairs!), dictionary definitions of “pirate” and “piracy” traditionally have much more to do with theft than kidnapping.

According to Merriam Webster online, “piracy” is defined as “1: an act of robbery on the high seas; also: an act resembling such robbery 2: robbery on the high seas 3a: the unauthorized use of another’s production, invention, or conception especially in infringement of a copyright b: the illicit accessing of broadcast signals.”

Putting aside the third definition (that’s another column), it seems that what the Somali “pirates” are doing is closer to extortion and kidnapping than robbery. They don’t want the grain in the holds of the Maersk Alabama and other famine relief ships headed to Kenya or even the vehicles on the decks of other seized ships. They don’t even want the ships. They want to exchange the ships and their cargoes for a ransom that is a very small percentage of what they are actually worth.

I know this isn’t the Council of Trent and I don’t hold out much hope of persuading my colleagues to call the “pirates” something else, like “kidnappers” or “extortionists” or “hijackers.” But I think we could turn down the “shiver me timbers” index considerably.

There are signs that the coverage of the kidnappings off the Horn of Africa are changing the ways some people think about "pirates."

In Grand Rapids, Mich., Amy Hekman, a childhood literacy coach, told the Grand Rapids Press that when she’s talking to her children about the incidents, “I’ve been conscious not to use the word ‘pirate.’ I tell them a ship was captured.”

And 10-year-old Jacob Peterson told the paper that he’s not sure he’ll want to reprise his pirate costume for Halloween, because, he said, the Somali “pirates” “seem mean.”

Thank you, Jacob.

- Jorge Maia is head of Research and Information for Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa, established in 1940 to promote economic growth and industrial development. The opinions expressed are his own -

Serious shockwaves are hitting Africa's shores as the global economic crisis unfolds.

The extent and depth of the damage is extremely difficult to assess or project, but it is clear that the pattern of financial flows associated with investment, lending and trading activity has been dramatically altered, with detrimental economic and social implications for the continent at large. The adverse impact has been gradually spreading from a regional perspective - a serious setback to Africa's recent growth performance, which had averaged 6 percent a year from 2003 to 2008.

The effects will vary widely, depending on each country's integration within the global financial system, its dependency on exports and tourism receipts, official development assistance and remittances from African citizens working overseas, among other factors.

Access to trade credit lines used to finance imports and investments is under threat due to the global credit crunch, while portfolio flows have been reversed and remain weak due to institutional deleveraging, pessimistic investor sentiment or extreme risk aversion.

Foreign direct investment flows are also expected to contract, although the rather long lead-time of typical projects could imply that some of the capital may have already been committed. The African banking sector is feeling the freeze in interbank lending worldwide from a funding standpoint, and may come under substantial pressure through its customer base should the economic slowdown intensify on the home front.

Where capital is still available, its cost is likely to have risen substantially, with implications for the viability of projects and for the debt repayment obligations of African countries. Such adverse trends are not only impacting negatively on capital inflows and national balances of payments, but also are resulting in greater volatility in foreign exchange markets.

The productive sectors of Africa's economies are being progressively affected by a fast deteriorating global environment as demand weakens, unfavourable terms of trade develop, corporate earnings decline, investment activity slows down and jobs are shed. As elsewhere in the globe, this has led to continuous downward revisions in economic growth projections. For instance, the latest IMF forecast of 3.4 percent growth for the African continent in 2009 is now considered optimistic by the IMF's own leadership.

The African economies that will contain the adversity are likely to be those that remain highly vigilant in managing the downside potential, those that are in a position to adopt counter-cyclical measures and that make an effort to seek new opportunities and competitive gains. However, liquidity or fiscal constraints are likely to prevent the majority of African countries from adopting economic stimulus packages. In order to preserve productive capacity, it is absolutely essential that a concerted effort be made to sustain private sector access to credit, including development funding.

Major crises bring to the fore not only comparative weaknesses but also comparative strengths. Thus, economies that manage downturns more successfully are those that exploit their comparative strengths instead of focusing on their weaknesses. The African continent is richly endowed with commodities and other resources, including an enormous, yet largely unexploited agricultural potential. Forecasts for most commodity prices point, at best, towards a very modest recovery in 2009. However, considering the demand and supply forces at play in the medium- to long-term, commodity prices should resume an upward trend. This will be underpinned by the roll-out of massive stimulus packages focusing on infrastructure investment throughout the globe, by the eventual recovery of the world's economies and by the resumption of growth in income levels, particularly in emerging regions. After all, the long-term demand for commodities from the fast-growing and very large emerging economies such as China and India has certainly not evaporated.

As credit starts flowing again through the global financial system, several emerging economies are likely to exhibit signs of recovery first, including China, India and Brazil. This should support a recovery in commodity markets and renewed investor interest in Africa for its resource wealth. The challenge remains for African countries to make the most of a future recovery, tirelessly encouraging the beneficiation of their resources instead of continuing to export value-adding opportunities, missing out on massive export earnings potential.

The impact of ongoing international efforts to thaw global credit markets and stimulate economic activity worldwide will, however, take time to bear results. In the meantime, competitive forces scrambling for a diminished global pie will pose unprecedented threats to African enterprises. Such challenges may include aggressive market penetration efforts and even protectionist measures on the part of foreign businesses and governments. African enterprises will have to adopt tough, well-formulated strategic decisions, as their present strategies may not hold them in good stead under rapidly deteriorating market conditions. They should be seriously vigilant, managing downside potential, adopting counter-cyclical measures, including appropriate cost-cutting measures and efficiency improvements, while constantly seeking opportunities for the development of new/niche markets.

African countries that remain committed to sound economic management will tend to restore investor confidence faster and mitigate the impact of the downturn more successfully. The momentum exhibited in improving the investment environment in numerous African countries must be maintained, so as to grow vibrant and competitive business sectors that will create employment and sustain broad-based economic growth. All feasible forms of support should be provided to the private sector at large, so as to sustain its growth potential and developmental impact. This should include strong and concerted governmental opposition to protectionist tendencies emerging globally, and insistence on greater participation in international governance.

On the business front, African enterprises that remain sharply focused on competitiveness improvements should be relatively successful in domestic and/or global markets, stand a better chance of surviving the crisis and should prosper in the long-run.

– Ray Chambers is a philanthropist and humanitarian who has directed most of his efforts towards children. In 2008, the U.N. Secretary-General appointed him as his first Special Envoy for Malaria. The views expressed are his own. –

Malaria infects one quarter of a billion people each year. Nearly one million of those afflicted die, taxing overburdened health infrastructures and decreasing productivity in Africa, where 90 percent of cases occur.

In some countries on the continent, 60 percent of all outpatient visits are malaria related, with one quarter of worker absenteeism due to the disease. Taking all lost time and productivity into consideration, malaria costs Africa more than $30 billion annually.

The mosquito carrying the deadly malaria parasite makes no distinction when choosing its victim. Young or old, male or female, everyone in endemic regions remains at risk; however, International Women’s Day on March 8th prompts us to examine independently the immense burden women shoulder as a result of malaria.

The disease strikes infants, children under five and pregnant women in astonishing disproportion, as these segments of the population account for 90 percent of malaria deaths. Given the dual role of women as both victim and primary protector of victims, malaria clearly belongs under the umbrella of traditional women’s health issues.

It deserves particular recognition as a priority in maternal health, which the World Health Organization defines as pregnancy, childbirth and the six-week postpartum period.

Unfortunately, the early stages of motherhood in Africa can entail suffering, ill-health and even death, as one-in-five African newborns will not live to his or her fifth birthday.

Mothers confront an endless series of menaces, from malnutrition to dehydration, but almost nothing poses a greater threat to the well-being of their children than malaria, which claims three times as many young lives as HIV/AIDS.

Even those children who survive the disease often face lifelong challenges, as the disease robs their brain and body of nutrients at an early age. In turn, over 12 percent of children who do survive suffer long-term cognitive deficiencies.

Malaria raises additional implications with respect to maternal health. Pregnancy in Africa carries an inherent risk for mothers, too frequently resulting in maternal fatality.

When a pregnant woman contracts malaria, this risk becomes significantly greater. Moreover, pregnant women who have malaria also have a higher risk of delivering low-birth-weight babies, a major cause of infant mortality.

While the effects and consequences of malaria appear incredibly dispiriting, reason for hope exists, for we know that we can prevent deaths from malaria among women and children through the application of proven interventions, especially by having them sleep under a long-lasting insecticide-treated mosquito net (LLIN).

Equally as important as this knowledge, we also have harnessed the collective global will and resources to turn the tide against malaria.

In 2008, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon issued a bold call to action to provide all endemic countries essential malaria control interventions by the end of December 2010, a call that rallied a broad coalition of funding and implementation partners, who have pledged over $3 billion in malaria funding.

At this moment, we can point to definite indicators of progress toward our overall goal of universal provision, with data revealing that LLINs now have been distributed to more than 40 percent of the population in endemic African nations, compared to less than 10 percent in 2005.

Over 140 million LLINs have been distributed over the past three years, offering protection to nearly 300 million people.

At the highest levels, women have led us to this unique moment in history. Dr. Awa Marie Coll-Seck, Executive Director of the Roll Back Malaria Partnership, Margaret Chan, Director-General of the World Health Organization, and Ann Veneman, Executive Director of UNICEF, represent only a few of the women who have had a most profound influence in mobilising support.

Concurrently, women have been galvanizing around malaria at a grassroots level, with advocates such as the mother of African soccer star Michael Essien leading malaria eradication programs.

While these and other women have guided us to a point filled with such promise, we hold no hope of reaching our target without the full engagement of women everywhere.

As evidenced with other issues, the unified commitment of women to a cause historically has yielded dramatic results. The collective contributions of women to the malaria effort will prove absolutely essential, especially as we work to increase LLIN utilisation throughout Sub-Saharan Africa in the next 22 months.

On this International Women’s Health Day, the malaria community sits poised to complete an undertaking previously viewed as impossible and, in the process, alleviate the unique and terrible sorrow the disease imposes on women. And it is women on whom the success of this mission so dearly depends.

The reception would have done justice to royalty or a movie star when Nigerian novelist Chinua Achebe paid a rare visit to his homeland recently, some 50 years after penning his book “Things Fall Apart”.

That book has a firm place on school syllabuses in much of Africa and is studied around the world. Achebe, now 79, has been acclaimed as the father of modern African literature and as the continent’s greatest living writer – his books being very accessible as well as giving a penetrating insight into the struggles of his people.

Achebe’s Igbo community in southeastern Nigeria wanted to mark his homecoming in style and Reuters Television’s Africa Journal programme was there to follow it.

Achebe delighted people with readings from his classic novel, which has sold more than 10 million copies and tells the story of Okonkwo, who finds himself and his traditions pitted against newly arrived British colonialists in the 19th century.

“Knowing that Chinua Achebe with his talent unsurpassed, in the literary world as far as I am concerned, certainly in Nigeria, unsurpassed certainly in Africa, knowing that he comes from my neck of the woods is actually an inspiration to me,” said musician Onyeka Owenu.

The region has a reputation for producing internationally acclaimed writers, including Ben Okri and more recently Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, author of the prize winning novel Half of a Yellow Sun.

Whether or not their success is also part of Achebe’s legacy, he hopes that he will continue to inspire more African writers to bring their stories from the continent.

But it can sometimes seem as though African writers find it easier to win recognition outside their countries than they do at home. Perhaps that should be no surprise given the state of the publishing industry in a continent where books are a luxury that can be afforded only by a minority - and where literacy rates are in some countries below 50 percent.

Those with the ambition and talent to become authors are in a tiny minority in any part of the world, but should we be doing more in Africa to encourage such aspirations and to pay more respect to our great writers?

Earlier this month, Zambian economist Dambisa Moyo argued that Africa needs Western countries to cut long term aid that has brought dependency, distorted economies and fuelled bureaucracy and corruption. The comments on the blog posting suggested that many readers agreed. In a response, Savio Carvalho, Uganda country director for aid agency Oxfam GB, says that aid can help the continent escape poverty - if done in the right way:

In early January, I travelled to war-ravaged northern Uganda to a dusty village in Pobura and Kal parish in Kitgum District. We were there to see the completion of a 16km dirt road constructed by the community with support from Oxfam under an EU-funded programme.

The road is bringing benefits in the form of access to markets, education and health care. Some parents say their daughters feel safer walking to school on the road instead of through the bushes. Many families have used the wages earned from construction work to pay for school fees and medical treatment. This is the impact of aid.

Having lived and worked in east Africa, I have witnessed the positive effects of aid. But done badly, it can be very limiting and even has the potential to create more harm. To avoid this, it must be provided within an enabling environment in which it is used as a catalyst for change and not as an end in itself. Governments must show leadership through an accountable system.

For individuals, access to resources – including aid - is like an investment. Aid can build up poor people’s assets, support good governance and enhance skills and capacities to bring about transformation. But it can become a bane when it makes communities dependent, lazy and hopeless. Governments, aid agencies and the United Nations need to ensure the delivery of aid is well planned and coordinated, leading to higher self-reliance among poor communities.

Aid is also beneficial when trade is fair. There are several examples in Africa, like the case of coffee farmers in Uganda, where aid has been used effectively to improve the overall quality of the coffee seeds, thereby giving farmers better prices for their produce. When they have access to markets at home and abroad, they generate income which is ploughed back into increased output, better access to health and education, and overall improvement in the quality of their lives. To make this happen, developed countries need to stop procrastinating and put in place fair trade practices.

Aid works well if governments are accountable – in other words, when they are responsible and encourage active citizenship. On this continent, civil society is still weak and needs to be nourished. But stopping aid will not resolve frustrations about poor governance, which is partly a result of weak public scrutiny. Aid should be used to help fight corruption and promote accountability through active input from ordinary people.

As I have argued here, receiving aid is not just an act of charity. It should be understood as the right of poor communities to a life of dignity. As stated in international conventions, people have a right to good health, food, water and education. We all need to ensure the planet’s resources are equitably distributed. As Mahatma Gandhi said, you must be the change you want to see in the world.

So what do you think? Which argument is most convincing?

By Daniela Kroslak, Deputy Africa Program Director, and Andrew Stroehlein, Communications Director, of the International Crisis Group, Any views expressed are their own.

Pirates, Islamists, refugees, anarchy, civil war -- not much good news has come out of Somalia in the last couple of decades. With warlord replacing warlord over the years and transitional governments constantly hovering between extremely weak and non-existent on the ground, the temptation will be to view this week's election of a new Somali president with an eye-rolling, "so what?"

Yet there is a chance, albeit a slim one, that this moment will mark the start of some small progress for the shattered country. That is, if the international community plays the next few months very carefully and does not let ideology trump pragmatism.

The first reason to feel any hint of optimism is that Ethiopian troops, who invaded Somalia in December 2006, are now leaving. Ethiopia's occupation was an unprecedented disaster. The last two years have been among the worst since Somalia descended into anarchy in 1991, with huge displacement of civilians, a massive humanitarian crisis and grave violations of human rights.

The Ethiopian military campaign, combined with US bombings of suspected militant hide-outs, also set in motion a chain of events that in mid-2008 culminated in the recapture of much of the country's south by the hard-line Islamist insurgent group, Al-Shabaab. They used the Ethiopian presence to rally support from and recruit amongst those marginalised by the transitional government, and they radicalised the Islamist movement.

The way Sheik Sharif Sheik Ahmed was elected president of Somalia -- a title representing more hope than actual authority over the fractured country -- inspires little confidence in itself. A reformulated Somali parliament in exile, part of UN-sponsored reconciliation efforts known as the "Djibouti process" after the city where it resides, chose him from a list of 14 other bickering leaders, and the vote only happened because of external pressure from the UN, AU, EU and US. These Somali actors have generally been living in a "Djibouti bubble", out of touch with what is unfolding back home and enjoying little credibility among Somalis.

Still, the situation on the ground hands Sheik Sharif a few good cards to play. As a moderate Islamist himself and former chairman of the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC), an alliance that ruled southern Somalia for six months in 2006, he could be well placed to win over other Islamist elements outside the process and undercut support for the extremists of Al-Shabaab.

Sheik Sharif's installation is significant as he is the first Islamist leader to become head of state with Western support in the Horn of Africa, hopefully reflecting a pragmatic shift in Western attitudes towards political Islam and efforts to contain militant jihadism. But Sheikh Sharif is in danger of being outflanked by the radicals in his camp. He will have to strike a difficult balance between Ethiopia's tight embrace and a still hostile opposition, and he will have to weight carefully Somalia's complex regional interests and clan loyalties.

If Sheik Sharif had clear and substantial backing from the international community in these efforts, including renewed Saudi support to engage with Al-Shabaab, it would make success more likely. In practical terms, this would mean politically and financially supporting a number of steps and encouraging the UN Special Representative, Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, to facilitate them.

First and foremost, Sheik Sharif and the international community have to make use of all intermediaries and back channels to reach out to the insurgent groups currently outside the Djibouti process, including Al-Shabaab, as well as the Asmara-based leaders of the Alliance for the Re-liberation of Somalia. They must be prepared to draw in to the negotiations members of groups which have control on the ground, even if their current leadership refuses.

The point is to get as many more radical groups and individual leaders on board for the negotiation of a comprehensive ceasefire as a step towards expanded Djibouti talks. Once a credible ceasefire agreement has been reached, each faction should be left to administer its respective territory temporarily and be invited to participate in talks intended to lead to the restoration of a legitimate government. The parties could then establish smaller sub-groups to negotiate issues such as: drafting a new constitution; integrating all armed forces into a common army and police force; planning for a national referendum on the new constitution; and establishing transitional justice processes to address the needs of national reconciliation.

If participants in the Djibouti process encourage influential clan leaders, business community leaders, clerics and civil society to create momentum and grassroots support for that process, its prospects for success will be improved.

The biggest obstacle to peace in Somalia this time may in fact not be Somalis' infamously fractious politics but the reluctance of the international community to engage with the Islamist opposition. However, if there is going to be a lasting settlement that returns even a semblance of stability to the country, Islamists cannot be excluded.

If they are kept out of the process, the extremist Islamists will maintain the upper hand and, quite simply, there will be no process. In that case, peace would, yet again, remain a distant illusion for Somalia's suffering population.