Much of the cobalt in a European electric vehicle battery, the lithium powering a Chinese storage plant, and the platinum in a hydrogen fuel cell begins its journey in Africa. The shipping lanes connecting Asia to Europe pass along African shores. ALSO READ: When the world chooses sides, where does Africa stand? Africa is also the youngest continent on earth. Roughly 70 percent of sub-Saharan Africa’s population is under 30. This is more than a demographic fact; it is a reservoir of energy, labour and imagination that could redefine global production. ALSO READ: Kagame: Africa must be ready for new world order Yet when the decisive contests of the new world order are debated — who controls technology, who profits from critical minerals, who supplies weapons, who sets the terms of debt — Africa is often treated not as a player shaping outcomes, but as the terrain on which others compete. This contradiction explains much of the continent’s persistent structural dependence. At the Munich Security Conference this month, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivered a speech framed as reassurance to Europe. But its implications reached far beyond the transatlantic alliance. His message was straightforward: those who control critical minerals, emerging technologies and the main arteries of global trade will shape the new world order. Too often, Africa is treated as if it were just observing these shifts, not shaping them. It is cast as the backdrop to competition, the terrain on which stronger nations advance their interests, rather than as a decisive actor in its own right. But this view misses a basic truth African leaders must confront. Africa should not be on the margins of this global competition. Its minerals power industries abroad. Its coastline anchors vital trade routes. Its young population will supply much of the world’s workforce. That is not the profile of a spectator. It is the profile of a central player. Africa can turn its advantages into lasting strength, or once again watch others reap the rewards of its resources and strategic location. This time, no flags will be planted, nor governors appointed but Africa risks becoming a neo-colonial chessboard – its independence shaped, and at times limited, by the ambitions of outside players. When supply chains, debt arrangements, security partnerships, and technology systems are structured from elsewhere, sovereignty narrows in practice, even if it remains intact on paper. Military arrangements increasingly intersect with geopolitical rivalries. Trade, migration, and finance are framed less as tools for shared growth than as levers in a global competition. History shows that dependence is not destiny. Nations once colonized – such as the United States, India, and Japan – faced structural legacies that could have constrained them indefinitely. They did not wait for the world to change. They invested in education, built institutions, enforced accountability, and pursued long-term strategies that converted aspiration into results. Africa can follow a similar path, but only by confronting the choices of today rather than holding the past as a shield. History matters, but it cannot be a permanent excuse. Some countries offer early signs of what is possible. Rwanda, for example, has positioned itself as a hub for digital innovation and governance reform. Kigali’s investments in technology, fintech, and even drone delivery illustrate that a small African nation can compete globally when political will, accountability, and institutional discipline converge. While Rwanda shows what is possible when vision and discipline align, it also exposes the structural challenges that any African country must navigate: reliance on foreign capital, regional security pressures, and the challenge of scaling innovation beyond borders. These lessons underscore the continent’s broader opportunity. Africa can turn its resources, people, and strategic position into real influence, but only if it confronts these obstacles collectively and decisively. Digital technology must move from consumption to creation. Security cannot be outsourced, as conflicts in DR Congo and Sudan show. Debt strategy must also be collective; negotiating alone weakens leverage, while coordinated action strengthens it. After decades of being treated as a stage for others’ ambitions, Africa faces a critical moment: will today’s leaders seize the continent’s advantages to build lasting power, or should we, like history did with our traditional chiefs who surrendered to outside powers, hold them accountable if they let others shape Africa’s future? The choices African leaders make in the new world order will determine not just the continent’s future, but the world’s. Great-power rivalries will not slow down. But if African capitals act with strategy, unity, and resolve, this century need not repeat the errors of the past. For the first time, Africa should shape the rules instead of following them. The writer is a management consultant and strategist.
