The developments surrounding Rwanda’s impending removal from the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) should give Namibia and, indeed, the rest of Africa reason to reflect on how we approach international trade, economic sovereignty and our dependence on external markets.
A recent report by CGTN Africa, highlighting how Rwandan traders are turning increasingly towards African markets amid the looming suspension of their country’s AGOA benefits, offers an important lesson. When access to a major international market becomes uncertain, countries must find alternatives, adapt and, above all, build economic resilience.
The United States announced on 2 November 2026 its intention to terminate Rwanda and South Africa’s participation in AGOA from 1 January 2027. Washington cited concerns relating to trade barriers, human rights, governance and national security. Whatever one’s interpretation of the political circumstances, the economic implications are worth examining.
For Rwanda, this is a reminder that preferential access to foreign markets is never guaranteed. It is subject to the political, diplomatic and economic interests of the countries providing it.
Namibia should take note.
We are a small, open economy with considerable natural resources, a relatively small domestic market and a strong dependence on international trade. Our exports include uranium, diamonds, gold, fish, beef and agricultural products. While these sectors generate important foreign exchange and employment, our dependence on a relatively narrow range of commodities leaves us vulnerable to international price movements, changing regulations and geopolitical developments.
The question is not whether Namibia should trade with the United States, Europe, China or any other major economy. We absolutely should. The question is whether we are doing enough to ensure that our economic future does not depend disproportionately on decisions made elsewhere.
There are at least three lessons we should draw from Rwanda’s experience.
First, diversification must move from policy documents to commercial reality.
Namibia has made commitments towards the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), and its first export consignment to Nigeria under the agreement in June 2025 was an encouraging milestone. But signing agreements and attending trade conferences will not, by themselves, create prosperous businesses.
We need Namibian companies that can manufacture, process, package and export competitively into African markets. We need to identify products and services that can be supplied to Angola, Zambia, Botswana, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana and Nigeria, among others.
Africa cannot continue to complain about external economic dependence while failing to take advantage of the enormous market on its own doorstep.
Second, value addition must become an economic priority.
It makes little sense for a resource-rich country to remain primarily an exporter of raw materials while importing finished products manufactured from those same resources.
Our uranium, diamonds, fish, beef, agricultural products and emerging critical minerals present opportunities beyond extraction. We must deliberately create an environment in which local entrepreneurs can participate in processing, manufacturing, logistics, technology and related industries.
This requires reliable infrastructure, affordable finance, skills development, predictable policies and a government that understands that private-sector investment is not an inconvenience but a prerequisite for economic growth.
Third, Namibia must learn to distinguish between market access and economic independence.
International trade agreements are valuable, but they should complement rather than define our economic ambitions. We must maintain constructive relationships with traditional trading partners while building stronger commercial relationships across Africa and beyond.
Our geographical position, the Port of Walvis Bay and our transport corridors offer opportunities to become a serious regional logistics and distribution hub. However, infrastructure must translate into actual commercial activity, local enterprise development and employment.
Government has an important role to play, but so does the private sector. Namibian entrepreneurs cannot simply wait for government to create opportunities. We must become more outward-looking, invest in innovation, explore new markets, form partnerships and develop products that can compete beyond our borders.
Equally, government must make it easier to do business. Bureaucracy, inconsistent regulations, slow decision-making and expensive financing can undermine even the most promising investment opportunities.
Rwanda’s response, as reflected in the CGTN report, should remind us that economic resilience is built before a crisis, not after one.
Namibia has resources, political stability, a strategic location and access to established regional and international trade arrangements. What we need now is greater urgency in converting these advantages into productive economic activity.
Ultimately, the lesson is simple: we should never build an economy on the assumption that another country will always keep its markets open to us.
Namibia must trade with the world, but it must also learn to produce for the world. Our economic future should be determined increasingly by what we create, manufacture and export, rather than by the goodwill or changing political priorities of those who buy from us.
