During a panel discussion on the relationship between geopolitics, political space, and development, several experts analyzed the changes in the international system and their implications for developing economies. According to Alexia Latortue, head of the secretariat of the Future of development cooperation coalition, the world is going through a crucial moment. This period is, in her opinion, “difficult”, marked by frustrations and sometimes even despair, but it also presents an opportunity to rethink development models.
She emphasizes that economic growth remains a central factor for progress: “what matters for any country that wants to progress is economic growth.” This is essential to create opportunities, improve living conditions, and address global challenges, especially environmental ones. However, Latortue stresses the need for high-quality growth capable of generating deep and lasting structural transformations.
Former president of the Open Society Foundations, Mark Malloch-Brown, offers a broader analysis of current geopolitical transformations. According to him, the world is going through a period of deep fragmentation of the international system. To illustrate this situation, he refers to the fable of “the elephant and the blind men,” where each observer perceives only a part of reality without understanding the whole.
This metaphor, he believes, reflects the complexity of the current global order, characterized by the emergence of new powers and the redefinition of the roles of traditional actors. Malloch-Brown also points out that the multilateral institutions created after World War II struggle to adapt to the transformations of the twenty-first century.
Power balances have shifted, but the governance of international institutions does not always reflect these changes. This situation contributes to weakening the effectiveness of the multilateral system and exacerbating tensions between different regions of the world.
Financial development in crisis
One of the most worrying aspects of this transformation concerns the future of development financing. Official development assistance, which has long been a central instrument of international cooperation, is currently experiencing a significant decline. While some attribute this evolution to recent political decisions, Malloch-Brown believes it results from a more structural tendency. Indeed, aid budgets are increasingly contested in donor countries and often become variables for budget constraints or strategic priorities.
This evolution also highlights the limitations of the traditional model of international aid. In many Southern countries, aid is perceived as fragmented, invisible, and often guided by donors’ priorities rather than those of the beneficiary countries.
To address these criticisms, Malloch-Brown believes that a profound reform of the system is necessary. Countries should be placed at the center of development strategies, while international financing should support their national priorities rather than impose them.
In this context of transforming international financing, the private sector should play an increasingly important role. Private investments could contribute to financing infrastructure, energy transition, or technological innovations.
However, Malloch-Brown warns against the risks of geopolitical instrumentalization of investments. In some cases, international financing could be conditioned by strategic interests, particularly access to natural resources. Such a scenario would recall certain practices of past decades when international aid was closely linked to the national interests of donor countries.
Africa faces the mutations of the global order
Adeyemi Dipeolu, former special advisor for economic affairs to the vice president of Nigeria, provides an African perspective to this debate. According to him, the liberal international order established after 1945 has contributed to significant progress in many areas, including poverty reduction, improvement of health systems, and expansion of education.
However, this order is currently undergoing profound transformation. Dipeolu observes a rise in trade tensions, an increased use of economic sanctions, and a progressive weakening of multilateral institutions. Globalization, which has long favored economic integration, is gradually being replaced by a form of strategic rivalry in which economic interdependencies are used as instruments of power.
Facing these challenges, Dipeolu believes that the priority for African countries is the structural transformation of their economies. This should create jobs, increase the value-added of natural resources, and sustainably improve people’s living standards. Industrial policies, technological innovation, and economic diversification play a central role in this strategy.
He emphasizes that there is no universal development model. Historical experiences show that each country must adapt its economic policies to its own realities. As economist Robert Solow summarized, “a list of ingredients does not make a dish,” reminding us that development policies cannot be mechanically applied from one context to another.
To succeed in this transformation, the capacity of the state plays a determining role. Governments must be able to coordinate public policies, support productive investment, and maintain a long-term strategic vision. Dipeolu also emphasizes the need to build national coalitions in favor of development, bringing together the public sector, the private sector, and civil society.
In a world marked by uncertainty and rapid transformations, Southern countries must strengthen their capacity to define their own development trajectories. If the international order is going through a transition phase, this period could also offer an opportunity to rethink economic models and build more inclusive and sustainable growth strategies.
