MKASIMDALAMW (@AndyMdalaMLW) header
MKASIMDALAMW (@AndyMdalaMLW) profile picture

Corporate and Technology Lawyer/Solicitor and industrialist. From Blantyre, Malawi

Blantyre, Malawi
Joined April 2026
Photo by MKASIMDALAMW (@AndyMdalaMLW)Photo by MKASIMDALAMW (@AndyMdalaMLW)
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
For EU-South Africa trade relations, it’s Business As Usual: Balanced, Reciprocal, Growing, Reliable. You’re welcome. 🇪🇺🫱🏻‍🫲🏾🇿🇦 @the_dtic @DIRCO_ZA @EUinSA @CCordeiro_EU @SADC_News
152
1,073
92
3,624
86,631
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
South Africa and Rwanda have lost their eligibility to the African Growth and Opportunity Act, a preferential US trade agreement that Pretoria had lobbied hard to retain. bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
56
87
27
264
81,310
SOUTH AFRICA’S GRADUATION OUT OF AGOA DOESN’T MEAN WE WON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE U.S. MARKET. WE WILL HAVE ACCESS, BUT WITH SLIGHTLY HIGHER TARIFFS. While we are now in a different political climate, I think it’s important to remember that aside from the issues the U.S. raised about South Africa’s eligibility to be part of AGOA, there have been some conversations for some time. For example, back in 2014, the focus, amongst other things, was on the reality that South Africa is an upper-middle-income country and should have graduated from AGOA to a full bilateral trade agreement with the U.S. Of course, we had our own complications, both because of the Southern African Customs Union (SACU), which we can’t sign bilateral trade agreements without, and because we lobbied to keep benefiting from this unilateral approach (AGOA). Looking back, if we had found a way to graduate out of AGOA, as we were pressured to do then, and started conversations about a trade agreement, we would be in a different climate than what we are seeing now. Of course, this doesn’t mean countries with trade agreements are spared from drastic changes in U.S. trade policy; we see those changes affecting countries like Canada. Beyond South Africa graduating out of AGOA, I think there is also confusion about the implications. Others frame it as a complete ban from the U.S. market, which is not the case. Simply put, as South Africa transitions out of AGOA, the country would face an additional Most Favoured Nation tariff of around 3.4% on top of the existing tariffs the current U.S. Administration added to various countries. Currently, some South African products enter the U.S. market at 12.5% tariffs (Liberation Day tariff). Without AGOA, these tariffs would rise to 15.9%, slightly reducing the competitiveness of some South African products in the U.S. market. Still, one could argue that while this would be a challenging path, it would not necessarily be as catastrophic as we have faced in the past, when we faced much higher U.S. tariffs and still managed to compete. Consider South Africa’s agriculture: in 2025, the South African farming sector faced tariffs of around 30%. Still, agricultural exports to the U.S. were strong. South Africa’s agricultural exports to the U.S. in 2025 totalled US$504 million, down 3% from the previous year. During the higher “Liberation Day Tariffs”, some South African agricultural exporters took advantage of the 90-day pause in the second quarter of 2025 and exported more volume than usual. After this pause, exports cooled in the third and fourth quarters of 2025. Notably, South Africa’s agricultural exports to the U.S. fell 11% in the third quarter of 2025, compared with the same period in 2024, to US$144 million. In the last quarter, South Africa’s agricultural exports to the U.S. fell sharply by 39% to US$81 million. Still, the overall annual exports were encouraging. Even this year, South Africa’s agricultural exports to the U.S. were strong. For example, South Africa's agricultural exports to the U.S. increased by 56% from the first quarter of 2026 to the second quarter of 2026, to US$123 million. The decline in U.S. tariffs, from 30% to 12.5%, among other factors, has been the major contributor to the increase in South Africa’s agricultural exports to the U.S. The U.S. remains an important market for South African agriculture, accounting for about 4% of our agricultural exports. Main exports include citrus, berries, grapes, raisins, wine, fruit juices, apples, pears, apricots, and nuts. Again, South Africa's graduation from AGOA must be viewed in context and may not mean a catastrophe. This is not to understate the impact some industries may feel as the increase in tariffs slightly reduces their competitiveness. Still, we must manage the sentiment and narrative around this issue well. Above all, this yet again reminds us of the need to work hard to diversify South Africa’s export markets to growing regions such as Asia and the Middle East. But export diversification must be framed correctly; it is not a replacement for the U.S., EU, UK, Africa, and other markets. These remain key, and we must work to retain our access to them. --Wandile
103
733
66
1,278
116,561
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
The US has ejected South Africa and Rwanda from the AGOA trade deal. Useful perspective and factual analysis from one of South Africa's top analysts:
SOUTH AFRICA’S GRADUATION OUT OF AGOA DOESN’T MEAN WE WON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE U.S. MARKET. WE WILL HAVE ACCESS, BUT WITH SLIGHTLY HIGHER TARIFFS. While we are now in a different political climate, I think it’s important to remember that aside from the issues the U.S. raised about South Africa’s eligibility to be part of AGOA, there have been some conversations for some time. For example, back in 2014, the focus, amongst other things, was on the reality that South Africa is an upper-middle-income country and should have graduated from AGOA to a full bilateral trade agreement with the U.S. Of course, we had our own complications, both because of the Southern African Customs Union (SACU), which we can’t sign bilateral trade agreements without, and because we lobbied to keep benefiting from this unilateral approach (AGOA). Looking back, if we had found a way to graduate out of AGOA, as we were pressured to do then, and started conversations about a trade agreement, we would be in a different climate than what we are seeing now. Of course, this doesn’t mean countries with trade agreements are spared from drastic changes in U.S. trade policy; we see those changes affecting countries like Canada. Beyond South Africa graduating out of AGOA, I think there is also confusion about the implications. Others frame it as a complete ban from the U.S. market, which is not the case. Simply put, as South Africa transitions out of AGOA, the country would face an additional Most Favoured Nation tariff of around 3.4% on top of the existing tariffs the current U.S. Administration added to various countries. Currently, some South African products enter the U.S. market at 12.5% tariffs (Liberation Day tariff). Without AGOA, these tariffs would rise to 15.9%, slightly reducing the competitiveness of some South African products in the U.S. market. Still, one could argue that while this would be a challenging path, it would not necessarily be as catastrophic as we have faced in the past, when we faced much higher U.S. tariffs and still managed to compete. Consider South Africa’s agriculture: in 2025, the South African farming sector faced tariffs of around 30%. Still, agricultural exports to the U.S. were strong. South Africa’s agricultural exports to the U.S. in 2025 totalled US$504 million, down 3% from the previous year. During the higher “Liberation Day Tariffs”, some South African agricultural exporters took advantage of the 90-day pause in the second quarter of 2025 and exported more volume than usual. After this pause, exports cooled in the third and fourth quarters of 2025. Notably, South Africa’s agricultural exports to the U.S. fell 11% in the third quarter of 2025, compared with the same period in 2024, to US$144 million. In the last quarter, South Africa’s agricultural exports to the U.S. fell sharply by 39% to US$81 million. Still, the overall annual exports were encouraging. Even this year, South Africa’s agricultural exports to the U.S. were strong. For example, South Africa's agricultural exports to the U.S. increased by 56% from the first quarter of 2026 to the second quarter of 2026, to US$123 million. The decline in U.S. tariffs, from 30% to 12.5%, among other factors, has been the major contributor to the increase in South Africa’s agricultural exports to the U.S. The U.S. remains an important market for South African agriculture, accounting for about 4% of our agricultural exports. Main exports include citrus, berries, grapes, raisins, wine, fruit juices, apples, pears, apricots, and nuts. Again, South Africa's graduation from AGOA must be viewed in context and may not mean a catastrophe. This is not to understate the impact some industries may feel as the increase in tariffs slightly reduces their competitiveness. Still, we must manage the sentiment and narrative around this issue well. Above all, this yet again reminds us of the need to work hard to diversify South Africa’s export markets to growing regions such as Asia and the Middle East. But export diversification must be framed correctly; it is not a replacement for the U.S., EU, UK, Africa, and other markets. These remain key, and we must work to retain our access to them. --Wandile
4
20
1
55
8,762
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
Under pressure from Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Trump administration may be within days of launching a nuclear strike on Iran. The target would be Pickax Mountain in central Iran, where Israeli intelligence claims the Iranian government has restarted its nuclear enrichment program. No conventional weapon in the American arsenal can penetrate 300 feet of solid granite to destroy the tunnels where enrichment is supposedly taking place. The only military option is a nuclear strike. Netanyahu has been pushing hard for one. “Bibi calls Trump about it every day,” says an informed observer. Netanyahu is cornered and desperate. After last week’s election results, he can’t form a government unless Trump intervenes directly in Israeli politics and brokers a deal with other parties that gives Netanyahu 61 seats in the Knesset. Otherwise, he is out as prime minister and on his way to ignominy, investigations and possibly jail. Netanyahu must stay close to Trump. He needs this war. To that end, he’s applied maximum pressure to his closest allies in the administration, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and CENTCOM commander Brad Cooper. Both oppose a negotiated settlement to the war they’ve so grievously mismanaged; both are pushing to restart major combat operations. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and CIA director John Ratcliffe are also following Netanyahu’s lead, as are leaders of the Democratic Party. In a recent meeting on the subject, former president Barack Obama said he opposes the current Iran peace deal being drafted in Doha. The rest of America’s longtime allies in the Middle East are terrified by the prospect of more war. On September 27th, Netanyahu flew secretly to Abu Dhabi to enlist the UAE in his lobbying effort for a final attack on Iran. The Emiratis refused. After eight months of conflict, Gulf economies are teetering. So are global energy and fertilizer markets. They won’t recover soon. Globally, there are a total of about 850 supertankers used to transport oil from producers to the rest of the world. In October alone, 11 of them were badly damaged in Hormuz. At this pace, a global depression is imminent. A nuclear strike would radically accelerate the destruction. Fallout from a ground explosion at Pickax Mountain would contaminate the Persian Gulf, poisoning the water supply for 100 million people. And those are just some of the immediate consequences for the region. The rest of the world is every bit as exposed. No country other than the United States has ever used a nuclear weapon in war. Some would like to. An American nuclear attack on Iran would set a new precedent. The Russians have already told at least two other governments that an American nuclear strike on Iran would free them to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine. Pakistan and India would be tempted to do the same against each other, as would North Korea against Seoul. After the first nuclear strike, World War Three is inevitable. That war would be short and final. We’ve been sleepwalking toward this moment for months. Since February, the administration has quietly rewritten America’s nuclear doctrine to make first use of so-called “battlefield nukes” easier and therefore more likely. No one in Washington in either party seems bothered by this. Now we’re on the brink of it. Close observers say Trump is likely to decide by next weekend whether or not to use nuclear weapons. That would be November 7, six days from now. To his credit, he’s hesitating. At the moment, Trump is listening to his vice president, JD Vance, and to his envoy and friend Steve Witkoff, both of whom argue a deal with Iran can be made. They’re right, though it won’t be simple. The Iranians are famously frustrating to negotiate with under any circumstances, and elements of that government have become more radical since Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his family were killed in February. After decades of isolation, even relatively moderate Iranian leaders seem confused by how decisions are made in the West. (There is a widespread belief in Tehran, for example, that the United States government controls Israel.) But overall, people who have spoken to decision-makers in Iran say there is consensus there that more war is bad for everyone and a deal is worth making. One group that hasn’t been consulted so far is the global population — the hundreds of millions of people who will be killed along with their children if Trump is pushed by Netanyahu into launching a nuclear strike next week. Now would be the time for them to speak up.
28,897
74,949
25,815
395,771
92,082,192
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
India saw about 496 million people lifted out of poverty between 2011 and 2023 in one of the world’s fastest declines in this metric, the World Bank said, although the gains remain uneven. bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
409
1,997
662
10,458
2,991,143
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
We’ve raised $1.3M from YC & Afore Capital so you never have to type or speak again. Typing is slow. Talking into your computer is awkward. Subvocal fixes both Our glasses give you the speed of speech without you making a sound or touching a keyboard. It tracks your internal speech muscles with non-contact sensing and decodes silent, almost invisible mouthing into text at more than 200 words/min. Pre-orders are now live at: subvocal.co/preorder?utm_sou…
2,375
2,830
2,709
26,321
12,053,593
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
JUST IN: U.S. sanctions Rwanda's defense ministry, accusing it of deploying thousands of troops & supplying weapons to rebels in eastern Congo, despite a U.S.-brokered peace agreement.
18
57
3
456
60,163
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
Sanctioning Rwanda is an important step toward ending Kagame's brutal invasion of Congo. Europe's inaction on this subject risks damaging its already limited credibility on the world stage.
Today, the United States makes good on President Trump’s promise to hold Rwanda accountable for its commitments under the Washington Accords for Peace and Prosperity. Rwanda must halt its support for M23 and withdraw its troops from eastern DRC.
854
716
258
2,641
478,696
Back in 2025, as sanctions mounted, Kagame told Rwandans to "funga mkanda," to tighten their belts. This May, he admitted the US sanctions "hurt, absolutely." His regime knows who pays. In the short term, the pain starts at the edges: foreign banks backing away, international transfers getting harder, and military purchases becoming slower and more expensive. Over time, that cost spreads. Workarounds are paid from the same budget that funds schools and hospitals. Companies linked to the security establishment may lose foreign partners and contracts. If investors start treating Rwanda as risky, pressure on the franc could eventually reach prices. Citizens are asked to tighten their belts so the war in Congo can go on. How much they end up paying depends on one decision by Kagame's regime: whether to keep backing M23.
Have any experts or journalists assessed the specific implications of US sanctions against Rwanda Ministry of Defence (MoD) and Zigama CSS? In particular could these sanctions affect employment, access to financial services, government spending, prices, or the livelihoods of ordinary Rwandan citizens? What direct and indirect consequences should the public expect in the short and long term? Cg you have to be Ikigarasha to ask yourself these questions
16
13
2
58
19,765
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
Replying to @KagutaMuseveni
@KagutaMuseveni Proposes @mkainerugaba as his Successor at @NRM CEC Meeting at State House Entebbe | ChimpReportsNews chimpreports.com/museveni-pr…
56
156
50
624
81,107
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
The United States is sanctioning Rwanda's Ministry of Defense and Zigama Credit and Savings Society for supporting armed groups in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. Rwanda must stop its destabilizing actions in eastern DRC that violate its obligations under the Washington Accords.
269
640
76
1,819
110,881
Today, the United States makes good on President Trump’s promise to hold Rwanda accountable for its commitments under the Washington Accords for Peace and Prosperity. Rwanda must halt its support for M23 and withdraw its troops from eastern DRC.
Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control imposed sanctions on the Rwandan Ministry of Defence and Zigama Credit and Savings Society, a Rwandan financial institution that has played a key role in facilitating Rwanda’s support for the March 23 Movement and its political wing, the Congo River Alliance. home.treasury.gov/news/press…
558
1,948
147
7,975
456,891
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
Not a light statement.
Today, the United States makes good on President Trump’s promise to hold Rwanda accountable for its commitments under the Washington Accords for Peace and Prosperity. Rwanda must halt its support for M23 and withdraw its troops from eastern DRC.
4
3
14
2,492
😂
Replying to @Cernovich
This is laughably true for women in their 50's and 60's. They approach dating like they are 32. There's going to be a lot of cat food and red wine sold as a result.
26
Thank you, @DeputySecState @SecRubio @realDonaldTrump @SecScottBessent @statedeptspox You’re truly helping save Rwandan lives by addressing this war driven by the mad dog of East-Central Africa (Paul Kagame)🇷🇼💔
2
4
34
3,957
Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control imposed sanctions on the Rwandan Ministry of Defence and Zigama Credit and Savings Society, a Rwandan financial institution that has played a key role in facilitating Rwanda’s support for the March 23 Movement and its political wing, the Congo River Alliance. home.treasury.gov/news/press…
431
896
274
2,141
573,800
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
Any one that claims to fight corruption but keeps appointing convicted corrupt officials amuses me.
How is a corrupt politician still getting posts? Wasn’t bamporiki in prison the other day on charges of corruption?
1
1
2
20
1,649
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
Never, Never, Never Give Up.
Whenever I feel demotivated i rewatch this... Elon Musk in a living room in 2008, 12 days from bankruptcy, pitching a $109,000 car to people...
49
488
13
5,034
484,612
MKASIMDALAMW retweeted
BREAKING: Revolut has announced it has incorporated Revolut Ventures, which will launch in 2027. Eligible customers will be able to invest in high-growth private tech companies directly in the app. Companies are staying private longer, so this is about giving retail access to that value creation phase. Makes me think this could also become the vehicle for Revolut to offer its own shares to new investors before any IPO.
33
49
19
1,036
75,196