The national grid has collapsed for the second time in 72 hours, leaving Nigerians in total blackout.

Data obtained from the Nigerian system operator’s portal showed that the grid recorded zero megawatts (MW) as of Thursday.

TheCable observed that the generation power dropped from 3,743MW at 10am to 2,709MW at 11am.

As of noon, the grid only recorded 3.70MW and 4.10MW at 1pm.

The Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN) has confirmed the incident.

Ikeja Electric Distribution Company (IKEDC) said it is experiencing a system outage affecting its supply.

“Please be informed that we experienced a system outage today 07 November, 2024 at 11:29Hrs affecting supply within our network,” IKEDC said.

“Restoration of supply is ongoing in collaboration with our critical stakeholders.Kindly bear with us.”

On Tuesday, the grid experienced a collapse – the ninth time in 2024.

TCN had blamed a series of lines and generator trippings as the reason for the instability of the grid and a partial disturbance.

On October 17, Adebayo Adelabu, minister of power, said the frequent system failure at the national grid is inevitable due to the outdated infrastructure.

Adelabu also said the country will continue to experience grid disturbances until there is a complete overhaul of the system.

The minister said more investment in power infrastructure will prevent future collapses.

The Cable

Nigeria's military has warned of a new insurgent group, Lakurawas, infiltrating the country's northwest region from neighbouring Niger and Mali, its spokesperson said on Thursday.

Defense spokesperson Edward Buba, a Major-General, said the group, an affiliate of militias operating in the Sahel region, has been active in northwest Sokoto and Kebbi states. The ideology of the group is not known.

"They began an incursion into northern parts of Sokoto and Kebbi states from the Niger and Mali axis, particularly after the coup in Niger Republic," Buba said in statement.

The influx of Lakurawas is linked to the July 2023 coup in Niger, which disrupted joint military patrols along the border between Nigeria and Niger.

While patrols have since resumed, the military remains vigilant against further infiltration, Buba said.

Nigeria has been grappling with a long-running insurgency in its northeast, primarily driven by the Islamist armed group Boko Haram and its offshoot, Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP).

But the emergence of Lakurawas highlights a growing security threat in the country's northwest, a region already prone to attacks by armed gangs and kidnappings for ransom.

Buba reported that the military had killed 163 insurgents, arrested 82, and rescued at least 80 kidnapped individuals in the northwest region last month.

Reuters

Biden plans final Mideast peace push but will leaders ignore him?

The Biden administration will make a final push for elusive deals to end the wars in Gaza and Lebanon, but Donald Trump's election may leave Washington without enough leverage to bend Israel and other regional players to its will before he becomes president.

Senior U.S. officials who have spent months crisscrossing the Middle East for peace negotiations are now likely to face counterparts reluctant to take big steps, preferring instead to wait for Trump's inauguration in January, according to sources familiar with the matter and independent analysts.

Trump has promised to bring peace to the Middle East but has not said how. If his first term is any indication, however, he is likely to pursue a strongly pro-Israel approach, going even beyond the staunch support given by President Joe Biden to Washington's top regional ally.

Ahead of a second Trump presidency, U.S. State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said on Thursday: "We will continue to pursue an end to the war in Gaza, an end to the war in Lebanon, the surge of humanitarian assistance, and that is our duty to pursue those policies right up until noon on Jan. 20."

But with Biden now a lame duck, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a close Trump ally, and Arab leaders will likely do little to accommodate the Democratic president and may take their cues from his Republican successor, whose erratic first-term foreign policy kept the region on edge.

"They've got substantially less leverage," said Brian Finucane, senior adviser to the International Crisis Group's U.S. program. "People may still answer their phone calls, but everyone is looking forward to a new administration, one that will have different policies and priorities."

HEDGING THEIR BETS

Since Trump's victory in Tuesday's election against Vice President Kamala Harris, Arab and Israeli officials have already begun hedging their bets.

Egyptian mediators who have been working with U.S. and Qatari counterparts on Gaza ceasefire proposals are waiting to see how Trump's plans take shape for the Palestinian enclave, Egyptian security sources said.

As the world watched the U.S. election on Tuesday, Netanyahu - who left little doubt of his preference for Trump and hailed his win as "historic" - sacked his Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, depriving the Biden administration of one of its favored Israeli partners.

The Palestinian militant group Hamas, which has been fighting Israel for more than a year in Gaza following the militants' attack on southern Israel, and the Lebanese armed group Hezbollah, locked in a parallel conflict with Israeli forces, both appeared to be looking past Biden to the incoming Trump administration.

Reprisal strikes between Israel and Iran have raised fears of a broader regional war.

Hamas urged Trump to "learn from Biden's mistakes," and Hezbollah said it did not hold out much hope for a shift in U.S. policy away from support for Israel.

Palestinian Authority officials say, however, they expect to be working with Biden aides right up to when Trump takes office.

Washington sought to kick start the Gaza ceasefire talks after Israel killed Hamas chief Yahya Sinwar in mid-October, but the effort went nowhere. In Lebanon, U.S. officials have said they have made progress but a final deal has yet to be reached.

When asked about the view that the Biden administration's leverage had eroded post-election, a White House National Security Council spokesperson said: “I’m not going to speculate on hypotheticals."

WAITING FOR TRUMP

Netanyahu and his allies celebrated the election of Trump, a staunch but sometimes unpredictable ally of Israel, hoping that the Republican president who in his first term delivered major wins for the Israeli leader would support Israel unconditionally.

Trump has strongly backed Netanyahu's goal of destroying Hamas but has called for Israel to finish the job quickly.

In his victory speech, Trump said: "I'm not going to start a war. I'm going to stop wars." But he did not elaborate.

Biden's support for Israel has divided his Democratic Party and cost Harris the votes of many Arab Americans and liberals.

The Democratic president has firmly supported Israel while pressuring Netanyahu to do more to protect civilians and allow more humanitarian aid into Gaza.

But Biden has been unable to end the war, with some critics saying he should have done more to restrict billions of dollars of military aid the U.S. sends every year to Israel.

Laura Blumenfeld, a Middle East analyst at the Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies in Washington, predicted that ahead of Trump's inauguration, Netanyahu would make a limited effort to meet Biden's demands on Gaza aid but would also be mindful of what he needs to do to placate Trump.

"From Election Day to inauguration day, Israel's posture toward the U.S. will be dictated by two things: what Netanyahu needs, what Netanyahu fears," she said. "Netanyahu also fears the erratic wrath of the next American president."

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin in an Oct. 13 letter demanded Israel take specific measures to improve aid for Gaza or face potential consequences in U.S. military support.

Blumenfeld said that during this interim, Netanyahu would make a minimal effort to comply with that demand, "just enough to avoid critical weapon restrictions."

Some analysts believe Trump may give Netanyahu a freer hand to act against Iran and its proxies.

"Netanyahu knows that Trump will give him carte blanche to carry out his plans, so he is just biding his time," said Brett Bruen, a former foreign policy adviser in the Obama administration.

Reuters

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Ukraine suffering ‘colossal’ losses in Kursk – Putin

Ukraine has lost more than 30,000 troops in just three months of fighting since its large-scale incursion into Russia's Kursk Region, President Vladimir Putin told the Valdai Forum on Thursday, noting that the Ukrainian people are paying a “terrible price” for Kiev’s decision to do Washington’s bidding.

Kiev launched an incursion into the region on August 6, deploying some of its best-equipped units. The force was contained by Russian troops and is steadily being pushed back, suffering immense losses, according to Moscow.

“Just look at what is happening now at the front line… They raided the Kursk Region. Well, their losses are colossal – in just three months of fighting, the Kiev regime suffered more casualties than in the whole of last year: over 30,000,” Putin said at the 21st annual meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club in Sochi.

Putin asserted that the decision to invade Kursk made little military sense and was rather dictated by purely “political considerations” imposed on Kiev by its “overseas” sponsors.

“Why are they sitting there, bearing such losses? Because they were ordered – from overseas – to hold on at any cost, at least until the US elections, to show that all the efforts of the Democratic administration to support Ukraine were not in vain,” the Russian leader said.

“That’s the price. A terrible tragedy, I think, both for the Ukrainian people and for the Ukrainian army,” Putin stressed.

The Ukrainian incursion has come at a great cost to Kiev, not only in terms of manpower but also regarding dwindling stocks of Western-supplied weapons. The latest update from the Russian Ministry of Defense estimated Kiev's losses at 29,600 casualties, 184 tanks, 106 infantry fighting vehicles, more than 1,000 armored vehicles, and scores of other pieces of heavy weaponry, including 26 military engineering vehicles.

Ukrainian officials have claimed that the operation has slowed Russian advances along the eastern frontline. However, according to media estimates, Russian troops gained more ground in October than in any month this year.

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Putin praises Trump, says Russia is ready for dialogue

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday congratulated Donald Trump on winning the U.S. election, praised him for showing courage when a gunman tried to assassinate him, and said Moscow was ready for dialogue with the Republican president-elect.

In his first public remarks since Trump's win, Putin said Trump had acted like a real man during an assassination attempt on him while he was speaking at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania in July.

"He behaved, in my opinion, in a very correct way, courageously, like a real man," Putin said at the Valdai discussion club in the Russian Black Sea resort of Sochi. "I take this opportunity to congratulate him on his election."

Putin said remarks Trump had made during the election campaign about Ukraine and restoring relations with Russia deserved attention.

"What was said about the desire to restore relations with Russia, to bring about the end of the Ukrainian crisis, in my opinion this deserves attention at least," said Putin.

Trump said during campaigning that he could bring peace in Ukraine within 24 hours if elected, but has given few details on how he would seek to end the biggest land war in Europe since World War Two.

The 72-year-old Kremlin chief gave just one note of caution: "I do not know what is going to happen now. I have no clue."

When pressed by a questioner what he would do if Trump called to suggest a meeting, Putin said he was ready to resume contacts if a Trump administration wanted that, and was ready for discussions with Trump.

Russia and Trump have repeatedly dismissed as nonsense some claims in Western media that Trump was a sort of Russian agent of influence. Russian officials say that during his first term, from 2017 to 2021, Trump was tough on Russia.

U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller investigated allegations of collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, but said in a 2019 report that he found no evidence of conspiracy.

Moscow has also repeatedly denied U.S. assertions that Russia meddled in the 2024 and other presidential elections and had spread disinformation in an attempt to sow chaos.

WAR?

The 2-1/2-year-old war in Ukraine is entering what some Russian and Western officials say could be its final - most dangerous - phase after Moscow's forces advance at their fastest pace since the early weeks of the conflict and the West ponders how the war will end.

Putin on June 14 set out his terms for an end to the war: Ukraine would have to drop its NATO ambitions and withdraw all of its troops from all of the territory of four regions claimed by Russia.

Russia controls Crimea, which it annexed from Ukraine in 2014, about 80% of the Donbas - a coal-and-steel zone comprising the Donetsk and Luhansk regions - and more than 70% of the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions.

Speaking for several hours on Thursday, Putin railed against the "adventurism" of Western leaders whom he accused of pushing the world to a "dangerous line" by seeking to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia in Ukraine.

"It is useless to put pressure on us. But we are always ready to negotiate with full consideration of mutual legitimate interests," Putin said, just seconds after scolding the West for promising Ukraine and Georgia eventual NATO membership in 2008.

He said that the West had never accepted Russia as an equal partner since the 1991 fall of the Soviet Union, treating it as a defeated power and enlarging the U.S.-led NATO military alliance eastwards towards Russia.

Russia, Putin said, was ready to restore relations with the United States but the ball was in Washington's court. Putin also said that China was Russia's "ally".

Asked about Kamala Harris' warning that Putin would eat Trump for lunch, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said with a chuckle: "Putin does not eat people."

I understand wealthy US citizens and conservatives of the evangelical hue rooting for Donald Trump. The rich believe he would loosen regulations and protect them and their businesses from excessive taxation. Conservative evangelicals believe he is the bulwark against wokeism, especially the ultra-liberal variety. And white folks want their country back.

But Africans at home and in the Diaspora – what is their business supporting a guy who described their continent as a “shithole” and has worn his anti-immigrant rhetoric on his sleeves? It didn’t seem to make sense that anyone who saw Trump 1.0 would ever dream or wish for the second version. But now, he’s back. He even has the Supreme Court and the Senate in his Red corner as of press time.

With the media (especially the major networks) awash with polls indicating a dead heat up to zero hours, I became more interested in the pro-Trump sentiment among Nigerians. I also checked in with friends elsewhere on the continent, and the feedback surprised me.

Trump, we want

Some friends told me Trump is just the man the US needs to purge itself of its hubris and arrogance. Once upon a time, the US was a moral force for good worldwide. Its exceptionalism didn’t often require bullying others to make the point.

It did many bad things during the Cold War, as did its arch-rival, the Soviet Union. But after that phase and with the fall of the Berlin Wall, many had hoped to see the emergence of a multipolar world, one in which, if you like, the lion and the lamb would lie side by side.

But that was not to be. From Cuba to Venezuela, Libya to the Persian Gulf and the Middle East, and right up to the old sphere of influence of the USSR, the US stoked—and still stokes—a zero-sumness that hardly brooks “live and let live.” Since then, the world has experienced fewer devastating wars, but it has wrestled with no fewer tensions of a new variety aided and abetted by technology.

Same difference?

Trump 2.0, these folks hope, will do at least two things for the world. It would further hasten the internal decay of the US by aggravating racial tensions and emboldening right-wing excesses. Two, Trump’s America First ultra-insularity and his off-the-fly foreign policy style will distance the US from its traditional allies and enable crazies around the world, like North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, to run amok.

This sounded more like saying that if US voters were happy to be seduced by their worst selves, they deserve what they get.

But that was not all. Some also wanted Trump’s victory as a stick to beat their leaders back home. On the eve of the election, Larry Madowo of CNN reported that Kenyans wanted Trump to win because “with him, you know where you stand.” The report contrasted Trump’s style with Kenya’s political elite, who could hardly be trusted.

Trumphobes

The CNN report might also have been about Nigeria, where Trumphobes wanted him to win for a slightly curiously different reason. They think his anti-immigration policy will force Nigerians and their government to fix their own country. In the US, Nigeria has the highest diaspora population of Africa, 327,000 citizens, followed by Ethiopia, 222,000, and Egypt, 192,000.

It didn’t matter much to the Trumphobes that Nigeria’s US diaspora sends home $20 billion yearly, an increasingly significant source of support for a distressed economy. What is at work is a reverse schadenfreude, which says that the fewer opportunities Nigerian immigrants have outside the country, the more seriously the government would be obliged to fix the country.

Someone even said to me that the “malicious support” for Trump was payback for the bad leaders that the US routinely propped and supported around the world, a list that included Saddam Hussein, Augusto Pinochet and Mobutu Seseko.

Republican African record

Some pro-Trump sentiments are, however, driven by facts. For example, Republicans have a far better record of engaging Africans than Democrats. The Republican Party opposed colonialism. Its support for African initiatives such as the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and efforts to combat AIDS contrasts with the Democrat’s preference for aid diplomacy.

The hope is that Trump 2.0 will not be an exception. Here, Diasporans are not too far from their Black cousins in the US. A NAACP poll in September showed that one in four Black men under 50 supported Trump for president.

Trump 1.0 showed tough love towards Africa, but it was on his watch, for example, that the US finally authorised the sale to Nigeria of the much-needed fighter jets for the prosecution of the war on Boko Haram, which President Barack Obama had blocked for eight years. On his part, President Joe Biden will only make a brief visit – his first to Africa in four years – to Angola on his way out of the White House.

Better or worse?

Trump’s overwhelming victory might mean one of two things for his presidency: The weight of the responsibility could humble him and increase the likelihood that he would be more restrained than before. On the other hand, it could also bring out the worst in him – that feeling that he never really lost in 2020, that he was cheated of victory as he claimed, that it's now time to take his pound of flesh with a vengeance.

We’ll have to wait and see. If Trump 2.0 means Africans who were not on the radar during the campaign will now have to look inward and find their way through an uncertain future, then so be it.

Ukraine and Gaza

Trump’s victory might hasten the end of the war in Ukraine and, hopefully, improve the protracted global supply chain crisis that has affected the supply of agricultural products and cooking oils to many African countries. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky knows he cannot depend on Trump to bear the cost of a war that has, for all purposes, become a meat grinder. The war in Ukraine might end sooner than later.

As for the Middle East, Trump. 1.0 moved the Embassy of the US from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem despite protests by the Palestinians and some Arab countries. If that means anything, it should suggest that Trump 2.0 will not walk on the eggshell of a two-state solution in his approach to the current war on Gaza. He’s flat-out pro-Netanyahu and big on oil deals with Gulf states.

I make no pretence of my dislike of Trump’s politics. Nor do I have any illusions that his second term would be significantly different from his first, which left the world holding its breath dangerously for four years. But if he’s the man American voters have chosen to lead them, so be it. Unfortunately, what America does – for good or ill – affects the rest of the world whether or not we cast a ballot.

** Ishiekwene is the Editor-In-Chief of LEADERSHIP and author of the book Writing for Media and Monetising It.

Joy Gendusa

When you're on a long journey, there are many twists and turns that require critical decisions. Once you've reached the very last few miles, your choices become even more significant.

In business, this means that the end of the year could require you to make some last-minute (but pivotal) moves in order to generate additional revenue and end 2024 strong.

The good news is you do still have time to finish strong.

In my experience taking a business from nothing to over $100 million in annual revenue, the last quarter can get intense. Here are my best words of wisdom for making the last weeks of the year as successful as possible.

Look back at your marketing choices to learn and make positive changes

In 1975, Edward Packard's Choose Your Own Adventure books were published. The series allowed the reader to select from a myriad of paths within a specific storyline. Each choice of the reader would lead to a different ending of the story.

Why did this series become so popular and sell more than 270 million copies worldwide? It's because people love to be in control of their own destiny; to write their own stories. First, ask yourself: What ending do I want to reach this year? Then, ask: What have I already learned so far that will help me get to that ending?

Have you been tracking your marketing results? If so, pull up the data and start investigating. Go beyond which channel generates the most leads. Which tactic creates the most customers? The most referrals? The most revenue? Look beyond the calendar year if you can, and compare trends year over year.

If you're letting intuition guide you, it's high time you started tracking your marketing. Feelings are no substitution for real data.

In 2023, we did our own research and found that direct mail delivers six times more revenue per lead than digital ads. We figured this out by analyzing 114,373 leads and which of those converted to sales that year and found that if we divide the income by the overall number of leads, we made $229.41 for every postcard lead versus $37.09 for every pay-per-click lead.

After this realization, we increased the number of postcards we mail weekly advertising our services by 20,000. It's your responsibility to do this work and discover what needs to change for positive growth.

For example, did Facebook ads not deliver the revenue you expected them to? You can re-invest the money you had planned to spend in December on digital advertising and redirect it to other marketing avenues like direct mailor connected TV ads.

The truth is that there really are no mistakes, just lessons learned. It's up to you to decide if you make changes for a better outcome.

Consolidate your remaining resources and dedicate them to the marketing channel with the highest ROI

Every year, about 3,000 people hike the Appalachian Trail, but only a quarter of hikers actually finish. One main reason hikers don't make it through is they run out of supplies. Similarly, in business, owners can hit challenges along the year that drain their resources.

If you feel like you're struggling in the last quarter of the year, it's time to take what you have left of your budget and any other available credit or set-aside funds and use them to market your business.

Which marketing strategies delivered the highest return on investment? Whatever you have left of your marketing budget should go towards thattactic. If you don't have much of your annual budget left, consider taking money from other sources to invest it back into your marketing to bring in more leads.

It could be something as simple as finding some savings by canceling a monthly membership. Whatever you choose to do, put as much money as possible back into those marketing tacticsthat have consistently delivered results. Then, next year, you'll have more revenue to invest back into your business for 2025 or take home with you.

Take advantage of potential tax savings by pre-paying for next year's marketing

The end of the journey isn't all about finishing strong — it's also about setting yourself up for future success. By allocating some of the profits you made in 2024 to marketing in 2025 before the year ends, you are getting ahead of the game. Not only are you entering the new year prepared, but you are also getting the added benefit of reducing your 2024 tax burden when you reinvest taxable profits back into your business and your marketing.

At my business, PostcardMania, we offer large discounts for ordering in bulk, which many business owners take advantage of prior to the year's end. They simply add up how much marketing they think they'll need for the following year and pre-purchase at a discount.

If you are a B2B business, you can implement a similar offer by encouraging your customers to pre-order what they'll need next year so that they can get the tax write-offs for the current year.

If you'd like to target customers every year with a year-end offer, you can use automated direct mail to target them faster. After setting up the direct mail automation one time, the postcards or letters are mailed automatically each year based on the criteria you set up. This saves you time and increases revenue by ensuring it happens every year without fail.

At the end of the year, it's satisfying to say that you gave it your all; you did the best you could with the resources available. Avoid feeling regret by considering these marketing paths to success, and then you'll be satisfied with the ending you always wanted to write.

Entrepreneur

Aliko Dangote, Africa’s richest man and the owner of the Dangote refinery, has built his empire on a foundation of ambition and resilience. However, in the pursuit of profit, he seems to have lost sight of the very people who sustain his businesses—the average Nigerians. His recent actions regarding fuel pricing and distribution reflect a troubling trend: an unrelenting greed that prioritizes personal gain over the welfare of the populace.

The Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria (IPMAN) has rightly criticized Dangote for setting fuel prices that are exorbitantly higher than even imported products, forcing many to seek more affordable options elsewhere. His insistence on recovering his substantial investment in the refinery overnight, regardless of the economic hardship faced by countless Nigerians, is not just short-sighted—it is profoundly unethical.

In a country where many struggle to make ends meet, the idea that a single individual would prioritize profit over the basic needs of the populace is both shocking and unacceptable. The staggering prices imposed by the Dangote refinery reflect a monopolistic approach that can only deepen the existing economic crisis. Nigerians are not just consumers; they are citizens deserving of fair treatment and reasonable access to essential goods. By driving up prices in the face of widespread suffering, Dangote undermines the very social fabric that supports his businesses.

It is imperative for the government to recognize and counteract this monopolistic behavior. Continuing to allow fuel imports is crucial to ensuring competition in the market, which will help keep prices in check and protect consumers from the whims of one man’s profit motives. A diversified market not only fosters healthy competition but also provides a safety net for the average Nigerian, who is already grappling with the challenges of rising living costs.

In these trying times, we urge the government to take a stand against unbridled greed. It is essential to maintain policies that allow for fuel imports and encourage competition, ensuring that no single entity can dictate the market and exploit consumers. The well-being of millions should never be sacrificed for the profit margins of a few.

Aliko Dangote has the power to influence the economy significantly, but with that power comes the responsibility to act ethically. It is time for him to recognize that true success is measured not only by wealth but also by the impact one has on society. In the end, a thriving nation is one where its people can afford the very basics of life—not just the bottom line of a billionaire’s ledger.

Three oil marketers, AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited, have asked the Federal High Court in Abuja to dismiss a suit filed by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals.

The marketers, in a joint counter affidavit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024, and dated November 5, 2024, a response to an originating summon filed by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals, argued that granting the application of refinery would spell doom for the country’s oil sector.

They emphasised that the plan to monopolise the oil sector is a recipe for disaster in the country.

Dangote refinery in its originating summon dated September 6, 2024, had sued Nigeria Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority and Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited, AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, T. Time Petroleum Limited, 2015 Petroleum Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited as 1st to 7th defendants respectively.

The refinery prayed the court to declare that NMDPRA was in violation of Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) by issuing licenses for the importation of petroleum products.

It stated that such licenses should only be issued in circumstances where there is a petroleum product shortfall.

It also urged the court to declare that NMDPRA is in violation of its statutory responsibilities under the PIA for not encouraging local refineries such as the company.

Shafa, A. A. Rano, and Matrix Petroleum, however, responded that Dangote refinery does not produce adequate petroleum products for the daily consumption of Nigerians.

They noted that the plaintiff had not placed anything before the court to prove the contrary.

They argued that they are well qualified and entitled to be issued an import licence by NMDPRA to import petroleum products in Nigeria within the meaning of Section 317(9) of the PIA.

They also noted that they are fully qualified for the issuance of the import licences issued to them by the 1st defendant, as they duly met all the legal requirements for the issuance of such import licences, before the same were issued to them.

“The import licences lawfully and validly issued to the defendants did not in any way whatsoever, cripple the plaintiff’s business or its refinery.

“The import licenses issued to the defendants by the 1st defendant are in line with the provisions of the Petroleum Industry Act, 2021, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, 2018, and other relevant laws,” they contended.

They insisted that giving Dangote Refinery the power of monopoly in Nigeria’s petroleum industry as it sought in the instant suit, would kill competitive pricing of petroleum products in the country.

Stressing that such an act would further deteriorate the country’s critically ailing economy.

They also added that it would “unleash untold hardship on Nigerians, all of which constitute a recipe for disaster in the polity”.

The marketers explained that if Nigeria puts all her energy eggs in one basket by stopping the importation of petroleum products and allowing the plaintiff to be the sole producer and supplier of petroleum products in Nigeria, with liberty to determine the prices at which it supplies the products, the prices of petroleum products will continue to rise and energy security will elude Nigeria.

They also noted that should the refinery break down being a monopolized sector, the country will be plunged into a hot mess of energy crisis.

“That in the event of any breakdown in or obstruction to the production chain of the plaintiff which stops it from producing Nigeria will be thrown into energy crises because it does not have the reserves that would last it for at least 30 days that it would need to order, pay for, freight and import refined products into tanks in Nigeria.

“That amidst the glaring absence of any credible and demonstrable proof that the plaintiff refines and supplies adequate petroleum products for the daily use/consumption of Nigerians, is a recipe for disaster in Nigeria’s energy sector.”

They further told the court that granting the reliefs sought by the plaintiff was a design to leave Nigeria and Nigerians at the mercy of the plaintiff with respect to the availability and cost of purchasing petroleum products in the country.

The presiding judge, Justice Inyang Ekwo fixed January 20, 2025, for a report of settlement or service.

Dangote exports products

Meanwhile, three foreign firms have accounted for about 75 per cent of what’s being lifted from the 650,000-barrel-per-day Dangote refinery, a new report has stated.

A report by Bloomberg on Wednesday said Vitol Group, Trafigura Group, and BP Plc are the dominant buyers of fuels from the oil refinery that’s reshaping petroleum trading in Africa and Europe.

The trio has accounted for the vast majority of the plant’s shipments since flows began ratcheting up around the middle of this year, according to data from Precise Intelligence, a new oil-and-gas trading analytics firm based in Geneva.

The report quotes products offtake from February 27 to October 10 with other customers including the local market taking 25 per cent of total fuel purchases from the company.

Earlier this year, Dangote began operations and kick-started the production of diesel, aviation fuel, and LPG before subsequently progressing to the production of Premium Motor Spirit (petrol).

Once it’s fully up and running, Dangote should be able to process about 650,000 barrels a day of crude into products including gasoline and diesel.

That will far exceed the fuel making capacity of any single plant in Europe or Africa, helping to reshape the regions’ oil and fuel trading.

The emergence of Dangote has already trimmed a glut of Nigerian crude.

Analysis of the report showed that the refinery has loaded almost 6 million tons of fuel since starting up.

This is equivalent to almost 45 million barrels, loading rates averaged about 35,000 tonnes a day in October, its data showed.

Dangote itself said late last month that the refinery had reached processing rates of about 420,000 barrels a day of crude.

The plant is also selling into the Nigerian market.

The composition of fuel cargoes loading from Dangote is closely watched because it offers clues into where the refinery is at in terms of starting up different processing units.

On the products sold, the figures show that automotive gas oil — commonly known as diesel — is the largest cargo type being lifted, accounting for the highest proportion of shipments. This is followed by fuel oil, which ranks second in terms of volume.

Together, these two products make up more than 60 per cent of the total output being collected from the plant.

Other significant fuel types being processed include gasoline, which is used for cars and other light vehicles, and jet fuel, primarily utilised by the aviation industry for aircraft.

Punch

It is an extraordinary comeback—or, as Donald Trump triumphantly put it in West Palm Beach, Florida, in the early hours of November 6th, “a political victory that our country has never seen before”. After losing four years ago he has survived impeachment, conviction as a felon, numerous other indictments and two assassination attempts, and will become America’s 47th president, to add to his stint as the 45th. He becomes the oldest man ever to win the White House.

Many had expected a long wait for the result of an extremely close election to become clear. In the event, the outcome was evident within hours. Mr Trump looked set to win all seven of the critical swing states: he triumphed in North Carolina, Georgia, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and had strong leads in Michigan, Arizona and Nevada. That translates into a decisive advantage in the electoral college.

It appears that Mr Trump was able to draw support from both urban and rural voters at levels notably higher than in his contest against Joe Biden in 2020. In state after state, Mr Trump performed better than he had in 2020. In Florida, for example, where he won by three percentage points last time, his margin is on track to surge to 12 points. And although opinion-poll aggregates had consistently shown Kamala Harris to be ahead in the national popular vote, it seems that Mr Trump may have won that too. Just as in 2016 and 2020, in other words, the polls underestimated Mr Trump’s support.

What went wrong for Ms Harris? For one thing, her advantage among women voters, on whom Democrats were pinning their hopes, turned out to be smaller than expected. The gender gap, between the votes of men and women, actually narrowed, from 23 points in 2020 to 20, according to exit polls. Among Hispanic voters, Mr Trump made striking inroads, improving his margin by ten percentage points compared with 2020, according to CNN’s exit poll. The trend was particularly strong among Hispanic men: Joe Biden won their vote by a margin of 23 points; this time Mr Trump was on track to prevail among them by a margin of ten points. More broadly, dissatisfaction with high inflation and immigration contributed to a sense among voters that the country was on the wrong track, for which they naturally blame the incumbent. Much as Ms Harris sought to present herself as the candidate of change, she was stuck with her association with the current administration.

As well as the White House, the Republicans also wrested back control of the Senate. It was always going to be hard for Democrats to hold on to their slender majority in that chamber, given that they were defending a disproportionate number of seats (a third of which are up for election in each election cycle). Not only did Republicans take the vacant seat in West Virginia, as expected; they also flipped Ohio and Montana and prevailed in a close contest in Nebraska. The upsets Democrats hoped for in Florida and Texas failed to materialise. Republican control of the Senate smooths the way for Mr Trump to make important appointments—from cabinet secretaries to generals to Supreme Court justices—that require Senate confirmation.

Whether the Republicans complete their sweep by retaining control of the House of Representatives is still not clear. Results in California, to arrive later, will determine that. But Mr Trump, in his victory speech, was confident that the House would be his, too.

“This will truly be the golden age of America,” he declared. Few will question that the country is indeed entering a new age. Whether Mr Trump will truly “heal” America, as he promised, is more debatable. Beyond America’s borders, too, the consequences are momentous. From tariffs to climate change to Ukraine, the world must brace itself for Trump II.

The Economist

Liz Peek

Donald Trump has just accomplished the most stunning political comeback in the history of the United States. The former president, who lost his bid for re-election in 2020, was impeached twice, convicted on multiple (flimsy) felony counts, investigated, sued, harassed without end, denounced as a fascist, blasted as too old, "deranged" and "unstable," not only won another four years in the Oval Office but pulled Senate and House candidates along with him. Though we don’t know for sure, it looks like the GOP may win control of all three branches of the government.

How did the former president pull off such a resounding victory? We can point to three reasons:

1. Some 70% of Americans, according to exit polls, thought the U.S. was on the wrong track and wanted change. Kamala Harris promised none;
2. Trump broadened his appeal and his outreach, eating into the so-called "Obama coalition" by winning sizable numbers of minorities and young people;
3. Harris ran a lousy campaign.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan, running to unseat Democrat incumbent Jimmy Carter, famously asked voters, "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" The answer to that question has always been consequential, and so it was this year. A telling Gallup poll conducted just weeks before the election showed 52% of the country felt they were worse off under the Biden-Harris administration than they were under Trump; only 39% indicated they were better off. In addition, Gallup reported that their economic confidence indicator, at negative 26, was a bad sign for Democrats. That low a reading normally has shown up only during recessions, signaling deep unease about the economy.

Numerous surveys showed voters, fed up with inflation, unchecked immigration and rising crime, wanted a change; Harris was unable to say how she would "turn the page" as she put it. When asked on "The View" what she would do differently than Joe Biden, she could not think of a "single thing." More than any other utterance made on the campaign trail, that unprepared and unimaginative response cooked Kamala’s goose.

She could have reversed some of the policies infuriating to common sense voters, by, for instance, promising to ban men playing in women’s sports or saying she would roll back the EV mandates that will force Americans to buy cars they don’t want. She could have vowed to secure the border, and promise she would not again open the gates to millions of migrants, criminal gangs and hundreds of people on the terror watch list. But she didn’t.

By contrast, Trump campaigned with purpose, promising to reduce inflation, roll back harmful regulations, deport criminals in the U.S. illegally, dump unpopular climate mandates and lower taxes. Moreover, he held rallies in Democrat-run New York City and California in defiance of political norms, helping down-ballot races but also expanding his appeal and his reach.

He won over a shocking 54% of Hispanic men compared to 44% who went for Harris; four years ago, Joe Biden won that group by a 23-point margin. Trump also greatly improved his standing with Black voters, and especially in key swing states. In Wisconsin, for instance, NBC exit polls show Trump doubled his share of the Black vote, winning 20% of that contingent, up from 8% in 2020. He also attracted more than 40% of Jewish voters in Florida, New York and Nevada.

Trump campaigned for all Americans, instead of the "slicing and dicing" favored by Kamala Harris.

Meanwhile, Kamala’s campaign relied on joy and "vibes," rather than substance. She coasted initially on Democrats’ relief that Joe Biden was no longer their candidate, and then, when that approach stalled, turned savagely negative on Donald Trump. She shunned interviews and unscripted appearances because she couldn’t handle either. She was flummoxed by even the mildest of inquisitions, such as that posed by CBS’ Bill Whitaker, who reasonably asked why she flip-flopped on issues she embraced in the 2019 Democratic primary, like "Medicare-for-all" and banning fracking.

Harris always appeared caught in the headlights with such questions, even though she should have seen the car coming from miles away. How could she not be ready with answers?

The most consequential campaign decision made by Kamala Harris was her pick of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate, instead of popular Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro. Choosing one of the most progressive governors in the country confirmed that she remained the far-left San Francisco liberal who showed up in 2019, embracing the Green New Deal, banning fracking, and decriminalizing illegal immigration. Shapiro was not only a political moderate, who would have balanced the ticket, but also would have appealed to Jewish voters. And, he might well have delivered key swing state Pennsylvania. It was a critical mistake made by an insecure candidate.

Harris warned that Trump was a threat to democracy, but voters saw his opponents weaponize the Department of Justice and try to lock up their political adversary, stiff the 14 million Democrats who voted for Joe Biden to be their candidate in the primaries, propose to "reform" the Supreme Court and do away with the filibuster, and persuade social media companies to censor their opposition. 

Ultimately, voters repudiated not only Kamala Harris but also the decades-old Democratic leadership. Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and other longtime Democrat power brokers pretended that President Joe Biden was just fine, even though his steady mental decline was obvious. Only after the entire nation witnessed the extent of that deterioration during his disastrous debate with Donald Trump in late June, did they acknowledge that he was not capable of governing for four more years. Because they hid the truth, the party then had no time to hold a primary contest; they were stuck with Kamala Harris. As one of the country’s most unpopular vice presidents ever, political analysts had long considered her unfit to run. That view proved correct.

Ultimately, voters did defend democracy; they elected Donald Trump.

Fox News