EDITORIAL: Turning geopolitical rivalry into Namibia's gain

When John Giordano appeared before the United States Senate foreign relations committee ahead of his posting to Namibia, one question stood out: how would he counter Chinese influence in this country?

That question alone tells us something important. Namibia is no longer a peripheral player in global affairs. We are now firmly within the strategic calculations of competing global powers. As our oil and gas discoveries gather momentum and critical minerals become central to energy transitions, our relevance in geopolitical affairs is rising rapidly.

The competition between the United States and China on African soil is not new. What is changing is its intensity – and Namibia is clearly part of that equation. But while superpowers may see a battleground, we must see leverage.

The presence of competing interests gives Namibia bargaining power. It creates options. And in geopolitics, options are currency. The danger lies not in rivalry itself, but in entering it without a clearly defined national strategy.

If Washington and Beijing both wish to position themselves as Namibia’s preferred partner, then the standard must be clear and uncompromising. Investment must translate into industrial growth. Access to our resources must come with technology transfer, skills development and meaningful local participation. Trade must not simply extract raw materials but strengthen domestic value chains.

Agreements must be structured around our national development priorities, not merely around the urgency of foreign demand. This is not about choosing sides in a global rivalry. It is about choosing Namibia.

We should neither romanticise one partner nor demonise another. Instead, we should negotiate from a position of calm realism. If global powers believe our resources are vital to their security and prosperity, then our development must be equally vital in the terms they offer.