While U.S. President Donald Trump brashly cited the Monroe Doctrine to explain the capture of Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro, he didn’t leave it there. He also underscored a crude tenet guiding his foreign adventures: “It’s important to make me happy,” he told reporters. Maduro had failed in that task after shunning a surrender order by Trump — hence, he was plucked in the dead of night by Delta Force commandos from his Caracas compound, and unceremoniously deposited at New York’s Metropolitan Detention Center. Yet despite the U.S. president’s admonishment about needing to be kept happy — an exhortation accompanied by teasing hints of possible future raids on the likes of Cuba, Colombia and Mexico — one continent has stood out in its readiness to defy him. Maduro’s capture has been widely denounced by African governments and the continent’s regional organizations alike. South Africa has been among the most outspoken, with its envoy to the U.N. warning that such actions left unpunished risk “a regression into a world preceding the United Nations, a world that gave us two brutal world wars, and an international system prone to severe structural instability and lawlessness.” Both the African Union, a continent-wide body comprising 54 recognized nations, and the 15-member Economic Community of West African States have categorically condemned Trump’s gunboat diplomacy as well. Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni even had the temerity to issue a blunt dare to Washington: If American forces attempt the same trick in his country, he bragged, “we can defeat them” — a reversal of his 2018 bromance with the U.S. president, when he said he “loves Trump” because of his frankness. Africa’s forthrightness and unity over Maduro greatly contrasts with the more fractured response from Latin America, as well as the largely hedged responses coming from Europe, which is more focused on Trump’s coveting of Greenland.   Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni had the temerity to issue a blunt dare to Washington: If American forces attempt the same trick in his country, he bragged, “we can defeat them” | Badru Katumba/AFP via Getty Images Fearful of risking an open rift with Washington, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer waited 16 hours after Maduro and his wife were seized before gingerly stepping on a diplomatic tightrope, careful to avoid falling one way or the other. While highlighting his preference for observing international law, he said: “We shed no tears about the end of his regime.” Others similarly avoided incurring Trump’s anger, with Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis flatly saying now isn’t the right time to discuss Trump’s muscular methods — a position shared by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. So, why haven’t African leaders danced to the same circumspect European tune? Partly because they have less to lose. Europe still harbors hope it can influence Trump, soften him and avoid an irreparable breach in the transatlantic alliance, especially when it comes to Greenland, suggested Tighisti Amare of Britain’s Chatham House. “With dramatic cuts in U.S. development funds to Africa already implemented by Trump, Washington’s leverage is not as strong as it once was. And the U.S. doesn’t really give much importance to Africa, unless it’s the [Democratic Republic of the Congo], where there are clear U.S. interests on critical minerals,” Amare told POLITICO. “In terms of trade volume, the EU remains the most important region for Africa, followed by China, and with the Gulf States increasingly becoming more important,” she added. Certainly, Trump hasn’t gone out of his way to make friends in Africa. Quite the reverse — he’s used the continent as a punching bag, delivering controversial remarks stretching back to his first term, when he described African nations as “shithole countries.” And there have since been rifts galore over travel bans, steep tariffs and the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development, which is credited with saving millions of African lives over decades. U.S. President Donald Trump holds up a printed article from “American Thinker” while accusing South Africa President Cyril Ramaphosa of state-sanctioned violence against white farmers in South Africa. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images In May, Trump also lectured South African President Cyril Ramaphosa in the Oval Office over what he claimed amounted to genocide against white South Africans, at one point ordering the lights be dimmed to show clips of leaders from a South African minority party encouraging attacks on the country’s white population. Washington then boycotted the G20 summit hosted by South Africa in November, and disinvited the country from this year’s gathering, which will be hosted by the U.S. According to Amare, Africa’s denunciation of Maduro’s abduction doesn’t just display concern about Venezuela; in some part, it’s also fed by the memory of colonialism. “It’s not just about solidarity, but it’s also about safeguarding the rules that limit how powerful states can use force against more vulnerable states,” she said. African countries see Trump’s move against Maduro “as a genuine threat to international law and norms that protect the survival of the sovereignty of small states.” Indeed, African leaders might also be feeling their own collars tighten, and worrying about being in the firing line. “There’s an element of self-preservation kicking in here because some African leaders share similarities with the Maduro government,” said Oge Onubogu, director of the Africa Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “In some countries, people on the street and in even civil society have a different take, and actually see the removal of Maduro as a good thing.” The question is, will African leaders be wary of aligning with either Russian President Vladimir Putin or China’s Xi Jinping, now that Trump has exposed the impotence of friendship with either by deposing the Venezuelan strongman? According to Onubogu, even before Maduro’s ouster, African leaders understood the world order had changed dramatically, and that we’re back in the era of great power competition. “Individual leaders will make their own specific calculations based on what’s in their favor and their interests. I wouldn’t want to generalize and say some African countries might step back from engaging with China or Russia. They will play the game as they try to figure out how they can come out on top.”

Sarah Brown is the chair of the global children’s charity Theirworld. Justin van Fleet is the president of Theirworld. From day one, every parent instinctively knows what their child needs: A safe environment, proper nutrition, spaces for play, medical attention, loving childcare and high-quality early education.  Time and time again, early investment has been proven to bring the greatest returns, not just for the child and their family but for the whole of society. And given that up to 90 percent of a child’s brain development takes place between birth and the age of five, it is probably the smartest social investment of all. Nobel Laureate James Heckman has shown that children who go to preschool are nearly 50 percent more likely to complete secondary school, no matter their background, and that each dollar invested in early childhood education can yield a return as high as $17. According to a new Theirworld study, results can be even more immediate, as investment in these early years can allow parents to return to work and impact poverty reduction within the first few years. Yet, historically, both governments and aid donors have had trouble finding the funds to invest properly in early childhood development, preferring to delay until children are in school — and even then, to invest more heavily in the later years of educational life. Too often, the youngest are at the back of the line. Investing in them is seen as a nice-to-have, not a must-have, leaving families to carry too great a portion of the burden of childcare — which is often excessively expensive or of poor quality. So why are we waiting? International commitments to early childhood have said the right things, but they have made little or no progress. For example, achieving quality early childhood development was included in the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals yet remains off target by most metrics. Inequality takes root in the first five years of life. | Juan Mabromata/Getty Images Similarly, in 2018, the G20 launched its Initiative for Early Childhood Development. The initiative set ambitious goals to address the disparities in early childhood among its member countries, as the inequality between low- and high-income groups are a problem in every type of economy. It included a pledge for all member nations to invest in the early years. However, nearly half of the world’s children — about 350 million — still have no access to childcare, and 175 million aren’t enrolled in preschool education.  Had the G20 followed through on its pledge, had member states’ spending on childcare and child benefits increased by just 0.6 percent of GDP, our projections show that 16.7 million children could have been lifted out of poverty by year two. Moreover, increasing universal childcare spending by just 0.4 percent of GDP could have brought 67 million more women into the workforce across the G20 by year three. This same increase could have prepared up to 5 million more children for primary school, potentially achieving near 100 percent school enrollment rates as well. These results would have been striking. But what was a lost opportunity could now be a source of great potential.  At last, momentum is shifting toward stronger support for early years investment. After Covid-19, the soaring cost of childcare drove working parents — usually women — out of the workforce in their millions, while the effects of months or years of lost learning on young children made families around the world acutely aware of the importance of getting the early years right. As such, voters in the U.K., U.S. and elsewhere have made early childcare and education a key issue. Governments are now waking up too, and importantly, rather than richer northern nations, major developing economies and medium-sized economies are the ones taking the lead on early childhood policies.  At the recent U.N. General Assembly, Theirworld held an event that brought experts from a wide range of specialties — including climate, gender and business — together with government ministers, youth activists and celebrities. They were there to discuss the importance of investing in the early years as a strategy for tackling inequality and poverty.   Paraguay’s Minister of Childhood and Adolescence Walter Gutierrez described how his country is “truly striving to transform the fortunes of its citizens from the early years,” opening 100 early childhood care centers and launching a school food program.  Brazil’s Minister of Social Development Wellington Dias expressed his deep frustration with the global rise of child hunger and poverty, and acknowledged how early years investment can reduce these blights. Accordingly, Brazil has introduced policies and programs covering health, school meals and childcare, and the country created a benefit for early childhood that has already helped 9 million children aged up to six. But Brazil will hopefully do so much more.  As the chair of the G20 summit this month, the country has been urged by more than 150 civil society and grassroots organizations — as part of the Act for Early Years campaign — to elevate the case for treating early childhood development as an investment in a public good rather than a cost. Due to demand, both domestic and from across G20 countries, its new Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty will have a special emphasis on early childhood, and it will make a concerted effort with donors, financial institutions and national governments to secure commitments to early childhood.  Of course, while we are hopeful for a significant commitment at the summit in Rio de Janeiro, we also urge a note of caution: Commitments have come and gone before. However, even to those of us who have been advocating for this cause for a decade or more, this time does feel different.  Brazil has introduced policies and programs covering health, school meals and childcare. | Pablo Porciuncula/Getty Images There is an organized global movement ready to press for the delivery of results. The Act for Early Years campaign consists of global and grassroots organizations, businesses, celebrities and youth campaigners who are ready to track progress and offer a platform to those taking action. And it will call out those who don’t act in the interest of the world’s youngest and most vulnerable children. Our request is for at least $1 billion in new funding commitments from governments, international donors, businesses and philanthropic donors to kick-start progress and action for the youngest children, as well as a major financing summit in order to boost momentum. Six years on from the G20’s initiative in Argentina, there is no dispute: Inequality takes root in the first five years of life, and only by acting now will we break the cycle of inequality and poverty.