IISWU expert group
Home » Projects & Assignments »

The Global South media on the war in Ukraine


This issue is entirely devoted to the Global South media reaction to the results of the Vilnius NATO summit


  1. Perception of the NATO’s approach to Ukraine

 The Indian Express,  an Indian daily newspaper, published on July 10 the article “Ten military lessons from the Ukraine conflict for India”, written by Venkatesh Varma, a prominent expert on international security, who served as the Ambassador of India to Russia between 2019 and 2021. In his article he argues that one of the most important conclusions that can be drawn from the conflict between Russia and NATO is that confrontations between great powers tend to escalate. If they are not restrained, they will inevitably result in hostilities and their gradual intensification.

 “First, unstable deterrence upended by big-power geopolitical conflict is inherently escalatory. How well Russia fares on the battlefield remains key to the fate of Ukraine as an independent state and the future of NATO. Given the high stakes, all parties to the conflict are in escalation mode, with its consequential deeply worrying risks. Short of membership, NATO may double down on supporting Ukraine.”

“Second, prolonged wars are more than stalemated wars due to their escalating aims. For some in our expert-community, long used to analyzing American wars fought in easy combat environments, Russia’s ability to defy numerous predictions of its defeat has come as a surprise. Counting on Russia’s defeat has been a bad bet.” https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/ten-military-lessons-russia-ukraine-conflict-india-8809103


Clarín, the most circulated newspaper in Argentina,  published on its website on July 12 the article “NATO closes its annual summit “with Ukraine closer than ever” (“La OTAN cierra su cumbre anual “con Ucrania más cerca que nunca”), devoted to the interpretation of results of a toward Russia

“NATO leaders wrapped up their annual summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, with renewed ties with Ukraine after pledging to give it more military aid to fight Russia. But the gesture of support ends there: the country’s future membership in the Atlantic Alliance will come when the conditions are met. Zelenski returns home without a date in his pocket and with a great disappointment.”.

“However, after a series of morning negotiations, Zelensky spoke to the media and presented the summit as “a success” for Ukraine. And President Joe Biden claimed that “everyone agrees” that Kyiv “will one day be in NATO.” “The result of the NATO summit in Vilnius is a success that Ukraine needed and that has great significance,” Zelensky said, on a stage with the leaders of the Group of Seven, who redoubled their support for Kiev, provoking an angry reaction from Russia.”

“Biden and his NATO counterparts also met with Zelensky under the new NATO-Ukraine Council, a permanent body where the 31 allies and Ukraine sit on equal terms and can start crisis talks. This is NATO’s plan to bring Ukraine as close as possible to the military alliance but without actually including it in the group. The leaders said on Tuesday that Ukraine could join “when allies agree that conditions are met.”

“Zelensky was obviously frustrated by Ukraine’s ambiguous membership plan that reflects the challenges of reaching consensus among the alliance members as the war drags on. However, the president thanked the military equipment promised by the group of the seven most industrialized countries, G7”.

“Despite his disappointment, the Ukrainian leader appeared more reconciled than the day before, when he criticized the lack of a scheduled timetable for Ukraine’s NATO accession, which he characterize as “absurd and unprecedented.”

“Ukraine’s future membership was the most divisive and emotionally charged issue at this year’s summit. Ultimately, Western countries are willing to continue providing weapons to help Ukraine do the job NATO was created to do – to confront Russian expansion. But they are not going to allow Ukraine to join their ranks and share responsibility for Ukraine’s safety while the war continues. Admitting Ukraine to NATO at the present moment would automatically drag the entire Alliance into a war with Russia. Article 5 of the NATO charter indicates that members are obligated to defend each other as if it is their own territory is under attack. And because of that the United States and other NATO countries could be quickly involved into direct conflict with Russia.”

“We must stay out of this war but be able to support Ukraine. We have maintained that very fragile balance for the last 17 months. It is to everyone’s benefit if we keep doing it,” Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo said upon arrival at the summit“.

“Anyway, cautiousness has prevailed at the summit, and Biden proved to be especially cautious, stating that he does not believe that Ukraine is ready to join NATO. There are concerns that the country’s democracy is too unstable and corruption too entrenched.”

“However, defining when hostilities end is not an easy task. The authorities have declined to define how this goal is to be achieved, through a negotiated ceasefire or by liberating all the occupied territory of Ukraine. In any case, Putin would practically have veto power over Ukraine’s NATO membership by prolonging the conflict.” https://www.clarin.com/mundo/otan-cierra-cumbre-anual-ucrania-cerca-fecha-ingreso-alianza_0_qPjXnfA5hc.html

(Translated from Spanish by IISWU)


El Universal, a Mexican newspaper based in Mexico City,  published on July 15 the article “NATO: mixed signals ahead of a protracted war” (“La OTAN: señales mixtas ante una guerra prolongada”), written by Mauricio Meschoulam, an eminent Mexican expert on  international relations.

“We could conclude that the NATO summit, that took place this week in the Lithuanian capital, sent mixed signals. On the one hand, in a sense, there was a remarkable unit in the approach to the support of Ukraine. On the other, the cracks in the attitude to Ukraine’s membership in the Alliance are becoming more visible and in this issue confusion and mixed messages have prevailed. In general, we can say that there are different interpretations within NATO of what is happening today and how the Alliance should react.”

“The current forecast is that the anticipated Ukrainian counter-offensive will be slow and its achievements are likely to be limited. According to some military analysts, the Ukrainian army is several weeks behind what it was originally planned. Some think that the Ukrainian forces appear to be focusing on creating an asymmetric level of attrition that sustains Ukrainian manpower at the cost of a slower rate of territorial gains, while gradually wearing down Russian manpower and equipment. This does not mean that the Ukrainian army is stopped, but it does indicate that, if the current tendency continues, the war will drag on for a long time.”

“In this sense, the current Russian tactical objectives consist of defending and holding positions, extending the defense lines in the east and south of Ukraine, and at the same time keep up the ongoing  bombardments of Ukrainian cities and its civilian infrastructure and thus increasing war-weariness and its political consequences, both in Ukraine and among its Western allies.”

“These scenarios are the main reason of developing of the different opinions within NATO.”

“The toughest positions are held by the countries that adjoin Russia or that are geographically closer than others to Ukraine and Russia. Their ministers and officials have argued since this war began  that only a harsh display of force will dissuade Putin. For example in 2022 we participated in the international forum, where the Prime Minister of Estonia said: “When Russia launches an invasion of Estonia, I don’t want to have 2,000 NATO soldiers to start fighting against the attack and then wait for reinforcements. What I want is to have at least 10 or 15 thousand to be deployed to make Putin think twice before deciding to attack.” This group of countries, together with Kyiv itself, argue that Ukraine should be part of NATO as soon as possible, if not in the middle of war, then at least with a timetable and well-scheduled steps toward its accession.”

“There are other countries that, on the contrary, consider that such measures can lead to further escalation. In fact, these are countries that, since the start of the war and even before it began, have preferred to be cautious and wary in their support to Ukraine, essentially out of fear of Russia’s reaction. Macron, for example, had been very reluctant about Ukraine’s accession to NATO in the foreseeable future, as in his view, Russian security considerations had to be considered in any negotiations. It must be said, however, that even Macron’s own discourse has changed, as he noted in his recent remarks at the GLOBSEC forum in Bratislava. Also the position of others like Germany has been switching in the recent months.”

“We could also identify another group of countries headed by the United States. Biden has also tried to be careful about offering Ukraine increased support that has been given only step by step. However, weapons that were previously off the table are now being supplied to Kyiv”.

“The fear that Russia will choose an escalation as a reaction to the increase of support for Ukraine, has been gradually easing. Washington, for example, is continually testing Russia’s tolerance by providing tanks, authorizing the shipment of F16 jets and training Ukrainian pilots to fly those planes, in addition to other equipment that was previously considered “escalatory.”

“Still, when it comes to Ukraine’s admission to NATO, Biden has been clear that the time has not come yet. It would be, in any case, a future accession. But refusing to offer a defined schedule at the present time, the White House shows that it prefers not to tempt Moscow with such a scenario.”

“Besides, there are countries like Hungary or Turkey, which have different issues of their own to negotiate with their NATO allies”.

“Erdogan—who does favor Ukraine’s accession to the alliance—imposed this week an additional condition to vote in favor of Sweden’s accession: Turkish membership in the European Union. A few hours later, Erdogan reversed his position, stating that his conditions were now met, and that he would endorse Sweden’s accession to NATO. However, towards the end of the Vilnius summit, the Turkish president put a halt to the high expectations that had emerged, indicating that everything was in the hands of the Turkish parliament; that what he wanted to see was a program of concrete measures that Sweden would adopt to fulfill Ankara’s promise, but that in any case the subject would not be known before October.”

“Outside of all that, basically, a military alliance is not a mechanism for reconciliation or a international organization for establishing peace. The basis of NATO’s integrity is that an attack on one member is an attack against all of its members and, therefore, any military action (which may be induced or even accidental) could lead to escalation. That is why the very idea of Ukraine joining NATO when fighting an active war with Russia is very complicated at this point. This would immediately cause the expansion of the hostilities.”

“But let’s imagine another scenario in which some interim agreement is reached with Moscow and the current conflict is stopped, but not fully resolved; that is, Russia maintains positions in places like the Crimea or in some areas of eastern Ukraine. Ukraine’s entry into NATO under such a scenario (as many neighboring countries in the area would like), may not activate now, but it does transfer the potential for a global conflict in the years that follow. These are highly sensitive issues that need enormous consideration. However, there is an opposite opinion that suggests that there have already been too many hesitations on the part of NATO. According to this argument, it is the shortage of determination and the lack of projection of that determination, that allowed Putin to commit his current acts”.

“The greatest test for NATO’s unity, however, is not at the present moment, but should be expected in the future. If the war continues for a long tome as many expect, the fracture that can be observed now may gradually intensify. That’s why, even with all his strategic setbacks, Putin continues to bet on time.”  https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/opinion/mauricio-meschoulam/la-otan-senales-mixtas-ante-una-guerra-prolongada

(Translated from Spanish by IISWU)


  1. Apprehension of the sources and causes of the conflict between Russia and NATO


La Prospérité, a daily newspaper in French published in Kinshasa in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, published on July 17, the article “Deep geopolitics versus surface geopolitics” (“La Géopolitique de profondeur versus la Géopolitique de surface”), concerning the geopolitical roots of contradictions between Russia and the Western countries.

“The war in Ukraine will never evolve into a world war because there are no conflicting military issues between Russia and NATO, especially from the US point of view. As great thinkers on war like Clausewitz, Marx or Hegel said, war is simply the continuation of peace. Peace is trade. Trade is war. There is no trade issue between the USA and Russia, so there will be no trade war between Russia and NATO. There will therefore never be a world war which is fought only between the technologically advanced powers. American and Italian microchips are found in Russian weapons. Technologically, Russia is several decades behind, which does not allow it to engage in a war on a planetary scale. So there will be no Third World War as a result of the Ukrainian conflict. Geopolitics is not a simple arrangement of territories. It is rather necessary to understand the arrangements in the estimation of the values of exchange which create the geopolitical space.”

“Deep geopolitics tells us that relationships between the states are rotten, not by accident, but in essence”.

“The war in Ukraine correlates with the world economy, which needs to eliminate overproduction to restore factories to working order again. All the destruction of jeeps, guns, tanks or planes that we see in Russia must take place to start over and redistribute the markets of the world. The Ukrainian war aims to prevent a second treaty of Rapalo who dared to operate a Euro-Asian unity against American imperialism. The USA has real high-level technological competitors only Europe, not Russia. After the First World War, the decisions of the Treaty of Versailles had plunged Germany into indescribable poverty; the Germans lived in shame and rage at heart. They had therefore secretly concluded a military cooperation treaty with Russia in 1924 where German technology would use Russian raw material. This is how Germany was able to invade much of Europe in 1939. All the US is looking for is to avoid a second Rapalo. The Ukrainian war is therefore taking place to oppose Europe to Russia. Here is a geopolitics of depth that it is better to understand in order to go beyond surface geopolitics which stop at supporting Putin or NATO.”

“It is necessary to understand the march of the commodity and the development of exchange value in order to better interpret the facts in their dialectical totality. This is the geopolitics of the depths. She does not see herself. It is therefore a question of apprehending what cannot be seen. We see the riches, the houses, the extremely expensive watches, but all that depends on the exchange value which we do not see. The depths are invisible to those who do not consider the totality but stop at the” https://laprosperiteonline.net/la-geopolitique-de-profondeur-versus-la-geopolitique-de-surface/

(Translated from French by IISWU)


The Punch, a Nigerian daily newspaper, published on July 9 the article “The carnage in Ukraine is lasting too long”, concerning the factors that caused Russian aggression against Ukraine.

“Russia’s fears that Ukraine might join the NATO alliance, thereby bringing Western troops and surveillance to its borders are legitimate concerns that could continue to be addressed by diplomatic and other forms of pressure. The invasion was a wrong call and a grave miscalculation. Obviously, Putin wanted to topple Zelensky, return another pro-Russia puppet to power, and bring Ukraine back into Russia’s orbit.”

“For years, the Russian president has denied Ukraine its own statehood. On August 24, 1991, Ukraine, after centuries of enduring in succession the Russian imperial and Soviet yoke, declared its independence. Putin’s aggression has backfired. Rather than limit NATO expansion, his misadventure has pushed Finland to rush for membership, and the Baltic States – Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania – that all joined in 2004, to move even closer into the NATO fold, raise their military spending and move further away from Russia. On September 10, 2022, Ukraine applied to join, and many of its 31 members favoured its accession. The military alliance, weakened over the years by under-funding and the seeming fading of a Russian threat, has been reinvigorated. Europe has become more united and some of its members now reconsider Russia as a major threat, militarily and economically. The war has also exposed the weaknesses of the Russian military and its society. Putin was badly shaken by the 24-hour rebellion of the Wagner Group mercenary force that was marching towards Moscow, turning back only 200 miles away. The war appears to have shattered his image of invincibility within Russia which he has nurtured in 24 years of dominating the country.”.

“No country should be subjugated under another in the modern world. Efforts should therefore be redoubled to end a war that has disrupted global energy and food markets, and supply chains, and pushed up consumer prices to unprecedented levels. The Eurozone is badly hit, while the African Development Bank said the war had caused a shortage of about 30 million tonnes of grains on the continent, along with sharp price increases. The war brought about a decline in the importation of durum wheat into Nigeria, according to data from the National Bureau of Statistics. Pleas from leaders from seven African countries of South Africa, Comoros, Egypt, the Republic of Congo, Senegal, Uganda, and Zambia, to stop the war have fallen on deaf ears.”

“Ukraine’s internationally recognised borders, and this is backed by two UN resolutions. Russia refuses and continues to lay claim to ‘annexed’ Ukrainian territory. Both countries should, however, consider the lives of their citizens and give peace a chance. The UN, other world leaders, especially in the West, and Russia’s strong ally, China, should step in and broker peace before this war degenerates further and ensnares other belligerents.”.  https://punchng.com/the-carnage-in-ukraine-is-lasting-too-long/


  1. African media on the impact of the conflict between Russia and NATO on political situation and economic activity in the Global South

 Togonews, an official news and information portal Republic of Togo, published on July 16 at its website the article “The frustration of the countries of the South is understandable” (“La frustration des pays du Sud est compréhensible”), in which it is suggested that the Global South countries have been suffering more from the consequences of the war in Ukraine than the developed states.

”US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen tried on Sunday at a meeting of G7 big moneymakers in India to allay concerns that massive support for Ukraine would come at the expense of aid to developing countries. “I reject the idea of a barter” between these two issues, which are in fact closely associated, she declared during a press conference in Gandhinagar in western India, where a G7 Finance ahead of a similar G20 meeting on Monday and Tuesday. A “key priority” is to “redouble our support for Ukraine” because “ending this war is first and foremost a moral imperative. But it’s also the best thing we can do for the global economy,” she said. estimated Ms. Yellen, thus repeating remarks that she had already made in November just before the G20 summit in Bali. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – two major breadbaskets on the planet – has sent shock-waves through the global economy since last year by driving up food and energy prices. An agreement on Ukrainian grain exports transiting through the Black Sea expires on Monday, and Moscow has so far refused to renew it”.

“The “illegal” war launched by Russia in Ukraine is one of the causes of the recent worsening of the over-indebtedness of developing countries, Yellen insisted on Sunday. The G7 countries (United States, Japan, Germany, United Kingdom, France, Italy and Canada) are determined to support Ukraine for as long as necessary to repel the Russian invasion, as they recalled earlier this week in Vilnius on the sidelines of the NATO summit. Insisting on support for Kyiv, however, may be potentially uncomfortable for the G20 host nation this year, with India failing to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine so far. Many countries in the South are also reluctant to openly take sides on the subject. Eager to demonstrate that the industrialized countries are not sparing their efforts for the emerging countries either, Ms Yellen mentioned a series of advances or reforms on various fronts in terms of development aid, which will be discussed at the G20 Finances of Gandhinagar.”

“ The G20 finance ministers meeting in Gandhinagar – an Indian new town, created in the 1960s and named in honor of the national hero of independence Gandhi – will also be an opportunity to continue negotiations for an international agreement on the taxation of multinationals. A preliminary project in this direction has been validated by nearly 140 countries under the aegis of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), but there are still stumbling blocks. Ajay Banga, the new president of the World Bank, worried this week about the “deep mistrust” quietly separating the countries of the North and the South, “at a time when we must come together” to overcome the “interdependent” challenges. the fight against global poverty, the “existential” climate crisis and the post-pandemic economic recovery jeopardized by inflation and the war in Ukraine. The frustration of the countries of the South is understandable. In many ways, these countries are paying the price for the prosperity of other states (…). They are worried that the means promised to them will be redirected for the reconstruction of Ukraine,” he said. “They feel their aspirations are limited because energy rules are not applied universally, and they worry that a burgeoning generation will be locked into a poverty trap,” Banga added in an op-ed. published online.” https://www.republicoftogo.com/toutes-les-rubriques/developpement/la-frustration-des-pays-du-sud-est-comprehensible

(Translated from French by IISWU)


The Standard, one of the largest newspapers in Kenya, published on July 18 the article “Food prices to skyrocket as Russia ends grain export deal”, concerning the impact of Russia’s decision  to quit the deal, which can be critical to food security of the African countries and exacerbate the global food crisis. It is stated in the article that the only way to prevent the disastrous consequences for the African countries is to extend the grain deal.

“The food crisis facing the country is expected to worsen after Russia yesterday ended a United Nations’ backed Ukraine grain-export deal nearly a year into the agreement, heightening uncertainty over global food supplies. The grain deal was hailed as preventing a global food emergency when it was brokered by the UN and Turkey last year. It ended a de facto blockade of Ukrainian ports by Russia, which agreed to let ships pass after inspections in Turkey. The prices of key food items have climbed locally significantly over the last couple of months, adding pressure on cash-starved households still reeling from the economic hit of the Covid-19 pandemic.”.

“But analysts said, Russia’s suspension of the Black Sea grain deal could drive up food prices across the globe including Kenya which relies on both Ukraine and Russia – both among the world’s biggest exporters of grain and other foodstuffs. Russia and Ukraine are significant players in the global commodities market including oil, wheat and maize, with Kenya being one of the importers of these goods.”

“Any fresh severe supply disruption is likely to add price pressures on food commodities at a time the current raging food crisis has stoked social tensions. The move by Russia comes at a time when President Ruto’s administration is facing mounting pressure to address the high cost of living. UN Comtrade — a source for official international trade statistics — shows Kenya was in 2020 the sixth highest importer of agricultural products from Russia, with the main commodity being wheat. Nearly half of Ukraine’s agricultural exports to Africa, including Kenya, is also wheat while maize is about a third. This means any fresh disruption could set up Kenya for increased prices of bread and wheat, spooking a market where food prices are already on a steep rise. Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) data shows the country imported goods worth Sh37.99 billion from Russia and Sh7.47 billion from Ukraine in 2020”.

“The National Treasury had early this year warned Kenyans of tough economic times ahead as energy and food costs soar and inflation rages in the fall-out from the war in Ukraine.”

“Millions of hapless Kenyan families around the country have increasingly found it difficult to put food on the table in the face of unprecedented high prices. These families are looking to President William Ruto’s new administration to soften a severe cost-of-living squeeze.”

“Russia’s President Vladimir Putin had threatened recently to suspend participation in the grain deal. He had however noted that Moscow could return to it if its demands were met for easier rules for its own agriculture and fertilizer exports”.

“Alongside the Black Sea grain deal, a three-year deal was struck last year under which UN officials agreed to help Russia get its food and fertiliser to foreign markets. Moscow says those terms have not been fully implemented, reported Reuters. Western countries say Moscow is trying to use its leverage over the grain deal to weaken financial sanctions, which do not apply to Russia’s agricultural exports.” https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/health/business/article/2001477447/food-prices-to-skyrocket-as-russia-ends-grain-export-deal


This Day, a Nigerian national newspaper, on July 17 published at its news website the article “Higher Food, Commodity Prices Raise Inflation to 22.79%”, concerning the effects of the war on the Nigerian economy.


“The Consumer Price Index (CPI) which measures the rate of change in prices of goods and commodities increased by 0.38 per cent to 22.79 per cent in June compared to 22.41 per cent in the preceding month, the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) disclosed yesterday. Year-on-year, headline inflation was higher by 4.19 per cent when compared to 18.60 per cent in June 2022, the NBS added”.

“Meanwhile Nigeria’s current food inflation may worsen as Russia, yesterday formally announced the suspension of its participation in the Black Sea grain deal, hours before its previous extension expired. The agreement before it was called off, ensured that no ships would be attacked entering and leaving the Ukrainian port while a separate one also facilitated the movement of Russian food and fertiliser. Russia’s withdrawal from the pact sent shivers through African countries, including Nigeria, which is currently reeling from inflation, climate shocks and conflicts.

Nigeria’s food security remains vulnerable to major global shocks as over 50 per cent of the foods consumed by Nigerian households come from purchased sources, according to the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Also, Nigeria is one of the 10 countries with the highest number of people in food crisis, according to the 2022 Global Report on Food Crises.

“Nigeria traditionally gets much of its wheat from the Black Sea region and would therefore be impacted. Wheat is the third most consumed grain in Nigeria and by the end of Q3 2021, data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) showed that Nigeria imported durum wheat and mackerel worth N88.46 billion and N30.69 billion, respectively, from Russia.”.

“The Black Sea grains deal, brokered by the United Nations and Turkey in July 2022, helped bring down global food prices and allowed aid agencies to access hundreds of thousands of tonnes of food at a time of rising needs and scarce funding. Nearly 33 million metric tonnes of corn, wheat and other grains have been exported by Ukraine under the agreement, which has been extended twice since it was first signed. Kyiv has also contributed 725,200 (2.2 per cent) tonnes to the UN World Food Programme (WFP). The reason for Russia’s decision is not far-fetched. Some days ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin during an interview said “not one” of Moscow’s conditions for the deal to function had been met. “I want to emphasise that nothing was done, nothing at all. It’s all one-sided,” said Putin. “The obligations recorded in the relevant Russia-UN memorandum to remove obstacles to the export of Russian food and fertilisers still remain unfulfilled,” Putin said , according to a statement by the Kremlin. Russia has also claimed that not enough grain was being sent to the poor countries, while the UN has argued that the deal had helped those states by lowering food prices by over 20 per cent across the world.”.

“The end of the deal means that the pressure by the United Nations and the diplomatic shuttle between Russia and Ukraine by seven African leaders, including the presidents of the Comoros, Senegal , South Africa and Zambia , as well as Egypt’s prime minister and top envoys from the Republic of Congo and Uganda did not yield much results”.

“Beyond the direct impact of reduced supply from Ukraine, one of the world’s largest grains suppliers, instability in global markets would likely lead countries with modest surpluses to hold back exports, said Saraf. Nigeria was projected to import 6 million tonnes of wheat in the 2022-23 marketing year, a 3 per cent decrease over the previous season, according to a Global Agricultural Information Network report from the Foreign Agricultural Service of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). In 2021, Nigeria imported 51 percent of its wheat from Russia, Lithuania, Latvia, and other Baltic countries. Wheat from Russia, Ukraine, and other Black Sea countries remains the cheapest option for many milling companies in Nigeria. Beyond the wheat import, Nigeria also buys a large quantity of potassium from Russia, which is a by-product for production of fertilizers. The country’s fish and wheat imports from Russia plunged by 83 per cent year-on-year in the first quarter of 2022 amid the ongoing war in Ukraine, data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) shows”. https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2023/07/18/higher-food-commodity-prices-raise-inflation-to-22-79