Following Ghana’s Foreign Affairs Minister Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa’s announcement on October 6, 2026, that Cabinet had approved plans to join BRICS, security and defense expert Colonel Festus Aboagye (Retired) has warned that the enthusiasm must be tempered with sober realism.
In his policy brief on the subject titled “A Test of Agency: Ghana’s BRICS Application and the Future of Strategic Diversification,” Col. Aboagye stresses that joining BRICS is not a guaranteed windfall. If improperly managed, diversification could harden into dangerous new forms of dependency and geopolitical entanglement.
Although he maintained that there are potential benefits such as economic diversification, development finance, global voice, etc., Col. Aboagye further outlines 6 critical risks that Ghanaian policymakers must navigate to avoid swapping old dependencies for new ones.
New Dependencies: Swapping One Master for Another
Diversification only grants true independence if external relationships remain genuinely balanced. Col. Aboagye warns that over-relying on any single BRICS heavyweight, such as China or India, for finance, infrastructure, energy, or technology would simply replace traditional Western dependence with a new Eastern one.
The risk is that Ghana merely changes its principal external patron rather than expanding its sovereign choices.
Commodity Dependence: The Raw Material Trap
Expanding trade volumes with BRICS nations is meaningless if the fundamental structure of trade remains unequal. He notes that if Ghana continues to export raw commodities like unrefined gold and cocoa while importing expensive manufactured goods, larger trade figures will only lock in structural economic weakness.
True national benefit depends on product quality and value addition, not raw export volumes.
Opaque Financing: Hidden Debts and Fiscal Traps
While the prospect of alternative development loans is enticing, opaque or poorly understood financing terms create severe fiscal hazards. Col. Aboagye notes that as of June 2026, Ghana’s external public debt stood at US$28.9 billion (representing 45.6% of total public debt), with bilateral debt reporting already lacking transparency regarding specific creditor breakdowns
Untransparent loan agreements, regardless of whether they originate in Washington, Beijing, or New Delhi, pose severe risks to Ghana’s public accounts.
Technology & Infrastructure Lock-In: Losing Control of the Digital Grid
Relying on foreign partners for major physical infrastructure, telecommunications, digital networks, and surveillance technologies can create long-term lock-in costs.
He cautions that Ghana risks surrendering control over its data sovereignty, system administration, and auditability if agreements do not include clear, workable exit strategies and independent oversight options.
Strategic Entanglement: Divided Fronts and Geopolitical Crossfire
BRICS is not a security alliance, but joining puts Ghana within diplomatic and financial webs that overlap with intense global rivalries. Crucially, African states are applying to BRICS individually rather than through a unified continental or ECOWAS position, which erodes their collective bargaining power.
This isolated approach leaves Ghana more vulnerable in negotiations compared to acting through a coordinated regional front.
External Reactions: Western Pushback and Tariff Threats
Navigating global rivalries risks inviting retaliatory pressure from traditional allies, most notably the United States.
In July 2025, U.S. President Trump explicitly warned that countries aligning themselves with what he termed the “anti-American policies of BRICS” would face an additional 10% tariff. Given Ghana’s heavy reliance on Western export markets, development aid, and security cooperation, economic pushback remains a very real threat.
The Bottomline
As Col. Festus Aboagye emphasizes, these risks do not mean Ghana should abandon its BRICS ambitions; rather, they demand vigilance, parliamentary scrutiny, and clear exit clauses in every contract.
Without rigorous oversight, what was meant to be a bold demonstration of national sovereignty could easily turn into a costly strategic misstep.
