(Ami Vitale/Getty Images)
Bondo is a scattered cluster of villages in a remote region of Malawi near the border with Mozambique. It sits in the foothills of Mount Mulanje, where residents rely on their feet for transport and a few crops to feed their families. Yet unlike in most places in this impoverished country, when night descends they can now switch on lights, stoves and televisions in their homes.
For electricity has arrived in Bondo. Three turbines were installed in a micro-hydro scheme exploiting the fertile region’s rainfall. And the impact has been life-changing for the 1,800 homes so far connected to a mini-grid. Children can study after dark, so now have a better chance of passing the exams for secondary school rather than having to leave aged 11. Drugs and food can be stored in fridges, so villagers do not have to make the 12-mile trek to the hospital and can produce batches of food or drinks to sell at market. Cooking the evening meal is three times quicker — and far less destructive to the environment — without the need to collect firewood.
One group of women giggled when I asked if they had televisions and watched football in their homes. “Before, our husbands would say they were going off to watch football when they were really walking out with other women. Now they can no long claim they are going off for football,” Bertha told me. The senior chief told me they had never dreamed of having energy supplied to the villages, with a dozen maize mills, many small enterprises, schools, shops and churches also connected to the grid. “When you move around Bondo you see happy people — and that’s because of electricity.”
Yet the big surprise in Bondo is not simply the supply of energy to such an isolated community, in a country where only one in eight citizens has access to grid electricity and on a continent where almost half the 1.2 billion population still lack this life-changing supply. The real eye-opener is the stack of 32 computers inside the concrete pump shed. This innovative mini-grid — located more than two hours from Malawi’s second city of Blantyre along bumpy roads and tracks that can become impassable in a torrential downpour — is mining Bitcoin to fund its operation.
It is a smart idea. The computers used to create valuable new Bitcoin tokens and validate transactions consume around the same amount of energy as a medium-sized country such as Sweden would generate. Hence the stinging critique of how this cryptocurrency wastes the planet’s precious resources. This initiative flips that narrative by using Bitcoin mining to fund energy in parts of Africa that are too poor or remote to merit connection to grids, but which do have plentiful supplies of potential power sources. Mining soaks up the excess energy of these renewable plants. And this delivers not just electricity but a powerful jolt to to drive development in the local economy.
The concept comes from a Kenyan firm, Gridless, set up in 2022, whose backers include Twitter founder Jack Dorsey. There are four other sites in Kenya and Zambia and plans for scores more across the continent. Its aim is to demonstrate how Africa could play a central role in countering the conventional belief that Bitcoin, now 15 years old, is used simply for risky speculation and dodgy transactions. Instead, it backs those who claim it will lead to more inclusive financial systems as it usurps the control of dysfunctional governments and manipulative central banks.
It will also release the community from reliance on foreign handouts to survive. The Bondo power plants were built by Mount Mulanje Conservation Trust, a local group trying to protect the mountain region’s unique bio-diversity, and were initially supported by finance from aid and development agencies — but now Bitcoin covers the running costs. This offers a commercial incentive that does not rely on altruism or subsidies to deliver power to remote regions, while exploiting energy waste at times of low use such as overnight.
Malawi, one of the world’s poorest nations, provides a powerful case study in the failures of aid. As former development minister Rory Stewart said in a lecture at Yale, Britain gave £4.5billion over half a century to this southern African country corroded by corruption and bad governance, yet it ended up “if anything, poorer than it was when we started”.
“Bitcoin can prevent Bondo becoming the sort of white elephant that you see across Africa, built by aid groups and then abandoned,” said Erik Hersman, chief executive of Gridless. He admits that he is “not a big fan” of the sector. “They come in with low-cost loans and grants to finance all these schemes that they say will pay their way in 30 years but the sums never add up. This is a new way to finance development.”
Malawi also demonstrates another reason why there is rising interest in Bitcoin in Africa: people are seeking a safer home for their cash than local currencies. Prices rose sharply after its currency was devalued two months ago by 44% against the US dollar — the second decrease in value of the kwacha in 18 months. Many African countries on the continent have suffered also from catastrophic inflation, while official currency conversion rates can be significantly lower than street rates.
One Kenyan entrepreneur told me she turned to the cryptocurrency after seeing her savings constantly eroded even in a country with lower than average inflation for the continent. “I was trying to save to buy a house but kept finding my sums declining. I wanted more stability so tried Bitcoin, and then found it had other uses,” said Marcel Lorraine, founder of Bitcoin DADA. Her clients include a trader of alternative health products in a Nairobi street market, who found it much cheaper to use than changing currencies after being introduced to it by a Nigerian customer and is now hoping it will provide a stable platform for building her business to obtain a shop.
While Warren Buffet dismissed Bitcoin as “probably rat poison squared” and the economist Paul Krugman has compared it to a Ponzi scam fuelled by libertarian fantasies and “technobabble”, devotees see it as a liberating force due to the decentralised design created by its mysterious and pseudonymous creator, Satoshi Nakamoto. BlackRock, the world’s biggest asset manager, has even applied to launch a Bitcoin exchange-traded fund that may open up the market to the US wealth management industry.
Certainly Bitcoin, for all its fluctuations, can seem comparatively reliable if you live in Africa — or indeed many other parts of the planet, from Argentina to Lebanon. “This is what I have seen everywhere,” said Peter McCormack, who travels the world for a Bitcoin podcast. “Here is an alternative to gold and property for a middle class that has some money and patience, but is seeing expenses and costs rise while savings decline in value. And a strong middle class helps build a strong economy by driving consumer spending, reducing reliance on the state and driving innovation and entrepreneurship.”
Bitcoin has also become a helpful tool for activists and journalists in dictatorships, since it makes it far harder to track funds. In Togo, a West African state run by one despotic family since 1967, it is used to channel cash to opposition and civil society leaders despite the freezing of bank accounts. Bitcoin has been instrumental in delivering donations to Alexei Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation in Russia and the pro-democracy movements in Belarus and Myanmar.
Alex Gladstein, chief strategy officer for the Human Rights Foundation and author of a book arguing that Bitcoin offers freedom from archaic monetary systems and political strife, believes the cryptocurrency is especially exciting for Africans, since they suffer “all kinds of financial repression”. He points out there are 45 currencies on the continent — with 15 still controlled by France — with high transaction fees on conversion deals that are largely processed by Western firms with heavily-fluctuating rates. “Bitcoin provides an escape and an alternative for Africans while its use is less limited than some people think,” he says. “Entrepreneurs there have figured out how people without the internet can use Bitcoin, which is frankly remarkable.”
This agility is typical of the technological innovation exploding across Africa, driven by a young, rapidly growing and increasingly well-educated population. “The beautiful thing about Bitcoin is that it is a bottom-up technology and its adoption has been genuine at all levels,” said one key figure at the second African Bitcoin Conference in Ghana at the end of last year.
Only time will tell if Satoshi’s invention will turn out to be a bubble with bad consequences or, as optimists believe, a driver of profound change in the world. The fraud conviction of Sam Bankman-Fried, who ran one of the world’s biggest cryptocurrency exchanges, and admission of money-laundering by the boss of another major exchange has hurt the reputation of cryptocurrencies for many in the West. But Bitcoin certainly seems to offer something positive in societies scarred by autocracy, colonialism, military coups and woeful governance — as seen with those computers in a concrete shed in rural Malawi turning water into streams of cash to fund electricity.
Ian Birrell is an award-winning foreign reporter and columnist. He is also the founder, with Damon Albarn, of Africa Express.
ianbirrell 
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeWhen the Russians or the Chinese saw Biden’s woeful response and spineless lack of resolve, I struggle to understand why you wouldn’t think that it might embolden them to attack Ukraine, or annexe Taiwan, with impunity.
Optics really matter. If Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan had been seen to be orderly, well-managed and well-executed, it would give the impression that it was happening at the will of the sitting President, who has at his command an awesome military power that might return if the Taliban become another rogue Isis-like regime.
When the withdrawal was as disorderly, poorly managed and badly executed as we saw, then it gives the impression that the sitting president has panicked, that his military is in disarray – not only does that weaken America in the eyes of its superpower rivals it also acts as the best possible recruiting-sergeant for jihadists around the globe, who are emboldened to target US and Western interests because they perceive them as weak.
Military power, now that we are beyond the era of empire building, is mainly about deterrence.
Little about Biden’s panicky response would have deterred anyone. Indeed, in the case of Russia/Ukraine, it merely invited attack.
I agree, who is this writer and what does he really want? because I find this article to be absurd. ‘Defense Authorities’? who are they? Maybe Unherd can explain.
The weapons abandoned – that looks stupid too. The Trillions of $ in Afghani mineral wealth we did not even bother to set up for production so the Afghani people would have an industry is shocking.
When the Russians were in Afghanistan we should have just left them alone. They would have built roads, opened Mines, built dams for hydro – opened girls schools because they know half the population staying home instead of working means endless poverty….
If Russia had gotten it going the place would be an actual Nation now, like a Kazakhstan say…not great, but having an economy and some functioning state.
Instead the USA went in and spent 20 years trying to bring in Woke Feminism they did not want, and pretty much nothing else.
Now China has it – they will get the mines running, and plunder and debt diplomacy, and all kinds of stuff.
USA cannot win the Peace!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Not since MacAthur. We let the NGO’s and stupid products of our hard Lefty Liberal Universities set the agenda for the peace, set the goals in country, set the processes, give them Billions and Billions – and none of them have ever held a job, all they want is to play Woke games with the nations they are given to ‘Fix’ – and they destroy the place, just like they are doing in USA.
I think it is important to draw a distinction between the US defence, military and intelligence and the US politicians. The first group are probably the best in the world at doing what they do – they can deploy massive force anywhere in the world at very short notice and certainly have the best equipment bar none. No other country is remotely close. The second group are quite different !
It might just be that the lack of a history of colonialism in the US (that is large scale colonisation of other countries – they had some small colonies, but nothing large scale) gives them a “cultural gap” which makes overseas adventures like Vietnam and Afghanistan much harder for them. I’m absolutely not arguing for colonialism here, just floating a thought that came into my head.
My own suspicion is that the American understanding of Europe is significantly better than it is for the Middle East, which is far too different from their mindset. US military failures all seem to have been in areas with very different cultures.
So I have some sympathy with the author’s view that failure in Afghanistan should not be seen as a lack of seriousness and commitment in general. If Putin drew that conclusion, then he clearly made yet another blunder.
The Phillipines a small colony? You have probably upset many Filipinos by leaving them out.
I know – was aware when I wrote this and considered that. My point was that the external population and land area colonised by the US is much, much smaller than the US itself, whereas the European countries colonised areas (and often populations) much larger than they were. So the impact of colonisation on the behaviour and culture of the US must be correspondingly much smaller.
It is not the supposed assurance of U.S. help that keeps European leaders from taking strategic autonomy too seriously. Western European societies will not defend themselves militarily in any circumstances. Neither would Japan, South Korea, or for that matter, Taiwan, who even now are spending barely 2% of GDP on defence. Like the US, Europeans will not even secure their own borders. The assurance of US military help, if that is thing, is neither here nor there. Any martial spirit has completely dissipated over two or three generations. Europeans today do not like or admire the US, and the withdrawal of US military support, which nobody has confidence in anyway, will not lead to a reassertion of European military power. That may be regrettable, but it is the reality.
The disordered and humiliating US withdrawal from Afghanistan clearly damaged American prestige. Most historians of decolonisation stress that each successful independence movement degraded the metropole’s aura of invincibility and thus encouraged similar efforts elsewhere. When the European empires came to be perceived as vulnerable, there were concrete consequences. Reputations matter. Of course, this is not the whole story but there is no need to acknowledge the other side of the argument if you can simply label those who disagree with you (in this case as “neoconservative”).
Not remotely persuaded by this argument, well-rehearsed though it certainly is.
It may very well depend mostly upon the optics as opposed to deep analysis of the strategic realities, but there can be no doubt that the chaos of the USA’s withdrawal last year has changed the reckoning of the many people who might risk their lives in future to collaborate with the USA and the West in general.
Not quite as bad as Bladensburg, but a good try none the less.
The US departure from Afghanistan confirmed what was already evident in Iraq, Libya and Syria, The US is so self contained, and consequently self absorbed, that it has no comprenension of what is in the minds in the citizens in other countries. Accordingly things never turn out as they intend. They most certainy do not end up in nation building in the sense that the US regards its own nation. The rest of the world can reasonably expect that the US will be more reluctant, for a while, to commit troops overseas.
What was far more damaging was Biden’s declaration that he would not commit troops to the Ukraine – it was far more important to him to reassure his own electors than leave an uncertainty that could have deterred Putin. Bush at least responded to Putin’s advance in Georgia by declaring the US would send humanitarian aid.
What we can be certain of is that China will analyse what has happened and will invest accordingly. There we need to make a better fist of understanding the minds of the key political leaders, which failed to do with Russia. It is unseen diplomacy that is needed if we are to rebuild and improve harmony in the world
Even compared with the information given on his own website this article is idiotic.
When I was just a kid in the USA, our President, John F. Kennedy, went to Berlin and spoke to those enthusiastic German citizens about the difference between a free country and a country under bondage.
He challenged the people of this world: “Let them come to Berlin!”
Let them come to Berlin to see, first hand, the difference between the western side of that great city, the free zone, as compared to east berlin, controlled by oppressively Soviet occupiers who were depending on a wall that they had built, a wall to keep East Berliners in their captivated territory.
“Ich bin ein Berliner!” he proclaimed to the Berliners, and to the world.
In other words, we are all, together, citizens of this world, and we are in a position of freedom and prosperity ought to reach out and lend a hand to oppressed people, and nations, to assist them in climbing, crawling or flying out of oppressive tyrannical regimes.. .
such as the Taliban.
We gave 20 years to that project, and that was enough.One important lesson in this life is: You can’t win ’em all. Resources do not permit infinite expeditions in foreign lands when there is still much work to be done at home.
My son in-law, a C17 pilot in the US AirForce, assisted by his highly competent crew, piloted the very first transport plane that landed in Kabul a year ago to carry our people and some Afghans out of that talibanated nation. As that C17 was approaching the Kabul airport, a crewman reported to his crew that the runway was “compromised.”
I’ll not go into the details. You many have heard reports, or seen photos, of what was happening at the Kabul airport on that fateful day.
But the pilot of that huge transport jet was required, in order to accomplish their mission while preserving and protecting human life, had to do maneuvers with that big air machine that he had never done before.
Later, that pilot and his crew were awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross, by the US Air Force.
What happened at Kabul on that fateful day was not pleasant, not simple, not easy to perform, and indeed–not without death and suffering– especially later when terrorists set off an explosion at the gates of the airport.
But our guys accomplished the mission that had been laid upon them by our President and the citizens of our United States. It was a long time coming, but it had to be done. Read ’em and weep, all you GOP naysayers.
Like it or not, we are now free–and less-entangled than before that drawdown–free to come to the assistance of other persons or nations in other parts of the world who may require our assistance in resisting and defeating tyranny and oppressive regimes, whether under the radar or over it.
Let them, the nations, come to America! to see what a nation of free people can do to assist other citizens of the world who are seeking help.
Even so, Ask not what America can do for you, but what, together, we can do for the freedom of man.
If you consider Afghanistan a success, I would hate to see what you call a failure.
“We gave 20 years to that project, and that was enough.One important lesson in this life is: You can’t win ’em all. Resources do not permit infinite expeditions in foreign lands when there is still much work to be done at home.”
You haven’t won anything in a long, long, time. This is no reflection on your son-in-law or the men he served with. But it is a reflection of the men they serve under. It’s difficult to know exactly what the world’s opinion of America is, there are so many different relationships or perspectives. It may be the sheer strength of the US military people admire, but I doubt it’s their foreign policy. Who could possibly trust them?
America hasn’t ‘won’ anything since Grenada. The military-industrial complex Eisenhower warned of however has achieved much for its stakeholders.
I arrived, as Master of a small Vessel, shortly after “Grenada” and was assured by the Harbour Master that ‘half-a-dozen London Bobbies would have achieved the same objective in a shorter time’. Nothing against the USMC (sometimes referred to as Uncle Sams Misguided Children) just the politicians using the proverbial big stick before finding out what was really needed.
Why do you classify the GOP as naysayers – “Trumps” original plan was to use Baghram which would have worked well. I can only presume that it was a political decision to change the plan. Any military planner in their right mind would not choose an airfield who approaches were under ‘enemy’ control.