Malawi is among the dozens of African countries excluded from a highly selective US-Africa business summit hosted by United States President Donald Trump, who has invited only five African leaders to Washington for a closed-door meeting focused on commerce and strategic interests.
The exclusive working lunch, currently in session at the White House, will bring together the presidents of Mauritania, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Senegal, and Gabon–a narrow slice of the continent’s leadership that omits not only Africa’s economic giants like Nigeria and South Africa but also smaller but geopolitically engaged nations like Malawi.
A White House official told CNN that the meeting is intended to “explore commercial opportunities that benefit both the American people and our African partners.” However, the limited invitation list has raised eyebrows across the continent and among international analysts, who view it as a glaring indicator that Trump does not regard Africa as a unified or strategic partner, but rather as a transactional platform for US interests.
“This is not engagement–it’s cherry-picking,” said Professor Christopher Afoke Isike, a leading voice in African international relations at the University of Pretoria. “Trump is targeting countries that are either politically pliable or rich in resources, and avoiding those that assert themselves independently or align with powers like China or Russia.”
Despite repeated US assertions about Africa’s economic potential, the Trump administration has steadily narrowed its diplomatic focus, particularly in comparison to its predecessors. Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden both convened full-scale summits involving nearly all African heads of state. Trump, on the other hand, has shown little interest in multilateral African engagement, having held a similar mini-summit with nine leaders in 2017–and now only five in 2025.
Observers note that the five invitees are neither continental heavyweights nor major players in pan-African politics. What they do have in common is untapped mineral wealth, strategic Atlantic access, and growing migration flows to the US–factors that fit neatly into Trump’s foreign policy agenda, which now emphasizes competition with China and efforts to stem illegal immigration.
The US is increasingly concerned about China’s dominant trade and investment footprint across Africa, and analysts believe Trump is seeking to counter that influence through targeted partnerships. But critics argue that the narrow scope of engagement–ignoring countries like Malawi, Kenya, and Ghana–risks alienating the broader continent.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Dakar-based journalist Mamadou Thior, who covered the first US-Africa Leaders’ Summit in 2014, said the nature of Trump’s engagement is unmistakable: “Trump is not looking for partners–he’s looking for deals. And only with countries he believes he can control.”
Malawi’s absence is particularly notable given its push in recent years to attract foreign investment and assert a greater presence on the diplomatic stage. Yet, its failure to appear even on the radar of this summit suggests Washington sees no strategic urgency in engaging Lilongwe–a reality that may force Malawi to re-examine its foreign policy alignment and regional standing.
“This kind of exclusion should be a wake-up call,” said a Lilongwe-based political analyst who requested anonymity. “If Malawi wants to be taken seriously, it needs to do more than just show up at donor forums. It needs a clear, assertive strategy on global partnerships, trade, and diplomacy.”
As the Trump administration moves away from traditional aid models–having already dismantled most of USAID programs in Africa–analysts warn that African nations left out of this new transactional order could find themselves increasingly isolated unless they reposition themselves.
For now, the message from Washington is clear: Africa’s strategic value to the US lies not in its collective strength, but in its resources, vulnerabilities, and geopolitical convenience–and only those who fit that mold will be invited to the table.