By Philippe de Pontet

On Sunday, Goodluck Jonathan was sworn in as the fourth president of Nigeria, guarded by security personnel and shadowed by the country's double-digit inflation. He's not alone. Rising food prices threaten governments across Africa, where food costs consume more than 50 percent of urban dwellers' average incomes. A handful of countries face a heightened risk of unrest as a result, and in a year of multiple elections, incumbents will struggle to cling to power. That said, the intensity of the threat varies widely across the continent, and the widespread upheaval rocking the Middle East isn't in the cards. Here's a cheat sheet for the continent:

• Nigeria and Uganda: The government is in control. In Nigeria, Jonathan can breathe easy. While inflation could rally the recently defeated opposition and fuel protests in opposition strongholds (in the north and Lagos), it won't fundamentally threaten the administration. The elections provided both legitimacy for Jonathan and space for the opposition, creating a release valve for discontent. The Ugandan government is probably safe, too, despite the bloody opposition-fueled protests that have plagued it since it swept the country's national elections in February. President Yoweri Museveni will enact his usual mix of repression and co-option well before Uganda becomes the poster child for any African spring.


• Burkina Faso, Guinea, and Madagascar: grumbling from soldiers. Governments are feeling the heat in countries where public-sector wage demands (including from the military) are intensifying­, but where the funds and political will to satiate them are missing. Burkina Faso, Guinea, and Madagascar are in this unlucky category. In gold-rich Burkina Faso, the presidential guard recently "mutinied" in a bid for housing allowances, touching off wage riots that encouraged President Blaise Compaoré to dissolve his cabinet. The cash-strapped governments of Guinea and Madagascar face potentially restive militaries, too, and each has a history of deposing heads of state in lean times. Madagascar, with fresh elections on the horizon, is the bigger risk because political crisis has roiled the country ever since former President Marc Ravalomanana was overthrown in 2009. Guinea's new president, Alpha Condé, meanwhile, has taken steps to consolidate his rule, including over the once-dominant military.
• Sudan: the continent's big risk. Sudan is on the grave end of the risk spectrum. Steep inflation (17 percent and rising) comes just as the south's looming independence, on July 9, threatens to sap President Omar Hassan al-Bashir's administration in Khartoum. As the Sudanese currency continues to tank, inflation could be the spark that unleashes latent discontent with the administration. Moreover, with long-standing cultural and political ties to Egypt, Sudan is arguably the North African country most susceptible to contagion from the Middle East. If protests do break out, the chief risk will be a heavy-handed government crackdown that ignites further instability.
• Incumbents at risk. If prices continue to soar, opposition-fueled agitation could also swing a few of the continent's elections against incumbents, especially where races are tight, as in Zambia, Senegal, and Ghana. In countries where elections are rigged, such as in the DRC and Cameroon, incumbents will still "win," but unrest will likely bubble up in the cities.
• Stability in the sub-Sahara. Countries that have basic democratic institutions, competent militaries, and diversified economies are of course far less vulnerable to regime-threatening upheaval. This is the case in most of the sub-Sahara, where inflation will stir up policy conundrums and at times protests, but won't shake administrations.

Philippe de Pontet is head of Eurasia Group's Africa practice.

By Scott Rosenstein

Contamination reports out of Japan have prompted more than just Jeremy Piven to second-guess their consumption of sushi and other Japanese delicacies. With many countries including the United States, Hong Kong, Australia, and Singapore banning selected food imports from Japan, fears of a global food supply riddled with radioactivity have been on the rise. The World Health Organization has characterized the situation as "serious." As a result, Japanese food is suffering from a burgeoning branding crisis.

Continued contamination revelations, including recent reports of plutonium in the soil around the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station and trace amounts of radioactive cesium and iodine reaching the United States, will likely exacerbate the situation. For Japan, the resulting economic dislocation will be a small (agriculture only constitutes 1.1 percent of the country's GDP) but notable addition to the long list of challenges it faces.

But should we all stop eating food associated with Japan? When it comes to food safety, emotion sometimes trumps reality. The United States, for example, imports less than two percent of its seafood from Japan. The Food and Drug Administration is now monitoring those imports closely, and many restaurants have already halted whatever remaining food orders they have with Japan. France, Germany, India, China, and South Korea have announced similar measures. These are prudent steps to take. But whether they reassure consumers remains to be seen. Even if none of the food on diners' plates is from Japan, ongoing fears could dent the popularity of Japanese-style cuisine worldwide.

Either way, the risk of elevated trade tensions remains low. As long as the import bans are temporary and not perceived as blanket restrictions intended to favor domestic producers, it is unlikely that conflict will arise. China, for example, consumes a significant proportion of Japan's food exports -- much of which is sold at a premium to high-end consumers with promises of quality and safety. Beijing will need to appear proactive for the sake of public opinion at home, but it won't be easy to replace Japanese imports domestically, making the government less likely to do anything drastic. China probably also wants to maintain good trade relations with its neighbor in order to increase exports of Chinese-made food into Japan, particularly if food shortages there worsen or if consumer confidence in Japanese food takes a serious hit. (Considering China's poor record on food safety, however, confidence in Japan would need to plunge considerably for the latter scenario to play out.)

To be sure, health concerns about the issue are not unfounded. The majority of illness stemming from the Chernobyl accident in 1986 resulted from contaminated dairy consumption. Simply instructing children not to drink milk from affected areas in Chernobyl would have drastically reduced the suffering there. Continued monitoring of the situation in Japan therefore remains critical. But we are still very far from Chernobyl levels of contamination. And as the headline risk about food safety in Japan continues to rise, so too does the possibility that much more immediate emergencies in Japan will receive proportionately less international attention.  

Scott Rosenstein is an analyst in Eurasia Group's Global Health practice.