I am a lot less bullish than you on Africa’s geopolitical relevance in the coming decades: I struggle to see how the continent would be anywhere near as pivotal to the global power balance as, say, India. Nevertheless, I am extremely wary of encouraging “competition” in Africa, and particularly of encouraging increased American attention. In the 70s and 80s during the oil crisis, and more recently during the GWOT, US officials didn’t need convincing of the importance of power projection in the Middle East. That hasn’t exactly worked out to the region’s advantage. Latin America has also long had clear importance to the American economy and security posture. The consequences of that for South Americans haven’t been pretty either. You pointed out that careerists in the state department tend to avoid Africa affairs: I’m not convinced that’s a bad thing, given their results elsewhere. It may prove better to let the ‘Africanists’ do their thing quietly without too much political attention. Part of the reason China’s foreign policy personnel have been so much more effective in Africa than in the EU and US is that those more high-profile postings go to diplomats better versed in CPC politics than the societies they are immersed into. There may be short term tactical opportunities to be gained playing off the major powers, but that is more than offset by the risk that African elites will attempt to draw these powers into their own disputes, or be coerced into picking a side. We’re already seeing significant electoral interference, tacit and overt support for coups and dictatorships in the name of counterterrorism or immigration control, awkward silences on human rights violations by ‘friendly African states’. With Russia also seemingly set on shoring up its influence on the continent, this is no time to invite the basilisk glare of the US foreign policy establishment. There are worse fates than being ignored.
I think the idea here is that African cannot autarky its way to prosperity. Whether we like it or not, we have to engage the world. Now the question is, do we want to have our options of development partners who are attuned to our priorities limited to China, or do we want to increase that menu of options?
On the point about domesticating global geopolitics, it's not entirely obvious why better informed attention would result in more coups. The people who orchestrated the Cold War coups were not particularly knowledgable about Africa. More broadly, African states cannot hide under a rock. Either they proactively engage the world and its powers and try to influence the agenda, or they will be acted upon - especially as long as the region's states remain poor and weak.
Mar 28, 2023·edited Mar 28, 2023Liked by Ken Opalo
Thanks for responding. Your point about needing to engage with the world is well taken. But I claim that ‘increasing the menu of options’ entails very significant risks, without correspondingly lucrative returns. If we manage to impress upon the rest of the world our importance to their fate without first shoring up domestic resilience, we’d only be inviting unwanted interference. It’s already so easy to subvert or coerce African governments; if the potential rewards appear greater we’ll just get more of that.
It’s also quite likely our elites will merely weaponize this new tension for self-preservation. Consider the ends to which the specters of mass migration or terrorism have been deployed. China is becoming a similar boogeyman, used to justify propping up corrupt, incompetent and tyrannical leaders.
You’re right that the Cold War coups weren’t conducted by area experts. But better informed policy teams won’t change American interests, only make achieving them more efficient. Their Middle East policy was driven by experts, while PEPFAR was a Bush administration afterthought. The results of the former were a disaster for the people not because the officials weren’t knowledgeable but because their primary focus was American security. And 2023 offers many easier, subtler ways of procuring influence than were available in the Cold War: disinformation on social media, for instance, or cyber campaigns for which we’re horribly underprepared.
In addition, I don’t see any plausible future US government having the political capital to invest seriously in Africa anyway, so the potential benefits are very limited. If this administration can’t get domestic infrastructure bills passed, how likely is it they’ll be funding power plants in Mozambique? Attracting their attention via China will probably lead to an even more heavily militarized relationship, along with more Cold War-esque bills like the ‘Countering Malign Russian Influence in Africa Act’
We certainly need serious development partners. And I agree that African states should define their interests clearly and push them aggressively in international spaces. But trying to spark America’s entry into a new scramble for Africa through the lens of competition with China seems decidedly ill-advised. Perhaps a stronger society, with a more nimble leadership class could pull off such a balancing act, but we’ll likely just end up casualties of a war above our heads.
I guess I’m operating under the assumption that the cat is already out of the bag in terms of Western attention to Africa. It’s not like France isn’t doing the same things it’s done over the last 60 years, for example.
So the risks are baked in, for sure. As I previously argued, African states should think hard about how to navigate the current multipolar moment.
I share your trepidation about the quality of our elites and their water carrying tendencies. But the response to that can’t be autarky or merely choosing one side. I’d argue that Francophone water carriers have styled up somewhat because China gave them an outside option. We don’t want to end up in a situation where elites simply carry water for one major power all the time.
Again, the risks you highlight are real. But their management will be on us, especially since as I’ve noted I’m convinced that the cat’s out of the bag. Tye attention is already there. Now the question is whether or not we can make the best of it.
China has always been an empire, it has an elective emperor selected by mandarins and potentates, like the old Mongolian Khanate . . . The vast majority of Chinese are Buddhists . . . The founder of the Yuan dynasty was Kublai Khan, who ordered all Buddhist temples in China to be led by the Shaolin Temple . . . eight princes during the Ming dynasty converted to Shaolin . . . China was primarily a Buddhist nation until the Mao Dynasty . . . Falun Gong is repressed in China because it is an offshoot of Shaolin Buddhism.
Many Chinese are starving to death and the air is very foul because of all the pollution . . . Western governments in their clamoring for hegemony moved their manufacturing to China where environmental and safety standards are ignored by their oligarchy, the empire views their own people as an expendable resource . . . All of the electronics manufacturing and rare earth mining is incredibly toxic, electric vehicles are ten times more harmful than simple gasoline combustion engines . . . Africa is viewed as a new source of rare earth metals where child labor is very, very cheap.
Half of China's natural rivers are gone, not just polluted, but gone altogether . . . All of India's major rivers originate in the Himalayas, this is why both countries have soldiers there and continuing skirmishes are occurring on the border. Of course, this wouldn't be an issue if China wasn't in Tibet to begin with, would it?
Many Chinese are starving to death and the air is very foul from pollution . . . Western governments in their clamoring for hegemony moved their manufacturing to China where environmental and safety standards are ignored by their oligarchy, the empire views their own people as an expendable resource . . .
All of the electronics manufacturing and rare earth mining is incredibly toxic, electric vehicles are ten times more harmful than simple gasoline combustion engines . . . Africa is viewed as a new source of rare earth metals where child labor is very, very cheap.
Half of China's natural rivers are gone, not just polluted, but gone altogether . . . All of India's major rivers originate in the Himalayas, this is why both countries have soldiers there and continuing skirmishes are occurring on the border. Of course, this wouldn't be an issue if China wasn't in Tibet to begin with, would it?
You say, ❝we’ll likely just end up casualties of a war above our heads,❞ this is true, especially if China and India go to war, that is 2/3 of the earth's population at war with each other over water and territory.
The United States government is a wholly owned subsidiary of the American Israeli Political Action Committee . . .
“Jews and some gentiles control the banking industry, international banks. They do! In Washington right next to the Holocaust Museum is the Federal Reserve where they print the money. Is that an accident?” — Louis Farrakhan
Good point - remember the often quoted phrase about how deadly it is to be a friend of the ynaks
...who are incapable of behaving otherwise - whenever the US 'invests' in a country it is to destabilise both that country and their neighbours, witness Rwanda and Morocco, that is to not mention their role in Libya and Sahel, and so on, the list is endless
The Chinese have other 'competitors' for investing in Africa - Russia, the numerous visits by Lavrov have opened up perspectives of alternate energy and security solutions, Iran and Turkiye
Is not piecemeal multipolar investment to be preferred to the same old desperate duo ... bla bla diversity democracy....and.... infrastructrural gigantism accompanied by incessant mineral extraction
The EUSSR needed Libya’s oil, but Muammar Gadhafi decided he wanted gold instead of worthless fiat currency from the EU…
What was the first thing NATO did when Gaddafi was deposed besides stealing all of Libya’s gold? Form a new government? NOPE, they formed a new Libyan national bank. Now, why would they do that? Because even if Muammar was deposed, he and his heirs would still be the sole proprietors! So, guess what?
And while Leon Puñettas (sic) was busy with gay pride celebrations at the Pentagon, two Navy Seals, a US Airman, and a U.S. ambassador were murdered, all because everyone was being so fucking gay.
Jews Albright and Clark had NATO bomb Serbia so the IMF Jews could make loans for rebuilding and get control of Serbian iridium assets… while Saudi non-profit NGOs kept the KLA terrorists well fed and well-armed… Just like ISIS in Syria… their Zionist bedfellows on Wall Street want Ukraine for GMO grain crops… Monsanto, Genentec, ADM, etc., are all buying land with the help of the Jews at the IMF by giving the Ukrainian “Dill” idiots debt relief… IMF = Israeli Military Fund
The Ukrainian parliament is full of Jewish apparatchiks… Jewish U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D), great grandson of Jacob Schiff (who funded Bolshevism, Leon Trotsky, and the October Revolution from Wall Street) is following in his great grandfather’s footsteps by illegally trafficking weapons with Igor Pasternak, funding foreign conflicts abroad… And trying to get Syria for the oil pipelines by blaming the Russians for another false flag… ISIS = Khazar = Kiev junta = Zionist IMF
The banksters need a war desperately right now. They’ve tried so hard in Syria, and it just hasn’t worked. Then they got crazy Trump actually saying we should stay out of the Middle East and focus on our own problems, and people were listening… What’s a self-respecting globalist financier to do?
So, they sent their puppets like McCain, Kasich, Romney, Clinton, and Biden out to talk up the fight against “evil” and threaten Russia, hoping to fool those dumb white ‘Murkins one more time into sending their sons off to die for God and Country and Goldman Sachs.
IMF Jews are in bed with Turks, Saudis, and NATO, they were worried about a Trump audit of the Federal Reserve and about Trump and Putin teaming up to destroy them once and for all…Trump was a vote for peace, and peace does not make money for the weapon industry. Trump wouldn’t give the deep state the shadow wars they wanted in Syria and Ukraine, so they rigged two US elections… and the first thing they did afterwards was send troops to Syria.
The pseudo secular media and their Zionist masters profit from destabilization. Retaining control of US foreign policy is what drives the neo-cons and Hillary’s flying monkeys… along with the millions Goldman Sachs and the Saudis have paid them.
❝Is not piecemeal multipolar investment to be preferred to the same old desperate duo ... bla bla diversity democracy....and.... infrastructrural gigantism accompanied by incessant mineral extraction ❞
.
Jewish Corruption in Ukraine . . . by Andrew Joyce, Ph.D.
❝. . . the present conflict is a huge distraction from the fact that, for decades, the biggest threat to Ukraine hasn’t been Russia, but financiers and speculators operating with impunity within Ukraine’s borders to exploit ethnic Ukrainians and plunder their resources.❞
A related, but distinct, issue to USAID’s focus on marginalized populations is it’s focus on rural areas on a continent that is rapidly urbanizing. This is both meaningful for progress on development goals and the constituency for donor-funded projects.
I'm curious to know your thoughts about USAID being considered an arm of US intelligence agencies. There is this Telesur article https://www.telesurenglish.net/opinion/USAID-or-US-CIA-20160919-0013.html from 2016 which nicely sums up the perspective I'm referencing. My apologies if you've already addressed this in other writing, I've just come across your Substack today. If you've written previously about this, perhaps you could point me in the right direction? Regardless I'm looking forward to reading more of your writing, thank you for this piece!
The United States government is a wholly owned subsidiary of the American Israeli Political Action Committee . . .
.
Jewish Corruption in Ukraine . . . by Andrew Joyce, Ph.D.
❝. . . the present conflict is a huge distraction from the fact that, for decades, the biggest threat to Ukraine hasn’t been Russia, but financiers and speculators operating with impunity within Ukraine’s borders to exploit ethnic Ukrainians and plunder their resources.❞
This is a really interesting article! I think related to some of the comments below - from a US foreign strategy perspective, how would you prioritize Africa vs. India (or SE Asia)? And what would the key goals be - securing good diplomatic relations? Establishing manufacturing base or military positioning? To those ends - what regions/countries in Africa would be the top priotities?
My ex is black and told me that he had blacks through the WH non-stop. When an older woman asked him why he hadn't used his executive powers more often to benefit the black community, he reminded her of what happened to Jack Kennedy. He was acutely aware that his life was under threat for 8 years.
“Obama was selected before he was elected. And the people that selected him were rich, powerful members of the Jewish community. They selected him to be their first Jewish president.”—Louis Farrakhan
....JFK was helping the Irish Americans too much for wasp taste, and so they...?
Obama looks pretty comfortable - the only thing apart from his wife he's visibly afraid of is his golf handicap - the reason why he did nothing is because he was afraid for his library and pension plan, that and because he'd been long bought paid for and well trained, just like the rest they put in power over there, or over here for example Kagamé
Try being poor in the US whatever colour to learn what life under constant threat means, or rather try it in Africa
“Obama was selected before he was elected. And the people that selected him were rich, powerful members of the Jewish community. They selected him to be their first Jewish president.”—Louis Farrakhan
I made the same complaint to a black friend, whose reply surprised me: "He did more for blacks than anyone by being black and the president. From age 12-21, my son lived under a black president. That's plenty".
“Obama was selected before he was elected. And the people that selected him were rich, powerful members of the Jewish community. They selected him to be their first Jewish president.”—Louis Farrakhan
Your friend's comment is merely recognition that no one, hardly, can point to anything Obama did to improve life for A-A in the US - anything means any specific political action, and not the display of his skin colour which was not of his choice nor under his control
On this saying -Any random A-A can do for any other - agency, politics, a plan are not required - life does not change but we must suppose we feel better : this is tokenism
And does not refute the A man on the street who saw nothing to remark on.....just another President - yet I can imagine the African élites rubbing their hands together and saying Great, this is all they could come up with? we too can play the diversity merry go round
“Obama was selected before he was elected. And the people that selected him were rich, powerful members of the Jewish community. They selected him to be their first Jewish president.”—Louis Farrakhan
the manner in which Chinese officialdom treats their African counterparts at a personal level?
One mid-level African official who hosted a mid-level Chinese official told me how excited he was when his new Chinese friend told him that, if he wished to bring his family to Beijing, he (the Chinese official) would organize a government-owned apartment and African cook for them.
Later that year he attended a conference in Addis and recounted his experience to an Ethiopian colleague, who responded, "My Chinese guy told me the same thing".
This is anecdote taken to a new and higher level of trivial - one may easily imagine that there are many more examples extant of such and far worse from the mouths of europeans or americans
How about this pair - some time back, around the time of Obama, the US State Department stumbled across a clever idea, they would send african-americans as ambassadors to African countries - Bingo!
At this time there was a certain amount of drum beating in Africa on behalf of Obama, in reality mostly restricted to governing élite circles, the A on the street being more realist about the ruling class - a Cameroon taxi driver was caught on tape saying why should I care who they elect he's never done anything for me - he was right : Obama never did anything for Africans, not much more for African Americans, some have said much less
USAID is designed to subsidize US and Western NGOs that can be used to manipulate the internal politics of the receiver nations, as well as subsidize US farmers. Its is a very useful sister to the NED, and part of the US integrated regime change network. Either the US starts respecting African nation's sovereignty in all respects or its influence will fade away. Of course, this would include the alteration of the continent's relationship's with the rapacious and extractive Western corporations such as Cargill, so it will not happen. China stands out just by not being as bad as the US.
All of the electronics manufacturing and rare earth mining is incredibly toxic, electric vehicles are ten times more harmful than simple gasoline combustion engines . . . Africa is viewed as a new source of rare earth metals where child labor is very, very cheap.
Half of China's natural rivers are gone, not just polluted, but gone altogether . . . All of India's major rivers originate in the Himalayas, this is why both countries have soldiers there and continuing skirmishes are occurring on the border. Of course, this wouldn't be an issue if China wasn't in Tibet to begin with, would it?
There is a lot to unpack in your comment. Firstly, it would seem in your assertion that "electric vehicles are ten times more harmful simple gasoline combustion engines" you are completely ignoring the existential threat of anthropogenic climate change. I would also be interested in any sources backing up your assertion.
With respect to rare earth metals, Madagascar is the only African nation that rates in the top ten producers, at a distant number 9. The extraction and processing of rare earth minerals is highly capital intensive, there is little or no proof of child labour being used (this is for actual rare earth minerals, not coltan etc. where the DR is intentionally kept weak to facilitate the looting of its resources by external parties). You are also discounting the onward advances of materials science that reduces specific material dependencies - as with the ongoing reduction in battery dependencies upon expensive metals.
The decline of "half of China's rivers" is significantly a result of anthropogenic climate change and historical inaccuracies. As we have seen with places such as Las Vegas, the level of water waste is so high that when push comes to shove massive reductions in water usage can be achieved, together with routing of water to arid areas (in China the issue is with the arid north, not the wet south).
Pakistan could make the same claim toward India when it comes to the control of its water sources, as also could Bangladesh. There has been no history of China using water as a weapon against India. The Chinese state freed the Tibetan population from medieval serfdom, where 99% of the people were utterly exploited and treated worse than animals by the elites. Tibet is a historical part of China, as is Hong Kong, as is Xinjiang and as is Taiwan. China has much more claim to Taiwan than the US has to Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam etc.
Mining the rare earth metals alone are 10 times more destructive . . . and that's not mentioning the manufacturing process necessary for the chipsets in all the superflous gadgets in your electric cars.
I'm an industrial process engineer in semiconductor manufacturing, and an expert in hazardous waste operations.
When discussing hypothetical outcomes related to the topic of China-US competition in Africa, I once said to a friend in Mozambique the Chinese proverb, "when the snipe and the clam grapple, it is the fisherman who stands to benefit" to which she responded, "when elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers." She was less optimistic that her government would be able to effectively engage with and harness the potential benefit from this geopolitical competition. Great piece - particularly the section on USAID.
I am a lot less bullish than you on Africa’s geopolitical relevance in the coming decades: I struggle to see how the continent would be anywhere near as pivotal to the global power balance as, say, India. Nevertheless, I am extremely wary of encouraging “competition” in Africa, and particularly of encouraging increased American attention. In the 70s and 80s during the oil crisis, and more recently during the GWOT, US officials didn’t need convincing of the importance of power projection in the Middle East. That hasn’t exactly worked out to the region’s advantage. Latin America has also long had clear importance to the American economy and security posture. The consequences of that for South Americans haven’t been pretty either. You pointed out that careerists in the state department tend to avoid Africa affairs: I’m not convinced that’s a bad thing, given their results elsewhere. It may prove better to let the ‘Africanists’ do their thing quietly without too much political attention. Part of the reason China’s foreign policy personnel have been so much more effective in Africa than in the EU and US is that those more high-profile postings go to diplomats better versed in CPC politics than the societies they are immersed into. There may be short term tactical opportunities to be gained playing off the major powers, but that is more than offset by the risk that African elites will attempt to draw these powers into their own disputes, or be coerced into picking a side. We’re already seeing significant electoral interference, tacit and overt support for coups and dictatorships in the name of counterterrorism or immigration control, awkward silences on human rights violations by ‘friendly African states’. With Russia also seemingly set on shoring up its influence on the continent, this is no time to invite the basilisk glare of the US foreign policy establishment. There are worse fates than being ignored.
I think the idea here is that African cannot autarky its way to prosperity. Whether we like it or not, we have to engage the world. Now the question is, do we want to have our options of development partners who are attuned to our priorities limited to China, or do we want to increase that menu of options?
On the point about domesticating global geopolitics, it's not entirely obvious why better informed attention would result in more coups. The people who orchestrated the Cold War coups were not particularly knowledgable about Africa. More broadly, African states cannot hide under a rock. Either they proactively engage the world and its powers and try to influence the agenda, or they will be acted upon - especially as long as the region's states remain poor and weak.
Thanks for responding. Your point about needing to engage with the world is well taken. But I claim that ‘increasing the menu of options’ entails very significant risks, without correspondingly lucrative returns. If we manage to impress upon the rest of the world our importance to their fate without first shoring up domestic resilience, we’d only be inviting unwanted interference. It’s already so easy to subvert or coerce African governments; if the potential rewards appear greater we’ll just get more of that.
It’s also quite likely our elites will merely weaponize this new tension for self-preservation. Consider the ends to which the specters of mass migration or terrorism have been deployed. China is becoming a similar boogeyman, used to justify propping up corrupt, incompetent and tyrannical leaders.
You’re right that the Cold War coups weren’t conducted by area experts. But better informed policy teams won’t change American interests, only make achieving them more efficient. Their Middle East policy was driven by experts, while PEPFAR was a Bush administration afterthought. The results of the former were a disaster for the people not because the officials weren’t knowledgeable but because their primary focus was American security. And 2023 offers many easier, subtler ways of procuring influence than were available in the Cold War: disinformation on social media, for instance, or cyber campaigns for which we’re horribly underprepared.
In addition, I don’t see any plausible future US government having the political capital to invest seriously in Africa anyway, so the potential benefits are very limited. If this administration can’t get domestic infrastructure bills passed, how likely is it they’ll be funding power plants in Mozambique? Attracting their attention via China will probably lead to an even more heavily militarized relationship, along with more Cold War-esque bills like the ‘Countering Malign Russian Influence in Africa Act’
We certainly need serious development partners. And I agree that African states should define their interests clearly and push them aggressively in international spaces. But trying to spark America’s entry into a new scramble for Africa through the lens of competition with China seems decidedly ill-advised. Perhaps a stronger society, with a more nimble leadership class could pull off such a balancing act, but we’ll likely just end up casualties of a war above our heads.
These points are all well taken.
I guess I’m operating under the assumption that the cat is already out of the bag in terms of Western attention to Africa. It’s not like France isn’t doing the same things it’s done over the last 60 years, for example.
So the risks are baked in, for sure. As I previously argued, African states should think hard about how to navigate the current multipolar moment.
I share your trepidation about the quality of our elites and their water carrying tendencies. But the response to that can’t be autarky or merely choosing one side. I’d argue that Francophone water carriers have styled up somewhat because China gave them an outside option. We don’t want to end up in a situation where elites simply carry water for one major power all the time.
Again, the risks you highlight are real. But their management will be on us, especially since as I’ve noted I’m convinced that the cat’s out of the bag. Tye attention is already there. Now the question is whether or not we can make the best of it.
China has always been an empire, it has an elective emperor selected by mandarins and potentates, like the old Mongolian Khanate . . . The vast majority of Chinese are Buddhists . . . The founder of the Yuan dynasty was Kublai Khan, who ordered all Buddhist temples in China to be led by the Shaolin Temple . . . eight princes during the Ming dynasty converted to Shaolin . . . China was primarily a Buddhist nation until the Mao Dynasty . . . Falun Gong is repressed in China because it is an offshoot of Shaolin Buddhism.
Many Chinese are starving to death and the air is very foul because of all the pollution . . . Western governments in their clamoring for hegemony moved their manufacturing to China where environmental and safety standards are ignored by their oligarchy, the empire views their own people as an expendable resource . . . All of the electronics manufacturing and rare earth mining is incredibly toxic, electric vehicles are ten times more harmful than simple gasoline combustion engines . . . Africa is viewed as a new source of rare earth metals where child labor is very, very cheap.
Half of China's natural rivers are gone, not just polluted, but gone altogether . . . All of India's major rivers originate in the Himalayas, this is why both countries have soldiers there and continuing skirmishes are occurring on the border. Of course, this wouldn't be an issue if China wasn't in Tibet to begin with, would it?
Many Chinese are starving to death and the air is very foul from pollution . . . Western governments in their clamoring for hegemony moved their manufacturing to China where environmental and safety standards are ignored by their oligarchy, the empire views their own people as an expendable resource . . .
All of the electronics manufacturing and rare earth mining is incredibly toxic, electric vehicles are ten times more harmful than simple gasoline combustion engines . . . Africa is viewed as a new source of rare earth metals where child labor is very, very cheap.
Half of China's natural rivers are gone, not just polluted, but gone altogether . . . All of India's major rivers originate in the Himalayas, this is why both countries have soldiers there and continuing skirmishes are occurring on the border. Of course, this wouldn't be an issue if China wasn't in Tibet to begin with, would it?
You say, ❝we’ll likely just end up casualties of a war above our heads,❞ this is true, especially if China and India go to war, that is 2/3 of the earth's population at war with each other over water and territory.
The United States government is a wholly owned subsidiary of the American Israeli Political Action Committee . . .
“Jews and some gentiles control the banking industry, international banks. They do! In Washington right next to the Holocaust Museum is the Federal Reserve where they print the money. Is that an accident?” — Louis Farrakhan
Good point - remember the often quoted phrase about how deadly it is to be a friend of the ynaks
...who are incapable of behaving otherwise - whenever the US 'invests' in a country it is to destabilise both that country and their neighbours, witness Rwanda and Morocco, that is to not mention their role in Libya and Sahel, and so on, the list is endless
The Chinese have other 'competitors' for investing in Africa - Russia, the numerous visits by Lavrov have opened up perspectives of alternate energy and security solutions, Iran and Turkiye
Is not piecemeal multipolar investment to be preferred to the same old desperate duo ... bla bla diversity democracy....and.... infrastructrural gigantism accompanied by incessant mineral extraction
The EUSSR needed Libya’s oil, but Muammar Gadhafi decided he wanted gold instead of worthless fiat currency from the EU…
What was the first thing NATO did when Gaddafi was deposed besides stealing all of Libya’s gold? Form a new government? NOPE, they formed a new Libyan national bank. Now, why would they do that? Because even if Muammar was deposed, he and his heirs would still be the sole proprietors! So, guess what?
And while Leon Puñettas (sic) was busy with gay pride celebrations at the Pentagon, two Navy Seals, a US Airman, and a U.S. ambassador were murdered, all because everyone was being so fucking gay.
Jews Albright and Clark had NATO bomb Serbia so the IMF Jews could make loans for rebuilding and get control of Serbian iridium assets… while Saudi non-profit NGOs kept the KLA terrorists well fed and well-armed… Just like ISIS in Syria… their Zionist bedfellows on Wall Street want Ukraine for GMO grain crops… Monsanto, Genentec, ADM, etc., are all buying land with the help of the Jews at the IMF by giving the Ukrainian “Dill” idiots debt relief… IMF = Israeli Military Fund
The Ukrainian parliament is full of Jewish apparatchiks… Jewish U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D), great grandson of Jacob Schiff (who funded Bolshevism, Leon Trotsky, and the October Revolution from Wall Street) is following in his great grandfather’s footsteps by illegally trafficking weapons with Igor Pasternak, funding foreign conflicts abroad… And trying to get Syria for the oil pipelines by blaming the Russians for another false flag… ISIS = Khazar = Kiev junta = Zionist IMF
The banksters need a war desperately right now. They’ve tried so hard in Syria, and it just hasn’t worked. Then they got crazy Trump actually saying we should stay out of the Middle East and focus on our own problems, and people were listening… What’s a self-respecting globalist financier to do?
So, they sent their puppets like McCain, Kasich, Romney, Clinton, and Biden out to talk up the fight against “evil” and threaten Russia, hoping to fool those dumb white ‘Murkins one more time into sending their sons off to die for God and Country and Goldman Sachs.
IMF Jews are in bed with Turks, Saudis, and NATO, they were worried about a Trump audit of the Federal Reserve and about Trump and Putin teaming up to destroy them once and for all…Trump was a vote for peace, and peace does not make money for the weapon industry. Trump wouldn’t give the deep state the shadow wars they wanted in Syria and Ukraine, so they rigged two US elections… and the first thing they did afterwards was send troops to Syria.
The pseudo secular media and their Zionist masters profit from destabilization. Retaining control of US foreign policy is what drives the neo-cons and Hillary’s flying monkeys… along with the millions Goldman Sachs and the Saudis have paid them.
❝Is not piecemeal multipolar investment to be preferred to the same old desperate duo ... bla bla diversity democracy....and.... infrastructrural gigantism accompanied by incessant mineral extraction ❞
.
Jewish Corruption in Ukraine . . . by Andrew Joyce, Ph.D.
❝. . . the present conflict is a huge distraction from the fact that, for decades, the biggest threat to Ukraine hasn’t been Russia, but financiers and speculators operating with impunity within Ukraine’s borders to exploit ethnic Ukrainians and plunder their resources.❞
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2023/02/17/jewish-corruption-in-ukraine/
A related, but distinct, issue to USAID’s focus on marginalized populations is it’s focus on rural areas on a continent that is rapidly urbanizing. This is both meaningful for progress on development goals and the constituency for donor-funded projects.
I'm curious to know your thoughts about USAID being considered an arm of US intelligence agencies. There is this Telesur article https://www.telesurenglish.net/opinion/USAID-or-US-CIA-20160919-0013.html from 2016 which nicely sums up the perspective I'm referencing. My apologies if you've already addressed this in other writing, I've just come across your Substack today. If you've written previously about this, perhaps you could point me in the right direction? Regardless I'm looking forward to reading more of your writing, thank you for this piece!
The United States government is a wholly owned subsidiary of the American Israeli Political Action Committee . . .
.
Jewish Corruption in Ukraine . . . by Andrew Joyce, Ph.D.
❝. . . the present conflict is a huge distraction from the fact that, for decades, the biggest threat to Ukraine hasn’t been Russia, but financiers and speculators operating with impunity within Ukraine’s borders to exploit ethnic Ukrainians and plunder their resources.❞
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2023/02/17/jewish-corruption-in-ukraine/
This is a really interesting article! I think related to some of the comments below - from a US foreign strategy perspective, how would you prioritize Africa vs. India (or SE Asia)? And what would the key goals be - securing good diplomatic relations? Establishing manufacturing base or military positioning? To those ends - what regions/countries in Africa would be the top priotities?
My ex is black and told me that he had blacks through the WH non-stop. When an older woman asked him why he hadn't used his executive powers more often to benefit the black community, he reminded her of what happened to Jack Kennedy. He was acutely aware that his life was under threat for 8 years.
“Obama was selected before he was elected. And the people that selected him were rich, powerful members of the Jewish community. They selected him to be their first Jewish president.”—Louis Farrakhan
....JFK was helping the Irish Americans too much for wasp taste, and so they...?
Obama looks pretty comfortable - the only thing apart from his wife he's visibly afraid of is his golf handicap - the reason why he did nothing is because he was afraid for his library and pension plan, that and because he'd been long bought paid for and well trained, just like the rest they put in power over there, or over here for example Kagamé
Try being poor in the US whatever colour to learn what life under constant threat means, or rather try it in Africa
“Obama was selected before he was elected. And the people that selected him were rich, powerful members of the Jewish community. They selected him to be their first Jewish president.”—Louis Farrakhan
I made the same complaint to a black friend, whose reply surprised me: "He did more for blacks than anyone by being black and the president. From age 12-21, my son lived under a black president. That's plenty".
“Obama was selected before he was elected. And the people that selected him were rich, powerful members of the Jewish community. They selected him to be their first Jewish president.”—Louis Farrakhan
Your friend's comment is merely recognition that no one, hardly, can point to anything Obama did to improve life for A-A in the US - anything means any specific political action, and not the display of his skin colour which was not of his choice nor under his control
On this saying -Any random A-A can do for any other - agency, politics, a plan are not required - life does not change but we must suppose we feel better : this is tokenism
And does not refute the A man on the street who saw nothing to remark on.....just another President - yet I can imagine the African élites rubbing their hands together and saying Great, this is all they could come up with? we too can play the diversity merry go round
“Obama was selected before he was elected. And the people that selected him were rich, powerful members of the Jewish community. They selected him to be their first Jewish president.”—Louis Farrakhan
the manner in which Chinese officialdom treats their African counterparts at a personal level?
One mid-level African official who hosted a mid-level Chinese official told me how excited he was when his new Chinese friend told him that, if he wished to bring his family to Beijing, he (the Chinese official) would organize a government-owned apartment and African cook for them.
Later that year he attended a conference in Addis and recounted his experience to an Ethiopian colleague, who responded, "My Chinese guy told me the same thing".
This is anecdote taken to a new and higher level of trivial - one may easily imagine that there are many more examples extant of such and far worse from the mouths of europeans or americans
How about this pair - some time back, around the time of Obama, the US State Department stumbled across a clever idea, they would send african-americans as ambassadors to African countries - Bingo!
At this time there was a certain amount of drum beating in Africa on behalf of Obama, in reality mostly restricted to governing élite circles, the A on the street being more realist about the ruling class - a Cameroon taxi driver was caught on tape saying why should I care who they elect he's never done anything for me - he was right : Obama never did anything for Africans, not much more for African Americans, some have said much less
USAID is designed to subsidize US and Western NGOs that can be used to manipulate the internal politics of the receiver nations, as well as subsidize US farmers. Its is a very useful sister to the NED, and part of the US integrated regime change network. Either the US starts respecting African nation's sovereignty in all respects or its influence will fade away. Of course, this would include the alteration of the continent's relationship's with the rapacious and extractive Western corporations such as Cargill, so it will not happen. China stands out just by not being as bad as the US.
All of the electronics manufacturing and rare earth mining is incredibly toxic, electric vehicles are ten times more harmful than simple gasoline combustion engines . . . Africa is viewed as a new source of rare earth metals where child labor is very, very cheap.
Half of China's natural rivers are gone, not just polluted, but gone altogether . . . All of India's major rivers originate in the Himalayas, this is why both countries have soldiers there and continuing skirmishes are occurring on the border. Of course, this wouldn't be an issue if China wasn't in Tibet to begin with, would it?
There is a lot to unpack in your comment. Firstly, it would seem in your assertion that "electric vehicles are ten times more harmful simple gasoline combustion engines" you are completely ignoring the existential threat of anthropogenic climate change. I would also be interested in any sources backing up your assertion.
With respect to rare earth metals, Madagascar is the only African nation that rates in the top ten producers, at a distant number 9. The extraction and processing of rare earth minerals is highly capital intensive, there is little or no proof of child labour being used (this is for actual rare earth minerals, not coltan etc. where the DR is intentionally kept weak to facilitate the looting of its resources by external parties). You are also discounting the onward advances of materials science that reduces specific material dependencies - as with the ongoing reduction in battery dependencies upon expensive metals.
The decline of "half of China's rivers" is significantly a result of anthropogenic climate change and historical inaccuracies. As we have seen with places such as Las Vegas, the level of water waste is so high that when push comes to shove massive reductions in water usage can be achieved, together with routing of water to arid areas (in China the issue is with the arid north, not the wet south).
Pakistan could make the same claim toward India when it comes to the control of its water sources, as also could Bangladesh. There has been no history of China using water as a weapon against India. The Chinese state freed the Tibetan population from medieval serfdom, where 99% of the people were utterly exploited and treated worse than animals by the elites. Tibet is a historical part of China, as is Hong Kong, as is Xinjiang and as is Taiwan. China has much more claim to Taiwan than the US has to Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam etc.
YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT.
Dr. SHIVA Ayyadurai, MIT PhD LIVE: ELON MUSK = AOC = ELIZABETH WARREN = CARBON TAX = $$$$ for THEM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lwxcx-8hi_o
Mining the rare earth metals alone are 10 times more destructive . . . and that's not mentioning the manufacturing process necessary for the chipsets in all the superflous gadgets in your electric cars.
I'm an industrial process engineer in semiconductor manufacturing, and an expert in hazardous waste operations.
When discussing hypothetical outcomes related to the topic of China-US competition in Africa, I once said to a friend in Mozambique the Chinese proverb, "when the snipe and the clam grapple, it is the fisherman who stands to benefit" to which she responded, "when elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers." She was less optimistic that her government would be able to effectively engage with and harness the potential benefit from this geopolitical competition. Great piece - particularly the section on USAID.
DFC now that it's taking over from OPIC has more teeth a s might be progress for the USG. we shall see.