Current+News

This will be a page for all current and relevant articles concerning the exploitation of Africa's natural resources. (Please make sure that when you post an article you cite its source. Thank you!) =China in Africa: Friend or foe?= In the first of a series on China's new relationship with Africa, the BBC's Adam Blenford looks at how their economic interests coincide.** The next piece looks at the Chinese firms rebuilding the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa. In almost every corner of Africa there is something that interests China. The continent is rich in natural resources that promise to keep China's booming, fuel-hungry economy on the road. There is copper to mine in Zambia, iron ore to extract in Gabon and oil to refine in Angola. In other countries less blessed by natural resources, Chinese companies have spied trading and investment opportunities.  Africa's need for new and better roads, school buildings, computer networks, telecoms systems and power generation has opened a lucrative window of opportunity for Chinese firms. The new Sino-African dynamic can leave the West ill at ease, reviving memories of Europe's colonial domination in Africa and drawing complaints that low Chinese bids are freezing out Western companies. “**China never imposes its own will on African countries, nor interferes in the domestic affairs of African countries** ” Yang Xiao Gan Chinese embassy, Addis Ababa China also offers "no-strings" aid, a marked contrast to Western donors who impose conditions on aid and tie trade sweeteners to human rights issues. Critics say China's approach has emboldened unsavoury governments, allowing them to ignore Western calls for reform, safe in the knowledge that Beijing will take up the slack. Sudan, with its vast oil reserves, is the number one recipient of Chinese investment, and sells some two-thirds of its oil to Beijing. As a result, China has been criticised for its links with a government ostracised by many for its role in the ongoing crisis in Darfur. Elsewhere, stories of anti-Chinese unrest in Zambia and the killing of nine Chinese oil workers by rebels in Ethiopia's Ogaden region have focused Beijing's attention on the price it might have to pay for its African adventure. The Chinese insist they are not interested in dominating Africa. Instead China says it seeks a "harmonious world", an evolution of its Cold War search for "peaceful co-existence", and it wants to coax African countries along the path towards development. Instead of top-down aid projects, Chinese companies seek profits in Africa as they bequeath the continent a new infrastructure - one that will more than likely be used to increase trade with China. "China consistently respects and supports African countries," Yan Xiao Gang, China's economic attache in Ethiopia, told the BBC. "It never imposes its own will on African countries, nor interferes in the domestic affairs of African countries." Ethiopian officials speak of "owning" their country's development, but do admit that major contracts usually go to Chinese firms because of their ability to keep costs down. Many Chinese firms employ large numbers of local workers but wages remain low. However, there is evidence that workers are learning new skills because of the availability of Chinese-funded work. Taking advantage of low labour costs, the Chinese are also building factories across Africa. Observers say Beijing appears ready for the long haul in Africa. "For China to become a major power, it needs to continue its double-digit economic growth of recent years. For this it needs energy and markets," Prof M Venkataraman of the University of Addis Ababa told the BBC. Those markets are proving receptive, and trade with the continent is famously booming - up to $40bn in 2004, a tenfold increase in under a decade. Yet most African countries now have a growing trade deficit with China, in spite of favourable tax-free trading agreements. Ethiopian exports to China reached $132m (£63m) in 2006, a figure dwarfed by the value of Chinese imports of $432m (£206m). "It is not clear what the long-term effect of the Chinese projects will be," said Mr Venkataraman. "But the facts are very clear - there are going to be benefits to both sides. China is going to remain in this continent for a very long time." The China-Africa relationship shot to attention in November 2006 when 48 African heads of government attended a forum in Beijing. China's capital was festooned with images of exotic Africa for the occasion. Speeches were made and deals were struck. Tsegab Kebebew, a senior official in Ethiopia's foreign ministry, was in Beijing for the meeting. One year on, he remains enthused about the relationship. "This is a new strategic partnership. There is no colonial history between Africa and China, so they are well received here," he told the BBC. "There is no psychological bias against the Chinese." In fact China has a history of involvement in Africa, and undertook major aid projects in the 1960s and 1970s. Among Beijing's gifts was a railroad linking Zambia and Tanzania, now scheduled to be rebuilt by a Chinese company. China's gifts to modern-day Africa will soon include a gleaming new conference centre at the headquarters of the African Union in Addis Ababa - a symbol of Beijing's commitment to African development, says Mr Yan of the Chinese embassy. There is symbolism in the shops, too. With Ethiopia only now marking the turn of its millennium, seven years after the rest of the world, the country is in the grip of a 12-month millennium frenzy. Banners adorn public buildings and souvenirs are on sale in many shops. The government hopes the outbreak of national pride will spur Ethiopia to a new age of prosperity. Those browsing a local market for, say, a souvenir plate bearing the legend "Ethiopian Millennium 2000" would do well to turn the gift over and look underneath. Embossed on the white plastic is a phrase already familiar to all in the West: "Made in China".
 * [[image:http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44230000/jpg/_44230189_gotera416.jpg width="416" height="200" caption="Chinese workman on site in Addis Ababa"]]
 * Beyond the stereotype**
 * Potent symbols**

Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/africa/7086777.stm Published: 2007/11/26 08:31:27 GMT © BBC MMIX

- http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_5661.shtml The exploitation of Africa’s land and people** By Ashahed M. Muhammad and Brian E. Muhammad Updated Feb 24, 2009, 09:58 am (FinalCall.com) - While images of Africa’s poverty and disease are regularly shown in western media, the corporations responsible for the continuous exploitation of the land’s mineral and human resources resulting in Africa’s dreadful condition see the world’s largest continent as the land of opportunity. Emira Woods, director of Foreign Policy in Focus for the Washington D.C. based Institute for Policy Studies says the strategic resources coming out the African continent are the prize, the African people are the victims and multinational corporations driven by excessive greed are the culprits. “The corporations use the labor and land, the people pay the price. It is absolutely modern day slavery. It is exploitation and makes you think about a 500 year history of exploitation of the African continent from its people during the days of slavery and now its resources,” Ms. Woods told The Final Call. “Very few people—those that have—getting more, those that don’t being exploited. That has been the process.” As an example, Ms. Woods cited Firestone, who for over 82 years has run the world’s largest rubber operation in the world in a financially exploitative relationship using child labor to extract rubber from Liberia without paying proper taxes to the government. As it relates to available resources, Africa has surpassed the Middle East as the greatest supplier of oil to the United States responsible for 24 percent of the oil used here. Over 80 percent of the coltan used by companies like Nokia, Motorola, Ericsson and Sony for many of the world’s electronic devices such as cell phones, computers and DVD players comes from Africa. Additionally, 80 percent of the cobalt used in lithium ion batteries—a key component in the future development of green technology—including cars—comes from Africa. In a recent column, Nicole C. Lee, executive director of TransAfrica Forum writes: “As a continent, Africa is still enslaved because of its vast wealth. The mining and extraction of precious materials—oil, natural gas, coltan and cobalt—enrich corporations but cast a shadow of poverty throughout the continent. Whether in the Niger Delta or the Democratic Republic of Congo, the people experience lives of misery and receive very little benefit from the richness of their land. This is known as the “resource curse”—the paradoxical relationship so many Africans have to the richness of Africa.” According to the United Nations and several human rights organizations, many of the conflicts on the African continent can be traced to the control of mineral resources. However, instead of reaping the financial benefits of their considerable mineral resources, the African people are instead left with a deteriorating quality of life. The multinational corporations leave behind a shameful legacy of the manipulation of African governments, the mistreatment of generations of African people along with toxic waste dumped into the same water they use to bathe and drink. While President Obama has not shied away from addressing issues relevant to the African continent, analysts are waiting to see what actual policy directives resulting in tangible results an Obama administration will pursue in critical African flashpoints such as Kenya, Somalia, the Congo and Zimbabwe. Long-time Pan-Africanist Dr. Mtangulizi Sanyika told The Final Call he anticipates that Pres. Obama will feel a special connection and obligation to deal with the problems gripping the African continent. “I would anticipate there is a special place in his heart, in his soul and in his fiber for the obvious reason that he is of African descent, more specifically his father is from Kenya, he still has relatives there and has been back there. He has not shied away from his heritage or disassociated (himself) from it. Sometimes we of African descent have trouble with our emotional links, intellectual and cultural links, but Pres. Obama has all three working for him,” said Dr. Sanyika. The Obama administration has pledged to double the annual investment in foreign assistance to Africa from $25 billion in 2008 to $50 billion by the end of his first term. The administration had pledged to cut extreme poverty in half by 2015 and to advocate debt cancellation for what they call “Heavily Indebted Poor Countries.” Consistent with those goals, the Obama administration has ambitiously pledged to modernize and reform the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund as well as strengthening the African Growth and Opportunity Act to ensure that African producers have access to markets in the United States thus encouraging more American companies to invest on the continent instead of only extracting wealth from it. Currently, U.S. trade policies allow U.S. corporations to send their products to Africa, demanding that African countries lower their tariffs, but does not provide reciprocal means for African farmers to access U.S. markets. Ms. Woods said there is “tremendous excitement” throughout the African continent resulting from Obama’s victory and his subsequent Inauguration speech indicating that there would be a change in America’s foreign policy, however, the degree to which there are actual policy changes, will determine whether the goodwill will last. “Those great words have to be met with policy changes and it will take pressure from people in the United States and throughout the African world to demand that those wonderful words of mutual respect and mutual interest are also upheld in terms of U.S. policy with regard to Africa,” said Ms. Woods. Citing the fact that UN Ambassador Susan Rice has advanced the idea of U.S. and NATO unilateral military action in Darfur as an option, the hawkish presence of Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, and the continued presence of Defense Secretary Robert Gates—a holdover from the Bush administration—Ms. Woods said many on the African continent are still waiting to see if real policy changes are forthcoming under an Obama administration. Kwame Nkrumah, the Ghanaian father of Pan-Africanism wrote that Neo-Colonialism will be the last stage of imperialism on the African Continent. According to the American Heritage dictionary, neo-colonialism is a policy whereby a major power uses economic and political means to perpetrate or extend its influence over other nations. The advent of the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) on the continent bears witness to the fulfillment of Dr. Nkrumah’s words. In 2007, former Pres. George W. Bush and Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced the creation of U.S. Africa Command. The decision was the culmination of a 10-year process within the Department of Defense acknowledging the emerging strategic importance of Africa and recognizing that peace and stability on the continent impacts not only Africans, but the interests of the U.S. and international community. Some critics of AFRICOM see it as nothing more than an extension of the military wing of the Neo-Conservatives desirous of protecting their strategic interests related to Africa’s resources. Others see AFRICOM as the U.S. attempting to militarize the continent in order to remain an economic competitor against the European Union and China, under the guise of fostering peace and security. “Domination of Africa’s resources would give America, so the capitalists think, the competitive edge over the rest of the world in the area of trade and the extraction of Africa’s resources,” said Sekou Nkrumah, activist, writer and son of the late Kwame Nkrumah. The younger Nkrumah further wrote that American neo-colonialism in Africa is equivalent to “international state terrorism,” strangling African economies. America helped enslave African nations to debt from IMF and World Bank loans to enable the “extracting and exploiting of resources, thereby creating starvation, wars, division, disease, poverty, and under development,” all acts of terrorism, he said. In addition, armed reactionary mercenary groups destabilized African governments, inspired coups, fomented ethnic violence, propped up dictatorial puppets, and now AFRICOM is its latest strategy to establishment of U.S. military bases on Africa’s soil in the name of peace and security. According to a policy statement on Barack Obama’s campaign website, “An Obama administration will pursue significant UN reforms at the same time as it improves the UN’s ability to conduct future peace and stability operations. It will also work with other multinational actors that deploy peacekeeping forces like the African Union, the European Union, the Economic Community of West African States, and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to help strengthen their capacity to conduct such missions.” Perhaps more importantly, the statement goes on to say that an Obama administration, “believe(s) that the U.S. must provide the political leadership required so that UN missions are backed by workable political strategies. They will lead in the UN Security Council, work with Congress to ensure the U.S. pays its peacekeeping assessments on time, and marry peacekeeping missions with serious diplomatic initiatives.” Observers say Amb. Rice, who served as undersecretary of state for Africa during Clinton’s administration could play a pivotal role in US-Africa relations but her challenge will be to avoid repeating the mistakes Pres. Clinton made. It was during the Clinton years that a deterioration of America’s involvement on the continent occurred from the illegal bombing of a privately owned pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan to the Somalian fiasco in 1993 when the U.S. attempted to overthrow President Mohammed Farrah Aideed by military force resulting in the infamous “Black Hawk Down” incident. The Rwandan genocide of 1994 also took place on Pres. Clinton’s watch. Amb. Rice is positioned to help shape the Obama administration’s policy in Africa and the relationship of the U.S. to African countries at the UN that are still marginalized by larger nations who dominate the world body. Central to the economic restoration of the African continent is the existence of the African Union. Africa is a critical part of the emerging world economy and the strength of the African Union will allow many of the African nations to be better able to negotiate with multinational corporations. The African Union (AU) was established in 2002 and is the outgrowth of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) that was started in 1963 by many of the African independence leaders such as Presidents Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt, Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, Ahmed Sekou Toure of Guinea, Ahmed Ben Bella of Algeria and others. The OAU had two primary aims, to promote solidarity between African states and speak as one collective voice for the continent. This was important to secure Africa’s long-term economic and political future. Years of colonialism had weakened it socially, politically and economically. Though rich in ideas, the OAU lacked power to deal with the massive poverty, political corruption and tribal conflicts that gripped many of the nation states. In 1999 Muammar Gadhafi, leader of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Great Jamahiriya called an emergency summit of the African heads of state in Libya to discuss the condition of the OAU and the need to transform it into an African Union, with the ultimate goal being the formation of the United States of Africa. The idea of a United States of Africa was a central theme to the OAU from its inception and espoused by Dr. Nkrumah. The decision to change the OAU to the AU was ratified in Lusaka, Zambia South in July, 2001 and witnessed by 41 member-nations. The only delegation from the African Diaspora was led by the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan. The vision for the unification of Africa, and its transformation from the OAU into the AU has been consistently advocated by Mr. Gadhafi who was named its chairman on February 2.
 * World News
 * Africa and the Obama administration**
 * AFRICOM**
 * The African Union**

FCN is a distributor (and not a publisher) of content supplied by third parties. Original content supplied by FCN and FinalCall.com News is Copyright © 2008 FCN Publishing, FinalCall.com. Content supplied by third parties are the property of their respective owners. - http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/15/world/africa/15niger.html?_r=1&ref=africa December 15, 2008The Spoils =Battle in a Poor Land for Riches Beneath the Soil= By [|LYDIA POLGREEN] AIR MOUNTAINS, [|Niger] — Until last year, the only trigger Amoumoun Halil had pulled was the one on his livestock-vaccination gun. This spring, a battered Kalashnikov rifle rested uneasily on his shoulder. When he donned his stiff fatigues, his lopsided gait and smiling eyes stood out among his hard-faced guerrilla brethren. Mr. Halil, a 40-year-old veterinary engineer, was a reluctant soldier in a rebellion that had broken out over an improbable — and as yet unrealized — bonanza in one of the world’s poorest countries. A battle is unfolding on the stark mountains and scalloped dunes of northern Niger between a band of Tuareg nomads, who claim the riches beneath their homeland are being taken by a government that gives them little in return, and an army that calls the fighters drug traffickers and bandits. It is a new front of an old war to control the vast wealth locked beneath African soil. Niger’s northern desert caps one of the world’s largest deposits of uranium, and demand for it has surged as [|global warming] has increased interest in nuclear power. Growing economies like China and India are scouring the globe for the crumbly ore known as yellowcake. A French mining company is building the world’s largest uranium mine in northern Niger, and a Chinese state company is building another mine nearby. Uranium could infuse Niger with enough cash to catapult it out of the kind of poverty that causes one in five Niger children to die before turning 5. Or it could end in a calamitous war that leaves Niger more destitute than ever. Mineral wealth has fueled conflict across Africa for decades, a series of bloody, smash-and-grab rebellions that shattered nations. The misery wrought has left many Africans to conclude that mineral wealth is a curse. Here in the Sahara, the uranium boom has given new life to longstanding grievances over land and power. For years, the Tuareg have struggled against a government they largely disdained. But this new rebellion has shed the parochial complaints of an ethnic minority, claiming instead that the government is squandering the entire country’s resources through corruption and waste. Armed with a slick Web site and articulate spokesmen in Europe and the United States, the movement has gotten sympathy from Westerners drawn to the mysterious Tuareg and their arguments for justice. It has also pulled in a wide variety of fighters — not only illiterate herdsmen but also college students, aid workers, even former pacifists like Mr. Halil. “This uranium belongs to our people; it is on our land,” Mr. Halil said. “We cannot allow ourselves to be robbed of our birthright.” Useful or Useless When Mr. Halil was in high school, an old French map hung in his classroom. The verdant crescent along the southern border was labeled “useful Niger.” The vast, dun-colored swath across the north that he called home was labeled “useless Niger.” It was a profound lesson, in politics as well as geography. The agricultural belt along the south had all the power. The herders of the north were irrelevant. It had not always been so. The Tuareg have plied the barren peaks here for centuries, ruling over the caravan routes that crossed the Sahara with the riches of Africa — from salt to slaves. With their camels and swords, they enriched themselves through tribute and plunder. By the time Mr. Halil was born, that era was long gone. As a boy he dreamed of having a huge herd of camels, as his father had before the great droughts of the 1970s wiped out the herd. After excelling in school, Mr. Halil went to college in Benin, but he failed to get the Niger government to give him a scholarship to veterinary school abroad. “My family had no connections,” he said. “Unless you have a friend in government, your chances of getting a scholarship are zero.” Instead, he started a union of herders to try to get those notoriously individualistic people to band together for their common interests. In his travels, Mr. Halil began to notice the stream of geologists from France, China, Canada and Australia scouring ever deeper into Tuareg grazing lands. Little seas of flags, used to mark potential mining areas, sprang up everywhere, he said. “I asked myself, ‘What do we Tuareg get out of this?’ ” he said. “We just get poorer and poorer.” An Insurgency Begins Mr. Halil’s efforts were part of a wave of civic activism that has swept over Africa in the past 15 years as the continent has become more democratic. Many of the new elected governments are deeply flawed, but because of a more youthful, urban population in touch with new technology, their citizens are often better informed and less willing to tolerate the corruption that has squandered so much of Africa’s potential. In February 2007, a group of armed Tuaregs mounted an audacious attack on a military base in the Air Mountains. A new insurgency was born. They called themselves the Niger Movement for Justice and unfurled a set of demands: that corruption be curbed and the wealth generated by each region benefit its people. Far from useless, as Mr. Halil’s high school map had said, Tuareg lands produce the uranium that accounts for 70 percent of the country’s export earnings. But almost none of those earnings returned to those who lost access to grazing land and suffered the environmental consequences of mining, the rebels argued. To fight the rebellion, the government has effectively isolated the north, devastating its economy. International human rights investigators have also documented serious misdeeds on both sides. The rebels use antivehicle land mines that have killed soldiers and civilians, while the army has been accused of extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detentions and looting of livestock. In all, hundreds of people have been killed, and thousands have been pushed from their land. Despite the violence, mining and exploration continues largely unabated, but the rebels contend that corrupt officials siphon off much of that wealth. The country’s prime minister was forced to step aside after being accused of embezzling $237,000, and last summer he was indicted. “This wealth needs to be used to help the people, not the politicians,” said Aghali Alambo, president of the rebel movement. “Otherwise it is just plunder.” The government argues that Niger is a democracy, if an imperfect one, with peaceful means of redressing grievances. Officials dismiss the men fighting in the north as bandits and traffickers who have moved drugs, untaxed cigarettes, gasoline and even human cargo across the vast Sahara for decades. Some rebels admit to trafficking, especially of cheap gasoline smuggled from Algeria, to support the rebellion. “Niger is a democratic country that is ruled by laws,” said Mohamed Ben Omar, Niger’s minister of information. “If someone has a grievance, let him form a political party and bring it to the ballot.” Poor Amid Riches The Tuareg have been fighting here for centuries. The warriors cover their faces with long, blue scarves that stain their skin. After France lost its grip on most of its Saharan colonies in 1960, the Tuareg found themselves a small minority divided among new nations created by arbitrary borders that meant little to them. Worse, droughts reduced them to penury. But the parched land on which they lived was valuable. A French nuclear company, Areva, was scooping hundreds of tons of uranium from northern Niger every year. Unlike southern farmers, who owned their land, nomads could use pastureland but had no title to it. The hardships of global warming and desertification, which eats away grazing land, further impoverished the Tuareg, forcing many to abandon herding. Yet as its fertility degraded, their land became increasingly sought after as the global price of uranium rose steadily. This paradox would prove explosive. Mr. Halil sat out the last Tuareg uprising, which began in 1990 and ended with a peace agreement in 1995. Back then, he was idealistic, hoping to avoid violence. But he knew his people’s history well. “Tuareg are fighters,” he said. “It is our nature.” In June 2007, an army vehicle exploded after driving over a land mine planted by the rebels. Villagers say that the army then slaughtered three elderly men; the army says no one was killed. But the story of the slaughtered elders spread swiftly among the Tuareg. For Mr. Halil, it was a sign that nonviolence was foolish. “If they were going to kill old, defenseless men, how could we even talk about negotiation?” he said. “Fighting was the only way to defend our communities and our way of life.” After months of indecision, Mr. Halil sent his 2-year-old daughter and his pregnant wife to stay with her parents. He set off for the Air Mountains. An Oath With Exceptions Once there, Mr. Halil found a growing army. He learned to use a weapon and march in formation, but he was more useful in jobs closer to his former vocations — healer and organizer. Wounded fighters sought him out under his tree in the camp. He treated infections and counseled men on splinting broken bones. Fighters started calling him the doctor. “I felt that I was useful,” Mr. Halil said. Each new recruit must swear a three-part oath on the Koran: never betray the movement; never attack civilians or take their property; serve all of Niger’s people, not just one tribe or clan. But the oath has exceptions, and stealing from outsiders is not only tolerated but encouraged. Armed men stole a new, white Toyota truck from [|Unicef]’s offices in April. The same vehicle turned up at a rebel base a few days later, its Unicef emblem scratched off. The rebels drove it to Mali to try to sell it. Such slips made Mr. Halil uneasy. “I was not born to be a soldier,” he said. The fighters spend little time actually fighting. Mostly, they drive around on patrols, take shelter under the meager shade of thorny acacia trees and prepare Tuareg tea, a potent brew poured into small glasses. At such moments, Mr. Halil ached for home. He thought of his newborn son, whom he had never seen. He wondered if he had made the right choice, leaving his family and taking up the way of the gun. “Sometimes I have doubts,” he said, stoking the embers of a campfire. In late June, Mr. Halil was on a mission when the thwacking sound of helicopter rotors suddenly broke the desert silence, he said. There had long been rumors that the government had acquired attack helicopters, a power that would fundamentally change the conflict. In the firefight, 17 rebels were killed. Mr. Halil managed to get away and fled to Algeria, leaving the rebellion and taking up his studies once again. He hoped, at last, to become a real veterinarian. “I won’t abandon the struggle, but I will continue by other means,” he said. The fighters left behind, in bases deep in the mountains, vow that they are there to stay. [|Copyright 2008] [|The New York Times Company]