quote:Originally posted by Alive-(What Box): than any prior administation in U.S. history? WTF?
Wow.
Lets not forget that no matter how much Dubaaya screwed up with Certain key issiues(Katrina) that doesn't sit right with Black Americans HE STILL IS OUR PRES. and HE has helped the image of Blacks by appointing TWO African Americans in Key American and POWERFUL positions.
Too bad is constant denial of the Failing Economy isn't helping his case.
Also if bush or any American Pres. is smart they HAD better high-tail it to Africa BEFORE CHINA to get a hand on the resourses ther...Making good relation will help.
Posts: 8812 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
Also if bush or any American Pres. is smart they HAD better high-tail it to Africa BEFORE CHINA to get a hand on the resourses ther...Making good relation will help.
Why encourage the exploitation?
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
Also if bush or any American Pres. is smart they HAD better high-tail it to Africa BEFORE CHINA to get a hand on the resourses ther...Making good relation will help.
Why encourage the exploitation?
First off, Why does it have to be explaitation look at the state of Nigeria. South Africa Im sure the Africans are not stupid they should find a way to use the resources they have their which will benifit the U.s greatly.
Second what exactly are the Chinese doing...? I see this as undercocer explaoitation
Posts: 8812 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^lol who's got you into thinking it is better for America to exploit Africa than for China to do so.
Exploitation is wrong, plain and simple.
Personally, I'd like to see more Africa/Asia relations though because I think we have a lot to learn from and offer each other, and if doing business is a way to promote that then it's cool.
Posts: 3423 | From: the jungle - when y'all stop playing games, call me. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
By Dr. Ravinder Rena Eritrean Institute of Technology
May 9, 2007
The 19th-century scramble for Africa saw great imperialistic powers rush to the continent to exploit natural resources. Today, the scramble continues as Africa is still a vital arena of strategic and geopolitical competition among the United States, France, Britain, China, and India. The key question for many is: will the exploitation of Africa's rich resources benefit the continent ?
Oil is perhaps the most important lure. It attracts more than 50 per cent of all foreign direct investment (FDI). In 2006, annual FDI rose to a historic high of USD38.8 billion, exceeding record levels of 2005 — a growth of 78 percent from 2004. According to the U.N. World Investment Report, FDI cash was concentrated in a few industries, notably oil, gas and mining and six oil-producing countries — Algeria, Chad, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Nigeria, and Sudan — hogged around 48 percent of it.
European firms represent roughly two-thirds of the total FDI in Africa. More than half of European investment originates from the U.K. and France, going mainly to countries with which they have historic ties. French oil companies such as Total, locked out of the Middle East through France's opposition to the Iraq war, have made large investments in Francophone countries such as Cameroon, Chad, and Gabon.
General William "Kip" Ward, Commmander, U.S. Africa Command
Africa is becoming strategically important to the U.S. because of its oil production (a cheap and reliable alternative to oil in the volatile Persian Gulf), and China's increasing regional influence. West Africa already supplies about 12 percent of U.S. crude oil imports, a share that is projected to rise to 25 percent by 2015. As is often the case with oil, military involvement follows. In February 2007, the U.S. set up an Africa command (Africom) base. It has established bases in and signed access agreements with Senegal, Mali, Ghana, Gabon, and Namibia.
Despite its big backyard, China is generally resource-poor. Africa offers the natural resources vital to fuel its rapidly growing economy. China looks to the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Zambia for copper and cobalt, to South Africa for iron ore and platinum, and to Gabon, Cameroon and the Republic of the Congo (Congo-Brazzaville) for timber. For oil, it has been wooing Nigeria, Angola, Sudan, and Equatorial Guinea. China is the second largest consumer of crude oil after the U.S, and was responsible for 40 percent of the global increase in demand between 2001 and 2005. Indeed, it imports 25 percent of its crude oil from Africa.
Beijing has charmed African rulers with arms sales, debt cancelaltion and soft loans.President Hu Jintao and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao visited 10 African countries, consummating the relationship at the China-Africa summit in October 2006, when Beijing rolled out the red carpet to almost 50 African heads of state and Ministers.
The global demand for natural resources will increase FDI and, as exports grow, improve balance of trade figures. One of the main concerns however is the scramble's fuelling of corruption, environmental degradation, internal dissent, reduction of a state's incentive to impose a free and just taxation system, and spending on the military.
Africa is being fragmented into many pieces by developed countries keen on exploitating Africa’s rich resources. A recent OECD report indicates that the world's major donors, 22 member countries of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC), provided USD 103.9 billion in aid in 2006, falling by 5.1 percent from 2005. This figure includes USD 19.2 billion of debt relief, notably exceptional relief to Iraq and Nigeria. Excluding debt relief, other forms of aid fell by 1.8 percent.
The fall was predicted. ODA was exceptionally high in 2005 due to large Paris Club debt relief operations (notably for Iraq and Nigeria) which boosted ODA to its highest level ever at USD 106.8 billion. In 2006, net debt relief grants still represented a substantial share of net ODA, as members implemented further phases of the Paris Club agreements, providing a little over USD 3 billion for Iraq and nearly USD 11 billion for Nigeria. Excluding debt relief, ODA fell by 1.8 percent. Preliminary data show that bilateral net ODA to sub-Saharan Africa rose by 23 percent in real terms, to about USD 28 billion. However, most of the increase was due to debt relief grants, excluding debt relief for Nigeria, aid to sub-Saharan Africa increased by only 2 percent.
Charities and NGOs working on the issue believe that even governments that are members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) are reluctant to investigate allegations against western companies of corruption or complicity in human rights abuses.
In Equatorial Guinea — where U.S. companies such as ExxonMobil and Chevron are active — the regime of President Teodoro Obiang Nguema has been accused of torture, electoral fraud, and corruption. Despite this, President Nguema was welcomed at the U.S. State Department by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in April 2006 and described as a "good friend."
The environmental impact is also alarming. The clearing of forests for timber exports increases vulnerability to erosion, river silting, landslides, flooding, and loss of habitat for plant and animal species. Gas flaring from oil production, where unusable waste gas is burned off, pumps large amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. It is estimated that flaring in the Niger delta emits 70 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year.
The environmental and social impact of extractive industries is already acknowledged as a key factor in conflicts in Sudan and Nigeria. There is a fear among NGOs that access to natural resources will fuel the kind of violent conflict seen in Sierra Leone, the DRC, and Liberia. A number of initiatives have been launched in an attempt to deal with the resource 'curse.'
Africa's biggest challenge is to compete in the global economy. It is a known fact that economic strength depends on command over natural resources and quality of the labour force. Besides the ability to cope with complex production techniques and technological changes that are cropping up in thr global arena, Africa requires not only a healthy and an educated citizenry, but policies supporting the poor — such as credit being more widely available particularly to the rural people, investment in rural roads, and support for small-scale enterprises.
It is no time to sit and cry that Africa is under assault. It is no time to watch as other nations 'eat' the African cake. African elites ought to figure out how they can take advantage of the new scramble for Africa to reap profit.
GHANA welcomed US President George W. Bush as a friend today but said it would not host any increased US military presence on the African continent.
Mr Bush, touring Africa in the final year of his presidency, has been supporting efforts to solve crises in Kenya and Darfur. But his trip sought mainly to highlight success stories on a continent often portrayed as a morass of conflict, coups, corruption and famine.
He arrived in Ghana today on the fourth leg of a five-nation tour after visiting Benin, Tanzania and Rwanda.
Despite some bloody army takeovers since independence from Britain in 1957, Ghana is now seen by Washington as a model of stable, democratic rule and is receiving millions of dollars of US aid for health, education and poverty reduction.
"Under President Bush, Africa has got more from US foreign policy than any previous American presidency," Ghanaian Foreign Minister Akwasi Osei-Adjei said before Mr Bush's arrival.
He said Mr Bush was leaving a "remarkable legacy" for Ghana.
Under a 2006 deal, Ghana is receiving $US547 million in US assistance - one of the biggest sums given to an African state - under a five-year anti-poverty program managed by the US Millennium Challenge Corporation.
Mr Bush's support for multi-billion-dollar anti-malaria and anti-AIDS projects in Africa has earned him an unusually warm reception there despite widespread condemnation of his foreign policy toward Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan.
Despite the mutual back-slapping, there were limits to Ghana's willingness to cooperate.
Ghana's armed forces - respected contributors to international peacekeeping missions - benefit from US military training.
But President John Kufuor's government, like many others in Africa, is unwilling to host any US military facility or base.
"Our sovereignty is something we cherish," Mr Osei-Adjei said, adding that Ghana did not intend to accept any part of the newly created US military command for Africa (Africom). The Bush administration created Africom last year with a view to strengthening the US presence in Africa, a major supplier of crude oil to the American market.
US officials talked initially of plans to move the Africom headquarters to Africa, but African opposition led Washington to change course and say that Africom will not bring any more US troops or bases to the continent. A base for 1800 US troops already exists in Djibouti. Africom commanders have instead suggested a loose structure of Africom liaison staff across Africa, helping to coordinate projects from counter-terrorism and military training to aid. "Africom is a much more comprehensive concept, so it's taking a little while to get it under way," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said aboard Air Force One.
On Friday, Mr Bush visits Liberia - Africa's first republic, formed by freed slaves from America in 1847. It has offered to host Africom, and Mr Bush said he'll consider this seriously.
Despite warm bilateral ties Mr Bush, accompanied by his wife
Laura, may still face some hostility in Ghana, where rights
activists announced plans for public protests against what they
call Mr Bush's "inhumane policies in parts of the world", notably Iraq.
Some critics wondered what Ghana stood to gain from the Bush visit. "It's only a move to redeem his lame duck days," said one Ghanaian opposition parliamentarian, John Mahama.
posted
The Bush administration messed up big time in Irak but did much more than Clinton's in Africa...there is no comparison...none..remember Rwanda's genocide under Clinton watch...even to this day he's still apologizing for his cowardice in 1994...
Posts: 461 | From: Kilimanjaro | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The very few places where George Bush in the world is appreciated is actually in Africa...personally I think it's the worst thing America could have produced even if as an African I have to acknowledge that he did far better than previous American administrations for Africa....but sincerely Africans should care about themselves and think about being better economically technologically than Americans, Asians or Europeans...The West have been providing aid to Africa for many years...it's useless...Only capitalism will save Africa...GREED...
Posts: 461 | From: Kilimanjaro | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Bush administration messed up big time in Irak but did much more than Clinton's in Africa...there is no comparison...none..remember Rwanda's genocide under Clinton watch...even to this day he's still apologizing for his cowardice in 1994...
Difficult to understand why the beckoning to some neo-colonial Euro-American head of state to make peace in Africa. Sounds like asking the "great white father to step in when the childish natives misbehave"(cf. Rudyard Kipling and his theme of "white man's burden").
But the civil war in Rwanda in 1994 can hardly be characterised as a "genocide" when the Tutsis--supposedly against whom the "genocide" was committed--are now 15-16% of Rwanda's population when they just 9% of Rwanda's population in pre-war 1994.
Furthermore, if "800,000 mostly Tutsis" were killed in 1994 in just 100 days then the Tutsis should be no more than 1% of Rwanda's present population of 8 million plus. In 1994 Rwanda's population was 6.9 million with the Tutsis being 9% of that population. After the war at most 20,000 exiles from surrounding countries.
The so-called "Rwanda genocide" is just another example of lazy, irresponsible Western reporting to portray Africans--just after Mandela's inauguaration--as wantonly barbaric. It's all part of their ongoing vile propaganda.
And besides it is stupid and demeaning to openly opine on what some genocidal[against the Iraqis]neocolonialist settler Euro head of state like Bush could do for Africa.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess you must be one of the people involved in the Rwanda's genocide, where are you hiding your machetes little bloody Interhamwe...Where are you located so you can be shipped to Arusha's International Crime Tribunal?
Posts: 461 | From: Kilimanjaro | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anyone who believes, Bush II was good for Africa, needs mental checking ASAP:
quote: “The United States Africa Command is to ‘be responsible for U.S. military operations in and military relations with 53 African nations - an area of responsibility covering all of Africa except Egypt.’”
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: Anyone who believes, Bush II was good for Africa, needs mental checking ASAP:
“The United States Africa Command is to ‘be responsible for U.S. military operations in and military relations with 53 African nations - an area of responsibility covering all of Africa except Egypt.’”
Egypt remains under the direct responsibility of United States Central Command (USCENTCOM). The United States Central Command is a theater-level Unified Combatant Command unit of the U.S. armed forces, established in 1983 under the operational control of the U.S. Secretary of Defense. It was originally conceived of as the Rapid Deployment Forces.
Its area of responsibility is in the Middle East, East Africa and Central Asia. CENTCOM has been the main American presence in many military operations, including the Persian Gulf War, the United States war in Afghanistan, and the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
.
Posts: 1549 | From: California, USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Difficult to understand why the beckoning to some neo-colonial Euro-American head of state to make peace in Africa.
[...]
And besides it is stupid and demeaning to openly opine on what some genocidal[against the Iraqis]neocolonialist settler Euro head of state like Bush could do for Africa.
quote:I guess you must be one of the people involved in the Rwanda's genocide, where are you hiding your machetes little bloody Interhamwe...Where are you located so you can be shipped to Arusha's International Crime Tribunal?
As usual the reply to a set of pointed observations is disappointingly ignorant.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
who's got you into thinking it is better for America to exploit Africa than for China to do so.
Printer-friendly view of this topic