...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
Africa's resource curse (foreign control of Africa's resources)
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Doug M: [QB] An article outlining the "resource curse" in Africa: [QUOTE] Dakar — In Africa billions of dollars from oil, gas and mining revenues go missing, leaving populations dependent on international assistance, according to a new report on natural resource use on the continent. The report, which details resource management in seven West African countries, was released on 2 July at the launch of West Africa Resource Watch (WARW) institute in the Senegalese capital Dakar. Established by the Open Society Initiative for West Africa (OSIWA), WARW is set up to provide information, training and policy advice - for policymakers and citizens alike - to foster sound and equitable use of natural resource revenues. The launch comes just days after a group of NGOs leading the drive for the Kimberley Process - an initiative against conflict diamonds - said the scheme has failed on many counts. Across West Africa natural resource wealth has not translated into better living conditions for the people and in some cases - including in the Niger Delta - has triggered violence. Sierra Leone's vast diamond reserves fuelled armed conflict during the 11-year civil war. "In Africa, anywhere natural resources are found in large commercial quantities people suffer and the country is locked in under-development," a WARW background paper says. "Africa's vast natural resources have devastated the continent, fuelling conflicts, corruption and bad governance." But the so-called "resource curse" is man-made and can be reversed, OSIWA executive director Nana Tanko says. "It is not inevitable that owning natural resources be a curse," Oladayo Olaide, WARW coordinator, said at the launch. "Countries can actually manage their resources in such a way that it becomes a blessing." WARW points to Norway and Canada - which have vast oil and other energy reserves - as examples. According to the needs assessment report, which WARW says is a starting point for its work, West Africa has a long way to go. The study gauges seven countries' (Chad, Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Niger and Sierra Leone) capacity to manage natural resources in a transparent, accountable, equitable and sustainable way. None of the countries has a long-term vision of extractive resources in the national economy, according to the report; each lacks a comprehensive strategy to manage its natural resources; in most of the countries civil society participation and influence have been minimal; and restrictive laws and lack of resources block the media from playing a watchdog role. "None [of the countries] has a long-term and nationally shared vision for moving the country from where it is now to where citizens desire to be and with the role of extractives in that scheme spelt out," the report says. OSIWA's Tanko told IRIN governance is paramount. "If we can tackle the issue of governance on the African continent a lot of these issues tied to natural resource management will be adequately addressed," she told IRIN. "We really need a watch [mechanism] like this...and to let them [leaders] know we are watching." WARW - based in Dakar - aims to mobilize technical and financial resources to strengthen civil society, advocate for responsible use of resources and reinforce laws and policies governing extractive operations. Bishop Akolgo, a member of WARW's technical committee and executive director of ISODEC, a social justice NGO in Ghana, worked on the needs assessment. He said in some countries meetings held as part of the research marked the first time representatives of civil society, media, government and the private sector gathered in one room to discuss natural resource management. "That was shocking to me because I didn't know it was that bad." He said none of the countries knew the volume or quality of their natural resources. [/QUOTE]From: http://allafrica.com/stories/200907030580.html While this article may sound good to some, it actually is a dangerous form of propaganda against Africans. #1 It pretends that the wars, corruption and bad governance are simply because Africans are TOO STUPID to understand how to govern themselves and inherently corrupt. This lays the foundation for making foreign "AIDS" agencies seem like "white saviors" who are coming to save Africans from their "savage ways", as if Africans need FOREIGNERS to manage their resources and affairs. This is propaganda because it DOES NOT mention the fact that ALL things mentioned in the articles are SYMPTOMS of FOREIGN desire to control and manage African resources. It is not simply some African "magic reaction" to the fact of resources in the ground, where Africans suddenly act dumb and want to kill each other and enslave themselves as soon as they come within 100 feet of some valuable resource. Of course this is nonsense as FOREIGNERS are directly responsible for most of these problems, stemming back to the OUTRIGHT desire of Europeans to control Africa's resources since they "discovered" it. NOWHERE does it mention that ALL of these conflicts are supported by FOREIGN industrial countries often as a MEANS to protect their ACCESS to those raw materials. Nowhere does it mention the recent TRIALS of foreign companies like Shell and Brown and Root who are accused of setting up elaborate systems of CORRUPTION in order to further their resource interests in various parts of Africa. NOWHERE is it mentioned the ARMS and FUNDING from foreign governments that supports the wars and violence in resource rich areas (how else do DIRT POOR Africans with no industry get weapons?). None of this is mentioned because that would make the "saviors" look like the demons that they are. Of course, we are led to believe that the government of Nigeria is simply "naturally corrupt" all on its own, with no reason. It isn't mentioned the fact that MOST of Nigeria's oil is benefiting FOREIGNERS and that the country itself has a SEVERE CRISIS in energy production. Yet it has millions of barrels of oil. Are we to believe that it is simply INHERENT in Nigerians to be corrupt and DEPRIVE themselves of the benefit of their own gas and mineral resources in order to HELP foreigners make profit? Or is it the other way around: Nigeria's government has largely been put in place to CONTINUE the legacy of foreign colonial control of its resources. ALL the companies involved are DIRECTLY related to the old British colonial gas and mineral companies established under colonial administration. The "government" consisted of hand picked puppets LOYAL to the Crown in Europe. But of course, that is all done away with right? Sure. This is simply another example of how far Europeans will go to control Africa's resources. Not satisfied with CAUSING these problems, now they want to pretend to SOLVE it, which actually means creating the notion that the ONLY way for Africa's resources to be properly used is with the MONITORING and SUPERVISION of foreigners. But why aren't they MONITORING the foreign COMPANIES that are making MOST of the money and control MOST of these resources? How can it be that the government is to blame when MOST of the resources and money taken OUT of Africa and therefore DENIED to Africans is by FOREIGNERS? Are we to pretend that FOREIGNERS taking billions of dollars OUT of Africa ever year is somehow SEPARATE from these struggles over resources? Are we to kid ourselves that these BILLIONS of dollars going to FOREIGNERS from the labor and resources of Africans is somehow BENEFICIAL to Africa? Of course not. These PHONY monitoring agencies are monitoring the wrong people. They should be monitoring THEIR OWN back yard, as THIS is the source of the problems they are talking about. But that is obviously not want they want. They want to STIFLE the ability of Africans to operate and use their OWN resources in their best interests by creating FAKE rules to MONITOR while they allow their OWN companies to CONTINUE to rape Africa of its wealth and resources. All the while PRETENDING to want to HELP Africa: [QUOTE] After thirteen years and countless hours by lawyers, community members, and activists around the world, Royal Dutch Shell finally settled the Wiwa v Shell case in a New York court for $15.5 million. Plaintiffs in the case, which included Ken Saro-Wiwa Jr., and the families of other Ogoni men hanged in November 1995, charged that the Royal Dutch/Shell company, its Nigerian subsidiary, and the former chief of its Nigerian operation, Brian Anderson, with complicity in the torture, killing, and other abuses of Ogoni leader Ken Saro-Wiwa and other non-violent Nigerian activists in the mid-1990s in the Ogoni region of the Niger Delta. Shell says they settled the case as a "humanitarian gesture" to the Ogoni. Does anyone really believe that after fighting for more than a decade to keep this out of court, Shell suddenly woke up and felt great compassion for the Ogoni? Please. Shell settled because they were scared, and they knew the evidence against them was overwhelming. They publicly say they had nothing to do with the execution of Ken Saro-Wiwa and the other Ogoni, and yet there were documents and video that they fought hard to keep out of the public eye. Evidence that was to be introduced in the case included an internal Shell memo where the head of Shell Nigeria offered to intervene on Saro-Wiwa's behalf, if only Saro-Wiwa and others would stop claiming that Shell had made payments to the military. Then there was this memo, requesting payment to the Nigerian military for an incident in which at least one Ogoni man died. Witness were set to testify that they saw Shell vehicles transporting Nigerian soldiers, that they saw Shell employees conferring with the military, that they saw money being exchanged between Shell employees and military officers, and that they heard military officers, including the brutal Major Okuntimo of the Rivers State Internal Security Task Force, make admissions regarding the work they were doing on behalf of Shell. We have known some of Shell's involvement in this tragedy for a long time. In early May of 1994, Ken Saro-Wiwa Sr. faxed me a memo authored by Major Okuntimo which read "Shell operations still impossible unless ruthless military operations are undertaken for smooth economic activities to commence" and further called for "pressure on oil companies for prompt regular inputs". I received that fax and immediately called Ken. He said "this is it. They're going to kill us all. All for Shell." It was the last time I talked with him. Several weeks later he was arrested on the trumped up charges for which he was ultimately hanged. In the last day, lots of people have asked me if $15.5 million is enough to compensate for the hanging of nine men, the death of thousands more, and for the destruction of an ecosystem. No of course not. But was it on par with what a jury would have awarded in this case? Yes, lawyers tell me, for sure. More importantly, does the settlement bring relief to Ken Wiwa jr and the families of the other men who were executed? If you read Ken's thoughtful and moving piece in the Guardian , the answer is clearly yes. That alone should be cause for celebration. Ken Sr.'s famous last words from the gallows were "lord take my soul but the struggle continues". In this moment, perhaps more than ever before, we need to heed that call to action. The settlement in this case brings satisfaction to the plaintiffs for an event that happened 14 years ago. It in no way, shape or form excuses or absolves Shell of their ongoing destruction of the Niger Delta environment One of the central complaints of Niger Delta communities for forty years has been gas flaring, which sends plumes of toxic pollutants into the air and water of the Niger Delta. Gas flaring endangers human health, harms local ecosystems, emits huge amounts of greenhouse gases, wastes vast quantities of natural gas, and is against Nigerian law. Shell does it nowhere else in the world in volumes that are even remotely comparable to what they flare in the Delta. But Shell is still flaring gas in Nigeria. While there is no doubt that the settlement represented a significant victory for the plaintiffs' in this one human rights case against Shell, true justice will not be served as long as the people of Nigeria continue to suffer the terrible impact of Shell's operations. Shell estimates it would cost about $3 billion -- only 10% of just their last year's profits -- to end Shell's gas flaring in Nigeria once and for all. But instead of putting their great "humanitarian concern" into action, Shell points the finger at the Nigerian government and demands that they pay to end this practice. [/QUOTE] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-kretzmann/shells-settlement-doesnt_b_213352.html Why aren't these foreign companies who can bring MILLIONS of dollars of equipment from Dump trucks to bulldozers and MASSIVE earth moving machines, some of which are the BIGGEST in the world, NOT providing similar types of equipment TO AFRICANS as a form of FAIR compensation for the right to TAKE the wealth out of Africa? Why is it that THESE SAME companies don't EVER look at providing manufacturing capabilities for natural resources to SERVE the African market? Why is it they only care about EXPORT, without even CONTEMPLATING providing ANY capacity to deliver useful products and services TO AFRICANS? How is this simply AFRICAS fault if foreigners do NOT care enough about the welfare of Africans to BUILD INDUSTRY to serve the African continent? If they have the technology and means to transport TONS of raw materials around the world and make infrastructure and products for the people OUTSIDE of Africa, then they can absolutely do the same IN AFRICA. There is more than enough money from the profits made off Africa's resources for this to happen. The reason they don't is because THEY ARE GREEDY and because of the HISTORICAL racism in European exploitation of Africa's resources, which was NEVER intended to benefit Africans, it was ONLY to benefit Europeans. The problem is not that they cannot, but that they don't WANT to. But of course none of that is in this type of propaganda article. Nigeria and the trans saharan oil pipeline: [QUOTE] The idea of piping gas thousands of kilometres across the Sahara was first dreamt up more than 30 years ago, but the project remained on the drawing board pending a concrete agreement between neighbouring states and a clear funding plan. "This, no doubt, is a major milestone ... in the commercialisation of the huge endowment of natural gas resources," Nigerian Petroleum Minister Rilwanu Lukman said at a ceremony in the capital Abuja. The project, with capital costs estimated at $10 billion for the pipeline and $3 billion for gathering centres, would send West African gas via a 4,128 km (2,580 mile) pipeline from Nigeria via Niger and Algeria starting from 2015. The European Union sees the Trans-Saharan project as a potential opportunity to diversify its energy sources. "This will provide another platform for a sustainable and reliable energy supply to Europe, thus ensuring security of supply," Lukman said. France's Total, Royal Dutch Shell ( RDSA - news - people ) and Russia's Gazprom have all expressed interest in helping Nigeria's state-run NNPC and Algeria's counterpart Sonatrach in the project. Gazprom and NNPC agreed to invest at least $2.5 billion to explore and develop Africa's biggest oil and gas sector, including building the first part of the Trans-Sahara pipeline. Some analysts see Russia's keen interest in Nigeria as an attempt to maintain its grip on Europe's natural gas supplies. FOREIGN PARTNERS NEEDED ? The three governments are expected to begin formal discussions with outside investors sometime next year. But Algerian Energy Minister Chakib Khelil said the project may not need foreign help as the three countries already have the gas reserves, the money and the technology to build the pipeline on their own. "We should be able to do it on our own," Khelil said. "We have the expertise and I don't think there is a problem with finance in this project." Nigeria has estimated natural gas reserves of 180 trillion cubic feet, the seventh largest in the world. Its liquefied natural gas company Nigeria LNG says it already provides 10 percent of world supply, much of it to Europe and North America. But it has not been able to develop its gas industry to anywhere near its full potential because of a lack of funds and of a clear regulatory environment. The European Union, which already relies on Russia for a significant proportion of its oil and gas supplies, sees the Trans-Sahara project as one way to bolster energy security. But sceptics point out the pipeline will run through some volatile areas. Nigeria's main militant group, responsible for attacks on the oil industry in the Niger Delta, has already threatened to sabotage the venture. The pipeline would also pass through northern Niger, parts of which are controlled by nomadic Tuareg rebels, and southern Algeria, where Islamic militant groups have long had a presence. (Editing by Nick Tattersall, Editing by Peter Blackburn) [/QUOTE] http://www.forbes.com/feeds/reuters/2009/07/03/2009-07-03T140045Z_01_L3457666_RTRIDST_0_NIGERIA-ALGERIA-PIPELINE-UPDATE-2.html Note that even with this and the millions of gallons of oil pumped out of Nigeria DAILY by foreigners and added to the MILLIONS of tons of gas WASTED because of flaring by foreign companies, Nigeria is having a FUEL SHORTAGE. Obviously this article at the beginning of this post would pretend that it is simply an INHERENT affliction of the Africans themselves. However the recent SUCCESSFUL trials against SHELL and BROWN AND ROOT in FOREIGN COURTS, tell a WHOLE DIFFERENT STORY. WHY does Nigeria have to IMPORT FUEL? And whose fault is it that there is LITTLE TO NO refinery capacity WITHIN Nigeria to not only serve Nigeria but ALL of Western and Central Africa. How does that make ANY SENSE? Right now Nigeria must IMPORT fuel for its domestic population, in a country that is PRODUCING MILLIONS of barrels of crude oil per day. Are you telling me that NOBODY ever though about creating refineries in Nigeria after ALL THIS TIME? Are you telling me that with the RECORD profits of these gas companies and their affiliated industries that there is NO MONEY to build a few refineries IN NIGERIA or to assist the Nigerians within the current joint venture to build one? Are you kidding? Such a venture would be CHUMP CHANGE. Are you telling me that there is no TECHNICAL know how even though the BIGGEST oil companies in the world have been operating there for over 50 years? ALL of this is simply NONSENSE. Not to mention the fact that out of ALL the money made off Nigerian oil, Nigeria only gets A SMALL PERCENTAGE of it and this is before it even goes to the "corrupt" government. So WHO is corrupt? The government for allowing the foreigners to walk off with MOST of the money from oil, which could be used to HELP Nigeria build infrastructure and refineries? Or is it the government which allows itself to get by on the SMALL PERCENTAGE of the actual profit made from Nigerian oil. In truth they aren't getting much of any money from Nigerian oil. This is where the accountability comes into play, which is to track HOW MUCH money out of ALL the money made off oil or other resources ACTUALLY is going to the government. It is not enough to monitor what happens to the money AFTER it goes to the government, because THAT is only a SMALL PART of a bigger problem. The BIGGER PROBLEM is the fact that these governments sign contracts allowing foreigners to walk of with 80% or more of the profits from these operations, leaving LITTLE money for the Africans to address their own needs to begin with. Yet of course, these foreign agencies don't want to do that. [QUOTE] LAGOS, May 13 (Reuters) - Nigeria's fuel marketers are ending a months-long suspension of imports which caused the worst fuel shortages in years after the government started clearing hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidy arrears. Wale Tinubu, chairman of the Major Oil Marketers Association of Nigeria (MOMAN) and head of one of the country's largest fuel retailers Oando (UNIP.LG), told Reuters normal fuel supplies in Africa's most populous nation should be restored within a month. "Import orders have been placed over the last two weeks. As the government's overall liability to the marketers has reduced, the marketers have responded by partially ordering what they would normally have ordered," Tinubu said in an interview. "The ships have started coming in. I would say over the next two to four weeks there should be normalcy," he said. [b]Despite being the world's eighth biggest crude oil exporter, Nigeria is forced to import around 85 percent of its petroleum product needs because of the chaotic condition of its four state-owned refineries.[/b] Nigeria's powerful fuel marketing companies, which usually account for around 60 percent of its total refined petroleum imports, suspended shipments earlier this year in protest at late payment of government subsidies. The supply disruption caused chaos in cities around the country, with motorists having to wait hours in long queues at filling stations or buy from street hawkers illegally selling fuel in jerry cans at twice the usual price. The government pays fuel marketers the difference between the regulated pump price, pegged artificially low to make it affordable for Nigerian consumers, and the cost of importation. But the marketing firms -- which include African Petroleum (APET.LG) and Conoil (NTOL.LG), controlled by two of Nigeria's most powerful tycoons Femi Otedola and Mike Adenuga -- said payments had been delayed and a sharp depreciation in the value of the naira currency meant there was an additional shortfall. "In the process of all these delays, the marketers had no choice but to stop the importation of products because we were at over $1 billion in outstanding subsidy claims," Tinubu said. He said there was an outstanding balance of $400 million but a first tranche of $150-200 million had been approved and the remainder would probably be paid within 14 days. [/QUOTE]From: http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssOilGasRefiningMarketing/idUSLD83783520090513 [QUOTE] Though government has done everything within its powers to convince Nigerians that full deregulation is the only way out of the fuel supply crisis in the country, there appears to be a missing link between what is and what ought to be in the implementation of the policy. [b]Those that make up the main opposition to the deregulation policy, mainly Labour, say they are not 100 percent against the implementation of deregulation, but the fact that there are a lot of things that need to be done to create the environment that would guarantee its success. It is common knowledge that the basic infrastructures that would facilitate the effective implementation of the policy are hardly in place. For instance, none of the nation's four refineries in Port Harcourt, Warri and Kaduna has been functioning at installed capacity. The 210,000 barrels per day capacity Port Harcourt refinery could produce only 113,000 barrels per day in 2006, while the 125,000 barrels per day Warri Refinery could only produce 6,126 barrels per day and the 110,000 barrels per day Kaduna Refinery could do only 11,911 barrels per day. In 2007, the situation was so bad that only Port Harcourt Refinery was producing only 51,835 barrels per day out of a combined capacity of 445,000 barrels per day. None of the refineries is currently producing up to 30 percent of installed capacity. Kaduna is currently undergoing turn around maintenance. [/b] Even if the four refineries are producing at 100 percent capacity, the total products yield would be just 18.2 million litres per day, which means almost 13 million litres would still be imported augment the supply. Besides, the 18 licenses given to investors to undertake the construction of private refineries in the country are yet to take off. The explanation was that they were unable to secure government guarantee that they would be able to get adequate supplies of crude oil for refining, and therefore could not go ahead with the plan. Petroleum products in Nigeria are always distributed through a network of storage depots and dedicated pipelines. But, in recent times, the pipeline networks have either deteriorated with age, or have been vandalized by criminal elements. Though the alternative way of transporting the products from the refineries or ports has been through bridging by trucks, the poor network of roads has always been an issue of contention between the Petroleum Tanker Drivers (PTD), who often complain that their members are always exposed to the danger of frequent accidents plying on such roads. There are seven products jetties in the country located at Calabar in Cross River, Okrika in Rivers, Warri in Delta, as well as Apapa and Atlas Cove in Lagos. There are about storage depots, out of which 22 are owned by the NNPC and managed by the Pipelines and Products Marketing Company (PPMC). Out of these 22, only three are currently functional. Though a couple of private depots have been established in recent times, the number is hardly sufficient to service the needs of consumers. For Labour, Deregulation is neither privatization nor liberalization. The kind of deregulation policy that government is contemplating about is such that market forces would be the sole determinant of prices of petroleum products, while all forms of subsidies by government would be withdrawn. In 2006, government claimed it spent N223billion on fuel subsidy, while the sum of N640billion was spent on the same purpose in 2007. Therefore, if the policy is to be implemented, the argument of critics is that, like what obtains in other countries where deregulation is operating, everything that needs to be put in place to make the policy functional has been done, to encourage private investors participate and break the government monopoly in the importation and distribution of petroleum products. Over the years, it is clear that despite that Nigeria is one of the biggest crude oil producers in the world, her economy is completely based on imported petroleum products. Venezuela, which is also a leading producer of crude oil like Nigeria, does not export the commodity, finished petroleum products she refines in her 18 public refineries. In 2007, government imported 10.2billion litres of PMS, out of which NNPC accounted for 7.7billion litres (about 191 cargoes), while marketers imported 2.13billion litres (about 53 cargoes), representing about 40 percent of the total volume. So, Labour is talking about a government that has not put in place the things that should be put in place before talking about the take off of full deregulation. The only way out is to ensure that nation's refineries are not only made to work optimally, but that new refineries constructed to meet the growing demand for petroleum products. If the refineries are made to work at full capacity, it will not only cut down drastically the volume of imports, but the price of fuel at the pump, since available products for distribution would not include all the foreign components that often add up to the final cost at the pump. [/QUOTE]From: http://allafrica.com/stories/200905190310.html But not only that, but if the industry is deregulated, NIGERIAN companies should have the FIRST option to run and manage the former state owned facilities, backed by guaranteed lines of credit. Deregulation won't help unless it is NIGERIAN companies that are being built and developed to take over in the government's place. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3