Exploitation of Africa's Natural Resources

[robocop187]

Far too many times have I listen to folks assert that the international community wastes resources by throwing money at the “problem” of famine and violent conflict in Africa. This is a huge misconception. In fact, the money that the international community spends is at best miniscule in comparison with the amount of profit the international community gains from the exportation of Africa’s natural resources.

Take oil in Sudan for instance- South Sudan is an impoverished and violence stricken country rich in oil that is exported throughout the global community for profit. The travesty in this is that the world does not recognize that the Sudanese only represent 5 percent of corporations that profit from oil exportation while 95 percent are represented by foreign countries. Herein is the real problem- gross exploitation.

What we see here is yet another case foreign power taking advantage of Africa’s instability to facilitate the build-up its own wealth. This is the real cause of famine and violent conflict in Africa.The pouring of money into Africa is not only a farce, but it threaten to perpetuate annihilation the continent’s people as it lures the global community’s attention away from true origin of Africa’s problems.

I would argue if rewarded with a more equitable share of profits from its natural sources, Africa would not need the international community’s money for humanitarian aid, building infrastructure, or anything else. It would be far better equipped to manage it problems itself. What do YOU think???

MAJ Robert L Perry, Student, Command and General Staff College, US Army Combined Arms Center, FT Leavenworth, KS
The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of defense, or the US Government.

[Stan]

Hi Major !

It's not that we are constantly throwing money at the problem, and it's not always what we want to gain. It is however our political system more concerned than most of us are willing to even participate.

Nearly all of the 11 countries I worked in for more than a decade all suffered the same fate (in spite of the fact there was tremendous wealth). Buying one's diamonds or oil legally is one thing, what that dictator does with the funds is another.

I advocate turning off the facet and letting them go at it all alone. If, and a big if at that, the remainder of the world sat back and just watched, and oil and diamonds no longer were bought nor traded, the entire continent would be forced to return to an honest day's work and the dictators would be long gone.

I do like your last para though - with my pesky twist

All that oil and diamond money must first fund all that Humanitarian aid, and, with whatever is left, let the dictator have at it.

The NGOs are going to hate that idea

[robocop187]

All that oil and diamond money must first fund all that Humanitarian aid, and, with whatever is left, let the dictator have at it.

The NGOs are going to hate that idea

Hey Stan!!!
Thanks for your response! You are right...The NGOs will hate this idea but who cares!!!!

Please keep with this string if you have time!!!

[Stan]

Hey Stan!!!
Thanks for your response! You are right...The NGOs will hate this idea but who cares!!!!

Please keep with this string if you have time!!!

OK, (Major) Robert , here's another twist for academic research, which I ended up with in both Zaire and Rwanda:

We're all there trying to do something. Some of us capable yet underfunded (by DOD), some funded (by everybody else on the planet) and yet incapable. Being part of the capable category and a member of a 3-man team faced with over a million refugees, I had some strange (and often inhospitable) bed fellows known as NGOs.

Stereotypes aside, our daily interaction included avoidance and antagonism. Gun-wielding military and the humble NGO would set the stage for 6 months of a disaster watching people get raped, shot, die of cholera, and starve to death.

I can't even fathom how much cash went into that scenario, but, I have wondered what would have happened if we just left that situation to fester without getting involved.

So, in the grand scheme of things, waste of money and resources aside, what would you have recommended we (the 3-man team) do ?

Keep in mind you were sent there without guidance, barely any money, and a very skeptical SNCO on the verge of crying "retired !".

I'm of the opinion we should be cleaning up our own backyard and should we have reserves, they should be put back in the pot. There are very few politicians at this point that agree with me

Regards, Stan

[Uboat509]

Here is a great piece on this subject from the Economist last week. As Dayuhan pointed out, most of these states lack the capacity to exploit these resources on their own. They must, therefore, find a balance wherein they can extract the maximum possible returns from the foreign companies without squeezing them to the point where they do not invest in the their facilities or pull out altogether. This is not an easy balance to find and the volatility of the commodities markets only complicates the issue.

The bottom line is that it is not up to these foreign companies to fix the internal problems of these states. They are businesses which exist for the sole purpose of creating wealth for the stockholders. It is also in no way the prerogative the home states of these companies to interfere with them in their dealings with these African states so long as the deals they are making are legal.

[J Wolfsberger]

The bottom line is that it is not up to these foreign companies to fix the internal problems of these states. They are businesses which exist for the sole purpose of creating wealth for the stockholders. It is also in no way the prerogative the home states of these companies to interfere with them in their dealings with these African states so long as the deals they are making are legal.

To which I'll add, if anyone wants to make it their business to clean up these states, start by talking about how many brigades they want to commit to the colonial venture.

[Dayuhan]

Take oil in Sudan for instance- South Sudan is an impoverished and violence stricken country rich in oil that is exported throughout the global community for profit. The travesty in this is that the world does not recognize that the Sudanese only represent 5 percent of corporations that profit from oil exportation while 95 percent are represented by foreign countries. Herein is the real problem- gross exploitation.

Of course oil is exported "for profit". What other reason is there for selling anything?

The ratio of local to foreign companies is not necessarily an indicator of exploitation. n many cases there aren't any local companies with the capacity, so the government cuts a deal with foreign companies, which typically pay substantial amounts to the government, which sits back and collects the money with no investment or effort. That could be called a win-win for the government and the company. Generally a lose for the people, since the government's share typically goes straight to an offshore account, but the companies can't do much about that.

Much of what's spent on aid is in fact tantamount to throwing money away, because the money is gone and the objectives are not achieved. I don't see the relationship between that and resource exploitation.

Also worth noting that "the international community is a pretty diverse place, and that it's not in any way under American control. Most of the companies exploiting African resources are not American, and they will do what they do regardless of our policies.

Of course if African officials wanted to stop exploitation, they could: they could make deal with the companies that brought more to the country and less to their own bank accounts... but why would they do that?