Secretary of State Antony cautioned Africa about China’s role in the continent in virtual talks with Nigeria and Kenya on Tuesday.
Responding to questions, Blinken said he hoped African countries would keep their “eyes wide open” when approaching relationships with other nations.
“We’re not asking anyone to choose between the United States or China, but I would encourage you to ask those tough questions, to dig beneath the surface, to demand transparency, and to make informed choices about what is best for you and your countries,” he said.
Beijing is involved in infrastructure projects across Africa, which the US views as a threat to American influence. President Biden has floated the idea of the US and its allies starting a global infrastructure project to rival China’s, which is known as the Belt and Road Initiative.
Biden has portrayed the US-China relationship as an ideological battle between “democracy” and “autocracy.” With this view in mind, it’s no wonder the US aims to compete with China in every theater it can.
China is also being used to justify domestic infrastructure projects. President Biden cited the need to compete with Beijing as the reason to pass his massive $2.3 trillion infrastructure plan.
Yes, it’s terrible. Here’s China, investing billions in ports, rail, roads, etc. and yeah they’ll expect some ongoing business opportunities in the long term.
Why don’t they act more like us: give large loans the countries can’t afford to a small, upper class and then collect usurious returns of natural resources and force those clients into “structural adjustments.”
…and force a fire sale of public assets.
Its like the white nations are saying hey just forgit the last 500 years of manifest destiny,trust us…
They should hear what was meant, choose the US over China if you know what’s best for you. We’ll protect you, and ensure you’ll need it.
“We’re not asking anyone to choose between the United States or China, but I would encourage you to ask those tough questions, to dig beneath the surface, to demand transparency, and to make informed choices about what is best for you and your countries,” he said.
Or we will break your freaking kneecaps!!
Blinken is fighting a Sisyphean battle. Though I believe I understand their tactics.
The US government and the multinationals want to control as many governments as possible before, during, and after the financial reset. US military casualties are to be minimized to the extent in-country missions are completed with proxies.
Those successes are extended wherever US dollars and their loan obligations are held and the Federal Reserve maintains the necessary global liquidity.
The plan is clear. But it has been the same all along in Africa. With variations to suit circumstances. And any less obedient country, or critical to various plans is always visited by terrorists of a
various brands. Locals are preferred, but can be fortified by more seasoned fighters from other “projects”.
But the plan is not working well. Those countries cannot take on more IMF and similar credits, the money is gone to previous officials/activists/academics and the whole stable of those that received “grants” and are now on the hook to uphold our narrative.
There is a growing African leadership that prefers Chinese deals. Why? It involves delivery of infrastructure, and repayments are most often in LOCAL currencies.
China can afford to take local currency, as it intends to buy products and raw materials, and use fees China owes for using facilities — like ports — are paying of debt. Now, one can ask how can a country paying off IMF debts, that lost its property to IMF for non-payment, afford to have spare local currency to pay off Chinese project?
Because China gives loan in the form of US Treasuries, that this country uses to pay off some of IMF debt. This frees up local currency to procure locally sourced materials and labor, China provides the rest. By the budget being freed up from going all to IMF or IBRD, or World Bank — but instead to local economy and payment to China — multiple benefits are realized. Most people fo not understand African countries and what IMF has done. It is the frantic push for exports to earn dollars and pay off debts, else IMF steps in and through “structural adjustment programs”, appropriately called SAP, literally reduce the country’s health care, education, pensions, and cut government jobs in infrastructure, from roads to water, sewer and electricity. The destruction has been immense. One African leader compared US and Chinese method of investing. “You cannot deposit a bridge to Swiss bank account.”.
Naturally, the stable of “activists” we keep, from academia to “bloggers” are there to badmouth Chinese projects, any snags exaggerated, and benefits derided. But this is by now a well known phenomena.
In Africa, the dangers of color revolutions and recruitment of terrorists are higher then elsewhere. The level of public awareness is still low, people easily excited into “freedom” rhetoric, and the need for military control much higher.
But this is a process, and eventually,
the benefits to middle class becoming more clear, politics will stabilize.
It is also no coincidence that China and Russia have signed an agreement on countering “color revolutions”. This is not in their countries aline. Both were clear on the damage done to their investments when a determined campaign is launched to discredit them, or unseat the government to freeze or abandon projects and all the agreements previous governments made.
There were already major interventions — Turkey I believe is one. Interventions to save Turkish currency, China reviving infrastructure projects after Japanese funding crippled it — clearly in response to US displeasure at Turkey.
But some colored revolutions backfired spectacularly. Like Armenia. In 2018, a journalist was propped up to lead anti-Russia campaign, ruining many investments. Worse, creating anti-Russia mood, protests at Russian base — but staying within CSTO, defense pact with Russia. In US instigation, Armenia provoked Azerbaijan — with expectations that Azerbaijan was going to accelerate Israeli weapons procurement, as Russia and Turkey were not eager to stir a war in neighborhood.
But the plan backfired, when Turkish-Russian deal resulted in loud commitment by Turkey to Azerbaijan taking Israel out of the picture, and Russia’s commitment to Armenia to protect its territory. What it meant — Armenia was to lose Azerbaijani territory, while Russia is to save Nagorno-Karabakh. And that deal had to be accepted by the journalist/prime minister. Now, Turkey and Russia have a “peace center” in Azerbaijan — translate a military base — while Russia is controlling corridor across Azerbaijan connecting NK to Armenia, and the corridor across Armenia connecting Azerbaijan to its exclave.
US “recognizing” Armenian genocide is a stunt meant to secure reelection of the same faithful color-revolutionary that was forced to resign. US did not intervene to protect Armenia, as it will under no circumstances alienate Azerbaijan — the only hope to get close to Caspian sea.
I am sure, just like Georgia, Armenia may be an irritant, but will not have the power to alter situation in trans-Caucasus.
Georgia got a major railroad built by China, as its Western allies asked for too much money and. many concessions.
This is why I am questioning the self-confidence of NATO talk regarding Ukraine or Georgia membership.
http://oneworld.press/?module=articles&action=view&id=2009
Armenia’s problem with NATO’s infiltration.
Thank you. Such reactions are expected. But watch the maneuvers to reelect Pashinyan.
The object is to splinter angry and agenda-less opposition. Much damage to the country is done by US diaspora. It is one of the wealthiest in US. Many wealthy donors belong to the era when they prospered in US — fifties and sixties. Many small donors are encouraged to contribute, to help homeland.
But the war of 2020 has sobered up many. They asked US to recognize Nagorno-Karabakh, and secure it from Azeri takeover. US and France were mum. Naturally, to US loss of Azerbaijan was by far bigger problem than Armenian loss of their ancient region.
Armenia provided the casus belli, by attacking and killing two Azerbaijan military leaders in July. I believe that the event created an opportunity to solve a long tern problem, occupation of Azeri territory — and preventing external powers to get involved in regional solution.
At present, Biden got out if the gate fast, getting reinserted in any and all problems as if it is his birthright. The way this war evolved in the waning days of Trump administration is a source of great anguish to neocons. So, hitting Turkey with “genocide” designation is considered a big move on the world stage.
But I doubt it will resonate. There is a form of global over-saturation of Western frantic accusations on the grounds of human rights. So frantic, that Saudi Arabia did not want to join accusing China of forced labor to support fellow Sunnis in Xinjiang. In fact, Turkey never denied that horrendous war crimes were committed. It questions the label “genocide” as Armenians lived in Ottoman empire for centuries and were not targeted as people.
But Biden went one step further, calling Istanbul — Constantinople.
With the Ottoman era half a millennium occupation of Christian lands, this is a transparent call to their not quite forgotten memories of occupation. Many a rebellions were crushed in Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece, Russia and others over those centuries.
It is a transparent call to excite Christian-Moslem hate, in all the Balkan-Russia-Middle East areas. I am sure, suddenly there will be calls for all kinds of actions against Turkey. Bloggers, academics, historical rights claims,
Let is see which stare vassals will fall for it.