Post by zarahan on Jul 10, 2018 21:30:14 GMT -5
I’m saying China may be a threat but I haven’t seen any evidence they’re particularly worse than the other 2 main non-continental actors: US, France.
True enough.
What are some examples of non-continental govts setting up bases in order to “grab resources” in the post-colonial period? If by “grab” you mean “steal” I can’t think of any. African govts are eager sellers, there’re well-managed international markets to trade raw materials, no African country is blocked from selling openly to any country by a colonial master. Those 3 reasons make it unnecessary to spend huge amounts of money to set up bases in Africa and use one’s military to “grab resources”. That only made sense in the colonial period.
Well some of those actors you mention, such as France, has had a long history of post-colonial military involvement in Africa, including bases, and including cosy relations and military interventions to prop up various regimes where resources were siphoned off, or extracted in terms quite favorable to French interests. Regimes like those of Bokassa of CAR or Houphet-Boigny of Ivory Coast have been critiqued on those counts. Some of these regimes have been quite eager sellers or makers of concessions. Then there are the collaborationist regimes further south in the days of South African apartheid and its regional hegemony. So its not quite a matter of freedom to sell openly to any country- it’s the sellouts, corruption and compradorism with former colonial masters or financial and commercial interests of the former master that is a factor. But like you say, China may be no worse that those that have gone before her.
The US’s biggest base in Africa by far is in Djibouti, China’s lone base is there too, and many other countries have bases there. Djibouti doesn’t have a lot of resources. The reason so many countries are there militarily is the strategic logistical point of the bab al-mandeb which is one of the most important shipping lanes in the world. Also for the US it’s also a good logistical spot to ferry men and equipment to the nearby strategic areas in the Middle East. In fact, the US’s many bases in Africa seem to be there to allow it the opportunity to have transit spots across the continent so it can militarily move almost anywhere and to fight terrorism. See this article here that outlines the many outposts the US has in Africa (while most media coverage and layman talk is focused on the bogeyman China): tonyseed.wordpress.com/2016/05/25/us-empire-of-african-bases/
DO you think there may be a double-standard at play in some quarters? How come the US is free to establish bases all over the globe, but if China sets up something in one country, then the sky is falling? Etc etc?
True enough.
What are some examples of non-continental govts setting up bases in order to “grab resources” in the post-colonial period? If by “grab” you mean “steal” I can’t think of any. African govts are eager sellers, there’re well-managed international markets to trade raw materials, no African country is blocked from selling openly to any country by a colonial master. Those 3 reasons make it unnecessary to spend huge amounts of money to set up bases in Africa and use one’s military to “grab resources”. That only made sense in the colonial period.
Well some of those actors you mention, such as France, has had a long history of post-colonial military involvement in Africa, including bases, and including cosy relations and military interventions to prop up various regimes where resources were siphoned off, or extracted in terms quite favorable to French interests. Regimes like those of Bokassa of CAR or Houphet-Boigny of Ivory Coast have been critiqued on those counts. Some of these regimes have been quite eager sellers or makers of concessions. Then there are the collaborationist regimes further south in the days of South African apartheid and its regional hegemony. So its not quite a matter of freedom to sell openly to any country- it’s the sellouts, corruption and compradorism with former colonial masters or financial and commercial interests of the former master that is a factor. But like you say, China may be no worse that those that have gone before her.
The US’s biggest base in Africa by far is in Djibouti, China’s lone base is there too, and many other countries have bases there. Djibouti doesn’t have a lot of resources. The reason so many countries are there militarily is the strategic logistical point of the bab al-mandeb which is one of the most important shipping lanes in the world. Also for the US it’s also a good logistical spot to ferry men and equipment to the nearby strategic areas in the Middle East. In fact, the US’s many bases in Africa seem to be there to allow it the opportunity to have transit spots across the continent so it can militarily move almost anywhere and to fight terrorism. See this article here that outlines the many outposts the US has in Africa (while most media coverage and layman talk is focused on the bogeyman China): tonyseed.wordpress.com/2016/05/25/us-empire-of-african-bases/
DO you think there may be a double-standard at play in some quarters? How come the US is free to establish bases all over the globe, but if China sets up something in one country, then the sky is falling? Etc etc?