Monthly Archives: October 2018

South Africa, the British Empire, and the Way Forward

Photo: Courtesy of Phapano Phasha. Caption: Phapano Phasha as a commentator on ANN7 television, 2017.

South Africa, the British Empire, and the Way Forward

by Phapano Phasha  , 27 October 2018

Phasha is an ANC Branch Secretary in Johannesburg, a researcher, social commentator, community activist and communications strategist. She writes in her personal capacity.

South Africa’s “state capture” hoax—the subject of her polemic here—is, for South Africa, what Russiagate is in the United States. Both are British psychological operations (PsyOps) for achieving regime change. Phasha asserts the basic truth that “The South African state … was created by the oligarchy … The state was therefore ‘captured’ from the beginning by British imperialism,” and remains in British hands today. This is the foundation of her attack on the current phase of the regime change operation in South Africa. The ultimate aim of that operation is to put former President Zuma and some of his allies in prison through their association with the Gupta family, while legitimizing as normal the continuing—but undisclosed—British imperial control of the country’s economy. That control is what Phasha, Zuma and others are fighting.

Her article reflects the existence of two different (unresolved) views among black South Africans on economic liberation. One view is that the international financial system (the British financial empire), must be brought to an end through the collaboration of anti-imperial powers, notably the BRICS and China’s Belt and Road Initiative. This is the key to opening South Africa to the kind of development that we see in China. However, because of U.S. military might and its possession of the hydrogen bomb, this collaboration will not avoid a nuclear holocaust unless the United States is taken out of the hands of the British-steered neocons and neoliberals—those who are demonizing Russia and China, and fantasize that the human race can survive a thermonuclear war. President Trump’s attempts to establish friendly, stable relations with China and Russia have much popular support in the United States, but are threatened—and made complicated—by the neocon/neoliberal establishment. Yet he is not giving up.

The other view is that “you can’t fight the imperial system”—and a political earthquake in the United States is unimaginable. Therefore, black South Africans should limit themselves to forcing a redistribution of South Africa’s wealth, so that black South Africans are not left out. The expressions “white monopoly capital” and “white capital” are principally used in this context: the capital in question is South African domestic capital, which is “owned” by whites. The concept discounts the fact that ownership is not control, and those in London and Wall Street who are capable of trashing your currency and manipulating your bond ratings, and, through their South African agents, able to organize capital flight, dominate your airwaves, and manipulate your politics—it is they who effectively own it all. Send every white person in the country to Australia or the Crimea, and there will be no reduction in black poverty, only a few more black billionaires.

Phasha’s article first appeared on the Black Opinion blog in February 2018. Because of its urgent relevance, given the launch of the Judicial Inquiry into State Capture’s dog-and-pony show, she posted it on her Facebook page in September under the title, “Did the Guptas Capture the State?” It is reprinted here with revisions, with her permission. It has been edited, and subheads have been added.

David Cherry

§ § §

It is highly probable that the Guptas have stolen from government; it is equally improbable to say the Guptas have “captured the state.” State capture, in essence, is about those who control the means of production through their proximity to the state and how this control permeates and influences our social strata.

To say the Guptas control both our productive forces and value system is the biggest lie to have been sold to South Africans. Capitalism by its nature thrives on corruption, and the Guptas, in the complex web of capitalism, will be considered petty thieves, for they control nothing of value in the context of production or wealth creation.

Quantitavely speaking, who has control over the state? Who makes the law in South Africa today?

Who creates knowledge in South Africa? Who owns the banks? Who owns the wealth and minerals of this country? The Guptas?

If the Guptas are deported tomorrow will you get your land back?

Who controls more than R400 billion of procurement for government, of which 90% goes to white-owned companies?

Are the Guptas part of the Big 5 construction companies, which control more than the R4 trillion from the Presidential Infrastructure Plan? The same construction companies which collude and steal billions from government and taxpayers?

Are the Guptas part of the Big 5 banks and asset management companies that control billions of government funds and which have been found to have manipulated the currency, “fixed” their account books or stolen from government pension funds?

Who controls the supply of coal at Eskom and has 20-40 year contracts?

If only 2% of procurement at South African Airways (SAA) is controlled by blacks, who controls the 98% at this parastatal? Is it the Guptas?

Who controls mega-projects at Prasa [passenger rail agency] and Transnet [rail, port, and pipeline agency], including infrastructure projects worth billions for our rails and ports?

Who controls the billion-rand health industry, which includes pharmaceutical companies that supply medicine and equipment for your government? The Guptas?

Who controls ICT infrastructure used by government? Guptas?

Government is the biggest consumer of legal services, and it is the Big 5 white law firms that are asked to prepare the briefs. It is white lawyers primarily who write legal opinions for the ANC-led government; it is white lawyers who developed such regressive legislation as PPPFMA [affirmative action law for bidders on government contracts], the Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB), and Chapter 9 institutions [intended to strengthen constitutional democracy] including the Competition Commission, which is meant to protect white corruption which is just called collusion.

The is no private sector without government, and there is no government without tax collection. The so-called private sector has always depended on government procurement and capital injection. If you look at the top 25 companies by market capitalization listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, all of them are co-owned by the Public Investment Corporation.

It is your pension funds that sustain white privilege if not state capture by white conglomerates.

How do you capture the state if you control nothing? In a capitalist society, business always seeks to influence politicians, and many of you who compete for tenders with government will know, because you are forever having meetings with politicians in an effort to influence them.

The mere fact that you can influence ministers does not then mean you have captured the state, because African National Congress (ANC) ministers have not even comprehended how the state interacts with society; many have not even explored the role of the state in its entirety.

How Afrikaners Resisted the British

The South African state in its basic terms was created by the oligarchy to exert influence through politicians and to manage the poor and the working class.

The state was therefore “captured” from the beginning by British imperialism, which was then forced to co-opt some Afrikaners including, in recent times, the late Anton Rupert.

To this day, what you call the Republic of South Africa continues to be a colonial republic under the custodianship of the British Empire; hence our gold reserves are under the custodianship of Queen Elizabeth.

However, across several generations, Hendrik Potgieter, Paul Kruger, Koos de la Rey, Christiaan de Wet, J.B.M. Hertzog, and others refused to be coopted by British capital, which led to the Anglo-Boer War and the formation of the secret Broederbond in 1918 to fight British imposition.

So powerful was Britain and its grip on the state through its business proxies, that even after the National Party came to power, Prime Minister Hendrik Verwoerd in Parliament lamented that the “Oppenheimers” were so powerful that they could easily destroy any government. Verwoerd attempted to dismantle British state capture, but was assassinated in 1966; the idea of nationalizing the wealth of the country from British control died with him.

Let me remind you that the first ever mining company to be owned by Afrikaners was only consolidated in 1963, nearly one hundred years after the rediscovery of diamonds in 1867. This means it took those who have been in South Africa since 1652 almost one hundred years to own a mine—mind you, not even to control it, because Gencor received vendor funding from Britain.

We must understand the difference between ownership and control.
White companies have perfected control through cross-directorships and cross-shareholding where they still control more than 50% of the economy. They might not own certain companies, but they control many of them by having given them vendor funding, and then they control the boards through directorships and shareholding.

They run a sophisticated web, which they control through legislation, the executive, and the judiciary.

Did I mention that more than 60% of senior prosecutors at the National Prosecuting Authority are white and most also worked for the apartheid government? Take Gerrie Nel, for example. As celebrated as he is, he never prosecuted any white collar criminal; instead he worked with the likes of the corrupt KPMG to bring black blue-collar criminals to book and to show his contempt, he went to join Afriforum to further protect and entrench white supremacy.

Any lessons learned?

The Broederbond fought to defeat state capture by Britain, but they were eventually defeated and coopted. From 1918 the Brotherhood built their own universities, refusing to take their children to English schools where the minds of their children would be shaped by Anglo scholarship. Instead of taking their children to Rhodes University, University of Cape Town or the University of the Witwatersrand, they opted to build Free State University, Stellenbosch, University of Pretoria, Rand Afrikaans University and Potchefstroom, so as to take charge of their future.

Afrikaners understood the power to define. They didn’t fight for inclusion like we do, but opted to start their own institutions in their own language.

They started their own banks and insurance companies such as Volkskas (now ABSA), Saambou, Sanlam, Avbob, and Nedbank (Nederland Bank). Nasionale Pers [National Press] was a brainchild of Hertzog. Afrikaners started their own media houses because they understood the power of the media and its ability to shape narrative and set the agenda.

The bedrock of Afrikaner self-determination was their church, the Dutch Reformed Church, which on a weekly basis taught whites they were God’s chosen race. Even though Afrikaners were eventually swallowed by British capital, they fought till the bitter end.

Even though Afrikaner capitalists like Anton and Johann Rupert (others contest that this family is truly Afrikaner), Jannie Mouton, Markus Jooste, and Christo Wiese have become economic partners to the British, they still exercise some control over their destiny. Remember, Afrikaners were also subjected to concentration camps and many were left to die in their war with Britain—both fighting for our resources.

Black Billionaires Owned by the British

Where is Black South Africa today? Nowhere!

We are confused, divided and fighting amongst ourselves. ANC leaders are fighting each other to be coopted by white capital, just to get bread crumbs and Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) status. Since 1991, Radical Economic Transformation (RET), adopted by the ANC in 2017, is the first ANC document that truly speaks to self determination. Now the question is whether the ANC has bold leaders prepared to die to implement this radical agenda?

Hence we must protect RET with our lives, because in it lies the wealth of our children and future children.

RET is no longer about the ANC.

BEE was conceptualized by the Brenthurst Foundation, commissioned by the Oppenheimers, which has led to a crisis in black business, and the tender system has failed. Thabo Mbeki conceptualized what he deemed to be a “patriotic bourgeoisie,” an elitist project which really created the new black colonial elite and led to social distance between the ANC and its constituency. Today ANC leaders are coopted by white businesses to such an extent that some are even prepared to say White Monopoly Capital does not exist.

Such denialism!

Do you understand how breadcrumbs numb your ability to analyze your concrete objective reality? Afrikaners refused breadcrumbs and were even prepared to kill black people, yet today you have leaders who are prepared to distort the truth and tell us there is no White Monopoly Capital or that the Guptas have captured the state.

Such a travesty!

In the history of our economic struggle post 1994, the Guptas were the first race outside of the power struggle between British/Afrikaner capital who succeeded in a hostile take-over through Tegeta to buy out a white controlled company.

For any student of history who has researched how capital has changed hands since the discovery of diamonds in 1867, this was monumental, if not the beginning of a proverbial economic war. The 5% that Tegeta snitched from Glencore/Shanduka-owned Optimum was the beginning of our war towards economic freedom….

How?

For the first time in the history of Eskom, a race outside of the white race had control of shares at Eskom. Forget Ramaphosa’s Shanduka—it was coopted. White business was shaken that another race had actually beaten them in their own game…. Anglo American, Exxaro, Glencore, BHP Billiton, Khumba Iron Ore were all shocked that more than 70% of their monopoly at the state-owned entity was now contested.

No black person has ever done what the Guptas have done—contest the domination of white capital. None whatsoever.

It is another lie that white capital is sustained by good governance or accountability. Steinhoff, KPMG, Investec, Murray and Roberts, ABSA, and others continue to prove that the private sector is a playground of sophisticated thieves in suits who collude and steal taxpayers’ money, but because they write legislation that protects them and they own the media that protects their thievery, you would only associate corruption and capture with others.

Look at our black rand billionaires.

Patrice Motsepe, though a brilliant business man, owns a British company now called African Rainbow Minerals, which in fact is AngloVaal, which was unbundled between 1998 and 2002, a brainchild of Clive Menell, one of the British mining randlords who was Harry Oppenheimer’s confidant. The Menells are part of the British dynasty in South Africa. Hence local white capital will never antagonize Patrice. So powerful were the Menells and so trusted by some ANC leaders, that when Nelson Mandela publicly separated from Winnie Mandela, he went to stay with the Menells.

Shanduka, founded by Cyril Ramaphosa, is an extension of Anglo American, with shares in almost all Oppenheimer-controlled companies having been given to Shanduka and Pembani since 1993.

The same with Tokyo Sexwale. And many emerging black billionaires have equally not done anything much to contest white economic domination.

The Way Forward?

Surely Britain does not want another South African war anything like the Boer War, and Afrikaners know they have nowhere else to go. For these reasons, an empowered black society is a threat to white privilege.

What is the way forward?

Do we continue to allow ourselves to be misled that the Guptas have captured our state?

Do we wait for another foreign family to come and fight with whites for our resources, or do we learn from both the Broederbond and the Guptas how to contest for real economic power which will empower all our people?

The Guptas, just like the Dutch and British, were mere tourists in South Africa, but decided to stay permanently. They saw opportunities that Black South Africans did not see. From 1993 they began to entice and then coerce ANC leaders in an effort to gain influence, but they went beyond what black aspirant capitalists aspired to, They fought to control patterns of ownership.

As ANC leader Dr. Kgosi Maepa in Pretoria would say, what you have today are “black capitalists without capital” and the question I ask today, directed in particular to the black intelligentsia, is what will it take you to start your own institutions?

The black society is in a crisis because the ANC is in a crisis, whilst pan-Africanist organisations are at war with themselves.

Surely you must come out of your closets and armchair criticism to save this sinking ship. The ANC as I would infer is just like the Titanic and headed towards an iceberg; we need to steer it away from this iceberg.

What does this mean?

The black intelligentsia must construct a new understanding to save the ANC from itself, unless they are also prepared to see political power right back in the hands of the minority.

by Phapano Phasha , introduction by David Cherry

 

Nigeria and Sub-Saharan Africa Should NOT Have the Majority of Poor People.

re posted from                                       Africa and the World

Nigeria and Sub-Saharan Africa Should NOT Have the Majority of Poor People.

Nigeria and Sub-Saharan Africa Should NOT Have the Majority of Poor People.

October 24, 2018

This  is absolutely unacceptable. There is no objective reason for Nigeria and Sub-Saharan Africa to have the highest percentage of poor people in the world, with all its natural resources and people. This is the result of failed policies that began with the so called “Washington Consensus” beginning in the 1980s. Under the International Monetary Fund’s diktats and Structural Adjustment Programs(SAPs), the economies of African nations were destroyed and many have still not recovered.  African nations are beginning to follow a different model in collaboration with China’s Belt and Road Initiative. The IMF and World Bank models which measure statistical monetary aggregates ignore the most essential ingredient necessary to create economic growth: technologically advanced infrastructure platforms, integrating rail, energy, water, and roads. Only in the last ten years is infrastructure finally being built, after it was outlawed under colonialism and neo-colonialism, (except for roads and rail for resource to port and transporting colonial soldiers).  For example, the Sudanese people are suffering terribly from a lack of economic growth, because Sudan has been threatened not to deviate from IMF dictated macro-economic parameters. The Sudanese people will rebel, if Sudan continues to adhere to the murderous policies of the so called “free market.”

It is time for African nations to over throw the old model and break free from the monetarist grip of the IMF and WB. Inclusive growth, as it is called, will only happen when there is improvement in the real-physical economy. 

It is projected that by 2050 Nigeria will have 400 million people and Africa as a whole 2.4 billion. Despite the hysteria of the “zero-growthers,” Nigeria and Africa are not suffering from over population, but underdevelopment of its vast wealth. Each new human born can be a new source of wealth, if their creative potential is nurtured and developed. Thus, the Africa continent  with its projected large population, should become the center development (not poverty) of world economy, if we act now to massively expand infrastructure across the continent.

Source: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld

The New Silk Road, End of Colonialism: A New Shared Future for Humanity

re posted from                                  EXECUTIVE INTELLIGENCE REVIEW

https://larouchepub.com/index.php

This article appears in the October 26, 2018 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE ADDRESS

The New Silk Road, End of Colonialism: A New Shared Future for Humanity

Schiller Institute founder and President Helga Zepp-LaRouche keynoted an invitation-only event for diplomats and others in Washington, D.C. on Oct. 17. The event was also addressed by Virginia State Senator Richard Black, who spoke about the strategic situation in Syria, and former U.S. diplomat and foreign policy advisor to the Senate Republican leadership, James Jatras, who spoke on British interference in the United States from the Southern Confederacy to what the British call Russiagate.

Technical difficulties prevented recording the first few minutes of Zepp-LaRouche’s remarks, in which she introduced the concepts of the new paradigm versus those of the old paradigm. The following is an edited transcript of her presentation.

Russiagate: Biggest Scandal in U.S. History

Now emerging and coming out into the open, is what will probably turn out to be the biggest scandal in the history of the United States—that is the so-called Russiagate and the so-called collusion of the Trump election campaign with Putin to win the election in 2016. This is all being exposed as collusion between the intelligence services of the Obama Administration with British intelligence—as a matter of fact, of MI6 and GCHQ with the FBI, the CIA, John Brennan, and the Department of Justice during the Obama Administration.

View full size

CIA
Former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova (left) exposes electronic surveillance on U.S. citizens done at request of the FBI and CIA Director John Brennan (above, right).

This is now all coming out into the open. There was, two days ago, a very fascinating interview with former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova on WMAL radio in Washington, in which he described how MI6 was conducting electronic surveillance on U.S. citizens at the request of the FBI, and CIA Director Brennan. Brennan actually visited London and he met with MI6 and GCHQ before the whole Russiagate story began, and where this all started still needs to be clarified. Did it come from John Brennan or did it not come from British intelligence? This question is now opening up. According to diGenova, who is the former U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., this is a tremendous liability on the part of these U.S. intelligence officials—for possible criminal prosecution.

It is also very clear that President Trump is completely aware of the coup against him, and that he is planning to defeat it. As a matter of fact, he just was in a very remarkable interview for “60 Minutes” with Lesley Stahl, where afterwards Lesley Stahl commented that he is now fully in control, that he is now running his Presidency in a completely sovereign way. And when she, in the interview, asked him if he would pledge that he would not get rid of the Mueller investigation, he said, “I don’t have to pledge anything to you. I’m the President, and you are not.”

So, it is very clear that Trump has defeated the Mueller investigation, which is now practically over. We are now three weeks from the Nov. 6 election, and a lot can happen in between. For example, you could have sudden turns, you could have a new financial crash much bigger than the one of 2008. We could also have the complete declassification and publication of all the documents related to this British coup against an American President. If that comes out, then it will not only be the biggest scandal—that the so-called “closest ally” of the United States, Great Britain, was involved in a coup attempt against an elected President—but this will reveal the motives, why this attempted coup occurred.

And that goes immediately to Trump’s promise in the election campaign that he would remedy the relationship with Russia. As you could see in the very successful summit he conducted in Helsinki with President Putin, despite the incredible stories thrown against him with the Russiagate story, he is, indeed, on this course. Not only will the British role come out, but also the different British operations, the false flag operations against the Syrian government, which Virginia State Senator Richard Black talked about, and naturally also, the phony Skripal affair. All of the British operations were designed to draw the United States into an increasing confrontation against Russia.

From recent encounters we’ve had in the United States with people at the Trump rallies, and also with simple citizens in the streets, it is very clear that Americans increasingly understand that this is a coup against the President.

The polarization in the United States, right now, as you all are aware, is unprecedented. And what is really clear is that the Democrats are in an all-out effort in the midterm election to win the House of Representatives, and possibly pick up some Senate seats. They have on their agenda,— if they win, they will probably be able to lure some neo-con Republicans into their camp and go for an immediate impeachment of President Trump.

View full size

DoD/D. Myles Cullen
NATO Supreme Allied Commander in Europe Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti says the West is already at war with Russia.

If that were to happen, we would be immediately back on a path to war against Russia and against China. Look at the very bellicose statements, for example, by General Curtis Scaparrotti, NATO Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, who recently said that the West is already at war with Russia, that it’s not yet a shooting war, but they are at war. The Democrats have been the real war party, in the recent period, even beyond what Obama and Hillary Clinton were doing in their time. With the Democrats back in power, we would be back on a confrontation with Russia right away.

It is also very doubtful, if there were to be any power play in this election, that the Trump supporters would take it. So, we are in for a really, very decisive battle, in which world peace depends on Trump getting the necessary backing. Trump people in the United States immediately freak when you say that, but it is the case.

View full size

Xinhua/Dai Tianfang
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

Now, what is the understanding of this internal situation in the rest of the world? Well, it is very clear from the statement of different Russians, like Foreign Minister Lavrov, for example, that the Russians have a quite differentiated view. They do know what President Trump is up against—they always make a clear distinction between what Trump says and what the Senate says, as does China.

The Chinese right now are really quite disappointed with the Trump Administration’s tariff policy, and even feel outright anger because, after the initial very positive relations between Trump and Xi Jinping, their relations are really not on the level they should be right now as a result of this. Nevertheless, they make a big distinction between such outrageous attacks on China, coming from Pence and also Bolton, and on the other side, Pompeo and General Mattis, who frequently just said that it is not the intention of the United States to contain China.

In Europe, it is absolutely amazing. I just checked this afternoon to be sure, and my colleagues confirmed for me that practically in no European country has there been honest coverage of this coup attempt. Articles, when they do appear, are rare, and if they mention anything at all about Christopher Steele, they never mention the British role as such! Such references are so opaque that nobody can understand them who has not got a complete knowledge of the whole story; and the other references are spins, attacks on Trump, and generally take the side of the Democrats. It is quite amazing that in Europe, concerning an issue where world peace is at stake, people are really in the dark.

View full size

CC/Gage Skidmore
Steve Bannon

Thucydides Trap or
New Silk Road?

The big question other than this internal fight in the United States, is the conflict between the United States and China. It is the old question of the “Thucydides trap”: How will the up-to-now dominant power, namely the United States, react to a secondary power rising and eventually bypassing it? What are people such as Steve Bannon and Kissinger, who seem to have formed an alliance, and many think tanks, so absolutely freaked out about? Bannon is absolutely obsessed. He says that China represents a mortal danger to the existence of the United States, that there is a tremendous stealing of technologies—which by the way, is a lie, because China, in the meantime, has long surpassed the state of its development where it was dependent on stealing technology, and has become a leading power in many areas of science and technology itself.

Now, ever since Xi Jinping announced the New Silk Road in Kazakhstan in 2013, about 100 countries have joined this effort. There have been investments in all of these countries, totaling 12 times the size of the Marshall Plan, all based on a win-win cooperation—an enormous number of infrastructure corridors, industrial parks, power plants; various agricultural projects have been built. And in the recent time, you have the building of a completely new system of international relations, based on respect for sovereignty, respect for noninterference in the affairs of the other country, and respect for the perspective of different social systems, and this has created a completely different dynamic in the world.

View full size

Xinhua/Wang Ye
Opening of the Beijing Summit of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, Sept. 3, 2018.

This has, for example, recently led to the complete integration of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization with the Belt and Road Initiative. There is a new formation of South-South relations which became very apparent at the recent annual BRICS meeting in Johannesburg, where you had the formation of Global South, which was practically all the organizations from the developing sector, the G77, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Mercosur, the African Union, many regional organizations. And then the very big Africa-China summit, of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC), in Beijing at the beginning of September, at which about 48 presidents and 5 other heads of state or government participated from Africa, announcing a new era in the friendship and relations between China and the countries of the African continent.

At the BRICS summit, Russian President Vladimir Putin promised that Russia would light up Africa by providing electricity, not from oil and gas, but through helping African nations to build nuclear power plants. At the same meeting, Xi Jinping said that Africa, of all the places in the world, has the biggest development potential in the world.

Now the New Silk Road Spirit, which has really captured this dynamic, is transforming geopolitical conflicts in many parts of the world. For example, the very successful developments concerning North and South Korea, who are now fully on the way to possibly announcing a peace treaty before the end of the year, and going in the direction of unification. This is definitely one of the great successes of President Trump, who at the Singapore summit with North Korea’s Kim Jong-un, promised to help to make North Korea a prosperous country if the denuclearization continues. And China has promised to integrate the Koreas into the Belt and Road Initiative. Russia has also promised to contribute to the economic prosperity in North Korea. This is a model in which you can see how this new spirit is helping to transform previous crisis situations into real miracles.

View full size

CC/Skilla 1st
The Holhol Bridge on the Standard Gauge Addis Ababa-Djibouti Railway.

A similar thing is happening in the Horn of Africa where—as a result of the construction of the fast railway between Djibouti and Addis Ababa—Somalia, Djibouti, Eritrea and Ethiopia are now developing new diplomatic relations and cooperation, which was unthinkable a very short time before.

The biggest breakthrough in such developments occurred two days ago with the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between the Italian government and the Lake Chad Basin Commission on the realization of the Transaqua project. The LaRouche organization has been fighting for Transaqua for over 30 years.

That China, Italy and six African nations have agreed to build it, is a game-changer for the entire African continent. Transaqua will refill Lake Chad, which is now down to about 10% of its previous volume, by bringing 3-4% of the water from the tributaries of the Congo River in a region about 500 meters higher, through a system of canals, into Lake Chad, creating an inland waterway for participating countries. It will provide hydropower, it will provide huge amounts of water for irrigation, it will fill up Lake Chad, and it will still provide for large areas in the Sahel zone to be irrigated. And that way you can really improve the life about 40 million people who live there.

This is a tremendous breakthrough, and I think this is really the kind of project which can happen around the world everywhere.

View full size

UN/Cia Pak
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

In the context of the New Silk Road, there have also been an enormous number of strategic realignments of countries that previously, for historical reasons and past wars, were completely at odds. For example, now there is a new cooperation between Japan and China, where both say that there is the possibility of joint projects in Africa. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, just two days ago, said that Japan and China can cooperate in third countries and the pivot could be Thailand. Another great project, for which we have been fighting for more than 30 years, is the Kra Canal, about which there has recently been a conference putting that project back on the agenda. The Kra Canal would be a game-changer for the entire transport route in Southeast Asia.

Even as Latin American countries are extremely keen to work with China, U.S. Vice President Pence had threatened them and attacked them, saying they shouldn’t cooperate with China. But, since the United States is not offering what China is offering, the tendency is clearly in this direction.

In Europe, the reaction has been mixed. The European Union and Berlin are insisting on a “European way.” I’ll come to what that means in a second. Tomorrow is the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM), in Brussels, where the Europeans will propose their own connectivity as a counter to the New Silk Road, but China so far sees no problem in such an arrangement, saying the two schemes can be integrated. Let’s see what happens at this summit.

But even Europe is completely captured by the advantages of cooperating with the New Silk Road. The 16+1, the Central and Eastern European countries (CEEC) plus China, are bringing in lots of infrastructure projects, and this has instilled optimism, for example in the Visegrad countries—that is Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary—whose transport ministers just met and announced that they want to connect their capitals through high-speed rail systems. So soon the Visegrad countries will be more prosperous and have more advantages than the West European countries which have basically not engaged in such infrastructure projects.

View full size

kremlin.ru
Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz.

A wonderful example of cooperation with the New Silk Road is Austria, where Chancellor Sebastian Kurz will conduct a big Europe-Africa Forum, before the end of the year. Austria has the presidency of the European Union for this present half-year; many institutions in Austria and Vienna are completely enthusiastic. For example, the head of the Vienna Chamber of Commerce is pushing for the complete integration of Austria into the New Silk Road. And he said the New Silk Road is very easily explained: It is our economic future. The Mayor of the city of Linz called the connection of Austria to China the “Trade Route of Creativity.”

View full size

Xinhua/Cheng Tingting
Italian Under Secretary of State Michele Geraci

Also the new Italian government, which is being attacked by the mainstream media practically every day, is practically going for a full strategic alliance with China. Various cabinet ministers, Michele Geraci, and Giovanni Tria just returned from China after concluding huge deals, inviting China to rebuild Italy’s infrastructure. Paolo Savona, made a wonderful speech in the Italian Chamber of Deputies, comparing Italy’s new economic plan to Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, and also advocating cooperation between China and Italy in Africa. And before the Transaqua Memorandum of Understanding, there was an earlier memorandum of understanding between China and Italy to engage in this great project. So this can be a model of any Western country.

This plan is also, naturally, coming under attack by the European Council on Foreign Relations, which is a George Soros-financed institution. I think the Swiss financial daily Neue Zürcher Zeitung summed it all up recently, writing about Europe’s “paralyzing fear of Africa,” pointing to the crucial difference that Europeans only see Africa as a source of refugees, as a big migration crisis, while China is seeing the economic opportunity, and that therefore Europe is completely missing the signs of the times; that even countries including India, Turkey, the Gulf States, Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, Thailand, Japan, and China, all are saying, “Let’s go to Africa; this is where the economic next big development will take place.” These people are talking about Africa being a “new China with African characteristics.”

A New Paradigm for the Old

Now, the new paradigm is very clearly a new system of relations among nations, which allows the developing countries to leapfrog, overcome their underdevelopment, and get access to advanced technology. The old paradigm is completely hysterical about that, because if you look at what they have been trying to build, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union, namely, a unipolar world based on the “special relationship” between the United States and Great Britain, they’re trying to save what Zbigniew Brzezinski called the “Great Game,” the efforts to contain Russia and China.

PNAC, the Project for a New American Century, was put on the agenda by the neo-cons after the collapse of the Soviet Union—going for “humanitarian” interventions; causing wars in the Middle East under the pretext “right to protect”; going for regime change, in which Syria is just one example—Iraq, Libya, other situations. All this has created a situation in which the developing countries have increasingly realized that they have to do something.

After the Asian crisis—already a result of the economic policies associated with this old paradigm—when George Soros speculated against the currencies of Southeast Asian countries in one week, driving their value in respect to the U.S. dollar down 50, 60, 80%, they realized they had to do something to defend themselves. The first such step was the Chiang Mai Initiative, an effort to protect against speculative attacks; and then came the Contingent Reserve Arrangement as a part of the BRICS policy, another effort in the same direction. But then, especially, the financial institutions associated with the New Silk Road—the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the New Silk Road Fund, the Maritime Silk Road Fund, and many others—all created specifically to provide financing of infrastructure.

Now the old paradigm was not just something with respect to the so-called “advanced sector,” but it was a paradigm shift at the end of the 1960s, ending the relative industrial optimism of the Kennedy period, the de Gaulle and Adenauer period, by trying to go to a post-industrial utopia. At that time the Club of Rome appeared with its fraudulent Limits to Growth theory, which was the idea that you had strict limits to raw materials, that you had to basically go for austerity, and this was a complete fraud. It was admitted by Meadows and Forrester, the authors, later on, namely, that they had left out completely the role of science and technology in defining what a “raw material” is.

Along the same line, the famous or infamous, Kissinger-authored National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM-200), came out in 1974, which guided U.S. foreign policy, saying that all raw materials belong to the United States and therefore excessive world population growth should be curbed because too many people will need too many raw materials. At that time, there was the promotion of a concern for the so-called “population explosion” as the biggest threat to world stability, and they developed the ideas of “sustainable development” and “appropriate technology,” which really meant no technology, because “appropriate technology” means everybody gets a shovel and can dig their own fields, but no tractors, no advanced machinery. NSSM-200 was only declassified sometime in the 1990s.

At the same time, you had the World Wildlife Fund under the leadership of Prince Philip, on behalf of this same British Empire, blocking any kind of development project in the developing sector.

The policies of the World Bank have to be critically reviewed in this context, because many of the loans given for development projects were organized in such a way that they had to be repaid even before the project had yielded any real productive result; the World Bank never financed infrastructure as the needed framework for these projects. That approach went along well with the infamous IMF conditionalities, conditionalities which prevented investment in infrastructure or even social systems in the developing sector, by demanding that debt repayment had priority over any domestic investments. This is the reason why there has been such a tremendous deficit in infrastructure.

This is also what the EU means when they say that the development of Africa needs to be “sustainable,” “appropriate.” They still have not woken up to the fact that what Africa and all the developing countries need, is real investment in infrastructure, in industry, in science and technology, in the most advanced technologies.

IPCC Turns Up the Heat of Dangerous Nonsense

Now recently, when it became clear that the New Silk Road was developing an unbelievable dynamic, there came renewed, unprecedented attacks, this time from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) demanding the total decarbonization of the world economy by the year 2050.This is an old-hat project of John Schellnhuber, the former president of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, who in 2011 published a report called the World in Transition—Social Contract for a Great Transformation, demanding exactly the total decarbonization of the whole world’s economy.

Many countries are completely dependent on coal, and that will not change for a long time, until we have developed new levels of energy, like fusion power.

Now we have demonstrated, and Schellnhuber has also admitted, or even demanded, that if you go to a complete decarbonization of the world economy, the carrying capacity of the Earth is about 1 billion people. In his “60 Minutes” interview, Trump basically dismissed the IPCC report, and said he was not going to spend billions of dollars and destroy millions of jobs for an unproven change in the climate; that there is absolutely no scientific proof that the climate change that is taking place is caused by man’s activity.

Indeed, climate change has been going on for millions of years in cyclical fashion—ice ages, warming trends—which are mostly caused by the position of our Solar System in the galaxy, and all the causes have not been researched sufficiently to demand such incredible demands such as the decarbonization of the economy, which would lead to a dramatic collapse—as a matter of fact, it would be genocidal in its effects.

Energy Flux-Density and Progress

One of the unique contributions of my husband, Lyndon LaRouche, was to develop the absolute connection between the potential relative population density on the planet and the energy flux-density in the production process. Each qualitative breakthrough is associated with a breakthrough in the energy flux-density, thus defining a new economic platform. If you look at the upward development from using combustion of wood as an energy resource, to combustion of coal, petroleum, natural gas, nuclear fission, and—on the horizon—fusion, then you can see that with these increases in energy flux-density you have an absolute rise in the potential of the Earth to maintain more people, living longer lives and in better conditions.

Now energy flux-density can be measured by the rate of energy use per person and per unit area of the economy as a whole. The energy used with a 2,000 calorie diet per person in civilization as it existed before man was able to tame fire for production uses, was about 100 watts, where every activity depended on the muscle of human beings. When the leap occurred to a wood-based economy, it comes to 3,000 watts per person, a 30-fold increase. With coal as a combustible fuel, it is 5,000 watts; with petroleum, the per capita rate of energy consumed shot up to 10,000 watts, which is already over 100 times that of a society without fire.

If nuclear fission were to become the dominant energy source, we would arrive at 20,000 watts per person, which would provide a much higher living standard and greater longevity for everyone, comparable to the best living standards in the United States and Western Europe today.

But this improvement of living standards is exactly what the neo-liberal oligarchy of the old paradigm wants to deny the developing countries. Just remember the disgusting speech given by President Barack Obama in his trip to South Africa, in which he said, if everybody in Africa wants to have a car, air conditioning, and a big house, the planet will boil over. Now, this open racism should never be forgotten. “Sustainable development” means “no development,” and it is really very useful that President Trump rejected the IPCC report.

I have not yet seen if there was any reaction coming from China, which previously only criticized the impossibility to implement the required measures, but to my knowledge China has not questioned in general the unscientific basis for this report. I have not yet seen the Russian reaction, either. But I remember very well that at the Copenhagen climate conference in 2009, it was the Sudanese head of the G-77, Lumumba Di-Aping, who refused to accept the findings of that climate conference, saying, “We are not going to sign a suicide pact.”

Now, if the New Silk Road becomes the World Land-Bridge, which is exactly what is in the process of happening, then in the next one to two generations, the world will require a completely new economic platform, in the terms it has been defined by LaRouche. It will require at least a tenfold increase in energy production and consumption, and obviously an immediate crash program for fusion power.

The IPCC report, in a scandalous way, says that they intend to invest $122 trillion by the year 2050, to implement the decarbonization of the world economy, and since these people are anti-nuclear as well, you go only to renewables—wind, solar, and so forth. If you were to invest the same sum, or even less, in fusion power, the breakthroughs could be accomplished in the near future.

Xi Jinping has set a different goal for 2050. He said, in the next development phases of the cooperation of all these countries participating in the New Silk Road, you will have by 2050 a completely new, beautiful, and wonderful world for the entire human population. This is an absolutely reachable goal. If you just consider that the wealth of only one man, Jeff Bezos, the owner of Amazon, whose private wealth is $150 billion, would be enough to pay for clean water for the entire world’s population for 15 years, you can see how quickly the approach taken by the New Silk Road countries can actually lead to this result.

View full size

FDR Library
President Franklin Roosevelt at the Boulder Dam, 1935.

Lyndon LaRouche’s Four Laws

What you need is the entire Four Laws program by Lyndon LaRouche: You need Glass-Steagall banking separation in the tradition of Roosevelt’s 1933 Banking Act. You need that on a global scale, which means you have to end the casino economy.

You have to go, secondly, to the American System of economy, a national banking system in the tradition of Alexander Hamilton. And you have to create a New Bretton Woods system, an international credit system, by which countries cooperate with national banking systems that provide credit for production, for real investment in the real economy, the most recent examples being the Reconstruction Finance Corp. of Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, the Credit Institution for Reconstruction, used by Germany in the postwar period to bring about the German economic miracle. Were the banks in the West reorganized according to this model, they could then cooperate with the AIIB, the New Silk Road Fund, and others, for fulfilling the World Land-Bridge.

And especially, you would need the Fourth Law of LaRouche, which is a crash program for fusion power and international cooperation in space to achieve a massive increase in the productivity of the world economy. Now, space research and travel are especially important because they uplift the eyes and minds of the people to our larger universe, and they make clear that the idea of our planet being a closed system is completely ludicrous. Consistent with space exploration and the fact that our planet conforms to the laws of the universe, which are anti-entropic, a new economic platform will be established, and many further ones are already visible.

My husband Lyndon LaRouche said many years ago, that the only way this will get done is if the four most important powers—the United States, Russia, China, and India—work together to implement a New Bretton Woods system, because only they have the power to undo the present system of financial control of Wall Street and the City of London.

Obviously, now, most people will ask: “Is that possible? Can the world be persuaded to join the new paradigm?” Well, provided the midterm elections turn out well for President Trump, it is my biggest hope and firm expectation that we will be much freer in the second half of his first term, and that he will pursue positive relations with Russia, and that if he meets with President Xi Jinping, that they will find a way to overcome the present tariffs crisis in a better way than implementing additional and higher tariffs, which are really driving both sides into lose-lose positions.

Great Power Cooperation in Earth’s
Next 50 Years

If Japan and China can cooperate in third countries for their mutual benefit, I think the United States and China can do so. For example, the United States could accept Chinese investments in building up the infrastructure of the United States, connecting all the major cities where infrastructure is currently in such terrible condition. If you drive from Washington to New York, you’ll find that the highways are full of potholes. The railroads are in terrible condition. The United States has no fast train system at all, while China is connecting all its major cities with fast train systems by 2035.That could be done in the United States.

And the United States could make joint ventures in third countries in collaboration with China, rather than threatening Latin America not to cooperate with China. The United States and China should develop together the Latin American continent. They could invest in Asia; together they could develop Africa—a huge continent, which needs international cooperation. The trade deficit can be overcome by making trade bigger.

There is a new concept of great power relations, developed by China, and proposed to the United States. In light of the current tensions between China and the United States, the Global Times, a government-related newspaper, recently asked the question: “What should the relations be between China and the United States in 30, 40, 50 years from now, or even towards the end of the century?”

In 2005, my husband Lyndon LaRouche wrote a beautiful book called Earth’s Next Fifty Years, in which he developed the absolutely optimistic perspective that the future of Eurasia, and by implication the rest of the world, should be dominated by the ideas of Vladimir Vernadsky, namely that the noösphere will play an increasingly dominant role over the biosphere. That is, that the impact of human creativity, of inventions in scientific and technological breakthroughs, will increasingly dominate the behavior of human beings, and will constitute a physical force in the universe.

Now, I think that is absolutely what our true identity should be: The human species is the only known creative species in the universe, at least the only one known so far, and this is a moment when I think we have to grow up as human beings and become truly human. We cannot sit on the sidelines of history in such a moment.

I would like to remind you of what Schiller said in “What Is Universal History and Why Does One Study It?” He said—and I am saying it now in my own words—We should look at the long chain of generations before us, who gave us a tremendous heritage. Should it not be our proud and passionate desire to connect our ephemeral life to that long chain of human generations, and contribute with our own life, so that soon, a generation will be living a better life as a result of what we have done?

So, in this period, in the words of Schiller, there is one thing to be done worth speaking of, so let’s do it. Thank you.

Source: EIR

Undermining South Africa`s Energy Security

This is a very interesting interview from 2017 on ANN7 with Sifiso Mahlangu interviewing  Energy Minister David Mahlobo. Under the Zuma administrated ANC government, energy security was a priority, one of the three pillars of freedom.

 

Source: Afro World View TV

Straight talk with Sifiso Mahlangu: Newly appointed Energy Minister David Mahlobo

Published on 28 Nov 2017

Part 2 : State Capture of Eskom

The following is the second part of an interview conducted by Sifiso Mahlangu of ANN7 with Dr. Ben Ngubane.

Source: Afro World View TV

Sifiso Mahlangu: “…and who stands to benefit when Treasury captures Eskom? I think you put it so bluntly in our previous conversation that Treasury is putting the hackle on Eskom to produce things that they cannot. Who stands to gain when Treasury possesses or opposes or oppresses Eskom?”

Dr Ngubane: “Well, it`s people who own the wealth and the power in the country who want to control Treasury. We are on a Washington consensus model of expenditure. For a newly liberated country this cannot work. We need to find a model that addresses developmental agendas of the country. Now when a minister of finance stands up on every platform and says that the state enterprises are corrupt and does nothing to implement the PFMA or charge the people he is calling corrupt; that minister is conditioning the mind to justify paying R5 million to the public protector to hastily put together a report, without interviewing the respondents in that report. And then push it out as state capture and damb everybody.”

Siphiso Mahlangu: “Hold on Dr Ngubane, just a minute! So who paid who to release the State of Capture Report?”

Dr Ngubane: “Pravin Gordhan when he was Minister of Finance gave funding to the public protector to hurry up the State Capture Report. It was in the dying days of her contract as public protector. That is why we were not even given a chance or a hearing. Our documents we submitted were never studied. That is why the report was hastily produced, without findings, mind you, but only remedial action requiring a judicial commission. That was, as far as I am concerned, a hatchet job on state enterprises. But in that hatchet job it`s only Eskom that was targeted. And it was clear that it`s because we bought coal from TAGETA. It was clear that the general impression that was being created about TAGETA was being affirmed through an organ of state.”

Siphiso Mahlangu: “Very serious Dr Ngubane, what is the way forward with this? Can you take it up with the S.A.P.S or with the Hawks or what action can be taken, from what Mr Gordhan did ?

Dr Ngubane: “Well, we want a proper review. He must come there and give any reasons why in the dying days of the public protector`s term, he gave money to hurry up the State of Capture Report. Which is totally inadequate, which is totally unconstitutional in terms of giving the right of the [_] principle which is the corner stone of our judicial system, ride rough shod of all reputations, make Brian ( Molefe) absolutely demoralized, and putting in danger a very important state institution which is Eskom.”

Siphiso Mahlangu: “Dr Ngubane, you have served this country for many, many years. In the days of pre-democracy , leading to the government of National Unity, CODESA, and beyond to this day. You `ve just resigned from Eskom, what does the future hold for Dr Ben Ngubane?”

Dr Ngubane:” I am going to look out for business opportunities because now when I die, at least I must leave a little bit of wealth for my family.”

 

State Capture of Eskom

State Capture of Eskom

This is an interview by Sifiso Mahlangu of ANN7 with Dr. Ben Ngubane, former Board Chairman of Eskom from 13 June 2017.

Dr Ngubane speaks about the mis-representation of Eskom by the media who have called it a mis-managed, corrupt and inefficient institution, ‘state-captured`. Thuli Madonsela`s State of Capture Report accused Brian Molefe, former CEO, of corruption. Dr Ngubane puts the record straight on Molefe`s commendable and dedicated time in Eskom as well as giving his thoughts on the real state of capture in South Africa.

Prior to management under Mr Molefe and Dr Ngubane, Eskom was compartmentalized with little communication between sectors. This was changed to make a far more cohesive system in which management from all areas communicated with each other. With a more cohesive management system, power shortages under `load shedding` were minimized and Eskom`s profitability went up.

Source: Afro World View TV

The following is a transcript of excerpts from this interview.

Dr Ngubane: “He ( Molefe) visited all the power stations, met all the managers, made them sign performance agreements, forced each division to speak to the others in terms of sharing information, which was not the case before. The guy in generation was not talking to National Control. That was why we were mismatching the mega-watts on the system, unable to predict demand, unable to predict when we are going to do outages, that is planned outages. It was a total mess. Financially Eskom had collapsed. And within the first year our earnings before interest tax depreciation shot up and we were able to declare a reasonable profit.”

Dr Ngubane:”I am sorry that we have been so mis-represented in the media, when you [are lead to ]think it has been a collapsing organisation, when in fact it is at its strongest today.”

Sifiso Mahlangu : ” Do you think the turn of events that are happening at Eskom and in this country is because of the State of Capture Report which we know is an incomplete and inconclusive report?”

Dr Ngubane: “You know, I was at CODESA. President Mandela spoke about reconciliation. But reconciliation demands that justice should be done. You cannot reconcile unilaterally. We hoped then that the forces of money, the forces that hold the land and wealth in this country would understand the meaning of reconciliation. And we would use institutions to work out all those thorny areas in the relationship between all the different races in this country, the inequality in terms of wealth, the serious poverty that exists, the systematic deprivation of skills to black people during Apartheid, we hoped all those things would be on the table. But it didn`t happen. That`s why we are at this juncture, having strident talks about white monopoly capital. We have white monopoly capital trying to defend itself because it thinks it`s under threat.

The mere fact that Brian [Molefe] questioned the 40 year contacts of some 4 or 5 big companies which under Apartheid received 40 year contacts with Eskom and therefore received billions and billions of Rands. When he raised the issue of Transformation that it should start there, we have a spend at Eskom exceeding 50 billion [rand] for coal only. Now that needed to be shared. I think that is when the trouble started for Brian. He was seen as a cheeky little fellow who dares to question what has been the status quo in this country and therefore all the guns were unleashed. They are being unleashed on all of us, black intelligentsia.

I mean, unfortunately our own are actually in the vanguard of this onslaught. It is very disturbing. I mean I have read a lot about democratic transitions which have happened in Spain, in Latin America, moving from rule by the Junta, academics, intellectuals leading the charge for freedom; and it`s been said that initially the elite in a democratic transition scrabble and take time to understand how to handle it and operate the levers of power.

Here it`s been the opposite. We went in through under the leadership of Mandela, through to now, starting from a very strong ability to govern and our acceptance of our capacity to govern. But gradually this has been eroding. Gradually if you are black in this country, you are corrupt, you are incompetent, and they forget that to be competent you need to be trained. and skilled. And most of us didn`t have the skills. The earlier vanguard troop for our liberation is now retired, has grown old, and then the deficiencies are coming through. Most of our people who came in to liberate us were trained overseas, universities overseas and so on, those people are going off, what we are remaining with is , is the emerging intelligentsia which unfortunately is being fed poison when they are being taught at institutions that have not transformed.”

Sifiso Mahlangu: “Dr Ngubane, you speak so eloquently on white monopoly capital, but some of the comrades you worked with in the then Government of National Unity and the government just after democracy are today denying the existence of white monopoly capital. These are struggle stalwarts that you sat with in CODESA in negotiations and they know that the ANC was out- manoeuvred and they are aware that black people only own 3% of the economy but it is these cadres and comrades today that are denying the existence of white monopoly capital. What do you think of that?”

Dr Ngubane: ” Well, probably I shouldn`t defame people. But I was shocked when Trevor Manuel made those statements. You know I had had a lot of respect for him. But I was absolutely shocked because everyone knows that 34 million families were moved from their homes, their land, in order to implement the Group Areas Act. Very painful. First of its kind in modern history that there was such huge enforced movement of people. Now how can a comrade say there is no such thing as white monopoly capital ? Land is wealth. If I give you land, I`ve given you wealth. If I deprive you of land you will never be wealthy whatever you do. Because you will only be receiving crumbs from the table of the masters. So that speech by him, or those remarks by him were absolutely shocking. I even doubt if he ever understood what the struggle meant.”

Dr Ngubane talks about the history of land theft in South Africa, the vast territories of the Zulu Nation, the decimation of the Koi by small-pox infected clothing and blankets. He says that state capture began in 1948.

Sifiso Mahlangu: “Dr Ngubane are these the same groups who want to capture Eskom or who have captured Eskom throughout the years? And I am referring to the 40 year contracts that Eskom had given to certain families?”

Dr Ngubane: Yes.

Sifiso Mahlangu: “And those contracts are coming to an end and that`s why there`s such hostility against you and Mr Molefe, I believe. Talk to me about those families and how they have captured Eskom throughout the years.”

Dr Ngubane: “Well, it was given because of the contracts. You couldn`t touch those contracts. Certainly now that they are coming to the end we are introducing new junior miners. We are even in manufacturing, we are trying to create skills and abilities through our academies of learning and training. So it`s a given , our life in South Africa, has been one of being captured. Which other group used to be woken up at 3 o` clock in the morning by a knock on the door by the police looking for passes. That was our life, the experience of our parents.”

Sifiso Mahlangu:” And the largest coal suppliers are still the likes of Anglo American, Exxaro. And if there`s a small player who comes in at Eskom he`s kicked out because of these long term contracts.”

Dr Ngubane: “You would think that people would understand that they have to share the wealth and the opportunity. We had expected that the big players would train junior miners and probably open up a seam in the mine and say : `you must look after this in partnership with us, we will help you, so you can grow the expertise and be equal operators`. That doesn`t happen.”

Sifiso Mahlangu: “So white monopoly capital had seized Eskom for all these years and now the talk is that Radical Economic Transformation must come. Is this why there is such a rectionary, a negative reaction, to Radical Economic Transformation because white monopoly capital had captured Eskom over the years, as you say?”

Dr Ngubane: “Absolutely, not only Eskom. I mean we are said to be in recession today but how much money lies in the banks un-invested? It has been said there are no bankable plans, no bankable projects. That is why manufacturing is not being promoted. It`s a systematic way of strangling this black government.

The ANC must wake up to that. It is being strangled. When we increase manufacturing in the country you increase jobs but to do that you need skilled workers. And those skilled workers will earn more and higher wages and therefore the purchasing power of the economy will improve year by year. Ultimately you have a thriving economy that is export orientated, that can provide a living wage, not just the minimum wage, to everybody. But that means the people must be re-skilled and the majority of our people were never given skills. So the capture, we need a whole seminar to discuss this issue. It is so fundamental to the future of this country.”

Sifiso Mahlangu; “Dr Ngubane, do you think our National Treasury has assisted or encouraged or facilitated the capture or oppression of Eskom and maybe other state-owned enterprises?”

Dr Ngubane:” Absolutely. You know we have submitted report after report to the National Treasury. They only want to pick out those pieces that indicate that our pre-payment to TAGETA was wrong. They have even said it must be called a loan. We bought coal from TAGETA at the height of winter when we didn`t have the reserves. The coal came, so it was paid for. The internal audit certified that the amount we paid as pre-payment, had bought the equivalent amount of coal.

Now how can you query this and say this must be a loan when in fact you have bought goods that are demonstrably there and of good quality. The test of a good supplier of coal is that the power stations can burn it and generate the requisite mega- watts into the national grid. All the stations do that because the coal is right. There will be batches of coal from certain seams in the ground that do not produce the same giga-joules as required. Those are called reject coal and Eskom does not pay for them. So this talk that we bought inferior coal from TAGETA when Majuba is working perfectly, producing the required mega-wattsis absolute nonsense.

It is just a way of finding fault with Eskom, to give the impression a favour was done to TAGETA, that we did not do the right procurement processes and so on. You know, I said in Parliament, 4 power stations did not have the required 28 days supplies of coal which we need for every winter. Then they sorted this out but still 2 more do not have adequate supplies.In fact you need 28 days supply, these 2 others have only 14 days supply, it is a danger in terms of our sustainability of electricity.

This has come about because Treasury has decided to take away the power from Eskom to procure coal. Eskom is an electricity company. People sit in Treasury, they have no idea how electricity is generated. They are now insisting they are going to see Exxaro, they are will have a meeting with Exxaro. Exxaro said, on its documents, they cannot supply the quality of coal we need. But Treasury still insists that we must buy from them. So what is this? To me, Radical Economic Transformation must start with the Treasury.”

 

 

Transaqua Begins: A Wonderful Step Forward for Africa!

re posted from                                    Africa and the World

Transaqua Begins: A Wonderful Step Forward for Africa!

Transaqua Begins: A Wonderful Step Forward for Africa!

16 October 2018

Today a huge step forward was taken for the Africa continent with the initial funding for a feasibility study of the Transaqua water project. Transaqua, a transformative inter-basin water transfer project to re-charge the shrinking Lake Chad, was first proposed over thirty years ago, to create a super-economic development zone between the nations of the Lake Chad Basin and Great Lakes Region. Expanding this lake is crucial for the Sahel and will help to turn back the desert. The success of Transaqua, a Pan African infrastructure project, will be bring peace stability to Nigeria, and to the other member states of the Lake Chad Basin, and as well create new levels of economic wealth. It will contribute to the industrialization of Africa, and should become part of the African Union’s “Agenda 2063.” I am proud that I have been energetically advocating this project around the world, especially in Africa and in the United States.

All Africans, and friends of Africa should rejoice at this small, but potentially giant step forward for the people of Africa.

Today, October 16, 2018- A MoU (Memorandum of Understanding) for the initial funding of the feasibility study for the Transaqua project was signed in Rome by the Italian government and the Lake Chad Basin Commission. Francesco La Camera, director general of the Italian Environment ministry, and Mamman Nuhu, Executive Secretary of the Lake Chad Basin Commission, signed today a document that certifies an Italian government grant of 1.5 million Euros to finance the feasibility study for the project refill Lake Chad and build a water, transport, electricity and agro-industrial infrastructure in central Africa, developed by the Italian firm Bonifica more than 35 years ago.

The formal signature is following the decision announced last February 29 at the International Lake Chad Conference in Abuja, Nigeria. There will be further bureaucratic steps before the grant can be delivered and the feasibility study can start.

“It is a historic step”, said Bonifica CEO Romina Boldrini. “Italy is giving money for Transaqua. Everybody is expecting Bonifica to start the feasibility study now”.

Marcello Vichi, the head of the Bonifica team that drafted the original Transaqua study in the seventies, said he is “very satisfied” with the agreement. “Finally, after so many years, Africans and Europeans understood the importance of the project. Now we have to make up that lost time”.

Read:  Save Lake Chad With Transaqua: Presidents Roosevelt and Nkrumah Would Concur

Source: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld

Africa Needs Tractors, Nigeria (and Africa) Need Energy Too

re posted from                                        Africa and the World

Africa Needs Tractors, Nigeria (and Africa) Need Energy Too

Africa Needs Tractors, Nigeria (and Africa) Need Energy Too

October 11 , 2018

{For Africa to provide jobs and feed its growing population, it needs energy and tractors to build a robust agricultural-manufacturing sector. Africa’s population is expected to double to 2.4 billion by 2050. If African nations massively invest NOW in infrastructure and industrialize their economies, the African continent can become the center of the world economy in two generations.}

Tractors Needed in Africa to Boost Agricultural Output

Oct. 8, 2018– The {Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung}-(FAZ) has discovered that agricultural output in African countries would be much higher if the farmers there had tractors to work their land, instead of using wooden ploughs and oxen to pull them. The output would be five to ten times higher, experts told {FAZ}. Swiss globalization critic Jean Ziegler said already in 2013 that the entire African continent had only 85,000 tractors in 2011, while Germany alone had almost 2 million tractors.

One problem faced by African farmers is that, with their miserable income, they cannot afford to buy tractors and other agricultural machinery on the world markets; not even the simple tractor models produced by Brazil’s AGCO, which have no fancy equipment and no GPS and cost only $10,000. Another problem is that tractors need diesel fuel, which is not available in such volumes in most parts of Africa because the transportation and storage infrastructure isn’t there.

_____________________________________________________________________

“Xi Jinping lends support to Nigeria’s long delayed $6 billion Mambilla dam”

View image on Twitter

Plans to build a 3GW hydropower complex on the Donga River in eastern Nigeria, which have been under discussion since 1972, were given a boost last week when President Xi Jinping of China announced his support for the project.

The Chinese leader was speaking in response to a request for help from President Buhari of Nigeria, who has made the construction of the scheme, on the Mambilla plateau in Taraba State, a key priority of his government.

Buhari said in a tweet: “I told President Xi that the Mambilla Hydropower Plant is Nigeria’s equivalent of China’s Three Gorges Dam, and that our hope is to fund the project with concessionary loans from China.

Continue reading

Source: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld

Final Call: IMF and World Bank real culprits in Africa’s debt crisis

re posted from                                    Africa and the World

Final Call: IMF and World Bank real culprits in Africa’s debt crisis

Final Call: IMF and World Bank real culprits in Africa’s debt crisis

October 9, 2018

This article debunks the myth of China colonizing Africa through a “debt trap” policy. It also has quotes from me on this subject. You can read more comments from me with this link to my post: A Brief Response: Marshall Plan for Africa or “Debt Trap?”

africa_watch_logo_18.jpg

FINAL CALL: IMF-and-World-Bank-real-culprits-in-Africa-debt-crisis.

BY JEHRON MUHAMMAD |  SEP 12, 2018 

Many Western press outlets, including CNN, have repeated a recent claim presented to the U.S. State Department that the “Chinese government is leveraging billions of dollars in debt to gain political leverage with developing countries.”

The phrase they use to accuse China is “debt book diplomacy,” a play on the past usage of the term “gunboat diplomacy” about U.S. policy. They accuse China of miring Africa in debt and “undercutting their sovereignty.”

rwanda_kagame_china_xi-jinping.jpg

Chinese President Xi Jinping (R) meets with African Union Chair Paul Kagame who is President of Rwanda at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, capital of China, Sept. 4, 2018. (Xinhua/Ju Peng)

Not to be outdone, ABC News chimed in: “China’s commercial presence in Africa has prompted complaints in some countries that the continent gets too little from the relationship. Africa is a major target of Beijing’s ‘Belt and Road’ initiative to build ports, highways and other trade-related infrastructure, but some critics in Tanzania, Kenya and other countries say they leave hosts with too much debt.”Pushing back, China claims to be helping African development, not piling up debt, one top China government official said.

“If we take a closer look at these African countries that are heavily in debt, China is not their main creditor,” its special envoy for Africa Xu Jinghy said, during a news conference. “It’s senseless and baseless to shift the blame onto China for debt problems.”

Claims that China is an “economic predator” in Africa, pillaging natural resources and dragging it into debt crisis are “as false as they are sensational,” the Xinhua official Chinese news agency said in a commentary.

According to African economic and political analyst Lawrence Freeman, “It is more than ironic that the West is complaining about Africa’s debt to China. Since the 1960s, Western nations, the IMF, World Bank, Paris Club, etc., have ‘looted’ Africa of hundreds of billions of dollars in bloated debt payments and through the manipulation of currencies, and terms of trade.

Of note is the fact that the anti- China accusation is fairly recent. An April 18 Financial Times article, headlined “African nations slipping into new debt crises,” did not mention China one time as the source of the continent’s debt crisis.

In fact the FT’s piece is critical of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. “The increase in debt should have raised all sorts of flags and triggered triage, but it didn’t. Neither the International Monetary Fund nor the World Bank sounded the alarm,” the London-based financial paper reported.

In addition, the FT claimed some African countries were hit because “they borrowed in foreign currencies and were finding debt hard to finance after a significant depreciation.”

In 2017 Quartz Africa reported, again not mentioning China, that “African eurobond debt is growing to risky levels.” A eurobond, also referred to as sovereign bond, is a debt security issued by a national government and is denominated in a foreign currency, usually dollars, rather than the euro that its name implies.

This debt crises have been cyclical. Africa’s debt of the 1980s mushroomed to $270 billion and had many factors, according to Quartz, “depending on which side of the fence you’re on.”

Those events came full circle. Even though Quartz recognized the repeating “hallmarks” of unchecked corruption, poor governance, and political mileage investment, the “single catalytic factor to trigger debt unsustainability in Africa has always been the crash of commodity prices on the global market.”

The news service Reuters reported in May of 2017 that “most sub-Saharan African countries still rely on U.S. dollar-denominated debt to finance their economies. Some investors say this is sowing the seeds of future debt crises if local currencies devalue and make dollar debt repayments more expensive.”

The United Nations trade body UNCTAD estimates that Africa’s external debt rapidly grew to $443 billion by 2013 through bilateral borrowing, syndicated loans and bonds. But since then sharp currency devaluations across the continent have pushed up the cost of servicing this debt pile, which continues to grow, the agency said.

It’s no wonder over 50 African heads of state attended the Sept. 3-4 Forum on China-African Cooperation (FOCAC) in Beijing. During the forum China president Xi Jinping announced a hefty $60 billion package to compliment another $60 billion pledged at the 2015 summit.

This breaks down, according to press reports, to $15 billion in grants and interest free loans, $20 billion in credit lines, a $10 billion fund for development financing, $5 billion to finance imports from Africa and waving the debt of the poorest African nations diplomatically linked to China.

On top of President Jinping letting the numbers speak for themselves he had words for China’s detractors: “Only the people of China and Africa have the right to comment on whether China-Africa cooperation is doing well … . No one should deny the significant achievement of China-Africa cooperation based on their assumptions and speculations.”

The African Union chairman, Rwandan President Paul Kagame, has been heard to call Chinese aid and investment strategy in Africa “deeply transformational” and respectful of the continent’s global position.

He said FOCAC had grown into a powerful engine “of cooperation fully aligned with Africa’s Agenda 2063 and sustainable development goals.”

“Our growing ties with China do not come at anyone’s expense. The gains are enjoyed by all who do business with us. Building the capacity of African institutions to transact and monitor more effectively is what will make the biggest difference,” he said.

Follow @jehronmuhammad on Twitter

Source: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld