American press: EU and US will sign a memorandum challenging China in the fight for African resources

The US and EU authorities intend to sign a memorandum providing for the development of an African energy corridor for access to mineral deposits. This measure is due to growing competition between Western countries and China in providing access to key resources of the African continent.

As reported by the American publication Bloomberg, citing its informed sources, in the future, an infrastructure project called Global Gateway, whose total cost is $317 billion, will help connect the northwestern part of Zambia and the southern regions of the Democratic Republic of the Congo with world energy markets through the port of Lobito in Angola .

It is assumed that the first step in the process of implementing the US and EU plan should be the expansion of railway communication between Angola and Zambia, for which it is necessary to ensure the development of an appropriate feasibility study.

In order to limit China's influence in African countries, the United States and the European Union plan to sign more than 30 agreements with their allies, including Bangladesh, Mauritania, Kazakhstan and Moldova.

At the end of last year, trade volumes between China and Africa amounted to $280 billion. At the same time, China is actively using African labor and local natural resources. In addition, China organizes training for African students, including engineering specialties.

Comments

[tralflot1832]

A waste of money, China is already in Africa with billions of dollars in investments. So, just for fun, ask who is building airports in Africa.

[credo]

Sometimes there is a strong opinion that the European vassals of the United States, like Banderlogs, are moving ever closer to Kaa, who hypnotizes them, in order to be eaten without a trace.

The desire of African countries to resume and expand cooperation with the United States and the EU is determined not only by the announced amount, but also by real actions aimed at improving their lives and the development of their countries.

How the US and EU countries show concern for Africa could be seen firsthand in 2022-2023, during the so-called “grain deal”, when they received only crumbs from this deal. Let the pale-faced savages now try to explain their disposition to the Africans when they remind them of such “care”.

[DymOk_v_dYmke]

Attempts to seize resources through investment are in every way better than seizure by military force.

[fruc]

The EU and the US will sign a memorandum challenging China in the fight for African resources

At the same time, they just forgot to ask African countries whether they want to allow these “partners” into their territories.

[Rumata]

It's pure in nature colonialist project.
But the project development Africa is the creation of industry in the energy-rich regions of Africa.

[Michael]

Quote: Rumata

But the project development Africa is the creation of industry in the energy-rich regions of Africa.

The Soviet Union collapsed in no small part due to the outrageous costs of developing Africa, Asia, and Europe. If Soviet citizens lived richer, they would stare less at the bourgeois abundance. And then dams, factories, schools and hospitals were built and built for wild peoples, but the ordinary Soviet man gnawed soup sets and walked around in one coat for twenty years.

[DymOk_v_dYmke]

Quote: Michael

Or if Soviet citizens were richer, they would look less at the bourgeois abundance.

It’s an old folk saying: appetite comes with eating.
It was the gluttons who looked in.
They got to grips with it.

Quote: Michael

And then dams, factories, schools and hospitals were built and built for wild peoples, but the ordinary Soviet man gnawed soup sets and walked around in one coat for twenty years.

It’s a pity that you didn’t remember about “galoshes”.
However, you deviate from the general line.

PS Aswan is better for Egypt than Abramovich’s yachts.

[Michael]

Quote: DymOk_v_dYmke

PS Aswan is better for Egypt than Abramovich’s yachts.

What is the fundamental difference between these options for the average citizen? That the communists channeled the surplus value seized from the Soviet proletarian towards their crazy desires for building socialism in Africa, that Abramovich exploits the Russian proletarian and satisfies his desires, in both cases the ordinary citizen becomes hungrier, colder and more joyless.

[bayard]

Quote: Michael

What is the fundamental difference between these options for the average citizen? That the communists channeled the surplus value seized from the Soviet proletarian towards their crazy desires for building socialism in Africa, that Abramovich exploits the Russian proletarian and satisfies his desires,

The difference is that the USSR built and developed the economies of countries liberated from colonial oppression not for free, but on CREDIT. Yes, the loan was preferential, yes - with a delay in the start of payments for (on average) 10 - 15 years. But this was done so that these states, having created their own economies, had the opportunity to pay us either with money (currency) from the profits from this economy, or to pay off their debts with direct supplies of their resources or the products of their new economy. In any case, the debts were repaid (should have been repaid), and we helped them with this. Drawing up development plans, training engineering, technical, military and administrative personnel, as well as doctors, teachers, sending specialists. And by this the USSR did not seize, but CREATE huge foreign markets for its Developed Economy.
And since all loans were issued in rubles and were used to pay for equipment, materials and wages for our specialists. That is, these were TIED LOANS and the money all remained within the Soviet Economy.
And the problems with the consumer sector of the economy in the USSR arose not because of the underdevelopment of the economy or its inability to produce all this... Well, this is funny - some kind of jeans , shoes , tape recorders and other nonsense ... All this was decided not simply, but VERY simply. Bring beautiful denim fabrics from Southeast Asia, make or purchase accessories to your order, and put... liberated women of the East at sewing machines... even allowing them to work from home. And that's it - all textiles, not just jeans.
Or maybe it was difficult to purchase in Italy production lines for tanning leather for shoes and several lines for sewing these shoes according to Italian patterns? They would sell it, install it and set it up, and they would kiss their legs for a good order!
Why wasn't this done?
Why did the Italians build only one VAZ plant for us? Although both the French (Renault) and the Japanese (all!!) offered us at least a dozen such factories to build for their own models under our name, or to develop models to order... “Your country is such a big and rich country, and so little is produced passenger cars. Why don't you want us to build one for you?" And there would be no shortage.
But for some people the deficit was vital. And this is not only trade, accustomed to trading under the counter with a markup...
It’s just that a group of “communists” really wanted to become capitalists and monetize their social position. And they achieved their goal.
And the people were tormented by a deficit, so that they would not interfere with and even help change the social system.
If someone dares to grunt wryly about the ineffectiveness of Socialism LOOK AT China! Let's look at the pace of development of the USSR. Let's look at his ACHIEVEMENTS and the shame of today's feudal lords.
Unfortunately, “effective managers” turned out to be extremely... fantastically... extremely ineffective, incompetent and flawed. But they learned to LIVE BEAUTIFULLY, monetizing their new social status.

[Michael]

Quote: bayard

In any case, the debts were repaid (should have been repaid)

Here it is! “They had to be repaid,” but everyone understood perfectly well that it was not at all necessary to repay the debt to the Soviet Union and did not repay it.
And what are we seeing? Some communists distribute people's property left and right, while other communists even decide to steal it for personal use.
What is the conclusion? The communists are to blame for everything. So the slogan “Give Soviets without the Bolsheviks!” is more relevant than ever.

[paul3390]

other communists

Can a baptized character who violates absolutely all commandments and foundations be considered a Christian? Can a person who has a party card but acts extremely counter-revolutionary be considered a communist?

It seems to me that the answer to both questions is the same. No. In no case. Therefore, call this public members of the CPSU. This is much more correct, because what makes a person a communist is only his deeds. And nothing else.

[bayard]

Quote: Michael

The communists are to blame for everything. So the slogan “Give Soviets without the Bolsheviks!” is more relevant than ever.

Eh Mikhail, Mikhail... inattentively, you watched wonderful old Soviet films. At least the same "Chapaev". Remember how a peasant comes to Chapai: “The whites came - they rob, the reds came - they rob. And where should the poor peasant go?” And then he asks him the main question: “Here our men are confused, are you Vasily Ivanovich for the Bolsheviks or for the communists?” .
A very important and very precise question was asked by a peasant. For the Bolsheviks were supporters of Lenin and Stalin, and the communists... were supporters of Trotsky, who later founded the Fourth International. And in the conditions of the Civil War and internal party squabbles, such a question was not at all idle. These forces were completely different.
So, the Bolsheviks were removed from power - removed from senior and middle-level positions starting in 1955. And it was the communists who came to power in the most literal - Chapaev sense of the word. So they disfigured Socialism, they tormented people with deficits and in every possible way restrained the growth of the people's well-being. They brought the Soviet Union to destruction. And they became new feudal lords. So don't confuse them with each other.

Quote: Michael

“They had to be repaid,” but everyone understood perfectly well that it was not at all necessary to repay the debt to the Soviet Union and did not repay it.

Come on ?? I wrote that “or should have” only because the start date for repayment of the vast majority of loans issued was in the early 90s. The USSR simply did not live to see this bright time. Right at the very beginning of the 90s, a monstrous financial and economic crisis in the West should have broken out (and would definitely have broken out). No worse than the Great Depression. On the contrary, we had such wonderful projects on the way that even without the receipt of loan payments (about 50 billion dollars every year) would have rushed both our economy and our high-tech exports to such heights that the decline of the Western economy and the rise of the Soviet one would have countered. would not leave them any chance even for the body of their former “leadership”.
And they understood this very well.
That is why it was decided to bring down the USSR immediately, using all the “sleeping” agents. The Trotskyist communists were dismissed as the last suckers, but the suckers didn’t just ruin the Greatest Country in the history of Mankind... they tore it to shreds. And squealing with fear about possible retribution for what they had done, they went to great lengths, robbing and appropriating for themselves everything they could get their hands on.
So the effectiveness of the socio-economic system, and what the Trotskyists who seized power led the USSR to, do not follow from one another. Chinese socialism shows the highest efficiency. But they made up their reforms according to our patterns - taking an example from the Stalin Model of Economics.
So the Trotskyists, like their blood brothers the liberals, will definitely not save the Russian Federation.

[paul3390]

If Soviet citizens lived richer

Obviously, you simply don’t understand what exactly the Bolsheviks wanted to create. Bukharin once put forward a similar slogan - “Get rich.” This is also why he was shot. Because getting rich is the same bourgeois values. With which you cannot build communism. This means that it is necessary to create precisely an alternative system of what a person generally lives for. It doesn’t intersect with the capitalist one in any way. Money and clothes - not measured. And after all, it almost worked out at first...

As an example, I always cite the famous story about Sparta.

Once, a Spartan athlete, when they were still participating in the Olympic Games, was offered 10 talents of silver so that he would lose the fight. He did not agree - and won. After the victory, they asked him irritably:
“What does that victory mean to you, Spartan, since you gave up such a gigantic sum?”
And he, smiling, answered:
- From now on, in battle, I will go in the first rank of the phalanx, covering my king with a shield. You can not understand...

[KVU-NSVD]

In order to limit China's influence in African countries, the United States and the European Union plan to sign more than 30 agreements with their allies, including Bangladesh, Mauritania, Kazakhstan and Moldova

How will the Moldovans help? ?! My imagination is running wild...

[DymOk_v_dYmke]

Quote: KVU-NSVD

How will the Moldovans help? ?!

Concert at the signing of agreements.

[Graz]

As I understand it, the US and EU will not ask Africans and will simply present them with a fait accompli?

[bone1]

What kind of allies do they have in Africa?

[nordscout]

"The US and EU authorities intend to sign a memorandum providing for the development of an African energy corridor for access to mineral deposits." In the current international situation and the very “modest” current economic opportunities of Europe + the USA, in the African theater of economic actions, China is “very violet” regarding any memorandums regarding their own business and their own interests - they didn’t give a damn about the Euro - American “wishlist” "....

[Petr_Koldunov]

If Africans are not idiots, then they will immediately see that this is a purely colonialist project! It does not imply the development of industry, culture, science, medicine, food security, knowledge and technology. At all! Its whole essence comes down to building a very convenient route that will allow you to comfortably get to natural resources, load them there - and just as comfortably transport them to a port on the coast - and then conveniently export these resources from Africa altogether.
Not just colonization, but the most typical 19th century! The East India Company is carrying you a mile away!

[TermNachTer]

Reminds me of an old story. wonderful film: "The haberdasher and the cardinal are power)))

[ASM]

Well, this is just a classic of fascism. Corporateism and external pressure on those who disobey. The People's Republic of China settled in African countries for a reason - it offered noticeably better conditions for rent, mining and subsequent recreation of the territories. Now we too, albeit in pursuit, are heading to Africa. And the Zone of Lies realized that the colonial system was already collapsing - so it went crazy, trying to outwit itself.