Below is a half hour video presentation on the importance of Alexander Hamilton’s credit policy for the development of Africa. The forum was organized by Watch Democracy Grow, an organization promoting democracy and development in Africa, and was filmed Afrique Today.
As I discuss in the video and article below, African nations need long-term and low interest lines of credit to finance trillions of dollars necessary for infrastructure projects across the continent. Government backed authorities or the government itself can issued public credit in the amounts required. To provide credit for the newly united colonies, Hamilton designed the National Bank of the United States in 1791 at the request of President George Washington. It was a corner stone of the successful American System of Political Economy. Similar institutions are appropriate for African nations to finance vitally needed infrastructure today. Applying the Hamiltonian model, the Belt and Road Initiative, promoted by China, is helping Africa build and finance infrastructure that is essential for African nations to industrialize and expand their agriculture and manufacturing sectors.
Below is an insightful article on the death of Robert Mugabe. One cannot honestly and competently analyze African nations today, unless one thoroughly studies the affects of colonialism, and before that slavery. When I look at the current state of affairs in Africa. I see the consequences of the long waves of hundreds of years of slavery, colonialism, and neo-colonialism. For example, can one truly understand Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, and South Africa, without examining the evil role of British Imperialism and colonialism? Is Kenya not suffering today from the removal of the Kikuyu from the the Highlands, which were turned into the “Whitelands” by the British in the early 20th century? Similarly, it is impossible to truthfully discuss Zimbabwe, and its now deceased leader, Robert Mugabe without revealing the failure of the 1980 Lancaster agreement to rectify the stealing of 70% of the nation’s most fertile land from millions of “black” Zimbabweans that was given to 4,500 “white” farmers. Why are African nations, with abundant fertile soil, still using primitive methods of farming and have weak agricultural sectors? Why does Africa suffer from the greatest deficit of infrastructure in the world per land area, which is only beginning to be reversed by China with its Belt and Road Initiative? Why is Africa the least industrialized continent on the planet? Are we going to blind ourselves to the ugly history of what was done to Africans over hundreds of years, and naively and simplistic blame conditions today on a lack of good governance? This error, this lack of understanding Africa’s history, perverts the the thinking of Western institutions and Africa specialists, yielding flawed analysis.
Let us remember what Pope Paul VI wrote in his 1967 encyclical; “On the Development of Peoples”: the new name for peace is development. UN Secretary-General António Guterres’ support for development of Africa at the Tokyo International Conference on African Development- (TICAD) conference is salient. Japan’s motivation to invest in Africa’s infrastructure is not to counter China. And China is not attempting to build a new colonial empire in Africa. These false characterizations are expressions from the old geo-political financial system that is losing its control over global policy. Witness the the utter failure of the G-7 Summit of so the called advanced sector nations. The Western banking system is about to collapse again as a result of the central banks pumping in into the financial system $17 trillion of “quantitative easing” over the last ten years. The US should stop attacking China’s new paradigm of development typified by its Belt and Road Initiative-(BRI), and President Trump should end his stupid, counter productive tariffs. The world needs leadership to lift the planet onto a new scientifically driven economic platform that will not only end poverty and hunger in the developing sector, but also raise the standard of living of all nations.
In this spirit, one concrete initiative that should be taken up at the upcoming United Nations General Assembly-(UNGA )is; funding for recharging the shrinking Lake Chad. The Transaqua inter-basin water transfer project has the support of the nations of the Lake Chad Basin and UN Sec Gen Guterres. This project, which has been called, “A Kwame Nkrumah Pan- African Infrastructure Project,” would transform the Lake Chad Basin. With the head of the Nigerian Mission to UN, Ambassador Tijjan Muhamed-Bande, presiding over this year’s UNGA, and Nigerian President, Muhammadu Buhari an ardent supporter of recharging the lake, we are at a propitious moment for the UN take bold action for the Lake Chad Basin.
“African nations have made ‘significant progress’ in developmental efforts in the last few years, UN Secretary-General António Guterres said on Wednesday, kicking off the Seventh Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD), taking place in Yokohama.
“Africa needs peace for its development” the Secretary-General said in closing.
“I look forward to productive discussions over the next days that will culminate in a common understanding of the priorities for common and coherent action to promote peace and sustainable development across Africa.”
President Buhari has maintained his commitment to recharging Lake Chad, which he discussed with me after he was elected to his first term as president in Mach 2015. The International Conference to ‘Save Lake Chad’ held in Abuja, (February 26-28, 2018) adopted the Transaqua inter-basin water transfer project as the preferred solution to reversing the shrinking Lake Chad and transforming the economy of the Lake Chad Basin. President Buhari has received support form the current Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, for the recharging of Lake Chad. I am certain there will be further discussion at the upcoming United Nations General Assembly in September regarding Lake Chad, and restoring economic vitality to the Lake Chad Basin.
Chinese-built Ethiopia-Djibouti railway wins acclaim for driving Ethiopia’s import-export needs
I had the privilege to attend the inauguration of the Addis-Djibouti electrified railroad and travel on its maiden trip on October 6, 2016.
Xinhua-July 24, 2019
“The Chinese-built Ethiopia-Djibouti standard gauge railway on Tuesday received acclaim for driving Ethiopia’s import-export endeavors as it leveraged the growing transportation needs of the country.
“The railway, which connects landlocked Ethiopia’s capital Addis Ababa with ports in Djibouti, mainly garnered the praise for its contribution in the transportation of the much-needed imported agricultural inputs to the East African country.
“According to figures from the Ethiopia-Djibouti Railway Company, the Ethiopia-Djibouti railway, over the past few months period, had transported about 70,000 tons of fertilizer from the Djibouti port to Ethiopia as the main harvesting season approaches.
“”We do this under the agreement with the Ethiopian Agriculture Works Corporation, and as fertilizer is considered to be an important commodity which has to be transported very quickly,” Ethiopia’s state-run news agency quoted Aminu Juhar, EDR Planning Manager, as saying on Tuesday.
“The 756-km railway, which officially commenced its commercial operations for both passenger and freight services between the two countries in January last year, has been instrumental in leveraging transportation needs of Ethiopia from its neighboring Red Sea nation of Djibouti.
“Juhar, who noted the railway’s “significant role in delivering fertilizers needed by farmers on time,” stressed that the much-needed fertilizer have been transported in 26 rounds with the capacity of transporting 2,590 tons of fertilizer in a single trip.
The analysis in the article below published by WPR is useful. However, I can be more blunt: President Trump’s policy for Africa has nothing to do with helping Africa, but it only to counter China’s influence! President Obama did very little for Africa, but make speeches about so called good governance and promoted his fraudulent “power-less Africa” program. Sadly, President Trump is following in Obama’s footsteps, premising his strategy for Africa on the old British geo-political doctrine of winners and losers in a zero-sum game. Read my article: President Trump’s Fundamentally Flawed Africa Policy Stopping China is not a policy to help Africa, a continent still suffering today from enormous infrastructure deficits, a legacy of 500 years of slavery, colonialism, and neo-colonialism. Despite all the propaganda against China, China’s Belt and Road infrastructure initiative has done more to assist African nations in developing their economies in recent decades, that all the combined initiatives of Europe and the United States. President Trump’s “Prosper Africa” will not advance Africa’s interests. The best way to actually promote development in Africa, build robust manufacturing sectors, and industrialize the underdeveloped continent, would be for President Trump to join China in building infrastructure across the continent in the spirit of the Belt and Road Imitative.
During the Cold War, American policymakers frequently pushed nonaligned countries to take sides. The Central Intelligence Agency fomented coups against governments that flirted with communism and the Soviet Union, or that just drifted too far to the left for comfort. The State Department threatened to cut aid flows to countries that voted too often against U.S. priorities at the United Nations. Could sub-Saharan Africa find itself caught in the middle again if a cold war with China breaks out?
In a speech at the Heritage Foundation last December, President Donald Trump’s hawkish national security adviser, John Bolton, launched a new initiative called “Prosper Africa” that he said was aimed at promoting trade and commercial ties “to the benefit of both the United States and Africa.” But there are a number of reasons for African governments to be concerned about what the administration really has in mind.
First of all, Bolton cast the goal of increased economic engagement as something necessary for “safeguarding the economic independence of African states and protecting U.S. national security interests,” not as something helpful for African economic development. He pointed to the growing influence of “great power competitors,” China and Russia, which he suggested were investing in Africa mainly “to gain a competitive advantage over the United States.” While there are certainly valid concerns about some of China’s foreign aid and lending practices in Africa and other developing countries, African governments have generally welcomed Chinese aid and investment. It’s not at all clear they would agree that this is a competition where they must choose one side or the other.
A second reason to be skeptical of how seriously this administration takes the goal of helping Africa develop is the low level of U.S. engagement to date. President Donald Trump has not visited the continent; his wife and daughter have in trips heavy on photo ops but light on policy substance. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross—hardly the most dynamic member of the Cabinet—was supposed to represent the administration last month at the U.S.-Africa Business Summit in Maputo, the capital of Mozambique, where details of the Prosper Africa initiative were announced. But he cancelled at the last minute because of a “scheduling conflict,” according to his office, sending Deputy Secretary of Commerce Karen Dunn Kelley instead.
By contrast, Chinese President Xi Jinping has visited Africa multiple times and has welcomed a stream of African officials to Beijing. Russian President Vladimir Putin will host 50 African leaders at a summit in Sochi later this year. Gyude Moore, a former minister of public works in Liberia (he’s now my colleague at the Center for Global Development), called the lack of Cabinet-level U.S. participation at the Maputo meeting insulting.
There are a number of reasons for African governments to be concerned about what the Trump administration really has in mind.
Finally, another reason to question the White House’s intentions with respect to trade with Africa is Trump’s view that trade policy is a zero-sum game: If another country wins, the United States must lose, and vice versa. Indeed, before getting to the mutual benefit part of his speech last December, Bolton asserted that the administration’s new Africa strategy would remain true to Trump’s “central campaign promise to put the interests of the American people first, both at home and abroad.”
So it should be no surprise that when he discussed trade, Bolton emphasized American jobs and exports to Africa. He said that the administration wants to pursue “modern, comprehensive trade agreements… that ensure fair and reciprocal exchange.” In recent congressional testimony, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer also reiterated the administration’s goal of negotiating a bilateral trade agreement with an African country that could become a model for others. Negotiators for a little country, negotiating with a big country like the United States, might wonder just what reciprocity means in that context.
If more than two decades of history is any guide, negotiating a trade deal with the United States will mean more or less accepting whatever text American negotiators put in front of their counterparts, including onerous demands for strict intellectual property protections that could increase prices for drugs and agricultural inputs. Negotiating with one country at a time is also problematic because most African countries are party to one or more regional communities, which they are stitching together in a single, continent-wide free trade agreement that just formally entered into force. The continent—home to a large number of small economies, many of them landlocked—desperately needs more regional integration to increase its competitiveness by lowering transportation and other costs of trade and achieving economies of scale.
Beyond these problematic trade plans, what else is in the administration’s Prosper Africa initiative? Its second stated aim is to engage the private sector and double U.S. trade with and investment in Africa. According to Kelley’s remarks in Maputo, two of the three strands of the program are aimed at helping American companies find and close deals across Africa by streamlining and better coordinating U.S. government activities that provide information, financing and risk insurance to the private sector. She also suggested that these efforts on behalf of American businesses could include “U.S. government advocacy” to “expedite” transactions, which sounds like it might involve a little arm-twisting if African officials question the terms of a deal.
Helping African countries improve the investment climate, which is Prosper Africa’s third strand, and connecting American investors to opportunities on the continent, are worthy—and indeed longstanding—goals. Overall, however, the initiative appears to be a mix of existing programs in shiny new packaging, and with little new money. The $50 million proposed budget for Prosper Africa is a drop in the bucket compared to the administration’s proposed 9 percent cut in overall aid to Africa. And efforts to negotiate bilateral trade agreements country by country would undermine the regional integration that is needed for the continent’s development.
Trade and aid to support development in Africa can and should be to the mutual interest of all involved. But putting Prosper Africa in the context of the geopolitical rivalry with China, alongside Trump’s belligerent America First rhetoric, undermines that positive message.
Kimberly Ann Elliott is a visiting scholar at the George Washington University Institute for International Economic Policy, and a visiting fellow with the Center for Global Development. Her WPR column appears every Tuesday
This excellent article, once again refutes the slander that China is imposing a ‘debt-trap’ on African nations. The author, Ehizuelen Michael Mitchell Omoruyi, executive director of the Center for Nigerian Studies at the Institute of African Studies, Zhejiang Normal University, shows how China through the Belt and Road is developing vital infrastructure for Africa.
“Millions of articles have been written on China-Africa engagement that involve the terms “Sino-optimism,” “Sino-pragmatism” and “Sino-pessimism.” With that said, somehow, China has also been mentioned in some Western media in a negative light, including headlines with phrases such as “Can China circumvent the middle-income trap?” “China’s trapped transition,” “The Thucydides Trap” and the “debt trap.”
“As for the debt trap, the term refers to the idea that Chinese loans in the continent of Africa are a strategy by the Middle Kingdom to extract concessions and purchase allegiance. I do not concur! China’s involvement with African nations is far beyond building railways, bridges and roads…
China Announces $1 Billion Belt and Road Africa Fund Led by South African
Announced July 3 on the sidelines of the Summer Davos Meeting World Economic Forum in Dalian, China, this $1 billion investment fund also achieves another first–in that it will be not be run by the state government–thus being China’s first “NGO.” It will also notably be led, not by a Chinese, but by a South African.
Intended to be up and running by September, this fund–to be capitalized by wealthy Chinese businessmen and their families–will be headed by Dr. Iqbal Survé, “born and educated in Cape Town” (according to his website). Survé had started his own, Sekunjalo investment fund in 1997, leaving his medical career at the call of Nelson Mandela, who was seeking local investors to lead the development of the economy. Dr. Survé had become “affectionately known as the ‘Struggle Doctor’ because of his provision of medical care towards victims of apartheid brutality,” says his “about” page.
Since then Survé came to serve as chair of the BRICS Business Council for South Africa, and most recently as a member of the Business Council Chairman for the five BRICS countries. A hedge fund operator he definitely is not. Commenting from China, Dr. Survé said, “The discussions that we’ve had with Chinese business people, state-owned enterprises and family offices, have resulted in the establishment of this fund. Africa is ready to grow and is heading towards a $5 trillion economy. The [Africans] have seen how China was able to grow from 1980, when China made up only 2% of the global GDP when compared to today, where China makes up 19% of the global GDP.
This fund is a great boost for the development of Africa.” The fund will be overseen by a Belt and Road Business Council, eventually to grow to 1,000 Chinese and African members.
The 2011 Libya regime change against President Gaddafi has created a failed state in Libya today that has lead to the deaths and slavery of thousands of Africans. President Obama, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and Samantha Powers zealously advocated the overthrow of President Gadadfi that created today’s nightmare for Northern Africa. What is needed to reverse this bloody disaster is a whole new approach to Northern Africa, one based on economic development, which must include refurbishing Lake Chad with the Transaqua water project.
China Global Television Network, or CGTN published my article on the African Union’s creation of the Africa Continental Freed Trade Area-AfCFTA
Six decades after African nations began liberating their people from the yoke of European colonialists, the African Union has launched the “operational phase” of the Africa Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), taking a giant step toward uniting the 54 African nations and fostering economic progress.
The landmark move was made at the 12th Extraordinary African Union Summit in Niamey, the capital of Niger, on July 7. Moussa Faki Mahamat, chairperson of the African Union Commission, referred to it as a “historic moment.”
Many prominent African leaders view this new free trade agreement as a “game changer” with the potential to catapult the continent into a foremost position in global trade and development, especially with Africa’s population projected to double in the next 30 years to 2.4 billion.
The article below written by a friend of mine is a useful over view of the African Union’s plan to build High Speed Rail-lines in Africa. High-Speed Rail together with the production of abundant supplies of energy are indispensable for the continent’s development and the industrialization of African economies. The link to the entire article that is worth reading follows the excerpts.
“The vital plan for an African Integrated High-Speed Railway Network (AIHSRN), approved by the African Union (AU) in 2014, appears to be going forward energetically. But in fact, Africa is getting only half a loaf at best. Standard gauge rails are being built, but to “save money,” they are not being built to standards permitting the high speeds that the African Union had specified. These “higher”-speed lines are not “high-speed” by any accepted standard. Or, worse, existing lines of the old colonial gauge are being rehabilitated—again because “there is not enough money.”
“Yet having “enough money” is not the problem it seems to be: The principle of Hamiltonian credit—credit extended by government, on the strength of nothing but the skills of the population, and earmarked for projects sure to produce leaps in productivity—has been known in theory and practice for 200 years, even if suppressed by the business schools.” Read my post from earlier this year on Alexander Hamilton: Nations Must Study Alexander Hamilton’s Principles of Political Economy
“AIHSRN is not a master plan for all rail transport in Africa. It is, rather, a plan for rapid rail transport across long distances. And Africa has long distances. To go from Cairo to the Cape of Good Hope by road or rail is more than 10,000 kilometers (6,200 miles)—the equivalent of going from New York to San Francisco and back again.
“Yet with the AIHSRN, an express train could depart from Cairo at 6:30 a.m. on Monday morning, travel at an average of only 220 km/h (137 mph), make only five half-hour stops—at Khartoum, Nairobi, Dodoma (Tanzania), Harare, and Johannesburg—and arrive in Cape Town in time for an early breakfast on Wednesday. The east-west trip from Addis Ababa in Ethiopia to Dakar, Senegal—“only” 8,100 km—will be quicker. The implications of such speed for the African economy—and for African integration in all respects—are enormous.
“The continental plan is for six west-east routes from the Atlantic to the Indian Ocean/Red Sea, and four routes that run from north to south—a 6×4 grid (see map).
“Because of their high speeds, the trains must run on dedicated, standard gauge lines that will not usually accept traffic from other, slower lines of the sometimes denser, surrounding rail network.
“The plan includes the construction of railway manufacturing industries, parts suppliers, maintenance facilities, and the building up of railway training academies.
“The AIHSRN is part of the African Union’s Agenda 2063, a fifty-year plan for the economic, social and cultural development of the entire continent, born in 2013”
Although I do not agree in full with the analysis in the report: “For Lack of Will: Child Hunger in Africa,” written by the Ethiopian based African Child Policy Forum-ACPF, none the less, it provides a startling study of the horrific effects of hunger on Africa’s children that should be read by all. (See link below for PDF).
The study states that child hunger in Africa is increasing, and presents the following shocking statistics on hunger in Africa:
Globally 10,000 children die every day due to hunger, and in Africa, hunger contributes to about 45% of childhood mortality. One third of child deaths in Africa is attributable to micronutrient deficiencies. Almost half of all child deaths on the continent are caused by hunger!
Ninety per cent of children do not meet the criteria for minimum acceptable diet.
Sixty per cent of children do not meet the minimum meal frequency.
In 2017 alone 14 million children were affected by wasting.
Africa Needs Real Economic Growth
The report correctly identifies poverty as the primary cause for hunger-access to food, estimating that in 2013, 49% of children in sub-Saharan Africa lived in extreme poverty-less than $2 per day.
Unfortunately, the report commits a fundamental error when it repeats the commonly accepted specious statistics of economic growth for African nations.
“Growth in Africa over the last two decades has been impressive by historical and world standards. But it has not been inclusive, with little impact on child hunger.”
If African economies had experienced real physical growth over recent years, then poverty and hunger would have declined. Instead, both poverty and hunger have increased in many sections of the sub-Saharan continent.
The reports of economic growth are inflated in a specific way; they do not measure real physical growth, but substitute calculations of price valuations of goods and services. There is a fundamental difference, which I will repeat here, because the actual criteria of economic growth is poorly understood.
Very briefly, true economic growth refers to enhancements in the physical production of goods necessary to sustain an expanding population at a constantly improving standard of living. The success of this growth depends on three essential features of an economy. An integrated infrastructure platform of rail, road, energy, and water. A viable manufacturing sector. Plus, the application of continued technology and scientific progress by an educated and healthy workforce. Of course, there is much more to be considered, but these requirements are indispensable. Simply adding up the price-valuations of extracted raw materials, real estate, services, stock exchanges, bank profits, etc. are measurements of monetarist values; not economic growth. Read my early post for fuller analysis: Africa Needs Real Economic Growth Not IMF Accountants
Various sleight of hand tricks and out right sophistry has been used to hide the reality that despite reports of so-called economic growth, poverty is increasing in sub-Saharan Africa, disproportionately compared to the rest of the world. Fallacious explanations have been given, like jobless economic growth, or growth that has not trickled down to the people, or non-inclusive growth. However, the bold truth is that Africa has not experienced the reputed growth that has been touted by all the financial intuitions, which sadly many Africans still believe and repeat.
According to this study, malnourishment has increased from 215.5 million in 2014 to 256.5 million in 2017. Other indicators of Africa’s poverty are; 338 million Africans living in extreme poverty, and 3.2 million children under the age of 5 die each other. Applying the figure of 45% of child deaths due to hunger, this would mean approximately 1.5 million African children die from hunger-poverty yearly.
What Need To Be Done
Under the section: “What is to be done?” the report states “No child should go hungry. This is a moral imperative.” I would add, that no adult, no human being should go hungry. While the study calls for radical transformative policies to be put in place, which is absolutely true, it then calls for “…government commitment to giving greater political visibility to ending child hunger.”
This is a grossly inadequate response to genocidal like elimination of Africans due to hunger. Since the liberation of African nations from colonial rule over six decades ago, the glaring lack of infrastructure and industrialization has plagued the continent. It has led to crippled economies, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of millions of Africans, which were preventable. While infrastructure in roads, rail, energy, ports etc. has finally begun to be built in the last decade, it is insufficient to address the glaring need of Africa’s existing 1.2 billion people and projected 2.5 billion by 2050.
Nothing less than a brute-force military-like commitment by Africans and their allies to inundate-saturate the continent with infrastructure, is required. This is the only pathway to eliminating hunger and poverty. It should have been done years ago. It must be done now.