Mozambique is Obligated to Exploit Its Resources For the Development of Its Economy

May 3, 2022

Mozambique joins other African nations that are putting the needs of their people ahead of the dictates from Western governments and financial institutions. African nations understand that unless energy poverty is eliminated there will be not be sufficient economic growth to end poverty and hunger. Ratner than allowing Africans to live in abject poverty and suffer unnecessary deaths, more African nations are insisting they have the right, nay obligation to use their sovereign natural resources to produce vitally needed energy. They are correct in this policy, which I support.

From slavery, through colonialism, and following independence, African nations have been denied what Kwame Nkrumah, and Cheikh Anta-Diop knew was essential for their sovereignty: the right to have industrialized economies.

Without energy dense, and infrastructure dense economies, to include mechanized farming, and robust manufacturing sectors, large portions of African nations will be forced to exist in miserable living conditions, which will lead to higher death rates.

It is criminal to prohibit African nations from using their own natural resources for the development of their economies, without which, hundreds of millions of their citizens will remain in wretched poverty. (Lawrence Freeman, April 29, 2022)

Read my earlier post: Nigerian VP: Osinbajo “Climate Justice Must Include Ending Energy Poverty” Especially for Sub-Saharan Africa

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for over 30 years. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com. Mr. Freeman’s stated personal mission is; to eliminate poverty and hunger in Africa by applying the scientific economic principles of Alexander Hamilton.

Nigerian VP: Osinbajo “Climate Justice Must Include Ending Energy Poverty” Especially for Sub-Saharan Africa

Vice President Yemi Osinbajo says the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA), as well as Nigeria’s gas initiatives, will help transform Nigeria into a gas-based industrialized nation. (Courtesy of pulse.ng, Tolani Alli)

April 29, 2022

Nigerian Vice President, Yemi Osinbajo, over the last year, has repeatedly demanded ending global energy poverty, which is a life and death necessity for the majority of the world’s population. Speaking at the Atlantic Council on April 13, VP Osinbajo challenged the prevailing green-environmental dictates against using fossil fuels to supply energy to energy starved nations. He told his virtual audience, “climate justice must include ending energy poverty .” (Osinbajo seeks justice for Africa.) (Emphasis added)

For sub-Saharan Africa, there is no more vital need to the survival of these African nations, than energy, energy, and more energy. Over 600 million Africans living in sub-Saharan Africa are without access to electricity. Another 300 million use charcoal and firewood to cook, both environmentally harmful. For Africa to end poverty and hunger, nothing is more essential than to have on-grid, plentifully, and accessible energy, with the capability to power an industrialized economy, for which solar and wind are insufficient. Any advocate for Africa, who does not fight for the creation of abundant energy for the continent, does not have Africa’s best interest at heart.

My own estimate is that for African nations to achieve the levels of energy consumption of the advanced sector, a minimum of 1,000 additional gigawatts of electrical power must be created. In his remarks VP Osinbajo stated, “For every Nigerian to consume the Modern Energy Minimum of 1,000 kilowatt hours per year by 2050 would require a 15-fold increase in our national power generation.” To achieve that goal, “Nigeria must add 200 gigawatts of new power capacity by 2060…”

West’s Green Hypocrisy

Writing in Foreign Affairs, August 31, 2021, The Divestment Delusion: Why Banning Fossil Fuel Investments Would Crush Africa, VP Osinbajo, confronted the discriminatory green anti-development “policies directed at African nations.

Hitting at the hypocrisy by developed nations, the Vice President wrote:  

“After decades of profiting from oil and gas, a growing number of wealthy nations have banned or restricted public investment in fossil fuels, including natural gas. Such policies often do not distinguish between different kinds of fuels, nor do they consider the vital role some fuels play in powering the growth of developing economies, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. As development finance institutions try to balance climate concerns against the need to spur equitable development and increase energy security, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the European Union have all taken aggressive steps to limit fossil fuel investments. The World Bank and other multilateral development banks are being urged by some shareholders to do the same. The African Development Bank, for instance, is increasingly unable to support large natural gas projects in the face of European shareholder pressure. Even UN Secretary-General António Guterres has called on countries to end all new fossil fuel exploration and production. ”

(Courtesy of Inside Africa-Facebook)

Under the subhead: Little Gain, Much Pain, he wrote:

“Curbing natural gas investments in Africa will do little to limit carbon emissions globally but much to hurt the continent’s economic prospects. Right now, Africa is starved for energy: excluding South Africa, sub-Saharan Africa’s one billion people have the power generation capacity of just 81 gigawatts—far less than the 108-gigawatt capacity of the United Kingdom. Moreover, those one billion people have contributed less than one percent to global cumulative carbon emissions.”

He continued:

But limiting the development of fossil fuel projects and, in particular, natural gas projects would have a profoundly negative impact on Africa. Natural gas doesn’t make sense in every African market. But in many, it is a crucial tool for lifting people out of poverty. It is used not only for power but for industry and fertilizer and for cleaner cooking. Liquified petroleum gas is already replacing huge amounts of hazardous charcoal and kerosene that were most widely used for cooking, saving millions of lives that were previously lost to indoor air pollution. The role of gas as a transition fuel for developing countries, especially in Africa, cannot be overemphasized.

Yet Africa’s progress could be undone by the rich world’s efforts to curb investments in all fossil fuels. Across sub-Saharan Africa, natural gas projects are increasingly imperiled by a lack of development finance.

Gas pipelines and power plants in the most energy-hungry markets need development finance to attract other capital and enable such projects to proceed

 But many more such power plants are needed to deliver electricity to our people, to power our industry and growing cities, and to balance intermittent solar power. A blanket ban on finance for all fossil fuels would jeopardize those objectives.” (Emphasis added)

African Leaders Contest Green Agenda

Gwede Mantashe (Courtesy of bussinesslive.co.za)

Gwede Mantashe, Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy of South Africa, has echoed VP Osinbajo, in his ddetermination to use South Africa’s abundant energy resources to end energy poverty. On December 9, 2021, Minister Mantashe, issued a powerful statement asserting that  South Africa’s “deserves the opportunity to capitalize on its natural resources.” (Shell: Gas and oil industry in SA under attack).  

He wrote in language more vigorous and iconoclastic than VP Osinbajo:

“Oil and gas exploitation has been carried out for decades across other economies in the World, including for more than 50 years in Norway, more than 80 years in Saudi Arabia and over 100 years in Germany. These economies are thriving today, and they were built on the back of the exploitation of these resources. Africa deserves an equal chance to develop its economies on the strength of her natural resources. 

“Several countries on the African continent have announced their oil and gas finds which present massive opportunities for economic growth, industrialization, and job creation. As these developments unfold, we have noted with interest, the pushback, and objections from environmental lobby groups against the development of these resources.

“I cannot help but ask myself, are these objections meant to ensure the status quo remains in Africa, in general, and South Africa, in particular? That is, the status quo with regards to energy poverty, high unemployment, high debt to GDP ratio at country level and economies that are not growing and, in some cases, jobless economic growth. Could it be possible that this is an extreme pure love for the environment or an unrelenting campaign to ensure that Africa and South Africa do not see the investment inflows they need?”

He concludes:

“South Africa deserves the opportunity to capitalize on its natural resources including oil and gas, as these resources have been proven to be game changers elsewhere. We consider the objections to these developments as apartheid and colonialism of a special type, masqueraded as a great interest for environmental protection. South Africa’s economic development is oppressed in the name of environmental protection when we have environmental framework that ensures that licensing is done with the utmost environmental care founded on Section 24 of our Constitution. We therefore appeal to all objectors to acknowledge this and allow South Africa to exploit its natural resources for the benefit of its citizens.” (Emphasis added)

Presidents Yoweri Museveni-left and Muhammadu Buhari-right (courtesy of dailypost.ng)

President Buhari of Nigeria has also challenged the attempt to keep African nations from utilizing their resources to industrialize their nations for the benefit of their citizens. Read: President Buhari of Nigeria, Demands More and Reliable Energy for Africa from COP26. President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda has raised similar objections. Read: Solar and Wind Force Poverty on Africa: Africa Needs Reliable Energy-Nuclear-to Power Industrialized Economies

Live With Energy or Die with Green

Will the Western dictated green-reset to shield civilization from climate change end up killing more people than it purports to save? How many lives will perish from the dearth of plentiful and reliable energy, which is required to end poverty and hunger in Africa?

At the highest echelons of the corporate and financial world, in conjunction with Western governments, it has been decided that investments in fossil fuels-hydrocarbons will be halted. Coal, oil, and gas production will be replaced by channeling money into solar and wind renewables, which are both unreliable to supply energy 24/7. Given that it is known that neither solar nor wind are capable of providing sufficient power to drive an industrialized economy,* it should be obvious the intent of these policies: prevent African nations from industrializing. The fact there is not an all-out effort to invest in nuclear energy, especially Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), which will provide safe, reliable power, indicates that there is an intent to keep Africa in energy poverty.

From slavery, through colonialism, and following independence, African nations have been denied what Kwame Nkrumah, and Cheikh Anta-Diop knew was essential for their sovereignty: the right to have industrialized economies.

Without energy dense, and infrastructure dense economies, to include mechanized farming, and robust manufacturing sectors, large portions of African nations will be forced to exist in miserable living conditions, which will lead to higher death rates.

It is criminal to prohibit African nations from using their own natural resources for the development of their economies, without which, hundreds of millions of their citizens will remain in wretched poverty.

*The sun “miraculously” maintains life on our planet, but is not an efficient energy source to perform work, because solar radiation reaching the earth’s surface is too diffuse i.e., has a low energy-flux density. Windmills are not cost efficient when one compares the energy required to construct acres of windmills, to the net energy produced. Both solar and wind are also dependent on weather conditions.

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for over 30 years. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com. Mr. Freeman’s stated personal mission is; to eliminate poverty and hunger in Africa by applying the scientific economic principles of Alexander Hamilton.

Will A Marred Presidential Election Be Used to Discredit Buhari and Nigeria?

The two leading candidates in Nigeria’s Presidential election. On the left-President Muhammadu Buhari (APC). On the right-Atiku Abubakar (PDP)

Plans are afoot to potentially use violence or other means to disrupt Nigeria’s Presidential election re-scheduled for Saturday February 23, 2018, in order to discredit President Buhari, and Nigeria. I am not making an idle prediction. Knowing Nigeria and its history as I do, and the intent of financial predators to weaken the Nation State of Nigeria, one must be prepared.

Hours before the polls were to open, the Independent National Election Commission postponed the voting for one week. Leading up to the originally scheduled vote on February 16, circles in the US and UK issued unprovoked condemnations warning President Buhari to conduct a “fair and transparent” election. Why such warnings delivered weeks in advance, when Nigeria had distinguished itself in 2015 by conducting, by most accounts, the most honest Presidential election in its history? The most dangerous threat against President Buhari came from George Soros’ Open Society of West Africa. Soros, a member of the financial globalist oligarchy is notorious for using his worldwide tentacles to foster regime change. Read: External & Internal Forces Fear Continuance of Buhari Presidency

Earlier this week, Republican Congressman Chris Smith, who is the party’s point man on Africa, issued a denunciation of President Buhari. In his statement Cong Smith said: “Responsibility for the delay of Nigeria’s presidential election lays squarely with President Muhammadu Buhari and those close to him.” He went on to accuse the President of “undermining confidence that this election and subsequent gubernatorial elections will be free and fair…” Smith is no friend of Africa. He is a proponent of regime change and has joined with anti-Muslims forces in the US in calling for the removal Sudanese President Bashir. In April of 2018, when Ethiopia was celebrating the selection of Dr. Abiy Ahmed as its new, young reformist Prime Minister, Smith’s subcommittee on Africa, passed a resolution denouncing Ethiopia for alleged human rights violations.

On February 19, John Campbell (retired US Ambassador to Nigeria), published a blog for the Council of Relations raising suspicions of President Buhari’s involvement in the postponement of the February 16 election. Campbell reports that many Nigerians “are seeing the postponement as part of a strategy to throw the elections, most often to incumbent President Muhammadu Buhari.”  He goes on to say: “Nigerians are also concerned that the postponement provides more opportunity for the incumbent powers to buy votes and deploy security services to intimidate voters.”

Campbell in his blog, retails the allegation from President Buhari’s opponent, Atiku Abubakar, “claiming that the Buhari administration postponed the vote to ensure a lower voter turnout.”  He also repeats the accusation that President Buhari’s plan: “is to provoke the public, hoping for a negative reaction, and then use that as an excuse for further anti-democratic acts.”

Violence: A Political Weapon 

There are forces inside and outside Nigeria, who would like to undermine the nation’s sovereignty, preferring a malleable government that would permit the continued exploitation of Nigeria. Since Royal Dutch Shell descended on Nigeria with its first oil well in 1956, Nigeria has never been truly sovereign. Mega oil companies and their financial cohorts, conspiring with a cabal of corrupt “middlemen,” have looted Nigeria’s oil for decades, resulting in economic and political instability for Africa’s largest populace.

The Buhari administration has not yet acted to fully mobilize the Nigerian economy as forcefully as required to end abject poverty and generate productive jobs for millions of unemployed youth. Not nearly enough has been done to reverse the British nurtured deep ethnic divisions that have instilled great mistrust in Nigerian society. Sadly, these volatile ethnic, religious, and geographic fault lines have been easily manipulated into wanton violence. However, President Buhari has displayed a nationalist commitment for economic development, initiating the largest expansion of vitally needed infrastructure in Nigeria’s history. He has also demonstrated his determination to alleviate the horrible conditions of life in the Lake Chad Basin (where Boko Haram recruits), through his steadfast support to replenishing the shrinking Lake Chad.

The next President of Nigeria should be decided by the Nigerian people. One cannot dismiss the likely probability that violence will be instigated as means to undermine the legitimacy of the election. Not only is there a history of violence in Nigerian elections, but Boko Haram, which has brutalized the Nigerian people, is dedicated to using violence as a political weapon. In the last two weeks leading up to this Saturday’s election, over one hundred Nigerians have been killed or injured. Not just by Boko Haram, and other extremists, but also from clashes between the APC and PDP, ethnic conflicts, and attacks by suspected herdsman. This has created an opportune environment that provocateurs may exploit in their scheme to disrupt the voting process in this all-important election.

Watch: Will Nigerian Election Be Destabilized? Interview with Lawrence Freeman