Accumulation By Dispossession - BRICS and AFRICA

The centuries-old looting of Africa, followed by the conference in Berlin that from 1885 began the ‘Scramble for Africa’, is being repeated now in a predatory attack by BRICS countries on the continent’s resources. Large corporations from Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa are not committed to development for ordinary people – whether in the homeland or the victim countries. As BRICS penetrate further into Africa, the winners consist of multinational and parastatal corporations, including some based in the industrialised countries – e.g. the Walmart retail empire – which purchase semi-processed inputs or finished goods from BRICS, along with local elites who lubricate the looting through corruption, cost overruns, and access to our cheapest electricity supplies.

Many African countries, if not all, are located at the extreme end of what Immanuel Wallerstein thirty years ago termed the core-periphery relationship, a position which impoverishes them to the advantage of rich and industrialised countries in the core. BRICS countries represent sub-imperialists trying to improve their relative location in the world system, perhaps moving toward imperialist power and thereafter even to imperialist superpower status, as the USSR once enjoyed. These countries have different levels of economic development and political influence, vested interests in the African continent and the DRC in particular, and geopolitical positions in world politics.

But they all share four characteristics. First, BRICS countries present important opportunities for foreign direct investment (FDI) which, drawn towards mega developments like the Congo River Inga Hydropower Project or towards minerals and petroleum extraction, impoverish the same people that they should empower. Impoverishment occurs through dispossession of natural resources with little or no compensation, unequal shares of the costs and benefits of mega development projects, repayments of debts incurred to build these projects, and structural exclusion from accessing the outcomes of these initiatives.

Second, BRICS countries share the same modus operandi at their different stages of imperialism, either as countries which have been active in Africa for a very long time (Russia and China); newly arrived (India); or playing their traditional sub-imperialist countries (Brazil and South Africa). The pattern is similar: accumulation by dispossession is taking place through abuse of local politics, national elites, warlords, and war economies, as in the eastern side of the DRC, where between BRICS and the West as consumers of the resulting mineral outflows, six million or more deaths have been the result.

Third, BRICS countries share the same interests in natural resources including but not limited to mining, gas, oil and mega-dam projects for water and for electricity to meet their increasing demands for cheap and abundant electricity. They are also actively involved in the search for new markets, and hence they promote construction of roads, railways, bridges, ports and other infrastructure. But this infrastructure is often indistinguishable from colonial-era projects, meant to more quickly extract primary products for the world market.

Fourth, BRICS countries have poor records of environmental regulation. There is virtually no commitment to mitigate climate change and invest in truly renewable energy, to take environmental impact assessments seriously, and to consult with and compensate adversely affected communities.

There is desperation in the air as a result of the following: three BRICS countries having crashed in 2013 (South Africa, Brazil and India) to join the ‘fragile five’ (Brazil, India, Indonesia, South Africa and Turkey); Russia crashing in March 2014 thanks to the implications of its Ukranian political and Crimean land grab, following China’s surprising trade deficit in February 2014 as many of its major industrial companies lowered their production. The prices of important commodities such as copper and iron are falling, as a result. The BRICS appear to need new market niches for trade, along with cheap energy through oil, coal and hydroelectricity, which can assist in lower-cost extraction and transportation. But each BRICS country is different.


For details of each BRICS' countries dealings in Africa GO HERE

Accumulation? Capitalism Is The Name Of The Game

Land grabbing is a topic not covered widely in western media but for local populations in countries where it is happening it is mostly a traumatic event culminating in lost livelihoods, eviction from homes and derisory, if any, compensation. The winners are shareholders and owners of big companies - mining, logging, monocrop agriculture, investment companies, pension funds and the like together with state or government actors using their position for pecuniary advantage. Note the quote at the end from the District Agriculture Officer compared with opinion from local farmers. Accumulation however, wherever, whenever, from whoever - capitalism is the name of the game.
JS
 
Farmers in Bombali and Tonkolili districts in northern Sierra Leone have said that land grabbing by multi-national companies and massive timber logging are some of the barriers to sustainable agriculture in the two districts.

One of the aggrieved farmers, Jaria Jalloh, said they are worried that there would be no land for their children to farm in the future as investors, with the aid of government, have grabbed large swathe of land in the districts.

"We have nowhere to farm or even fetch firewood. We are worried that our unborn children will not have land to farm too," she cried, adding that their land was being taken from them with little or no compensation.

Madam Jalloh opined that another hindrance to agriculture was indiscriminate logging in both districts, with the attendant negative effect of soil erosion caused by massive deforestation.

She called for an immediate response from government in a bid to rescue farmers from poverty, and enhance sustainable agricultural practice in the two districts.

The two districts house mining giants African Minerals and Addax Bioenergy, who enjoy a long period of ninety years land lease agreement with the government. The companies have had to contend with agitations from communities, many of whom are aggrieved that they have lost their livelihoods, while being given ridiculous amounts for land rents.

Meanwhile, the District Agriculture Officer in Bombali, Joseph Tholley, said many companies are in the district with a view to invest in agriculture, but that the ministry was careful not to go into agreement with dishonest companies.

"We have been approached by individuals and companies who have vested interest in investing in agriculture in the district,but we are careful that we do not want to go into arrangement with dishonest ones," he said.


BY ALUSINE SESAY

Source: Concord Times