The sentiments that you have expressed coincide / synchronise with
mine, absolutely.
I was hoping that my post would elicit the kind of response that you
were honest and straightforward enough to deliver. You know how it is,
if I said that "all men are bitches"
some men would keep quiet.
Over the years, some of my more revolutionary African friends have
been fond of quoting Chapter Six of Chairman Mao : "Imperialism and
All Reactionaries are Paper Tigers" :
First of all I did not say that the Chinese people were only doing
business with crooks and dictators in Africa. Where did I say that and
what gave you that impression? But some of the guys that they have
been doing business with are not saints either....
More importantly, China has been doing a lot of building construction
work in Africa. Nor is it to be expected that it's all in vain or that
it's all done in the spirit of enmity or solely for profit. China too
wants to have more influence in the world......and that's surely not
supposed to be a crime.
America has given 'everything', was a reference to some of the so
called Afrikanists (anyway you care to spell it even in
hieroglyphics) people who the United States of America has indeed
GIVEN everything they can boast of and that's one reason why they are
still there chirping about their idol Gaddafi and turning a blind
eye on his Human Rights transgressions that have been suffered by not
only the long suffering Libyan people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Libya
Just one of many :
http://swampland.time.com/2011/02/22/gaddafis-blood-soaked-hands/
I have been following you in Twitter for quite a while now....
Have a great day.
Cornelius Adebayo.
On Sep 8, 11:30 am, Ayo Obe <ayo.m.o....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Cornelius, it really is a nonsense to present the Chinese as doing business only with dictators in Africa. However imperfect African democracies, there are certainly more of them on the continent than there are dictators. And however much sneering there may be at the quality of African democracy and governance, it has certainly come a great deal further a great deal faster with fewer resources and greater problems than the 'mature' (yes, there is a reason for that word) democracies in other parts of the world.
>
> And by the way, how about the Africans taking over in Africa? If that is a ridiculous pipe dream, do remember that there are people in the US and Europe who fear that the Chinese have already taken over there. Or has it occurred to you that maybe the whole concept of countries 'taking over' other countries is simply outdated.
>
> As to your suggestion that America has given us 'everything', you might care to elaborate.
>
> Of course, in the face of the relations with Saudi Arabia (and, up to the day before yesterday, with Muammar Gadaffi's Libya) surely you jest with your suggestion that the US and 'the best of the West' make respect for human rights a condition for doing business or giving development aid?
>
> By the way, note that the staunchest opposition to efforts to control the flow of small arms comes, not from China, but from the US which would have us all live by the 'right to bear arms' mantra of its own national constitution.
>
> In short, it is not nearly as black and white - if you will forgive the expression - as you like to imply. The devils are not all on one side nor the saints and angels all on the other. We in Nigeria certainly know that. Particularly with regard to Muammar Gadaffi.
>
> Ayo
> I invite you to follow me on Twitter @naijama
>
> On 7 Sep 2011, at 21:34, Cornelius Hamelberg <corneliushamelb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dear Ken,
>
> > Thanks for the details. Hopefully the Chinese weapons if they ever
> > arrive on Libyan soil will be delivered unto the hands of the NTC and
> > stay with them and not be passed on and find their way into the hands
> > of eager terrorists ,be they affiliates of Palestinian Jihadists, al-
> > Qaeda or the ambitious elements cloaked as Boko Haram.
>
> > About your concerns about China's future in Africa/Africa's future in
> > China I'm afraid that what you'll get from some of the powerless
> > AfriKanists of the Gaddafi's hue is more toothless ideology (mostly
> > theoretical building of castles in the air about e.g. " The
> > Constitution of the United States of Africa" which they say will be
> > implemented , latest 2017) ) and about liking China more than
> > America which has given them everything, because China turns a blind
> > eye on Human Rights Transgressions being committed by many of the
> > African leaders with whom they do business whereas the US and the best
> > of the West at least would like respect for human rights as a
> > condition for doing business or giving development aid.
>
> > The Chinese civilisation has been around for a very long time and
> > the Chinese are said to be thinking and planning for the next five
> > hundred years. Like,
>
> > "Well, I don't know, but I've been told
> > The streets in heaven are lined with gold
> > I ask you how things could get much worse
> > If the Russians happen to get up there first
> > Wowee! pretty scary! "
>
> > For some people, the idea of China/ the Chinese taking over in Africa
> > within 150 years of the Berlin Conference, that too is pretty scary,
> > especially since the Chinese have the advantage in the eyes of all
> > those who look at the past and chime, "The Chinese never colonised
> > us" ; China doe not have that back-load, so today the Chinese don't
> > use "big grammar" - they can speak the same Broken Palm Wine
> > Drinkard metaphorical English as Amos Tutuola : all the Chinaman has
> > to do is to take Mugabe by the left or right arm , hook up with him
> > arm in arm and ask him this question :
> > " We make friendship? - we make friendship and we do business" and the
> > deal is done.
>
> > Indeed, Chinese weapons could be very big business in Africa.
>
> > This news flashed from the Tripoli to the cape and I' sure that it
> > must have resonated a worrisome chord in you too: David Cameron warns
> > Africa about China:
>
> >http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=sv&sugexp=gsis%2Ci18n%3Dtrue&cp=38&gs_id=...
>
> > Stretching my imagination a little further ahead and should China
> > want to take it all....I suppose that Africom could come in useful if
> > the West and China will be battling it out on mainland Africa in the
> > not too distant future not for the souls ( Human Rights) but mostly
> > for gold in Ghana and South Africa and it will not be an ideological
> > or religious battle.
>
> > "he comes for your gold,
> > watch out for your soul.":
>
> >http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Rock-%27N%27-Roll-Is-Music-Now...
>
> > The war mongers among the AfricKanists who want a unified African
> > continental army of their own mostly speak English and have still not
> > got around to adding Chinese to their secret language
> > repertoire.....who knows, one day every Chinese will be a professor of
> > English - but not every colonial subject is yet ambitious to be a
> > professor of Chinese – hieroglyphics yes, but not Chinese to write
> > competent linguistic analyses, not even those who would like to be
> > somewhere in the chain along the Chinese military chain of command at
> > a time that they could want to be fighting side by side with China for
> > possession / mastership of their own homelands
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQXqgk_GPxc
>
> > Others are a little more cautious and say, " Better the devil you know
> > than the devil you don't know..."
> > Me? No more hide and speak, I'm going to get that Skype; I'll
> > continue to be me but like Leonard Cohen, " I'm staying home tonight"
>
> >http://www.google.com/search?q=Leonard+Cohen%2C+Democracy&ie=utf-8&oe...
>
> > On Sep 7, 4:49 pm, kenneth harrow <har...@msu.edu> wrote:
> >> dear cornelius
> >> just reading the bloomberg account of this issue, on the site you
> >> provided. it does make it seem that private companies in china made
> >> deals; it isn't clear if they were carried out, or if a variant of the
> >> deal was consummated by the flow of chinese arms previously stocked in
> >> algeria. further, the ntc alluded to weapons used against them that they
> >> thought were chinese.
> >> it seems to me that if the chinese govt says they are now going to make
> >> sure that arms are not shipped without their approval they are conceding
> >> that this might have occurred beforehand.
> >> the globe and mail reporter, whom i heard discuss this on the radio,
> >> alluded to papers he saw that indicated a deal had been struck.
> >> if that is true, it seems less relevant whether they were able to
> >> actually ship them over in time to meet their contract.
> >> this is part of our larger question, still a question open for
> >> discussion, of the role of china in africa. i hear pros and cons, and
> >> remain interested in knowing ultimately whether this will benefit
> >> african states or not.
> >> china built a great road in mauretania. what did they get in exchange?
> >> who will benefit from it? i want concrete answers to concrete questions,
> >> not ideological posing, in this debate. i am truly curious about what
> >> the chinese money means for africa.
> >> ken
>
> >> On 9/7/11 9:40 AM, Cornelius Hamelberg wrote:
>
> >>> There's no good reason for this drawn out debate about whether or not
> >>> China has recently been selling arms to Gaddafi when China has made
> >>> it clear that they have not.
>
> >>> First of all we must make a distinction between private firms and the
> >>> government of China which in the end is the authority that grants or
> >>> denies permission to do business - even a potentially lucrative
> >>> business possibility such as taking over Sweden's SAAB - not to
> >>> mention a major foreign policy affair such as selling arms to Gaddafi
> >>> in the middle of an arms embargo against Gaddafi which they
> >>> themselves supported when the UN voted.
>
> >>> What actually happened is that in desperation some of Gaddafi's big
> >>> guns went over to China and tried to make some arms deals there with
> >>> the firms that they contacted, and they did not succeed .
>
> >>> The media is replete with these denials and explanations about what
> >>> actually happened : Gaddafi's unsuccessful attempts to buy more
> >>> weapons:
>
> >>>http://www.google.com/search?q=China+%3A+we+did+not+sell+arms+to+Gadd...
>
> >>> There are a number of other issues here that have been erroneously
> >>> reported along with spurious claims that will be vengaged most
> >>> vigorously if those erroneous reports persist
>
> >>> On Sep 7, 10:35 am, Olayinka Agbetuyi<yagbet...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Thanks for the clarifications on the specific issue of voting on the arms embargo, but the jury is still out on the veracity of its violations by China. Whichever way that eventually unravels, my point is that Gaddafis and Chinese models of governance (given the American issues with human rights violations in the latter) should leave no one in surprise if the latter goes to any length to prop up the erstwhile regime in Tripoli. This was my connection with the proxy wars. We know how much surreptitious support the French gave the Continentals in the American War of Independence from England even though a large section of American historigraphy represented that as the sole victory of the colonies against England.
>
> >>>> Olayinka Agbetuyi
>
> >>>> Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 19:02:57 -0400
> >>>> From: har...@msu.edu
> >>>> To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
> >>>> Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series -
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment