You have strong opinions about who should own that piece of land, but you haven’t made any points to justify why Palestinians have no claim to the territory.
Seems to me that it’s been a US enclave since the 60s. A convenient strategic post in the Middle East. All Trump is doing is to remove the illusion it was ever a sovereign state.
Sorry, I really don’t care enough. Why do you think it is of any interest to me?
Do you think Trump should offer the 2 million Gazans residency in the USA? Then he can build his luxury resort.
According to an Al Jazeera reporter the US has been pretty much propping up many African states. Now that funding is withdrawn, not only will it cause a potential humanitarian disaster (which could lead to public health risks to our populations) but will also clear the way for China to go full speed ahead in their pursuit of power in that continent.
Who did I say should own that land? I do have opinion who should control it. And I do have facts that contradict other opinions of ownership.
I really don’t care if Palestinians lives there, but if they think they can mess with neighboring countries, they got of easy this time.
But I believe that game plays both ways. The border between Palestine and Israel need to be well identified and if either side violates the border, send them to their God.
I haven’t seen that but you probably have a better seat then me.
Might want to get another source because this is not what he said
wants America to take it over — using its military, if necessary
That is a lie and the writer of the article is a liar and anyone that uses that source is to for pawning it as a truth when it’s a lie.
Europe are the sucker taking refugees, let them go there and less travel time. Or even put them in the center of Australia, plenty of open spaces.
Africa is not our problem. Not our job to feed them. Everyone is saying Africa is becoming technology advanced let them fend for themselves.
Everyone knows that china doesn’t have a foot hold in Africa. Let them feed them.
America first
Probably the best solution is to let all those Israelis who object to living peacefully alongside the Palestinian population move to the USA. Many if not most, of the Zionists are of European descent so they would have no problem with American culture.
There’s plenty of empty space for them in many states and Trump could give them resettlement grants and save money on weapons.
Really? You are often the one who demands people do their own fact finding. I’ll help get you started. In short China has been trading inward investment for mineral rights - its building roads and railways in many African countries. This is accelerating. The US has now decided to step away from Africa - supported by its isolationist voters (by which I mean short term thinkers with no international perspective - such as Trump). The US is fast creating global problems for the coming decades. Smart (not).
https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/06/why-strong-regional-value-chains-will-be-vital-to-the-next-chapter-of-china-and-africas-economic-relationship/
I know, it was a sarcastic statement. Let china deal with the aid to those countries.
I sometimes think that too much help for oppressed poor foreign countries prevents them from standing on their own two feet. They get complacent, especially when a lot of the money intended for aid goes to the rulers, weapons or governments of those countries. The respective governments should do the job they were elected to do or be deposed.
Lets face it, if a country is inhabitable, throwing money at it won’t improve the situation and with the anticipated global warming, populations must shift to more favourable areas.
Thank you for letting me know. The difficulty any reader of your posts will have is identifying sarcasm amidst the norm of utter bollox. Perhaps signpost the sarcastic comments in some way.
Speaking of utter bollox, are you sure you want the US to completely hand over support and relations with Africa to other powers? China would certainly take the opportunity to extend its global influence and I suspect Russia would do the same. This is gifting an entire continent, full of mineral wealth and talent wealth to powers that do not have the west’s best interests at heart. That is a bad idea and future generations will be damning of Trump and the US if this is allowed to happen.
I think is a valid point here. Certainly not all aid is well spent or well used - the wrong people seem to benefit too easily. And more emphasis should be placed on self sufficiency - although many aid programs do aim to promote this.
But the way to transition from simple giving money to help towards self sufficiency is not to cut all aid overnight. This surely needs to be a managed and gradual change. Abruptly cutting all aid will only result in hunger, conflict and refugees. It is morally irresponsible to make this brutal and complete cut.
Africa is rich in many natural resources and materials needed to run our own tech. China has been schmoozing Africa and increasing their control of those resources for the past twenty years. Reduced US influence will only increase China’s influence in that region and China’s domination of mining etc rights worldwide, which is their main ambition - to control world access to raw materials.
Surely you don’t think altruism is the motivation of such investment?
Monroe doctrine, that is what Trump is trying to fix with the Panama canal.
Are you not one that is always saying the US to interferes to much in foreign affairs. But now you wanting the US in Africa. People really have to make up their mind and stick to it.
Wasn’t that the excuse why the US was getting so many illegals. Because the were interfering to much.
The government has asked departments to make budget cuts and they can’t seem to come up with anything. They are not want others to look at their books and fight to prevent it. Shutting them down completely and now look at the books of the waste that can be found. That is what the uproar is about right now. They still have programs running where needed but once the closed parts are checked the rest can be checked.
One that has been reported is, there are 6.2 million social security numbers in use that would put them over 112 years old. And they can’t figure out why SS is having financial problems.
These are things Trump is trying to fix.
We have our own resources too. But let china have it and let the environmentalists deal with China about deforestation and pollution etc.
Not quite clear whether the United States Institute for Peace has been a victim of the recent cuts, but this is an article from last year which is relevant to the US’s reliance on African-mined natural resources.
USIP report offers ways for the United States to diversify its critical mineral supply chains through mutually beneficial partnerships in Africa.
A new USIP report emphasizes the importance of the United States government being engaged in the African critical minerals sector if it is to diminish its dependence on China and fortify its national security and foreign policy interests.
The report outlines practical steps that the United States can take to build mineral partnerships with African countries to diversify its supply chains and strengthen peace and security on the continent. It offers options to better support U.S. mining operations in Africa, including by working with African civil society to strengthen the rule of law. It also highlights potential risks, such as greater conflict as the global competition for critical minerals on the African continent intensifies.
Tom Sheehy, a distinguished fellow in USIP’s Africa Center and the report’s executive director, discusses the importance of critical minerals and key recommendations in the report.
The 2020 Energy Act requires that the United States maintain a list of minerals deemed essential to the U.S. economy and national security. Currently, 50 minerals are listed as being critical to supporting technological innovation in a full range of industries, including the defense industrial base. Updated every three years, this list evolves depending upon a mineral’s importance, availability and technological developments that impact its demand and supply. The list is dynamic: a mineral deemed critical today could be considered not critical tomorrow, and vice versa.
Some critical minerals are commonly recognized, such as cobalt, lithium and nickel. Cobalt is essential to consumer electronics, including cell phones. Lithium is a critical input to the electric vehicle and long-term storage batteries central to the energy transition. Other minerals are lesser known, including antimony, and important in defense applications. Many critical minerals are not mined in the United States but are mined in African countries.
Critical mineral development in Africa impacts U.S. interests on another level — namely peace and security in Africa. Much of the world is coming to Africa in search of critical minerals. These natural resources will be developed, our report stresses. The question is how will these minerals be developed? Developed in a way that contributes to African economic development and promotes social stability? Or, as we’ve often seen, will these resources be developed in a destructive and exploitative way?
The USIP report aims to encourage critical mineral partnerships between the United States and African countries that are mutually beneficial. This includes ensuring that critical mineral development does not fuel conflict, a U.S. interest.
Most experts view the United States as being too heavily dependent on China for too many critical minerals. It’s common sense not to be overly reliant on one supplier, especially a top economic and geopolitical competitor, for any commodity or product. Of course, these concerns are heightened as the U.S. relationship with China grows more tense across the board, including as Beijing broadly threatens U.S. national security.
One critical mineral we look at is graphite, essential to many industrial processes requiring lubricants, and products including batteries and fuel cells. The United States produces little to no natural graphite, meaning we are virtually 100 percent reliant on imports for graphite supply, with China being the leading import source. China uses its strong market position to manipulate the market, and recently imposed a graphite export ban of significant concern.
The United States has a project underway to support a graphite mining project in Mozambique, with processing to be done in Louisiana — an effort to counter Chinese dominance of this critical mineral. This is an example of the United States looking to Africa to help overcome a critical mineral vulnerability.
It’s important to realize that China’s dominant position as a supplier of many critical minerals has been years in the making and won’t be upended overnight. China has systematically engaged with Africa, including through its Belt and Road Initiative, for decades now, well outpacing the United States in resources and political attention committed to Africa. It is encouraging that the United States is more focused on African critical minerals, but progress establishing a significant U.S. mining presence will take time. And China will remain a major player in Africa, regardless. However, we conclude that U.S. interests justify this effort for many reasons, including diversifying its critical minerals supply chain while helping African nations retain some value for their mineral resources by doing more mineral processing.
The development of natural resources often heightens conflict, with security implications. Too often in African countries and elsewhere, the benefits of natural resource development go to too few, while many more bear its costs, including population displacement and environmental degradation. This can lead to resentment and even violent conflict. Unfortunately, African governments are challenged to manage these conflicts to see that the benefits of development are widely shared, and damages mitigated.
For example, the resource-rich northern region of Mozambique has suffered violent conflict recently. The roots of this violence vary, but there is little doubt that the jihadist groups that have killed tens of thousands of Mozambicans have seized upon general discontent with the development of natural gas and other natural resources to win some support among the populace. Thankfully, regional intervention has stemmed the violence, but the Mozambican government will have to do better to ensure that natural resource benefits are more broadly shared.
The Wagner Group, or what’s now called “Russia Africa Corps,” operates solely to enrich itself by propping up authoritarian and exploitative governments with security services, at no benefit to a nation’s people. There is no pretension of commercial transparency where this outfit operates —including Mali, the Central African Republic and Sudan — so it’s hard to make a definitive assessment, but this model exhibits no concern for how fairly resources are distributed, labor conditions or environmental standards, or the other potential downsides of natural resource development. In fact, there are numerous reports of Wagner forces killing African miners. Unfortunately, Africa has been cursed by Wagner-type exploiters going back centuries.
No doubt, mining is a challenging industry. One of the reasons that the U.S. critical mineral dependency is acute is that mining is unpopular at home and projects are often opposed. If we’re going to operate in African mining sectors, the United States should do so in the most responsible way possible.
Transparency and the rule of law are critical. If African countries are to attract the foreign investment from high-standard foreign operators needed to take advantage of this moment, they must respect that investment by honoring contracts and resisting arbitrary rulings and taking other irregular actions. U.S. and other Western mining operators will respond to mining project opportunities in Africa, but only if there is sufficient confidence in the business climate. If not, there are many competing investment opportunities worldwide.
One of the biggest challenges to greater investment in the African critical minerals sector is infrastructure. The mining and processing of critical minerals is energy intensive. Yet many African countries are energy starved. Critical minerals also must be moved to market. Unfortunately, African roads, railways and ports are lacking and inefficient. These challenges aren’t insurmountable, but they’re formidable. That’s why the Biden administration has focused on the Lobito Corridor project linking Zambia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Angola, an example of what can be done to improve infrastructure.
The United States needs to diversify its critical minerals supply chain, especially away from China. Certain African countries can play an important role. It’s going to take a lot of effort, however, for the United States to be a serious player in the mining sector.
The good news is that many Africans are eager to have U.S. investment, reducing dependence on China. But only a few U.S. mining companies operate in Africa. The U.S. government is aiming to change that.
This report makes many recommendations to better support U.S. and Western mining operations in Africa. The senior study group offers several proposals to strengthen the U.S. Development Finance Corporation, a critical agency in this effort, for example. The United States needs a much stronger commercial diplomacy presence on the ground in Africa. Prospective mining opportunities are best identified in person. But U.S. embassies in Africa are woefully understaffed, including in key critical mineral-producing countries. We do have allies in this critical minerals effort. The United States and several other countries have created the Minerals Security Partnership to diversify supplies and “ensure that critical minerals are produced, processed, and recycled in a manner that supports countries in realizing the full economic development benefit of their mineral resources.” We suggest ways to strengthen that partnership, including better engaging African states.
The United States should be realistic regarding critical minerals in Africa. There will be limits to the impact of its policies, however constructive. Ultimately, Africans, not foreigners, will decide how their critical minerals are developed. Hopefully it will contribute to their economic development. And it is private mining and companies in related industries that will or won’t invest in African countries. But the U.S. government has an important role to play, especially in de-risking mining investment — assisting African civil society in strengthening the rule of law, coordinating and strengthening U.S. investment programs, and facilitating knowledge and skills sharing and development with Africans. We recommend that more attention and resources should be devoted to African critical minerals aimed at creating mutually beneficial relationships with African partners. U.S. economic and national defense interests warrant it.
That made me laugh. Sharp wit!
You see, this is where you have fallen into the media trap. Along with the declaration to “shut down” USAID, Rubio, the Secretary of State immediately triggered the protocols to waive direct emergency humanitarian relief, and that at this hour, funds are still being provided.
https://www.state.gov/emergency-humanitarian-waiver-to-foreign-assistance-pause/
The sick thing is that the money launderers who were using their NGOS and foundation grants to front money laundering by “helping” people may be hurt in the short run until they can reapply for direct grants. For example, the Clintons are massive grant recipients of USAID money; how is it that they, including Chelsea are worth close to $100M since initiating their “foundation”? We are going to find out how sincere these foundation trustees are about their “causes” by writing bridge checks from the money they have stolen from the American people.
The fact is, Americans voted to clean up the waste in government, and that is exactly what the administration is giving them. Who knew it was as bad as it was? The only people to blame here are the thieves and scum that have hidden behind the guise of humanitarian aid to become obscenely rich or to further their bizarre agendas.
@Annie, I will read your article on Africa later. Thank you for that.
A person I know, wife got laid off for not returning to office work.
But these work habits remind me when I was in East Germany. I was talking to a brick layer. He was telling me that under the DDR government you go to work in the morning and lay bricks until you run out and go home. I asked what if the bring another load of bricks? He said we will do those bricks tomorrow and if they don’t bring any, we go home but still get paid.
