WARNING: This is Version 1 of my old archive, so Photos will NOT work and many links will NOT work. But you can find articles by searching on the Titles. There is a lot of information in this archive. Use the SEARCH BAR at the top right. Prior to December 2012; I was a pro-Christian type of Conservative. I was unaware of the mass of Jewish lies in history, especially the lies regarding WW2 and Hitler. So in here you will find pro-Jewish and pro-Israel material. I was definitely WRONG about the Boeremag and Janusz Walus. They were for real.
Original Post Date: 2007-03-01 Time: 00:00:00 Posted By: Jan
The Herald
OPINION
February 27, 2007
Jeffrey Gogo
Harare
THERE is a new Scramble for Africa, targeted at the continent’s natural resources.
Not that this is an entirely new phenomenon. Far from it. It is now camouflaged under glossy terms such as globalisation or foreign direct investment.
Nothing wrong with FDI or globalisation per se, but the stampede by transnational corporations to secure the lion’s share of Africa’s platinum, oil, gold, natural gas, uranium or diamond wealth has triggered memories of the parcelling out of Africa by its ersthwhile colonisers at Berlin in 1884.
Most international corporations are in the habit of repatriating profits generated from Africa back to their home countries with little or nothing filtering down to the local communities, many of whom continue to live in poverty.
There have been growing concerns by economic analysts here and elsewhere that China’s foray into Africa was tantamount to recolonisation.
The West is obviously getting jittery at China’s growing influence in Africa, particularly in oil-rich Angola. The West has always treated Angola as one of its “protectorates” given the ideiological dimensions its two-decades-long civil war.
China, the world’s fastest growing economy, argues its African investment drive — which is expected to rise to US$100 billion by 2012 — is premised on its energy needs and trade expansion than political considerations.
China has also made it clear that it does not believe in “middlemen” and prefers to deal directly with the producers. Hence, it does not understand why it should buy African diamonds from the Oppenheimers of this world when it can do business with the owners.
But Africa has every reason to worry when international companies begin to fight for a stake in Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea and Angola’s oil, Zimbabwe’s diamonds and platinum, Zambia’s copper, South Africa’s gold, coal, platinum and uranium, Botswana’s diamonds and many other resources far too numerous to mention here.
Perhaps, this explains why African governments believe they deserve more from foreign mining company investments than they are currently getting.
No wonder, Africa has been edging towards higher taxation and indigenisation policies for the benefit of the local populace.
Most indigenous people are sidelined from mining in Africa due to lack of capital resources.
To counteract this, governments across Africa, particularly Zimbabwe and South Africa, have enacted laws that encourage participation by locals in foreign-owned mining conglomerates.
In Zimbabwe, for example, expatriate firms are required to cede at least 15 percent of their total issued share capital to blacks.
Recently, Government also nationalised diamond mining at Marange following an influx of foreigners who were buying the precious stone at giveaway prices before smuggling it to regional markets.
Almost similar laws are in force in South Africa. Like in Zimbabwe, local communities were sidelined from mainstream economic activity by the minority white population.
In what appears to be another case of the resource nationalism in developing nations, Zambia recently hiked income tax and royalties payable by mining companies by 3 percent.
Those who were not happy with this new dispensation were free to pack their bags, the Zambian government said. As turned out, not even a single company left. In other words, the 3 percent tax was a pittance compared to what they were repatriating.
There was a hue and cry last year after the Zimbabwe Government announced plans to take up a 51 percent shareholding in all foreign-owned mines. But it’s still business as usual for the companies that were vocal in protesting at what they called “the nationalisation of our assets”.
Speaking during Zimbabwe’s 26th independence anniversary last year, President Mugabe told the nation that the time had come for Zimbabweans to take control of their natural resources.
“The non-renewable resources are ours in the first place. The investor will get a reward, but that reward should be balanced with what we keep for ourselves,” President Mugabe said.
Relevant Links
Southern Africa
Zimbabwe
Sustainable Development
Asia, Australia, and Africa
Mining
Economy, Business and Finance
The President was responding to concerns raised by multinational companies after Mines and Mining Development Minister Ambassador Amos Midzi announced a proposed mining law that sought to give Government and indigenous Zimbabweans a majority stake in mining firms.
Justifying the need for such a law, President Mugabe said: “It should be clearly stated that foreign investment should take cognisance of our Indigenous and Empowerment Policy and programmes under which equity balances between foreigners and Zimbabweans are regulated.”
That is as it should be.
Source: The Herald
URL: http://allafrica.com/stories/200702270892.htm…br>
[Posted by: ]