An employee of Logistique Petroliere in Madagascar. Photo: Flickr user DavidDarricau

Ayo Johnson, a Worldfocus contributing blogger, writes about extraction of natural resources in Africa. The piece is excerpted from his blog, Africa Speak International.

The truth is that Africa is the next new frontier of mineral exploration. With major stakeholders battling, wilding and conniving their charm against a complex network of shady deals to outwit the cool, smart and calculative moves of the Chinese.

Africa’s strategic importance cannot be underplayed nor its value cheapened. Its geographical positioning and untapped mineral wealth make it a unique selling proposition to any investor. The trading ability of any multinational company is dependent on contracts signed and memorandum of understandings reached between hosts and investing governments.

African countries, dissatisfied by unequal trading relationships with the rest of the world, have hardened their political stance. China’s current interest in Africa is only a convenient opportunity for African governments to support another would-be investor.

China’s relationship building with Africa over the past 10 years has left the continent in relatively decent shape. African governments have realized that they need trade far more than aid. They need fair term without carrot and stick approach linked to investment. Africans clearly understand that they can choose between China from the East versus the rest of the world.

China has stolen the lead in Africa with over $60 billion worth of investment and untold influence.

Virtually in slow motion, overnight the Chinese had taken a grip of mineral extraction with Europe and the U.S. a distant fourth. Behind Russia and Brazil — both major players in their own right.

Industrialized nations’ appetite for oil goes unabated despite calls from pressure groups. Governments need to diversify into large scale production of new greener cleaner technologies of wind, solar and hydro. Wars in the Middle East, combined with strained relationships with many other oil-producing countries, have forced the West to look for new suppliers of oil.

China is also desperate; its rapid growth and technological advancement have increased its appetite for energy to fuel its enormous economy. This is the central driving force that justifies it presence in Africa. China’s dominance across the continent has come at a price. The Chinese have built bridges, road and general infrastructure all for free — in a bid to guarantee access to Africa’s precious minerals.

China has also provided soft loans to African governments, namely Angola, Sudan, Zambia, Congo and Rwanda as a means of raising much needed private capital outside of the framework of the IMF and the World Bank.

The Chinese have not imposed conditionality packages as part of their loan agreements, unlike the stringent and detrimental conditionality packages imposed by industrialized nations. Instead China has requested that African governments in receipt of Chinese money do business with Chinese companies and buy goods from Chinese firms.

Guaranteeing that the circulation of money is kept strictly with the China-Africa trade zone squeezes Western products and firms out of the picture. There are now little Chinatown enclaves popping up all over Africa with cheap Chinese goods replacing Western brand names.

It is therefore not surprising that President Obama visited Africa, flagged by an extended trip to various mineral hot spots by Hillary Clinton. The U.S. is eager to show support to Africa and to rekindle influence in a bid to up root and dislodge the Chinese iron grip on the continent.

African leaders and their advisers have finally awakened, realizing what the new type of global politics is all about. Who are the new major players, and what choices have to be made?

Africa finds itself in a very unique position to be able to choose among multiple investors all bidding for the same job. This increases the value of Africa’s currency, ensuring that the best deals are signed.

Africa’s choice will be at the expense of Western governments and their respective multinational companies. A liberalized continent is voting with its feet and changing suppliers, manufacturers and investors all at the same time. This is ground-breaking and truly unprecedented.

While Obama has spoken with Chinese leaders in depth about business and trade, human rights issues have not been the main topic of the bilateral dialogue.

Daljit Dhaliwal talks about China’s new role with Jamie Metzl, executive vice president of the Asia Society. He says that China may emerge as a strategic partner.

Worldfocus correspondent Edie Magnus and producer Ara Ayer interviewed Velasco in Santiago in July.  His interview will be featured in several Worldfocus stories on Chile, including Chile squirrels away copper fortunes and spends prudently. This is part of our ongoing series looking at how other nations tackle complex policy issues.

In this wide-ranging discussion,  Velasco speaks about Chile’s privatization of social security, its past and present economic policy, and the lessons advisors have learned from economic cycles of the past.

Here, CCTV reports on Vladimir Putin’s first visit to China since he became prime minister in May 2008. Putin and Chinese premier Wen Jiabao signed $3.5 billion in natural gas and other trade agreements.

Even with the embargo, the United States is Cuba’s fifth largest trading partner — there are exemptions on food sales to the island. Photo: USDA

There’s no reason to be surprised by President Obama’s decision this week to renew the U.S. embargo with Cuba — he was sticking the script followed by presidents since John F. Kennedy.

Not doing so would throw a wrench into his efforts in Congress on universal health care. Without even arguing pro or con on the issue, let’s just state the obvious — the president is dealing with pressing matters that take front-burner attention right now. Cuba and Latin America are way down on the list of problems to deal with.

All this despite the emptiness and loneliness of the embargo. Many Americans don’t realize the oddities of the U.S. stance — it can’t be called a policy. Something like 178 other countries have normal diplomatic relations with Cuba. Even with the embargo, the United States is Cuba’s fifth largest trading partner — there are exemptions on food sales to the island.

A majority of Cuban Americans now support an end to the embargo. Some of the most vociferous supporters of a change are midwestern Republicans, who want to open new markets for their constituents. And it should be made clear: Those suffering the most are the Cuban people, not the Cuban government.

President Obama’s decision therefore may be disappointing to the coalition of Americans who think it’s time to acknowledge the failure of the 50-year economic embargo of Cuba. But they won’t scream as hard as the other side would if the president endorsed a new policy. Obama can’t stand potential defections of support for the health care bill.

Cubans in Cuba and Miami tend to see their own issue as the only issue. But even they know the reality.

The Cuban government has expressed doubt for some time that Obama would strike up a new, close friendship with the Communist country. Ricardo Alarcon, the president of Cuba’s National assembly, told me in Havana this year that he hoped, but didn’t think the new president would live up to his billing as an agent of change.

Watch: Cuba embraces Obama and clamors to end the embargo.

Any idea of quick change comes from an early flurry of talk that Obama might be willing to drop a travel ban to Cuba affecting most U.S. citizens. There was a lot of noise in the spring when Obama suggested changes in U.S. Cuban policy. But he’s taken minor steps other than to eliminate restrictions imposed by George W. Bush on Cuban Americans traveling and sending more to relatives on the island.

Actually, there were two small changes that are worth mentioning. One is that the United States and Cuba have begun holding regular occasional meetings on immigration and other matters. So there is some level of official contact between the countries. There was also an odd contact point recently when Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico paid a visit to Havana and said he held unofficial meetings with high-ranking Cuban officials. It’s not clear whether he was carrying water for the president or not, and it’s also not clear who he really met with, besides Alarcon.

The real point person on Cuba and Latin America should be Arturo Valenzuela, who President Obama has designated as the deputy assistant secretary of state for Inter-American Affairs. He’s not on the job yet — Congress is stalling on confirmation hearings.

Latin America, as usual, is an afterthought in U.S. foreign policy planning.

- Peter Eisner

Michael Novacek, provost of science at the American Museum of Natural History, joins Martin Savidge to discuss scientific methods used to fight the ivory trade and animals that are at risk.

The real test for China may be if the country can commit to hard targets under a new Copenhagen climate treaty.

I was once concerned that Congressional fury over China’s undervalued currency and our huge bilateral trade deficit would combine with resentment over the costs of climate change legislation, and over China not doing enough to curb its emissions.

Climate and energy — far from becoming a new area of cooperation between the U.S. and China, as I have advocated — would instead become a new irritant in the relationship, and climate negotiations would devolve into even more bitter fingerpointing across the Pacific, delaying progress on the fight against global warming. Most recently, Paul Krugman explains why we don’t have any time to waste.

So far, at least, this train wreck has not come to pass. China has taken impressive steps on energy conservation, as this report from my colleagues at the Center for American Progress details. Beijing may even reject the Hummer deal on environmental grounds — how very sane.

The real test, though, is whether China will commit itself to hard targets under a new Copenhagen climate treaty. Meanwhile, in Washington, the Waxman-Markey legislation, which creates a cap and trade system for carbon, just passed the House. It would slap tariffs onto goods from countries that do not accept limits on global warming emissions, but only after a whole bunch of criteria are met and other remedies tried first. Given the politics, that showed real restraint. Overall the bill is far from ideal. It is, nevertheless, something.

President Obama has gone farther to head a trade/climate collision off at the pass by announcing Sunday that he didn’t support the trade sanctions in the cap and trade legislation. He gets a two-fer for this, in typical Obama Administration fashion. First, he is showing leadership on international trade. Protectionist measures are being enacted all over the world despite promises to the contrary, and in the lead up to the G-8 and G-20 meetings in Italy next week, this shows wise economic leadership on a tough issue that does threaten to exacerbate the current crisis, according to most experts.

His statements also serve the U.S. from a climate negotiation point of view. They signal to countries, particularly China, that the Administration will negotiate in good faith and hold off on trade punishments if they are forthcoming at Copenhagen – if.  Let us hope they are.

- Nina Hachigian

Photo courtesy of Flickr user PeacePlusOne under a Creative Commons license.

A vendor in Cuba.

About a year before the Iraq War began, I had a chat with a U.S. Coast Guard officer who had been assigned to work with his Cuban counterparts in Havana on drug interdiction, piracy and other maritime issues. Those interchanges were more than useful, the officer said, and such cooperation made a real difference in U.S. security efforts.

The problem was that he had to work quietly and unnoticed. He heard criticism and reprimands from back home any time the Bush administration got a whiff of “too much” cooperation. Eventually, he got shut down, along with most other contacts between the United States and Cuba.

Last week, the State Department told the Cuban government it wants to resume twice-yearly talks with Cuba about migration issues, which were suspended by George W. Bush in 2004. Presumably, the Coast Guard would have a role there once again, and that is helpful in monitoring safety — potentially even terrorism — on the high seas.

Cuban officials quoted by the Miami Herald were enthusiastic:

A spokesman at the interests section [Cuba’s diplomatic representation in Washington], Alberto González, said Cuba ‘is always in the best position to sit at the table and talk about any kind of topic with the U.S., including immigration…It’s important for us, it’s important for the United States.

Timing is everything. President Obama announced a series of concessions earlier this year, just before attending the Summit of the Americas meeting in Trinidad. In that case, he rolled back Bush administration restrictions on travel and money transfers by Cuban exiles in the United States to the island. He also authorized new communications licensing measures with Cuba.

This time, the decision on migration precedes a visit by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to the 39th General Assembly of the Organization of American States in Honduras on June 2 and 3. In both cases, the changes look like they were aimed at defusing criticism of U.S. policy on Cuba. Many world leaders — almost all in this hemisphere — are urging Obama to drop the half-century old Cuban trade embargo.

A majority of Americans — even a majority of Cuban Americans polled in Miami — support an end to the embargo. A small group of politicians in the United States loudly protest any changes in U.S.-Cuba policy, demanding democratic reforms in Cuba that are unlikely to come any time soon.

The latest changes take U.S.-Cuban relations basically back to where they were when the Bush administration took office. But there’s no sign that Obama will drop the trade embargo altogether any time soon.

- Peter Eisner

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Paul Keller under a Creative Commons license.

A fence at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Over the last year, Mexico has been swept up in a tidal wave of drug violence. Things have gotten so bad that, according to a recent Pentagon report, the country risks a “sudden collapse.” For more, listen to our online radio show on Mexico’s war on drugs.

On Wednesday, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived in Mexico for a series of high level talks. Not only does the Pentagon assessment have Mexican officials bristling, there are lingering resentments over other issues too — there’s a growing trade dispute and ill will over the construction of that giant border fence.

Worldfocus editorial consultant Peter Eisner, the former deputy foreign editor of the Washington Post, writes about engaging with Mexico and its troubles rather than building fences.

“Show me a 50-foot fence, and I’ll show you a 51-foot ladder.”

That quote from Janet Napolitano when she was governor of Arizona makes more sense every day. Napolitano, now the Secretary of Homeland Security, was referring to the multibillion dollar, 700-mile long fence being built along the U.S.-Mexican border.

The idea of the controversial fence was to stop illegal immigration and drug trafficking across the border. Many people — including most people in the Mexican government — agree with Napolitano that the fence was a bad idea.

For many, the fence has come to symbolize arrogance and disinterest in dealing with real issues, such as poverty that fuels immigration, and consumer demand that supports the multibillion dollar cocaine, marijuana and heroin trade out of Mexico.

And if anybody in the United States still thinks the fence can hide the uncomfortable reality across the Rio Grande, they’re deceived.

The wave of drug violence in Mexico is bleeding over into the United States, and U.S. military officials fear a worse scenario: One Pentagon study says that Mexico, like Pakistan, faces the prospect of being unable to deal with the violence and could become a failed state.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is diving right into talks about drug cooperation, trade and other issues today and tomorrow in Mexico City and Monterrey. And President Obama is scheduled to go to Mexico in less than a month.

The administration has an opportunity to come up with answers that would include engagement with the Mexican government rather than building barriers. The answers will probably be costly, but there is rising sentiment in Washington that Mexico can’t be left, as one analyst recently said, to “muddle through somehow” on its own.

- Peter Eisner

Photo courtesy of Flickr user jcarter under a Creative Commons license.

Worldfocus special correspondent Peter Eisner and producer Ara Ayer venture to Cuba and report that from agriculture to medicine to oil, the island is a sea of lost opportunity for American businesses.

Also, listen to our radio show exploring the roots of U.S.-Cuban relations and potential changes under President Barack Obama.

Alison Smith, Washington correspondent for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, joins Martin Savidge to discuss trade between the two countries, Canada’s troop presence in Afghanistan and Obama’s popularity with Canadians.

Below, read what Canadian bloggers thought of Obama’s visit and trade developments.

Blogger “Tanveer” writes that Obama’s brief trip will not sufficiently address the trade issue, or any other:

How can any of us take such notions seriously when he’s only allocating six hours to discuss issues that are of high importance to the United States’ biggest trading partner? Can we really expect Harper and Obama to make any grounds regarding the “Buy American” clause featured in Obama’s much hyped stimulus package?

[...]Americans of course are welcome to rally around Obama; he is after all their president. However, Canadians are in need of a wake-up call to realize that what Obama does might be good for America, but that doesn’t mean it will be good for Canada as well.

Blogger “jayesswhy” points out that New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton has proposed a “Buy Canadian” measure in response to the “Buy American” provision, arguing against it:

So why, at this crucial moment when the US is considering a “buy American” policy that would shut out Canadian producers from their largest market, would Mr. Layton suggest an antagonistic policy like “buy Canadian”? How would we begin to convince our biggest trade partner not to institute a “buy American” policy, while we turn around an institute one of our own? This is the other side of the argument that ideological anti-free traders like Mr. Layton conveniently miss, and it is a point on which I think they are far too infrequently pressed on.

User “Rob” comments on a story about George W. Bush’s scheduled speech in Calgary, his first since leaving office:

It’s amazing that Canadians do not respect [Bush] more. He did a lot for this country from opening the borders for cattle, to ending the softwood lumber, to his energy policies. Look, [Obama] is in office for less then a month and we are already battling Democratic protectionist policies that would hurt Canada’s economy. We as Canadians need to wake up to the fact that the platform of the Democratic Party in the U.S. hurts Canada’s economy, and instead of hating the Republicans, we should hope their open trade policies win over the next 2 years.

Chinese President Hu Jintao ended his tour of four African nations this week, having promised to deepen ties with the continent. See where President Hu visited by scrolling down to our interactive map.

A lot of chatter has surrounded China’s interests in Africa. Media have branded China’s role in Africa as an invasion or an era of neo-colonialism with ulterior motives of pillaging Africa’s raw materials. Rhetoric from Chinese and African leaders includes words like “friendship,” “partnership” and “brotherhood,” stressing a shared history and common experience.

Worldfocus traveled to East Africa last summer to explore the strengthening trading ties among China and African countries — Sino-African trade amounted to almost $107 billion last year and has expanded tenfold since 2000. Chinese investment has encouraged new infrastructure projects and growth on the continent.

Some of this trade, however, involves countries like Sudan and Zimbabwe, where human rights abuses have been cited. Some also criticize the flood of cheap Chinese goods because it has eliminated Africans’ jobs.

Worldfocus.org’s weekly radio show examined the roots of the China-Africa relationship dating back 50 years, exploring what it means for Africa and China and whether the U.S. has become an uncomfortable third wheel.

Worldfocus anchor Martin Savidge hosted the following guests:

Li Anshan is a professor at the School of International Studies, Peking University and the director of the Institute of Afro-Asian Studies. His publications include “A History of Chinese Overseas in Africa” and “Social History of Chinese Overseas in Africa: Selected Documents, 1800-2005,” among others. His interests include African history, China-African relations, colonialism, Chinese overseas, comparative nationalism and development studies.

David H. Shinn is a former Ambassador to Ethiopia and Burkina Faso. He is currently an adjunct professor at George Washington University. Amb. Shinn’s research interests include Africa, terrorism, Islamic fundamentalism and U.S. foreign policy in Africa. He also blogs regularly here.

Mariana van Zeller is is a correspondent for Vanguard, an original documentary series on Current TV. She’s a native of Portugal and has spent the last several years traveling the globe to cover the emerging trends that are reshaping our world. Mariana has reported on conflict, immigration and the environment. In 2008, she traveled to Angola to produce the documentary “Chinatown, Africa,” which examines China’s rapidly growing presence on the continent.

Each year since 1991, a Chinese foreign minister has selected Africa as the first overseas trip. China has diplomatic relations with 49 of Africa’s 53 countries and has ambassadors in all these countries, except for Somalia due to the security situation. Below is an interactive map detailing recent visits by President Hu Jintao and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao to African nations. Click on the highlighted African countries below to see China’s recent high-level visits.

Credits:
Host: Martin Savidge
Producers: Lisa Biagiotti, Katie Combs and Stephen Puschel

Jan. 1 marked the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Revolution, when the nation’s U.S.-backed government was overthrown and Fidel Castro took power. A few years later, in 1962, the U.S. instituted a trade embargo against Cuba designed to pressure the communist government.

President Barack Obama has said he plans to ease travel and remittances restrictions for Cuban-Americans, but will keep the embargo in place.

Half a century after the Cuban Revolution of 1959, Worldfocus looks back to the roots of U.S.-Cuban relations and forward to the potentially changing relations under President Obama. Worldfocus.org and anchor Martin Savidge discuss what Americans don’t know about Cuba and the history of American policy.

Martin Savidge hosts a panel of guests to discuss U.S.-Cuban relations:

Peter Eisner is the editorial consultant for Worldfocus and a long-time Latin American foreign correspondent. Peter is a 30-year veteran of international news and has held editorial positions at The Washington Post, Newsday and The Associated Press. Peter is also working on a book about the history of Cuba.

Arturo Lopez-Levy is a lecturer at the University of Denver and the University of Colorado. Born in Cuba, Arturo served in the Cuban army and graduated from the Higher Institute of International Relations in Havana. He then worked as a political analyst for the Cuban government, but resigned after two years and later moved to the U.S. He holds a master’s degree in international affairs from Columbia University and is a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Denver.

Wayne Smith directs the Cuba Program at the Center for International Policy. He is a visiting professor of Latin American Studies and director of the University of Havana exchange program at Johns Hopkins University. During his 25 years with the U.S. State Department, Wayne served as executive secretary of President Kennedy’s Latin American Task Force and chief of mission at the U.S. Interests Section in Havana. In addition, he served in Argentina, Brazil and the Soviet Union.

Associated thumbnail courtesy of Flickr user trailofdead1 under a Creative Commons license.

Credits:
Host: Martin Savidge
Producers: Lisa Biagiotti, Katie Combs and Stephen Puschel

Shannon O’Neil, a specialist on Latin America at the Council on Foreign Relations, speaks with Martin Savidge about Obama’s position on Cuba, the future of relations with Cuba and Venezuela and major trade issues that are currently under review in Congress.

Some of this trade, however, involves countries like Sudan and Zimbabwe, where human rights abuses have been cited. China is a permanent member of the United Nation’s Security Council, and the nation’s self-interest in Africa has been criticized for blocking U.N. action in Darfur and ultimately helping to fuel the crisis there.

In Kenya, the Chinese are building roads, shipping in goods and selling them in Chinese-owned shops. Kenyans are learning Chinese and Chinese are learning Swahili.

Listen to our online radio show on China’s role in Africa and view an interactive map of China’s recent diplomatic efforts on the continent.

Worldfocus special correspondent Martin Seemungal and producer Yuval Lion report from Kenya and Tanzania on China’s aggressive moves into the region’s marketplace.