Africans must learn to control their own resources

WHETHER THROUGH PEACETIME or wartime, Africa’s natural resources have always been attractive to those outside the continent. In Africa’s modern day economy, extractive industry remains the major source of national revenues, especially as governments depend on the export of these commodities for running their countries’ affairs. Produce from farm and non-farm agriculture or from minerals have been historically massively moved away to other countries, particularly in the Western hemisphere. Notwithstanding the long history of this, the practice still remains till now and even appears likely to be more pronounced in the future. Under the subsisting arrangements, the importing countries have been the greater beneficiaries while the exporting countries have remained at a disadvantage within the context of the global value chain. The prevailing arrangements seem like such as have been — and continues to be — skewed in favour of the importing countries and against the commodity-dependent exporting countries. Trade relations have proved this to be true over the years. Considering the failed Asia, Caribbean and Pacific- European Union’s (ACP-EU’s) Economic Partnership Agreement and World Trade Organisation’s (WTO’s) Doha Development Agenda, any commitment to Africa’s development could be described at best as mere lip service.

Where tariff bands on exported commodities discourage value addition at the countries of origin, these measures look like hidden tactics to discourage the exporting countries from gaining much from their export commodities while exponential gains accrue to the importing countries where the price benchmarks are mostly determined. In agriculture, cocoa and coffee exports are prominent examples. Although the WTO is at the forefront of global free trade, it is obviously missing out on something. If the trade in cocoa and coffee presumably fails to meet key criteria on fair trade, a worse description probably suits trade in mineral exports. It is the trade in minerals that is at the centre of the crisis between the global North and the global South, particularly the African continent now. The endowment of Africa with abundance of mineral resources is not in doubt. What is worrisome, however, is how these minerals are being extracted and exported to develop the global North, leaving Africa to grapple with the social, economic, political and environmental consequences of mineral extraction. 

Rather than abating, the urge to import minerals from Africa by the countries in the global North will be on the increase, especially under the Fourth Industrial Revolution era, and more especially as more technologies are emerging that will make greater demands on many different types of minerals that their deposits are in abundance in Africa. The increase in demand is engendering a variety of approaches directly or indirectly used by supply chain operators. These approaches are either seemingly innocuous, mild, benign or deadly. Those going through unofficial channels sometimes appear cheaper or costlier, with human rights and commodity quality often compromised. They often take the deadly form. 

Those going through official channels have recently become objects and subjects of controversies at political and diplomatic levels. In Africa, more and more political leaders are beginning to question the traditional mineral export procedures, preferring rather to decide rules of the game instead of dancing to the tunes of the foreign miners who come in to operate in Africa. They are now waking up to the realisation that the foreign miners have been short-changing their countries for far too long and want to put an end to prior unfair deals. 

The unofficial trade in minerals in Africa has been more of a scourge or curse. A particular commodity common to three African countries that have been at war in the past, involving rivals within, is diamond. The role of diamond trade in financing the wars in Angola, Liberia and Sierra Leone led to international condemnation of the trade in what was dubbed “conflict diamonds,” “blood diamonds” or “illicit diamonds.” Blood diamonds are diamonds mined in a war zone and sold to finance an insurgency, an invading army’s war efforts, terrorism, or a warlord’s activity. This term can be applied to other commodities under similar conditions, like the case of gold, which could conveniently be referred to as blood gold. Angola’s return to war was funded by the international diamond trade, with UNITA forces earning at least $3.72 billion from illicitly obtained rough diamonds mined in the country, as the war raged on, between 1992 and 1998, according to Global Witness, quoted by the World Diamond Council. That constituted about 93 percent of all Angolan diamond sales during the period. The diamond mines served as the chief source of UNITA’s money, arms, and fuel during the war.

For 14 years of the war spearheaded by Charles Taylor in Liberia, he was a trader in arms, timber and minerals and initiator of the first phase of the Liberian civil war. Charles Taylor, who later became Liberian President, was found guilty of aiding and abetting forces in Sierra Leone that committed war crimes and other atrocities; during Sierra Leone’s brutal 10-year civil war, in which approximately 75,000 civilians were killed. The Revolutionary United Front (RUF) leaders were aware that whoever controls the diamond mines controls Sierra Leone. They used profits from smuggled diamonds to fund their attacks. According to the UN report, the RUF’s diamond trade was estimated at something between $25 million and $125 million a year. For Sierra Leone, diamonds are a curse and a blessing. A blessing only as the same resource could help make the country one of the richest in Africa. It was a curse in that it contributed to the civil war that left thousands dead.

Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo also known as Hemedti, leader of Sudan’s paramilitary Rapid Support Services (RSF), who is very rich, has been accused of illicit gold plundering, involving illicit gold mining and sales. In the ongoing war in Sudan, the illegal smuggling of these minerals has deprived governments of crucial tax revenues that could be used for public services. Yet, a gold mining boom takes a human toll, while the real figure, including illicit artisanal mining sponsored by military forces, remains a guesswork. A de facto split in Sudan’s gold-mining areas and forms of illicit minerals has been reinforced and amplified as Sudan’s militia leader is allegedly part of illegal gold sales, with Dagalo at the centre as illegal gold trade by both RSF and Army is used to generate funds to pump weapons into Sudan. Some Asian impostors were reportedly caught off guard recently in Kenya, in which seven Chinese nationals were convicted of illegal mining in Kenya’s West Pokot. 

In the DR Congo where armed groups are fighting for the control of minerals, tech giant Apple disputed the claims filed against its subsidiaries in France and Belgium. The DR Congo had filed a criminal complaint against the tech giant for using conflict minerals in its supply chain. The company said it has told suppliers not to use minerals sourced from the DR Congo or Rwanda. But rights groups wanted immediate action against conflict minerals. They said some mines in DR Congo are run by armed groups involved in war crimes. DR Congo is a major source of tin, tantalum, and tungsten that are used in computers and phones. The country is estimated to have $24 trillion worth of mineral deposits. This is a microcosm of the dilemma of Africa and a major reason why many Western countries are unlikely to be willing to let go of control over Africa. In particular, the enablers of corrupt practices from within and outside Africa are actively working against the economic emancipation of the continent. This is partly responsible for why political leaders that do not fall in line with the foreign beneficiaries are treated with scorn, disdain or are easily eliminated. Cyril Ramaphosa, South Africa’s president, once said in a global forum that “Africa should never be seen as a continent that needs generosity. We want to be treated as equals. There should be a good measure of equality among sovereign nations. Our sovereignty is one of the things we hold on dearly to. During COVID-19 and in relation to vaccine access, we felt like life in the northern hemisphere is much more important than life in the global south. And these are issues that need to be addressed.” 

But very recently, some African leaders that chose to turn the tide in favour of their countries by reviewing the official agreements on mining have been variously under attack. Since 2017, since John Magufuli, then Tanzania’s president, signed into law new mining bills which require the government to own at least a 16 percent stake in mining projects as well as increase royalties tax on gold and other minerals, he has come under intense criticisms in what appeared like a well coordinated propaganda and smear campaigns, particularly from foreign media. He also insisted that raw minerals be processed within the country to add value before export. His government was tagged undemocratic and brutal. The attacks stopped immediately after his death that was purportedly from his non-compliance with COVID-19 protocols, particularly the vaccinations. While all this was happening, many non-performing leaders of other countries appeared to have been taking note. In 2021, Félix Tshisekedi, president of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DR Congo), called for a review of mining contracts signed with China in 2008 by his  predecessor because they were not sufficiently benefiting the country’s citizens. His government therefore was poised to review its $6 billion “infrastructure-for-minerals” deal with Chinese investors. Since the military took over in Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, all three have changed their policies on mining.

Recently, Niger Republic in partnership with an Emirati company, teamed up to establish its first gold refinery and gemstone processing units. This venture will comprise a gold refinery, jewelry manufacturing, and a gemstone cutting and polishing center in Niger. The latest is Burkina Faso where military leader, Ibrahim Traoré, is calling the bluff of foreign powers, choosing instead to concentrate on local miners. He too has already begun having serious backlash from disgruntled foreign powers who claim that Traoré was using the wealth accruing from mineral exports to fortify himself. 

Of course, Captain Traoré stands out as a beacon of hope and a positive reference point in patriotism for Africans. However, his patriotism is scorned by those who would want to keep plundering the mineral and agricultural resources of Africa through malleable allies. Africans who are disappointed with the negative responses from the West need to remember what an economist, Professor Howard Nicholas, said some years ago about Africa. According to Nicholas, the poor state of development in Africa was deliberate. Nicholas talked about how the global economic system keeps Africa impoverished, dependent on raw material production, and unable to industrialise. He explained how Western countries keep Africa poor for their own survival, using economic structures and institutions. He highlighted six economic structures that keep Africa poor: namely aid, debts, foreign loans, monopoly buying structures, international economic institutions, and destruction of food self-sufficiency. Against these backdrops, the songs of two different singers from Côte d’Ivoire resonate well, allegorically.

The first song of reference, although a personal story of the singer, is about learning not to be fooled twice. If Africa has been fooled under the illusion of political independence, it is time to refuse to continue to be fooled. Francophone countries in particular have come to a point in time when they should declare permanent independence from the vice grip of France. From Côte d’Ivoire nearly 25 years ago emerged this interesting street song that rocked West Africa. Nigeria, an Anglophone country, was particularly thrilled as many Nigerian lovers of trending songs took it on their lips without even knowing or understanding the wordings of the song or whatever they meant. The superficial, literal and allegorical applications of the song are important in the discourse about post-independent African countries, particularly the francophone. Originally recorded in 1999 but released in 2002, the hit song by Ivorian Zouglou artists, a musical group known as Magic System, was sang by lead singer Salif “A’Salfo”, and the song which means first time fool, or “first fool” in urban Abidjan slang, is not really the fool, but the The real fool is the one that allows himself to be fooled twice (niata) (or Nouchi).

On dit premier gaou n’est pas gaou, oh

C’est le deuxième gaou qui est niata, oh.” 

And the second allegory, from another Ivorian singer, was a bit of lamentations. Tiken Jah Fakoly, in his song, released in 2016, mourned the reality that whilst Africa is geographically one of the richest nations on earth, its people are some of the poorest. According to him: 

“Ils ont partagé le monde, plus rien ne m’étonne.” (They have shared the world, nothing surprises me anymore). 

It is now up to Africans to mend the broken walls, refuse to be fooled again and retrieve what has been shared. Looking to the West that shared the world has proved disappointing over the past decades. For every African leader or follower it is time to look inward.

• business a.m. commits to publishing a diversity of views, opinions and comments. It, therefore, welcomes your reaction to this and any of our articles via email: comment@businessamlive.com