A 'letter' to my fellow Africans
Even when not at war in a military sense, countries are generally engaged in a struggle for economic power and players in the international system are increasingly regarding the health of their economies as a priority. Despite the Cold War having long ended, the primacy of insecurity - the infinite striving for security - has not. It is presently manifested in both economic and psychological realms, as countries seek to increase economic competitiveness and to reduce unemployment within their borders.
Historically, the goal was to secure and extend the physical control of territory, and to gain diplomatic influence over foreign governments. Today's corresponding geoeconomic goal is not to attain the highest possible standard of living, but rather the conquest and protection of desirable roles in the global economy.
There will be long-term (perhaps permanent) 'winners' and 'losers' in today's battle for the system's power positions, with the spoils of victory including; industrial supremacy, technology and information leadership, and the economic capacity to sustain a modern military. The losing states, on the other hand, will face the problems resulting from reduced fiscal resources, reduced economic growth and a smaller economic pie, permanent relegation to the ranks of 'the resource extraction/branch plant/cash-crop economies', second-rate technology and information systems, and a lack of the economic means to escape the poverty cycle.
Realists argue that states are concerned with relative economic gains, because their economies are the foundation of their power. Nation-states worry that a decrease in their power capabilities relative to those of other nation-states will compromise their political autonomy, expose them to the influential attempts of others, or lessen their ability to prevail in political disputes with allies and adversaries. Consequently, states will compete for economic advantage, not only seeking absolute gains, but relative gains in their favour, to prevent other countries from surpassing their own economic. As in war, offensive weapons will dominate the new global struggle for economic power; a mercantile world with states using unilateral actions to alter the balance of trade in "desirable" economic sectors. Governments and their self-interested bureaucracies will use a combination of "incentives" and trade barriers.
Owing to the severity of the stakes involved in the future struggle for economic power, states will find themselves in an incredibly 'cut-throat' competition for economic development. Such competition could compromise their political relationship. A study of twelve 20th Century conflicts, for instance, found that access to oil or strategic minerals was an issue in ten of those conflicts! Which is an interesting coincidence indeed, considering that oil and strategic minerals are the lifeblood of industrialized economies, whereas modern military capabilities are regarded as a defining factor in the power of a state.
It has been reported that the republic of Kenya may possess the world's largest titanium-bearing reserves, and that imperialism is once again knocking at the door. This may be owing to the fact that titanium is essentially the most valuable metal in the rapidly evolving aerospace and military industries. This scenario may be paralleled to the discovery of the world's largest coltan reserves in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and the subsequent explosive computer revolution, owing to rapid advances in wireless communications technology. It has, however, been reported that "the path that coltan takes to get from Central Africa to the world market is a highly convoluted one" and that "much of the coltan illegally stolen from Congo is already in laptops, cell phones and electronics all over the world". Capacitors made from coltan are also found in nuclear reactors, aviation equipment, missiles, and weapons systems. Soon, our "visitors" may be visiting the seabed off the Kenyan and Tanzanian coasts.
It is obligatory that we echo the most recent call by the Kenyan President, for "an end to the capitalist's obsession with African mineral deposits". In Africa Must Unite, the late Kwame Nkrumah states that political independence in the face of economic dependence is of no value.
One of the immense economic benefits of the Volta River scheme would have been Ghana's ability to produce aluminum, which at the time, was the "world's miracle metal, used for the manufacture of a wide range of things. When 'Washington' was orchestrating his overthrow, it was stated that "U.S pressure if properly applied, could induce a chain reaction, eventually leading to Nkrumah's downfall. Chances of success could be greatly enhanced if the British could be induced to act in concert". Intensive efforts were to be employed through psychological warfare and 'other means', to diminish support for Nkrumah whilst nurturing the conviction among the populace that Ghana would be better off without its visionary leader. A year later, the CIA director received a report from America's Ambassador to Ghana, that popular opinion was against Nkrumah, and that the economy was in a precarious state.
In his 'congratulatory assessment' to the U.S president (after Ghana's 1966 coup), the U.S National Security Assistant stated that Nkrumah had been doing more to undermine Western interests, than any other African.
Further / recommended reading for the citizens of Kenya: The Titanium Issue (Refined) - www.kenyawatchdog.com
Charles Wanyee, Kenya