Foreign Policy Challenges for Nigeria 2015 and Beyond

2nd Tier Sub-National Map of Nigeria

Introduction

As the year is closing in one is apt to review Nigeria’s foreign policy performance and if possible project distinct patterns and relationship that may potentially emerge from next year. This is extremely important since 2015 will usher in a new administration which may potentially offer business-as-usual regardless whether the incumbent is returned or not; or trigger new adjustment in foreign policy posture also regardless of the national election outcomes. This article will use some of the current foreign policy files to make informed guesses taking into consideration unique domestic conditions.

Charity Begins at Home

Opening a European newspaper in the last few years presents you with a certainty; austerity. The word ‘austerity’ is now a byword for Europe or the so-called developed North illustrating a mask for political ineptitude, intellectual poverty and cultural regression. This presentation is complemented with renewed attention to Russia. So now ‘Austerity’ and ‘Russia’ are the current raison d’être for Europe. 

Similar search in South American media gives a distinct flavour of confidence and positive self-identity. A significant item is the persistent rhetoric that their individual and collective sovereignties no longer correlate with ‘US backyard’. Washington DC move to open relations with Havana is a strong testament of Latin America confidence and US weakness. China and India can both be summarised in the word; (economic) deals. There is no suggestion that singularity of word representation indicates linearity or simplicity rather that they conveys a positive vibe that dominates governance in the mentioned territories.

In the case of Nigeria; empty, shallow or personality (Godfather) politics showcases. I don’t know why there are no Godmothers in Nigeria’s personality politics but that is for another piece. This presentation in reality and in fact masks and suffocates potential positive interaction, intellectual development and positive political/economic investment/development. It foretells the story of a troubled domestic policy where apparently policies do not drive politics. Only ontological poverty mostly motivates engagement in politics despite rhetoric. While interest in policy cannot be dismissed expectant hope of positive outcome for citizens borders between resignation, apathy and taking a long view. This is the summary of ‘bruised and battered’ population for nearly 2 generations.

Taking the above paragraph into consideration it becomes obvious that effective foreign policy runs on the back of cohesive internal affairs backed-up with viable political & economic governance/implementation with all the complexities associated with it. In the case of Nigeria post-military national politics have miserably failed to trigger serious effort against regressive actions. If a few indicators are reviewed it becomes clear that domestic issues remain sub-standard; transport infrastructure, accountability on state/national resources, quality of education graduates, internal security, process management in private and public sectors.

2 words summarises geographically-nested low national performance: corruption and waste. Corrosive corruption and waste of human & material resources at industrial scale! With these set of regressive characteristics Nigeria is unable to project power coherently internally talk less of externally. The country cannot and is not perceived positively even at the base level of public diplomacy, and she becomes isolated in a complex world undergoing massive geopolitical reconfiguration. In addition, Nigeria is placed in an (apparent) immovable position unfortunately assigned to it by Western geopolitical power led by United States that condemns her to the status of ineffectual client (vassal), a geopolitical consumer and a puerile player even in her own sub-region. 

Select Points of Contention

Taking into consideration that enhanced domestic affairs and robust internal security is yet to emerge in Nigeria, Abuja can be forgiven from using confidence in internal affairs as springboard to commence full spectrum review of Nigeria’s foreign policy, posture and power projection capacities. International changes, global geopolitical reconfigurations and modification of global economic/financial architecture should be serious incentives for Abuja to get a grip. Above all in what could have been her ‘backyard’ serious developments are emerging potentially favouring cost-reduced expansion of influence.

The select areas of consideration include West Africa sub-region, relationship with OPEC, relationship with United States and relationship with China.

West Africa

Nigeria is seating on the eastern-most part of the sub-region while Cape Verde is on the most western point.  Geopolitically the area of interest includes all the territories, rich mineral resources therein, airspace and continental shelves of member-countries of Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS/CEDEAO). It is dangerous to be misled by the fact that Nigeria is the most populous, possess the biggest economy and the biggest market. See map below.

ECOWAS Member-States

In reality while the variables unravel incoherently in the region over the decade, coherent strategic posture has failed to gain traction. The loss of traction in Nigeria’s ability to project power in the sub-region in a coherent manner increased with the exit of military regimes. There are a number of reasons for this development. The defeat of US-backed South Africa forces and UNITA in Angola by Cuban-backed Angolan forces, the collapse of the apartheid regime in South Africa and subsequent decolonisation of Namibia closed the picture of anti-colonisation struggle. A subtext in the demise of cold war is equally significant. These has been the raison d’être of Nigeria’s foreign policy and its exhaustion offered a recipe for change which was not seriously considered. Accompanying the Pan-African posture was the benign pass to (France) Paris to dominate affairs in her former colonies of West Africa.

In any case Nigeria till present continues to perceive a chuck of West Africa as France ‘backyard’ even as Paris is tumbling down the tubes of geopolitical weakness and confusion.  See map below. In foreign policy and geopolitics circles, analysts are apt to regard France as Nigeria’s true neighbour as all the neighbours are former French colonies. While Lagos and then Abuja continues to extend its statecraft specifically on Anglophone countries which was maximised in her sponsorship of ECOWAS Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) during the Liberian civil, there is a constrain in flexing muscle against perceived French interest.

Nigeria's Neighbours - France

Another reason for this constrain include Lagos/Abuja’s position as a client state of United States within a nested hierarchy of geopolitical network. At a higher level of that network, French interest took precedence over Nigeria natural designs. French position is a compensation for losing WW2 allowing her room to maintain her sphere of influence without interfering with Washington DC global designs. Perfect example of this network interest is the nomination/occupation of French citizen always as International Monetary Fund Managing Director.  Seating on the West African front of French interest was a linchpin positioned in Cote d’Ivorie’s President Felix Houphoet Boigny.

Cote d’Ivorie was not only advancing French interest but also United States strategic interest hence her proactive contribution to the coup that overthrew Ghanaian President Dr Kwame Nkrumah in 1966. French interest projected through her geo-economic design of domination was crucially tied in the currency/monetary union between former French franc in the currency used by West African francophone countries; CFA. Nigeria’s room to maneuver as United States client in the sub-region was limited in principle at the time.

Fast-forward to this decade with highlights of the past including end of cold war, emergence of European Union and associated austerity of Europe; new opportunities are potentially opening up in West Africa. For starters all the francophone countries have modest economies of various bands in ‘struggling’ status.

A number of situations have emerged that present new and interesting geopolitical and foreign policy challenges to the erstwhile dominant players in the region.  Some of the significant outcomes are mentioned below;

• West Africa remains a richly resourced part of the world in human, mineral, land and marine/hydrological resources
• Cote d’Ivorie is currently a shell of its former status with unstable politics and economy after over a decade of civil war which ended in part with French military intervention under ex-President Sarkozy
• Various parts of West Africa were and are bedevilled by conflict, instability & biological warfare (Ebola) such as Sierra Leone, Liberia, Mali, Guinea and Guinea Bissau
• With France accession to EU, CFA is decoupled from Franc and in addition French economy is facing depression and will continue to face difficult times in the short and medium terms
• With United States power ebbing away with rising China in Africa vacuums are emerging in the sub-region

The above points are few items among an array of strategic opportunities of which Nigeria is taking advantage rather in an incoherent fashion. Even Abuja’s public diplomacy investment and projections have been rather trivial and introverted for example President Goodluck Jonathan’s ill-fated Paris visit on the back of Boko Haram abduction of over 200 school girls. Another example is the President’s joint visit to Ouagadougou on the back of President Compaore’s forced exit. Both actions displayed featherweight disposition, 4^th rate power projection and lingers the perception of a visionless foreign policy. A new administration should recalibrate her strategies and generate robust policies to take advantage towards a coherent geopolitical and geoeconomic expansion and dominance of the sub-region.

Relationship with OPEC

Nigeria has been a member of Oil Producing and Exporting Countries (OPEC) for a number of decades. One of the presidential aspirants was an Oil Minister in the 1970s. What is OPEC’s relevance to Nigeria in the current geopolitical climate? Does OPEC have serious leverage in determining high prices for oil dominated economies like Nigeria?

The ongoing deliberate price depression is a testament of real weakness of OPEC in a series of contracting performances. The last time OPEC displayed grit, stature and confidence as an organisation was when President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela rallied member-states for concerted action. Production was cut, prices rallied and sale of OPEC crude oil in other/basket of currency became a possibility. The current price tumble deployed as an economic weapon by an OPEC member (to counter another state that formerly deployed energy weapon) against other member-states strategic interest is dangerous.  Of course the question will always be asked of the reasons behind poor diversification of Nigerian economy away from oil and or how accounts of previous sales/investments are reinvested. They are legitimate questions which border on both strategic interest and national security.

Saudi Arabia’s [US ally] action of deliberate crude oil prices depression delegitimizes justification of OPEC existence and Abuja should commence considering its membership as well as potentially selling crude oil in a basket of currencies. Saudi Arabia’s action of over-production which Abuja endorsed in the last OPEC meeting is regressive, treasonous and threatens Nigeria’s national security. Of course Riyadh’s action is motivated by demand from Washington DC, it is doubtful that the policy was coordinated prior to implementation with Abuja. New/subsequent administrations should address this issue with great care and serious attention.

Relationship With United States

It is important to state at the outset that relationship between Nigeria and United States is unequal. This has nothing to do with ethics or morality. It is an understatement that the relationship is best captured by master-servant analogy despite diplomatic niceties placing Abuja on client status.  It is also important to construct into the argument Nigeria's client status to Washington DC include vagaries of subordination to European powers in particular as all European capitals are subservient to United States. Any interested Nigerian or foreign policy observer who has experienced first-hand the might of US power closely should ask the question, why would a US official on Capitol Hill border with Nigeria? The observer should pose the question at the height of US power and at the outset of its weakening. 

Leaving aside the questions, attention is focused on Nigeria-US relationship from the Clinton presidency which effectively allocated Nigeria a position and status of sub-regional ‘policeman’which remains unchanged.[link para 27 -31]. However attention must be focused on flickers of realism emerging from Nigeria’s diplomats after many years of pretending an equal relationship.  The idea that Abuja can robustly & effectively deflect major US foreign policy is a pipe-dream. Nigeria is seriously constrained by regressive self-identity and poverty of initiative that blind her in formulating realistic understanding of US policy towards her. In a sense Nigeria foreign policy elite are star-struck borne of unchallenged absorption of dehumanising education and biased information of imposed worldview and assimilation of glorified US objectives.

The perpetuation of near-colonial narrative/knowledge continues in the unreconstructed negative attitude to local history, dehumanisation of African identity and unquestioned glorification of everything Western/English contextualised in US ‘exceptionalism’. Truth shows that US was a slave republic that denied full humanity to Africans as a matter of law for over 300 years.  Apart from 1976 when General Murtala Muhammed challenged Dr Henry Kissinger on the merit and veracity of US exceptionalism cum suggested African irrelevance, no other Nigerian leaders have ever had a formalised defiance/defence of Nigeria’s strategic interest vis-a-vis Washington DC. With rising China and other emerging economies in Africa, US highest priority on Nigeria is security of access to crude oil and other strategic mineral resources. Beyond this point Nigeria commands very low priority in Washington DC.

Curiously Nigeria has no ethnic interlocutor in the United States politics. The Black Congressional Caucus (BCC) has transformed from a relevant ethnic power block into accessory to Washington DC aspiration for full-spectrum violence-oriented global domination including Nigeria and as such US foreign policy issues relating to Africa command less of their attention. DRC and Rwanda crises are examples of BCC puerile performance hence cannot be counted upon by Abuja. Compare them to Israeli, Irish, Armenian and Arab lobbies!

So the following questions are to be considered for future relationship with Washington DC;

• Does Nigeria want to remain a client of US and on what conditions?
• Does Nigeria want to remain the sub-regional ‘policeman’ and under what conditions?
• In a geopolitically reconfiguring world, where should US be in relation with other emerging geopolitical powers?
• What does Nigeria hope or expected from US strategically and geopolitically in the medium and long terms?
• What is Nigeria’s strategic interest with United States deployment of USAFRICOM?

Furthermore, these questions are belied by emerging evidence that Boko Haram phenomenon is far more complex. Case in point is Abuja’s allegation that former Burkina Faso President Compaore was sponsoring weapon/equipments transfer to Boko Haram. Ouagadougou, a staunch US client shrugged this allegation. The recent inconsistencies by United States to share intelligence on Boko Haram and recently reported refusal to sell weapons/equipments to Abuja on the red herring of Nigeria’s human right records add fuels to suspicion.

Complementary to these developments is the apparent meltdown of French power/interest in West Africa which is transforming the geopolitical landscape enabling her displacement by United States. Call it de-imperialisation of France! There is a US drone base in Niamey, Niger. There is another US military base in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. These US military investments present evidence of gradual physical encirclement in addition to cyber and remote sensing capabilities projections deployed against Africa particularly Nigeria.

Apart from making diplomatic statements, there is absence of coherent policy and consistent response to threats emerging from US relationship. US interest on Nigeria and Africa in general have moved from benign ambivalence to full-spectrum deployment through militarisation of the continent (resources) as part of the strategic Asian pivot to contain China. 2011 Libyan invasion by United States via NATO summarised Washington DC disposition towards Africa and Nigeria in particular. These developments make for sober reflection which Abuja is expected to counter very seriously.

Relationship with China

Chinese relationship will be enigmatic for a number of reasons. For the past 2 generations Nigeria’s political, economic, intellectual formation and world-view has been predominantly western. It is more or less an extension of intellectual colonial enterprise. The implication of this world-view is the instinctive dealing of complexity in socio-political and geopolitical diversity/difference through western lens. Such lens is bound to trigger colossal failure. The richness of pre-colonial geopolitical/diplomatic heritage is lost on current Nigeria post-colonial project.

China is operating on 2 distinct levels. One as a developing country sharing brutal colonial experience with countries of the Global South as part of geopolitical and geoeconomic strategies towards expanding her influence and maximise profit. Simultaneously it is the factory of the world since for the West basic manufacturing has lost its shine. Only high-end goods suffice to be produced in their territories! On another level Beijing is playing with the big boys with ‘Peaceful Rise’ and is apparently winning in the short and medium terms. With well crafted foreign policy and robust geopolitical focus, China is gradually altering erstwhile geopolitical, geo-security and geo-economic architectures.

How does Nigeria react to this development? Does Nigeria want to swap subservience to one geopolitical power for another? With a new geopolitical power emerging without military defeat of the former, what is Abuja’s game plan with both Washington DC and Beijing? In the short-term there is an apparent need to accommodate Chinese needs for mineral resources paid for at world market prices. On the other hand Beijing is bullish with oriental subtleties and to an extent has modest access to Abuja. There is a problem with this situation because Nigeria’s intellectual burden and worldview forestalls independent assessment. Nigeria cannot freely make strategic choice unless Abuja redefines her status/role in a US led hierarchy/network.

China rightly perceived economic opportunities in Nigeria and have invested in various sections of the national economy as well as fund major contracts with the attendant mobilisation of thousands of Chinese citizens. With Nigeria’s rich resources and income streams, what does Abuja need Beijing for?  Has Nigeria fully explored Beijing’s real economic and geopolitical weakness vis-a-vis Africa? Is Nigeria prepared for Beijing shedding of her ‘developing country’ card and its implications? The viability of people-to-people and business-to-business between the 2 countries is growing astronomically but the implications are already manifesting with massive dumping of cheap substandard/harmful products from China. Nigeria’s local industrial and manufacturing capabilities are already hurting with poor government response.

What is Nigeria’s strategic plan to utilise Beijing to nullify/moderate Washington DC design on her and on the whole of Africa? China’s influence in Africa is geopolitically anchored in Pretoria through their intercontinental alliance in BRICS with Brazil, Russia and India.

Conclusion

There should be a lot in the in-tray of new/subsequent administrations. For all the rhetoric on the ‘giant of Africa’ Nigeria remains a potential power devoid of real cohesive and consistent power. The absence of cohesive and progressive internal affair drawn from a stable economy, massive user-friendly infrastructure, efficiency transportation systems, high quality education and cost-effective bureaucracy all contribute in limiting any attempt to pursue robust foreign policy and power projections.  Probably as stated at the outset, the viable way to pursue foreign policy is to invest in stable and robust domestic affairs as a viable launch pad. Else Nigeria for all the goodwill in the world will remain a laughing stock and lightweight among the comity of nations. No amount of football tournament participation will change such negative perception.

Implications of Western ‘Evangelisation’ on the Wings of Violent Imperialism & Geopolitical Annihilation of African Peoples

Introduction

The purpose of this piece is to shed light on how Christian faith arrived in parts of Africa not on its own merit rather on the back of geopolitical savagery of Western Powers accompanying the Scramble. Reviewing history of Western Christian ‘evangelisation’ of many parts of the world requires deeper insight and careful analyses of dominant narratives (by the conquerors) of rescuing ‘savages’.  Gaps in the narratives have been smoothed over many generations of civilisation-stripped erstwhile savages who are caught in an existential struggle between advancing their own histories which conflicts with the fact that the Christianity their forefathers received was imposed by force in part. The so-called evangelisation is rather part of a geopolitical enterprise of capitalism expansion post-slavery which used the politico-military prowess to subjugate peoples to accept a new faith by force of arms. By so doing faith was not shared in peace and ‘signs and wonders’ did not manifest as endorsement of the High God of Jesus Christ.

Correct Label

While Christianity as a term connotes global spread of Jesus Christ existence/teachings, it is important to carefully isolate and delineate identities of its exponents and exporters at any given time. With regard to this narrative, the western Christianity exporters are the main supplicants i.e. Roman Catholic, National Church of England alias Anglican Communion and other Protestant denominations. These groups are the main players who engaged directly or indirectly with the Western Powers [Spain, Portugal, UK, France & Germany] plying their geopolitical trade to violently capture, destabilise and strip peoples of their civilisations.

Various Western religious labels have already notoriously participated in the ignominious dehumanisation of Africans in the over 3 centuries of international slave trade.  What they engaged in, or supported or identified with have nothing to do with faith in the High God of Jesus Christ rather a deliberate association with full spectrum geopolitical power unleashing savagery, unmitigated violence and total destruction of generations in God’s name. Blasphemy 101!

There are other labels of Christianity that did not participate or engage in this savagery and industrial violence on African peoples. These include the Orthodox Catholic Christians in their different national formations. In any case all these are the communion of faith centred on Constantinople sphere of influence that fell out with Rome in 1054 as a result of the Filioque controversy. Geopolitical weakness may have spread them such enterprise. On this point it is established that an absence exist in the universality of Christian labelling in its association with inter-generational dehumanisation and annihilation of peoples pretending to be executing divine project of evangelisation in the name of the High God of Jesus Christ. Where Eastern Christianity cannot be totally excluded from violent missions of civilisation around the world but their footprint is either absent or minuscule in Africa.

Agency of Dehumanisation/Suppression

Human beings do not give faith. Human beings have always produced contradictions, inconsistencies and struggles. They equally seek to use any opportunity to advance profound interest even at the expense of other human beings by invention superiority/inferiority classification. Even authorities within the body of Christ advance abhorrent theories as was the case on whether American Indians were real human beings in the debate between Bartolome de las Casas and Juan Gines de Sepulveda in 1550/1. 

Since the resurrection of Jesus Christ, since the passage of the last apostle and since the last phases of Christian persecution by Rome; the new opportunities afforded in the Edict of Rome in 312 by Emperor Constantine brought profound and unexpected change in self determination in faith & Christian living. It is inconceivable that this new profound association with imperial power will simply wash off without compromising some of the human contingencies of faithful. The lifting of persecution brought many benefits but no one could affirm that all attribution of God’s benevolence on this act is neutral and cost-free. By the way Constantine was not Christian as much as Cyrus didn't know God.

It would be spiritually incompetent and malevolent for anyone claiming faith in Jesus Christ to think that they can manage and handle competently a power that perceives the whole world as its beef, with grand geopolitical designs and possess the best military capability. By the way in an existential struggle between temporally unlimited spiritual essence and a temporally limited powerful imperial construct, in time and space blinking was inevitable. So in many ways the final outcome may allow each party to claim victory of superiority hence international division of labour between the spiritual and the temporal allowed one party to control the order for a fixed period of time while the other party compromise biding time for the long haul in the then Christendom. It was more complex than that.

When the dust settled a Christianity devoid of internal cohesion and its leaders started piggybacking political power ever since and at times became totally dependent on it for very simple things like affirmation of faith components. With subsequent reconfiguration of politics in context and in space, Western Christianity has continued to leak independence and increasingly become subordinated to political power. In any case it is not unusual for western Christianity to be devoid of temporal power even blessing temporal power immoral enterprises, actually it is the real deal though not the final manifesto. Treaty of Westphalia is a testament of such subordination after temporal separation from (Western) Holy Roman and (Eastern) Byzantine Empires associations/control of the human component of the Body.

Colonialism Evangelisation

It will not be puritanical to question the assumed methods of mass evangelisation currently accepted after generations as normal. After all man is not just matter, but equally spirit. Therefore evangelisation is supposed to be an experiential spiritual war in essence not an intellectual/academic exercise. In any case the question can be stretched further to critic the viability of forced conversion of peoples as a secondary effect of imposition of colonialism via industrial violence and sustained dehumanisation. This has happened in different parts of the world, in the Americas, even after the Apparition of Our Lady of Guadalupe in 1531. The unique feature of this apparition or ‘signs and wonders’ for the faithful then and now is the clear manifestation of divine design within the ontological and cultural context of the target population. An overthrow of the erstwhile spiritual order without firing a shot! The case for inculturation was dealt a massive blow even then! Whose culture is superior to be inculturated into and whose culture is inferior to be de-culturated?

There was a clear manifestation that the High God of Jesus Christ is not a white man which fits perfectly with Pauline conclusion that in Christ there are no distinctions. The essence of the High God of Jesus Christ is manifested to peoples in their own unique circumstance and not by vicious imposition of superiority complex in the name of God. Therefore evangelisation, conversions and mass conversions are actions of the High God of Jesus Christ that cannot be imposed with industrial violence, murderous annihilation of peoples and unquestioned acceptance of errors.

The template for individual conversion can be extracted from the sacred scripture in the case of Cornelius. There is no evidence of inhibition of the Holy Spirit on his person as a result of his ethnicity, status and origins. Defying human expectations and narrow conclusion, the High God of Jesus Christ revealed himself sufficiently from His immense salvific economy for Cornelius conviction, acceptance and conversion. No gun was pointed to his head neither were his interlocutors in a hurry to cover the next territory to consolidate fresh spatial gains.

The whole of Act of the Apostles of the sacred scripture is replete with examples of post-resurrection mass conversions. What is very clear in each example is that this new faith is the spring up of devotion in a dominant geopolitical superstructure called Rome. The human agency of the new movement did not assign or ascribe to itself anything beyond testament to the High God of Jesus Christ. They were not backed up by any geopolitical power, military arsenals, and multinational corporate interests.

They saw to it that there are souls to be converted in their unique economic, political, social and environmental situations only. These conversions took place mostly if not in all case with the expression of interlocutors’ evidence through the power of the Holy Spirit manifesting in ‘signs and wonders’ of miracles which suspend & defy physical law, scientific laws and overcoming/overriding default malevolent spiritual orders. At these manifestations of divine order in miracles including projecting positive impacts on personal and collective circumstances, conviction and conversion is effected through baptism of the Holy Spirit complimenting prior baptism of water which is insufficient.

It is the contention of this article what is ignorantly portrayed as successful evangelisation of peoples or ‘savages’ on the back of geopolitical destructions and industrial violence is corrupt, decadent, immoral, regressive and innately unchristian. Imposition of new knowledge, learning methods, cultural milieu, new languages and new worldviews which may trigger abandonment of questionable sociological practices cannot be equated to Christianity or conversion. They are mere works devoid of the spirit. Most of the interlocutors who were on these evangelical missions post-international slave trade were ordinary men who were awed by foreign experience and limited knowledge of the Other.

Many of them were oblivious of the potency of the Holy Spirit, most were divorced from the reality of the sacred scriptures examples in the Acts of the Apostles. These positions were most devastating with western European secular and anti-God educational methods that dismiss the divine, the Holy Spirit and any disposition that opens the door to positive spirituals. In the name of eschewing scandal and maintain order as if God can be imprisoned in structures, evangelisation and conversion missions are reduced to routines drafted in manuals and huge texts of questionable relevance. Above all the end doesn't justify the means. There is nowhere in the sacred texts and Tradition that support annihilation of peoples because they are not Christians. All the wars of crusade, wars against heretics, wars of conquests in God’s name, all the genocides, international slave trade and colonialism if pursued in God’s name are intrinsically unchristian, false, devilish and delusional.

Abandoned Leftovers

The main objective of evangelisation is not to bring soul to God, rather to enable the High God of Jesus Christ to reveal himself to each soul. The enabling process include availability of free space, free time and unfettered awareness to allow for uncompromised exchange, processing of information, examination of issues/contradictions, presentation of evidence (‘signs and wonders’) and making informed decision based on freewill.  This is not an ideal that should be dismissed under careless ruse of false philosophical and regressive theological development. It is a spiritual investment for an individual, for a family and for communities. Conversion based on baptism of water and Holy Spirit frees the converted from among other things the erstwhile dominant (malevolent) spiritual order.

One of the outcomes of the colonialism backed evangelisation is its clear incompleteness. Of course it was invested and rolled out to buttress geopolitical and geoeconomic objectives in space and time, the preciousness of time meant that standard of true conversion was eliminated. In a conflict of huge human annihilation, lives are protected if one/communities converted under duress. It is called self-determination. Change of disposition for apparent material consolation is enough to maintain a façade of faithfulness, avoid apparent social ostracisation and accelerate social mobility in a new system. Big church buildings and huge turnover of attendees do not signify successful evangelisation and true conversion. Since the spiritual order was untouched and the deities remained in place, the façade of evangelisation was and remains a farce.

Positive change in material possession is not the true sign of conversion to the High God of Jesus Christ. The near dormancy of invoking the Holy Spirit forcefully to clear the path, the vibrancy of dependency on human intellect, the full adoption of human methods/structure and near ignorance of humility versus arrogance becomes cogs in the wheel of true conversion. Those who pretended conversion to save their lives continued to serve various deities until they deceased without clear transfer to their subsequent generations. Then the first receptor received baptism of water on their death bed like Emperor Constantine if they are lucky. Now for most pretenders, only the same baptism of water suffice ignoring and defy that of the Holy Spirit. The children devoid of baptism of the Holy Spirit have been brainwashed in the new educational/learning/knowledge systems to disregard their historicity and ontology to the point of leading malevolent attacks on their own now perceived inferior and devilish origins.

A number of processes evolved and emerged in this outcome. The powerful deities left unpropitiated and devoid of devotees & supplicants reacted and continue to react in various ways. Profoundly their reactions always triggered as temporal reflex or by living human agent are malevolent displayed through various wicked projections, manipulations and negative outcomes. Untimely deaths, unprecedented loss of fortune/greatness, division in families/extended families, confusion among erstwhile united communities, massive fear of the unknown, serious illnesses defying medical knowledge that rather gouge huge resources, marital problems, business misfortune and many other negative & distressing situations are examples of malevolent spiritual reaction.

These experiences manifest regardless of status, level of attainment, wealth, education, location or distance from origin and authority. Malevolence of negative spiritual forces is not respecter of persons. Malevolent spirits/deities are not specific to Africa, they are a global phenomenon in case any fool dismiss them from the so-called developed world. For examples what motivates abortion? A murderous condemnation of the unborn in industrial scale as solution for the problems of the living!

Most of these issues are dismissed as nonsense, inventions, psychological, emotional and improbable by the so-called learned and educated ‘Christians’. The so-called educated mind/victim is caught in an existential struggle to explain and dismiss real experience simultaneously. Sadly he/she is already exposed on 2 fronts; an imposter of his ontology and origin unable to understand and defend oneself from raging onslaught, and a nominal Christian who is uninitiated into the power of the Holy Spirit to enable him/her to understand and successfully defeat the malevolent forces and their agents. Their efforts to engage their priests and pastors for help collapse on the fact that these priests/pastors are not only ignorant but are trained to be ignorant and doubtful. Yes, doubtful of the true power and essence of the High God of Jesus Christ by those perceived as first soldiers in the front line.

Conclusion

The whole presentation or narrative that colonialism was accompanied by successful evangelisation and conversion of peoples especially in Africa needs to be revisited from the true Christological and Holy Spirit perspectives using Act of the Apostles are reference. As ignorance abound, misery will continue to pile on the innocent and the misled.

Fuzzy Variables in Iran – P5+1 Nuclear Negotiations

Introduction

The nuclear negotiations between Tehran and Washington DC has dragged on to its final day 24/11/2014. In the interim both sides have sized each order up and made strategic calculations regardless of the negotiation end game. While Anglo mainstream media dominate the information war with misinformation, a number of variables missing from the geopolitical equation indicate that in the long term, unfolding forces will favour Tehran’s position. Select treatment of these factors/variables is presented below.

US Internal Incoherence

Credit must be given to interlocutors on Tehran and Washington DC sides that pressured and successfully convinced both parties to agree and engage in negotiations. One must equally express clear surprise that the negotiations lasted the current duration without complications. It is a victory of sort that these negotiations took place however it will be myopic to anticipate a comprehensive agreement between 2 hegemons of pride and juggernauts of pig-headedness.

One of the fault lines of potential failure of US position is fissures within its political leadership with clear absence of coherence, diminution of national interest below intangible proxies and lack of dedication to defining and maintaining unsubordinated US position. Despite all the wealth of human and material resources, current US leadership is divided to pursue a consistent position in foreign affairs. The gap between the presidency, the legislature and interest groups is so huge that prospective opponent is bound to receive conflicting and confusing messages that only succeeds in hardening minds in Tehran.

Even within the narrow field of domestic political participation, between and within Republican and Democratic Parties, various dynamic views continue to evolve with no concrete structure, dominance of immature discourses and above all detest any room for generating a package of national interest limited to US aspiration. Rather US position is represented as an evolving amalgam of internal and external interests which more or less hold Washington DC hostage on its hamstring foreign policy.  

Economy stupid

States need positive economic growth and progressive economic development in peace time to successfully engage in complex international relations project vis-a-vis hard/soft power projection. The last few years has exposed US economy through deliberate mismanagement, myopic deployment of narrow interest policy and illusory pursuit of unbalanced geopolitical projects. Despite possessing potentials for dominating the global economy, the adoption of counter-productive and regressive policies is gradually eroding US influence which manifest domestically in growing unemployment, huge underemployment and declining productivity.

Externally, illusory pursuit of global domination through deployment of hard power with declining economic growth domestically has contributed to the rise of other economies befitting massively from producing for and targeting US market. These outflows of capital from US to emerging economies without serious counter-balance/moderation diminish her ability to manoeuvre in the world stage and Tehran is watching with keen interest.

Abuse of economic warfare through misapplication of economic sanctions against Tehran succeeded to the point of eliminating Tehran from direct US attack and opening opportunities for her engagement with other capitals. For any economy imposed with US sanctions, US products and US currency are the first victims contrary to western media spin. Other powerful currencies naturally fill the vacuum. It is obvious that Tehran’s bilateral trade and balance of payment in basket of currencies is boosted by US economic warfare. Ongoing sanction by US against Russia has eliminated Visa and MasterCard as payment system players with Moscow’s development of home-grown alternative. In addition the SWIFT international payment system, a US dominates financial architecture is currently being replicated by alternative structure which may be favourable to Iran.   

Europe Divide Weakness

Nearly 2 generations after the 2^nd world war it is evident that Europe remains to all intents and purposes a colony of United States. The potent political weakness, absence of robust geopolitical identity in a changing world and disappearance of a molecule of independence has convinced Tehran that not only is the US the only player of stature in the West, that European capitals are unworthy of trust and dependence especially London and Paris. Emerging divisions in Europe with regard to Russia relations only allows Tehran room to review erstwhile policies.

Lack of political ambition and poverty of leadership has effectively eliminated Europe as a serious progressive player in a rapidly changing world that includes Iran. Ubiquitous and under-performance of Berlin is a testament of geopolitical weakness in the global arena. One must not forget that US military bases are still in effect in Germany post-cold war unification. Such weakness and division allow Tehran room to exploit favourable interests elsewhere towards meeting her strategic objectives.

East Drift

In view of issues raised on US under-performance on the global economy, members of the Global South are emerging as the new economic powerhouses including China, India, Brazil and so on. These and many other economies are not only growing economically but geopolitically as well which cannot be dismissed, reversed or ignored by United States. The recent past APEC, ASEAN and G20 summits that all took place in Asia sent a single message; Asia/Global South has arrived. With Russia already on a favourable seat on the non-Atlantic and non-European configurations, these constellations of geopolitical power possess potentials for accommodating Tehran.

One must appreciate that the gap between United States and Iran is not about possession of nuclear technology or potential acquisition of nuclear weapons. The crux of the matter is Tehran desire to appreciate in the ranks of human, technological and resource developments. The idea of limiting, containing or controlling Tehran’s development ambition by United States resonates negatively & strongly in the formerly colonised Global South coupled with increasing evidence of US undermining effort among various Global South capitals. Most Global South countries will never challenge US but are fully aware that only in equitable development can their societies be stabilised.

Devoid of coherent position on every issue, Global South members are disposed to seek alternative routes collectively or otherwise for economic growth, economic development and geopolitical engagement. Concentration of global wealth and power in this group of countries only limits ability of United States to suppress and emasculate Iran.

Cuba, an island in the Caribbean, has survived 50+ years of US sanctions and is unlikely to give up her independence and sovereignty.  Iran can afford to wait, Tehran can afford to do nothing, can afford to manage stalled negotiations and bid her time with the emerging geopolitical heavyweights in the Global South since the new wind of geopolitical reconfiguration is blowing in that direction. It will be a realistic conjecture for Tehran to walk away from the deal which will be a perfect epithet of US era and a favourable signpost of East/Global South initiation on the world stage.  

Changing ‘Middle East’

The epicentre of US foreign policy attention and interventions in the last 50 years is the ‘Middle East’.  Apparently the reason for multiple interventions is inadmissible US policy failures. Years of opportunities for resolving some of the issues are dismissed with expectation in deployment of military force and advanced weapon systems. Evidence of weakness in the United States geopolitical project is manifesting in ‘Middle East’. The list is numerous to count but they include failure to contain Iran, failure to moderate Tel Aviv, failure to support feasible Palestinian self-determination, failure to justify/explain Iraq destruction and current inability to destroy & regime change in Syria.

With defying solidity in Tel Aviv, intransigence in Ankara and profound uncertainty in Riyadh; US is leading a house built with cards. It is very clear to Washington DC that an emerging Middle East is a surprise and an uncertainty it wants to certainly control strategically but is equally aware that this cannot be accomplished without Tehran. With Iran as the sole stable territory in a sea of intergenerational instability, the die cast. Iran is not going to do Gorbachevian error/naivety via toxic doses of glasnost and perestroika in casting off allies in Hezbollah and Damascus for illusion while it is surrounded.

With United States unwilling or unable to deal with the above named capitals and their diverging interests, Tehran may be best placed to limit concessions, delay and rejuvenate her strategic interest to fully align with the East in the long run while Washington DC continues to battle the demons it unleashed in Tel Aviv, Riyadh, Baghdad, Erbil and Ankara. US State Department will have her hands filled.

Conclusion

In the final analyses, Iran – US nuclear negotiations can only be comprehensively addressed when both capitals focus on their sole strategic interest rather than one carrying multiple baggages of irrelevant policies, expectations and design with time regressing aggressively.

Africa and Emerging Flexibility in the Geopolitical Economic Infrastructure

Africa - Epicentre of Geopolitical/Geoeconomic Battle/Rivalry/Struggle

Introduction

Geographically African continent seats comfortably at the centre of the world. This centrality is part of its attractiveness and enduring interest of outsiders from antiquity. Abundant human and material resources from Africa built Europe and North America; these almost infinite resources continue to drive external geopolitical designs for continued odious exploitation. In the last 2 decades geopolitical and geoeconomic perceptions have started changing despite massive reactionary resistance. This change brings to a point where a timely review of the status quo and the emergence of new geopolitical economic infrastructures impacts on Africa.

Emerging Midfield

The biggest myopic geopolitical conclusion is that United States is on a free fall. Attention should rather focus on the reality that United States global economic dominance petered out in less than 3 decades ushering in new global economic competitors. This fact is the engine driving new geopolitical reconfigurations as the future progresses and with it the power structures. The time when Washington Consensus with its colossal arrowheads of World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) dominated multilateral funding and foreign investment in Africa is over. This is an important lesson not only for United States, her acolytes and clients; rather it is crucial for African leaders, African intelligentsia, African elite and African peoples.

New Geo-Economic Structures

The last 2 decades have opened up a new vista on the African economic space ushering in China in a bold move towards maintaining her internal security and control of power in Beijing through meeting tactical and strategic economic interests. The idea that Beijing presence in Africa is motivated by altruism is preposterous and displays intellectually amateurism. Communist Party of China can only maintain strong grip on power not by delivering democracy rather by pragmatically investing in real economic growth and progressive economic development.

Her bulging monetary reserves offers huge opportunity to identify, secure and sustain new supply lines of strategic mineral resources of which Africa possess huge commercial deposits. As a new competitor in the continent, China is naturally playing a rival’s game to obtain the best outcome in line with her strategic interest. African countries are wily enough to respond positively to Chinese overtures despite profound gaps in strategy have maintained the ability to attract, benefit and pragmatically manage Chinese expectations vis-a-vis Washington Consensus requirements. Comparative evidence between Washington DC and Chinese funding in Africa in the last 2 decades shows clear Beijing majority. Most importantly and for now, Chinese investment is positioned to provide real development through huge infrastructure projects to both the national economic and Chinese strategic interest.

China is driving diversification of new multilateral funding structures and the timing of these developments is crucial. In addition to dodged determination of United States to refuse credible reforms in World Bank and IMF allowing other countries especially emerging economies greater say points to loss of their legitimacy. At a time the West is barely registering positive economic growth, when some economies are shrinking, where many economy ministries have run out of ideas; China struck. 

Before the end of the decade BRICS New Development Bank will be up and running. In addition China is spearheading a new development bank, Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), targeting huge Asia market. Increased trade between emerging economies naturally diminishes preponderance of US dollars as many countries opt for national currency swaps for bilateral trade. What do these developments portend for the African economic space?

Theoretical Statics

Beyond the rhetoric of Chinese ‘peaceful rise’ and spearheading new geopolitical alternatives, theoretically China and partners in the new alternative are not different. They share the crux of action with their opposite/competitors in that the foundation of capitalism remains unchanged or unshaken. The basic element of capitalism which is depression of cost for maximum profit by any means necessary remains reinforced and unchallenged in the argument. And this is where African interlocutors will run into potential problems.

With exception of Russia most the countries of BRICS and AIIB emerged from Western colonialism or rather seat within western neo-colonialism since the last 100 years. Presentation of ‘peaceful rise’ by Beijing is carried along ‘developing’ countries lines which doesn't attempt to depict the full story. With the destruction of the erstwhile 3 or 4 tier global economic development classification, there is no basis for Beijing to sustain those claims any more than isolating examples of solidarity with former colonies during the colonial times.

It cannot also be suggested that China move is a serious threat to United States as the evidence is patchy in view of the fact that United States is not conquered or defeated by China in a conflict demanding her full submission as was the case for Germany and Japan post-WW2.

Capitalism Conditions Stupid

Before making the case that alternative multilateral funding to Africa will focus minds on inherent conditions, it is important to revisit basic understanding of Western capitalism and summarised its practice in Africa in the last 500 years. Capitalism is a method for wealth acquisition, wealth creation and wealth maintenance. Its raison d’être is profit. It is the highest expression of dehumanisation and social atomisation that reduces all material/immaterial to tradeable values as commodities.  

Capitalism (and particularly the neoliberal version) cannot thrive without violence and destruction towards extraction of profit. Read Liberal Virus by Samir Amin. By neoliberal capitalism, we express the method of pursuing economic growth/profit entailing movement/exchange of goods, services and capital (modes of production) with less/reduced state involvement/regulation versus more (few) private/market participation in a national economy.

For Africa this is vividly expressed starting with European imposition of Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade in the 15^th century. The structure of European power including pre-Westphalia religious establishments accentuated the devaluation of African peoples which among other things enabled full scale dehumanisation and civilisation-stripping through violence that sustained over 300 years of slave trade which provide the riches now ring-fenced by Europe and North America. Slavery in its crude form was not abolished as a result of any semblance of humanitarian or moral acquiesce rather by economic priorities especially technological advances. Read The Counter Revolution of 1776 by Gerald Horne & The Deepest South: The United States, Brazil, and the African Slave Trade by Gerald Horne.

The natural by-product of slavery is colonialism. It was not a system of political imposition alone, it was a methodical application of industrial violence to appropriate peoples, domains and strip civilisation of their real and ontological existence. No amount of historical revision or sanitisation will delete this fact.  By act of foreign law, former slave zone were designated private properties of foreign sovereigns while the peoples, everything on the territory and continental shelves became commodities. Read How Europe Underdeveloped Africa by Walter Rodney.

Comparatively, there is no evidence that the brutal impact of capitalism on Africa become excruciatingly pain only at the stage of neo-colonialism as alluded by Nkrumah in his Neo-colonialism-The last stage of Capitalism. Capitalism as an aggregate or as a disaggregated phased experience as present by Lenin in Imperialism – The Highest Stage of Capitalism is brutal, violent, destructive and inhuman wherever it is implemented and later dissected.

State Capitalism Par Excellence 

One of the main characteristics of China-led alternatives is the preponderance of state role in the various economies in contrast to US neoliberal agenda with its devastating impact on Africa currently and since the 1970s. Read Maldevelopment by Samir Amin. What is even more interesting is that the blueprint for successful management of capitalism is spearheaded by communists in Beijing. There is an important lesson apparently for African strategists and policy makers who are mostly drenched in western ideologies and ‘dogmas’. In any case action for reversing the role of the state in African economies, a Washington Consensus staple needs to be put on ice. Europe is a now a classic example of a failed neoliberal economic policy.

There is no empirical evidence to back the mantra that private sector provides better/quicker solutions or that private sector generates higher productivity. The case against public sector contributor is its obstruction to elitist control and minority monopolistic tendencies. While United States is erroneously held up as top example, the contradiction lays bare when centuries of racial discrimination against Africans, minorities, women and the poor is magnified. Read The Peoples History of United States by Howard Zinn. African leaders have the chance to review policies and strategic positions to assume important ground between depleting Washington Consensus and rising BRICS ND_Bank and AIIB.

As the new geopolitics of multilateral funding is emerging, it presents an architecture run and managed by post-colonial entities despite complex interlocking relationship between them, with the West and Russia. For the first time in many centuries, geopolitical power and density of monetary values/income no linger reside in the West. It is a profound outcome which seems unlikely to be torpedoed or reversed.

While the alternative developments offer Africa new opportunities, African cannot be blind to each country’s economic and institutional contradictions.  China, India, Russia and etc possess serious contradiction among doubtful state of readiness to play global role of such magnitude. Dismissal of Beijing’s power calculation or flexing of influence is a dangerous option because these funds carry associated conditions which may not be as odious and onerous as the West, nevertheless Chinese power will be projected forcefully devoid of military intervention.

Therefore Chinese Yuan loans for triggering state productive sector & infrastructure expansion in Africa provides strategic alternatives for chain-reaction development within national spaces and the continent at large.  Infusion of these funds should be guarded to prevent subversion toward massive privatisation of remaining state concerns in various African countries for Chinese interest. Privatisation is mostly skewed towards elites and corporations while the net result is massive loss to the state/citizens. Read State Resistance to Globalisation in Cuba by Antonio Camona Baez.

Crucially a new kind of leadership is need from Africa. Post-colonial leaders with full knowledge of colonialism and appreciation for emerging world nuance are ever critical. Strategists, analysts, managers and leaders with wider capacities to navigate through the geopolitical and foreign policy labyrinths of both West and East cannot be dismissed. Ethiopia is trending an example worthy of deeper review. Botswana continues to thrive with stability and limited resources.

These investments offer greater incentive for the main thrust of African development, which is African integration.  Read Africa Must Unite by Dr Kwame Nkrumah. Decline and weakening of the West may upset their ability to micro-manage their fronts in the continent as such gradual withdrawal of influence opens opportunities for seeking new partners in the continent. This is particularly obvious in the French colonised parts of the continent. Example shows that Portugal is more or less economically dependent on Angola (& Brazil).

At the End

China will be powerful and may be the most powerful country in the world. It will not be a dominant power with full spectrum control of global affairs rather counter weights will be strategically positioned in renewed geopolitical deployment of balance of power. Africa is poised to take advantage of this emergence of alternatives with increased vigilance against becoming accessories of internal conflicts and destabilisation. Events in Libya, DRC, Rwanda, Cote d’Ivorie and Mali are examples of conflicts sparked by geopolitical actors to control natural resources and in some cases to curtail supply to China.

It will be naive and dangerous to project a future with less conflict without adequate preparations. United States ambivalence on Africa is legendary and Washington DC has never countered the fact that its projection of power in Africa is mirrored in military conflicts. This form of foreign policy is far entrenched to be reversed.  Africa resource nationalism is important especially in the management of downstream activities within productive countries to ensure greater control of the benefits and greater transparency/equity in wealth distribution.

Above all African capitals must refrain from full opening of their markets in the form of free trade to other countries which will put the final nail in the coffin of economic development and subtle economic independence. China has become notorious with dumping of cheap products which eviscerated local industries. In the long run Africa must strategically position to seek full access to other markets around the world including Europe and North America. 

United States in a Bind over Iran Nuclear Negotiations

Introduction

As nuclear negotiations between Iran and P5+1 countries is sluggishly grinding towards the end, a number of patterns have emerged which present contrasting positions between rhetoric and praxis, prior to and during the negotiations. It is important to stress that these negotiations to all intents and purpose is between Tehran and Washington DC and as things are shaping up, it is crucial to move away from bombastic reductionist geopolitics and focus on the realpolitik considering other interconnected events.

Pre-Status Quo

For the past 3 decades United States has used any means to demonise Islamic Republic of Iran even though the latter is no match on her huge material and intellectual resources. One may surmise that it will be difficult to find a US citizen/resident/official with a positive of the country and her citizens. Of course there are a minority who appreciate and respect Iran beyond altruistic reasons; nevertheless their views may carry little weight beyond perception as ‘noise’.  Since Shah of Iran was overthrown in 1979, Washington DC have found it excruciatingly difficult to accept the reality that the ancien regime is gone.  The mental template of realpolitik inflexibility has allowed Washington DC to consistently boxed itself into an unfavourable corner with the possibilities of even subverting her national interest.

Misinformation Incorporated

It is apparent that in geopolitics, misinformation is a huge investment against ‘unfriendly’ countries. United States used misinformation weapon to distort Iran image around the world especially in Western Europe since the Islamic Republic came into being in 1979. One of the mantras of misinformation against Tehran is that the leadership is irrational hence depicting the country as unstable, uncertain, fragile and a threat in its neighbourhood despite lack of evidence. On the contrary one would notice Iran is a democracy with centrality of power in Tehran received as a heritage of the Shah. 

It was the Shah, then a US ally, who centralised power under his rule. Demographically one appreciates that while most of the population is Shia by religious disposition, the most populous ethnic nation, Farsi, is less than 60% and are mostly found in the centre of the country. See map below. Iran has a population necklace of minorities all around its borders with co-ethnic nation community in neighbouring countries offering tempting potentials for insurrection/irredentism. See map below.

Iran Demographic Distribution

Instability and uncertainty driven by irrationality is not a recipe for surviving for more than 3 decades in a turbulent neighbourhood including prosecuting a defensive war against Iraq between 1980 and 1988. With another necklace of foreign military bases around the country, Tehran will be most foolish to let down her guard. See map below. US investment around Iran challenges her earlier commitment not to invade or attack Iran in the 1980 Algiers Accord. Misinformation can be the vehicle for bilateral expression of grievances and deeply entrenched misgivings. It is essential to stress that Iranian nuclear programme was commenced with US approval under the Shah of Iran.

Necklace of Surrounding Foreign Military Bases

Prudent Reactions and Windfalls

It must be testified that Tehran never had time and resources to export its revolution beyond her borders for a number of reason including but not limited to purging the population of those associated with or suspected to be favoured/benefited from the ancien regime politics, bureaucracy, economy and social fabric; and then the long 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war which really set the country back almost a generation. Iranian geopolitical footprint is spatially limited in Middle East although in its realpolitik, relations with Oman and United Arab Emirate has been stable & viable among the Gulf States and other regional players.

Despite the above mentioned items, Iran invested heavily in Lebanon (conflicts) with a 2-pronged geopolitical strategy of supporting Hezbollah internally and externally through enhancing strategic relationship with Syria then under President Hafez Al-Assad (a policy unchanged by President Bashar Al-Assad). This strategy was deployed to foil any attempt to have Lebanese governments leaning toward United States/Israel in Beirut. (Read Syria and Iran Diplomatic Alliance and Power by Jubin Goodarzi). Over the decades Hezbollah has risen in profile and stature as an indispensable & strategic geopolitical player in Lebanon and Middle East respectively to the consternation of Washington DC and regional players.

Geopolitical windfalls to Tehran must have handed Iran a form of ‘shock and awe’. The twin invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001 and 2003 respectively were inverse or reverse rewards to Iran by United States. What was the calculation of Washington DC in the preparation and implementation of these policies mirrored actions based on historical amnesia. An Iraq without Sadaam Hussein in the shambolic manner of its invasion and post-invasion can only allow any political vacuum to be filled by Iran. 

Even without direct Tehran influence, physical and violent destruction of her western and an eastern neighbours plus presence of an unstable eastern neighbour automatically makes her the stable patch in the neighbourhood. See map below. Her profile should surely increase; it becomes a centre of demand and supply for those areas in the neighbourhood with huge lacks in goods and services. In essence United States cannot blame Tehran for taking advantage of the gain or even wish to reverse those gains.

Neighbourhood of 'Fire'

Sanctions Long Duree

The Islamic Republic has been placed under economic sanction by Washington DC since 1979 and there is limited flexibility or withdrawal along the lines of 1980 Algiers Accord. Tehran has been under economic sanctions of various stripes for over 3 decades and in a sense have developed dependable social, economic, political and geopolitical projects as a result. Sanctions serve many purposes for the party placing the sanction and elicit different reactions from the party suffering the sanction. Despite the hollow glorification of economic sanctions by its imposers, sanctions are not wholly adhered to because of the complexity of interests and interlocking relationships between various stakeholders within the imposing country including huge resources required to monitor its effectiveness.

Iran neighbours have benefited from the economic sanctions as they naturally became entrepots for transferring various goods and services desperately needs of Iranian market. Even some US allies in the region turned blind eye when necessary to benefit their economic interests. The complexities of economic sanction present various kinds of strategic opportunities within and beyond the country. Internal interests that benefit from the sanction would fight against its elimination. Some foreign interests that boldly flouted the sanction hence developing pseudo-monopoly in the Iranian economy are bound to recalibrate their investment against potential competition if and when sanction is lifted. A high profile example is United States feigning ignorance/blind-eye while her Afghanistan project purchase petroleum products from Iran.

With this background the suggestion by section of western observers that sanction prompted Iran to accept negotiation is wholly preposterous. What these sentiment express is lack of information and ignorance of an array of Iran assistance and cooperation with United States including Taliban overthrow with United States on various strategic issues of importance to Washington DC. Washington DC has long spurned Tehran offers for diplomatic engagement. (Read Going to Tehran by Flynt Leverett & Hilary Mann Leverett). Negotiation between strong parties cannot be imposed rather strategic interest of both parties guide response and agreement.  On both sides various expectation and strategic initiatives have failed and both sides are privy to inevitable geopolitical changes around the world and in the neighbourhood.

It is important to stress that the nuclear negotiation commence under the former president, Dr Mahmoud Ahmedinajad, an individual savagely demonised by the western media. He and members of Islamic Republic leadership were and are not irrational after all. The fact that the negotiation started in secrecy, with US allies in the region kept in the dark by Washington DC says volumes. In addition, despite bombastic hyperboles of revolutionary propaganda, Tehran was fully aware of its vulnerabilities and opportunities. Its core strategic political and geopolitical objective remains nationalistic. For this ideal majority of the population are willing to make huge sacrifices in addition to playing for the long haul. Similar description can be made of the Cuban revolution.

There was something lacking in the western context of (Iran) Others, Other peoples and Other countries. Deliberate ignorance of information and attention to proximate data on others are dismissed. While Iran may lack parity in economic, technological and military department with US; Iranians are ready to die for their revolution. Above all Iran was not and was never isolated physically. Even Cuba, an island in the Caribbean, was placed under economic sanction by Washington DC for the past 50 years, has survived.  Despite the 50+ years sanction, Havana is stable, certain and developed impeccable anti-imperialist and medical geopolitical credentials. Expectations that collapse of USSR will drive her underground remains a dream for its antagonists.

End of Battle of Red Lines

Going beyond rationality of diplomacy and engagement of Iran, it is apparent and certified that Tehran is a credible party for tough negotiations, a party open and willing to make compromises and is equally a ‘demon’ that can negotiate with ‘Satan’. Beyond the rhetoric the last year has produced important milestones based on mutual respect along the project time line while various redlines remain immovable, changing and shifting.

Amplification of trust is evident in the measures adopted by both parties to advance the negotiations. One can surmise that Tehran has not only displayed flexibility but conducted its diplomacy with coherence. Various centres of power in Iran have coordinated and cooperated to advance a unifying ‘grand strategy’.

It is obvious that a deal may not be clichéd for a simple reason. United States centres of power including its strong influencers/lobbyists may not be ready for Washington DC rapprochement with Tehran. Incoherent foreign policy, inconsistent implementation of strategy, misreading of geopolitical reconfigurations and insertion of wishful variables may force the negotiation to end in a stalemate. The ease with which sanctions were enacted may force the hand of those who enacted them as they struggle existentially to come to terms with an ill-fated 'dogma' that all sanctions cannot be removed at once.  

Tehran has concluded that extension of the current negotiation time-table is not in her interest. President Obama has given a number of mixed reactions to current ‘progress’. So until Washington DC resolved its internal crisis which only diminishes its geopolitical capital not surprisingly, Tehran can only sustain business-as-usual of the previous 3 decades of US ambiguity and ambivalence. Nevertheless it remains obvious that things are not going economically well with P3+1. A pattern of geopolitical pattern to come!

Complicated Dimensions & Manifestations of Compaore’s Burkina Faso Geopolitics

Burkina Faso - The Land of Upright People

Introduction

The purpose of the article is to extract the juice of Ouagadougou’s geopolitical machination of almost 3 decades. Beyond the ‘frenzy’ of recent past peoples’ revolt in Burkina Faso which in itself is not spontaneous that led to the resignation of erstwhile president, Blaise Compaore, a number of important issues remain in the geopolitical black box.  

While French media among Western outlets refer to him as a mediator, and refer to Burkinabes secondarily as poor probably based on a devalued and devaluing US dollar; on the contrary the measure of events indicates that those contested labels are red herrings. Lastly the non-spontaneous response of Burkinabes is not for democracy; it is for something far deeper than Western media constructed outcomes. This is essential mostly for African observers who doggedly refuse to reconstruct ill-fated political views received under violent impositions of imperialistic assumptions.

In the Historical Wider Beginning

Then Upper Volta (Haute-Volta) was part of colonial French West Africa manipulated from Paris with a combined initiative to extract her human & natural resources for the sustenance of the empire while holding the people down with civilisation-stripping policy of assimilation. Assimilation as a policy can be summarised as a strategic ploy to institutionally eliminate Africans historically, culturally and civilisationally to be recreated with new imposed French civilisation which is constructed as the raison d’être of French deluded mission of civilisation. For the French Africans including Upper Voltans were only as good as what can be extracted from them by violence and not in the essence of usefulness to their people and as a people.  See map below.

Map of Colonial Africa

When WW2 eliminated French pretension of empire, Paris reconstructed her strategic initiative to run and maintain an empire based on her colonial possessions. French political elite understood perfectly well that without Africa the essence of France evaporates. Georges Clemenceau was the embodiment of this policy earlier at the end of WW1 and fought tirelessly against naive Woodrow Wilson’s post-WW1 geopolitical infatuations. (Read A Shattered Peace by David Andelman). Empire was the crux of WW1 and as one winner, Paris held fast to her prized possessions. 

Post-WW2 finally lifted the veil of geopolitical intransigence which among other things stripped France and United Kingdom of any clout and coupled with entry of new geopolitical players in town. So the 2^nd fiddler, France, cemented her colonial credentials in Africa and Asia. By the time General Charles De Gaulle arrived in Paris of course with a panache for racism against Africa(ns) initially displayed in public after the liberation of Paris in his refusal to allow African troops who contributed to partake in the parade, the die was cast. Better understanding of his geopolitical initiatives and designs on Africa is better presented in a biased 2-volume biography by Jean Lacouture, De Gaulle: The Rebel 1890 – 1994 & De Gaulle: The Ruler 1945 – 1970.

 Conakry & Sekou Toure’s ‘Non'

By the time of De Gaulle’s 2^nd ‘missionary journey’ at Elysee Palace, there is little room for France to project power in Europe. USSR is already at the door slicing off eastern half of Europe while United States is dominant on the West. Some of French colonial possessions including Algeria and Vietnam are becoming restive and combustible from long inhuman imperialist policies in addition to war pacifications ordered by De Gaulle which resulted in the genocide of many Africans in various parts of French colonial Africa. (Read Wretched of the Earth by Franz Fanon). 

So by 1958 as the so-called negative ‘wind of change’ blew across Africa, De Gaulle crafted a carrot & stick policy of holding down African colonies. De Gaulle didn't refrain at using unchecked violence to forestall Africa’s self determination. (Read Algeria: France Undeclared War by Martin Evans).

One must appreciate that the level of French economic, social and infrastructural investments across her possession where pittance. This is even acute in landlocked areas like then Upper Volta. Mind you with assimilation, the best and promising Africans like Cote d’Ivorie’s Houphouet Boigny are shipped to Paris to become French in all things, so these lands where hamstrung to take any independence initiative in geopolitical isolation and economic limitation. Ideologically the world was bifurcated between communism and not-so-free market.

Independence of former French Colonies (in red F)

When in 1958 De Gaulle deceptively offered independence to African colonies with onerous conditions including unfettered exploitation of natural resources, only Amadou Sekou Toure of Guinea jumped at the offer with a categorical ‘Non’ to French rule. See map above for pattern of independence and Guinea’s temporal isolation. De Gaulle did everything in his power including rabid reconstruction of history, using violence to destabilise, attack and reverse Guinea’s vote for self-determination via his African Czar, Jacques Foccart & his Foccart Network. Guinea was perceived as reactionary to Paris designs therefore needed to be cut to size. The rest of African leaders including Maurice Yameogo (later the first president) and Houphouet Boigny played for time.  Houphouet Boigny, a man of means and influence for the French project was married with daughters.

Neocolonial Independence and Underlings

Independent African Countries

By the time Upper Volta gained independence in 1960 it was already in a position of political and economic weakness due to unfavourable terms of independence which include but not limited to dependence on Paris, a military pact that stationed French troops in Ouagadougou, subjection of internal, foreign, and economic affairs to Paris oversight. Coupled with the fact of having a smaller population, being landlocked with 6 neighbours, part sahelian, part desert and left alone as French sphere of influence by other Western powers, Ouagadougou was stymied for a while.

Devoid of ethnic conflict, political power remained partly stable over time. However within the sub-region, Cote d’Ivorie rose to become the dominant power in the French area. Senegal under Leopold Senghor chose a path of sublime radicalism without disrupting relationship with Paris. President Houphouet Boigny saw his country as the epicentre of West African affairs and hub of French interest as a keen product of assimilation. Read Black Skin White Mask by Franz Fanon. With French collaboration and assistance Cote d’Ivorie gradually became an economic hub based on cocoa, other agricultural produce and natural resources.

In addition Cote d’Ivorie felt constrained by the perception that Guinea and Ghana on the eastern and western borders, who shared ideological and geopolitical positions were potential flashpoints of stability & higher geopolitical profile. The reason for this disposition was the fact that these countries sought the assistance of Moscow & Peking for economic development. These countries never tilted politically towards communism. So to advance Abidjan ambitions, relationships with Paris and Washington DC were elevated and in return CIA found fertile ground to culminate regime change in Accra which was successfully accomplished in 1966 while Nkrumah was on official visit to Vietnam.  History will take catastrophic revenge decades later on Cote d’Ivorie.

Structural Adjustment West African Branch

By the 1980s a number of events converged to challenge power structures of Upper Volta. Under the singular influence of Paris, it suffered the 1970s destructive Sahelian drought and with limited scope for developing the productive sector ran up massive foreign debts under Paris Club/World Bank. With a gradual reversal of French economic fortunes and de-linking of erstwhile economic relationship against an isolated country, the leadership was faced with complicated problems. 

Various army factions took power at various times until Captain Thomas Sankara arrived Ouagadougou in 1983 with fresh air at the age of 34. His emphasis was economic development and political solidity based on independence in internal affairs, free hand in foreign policy, foreign debt rejection/repudiation, prioritisation of local industries, zero-tolerance to corruption and increased political awareness of citizens. The debt repudiation suggestion made him enemies in the West.

His government tried within 4 years of his administration to redirect Upper Volta which he now renamed Burkina Faso (Land of Upright People) along the above stated lines and these policies upset powerful domestic and foreign interests. His popularity across Africa and many other parts of the world who have been chaffing under the weight of Washington Consensus was overwhelming. His policy of non-alignment including perceived closeness to Havana was not welcomed by Washington DC and Paris. In West Africa, Cote d’Ivorie was alarmed by this development moreso for the increasing geopolitical profile of a small country and a younger leader. Even the then French President Mitterrand publicly expressed concern at Sankara foreign policy choices.

From a geopolitical viewpoint there are missed dimensions in the Burkina Faso discourse. Given the fact that it is landlocked, given the fact that its economic footprint is small within the region and within French West African sub-region, given that it is expected to orient unwavering towards Paris direction; a mental image developed that quarantined this country in the minds of statesmen and diplomats. Nevertheless the fact remains that geopolitically and temporally, Burkina Faso and Captain Thomas Sankara were isolated. 

Sankara was exposed seriously and he expressed his impending mortality without restriction. Positive political and economic developments are imperfect and the suggestion that an international revolution can be sustained in isolation is far-fetched.  His murder in 1987 by his successor was not triggered by internal affairs errors rather by power hunger (with foreign encouragement) of his trusted ally, then Captain Blaise Compaore whose wife is one of Cote d’Ivorie president’s (Houphouet Boigny) daughters. With the coup, the coup leader’s wife became the First Lady of state for nearly 3 decades.

Post-Sankara and Jewel of Landlockness

2 important developments accompanied post-Sankaran rule in Burkina Faso. The first was reconstructing erstwhile alliance dismantled by President Thomas Sankara. These policies reflected in the promotion of Paris & Washington Consensus, and recalibrating relationship with regional power, Cote d’Ivorie, of whom the new leader is a son-in-law. The second strategy was repositioning Burkina Faso in a new geopolitical environment that allows it enhanced visibility especially when the opportunity arrives. 

Let us expand our view of the second strategy. Every neighbourhood consist of hierarchy of powers and no two countries share the same relative power. All cannot be weak and all cannot be strong. Some weak states will feed off the powerful ones far and near. The new government with filial relationships between the leader of the most powerful country (Cote d’Ivorie) in the sub-sub-region was bound to reflect some the latter’s potency. Not only that, it was also disposed to reflect even stronger influence from the higher powers (Paris & Washington DC) from which the strong regional power draws legitimacy.

Operationalisation of opportunistic projection of influence is effected at the behest of stronger power far and near who identify, plan, implement and monitor most of an influencing project in the sub-region.  These opportunistic influences enabled by distant powerful states allows Ouagadougou to play reflexive 2^nd fiddle, deliver its bargain, consolidate power and maintain unchallenged power by any means necessary including maintaining semblance of deoxygenated democracy  so far the distant powers continue support and assistance.  

As a landlocked country, civilian and military air transport is the only means allowing it to implements its phase of any project. It is also important to dismantle the myth that desert is an obstructer of movement. There is no evidence of such rather this mental disposition has enabled in many quarters total dismissal of actual huge movement of men and machines across desert borders between countries.

 Epicentre of Regional Destabilisation

While French media imposed its own of reflexive corruption in referring to Blaise Compaore as a regional ‘mediator’, what is missing is the true narrative of conflicts that enabled his erstwhile ‘peacemaking’. Although in such byline, France24 only confirmed what is already know in public about French collusion to maintain its fading illusion of empire in Africa.  He was a merchant of death!

As stated earlier the construction of a geopolitics based on opportunity for influence projection in the sub-region allowed Ouagadougou to flexibly punch above her weight while dynamically assuming various roles aside from 2^nd fiddle between her and her handlers in Washington DC and Paris. A number of conflicts in the region established Blaise Compaore as the enfant terrible of West Africa geopolitics. 

Outflows of Instability from Burkina Faso Under President Blaise Compaore

It is a fact that Burkina Faso under Compaore facilitated, assisted and hosted Charles Taylor in his bid to take power in Liberia which resulted in the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. This assistance was coordinated in full knowledge and at times with cooperation of the French government. Interestingly Compaore used the good offices of his father-in-law to transfer rebel troops and equipments through Cote d’Ivorie territory into Liberia.

Following the demise of President Houphouet Boigny instability descended on his beloved Cote d’ Ivorie and this country reverted to destruction. His exit from the political landscape and lack of credible successor opened the door wide open for Ouagadougou to reconstruct new alliances with potential leaders of the country. As Cote d’Ivoire boiled in 2000s, Compaore exploited and aligned with former Prime Minister Alasanne Ouatarra and New Forces rebels to seek for power through the barrel of the gun.  Houphouet Boigny must have rolled in his grave!

Ouagadougou facilitated, assisted and directed resources towards the country’s instability in connivance with Paris including arranging stop-gap peace summits to allow the rebels breathing space until the final push by the French who violently removed Laurent Gbagbo from power. It is no surprise that the new Cote d’Ivorie president is firmly under Paris thumb print. Alasanne Ouattara welcomed Compaore immediately after his exit.  

There are evidence that Blaise Compaore used his office to contribute to Sierra Leone instability by sponsoring, facilitating, assisting and providing training and equipments to Foday Sankoh in return for illicit diamond and other natural resources. This was finessed with another ally rebel-turned-president of Liberia, Charles Taylor. Sierra Leone continues to suffer from the genocide that took place in the war. It must be asserted that wars in Cote d’Ivorie, Liberia and Sierra Leone were outcomes of collapse of internal leadership and poverty of strategic initiative which was exploited by various rebels which in turn were exploited by Blaise Compaore.

Lastly, it is a known fact that Boko Haram is not an isolated group and an allegation by Nigerian government against Burkina Faso's alleged sponsorship and to have their bases in Burkina Faso closed was rebuffed vigorously by Blaise Compaore. It is equally interesting to observe how among other sly operations under the rubric of US Africa Command (USAFRICOM), United States in the name of ‘war on terrorism’ established military/drone bases in West Africa; in Niamey Niger and in Ouagadougou Burkina Faso. These are subtle manifestation of Asia Pivot against China which is implemented across Africa wherever China has strategic investments to forestall Beijing mineral resources supply from Africa. 2011 NATO’s violent destruction of Libya and murder of his leader and peoples calls to mind.

Phased Peoples Opposition

While the people of Burkina Faso have been chaffing under the erstwhile administration for almost 3 decades and finally boiled over for him to give up, BBC and French media continued to deny their agency and ability rather paint an inglorious picture of a conflict-maniac as peace maker. Above all, Western media has taken a dodged position in referring to Burkinabes as poor. This is repeated over and over again. Burkina Faso people are rich economically, culturally and historically and probably on a good day will refuse subordination to foreign powers.

The critical element which may be the main outcome of this situation as the dust settles is acknowledgement of losses. Of course Burkina Faso military cannot assume any legitimate claim to power since the overthrow was people-instigated and people-executed. Since Burkina Faso is not and has not engaged in civil war, her potential is higher. Their key to the future is avoiding such conflict whenever it is imposed and excluding France from her strategic decision making. This is stated clearly because the main loser of this phase is France. The language will remain but other vestiges of French institutional influence need to decline. The military pact is regressive and outmoded for the times although the US base will survive. If African democracy of the 21^st century must flourish, then it doesn't require French military legitimacy, an instrument of cold war ideological strategy.

Dynamic Final

Furthermore, despite Paris pretences she can no longer afford its hand-on approach to African politics because of its continuing economic weightlessness. Paris aggressive choices on the African continent be it in Cote d’Ivorie, Libya, Mali and Central Africa Republic are staples of unstoppable haemorrhage. While the disposition of illusory friendship mirrors elite observation, Africans see no friend in Paris. Over time Paris will throw in the towel because she has become poor. Quai d’orsay expectation that the strategy of ‘playing from the front for US to lead from the rear’ will be rewarded is foolhardy. US don’t reward countries unless there is total subservience.

Curiously beyond France losses, United States have moved closer to and away from her previous ambivalence toward Africa with a new direct military geopolitics as part of recolonisation of Africa’s mineral resources geostrategy a la Asia Pivot against China. With US military bases in Bamako, Ouagadougou and Niamey, progress is made towards final preparation of potential show down with Beijing in Africa. On this point future administrations in Ouagadougou cannot resist US overtures.

In the final analysis, Burkina Faso will be active and vibrant in the neighbourhood albeit with a reduced profile. It will have stable profile where many countries in the neighbourhood have been disabled by internal conflicts her former president contributed to. The only concern is how future administrations will manage the economy file and the strategic China file, as these policies will be the contentious potential for combustion more so if Burkina Faso possesses commercial quantities of mineral resources.