The Rise of the Sahel Alliance: A New Era in African Independence

Author Avatar

athompson

Joined: Mar 2024
Spread the love

The Rise of the Sahel Alliance: A New Era in African Independence


Discover the rise of the Sahel Alliance, a new era in African independence. Geographically close countries, united by common challenges, linked by the bonds of religion, culture, and history, have come together to form a powerful alliance. Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, ruled by military personnel who seized power through similar coups, have…

source

Reviews

0 %

User Score

0 ratings
Rate This

Sharing

Leave your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

22 Comments

  1. West New Imperialism Now Can't Imposing & Dictating All ex colonialist nations in Africa & Asia, West Block is Super Liar Hypocrisy Nations Who Imposing Implementation All Human Rights By Their West Block Definition & Measurements But All Human Rights Measurements & Values Not As Same As Implemented To West Block Nations Cause They Think They Above Every Nations of The World & Untouchable by any international laws, international laws is existed only to sanction and punushed all weaker & little nations in the world… it's Public's Secret That Every nations know it… There's no justice and equality in this world….

  2. Great Channel, Great Content and Delivery. Dr. David Sir, You are much much more Knowledgeable in the Current Events and the Deep History of AFRICA than those in Main Stream Media of All the West. Instead they Lie too Much against People of the Global South or Southern Hemisphere.

  3. Playing to Our Strength in the U.S. China Policy

    Robert Zoellick’s Remarks
    at the UC San Diego Forum on US-China Relations

    January 31, 2024 | Washington D.C.

    Today's politics welcomes a confrontation with China. It suits both parties. Ever since Truman and Acheson were accused of losing China, Democrats have not wanted to look soft on China. Kennedy, Johnson, Clinton and now Biden have all wanted to avoid the accusation of being soft. The Republicans find this to be one of the few issues on which they can pull the party together, look strong and criticize Biden.

    Let’s consider whether this confrontation is a sensible strategy or based on mistaken assumptions. Will this spirit of confrontation ultimately serve U.S. interests? I will highlight two faulty assumptions, then turn to the policy implications and close with a final word on politics and policy.

    First, I think the Cold War is a mistaken, even sloppy analogy for China today. In the Cold War, the U.S. and the Soviet Union were two opposing international systems: capitalism and communism. The two superpowers didn't have much economic connection except in energy, some commodities and, toward the end, with the debt of Eastern European countries. That’s a very different situation from the U.S. and China today. We share a security and economic system.

    A further difference is that the Soviet Union wanted to promote world communism. China, at most, believes in Han chauvinism, a national ideology with little potential for global exportation. Policymakers in Beijing don't believe anybody could be like China. China wants power and respect. It would prefer a model of tributary states, regardless of their internal politics. Authoritarian systems may be easier for China to deal with, but that's not Beijing’s priority.

    Our diplomacy requires a more complex mix than a preoccupation with confronting China on every issue. Our allies will certainly not agree with the idea of trying to contain China. If we try containment and total confrontation, in conflict with allies, we'll lose a great source of America’s power.

    Other friends will also differ. Bilahari Kausikan of Singapore, a friend of the United States, makes a perceptive point that other countries will seek agency within the Sino-American competition and cooperation.

    Even India, the big prize of geopolitics, wants strategic autonomy. New Dehli is pleased to use the U.S. against China when it needs to, but it is also a member of the BRICS. India will take care of its own interests in the world. So should we.

    It's also a mistake to focus on dividing the world between democracy and autocracy. Vietnam doesn’t rank highly on the democracy scale, and it’s similar with the Gulf States. But we will want to work with them.

    If I had to draw a comparison, I'd say international relations today look more like 1900 than 1950. Analogies to the Cold War thus risk leading us dangerously astray.

    Second, sound strategy requires a realistic assessment of our capabilities and needs. I think Jake Sullivan’s Brookings speech missed an opportunity to explain the real challenge that we're facing.

    Let me give you some statistics from Fareed Zakaria, who hardly a conservative idealogue. In 2008, the U.S. and the Eurozone economies were about the same size. The U.S. economy is now twice as large. In 1990, U.S. per capita income was about 17% above Japan. Today it's about 54%. In 1989, four of the 10 most valuable companies in the world were in the U.S. Today, nine out of 10.

    Consider a much-discussed topic: global manufacturing. The U.S. has a larger share of global manufacturing output than Japan, Germany and South Korea combined. Of course, we have fewer manufacturing jobs with greater output because we're more productive. The same thing happened in the agricultural sector between 1900, when farming employed about 40% of the labor force, and today, when only 1 or 2% of workers are farmers.
    The top 10 most valuable tech companies have a total market cap above the stock markets of Canada, France, Germany and the UK. The U.S. leads in industries of the future, such as AI and bioengineering.

    We have more favorable demographics than Europe, Japan or China. We have low unemployment. The dollar is used in 90% of international transactions.

    According to the CBO, between 1990 and 2019, household income from market gains alone grew 26% after inflation. If you add in social insurance and tax transfers, that income increases to 55%. The bottom 20% of income earners had market growth of 50% and after-tax transfer growth of 74%.

    Or consider the question of mobility. Based on studies from the Treasury, the IRS, the Federal Reserve and Pew, over 90% of the people born in the bottom quintile of families earn more than their parents in real dollars. That's not what you normally see in the press. 63% rose to higher income quintiles.

    In sum, America has not suffered through some dystopian past to be transformed by protectio

  4. France has always been a blessing to all these countries. Right?
    France, by force, buys URANIUM from Niger for €0.88 per kilo.
    France then turn around and sells the same URANIUM for €200.00 per kilo.
    That tells me that France is getting richer off the back of the Nigeriens.