China and Africa

CHINA'S QUEST FOR RESOURCES
A ravenous dragon
Mar 13th 2008 From The Economist print edition

China's hunger for natural resources has set off a global commodity boom. Developed countries worry about being left high and dry, but the biggest effects will be felt in China itself, says Edward McBride (interviewed here)
Newspix
BESIDE the railroad track, between two hillocks of rust-red soil in the midst of Congo's mining belt, three Chinese labourers appear as if from nowhere. There are lots of Chinese around these days, explains one of their compatriots, Harvey Lee, who is driving through the scrub to the nearby copper plant he runs for a Canadian metals firm. On his way, he points out several rudimentary smelters. “That one”, he says, waving at a clump of corrugated-iron sheds and belching chimneys, “is owned by a man from Shanghai.” Moments later, when another ramshackle compound comes into view, he adds, “and that one belongs to two ladies from Hong Kong.” In all, he reckons, Chinese entrepreneurs have set up half of Lubumbashi's 50-odd processing plants.
All around Lubumbashi, the capital of Congo's copper-rich province of Katanga, there are signs of a sudden Chinese invasion. Chinese middlemen have begun buying ore from the area's many wildcat miners and selling it on to processing plants like Mr Lee's. Locals point out several villas in the city's leafy colonial cantonment that are occupied by mysterious Chinese businessmen. Katanga Fried Chicken, hitherto Lubumbashi's most popular restaurant, now has three busy Chinese competitors.


If all goes according to plan, these fledgling businesses will soon be overshadowed by Chinese investment on a much grander scale. In late 2007 the Congolese government announced that Chinese state-owned firms would build or refurbish various railways, roads and mines around the country at a cost of $12 billion, in exchange for the right to mine copper ore of an equivalent value. That sum is more than three times Congo's annual national budget and roughly ten times the aid that the “consultative group” of Western donors has promised the country each year until 2010. The Chinese authorities, it seems, are so anxious to obtain enough minerals to sustain their country's remarkable economic growth that they are willing to invest billions in a dirt-poor and war-torn place like Congo—billions more, in fact, than Western governments and investors combined are putting in.
And Congo is not the only beneficiary of China's hunger for natural resources. From Canada to Indonesia to Kazakhstan, Chinese firms are gobbling up oil, gas, coal and metals, or paying for the right to explore for them, or buying up firms that produce them. Ships are queuing off Australia's biggest coal port, Newcastle, to load cargoes destined for China (pictured above); at one point last June the line was 79 ships long. African and Latin American economies are growing at their fastest pace in decades, thanks in large part to heavy Chinese demand for their resources.
China's burgeoning consumption has helped push the price of all manner of fuels, metals and grains to new peaks over the past year. Even the price of shipping raw materials recently reached a record. Analysts see little prospect of an end to the boom; the prices of a few commodities have fallen on the back of America's worsening economic outlook, but others, including oil, wheat and iron ore, continue to set new records. China, with about a fifth of the world's population, now consumes half of its cement, a third of its steel and over a quarter of its aluminium. Its imports of many natural resources are growing even faster than its bounding economy. Shipments of iron ore, for example, have risen by an average of 27% a year for the past four years. Western mining firms are enjoying a sustained boom.
Unwelcome advances
But China's sudden global reach is generating as much anxiety as prosperity. In 2005 America's congressmen, citing nebulous national-security concerns, scuppered the proposed takeover of Unocal, an American oil firm, by CNOOC, a state-owned Chinese one. The opposition candidate in Zambia's presidential election in 2006 made a point of attacking the growing Chinese presence in the country. Residents of Russia's far east fear that China is planning to plunder their oil and timber and perhaps even to colonise their empty spaces.
Some non-governmental organisations worry that Chinese firms will ignore basic legal, environmental and labour standards in their rush to secure resources, leaving a trail of corruption, pollution and exploitation in their wake. Western companies fret that the Chinese state-owned firms with which they suddenly find themselves competing have an agenda beyond commercial gain. The Chinese government, they say, is willing to pay over the odds for mining or drilling rights to secure access to physical resources. It also intervenes unfairly on its companies' behalf, they claim, by offering big aid packages to countries that welcome Chinese investment. All this, it is feared, will dent the profits of big oil and mining firms, stoke inflation and imperil the West's access to resources that it needs just as much as China does.
Diplomats and pundits, for their part, fear that the West is “losing” Africa and other resource-rich regions. China's sudden prominence, according to this view, will reduce the clout of America, Europe and other rich democracies in the developing world. China will befriend ostracised regimes and encourage them to defy international norms. Corruption, economic mismanagement, repression and instability will proliferate. If this baleful influence spreads too widely, say the critics, the “Washington consensus” of economic liberalism and democracy will find itself in competition with a “Beijing consensus” of state-led development and despotism.
Such fears are not entirely groundless if the recent conduct of some of Congo's neighbours is anything to go by. Angola, to the south, has been receiving so much aid and investment from China that in 2006 it decided it had no need of the International Monetary Fund's billions and all the tiresome requirements for transparency and sound economic management that come with them. Sudan, to the north, has shrugged off Western threats and sanctions over the continuing atrocities in Darfur, thanks in large part to China's readiness to invest in Sudanese oilfields and buy their output. Farther afield, China's eagerness to do business in Myanmar, and its consequent reluctance to chide the tyrannical generals that run the place, helped to prevent a forceful international response to the violent repression of peaceful demonstrations there last year.
Nonetheless, this special report will argue that concerns about the dire consequences of China's quest for natural resources are overblown. China does indeed treat some dictators with kid gloves, but it is hardly alone in that. Its companies do not always uphold the highest standards, but again, many Western firms are no angels either. Fifty years of European and American aid have not succeeded in bringing much prosperity to Africa and other poor but resource-rich places. A different approach from China might yield better results. At the very least it will spur other donors to seek more effective methods.
For all the hue and cry, China is still just one of many countries looking for raw materials around the world. It has won most influence in countries where Western governments were conspicuous by their absence, and where few important strategic interests are at stake. Moreover, as China is becoming more involved in places such as Congo, its policies are beginning to change. It has promised to co-operate with the World Bank in its development efforts in Africa. It no longer seems prepared to back its most objectionable allies in the face of international opprobrium. Its diplomats, for example, did eventually stop parroting their line about unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state and allow United Nations peacekeepers to be deployed in Sudan.
The saga over Sudan shows how sensitive the Chinese authorities have become to criticism, despite their impassive reputation. When Steven Spielberg resigned as an adviser to the Beijing Olympics in protest at China's failure to do more about Darfur, a shrill chorus of criticism arose from China's official media—suggesting that such gestures do indeed have an impact.
Chinese companies will inevitably find themselves in fierce competition with Western ones for natural resources, as they must if global markets are to work efficiently. For the most part, however, they do not operate very differently from their peers. To the extent that the Chinese government does subsidise oil production, it helps to bring down the price for everyone else (its subsidies for oil consumption are another matter). As the world's biggest consumer of many commodities, China naturally wants to ensure a steady supply of them to keep its economy going. But markets for commodities are global, and the risk of any one consumer cornering supplies, or securing them at a lower price, is negligible.
Own goal
The worst fallout from China's quest for natural resources will be seen not in the countries they come from, nor in the countries that are competing for supplies, but in China itself. Over the past few years the volume of raw materials it consumes per unit of output has risen sharply. In particular, China has gone from miser to glutton in its use of energy, and is now struggling to diet. That has involved bigger imports of oil, gas and coal, and so more foreign entanglements. But it has also led to the rapid depletion of resources that China cannot import, such as clean air and water.
China is building a huge stock of grimy heavy industry, just as its coastal provinces are getting rich enough to care about the consequences. Protests about environmental issues are on the increase. There is not enough water in the Yellow River basin, which covers a huge swathe of northern China, to supply both farmers and factories. Acid rain from coal-fired power plants is reducing agricultural yields, raising the spectre of increased rural unrest. As it is, the authorities are struggling to ensure that the air will be fit for athletes to breathe at the Olympics in Beijing this summer. All the while, the number of noxious steel mills, cement kilns and power plants relentlessly increases. Global warming, which is fed by their fumes, will make all these problems even worse.
Environmental concerns are unlikely to bring down the Communist regime, or even to stir as much resentment as the arbitrary confiscation of land currently does among China's poorest. But those concerns are certainly prompting the government to reflect on what sort of economic path it wants to pursue. So far, its efforts to temper economic growth, encourage energy efficiency and wean the country off heavy industry have had little effect. But continued failure would eventually make China a less prosperous and more unstable place.

Asylum seekers protesting in Rome

Oggi 10/09/2008 richiedenti di asilo politico provenienti soprattutto dall'Etiopia, Somalia e dalla Nigeria protestano contro la lunghezza della procedura per ottenere il permesso di soggiorno e di lavoro in Italia e contro le condizioni disumane dei "Centri di accoglienza" in cui vivono. Donne i gravidanza, bambini e uomini hanno marciato da Castelnuovo di Porto a Roma (Via Mazzini)per circa 49 km..
La televisione ha riportato la notizia puntando l'attenzione sul traffico bloccato sulle strade consolari romane .
Today 10/09/2008 Ethiopian, Somalian and Nigerian asylum seekers are protesting against the lenght of procedures to get a staying and work permit in Italy and against inhuman conditions of "Centri di accoglienza" where they live. Pregnant women, children and men marched from Castelnuovo di Porto (at the outskirts of Rome) to the center of Rome, for 49 km.
Media reported the episode striving at the fact that the protest was causing hold up on roman main roads.

La nuova pattumiera è il Ghana

Il paese africano usato come discarica dei rifiuti elettronici nocivi
L'organizzazione ha ricostruito la rotta delle nuove navi dei veleni

E-waste, denuncia di Greenpeace
La nuova pattumiera è il Ghana

Le stime Onu parlano di 20-50 milioni di tonnellate di rifiuti ogni anno
Contengono elementi tossici che mettono a rischio ambiente e salute umana
di ANTONIO CIANCIULLO

E' il remake di un film degli anni Ottanta, un brutto film. Gli slum africani utilizzati come pattumiera dei veleni dei paesi ricchi, i primi vani tentativi di bloccare il traffico, la rivolta dei nigeriani che, esattamente vent'anni fa, sequestrarono una nave italiana, con 24 uomini di equipaggio, come arma di pressione per costringerci a risanare la discarica pirata di Port Koko. Adesso ci risiamo. Nella versione tecnologicamente avanzata dell'e-waste, il rifiuto elettronico che fluisce sempre più abbondante. La nuova pattumiera del mondo industrializzato è il Ghana: è qui che finisce una buona parte degli oggetti che fino a un istante prima dell'abbandono sembravano indispensabili e che all'improvviso si sono rivelati inutili, cancellati nella possibilità d'uso da memorie più potenti, software più avanzati.

GUARDA LE FOTO

La denuncia viene da Greenpeace che, con un'azione di "spionaggio industriale" è riuscita a ricostruire il percorso delle nuove navi dei veleni. Il punto di partenza per l'Europa è Anversa, in Belgio, dove confluiscono scarti elettronici provenienti da Olanda, Germania, Italia, Danimarca e Svizzera. Non si tratta di piccoli numeri. Le stime Onu parlano di 20-50 milioni di tonnellate di rifiuti tecnologici prodotti ogni anno: i Raee, ovvero i rifiuti derivanti da apparecchiature elettriche ed elettroniche, rappresentano la tipologia di rifiuti pericolosi in più rapida crescita a livello globale (3-5% annuo, nel 2006 ogni cittadino europeo ne ha prodotto tra 17 e 20 chili all'anno). Contengono elementi tossici e persistenti (metalli pesanti, ftalati, pcb) che rappresentano un rischio per l'ambiente e la salute umana nelle fasi di trattamento, riciclaggio e smaltimento.

Dunque roba da maneggiare con attenzione. Ma le foto che potete vedere mostrano cosa succede veramente. Oggetti pericolosi trattati senza nessuna precauzione anche da bambini, materiale tossico bruciato vicino alle case, pozze di liquame contaminato in cui tutti sguazzano. E' questa la fine che fa una buona parte dell'e-waste occidentale: si perdono le tracce del 75 per cento dei rifiuti tecnologici prodotti nell'Unione Europea e di oltre l'80 per cento di quelli prodotti negli Stati Uniti. In parte restano nei garage e nelle cantine, in parte vengono smaltiti illegalmente nei paesi in cui sono stati usati, ma in buona parte salgono sulle navi dei veleni per arrivare nei luoghi in cui i lavoratori, spesso bambini, sono esposti ai rischi legati al cocktail di composti chimici che questi rifiuti sprigionano quando vengono trattati in modo non adeguato.

In Ghana l'indagine di Greenpeace ha messo in evidenza una rete di cimiteri clandestini. Le navi ufficialmente cariche di "beni elettronici di seconda mano" arrivano nel più grande porto del paese, a Tema, e da lì prendono la strada del centro di smaltimento di Agbogbloshie, ad Accra, la capitale. Oppure si sperdono nel marasma dei piccoli cimiteri sparsi un po' ovunque. Greenpeace ha fornito i dati relativi a quello di Korforidua, ma è un esempio tra tanti.

Un disastro ambientale, sociale, umano che rappresenta l'altra faccia del disastro politico che ci coinvolge direttamente. Vent'anni fa l'Occidente chiuse gli occhi sulle rotte dei veleni finché il contenzioso internazionale divenne troppo aspro per ignorarlo. Ora la capacità di risposta dei paesi che subiscono l'arrivo clandestino dei rifiuti elettronici (dall'Africa alle piazze asiatiche) è più alta ed è prevedibile che la tensione tornerà a salire molto presto.
http://www.repubblica.it/2008/08/sezioni/ambiente/africa-rifiuti-elettronici/africa-rifiuti-elettronici/africa-rifiuti-elettronici.html
(5 agosto 2008)