How the US Sold Africa to Multinationals Like Monsanto, Cargill, DuPont, PepsiCo and Others

[xchrom]

http://www.alternet.org/food/155559/how_the_us_sold_africa_to_multinationals_like_monsanto%2C_cargill%2C_dupont%2C_pepsico_and_others_/

_640x428_310x220


Driving through Ngong Hills, not far from Nairobi, Kenya, the corn on one side of the road is stunted and diseased. The farmer will not harvest a crop this year. On the other side of the road, the farmer gave up growing corn and erected a greenhouse, probably for growing a high-value crop like tomatoes. Though it's an expensive investment, agriculture consultants now recommend them. Just up the road, at a home run by Kenya Children of Hope, an organization that helps rehabilitate street children and reunite them with their families, one finds another failed corn crop and another greenhouse. The director, Charity, is frustrated because the two acres must feed the rescued children and earn money for the organization. After two tomato crops failed in the new greenhouse, her consultant recommended using a banned, toxic pesticide called carbofuran.

Will Obama's New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition help farmers like Charity? The New Alliance was announced in conjunction with the G8 meeting last Friday. Under the scheme, some 45 corporations, including Monsanto, Syngenta, Yara International, Cargill, DuPont, and PepsiCo, have pledged a total of $3.5 billion in investment in Africa. The full list of corporations and commitments has just been released, and one of the most notable is Yara International's promise to build a $2 billion fertilizer plant in Africa. Syngenta pledged to build a $1 billion business in Africa over the next decade. These promises are not charity; they are business.


Will Obama's New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition help farmers like Charity? The New Alliance was announced in conjunction with the G8 meeting last Friday. Under the scheme, some 45 corporations, including Monsanto, Syngenta, Yara International, Cargill, DuPont, and PepsiCo, have pledged a total of $3.5 billion in investment in Africa. The full list of corporations and commitments has just been released, and one of the most notable is Yara International's promise to build a $2 billion fertilizer plant in Africa. Syngenta pledged to build a $1 billion business in Africa over the next decade. These promises are not charity; they are business.

This is par for the course for the attempted “second green revolution” that is currently underway. The Gates Foundation and its Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa are working to build up a network of private seed companies and private agro-dealers across Africa. The goal is to increase average fertilizer use in Africa by more than a factor of six and to decrease the distance each African farmer must travel to reach a shop selling seeds and inputs. Those who support this vision have heaped praise on Obama and the G8's New Alliance. In fact, with both Republican and Democratic support, this is one of the only things both parties agree on.

[tabatha]

1. This makes me very angry.

Gates knows nothing about what he is doing in this area,

I intend to write to Obama.

[brush]

2. Stop subsidies

If the US and Europe would stop subsidizing big agribusiness crops like cotton, corn, sugar etc, African and other third world farmers would be able to compete on world markets with their production because in many cases, their costs per acre is less than even the big agribusinesses. The agribusinesses are able to flood markets with their huge crops because government subsidies make their crops cheaper even though they're really not (ie: if agribusiness costs of cotton per acre is $1.00 but government subsidies slash it to .50 per acre, they can make money by flooding the market by selling as cheap as .55 cents and thus undercut local farmers whose costs may be as low as .60 cents). This is an oversimplification of course but it helps make my point. US farmers with their mechanization and subsidies have a huge advantage. And with onerous loan terms and conditions from imposed on them by the World Bank, third world countries, even if they tried to help their farmers mechanize will never catch up. Some would say this is by design.

[bvar22]

3. This also explains WHY the US Disaster Capitalists....

...Piggy-Backed on the legitimate Arab Spring uprisings to join an Ongoing Civil War in Libya.
Warts and all, Gaddafi WAS a committed Pan-African, and a major roadblock o the G-8 and IMF Predation of African resources.
"Pan-Africa" = African Resources FOR Africa, NOT Global Corporations.

” For all his dictatorial megalomania, Gaddafi is a committed pan-African - a fierce defender of African unity. Libya was not in debt to international bankers. It did not borrow cash from the International Monetary Fund for any "structural adjustment". It used oil money for social services - including the Great Man Made River project, and investment/aid to sub-Saharan countries. Its independent central bank was not manipulated by the Western financial system. All in all a very bad example for the developing world.”

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MD27Ak01.html

Google : "IMF & Libya" for an update on how things are going in North Africa for the IMF and Global Banks now that Gaddafi has been "removed".
The gates to North Africa are now WIDE OPEN for IMF Predatory "development" Loans collateralized by Africa's natural Resources.

[font size=5]Let the Pillaging BEGIN![/font]

IMF Recognizes Libya's National Transitional Council
, Says Ready to Support its Efforts to Revive the Country's Economy
Press Release No. 11/329
September 10, 2011

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) announced today that, guided by the views of its membership, it has recognized the National Transitional Council (NTC) as the government of Libya and that it is ready to assist the NTC in its efforts to promote rapid and sustainable economic recovery as the country slowly emerges from a violent civil conflict.


http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/pr/2011/pr11329.htm

Do you find it alarming, or at least odd, that the secretive and non-transparent IMF would take the LEAD in recognizing "the National Transitional Council (NTC) as the government of Libya"
before the World's representative bodies, like the UN?

A NEW BANKING MODEL

He said he hoped the influence of international organizations would help shape a new Libyan model of banking, and [font size=3]the groundwork had already been laid by IMF and World Bank over the previous 2-3 years.[/font]

"The IMF and WB have a roadmap and I would like to go ahead with the facelift. We need a strong central bank," he said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/03/us-libya-cbank-idUSTRE7A22K420111103

So the "groundwork had already been laid" 2 - 3 years ago.
How convenient.
All "they" needed to do was get rid of Gaddafi.

Do you find it frightening, or at least odd, that the IMF and World Banks have the power to use the US Military to help with their plans?




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their cover stories.
Follow the MONEY.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]