Crimea is worth much more to Russians than to Ukraine. — Jabberwock

How so?

With Crimea, Russia can easily block (as it does) sea routes Ukraine is quite dependent, as we have seen. You see, the route from Odessa and other ports (and we have to forget ports in the Azov sea) and any sea route to them is easily inside the range of even the land based K-300P Bastion anti-ship missile system.

Yet the Black Sea isn't the only route to global sea trade for Russia and even without Crimea, Russia still would have it's ports in Novorossiysk among others in the Black Sea.

The Novorossiysk port in Russia (proper) on the Black Sea. Quite large, actually:


And the Russian fleet has a military naval base there already:


If your argument is that Russia needs Crimea for it's imperial domain, then I agree. For Russia to show that it can unify all Russians living now in various other sovereign states back to mother Russia, sure, Crimea is great achievement in furthering this ideal. Especially for Putin it was the victory he can boast about. But once you get something, usually the appetite grows and there's many Russians still out of Russia. Comes to mind how Hitler viewed the Volksdeutsche and had the policy of Heim ins Reich.

Among all, it would be simply a humilitian for a country that think of itself as an natural Empire. Yes, that would be difficult for a country that thinks it's still a Superpower.

On the other hand, militarily it will be easier to take back Crimea than Donbass. — Jabberwock

Well, to literally get landforces into Crimea is difficult. In this map triangles show where Russia has built fortifications. A lot of trenches and dragons teeth in the Crimea too now.

(where's that photo from anyway?) — jorndoe

That's actually from Putin's firm ally, Belarus. And people there not being happy about their leader. But now I guess everything is fine.

Conversely, Ukraine had (and has) international and domestic monitors. I guess that would end if they were to be assimilated by Russia. — jorndoe

If Ukrainian elections would be rigged, yes, we would know about it. I'm pretty confident about that.

And in Ukraine the war has done something which the WW2 did in Finland, it ended the political quarrel about language. And also the real threat from the far right (which actually was the worst prior to 2014) has in my view subsided to a Russian talking point (and even the Russian's aren't talking about denazification so much).

Perhaps in my view the only real obstacle is for Ukraine is to do away with the corruption. You see, a lot of money is now pured to the country and if (when) the war is over, the West will likely help with the reconstruction effort. Here lies the possibility of a problem: if this is done without supervision, it will just creat rampant corruption as all the money poured into Afghanistan did. If Ukraine is left to itself, this might be the hardest problem afterwards. And as someone observed: if Russia then stay basically where it is now, who will genuinely invest in the country? The fear of the war reigniting will be there. Hence Western security guarantees will be needed then.

There are no and never have been any grass roots opposition movements in Russia and it's near abroad. None. Everything is CIA/Western backed covert operations for Putin. And when you repeat the lie again and again, you will start to believe it yourself. What else could you admit to yourself later?

maybe the coup in Niger (after the coups in Mali and Burkina Faso), will make France less hesitant against the Russians now. — neomac

If either France or the US will say by a high ranking diplomat or official that Wagner and Russia has been involved, that surely would show that they are on the warfoot with Russia in Africa. If they don't say that, it tells something also.

And as Wagner is a private company and the members are mercenaries, it's not an escalation to attack them as would be let's say Russia military advisors of the armed forces or deployed Russian troops. This happened with Wagner and US forces coming into blows in a fight on an Conoco oil installation in Syria.

Why does world politics look like the 19th Century? — frank

Especially post-WW2 Cold War got world politics to look to be two sided. Now it's really getting back to being multipolar. Also in the way that so-called allies of one camp can be found meddling in some third countries internal politics being on different sides. Something that would have been unheard of during the Cold War. You have simply more independent and active participants.

Science and technology has improved, but has there been much other improvement? For me World politics looks more and more like in the 19th Century.

There is a country in the Sahel that should be discussed in thread: Sudan.

The latest fighting has been because of a power struggle inside the armed forces, between the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) lead by Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo and known as Hemedti and Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, the commander of the armed forces.

Some might remember the outcry in 2003 about the war in Darfur. The paramilitary Janjaweed responsible of a genocidal attack against the Darfuri people later was formed into the RSF, which was directly responsible to the former president Omar al-Bashir.

Here's a quick 5-minute recap of what has happened in Sudan (from some months ago, but still current:



Sudan has had 15 military coups since it's independence and even regions that have detached from it (South Sudan) haven't had good luck politically. Now it really is on the road to become a bigger failed state than Somalia. It seems that the fighting has again started in Darfur.

(Earlier the officers got on together, here next to each other from the left:)


In Western countries we assume that the armed forces are basically one single entity, but where there is the possibility of a military coup, the leadership fearing a coup usually divides on purpose the armed forces to separate organizations that basically are against each other in order to avoid a coup. Sudan is one example of infighting inside the armed forces, but the actually so is Russia (with the Prigozhin mutiny). Such arrangements many times make things worse.

Now it is estimated that about 1 million have fled the country.

You can defend yourself when someone wants to hurt you. But it should be quite clear that the person is really going to attack and hurt you. We know very well just how easy the wording "an existential threat" is used in politics even today and "pre-emption" is cherished.

It really comes down to when people think that they will create a better World by killing other people. Be those to be killed the rich, the jews, the infidels, the communists or whoever. Ideologies, religion and the demand for justice etc. are just excuses that are used to implement the atrocities.

Point being, Russia and China are bad examples because they were absolute basket cases before communism and in many ways improved despite communism, while it's unclear that any system could have avoided their problems. — Count Timothy von Icarus

Of course, you have the best example of Marxism-Leninism in the example of East-Germany and how it compared to West-Germany. It didn't experience famine and didn't experience massive purges, even if it had a large security state. Germans really showed just where you could make of Marxist-Leninist socialism. And we really have to remember that the most successful version of socialism has been with social-democracy, which is still quite alive an kicking in the Western World. Social Democrats have ruled many Western countries and are and inherent part of Western democracy just as are conservatives.

I think it isn't even just related to Communist revolutions but overall to revolutions: just how bloody or bloodless they can be differs. The French Revolution compared to American Revolution is the best example I can think of. Both countries had to fight foreign armies ("foreign" perhaps in the US case), but only one had internal terror.

When you have radicals in control that share a firm belief that they can better the World by killing the "bad" people, then there is no end to the piles of bodies they leave behind them. Pol Pot is a good example, but so is the Holodomor.

And when you have these killers then reading Marx, they will interpret Communist Revolution literally meaning that you have to kill the bourgeois, kill the rich, in order for the class struggle to succeed. Heaven forbid if you then are defined as "rich", a "kulak" or an "enemy of the state". The similar kinds of people can read the Koran and have their own ideas what fighting the "Jihad" means and would happily kill the unbelievers. Even Christianity has had this with it's Crusades, which really is a bizarre feat to pull out from the teachings of Jesus Christ, and all those time people wanted to build "The New Jerusalem".

It should be noted that the ruble has dramatically lost value also to the Chinese yuan and the Indian rupee. About 70% of Russian-Chinese trade is done in yuan and the ruble. Two years ago it was 30%.

I'm wondering how it's felt on the streets. — jorndoe

Russians will soldier on and just try to cope with it. It's not like they could be angry on the ballot box and choose a different leader and party in the oncoming presidential elections next March. Besides, they have it quite easy compared to the Ukrainians.

Furthermore, Russia did experience also higher inflation that for example the eurozone, even if now isn't so rapid:

Banned Jack Rogozhin for being a returning banned member. — Baden

When was he first banned?

The supposed 'coup' was preceded by three months of protests with dozens of thousands of participants. Were those all CIA agents? — Jabberwock

The most important development is typically left out of the "US Coup" narrative: That after few months Ukraine held democratic elections after the revolution where the ultra-nationalists lost (the Svoboda party was out of the new administration). And since then there has been many governments and a party that didn't exist in 2014 won the Parliamentary and Presidential elections, which is now leading Ukraine.

But somehow they are CIA backed nazis. Even if lead by a Russian speaking Jew.

Lavrov has said similar things:

Question: Could you please comment on the events in Niger?

Sergey Lavrov: The Foreign Ministry of Russia has already commented on the attempted coup (as I understand, everything is still in motion there) in Niger. We believe the coup is an anti-constitutional act. We always occupy a clear position in such cases.

But have to say that it's Prigozhin's Wagner, which is active in Mali and CAR makes it all quite puzzling.

Hope the ideas of military incursion to Niger simply fade away. That's at least avoiding the worst possible catastrophy.

Global inequality has been falling since the 90s and has fallen at a faster rate since 2019. But at the same time, the share of wealth held by the top 1% has also been steadily increasing. Both phenomena seem set to continue. — Count Timothy von Icarus

Exactly. As the West hasn't seen such rapid growth, we tend to miss just what a huge transformation has happened in China, the Far East and is happening in India. It's a fantastic development that people that has really faced large scale famine (and did experience a famine of 15 to 55 million deaths in 1959-1961) has prospered so much. All thanks to Chinese Marxism! :wink:

Although, I do wonder if the shift of population growth towards Sub-Saharan Africa might effect this trend in the long term. — Count Timothy von Icarus

The hope would be, that after Asia, the economic growth would finally start in Africa. Yes, it starts with sweatshops and cheap labour, but hopefully similar development as in Asia would happen there too. Yet there are many problems that can make it not happen.

Remittances dwarf all foreign aid; people send a LOT of money back when they migrate away. — Count Timothy von Icarus

As do direct investments work. With Foreign aid I'm not so sure: it is basically drug addiction that doesn't make the countries better. In fact the now collapsed Republic of Afghanistan is a perfect example of just pouring money creates: rampant corruption and state that collapses. Before the collapse, 43% of the GDP of Afghanistan came from foreign aid. About 75% of public spending was funded by foreign aid grants. That is totally reckless, basically from the West that was responsible of this. Yet when you look at the countries that have really developed, really went from the verge of famine to an industrialized country, it hasn't happened because of foreign aid. Foreign markets, yes, but not aid.

Shanghai in 1990 and in 2010, just 20 years:

RICO charges for Trump in Georgia.

Trumpism isn't going to be defeated in court anyways. — Benkei

And Trumpism might succeed better without Trump and with Trump being a fond memory.
Or actually it should just be called populism.

You clearly dont' care about national sovereignty or sovereign borders. — Jack Rogozhin

Lol :lol:

Says the person that has written on nationality sovereignty and sovereign borders this:

And again, Crimea was never part of Ukraine proper but part of it when it was a territory for 40 years, after being part of Russia for hundreds. Even if there is a rule about borders, it wouldn't quite apply here.

And...

Russia rightly doesn't consider Crimea taken land. It had been Russian territory for centuries until Ukrainian Kruschev gave it to Ukraine in a narcissistic, ceremonial move not anticipating the Soviet Union's breakup...Kruschev wasn't a brainiac.

So for you, sovereign borders don't apply ...in some cases. Some aggressors are understood.

Whereas for me the sovereignty of the states, and there borders, is important. Of course there are problems like those who don't have a nation like the Kurds, so borders can be redrawn, hopefully peacefully. At least sticking to territorial integrity is one way to make the World less violent than it is. Hence I was against Operation Iraqi Freedom and think that the reasoning of invading Afghanistan and the reasoning was absolutely crazy. And if now ECOWAS with French or US assistance would go into Niger, I would oppose it. (But I guess you haven't noticed it)

This is hilarious. The US has pushed--often very successfully--coups in Cuba, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Chile, Venezuela, Syria, Ukraine, Australia, and many other countries...just this year in Pakistan. Where do you get your world history from? — Jack Rogozhin

Obviously you don't seem to read what I write, but simply attack something you intend me being.

(And when was there a US sponsored military coup in Australia? Or are you referring to the Rum Rebellion? I don't think the US was involved, but you have to enlighten me.)

Your arguments make it clear you think America has the right to violate that sovereignty as they have done for almost a century — Jack Rogozhin

Again a strawman as I've never said that. Or thought. I was on the previous Philosophy Forum site arguing with Americans defending President Bush's decision to invade Iraq as a wrongful move.

You literally said American only TRIES to influence states and the actions are limited. Tell that to Afghanistan, Syria, Libya — Jack Rogozhin

1. And Afghanistan is an Islamic Emirate today.
2. Syria is still being lead by Bashar al-Assad with basically the civil war now won by him and neighboring states starting to normalize their relations.
3. Yes, Libya is a mess...and there's a multitude of countries involved. Basically so-called allies of the US are on different sides supporting different groups.

So look yourself at how that influencing has gone. I will remain with my words: the US TRIES TO influence states, it doesn't control them and they aren't the helpless victims as you think they are in the face of your country. Clearly the World doesn't go the way people in Washington DC want it to go.

Nuland even made implicit threats against Niger if they didn't turn the government back over to the deposed ruler....that is absolutely disregard and violation of sovereignty. — Jack Rogozhin

Western countries, just like the ECOWAS, condemn military overthrows. Condemnation and sanctions are one thing. A military intervention or military action is quite different. We haven't yet seen what will happen in Niger, yet in the example of Mali, they just left. Yet there is the threat that this could get out of hand.

The US is doing the same thing in Syria where they have multiple unwanted bases and soldiers where they steal Syria's oil — Jack Rogozhin

Here is a perfect example of your totally ignorant attitude about the reality on the ground. Or then you simply paint with such broad strokes your World that it doesn't make much sense (other than US bad, those who oppose the US are good).

The US isn't doing the "same thing" in the countries of Sahel as it has done with Syria. With Syria Obama tried to start a war against the regime, but didn't get any of it's allies with it and backed down (Obama's famous line in the sand). Then Trump attacked Syrian armed forces (an airbase). And the US had an absolute fiasco of trying to form a "politically correct" opposition fighters to fight the Syrian regime, which basically feared more about the fighters themselves being islamists or that the weapons would go to islamists. And lastly it went to Syria to fight ISIS and has quarelled with Wagner troops there. Syria has been an absolute trainwreck for the US.

The Sahel countries are different.

Yet the US hasn't attacked Nigerien forces. It has trained these forces, and these generals, that now took over. But for you such difference seem not to matter. Because Nigerien leaders have been puppets, not politicians that have faced a huge tasks with their countries. You know the facts and others are just American jingoists.

It asked and was given permission by their puppet ruler. — Jack Rogozhin

Again the obsession of puppets.

you've spouted such naive NATO/American jingoism — Jack Rogozhin

Like what a failure the war on Terror has been? How bad it has gone?

Right, thta's American jingoism. Likely you don't care to read what I actually say. But seems you see puppets everywhere.

Has the economic anarchy of capitalism produced the current status quo of 2/3rds of the world living below the poverty line? — an-salad

Actually, there are now less people living in absolute povetry than earlier.

Perhaps the reason isn't only capitalism. It might be also that China and India threw away old school socialism.



But we can always choose again socialism! :wink:

It's funny how SSU is so concerned about the sovereign borders of Ukraine, but cares nothing for the sovereign borders and sovereignty of Niger...or any other countries sovereignty the US has violated — Jack Rogozhin

Because the US didn't attack Niger. Or it hasn't annexed parts of Niger.

It asked and was given permission and then build the base starting in 2016 for Nigerien armed forces too. Niger then was feeling the pressure from islamists from Mali and Boko Haram from Nigeria.

And then, after many years, things has gotten worse and not much had improved. As I stated with example of the Dogon and the herders or Azawad, not everything is about islamists in the Sahel. Which has been the basic problem. I'm not sure if you have much knowledge just how his war has evolved.

Now perhaps it can ask for the US to leave, as it has asked the French to leave.

US might have to leave the Sahel like it had to leave Central Asia and the stans (not only Afghanistan).

i have correctly shown where this has occurred. — Jack Rogozhin

Just what have you correctly shown? What you have said is "Sorry, but the Niger coup against America, France, and their puppet government has the backing of the Niger people and is not evil". And then you have referred to Ukraine and Hungary.

That's not much and not very informative.

What is the role of US military in Niger? — T Clark

I guess to fight GWOT. Or whatever under the Biden administration it is called.

As it's centrally located in the Sahel and up until now has been rather stable, it (the US) has a drone base in Agadez (Air Base 201) in the country and has about 1000 soldiers in the country. (The French basically have had their troops in the Niamey airport.) Being next to Mali, Libya, Algeria, Chad and Nigeria makes it a good place for drones that still have a limited range.



The war against the islamists came up in 2017 when a group of US special forces were ambushed in Niger close to the Malian border.

Just why the GWOT or fight against the islamist has been a train wreck is great issue to talk about.

So, is this iteration of the Great Game primarily an economic one, countries grabbing for markets? Is there still a military purpose, i.e. a struggle for political hegemony? — T Clark

France and it's relation especial to the Sahel region and Sub-Saharan Africa is still that kind of traditional.

China is different. You have to sell somewhere the concrete you produce, when you produce in two years as much concrete that the US has produced in the 20th Century. China isn't fighting a war on Terror in Africa. It literally doesn't have the bases. Last time, apart from attacking Indian border guards with sticks, China used it's military was against the Vietnamese and that border war didn't go so well for China. One could say that China can be a bully only with it's close neighbors.

Especially the US is scared about China in Africa, but then again, the Development Aid by the West has been quite similar... and not so effective.

Let's remember that "Development Aid", especially to African countries, is nearly allways a way to substitute your OWN industry and corporations that do the projects. If China goes to Africa and builds a railroad, the workers, engineers and project leaders as the machines will be Chinese. Perhaps the engineer driving the train will be African, but he has had to learn Chinese. And many countries do the same. Development aid isn't similar to an direct investment, somebody believing in the economy of the country (or in the cheap workforce) and investing their money in an business enterprise.

What's the obsession with misrepresenting a statement of fact as "obsession with puppets"? What's with your obsession with denying the fact "first world countries" have always, and still have, puppet leaders in third (and even second and first) world countries. It's like you've never heard of colonialism, imperialism, or soft power — Jack Rogozhin

What statement of facts?

Seems like if previously you couldn't say anything about the reasons of Putins actions, somehow now Nigerien politics is quite clear to you as are the facts.

Perhaps you don't seem to notice just how condescending it is to view everything evolving around the US and the Great Powers and everybody else being puppets, pawns and sycophants. Yes, these counties TRY to influence states, yet the actions are limited. They can influence only so much what events happen and in the end foreign countries are just one group of actors in a country. Yet if we are fixated only the colonialists, domestic poltics and internal problems don't matter. Perhaps it's too difficult for Americans to understand it as everything has to be about them, it seems.

In the case of Niger coup, we still don't know the reasons.

Yet if President Bazoum had forced generals into retirement and it's alleged that he was trying to retire the 62-year old general Tchiani, wouldn't that be a reason for the general to do a military coup and then get support for by playing the populist / anti-colonialism card?

It was known that his (Tchiani's) relations with Mr Bazoum, a longstanding ally of Mr Issoufou (previous president), were more distant and in recent weeks there were rumours that the president was preparing to force him into retirement.

Or these US trained officers just suddenly felt this anti-colonial vibe and went for it?

And isn't Bazoum then trying to influence the US when he is asking them for help and portraying that Wagner is behind it?

Besides, the real danger is if ECOWAS really would go with it's ultimatum and the nations would go to war, which is totally catastrophic.

In other countries the parties promote younger politicians. The older politicians don't take the top jobs, but are OK once their stint on the political cutting edge is over. In my country the previous administration was a perfect example of this. By perhaps coincidence, the leftist parties along with the centrist party wanted to look young and feminine, and they all put as their party bosses fairly young women. The end result was a coalition administration of them that looked like this:


Those four are all leaders of their political parties. Of course, the parties are still male dominated and party activists are as old as anywhere, but it's the image that counts, I guess.

Yet it seems in America the dual-party system is so entrenched, that there seems to be a culture of older guys getting finally the top jobs after a long, loyal career for the party.

I mean, just look at them:

Sorry, but the Niger coup against America, France, and their puppet government has the backing of the Niger people and is not evil — Jack Rogozhin

What's the obsession with puppets? I think Nigerien political actors themselves have a role in this and Nigerien domestic politics can be a bigger reason, like Bazoum forcing generals to retire. Yes, there is disenchantment about the democracy of Bazoum's administration.

Yet Bazoum representing Nigerien Party for Democracy and Socialism won the elections in 2021 from a former president of Niger Mahamane Ousmane. Btw Ousmane had been also thrown out of power by a military coup and there had been one failed coup against Bazoum already in 2021. So were they both puppets or what?

And coup against America? France, definately yes, US perhaps not:

(REUTERS 10th Aug 2023) After ousting President Mohamed Bazoum from office on July 26 and placing him under house arrest, the junta revoked military cooperation agreements with France, which has between 1,000 and 1,500 troops in the country.

So far the United States has not received any request to remove its troops and does not have any indication that it will be forced to do so, said two U.S. officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

And I think five officers of the junta have been trained in the US... and Victoria N has been already there to talk with them.

I can't help thinking that Russia and China are somehow responsible for stirring up this mess. — magritte

China's interest in the Sahel (and in Africa in general) with it's Belt and Road Initiative is simply to get more customers for it's industry and enlarge it's infrastructure building beyond China. China's only military base in Africa is in Djibouti, where it shares the place with a myriad of other countries from Saudi-Arabia alongside France, Germany, Japan and the US.

(The below map is old as Mali doesn't have the international operations going in it anymore and hence no western bases. French troops left the country last year)



Russia has been more active in the "Great Game" by giving an alternative to the West in security services, and it's mercenaries from Wagner have been active in Central African Republic (CAR) and Mali. Mali, which had seen a lot of Western assistance in the form Operation Serval and Berkhane, went on to have Wagner troops after the French withdrew. Mali's junta has openly advertized that the Wagner forces have been effective, hence it's likely that people in Niger see Russia as a preferable option, because there is a genuine security problem. Yet it goes a bit too far to say that Russia is behind this mess: Russia gives an alternative choice which some factions can think is an answer to their problems. Hence the Russian flags and pro-Russian sentiment in the demonstrations. But this isn't clear cut. For example the military junta in Burkina Faso has said it doesn't want Wagner / Russians to come to help them.

Does this in any way mean that the military might be able to provide more stable government than the civil sector? — T Clark

Stable government is far more than the security sector, and that's a problem. You cannot use only a hammer, if you would need a saw or an axe. And military junta's are prone to corruption and building a "military-industrial complex" where the armed forces have a large role in the country's businesses.

Are there any areas of peace and stability. — T Clark

I guess Senegal has been rather peaceful and stable, even if there are internal problems even there. But there hasn't been a military coup in the country or a civil war, although that from 1960 the country has had only four presidents. Yet economic growth has happened more in East Africa than in West Africa, where the Sahel region hasn't seen much if any improvement.

I read parts of Mungo Park's "Travels in the Interior Districts of Africa." If I remember correctly, he travelled up the Gambia River and down the Niger in the period between 1795 and 1805. He painted a picture of a region made up of small, relatively peaceful and prosperous kingdoms. — T Clark

That's basically hundred years before Europeans colonized the Sahel region. Learning pre-colonial history of Africa is very informative as usually people just gaze at the continent from the (negativs) effects that colonalization had on the countries. In a way just looking at Africa (and the Sahel) as the playground for European Great Powers downplays the African actors and African issues.

Mental fitness tests for presidential candidates would be fantastic. — flannel jesus

Simply a younger generation of candidates is what the US needs. If I'd be an American, I really wouldn't be excited about choosing from two old farts like Trump and Biden, that have some probability of dying or being hospitalized during the next four years. What's this peculiar desire to pick so old people as representatives?

New Trump indictment coming down the pipe any day now. — NOS4A2

Likely impeachments will be the new norm for US administrations. You already have the theater of the debt ceiling, hence what could be more useful than have impeachment hearings every then and now?

It seems unlikely that ECOWAS will successfully restore democracy. — BC

I think the probability of military intervention into Niger is low, but still exists.

The ECOWAS is divided about any intervention into one of their member states. And it should be remembered that both Mali and Burkina Faso are part of the organization. So it seems that ECOWAS is similar to the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council), where the members have been close to outright war also.

the ECOWAS Parliament is divided over the use of military might to force the junta, which overthrew President Mohamed Bazoum on July 26, out of power and to reinstate the Nigerien President.

The Nigerian military high command, it was gathered, had directed the service chiefs to compile and submit war requirements such as the number of personnel, equipment, logistics and financial costs to the Chief of Defence Staff. One of our correspondents gathered on Friday that this was the preliminary stage in the planning process of amassing human and material resources required for the planned military intervention in Niger.

A leaked memo indicated that about two battalions would be required to prosecute the war against the junta in Niger Republic.

Niger: DHQ directs service chiefs to compile war items, ECOWAS lawmakers divided

Famine, certainly. What desertification doesn't do, bad politics probably will. There were efforts being undertaken to slow the advance of the desert southward; the last time I read about that was years ago. — BC

There has been this large effort of the Great Green Wall initiative, which does have seen millions of trees planted.



Unfortunately the Sahel countries don't have the resources of China, which has tackled it's own desertification problem with a similar project. So it's a bit of a problem when the people use wood for heating and cooking.

Capitalism is a recent example, the more I learned, the more I realised, this is an umbrella term and no comprehensive understanding is appropriate, more specificity is needed. — Judaka

The problem is when a term means totally different things to different people. There usually is a consensus about the actual definition of the term, but there ends the agreement on anything.

If you ask a Marxist and a classic liberal "What is typical for a capitalist society?", you will get totally different answers starting from totally different premises, viewpoints and theories. Still the Marxist and the classic liberal can agree that capitalism has something to do with just who owns stuff.

but for those of you who agree or partially agree, feel free to share any thoughts on the topic. — Judaka

Well, you simply will disagree with smart, educated and informed people with no "Leibnizian" way to "compute" a correct solution that will solve your differences once and for all.

That's simply a part of philosophy, politics and life.

How does Boko Haram fit into this? Are they one of the Al Queda/IS franchises you mentioned? — T Clark

It has played a part, yes. Boko Haram was for a while working with the IS.

The Franchises have actually older roots than 9/11 and Osama's successful terrorist strike. AQIM, al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, was formerly know as the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat, had links to the Algerian Civil war and there the GIA.

Under the command of Abubakar Shekau, Boko Haram rebranded itself as Islamic State – West Africa Province. Yet then after internal disagreements the ISWAP and Boko Haram separated again and Khekau continued to lead the Boko Haram... until he seems to have died in a battle between Boko Haram and ISWAP in june 2021. It's estimated that ISWAP had something like 4 000 to 5 000 fighters last year and the operate basically in the northeast corner of Nigeria next to Chad and Cameroon. (Basically Northern Nigeria is Muslim and was only later years of the British Colony annexed, while the south is Christian / animist.)

(the former Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau, who gained international media attention after kidnapping hundreds of young girls)


Here's a map of the IS franchise in Africa:



The jihadists fighting each other isn't actually rare and there's really room for conspiracy theories.

The best example is GIA in Algeria, which basically started killing Algerian civilians and the actual "moderate" Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) leaders (who basically had won the elections and then the Algerian military staged a coup and the civil war started), but not so much the Algerian army. There are many allegations that the Algerian government worked with GIA, didn't do much to stop the massacres done by GIA and allegations that governments forces operated as being GIA terrorists. When the FIS wanted France to be a peacebroker between the Algerian government, it was GIA who staged terrorist attacks in France. France then wouldn't start negotiations, but backed the Algerian government. And finally the FIS (now aligned with a new movement AIS) basically surrendered to the government forces after getting amnesty. After this the GIA quickly evaporated. But the remnants later found themselves across the border in Mali.

To argue that GIA was fabricated by the Algerian government would be a crazy conspiracy (just like the idea that the US/Israel were behind the IS), but that a government would first go for the "moderate" insurgents (that actually had won democratic elections) before the fringe movement is quite a rational and logical choice.

I pointed out Niger was a French colony and you countered by saying they were allies. — Jack Rogozhin

Allies in the war on Terror. Belarus is an ally of Russia. But Belarus has also been a part of Russia. And Russia influences Belarus a lot. Has a lot of forces in Belarus.

Please see the other thread about Niger.

I remember a meteorologist I knew was asked by a reporter that as he believed that a new ice age was coming and then there global warming (called that then), wouldn't they counter each other? His response: New ice age comes in the next 50 000 years, climate change happening now.

But that was decades ago.

Poland putting 10 000 troops on it's border.

The Polish Defense Minister, Mariusz Blaszczak, told public radio that while 10,000 soldiers will be on the border, 4,000 will directly support the border guard and the remaining 6,000 will be in reserve.

Lukashenko joking about Wagner troops on the Polish border.

Earlier on Tuesday, Lukashenko mockingly told Poland it should thank him for keeping in check Wagner mercenaries now stationed in Belarus after an abortive mutiny against the Kremlin last month.

Sabre rattling...

The fact you are still denying they were coloinies of France, and are still being treated as such by France is bizarre. — Jack Rogozhin

I absolutely didn't say that. Actually, the Sahel is worth a thread of it's own so I started one here. Especially what is happening with Niger.

I think I've made my point there.

And no, Russia's corruption wasn't worse — Jack Rogozhin

By that list I quoted it is.

LOL...Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso were colonies (not allies) of France — Jack Rogozhin

The African countries have been allies in the War on Terror (that curious war that started with 9/11, you remember). Operation Serval was widely appraised... and then things turned south (as usual they do). But back in 2013:

Operation Serval received a great deal of support, both nationally – even Captain Sanogo immediately approved it – and internationally. Mahamadou Issoufou, President of Niger, argued that the operation in Mali was “the most popular of all French interventions in Africa”.

With Operation Barkhane things went something like in Afghanistan and France ended the operation last year. In the vacuum, the countries seem to hope for Russia to be solution.

And Belarussia was a part of the Russian Empire and then part of the Soviet Union. Just like Kazakhstan etc. Heck, my country was a colony of Russia for a brief time.

Ukraine's corruption level was terrible way before the invasion — Jack Rogozhin

And corruption was worse in Russia, yet I think the damage the war has done to the economy is worse.

You said it, not me — Jack Rogozhin

Really? :smirk:

Because the economy is in war mode. Russia is spending a lot of money to make new weapons, ammunition etc. Therefore its industrial output is steady, there is no unemployment (in fact, there are drastic labor shortages), wages in some sectors are steadily increasing etc. So on paper there is no recession. The catch is that this industrial output mostly goes up in smoke - it does not contribute to the development of the economy as a whole, in fact it drains other sectors of labor force and support, so it is not prime pumping, just the opposite. — Jabberwock

This is a very good point to make. Economists rarely want to take into consideration of their models when countries are in wartime economy: the statistics just look so great. Never mind that people are worse off, production figures are usually off the charts. Conscription of hundreds of thousands do have an effect on labour. The only negative aspect is if your enemy is destroying your factories and infrastructure and you have millions of refugees ...like Ukraine is experiencing now.

No, this is a terrible analogy. Belarus and Russia are allies with shared ethnic groups — Jack Rogozhin

Lol.

Just as Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso were allies with France ...until a change in leadership! And the huge protests against Lukashenko earlier (until Russia sent help) and that some Belarussians are fighting for Ukraine show that all is not fine and dandy in Belarus. Many Belarussian commentators have been worried that Russia will take over their country for a long time.

Thinking the US doesn't control NATO is just naive. — Jack Rogozhin

What is naive is totally dismissing how the organization actually works.

Again, you think you know Putin's motivations; I don't get that. — Jack Rogozhin

Again, you should give reasons just why you ignore the reasons Putin has given for his annexations of territory. I don't get that.

Putin's Russia has not regressed, their economy is going strong, Brics is going well, and it looks like they're getting the Donbass...and they're now China's number one pal. Ukraine hasn't progressed. They've had civil war and strife since the Maidan coup, they've been consistently listed among the most corrupt countries in Europe, they've lost hundreds of thousands of their citizens--and probably the Donbass--and NATO and US are losing patient with them. — Jack Rogozhin

Glorious Russia going from triumph to triumph!!! Hail Putin!!!

(Corruption Perceptions Index)
Ukraine: 116th
Russia: 137th

I wonder if Russia making a large scale attack on Ukraine has had an effect on just why Ukraine has it so bad now...