By Abdulai Darimani
Global Greengrants Fund Advisor, West Africa Board
Environment Programme Officer, Third World Network-Africa
The natural resources of Africa have been the objects of the persistent scramble for the continent. Land, minerals, gas, oil, timber, territorial waters, among others, are often at the heart of the scramble for Africa. Behind the political and military interventions of Western powers in countries such as Somalia, Sudan, The Democratic Republic of Congo, The Comoros, Chad, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Central African Republic, Liberia, and of late Libya and Cote D’Ivoire is the issue of access to and redistribution of the resources of Africa. In the full glare of international military might, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) signed and sealed some of the worst forms of mining contracts with transnational corporations of some of the western countries seeking to maintain peace in that country. These contracts up-scaled the grip of transnational mining companies on the mineral resources of DRC.
Iraq to Libya, the United States’ Quest for Oil
NATO is enforcing a United Nations no-fly zone in Libya in order to protect civilian population from being trapped and killed in the war between rebel and government forces. Behind the overt military intervention also lies the issue of redistribution of Libyan oil. The scenario in Iraq provides enough bases in support of this argument. One of the arguments the United States made to justify its attack on Iraq was that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that were a threat to Americans and the entire “civilized” world. Behind this argument was a strategic reason of repositioning the US in the Iraqi oil market. Prior to the attack on Iraq, the French had central role in oil deals with Iraq. The attack dislodged this central role and repositioned the US in leadership of oil deals and contracts for reconstruction of Iraq.
As in the case of Iraq, Libya is not a field for the scramble between nations over its oil resources. However, the attack on Libya obviously raises the issue of redistribution of wealth among the intervening forces. The Libyan state has developed certain skills and capacities for managing and handling its oil sector which offer it some relative advantage in its relations with oil transnational companies and national governments. These skills and capacities, which the rebels do not have, were developed through years of trials and self-determination under international sanctions. A change in regime means that the rebels would need to outsource these skills and capacities, and the obvious source is the countries in the frontline of enforcing the no-fly zone. A BBC website report of April 8th 2011 indicates that the rebels are already calling on NATO to mediate in oil sales. The report further state that the “rebels’ first oil shipment, earlier in the week, worth over $100 million.”
French Taste for the Resources of Cote D’Ivoire
The struggle in Cote D’Ivoire is equally connected to issues of control and redistribution of resources of the country. In his early days as President of Cote D’Ivoire, Laurent Gbagbo had the support of the French. Today, the French has shifted their support to Alassane Ouattara and forces opposed to Laurent Gbagbo. This swing of support can be linked to the permanent interest that France have for the country. France has huge control of key sectors of the economy of Cote D’Ivoire. There has been a lot of discussion about the Pacte Coloniale (Colonial agreement) between the governments of France, Cote d’Ivoire, Dahomey (now Benin) and Niger which was entered into on 24 April 1961 in which France has priority in the acquisition of “raw materials classified as strategic. Sections of the agreement suggest that “The French Republic shall regularly inform the Republic of Cote d’Ivoire [and the other former colonies] … of the policy that it intends to follow concerning strategic raw materials and products, taking into account the general needs of defence, the evolution of resources and the situation of the world market”. On the other hand, “Cote d’Ivoire, Dahomey and Niger shall inform the French Republic of the policy they intend to follow concerning strategic raw materials and products, and the measures that they propose to take to implement this policy.”
Until the November 2010 electoral triggered conflict, Cote D’Ivoire was the world largest producer and exporter of cocoa. Recent exploration reports suggest that Cote D’Ivoire has huge potential of oil reserves and is on the road of becoming one of the largest oil producers on the continent. With the current liberalized trade and investment regime, it may be possible for the president of any of the three countries in the agreement to vary or weaken the spirit of the agreement by opening access to other players. Laurent Gbagbo had already opened access of vital sectors of the Ivorian economy to American and Chinese companies. This implies that the ability of the French to retain control of the resources of Cote D’Ivoire requires the French to establish a certain depth of friendship with or control of the ruling class of Cote D’Ivoire.
The Growth of Land-Grabbing
One of the areas in which Africa is experiencing a renewed scramble is land acquisition (land-grab). While land take in Africa by foreign interest is not a new phenomenon, the last few decades have witnessed enormous growth in the scale of large-scale land acquisitions across the continent. Millions of rural populations and urban populations along urban beaches and rural areas in Africa are displaced and dispossessed of land. Land grabs occur directly or incidentally, but in both cases involve displacement and dispossession of rural or urban poor communities. The incidental land grab involves activities in which land is only a facilitating factor. Such activities include the construction of mega-projects like dams as well as extractive sector activity like the extraction of minerals, oil and gas.
National governments in collaboration with local and foreign elites are increasingly leasing out millions of hectares of land in Africa directly to transnational corporations and businesses. In a report released by the World Bank in 2010, the first 11 months of 2009 saw farmland deals (land grabs) covering at least 77 million acres in Africa. In a paper released by the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) between 2004 and early 2009, at least 2.5 million hectares of land were transferred from local users to foreign investors in five African countries alone, namely Ethiopia, Ghana, Madagascar, Mali and Sudan. The paper further estimates that investments of some 1,000 million dollars were agreed upon in the contracts in these deals. In Mali alone, about 60 land deals covering an estimated 600,000 acres is reported to have been committed.
The increasing demand for land is driven by a combination of factors including volatility in the price of food stuff, concerns for food security, rising interest in agrofuel production, forest plantations, construction of estates, an expansion of finance as instrument for trade and investment, a new market for carbon trading, and the commodification and privatisation of land. In general however, the increasing demand for land should be seen in the context of capitalist accumulation through foreign direct investment.
Resource Extraction Displaces Communities, Dispossesses Millions from Their Livelihoods
Over the past few decades, liberalization of trade and investment under the banner of globalization has fostered growth of capitalist accumulation. One of the areas in which the accumulation in Africa has reproduced displacement and dispossession of populations from access to land is foreign direct investment in the extraction of minerals, metals oil and gas. Displacement and dispossession of rural communities from land and the accompanying disorganization of their economic and social relations remains one of the persistent features of communities in mineral and petroleum extraction areas in Africa. Investment in the extraction of minerals, metals, oil and gas has resulted in displacement of whole communities and dispossession of millions of rural populations from access to productive lands.
Resource extraction involves several stages from exploration, site preparation and development, production, processing to decommissioning. Each of the different stages requires large tracks of land to facilitate the extraction and refinery of these resources. In Mali, the Sadiola mine has displaced eight villages. The facilities and installations of the mine which resulted in displacement of the eight villages include works site of an area of 1000 hectares of land, an open pit (production site), a cyanide gold treatment plant, mineral reserves area, waste dump, a sedimentation tank for cyanide mud, an air strip and a mining village where about 300 employees of the company live. The company draws its water supply from River Senegal, which is about 57km away from the mine site.
Between 1990 and 1998, a single large-scale open mine in Tarkwa in Western Ghana displaced a total of 14 communities with a population of over 30,000.
This displacement resulted in a net loss of over 7000 jobs in the area as people lost access to land and could not also be employed by the mine due to skills mismatch. Again, the Newmont Ahafo mine project in northwest Ghana displaced over 355 households in Kenyasi area alone. Another project of Newmont in Eastern Ghana is set to displace one whole village with a population of over 300 men and women. In addition, implementation of the project would result in destruction of 1465 hectares of land and lost of 3057 farm holdings belonging to 1,208 individuals. Further, the project would destroy 74 hectares (13%) of the Ajenua Bepo Forest Reserve, one of the last vestiges of Ghana’s forest reserves. Along the West Coast of Ghana, more than 72 villages are complaining of loss of access to fishing grounds due to the intensity of offshore oil exploration and production.
Nigeria: Hundreds of Villages are Displaced and Dispossessed of Land by Oil Companies
In addition to actual land-take for oil extraction, installations and other facilities, frequent oil spills and disposal of oil waste have rendered thousands of hectares of arable land useless for farming. Communities who may not be directly affected by oil extraction suffer land loss through oil spills and waste disposal. In 2007, I went to Warri for a meeting organised by the West Africa Advisory Board of Global Greengrants Fund. While at the meeting, we received news that Ubeji, a nearby village, was polluted by a spill of chemicals from the refinery of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC). During a visit to the village, we found that fire from the spill that came from the refinery had burnt crops, personal property and the vegetation was left as ashes. The only river, which the community depended on for fishing, had turned red due to the pollution. In an interview, the villagers reported that this incident has become common in the area. The frequent pollution and destruction of land and landed property means that in reality this community and many others like it have been dispossessed of land.
In Africa, particularly sub-Saharan Africa, most people still live in rural areas, where they farm crops and livestock or derive other livelihoods from land related activities. Land is thus a critical and an indispensable natural and environmental resource.
Further to being a factor of production, store of value, space for shelter and recreation, and disposal of waste for animals and human beings, land is also an object that defines a constellation of social and political relations in rural communities. Displacement and dispossession of communities of their land is therefore an assault on their livelihoods, coping strategies, as well as their social, cultural and political systems. Communities have social, cultural and political attachment to ancestral lands. People express their identity and sense of belongingness in relation to their ownership and use of land. Loss of these ties through displacement and dispossession equally impacts adversely on their sense of self and identity. Rural communities in Africa are already marginalized in terms of access to formal employment, education, health, safe water all year round, and other economic infrastructure. These issues compound their already marginalized status. They also inform the popular struggles in communities affected by mining and oil extraction.
The basis of these struggles has been to redress the injustice of being deprived from land, the destruction of livelihoods, the disproportionate share of benefits accruing to mining companies, and general lack of foresight. It is also about a reexamination of economic and governance regimes of mining and petroleum extraction, most of which take place in rural areas.
While these struggles are legitimate, communities lack the financial resources to assemble data and instruments for their struggles. Most large-scale foundations do not pay particular attention to these struggles due to the absence of formal organizational structures. This is the gap Global Greengrants Fund is filling up very successively in West Africa and many parts of the world.
Support from Global Greengrants Fund has enabled communities to improve the pace of organization and linkages, create advocacy and communication infrastructure, and improve their knowledge and understanding of critical issues affecting their livelihood. Through these, communities are able to deploy non-violent means and approach to demand accountability of mining companies and state institutions, and in some cases have successfully claimed their rights through democratic engagement.