Quote:
Originally posted by Lebell
Inevitably, some Kissingerian realpolitiker is going to argue in favor of intervention, because in the vacuum of Western aid, perhaps the Communist Chinese would step in and increase their influence in the area. There are two reasons why this isn't going to happen.
|
Ironically, Kissinger himself has come close to advocating Wilsonian idealism in response to Africa's plight. I was rather surprised.
There are a couple of things I want to know about this idea of "leaving Africa to its fate". Will Western companies be relinquishing thier control of mines and mineral resources? Does "cutting Africa loose" mean giving it a fair go at the global free market or does it mean isolating it economically; either through the current regime of protectionism for European and American agriculture or maybe through perversely punitive trade santions - the economic equivalent of a "high wall around the whole continent". What about debt relief; does cutting them loose mean freeing them from that particular aspect of our "charity" or is that going too far?