Anglogold miners throw stones at Vavi
19 Oct 2012 16:12 - Kwanele Sosibo
NUM officials and Cosatu general secretary Zwelinzima Vavi were pelted with stones by some protesters at AngloGold Ashanti's mine near Orkney. Zwelinzima Vavi (Madelene Cronje, M&G)
"These hooligans threw stones at us," National Union of Mineworkers regional coordinator Madoda Sambatha said.
Sambatha said earlier on Friday their entourage had travelled to two other mines. At Kopanong workers told them they were going back to work on Monday and at the other, Vaal reefs number eight, they said they would not.
Both meetings were peaceful.
"We [then] went to Vaal reefs Moab Khotsong and were told that before we arrived, this woman from the Socialist Democratic Movement had already addressed those workers, and said they must not listen to the general secretary of Cosatu."
However, they went ahead and spoke to them. They left their cars and walked in on foot. As they approached they saw two groups – a NUM group waiting for Vavi, and a second group "who are the permanent disrupters", said Sambatha.
"We were on foot. As we were advancing, these hooligans threw stones at us. We retreated."
They drove back to the union's regional offices.
"We are okay. The car was not damaged," he said.
Detained and interrogated
Earlier, the Democratic Socialist Movement (DSM), a Trotskyist organisation that helped form the joint strike coordinating committee across many of the mines beset by strikes say they were detained and interrogated after addressing a crowd of over 1 500 striking workers.
Liv Shange, an executive member of the organisation, said the group had been invited by the mine's strike committee and began addressing workers by midday. Following the address, they met with committee members at one of the mine's hostels.
As they left, Shange said four members of the organisation who were travelling together in a car were followed by mine security vehicles, about five police vans and what appeared to be a security helicopter belonging to the mine. After being stopped, she said they were taken to mine offices where they were interrogated by a team led by a policeman who identified himself as Lieutenant Colonel Pretorius.
"We were stopped aggressively and taken to mine security offices at about 2.30pm and interrogated one by one by a group of 10 men," said Shange. "He said we could only meet with workers if we were a recognised union. I told him we were not a union and had the right to assemble and associate with the workers."
Shange, a Swedish expatriate, said she was also threatened with deportation and asked questions about her family and children.
The DSM, which is part of the UK-based committee for Workers' International, has chapters in over 40 countries. It has been upfront about its role in the ongoing mine strikes which have affected the platinum, gold and diamond sectors. It is also affiliated to the Democratic Left Front, a coalition of leftist organisations. Police have cracked down on the campaign waged in unison with the joint strike coordinating committee by arresting hundreds of striking workers.
The mines have responded by issuing ultimatums to striking workers. Strikes continue however, with workers in many cases disregarding the ultimatums.
George Ntsane, a strike committee member at Anglogold Ashanti said six workers had been arrested for public violence at the mine and that the underground workers would not return to work until their demand of R16 000 salary had been met. – additional reporting by Sapa
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, MINING, NUM (SA), STRIKE, ZWELINZIMA VAVI
Read more...
Anglo American to face SA silicosis hearing
01 Oct 2012 13:29 - Ed Stoddard
Anglo American will face a hearing next year to determine if it's liable for miners who contracted silicosis while working in its gold shafts.
Anglo American will face a hearing next year to determine if it's liable for miners who contracted silicosis while working in its gold shafts. (AFP)
Anglo American no longer has gold assets in South Africa, but the proceedings, initiated by 18 plaintiffs, have been launched on the grounds that miners contracted the debilitating lung disease when the company still ran bullion mines.
The arbitration hearing is scheduled to begin on September 2 2013 and will be presided over by a panel including South Africa's former chief justice, Sandile Ngcobo, lawyers for the plaintiffs said on Monday.
"The hearing will determine if Anglo American South Africa is liable to compensate the plaintiffs," said Richard Meeran, a partner at UK-based law firm Leigh Day & Co, which is representing the miners along with the Legal Resources Centre and Legal Aid South Africa.
A spokesperson for Anglo American in South Africa said he was not immediately able to comment. The case is separate from a silicosis class action suit filed in August against AngloGold Ashanti, Gold Fields and Harmony on behalf of thousands of workers.
In the Anglo American case, proceedings were first issued in 2004 by 18 former gold miners who are suffering from silicosis. Three of these men have since died. Legal and industry experts have said the different suits, if successful, could cost the industry billions of dollars.
Miners contracted silicosis, which has no known cure, by working in gold mines for many years without adequate protection. The silica dust that causes the disease is inhaled from gold-bearing rocks. The disease causes shortness of breath, a persistent cough and chest pains. It also makes people highly susceptible to tuberculosis, which can kill.
Question: how much of the tuberculosis in South Africa (clearly) is not about HIV/AIDS, but from occupational diseases miners run into? Like asbesthosis, silicosis, and other diseases of the respiratory system? Tuberculosis is consistenly listed as the leading cause of death in South Africa, in Statistics South Africa's Death Notification Forms Survey. (For the 2008 survey, see here, which includes Appendix D: The 10 leading underlying natural causes of death: 1997–2002.) - MrK
Tens of thousands of black miners from South Africa and neighbouring countries are believed to have contracted silicosis during the decades of white apartheid rule, when their health and safety were not priorities of the country's gold barons. – Reuters
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, APARTHEID, DEBEERS, GOLD, HEALTHCARE, LABOUR, MINING
Read more...
'We'll bring mining companies to their knees'
13 Sep 2012 14:41 - Sapa
A leader of a major protest by platinum miners has called for a national strike in the sector "to bring the mining companies to their knees".
Miners gathered at Blesbok Stadium, where they demanded a gross salary of R16 070. (Madelene Cronje, M&G)
"On Sunday, we are starting with a general strike here in Rustenburg," protest leader Mametlwe Sebei told a crowd of several thousand striking workers at a soccer stadium near Rustenburg in the heart of the platinum belt.
Striking Anglo American Platinum (Amplats) mineworkers demanded pay of R16 070 a month at Blesbok stadium on Thursday.
Gaddafi Ndoda, who described himself as a member of a newly formed workers' committee said: "To us, R12 500 is just a basic salary," he said, referring to the amount raised as a demand among many mineworkers over the past weeks.
"Anglo is the most-paying [sic] mine in the country, so our demand is different from other mineworkers," said Ndoda.
He said they wanted "nothing to do" with AngloPlats' Mageu beverage, and wanted their refreshment allowance to be R30 a day.
On Wednesday workers there complained about the quality of the Mageu, an energy drink made from fermented grains.
Ndoda said currently workers were not entitled to a safety and transport allowance.
"We want our transport allowance to be R60 daily and [our] safety allowance to be R1 500."
They also wanted the increase in their living-out allowance to be R2 000 – up from R1 700.
Song and dance
An "executive committee" of six members representing workers outside formal union forums had been formed and they were expected to take a memorandum to the mine's management in Klipfontein near the stadium, he said.
While heading towards the nearby offices, about half the workers who had been in the stadium accompanied the committee, singing and dancing, amid tight security.
As in the past week, the police had Nyalas stationed in the area and a helicopter overhead. Amplats security vehicles and security guards were also on alert, and a Netcare911 ambulance was on standby.
Workers carried knobkerries, sticks and whips. Some also carried umbrellas.
It appeared that a group of striking workers from Lonmin Platinum did not join them as hoped.
Amplats said it suspended operations on Wednesday out of concern for the safety of its employees and said there was no strike at the mine.
Chief executive officer Chris Griffith said the situation in the Rustenburg area was volatile and that people who wanted to go to work could not because of threats of violence.
"Anglo American Platinum has decided to suspend its operations in the Rustenburg area with immediate effect," he said.
"The suspension will continue until such time as operations can be safely resumed."
Peaceful resolution
Amplats' chairperson Cynthia Carroll said the company was in touch with authorities "at the highest level" to identify ways of working with government and the recognised labour unions to achieve a swift and peaceful resolution.
She said the company's Rustenburg platinum operations were already under financial pressure and the suspension of operations on Wednesday risked their long-term viability, the longer the situation lasted.
A strike at Lonmin entered its second month this week. Workers at Gold Fields' KDC West mine were also on strike on Thursday.
Meanwhile, the Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union (Amcu) has said it has been seeking an opportunity to engage with President Jacob Zuma and senior government officials to resolve the unrest in South Africa's mines.
President of Amcu, Joseph Mathunjwa, told reporters in Rustenburg that the union's formal requests were being considered.
"From day one of the [Marikana] massacres we are on record, asking for a meeting with the office of the president. They are still thinking of when they are going to meet us; they have acknowledged that our letter was received and said the president would respond soon," said Mathunjwa.
"We are still waiting. We have written to the Minister of Mineral Resources [Susan] Shabangu, Police Minister Nathi [Mthethwa] and the Labour Minister [Mildred Oliphant]. We have done all that and have copies of the letters ... [as] proof," he said.
Mining indaba
The union called on Zuma to intervene and stop the ongoing unrest in the South African mining sector. Mathunjwa said Zuma had to convene an urgent, all-inclusive mining indaba.
"We believe that he is the high office in the country. We could share the direction on how to curb these sporadic work stoppages. It is in the interest of the country for him to intervene," said Mathunjwa.
He said the mooted indaba would have to deal with issues including minimum wages, housing, skills development and a mining victims fund for the sector.
Mathunjwa said Amcu had repeatedly denounced all the violent activity recently seen around the mines.
"As we have said in the past, Amcu denounces any violent conduct by any member, official or office bearers of the union. We have never encouraged our members to embark on any illegal or unprotected work stoppages," he said.
Amcu national treasurer Jimmy Gama said the ability to rectify the situation in the mining sector lay with Zuma.
"This seems to be an emergency situation where nobody seems to be winning the battle. In a country, the only person with power to summon everyone is the president. Hence Amcu is taking [the] initiative to request the president to deal with the matter," he said.
"It is high time that somebody speaks out and makes it loud and clear [to Zuma] to say 'president, this is time that you act'," said Gama.
Uninvited
Earlier, freelance journalists were told to leave the venue where Amcu was holding its "state of the mining industry" media briefing.
Before the briefing started, all journalists in the room were asked to introduce themselves and the media organisations for which they worked.
Gama, sitting next to Mathunjwa, told a cameraman who introduced himself as "a freelancer" to leave the premises because invites had been sent to media houses.
"We are not comfortable with a person who comes as a freelancer, because we haven't invited you. We would like you, sir, to excuse us," said Gama.
Two other journalists joined the cameraman as he walked out of the room.
Mathunjwa later said an Amcu media briefing at Melrose Arch, in Johannesburg, had once been "infiltrated by other [rival] unions". – Sapa
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, MINING, NATIONALISATION, PLATINUM
Read more...
COMMENT - Also
here.
(International Diamond Exchange) Privately Held De Beers To Go Public Again
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 30TH, 2010, ISSUE NUMBER 242
Many analysts are convinced that by early next year De Beers will again seek a public primary listing on the London Stock Exchange, with secondary listings on the Botswana and Johannesburg stock exchanges. The
current shareholders (
Anglo American 45 percent, the Oppenheimer family’s
Central Holding 40 percent and the
government of Botswana 15 percent) would either sell off parts of their holdings or accept ownership dilution through the issuance of new shares to the investment community.
De Beers’ management officially dismisses all of the talk, saying this is a matter to be decided by the company’s shareholders. Privately they have very lucid views on such an eventuality – and I bet that some of the scenarios are realistic and certainly appear advantageous to both Anglo American and the Oppenheimer family. A relisting would provide these shareholders with exit strategies – whether gradual or immediate. The key in this game is what Nicky Oppenheimer (and his son Jonathan) wants. More about that later.
It is for the trade and industry to ponder whether such a move would impact the downstream players, whether it would affect the stability of the industry and whether it would trigger changes in the management of the business. Then there are secondary questions as to whether such a move is “good” for the mining joint ventures with the governments of Botswana and Namibia.
One might even wonder whether the company isn’t already in “going public mode.” Is De Beers’ current policy of leaving much-needed goods in the ground and thus creating market shortages that will drive up prices, motivated by a desire to optimize short-term revenues to make its balance sheets more attractive on the eve of a listing?
Several respected analysts dismiss this whole exercise by pointing to the current, heavy company indebtedness (of well over $3 billion) and the company’s less-than-convincing performance. These analysts may need to be reminded that the De Beers privatization process was put in motion in the second half of 2000 when the diamond market faced “unparalleled prosperity,” to quote something Nicky Oppenheimer said at the time – and the market value of the diamond business was priced accordingly. By the time the shareholders approved the deal, in May 2001, the market had already began its downturn.
If De Beers’ shareholders are planning to go public next year, this might be timed with the beginning of the renewed growth of consumer demand; it would not take place during the “peak,” so investors would be buying “blue sky” shares with the potential for upward opportunity. For a mining and exploration company, the timing of the possible relisting makes for a “sexy” proposition.
True, debts are not helpful, but the prospects of realistic share-price appreciation would undoubtedly make a listing successful. Current shareholders might be able to get their shareholder loans back – something that would be particularly helpful to the Oppenheimers, who financed their latest injection of funds into the company.
The free float (i.e. the proportion of shares not held by the current three major shareholders who may not sell their shares) is likely to be limited to about 25-30 percent. So, the listed company would, just as in the past, be managed as if it were private. The question is by whom? Anglo American or the Oppenheimers?
If the initial listing price is fair, a renewed De Beers would be far more popular among investors than the “old” public company. In 2001, the privatization of De Beers was almost borne out of necessity; in 2011, there are different but no less compelling reasons to consider relisting.
What A Difference A Decade Makes
A decade ago, De Beers faced an almost ridiculous situation as a public company. The company’s balance sheet had two components: its diamond business and investments in other mostly public companies, including more than a third of Anglo American shares. There were periods in which the value of the company’s investment portfolio was above the entire market capitalization of De Beers.
In other words, there were times when the investment community valued all the De Beers mines, all its sizeable diamond stocks in London, all its reserves in the ground, all its real estate, all its cash flow and its diamond business at less than zero. There was absolutely no question that De Beers’ market capitalization had an abominable history of massive under-valuation. The investors simply didn’t trust the company – and for good reason.
The controlling Oppenheimer family never feared a shareholder revolt. Its cross-shareholding (where Anglo American held 32.2 percent in De Beers and De Beers held a 35.4 percent share of Anglo American) had made the company virtually “takeover proof.” There was no fear of corporate raiders; the company was bulletproof. The chances that the Oppenheimers would be unseated were also close to zero, as the family separately held some 7.2 percent in Anglo American and 2.6 percent in De Beers; they were untouchable.
The funny thing is, as a DTC Sightholder remarked this week, “when De Beers was listed they managed their business like a private company with vast resources of monies. Only after becoming a private company, they started to act more like a public company…”
At the time, investors didn’t like the lack of transparency. They also despised the arrogance and haughty management posture by executives whose main objective was “to please the boss.” Let’s face it: when you are a cartel, you don’t need employees with entrepreneurial instincts to compete more effectively in the market. Nepotism was rife back then.
These characteristics are long gone now. However, they will always be remembered by the prohibition of DTC (then CSO) clients from using the front door to enter or leave the then new Charterhouse 17 building. At one time, Sightholders could only come in through the (Saffron Hill) service entrance, behind the iron gates where cars drove in. Executives received their bonuses (or part of them) directly from the Family Company, lest they would forget for whom they worked…
NFO Was and Remains the Driver of Change
As the various chairmen of De Beers clearly left their indelible imprint on the company’s affairs, I need to be accurate here: between 1929 and 1984, the company was consecutively chaired by Ernest and Harry Oppenheimer. This was followed by 14 years of chairmanship by Julian Ogilvy Thompson, an outsider, who was reluctant to hand back the top job to an Oppenheimer. But Harry prevailed. The present chairman, Nicky Oppenheimer, came in on January 1, 1998; two years later, his legendary father passed away. Since then, things have never been the same.
Under Nicky’s management, there have been Strategic Reviews, the settlement of the anti-trust problems, the introduction of Supplier of Choice, the creation of the De Beers jewelry stores (a joint venture with LVMH), and, most relevant for this column, the company’s privatization, of which Nicky was the principal driver.
Back in 2000, Nicky realized that the cross holding with Anglo American represented an obstacle, an anachronism that needed to be abandoned. He personally had to make a choice: to go with Anglo American or to go with diamonds. He consciously chose diamonds. To lift the cross holding and have the grossly undervalued De Beers stand on its own would have made the company easy prey for corporate raiders. Going private through a management buyout was the only viable proposition.
And that is what happened. Oddly, the very same analysts and investment companies that had always kept De Beers’ shares undervalued, as the “company wasn’t worth more,” then changed their tune. They charged that the diamond business was worth more than Nicky Oppenheimer, Anglo-American and Debswana were willing to pay for it.
The De Beers diamond business for the purpose of privatization was first valued at $8.3 billion. Under great pressure from the institutional shareholders, the offer was eventually changed to $9.3 billion. The rest is history. The continued stewardship by Nicky Oppenheimer was guaranteed by a management contract. He is still the man in charge.
Prospects of Re-Listing
Today, De Beers is a very different company than it was 10 years ago. Its business model has changed dramatically. Its cartel structure has been dismantled. The domestic beneficiation aspirations of its government partners have been accepted and embraced. The Supplier of Choice marketing model remains the rough diamond marketing model, though it is continually adapted to new realities. The DTC has ceased to purchase or sell the Russian output. Its Canadian properties are producing. The changes in business model necessitated a transformation in the kind of work force needed to run De Beers.
To many people in London, most of what is described in this column is from “before their time.” There are many young, ambitious, well-educated people in London with MBA’s and marketing experience – who may not necessarily know much about diamonds. Managing director Gareth Penny has embedded a highly responsible and transparent governance culture (with zero-tolerance for some practices, which only a decade ago, were often the norm.) If the company goes public, Gareth may be able to provide young talent with share options – a powerful incentive to draw the best and the brightest to the company.
The De Beers privatization of 2001 was the brainchild of Nicky Oppenheimer – he presented the detailed proposals to Anglo American and Debswana. We believe that history may repeat itself. Though analysts are eager to point out that De Beers doesn’t really fit into Anglo American’s current business model and that, in any case, De Beers has become the giant mining conglomerate’s worst performing asset, Anglo American is not likely to be the driver behind a De Beers relisting. It will undoubtedly welcome such a move, as it provides the company with a possibility to develop an exit strategy.
How much is the company worth today? At the end of the day, the value calculation depends on the discounts applied to the estimated future cash flows that the publicly listed company would generate. It also depends on the valuation of certain assets (such as exploration properties, the Forevermark branding initiative, etc.) We don’t want to get into that – because we don’t take it for granted that De Beers would be listed “as is.”
We would conjecture that the Oppenheimers might want to take the Element Six business, the Forevermark brand and the jewelry stores joint venture, and keep them for the family. The listing would, we expect, be only for the diamond exploration, mining and marketing business – definitely the core elements of De Beers and more appropriate for staying in the Anglo American stable.
In 2000, Nicky Oppenheimer showed that he could work well under a cloud of the greatest secrecy; he knows what questions to put to his team; he sharply and accurately anticipates the reactions of the stakeholders.
The key now is timing. Nothing will happen, or is not likely to happen, before the Botswana marketing contract, which expires in December, is renewed. But renewed it will be. If my guess is right and the family opts to leave the synthetics and jewelry business to the younger Oppenheimer generation, the relisting may see the departure of the Oppenheimers from the mining side. One thing is for sure: the family has a unique ability to surprise and it won’t be any different this time around.
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, DEBEERS, DIAMONDS
Read more...
Web of Debt
by Ellen Hodgson Brown
Chapter 22
THE TEQUILA TRAP: THE REAL STORY BEHIND THE ILLEGAL ALIEN INVASION
Waves of immigrants are now pouring over the Mexican border into the United States in search of work, precipitating an illegal alien crisis for Americans. Vigilante border patrols view these immigrants as potential terrorists, but in fact they are refugees from an economic war that has deprived them of their own property and forced them into debt bondage to a private global banking cartel.
When Mexico was conquered in 1520, the mighty Aztec empire was ruled by the unsuspecting, hospitable Montezuma. The Spanish General Cortes, propelled by the lure of gold, conquered by warfare, violence and genocide. When Mexico fell again in the twentieth century, it was to a more covert form of aggression, one involving a drastic devaluation of its national currency.
If Montezuma's curse was his copious store of gold, for Mexico in the twentieth century it was the country's copious store of oil. According to William Engdahl, who tells the story in A Century of War, the first Mexican national Constitution vested the government with "direct ownership of all minerals, petroleum and hydro-carbons" in 1917. When British and American oil interests persisted in an intense behind-the-scenes battle for these oil reserves, the Mexican government finally nationalized all its foreign oil holdings. The move led the British and American oil majors to boycott Mexico for the next forty years. When new oil reserves were discovered in Mexico in the 1970s, President Jose Lopez Portillo undertook an impressive modernization and industrialization program, and Mexico became the most rapidly growing economy in the developing world. But according to Engdahl, the prospect of a strong industrial Mexico on the southern border of the United States was intolerable to certain powerful Anglo-American interests, who determined to sabotage Mexico's industrialization by securing rigid repayment of its foreign debt. That was when interest rates were tripled. Third World loans were particularly vulnerable to this manipulation, because they were usually subject to floating or variable interest rates.1
Why did Mexico need to go into debt to foreign lenders? It had its own oil in abundance. It had accepted development loans earlier, but it had largely paid them off. The problem for Mexico was that it was one of those intrepid countries that had declined to let its national currency float. Mexico's dollar reserves were exhausted by speculative raids in the 1980s, forcing it to borrow just to defend the value of the peso.2 According to Henry Liu, writing in The Asia Times, Mexico's mistake was in keeping its currency freely convertible into dollars, requiring it to keep enough dollar reserves to buy back the pesos of anyone wanting to sell. When those reserves ran out, it had to borrow dollars on the international market just to maintain its currency peg.3
In 1982, President Portillo warned of "hidden foreign interests" that were trying to destabilize Mexico through panic rumors, causing capital flight out of the country. Speculators were cashing in their pesos for dollars and depleting the government's dollar reserves in anticipation that the peso would have to be devalued. In an attempt to stem the capital flight, the government cracked under the pressure and did devalue the peso; but while the currency immediately lost 30 percent of its value, the devastating wave of speculation continued. Mexico was characterized as a "high-risk country," leading international lenders to decline to roll over their loans. Caught by peso devaluation, capital flight, and lender refusal to roll over its debt, the country faced economic chaos. At the General Assembly of the United Nations, President Portillo called on the nations of the world to prevent a "regression into the Dark Ages" precipitated by the unbearably high interest rates of the global bankers.
In an attempt to stabilize the situation, the President took the bold move of taking charge of the banks. The Bank of Mexico and the country's private banks were taken over by the government, with compensation to their private owners. It was the sort of move calculated to set off alarm bells for the international banking cartel. A global movement to nationalize the banks could destroy their whole economic empire. They wanted the banks privatized and under their control. The U.S. Secretary of State was then George Shultz, a major player in the 1971 unpegging of the dollar from gold. He responded with a plan to save the Wall Street banking empire by having the IMF act as debt policeman. Henry Kissinger's consultancy firm was called in to design the program. The result, says Engdahl, was "the most concerted organized looting operation in modern history," carrying "the most onerous debt collection terms since the Versailles reparations process of the early 1920s," the debt repayment plan blamed for propelling Germany into World War II.4
Mexico's state-owned banks were returned to private ownership, but they were sold strictly to domestic Mexican purchasers. Not until the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was foreign competition even partially allowed. Signed by Canada, Mexico and the United States, NAFTA established a "free-trade" zone in North America to take effect on January 1, 1994. In entering the agreement, Carlos Salinas, the outgoing Mexican President, broke with decades of Mexican policy of high tariffs to protect state-owned industry from competition by U.S. corporations.
By 1994, Mexico had restored its standing with investors. It had a balanced budget, a growth rate of over three percent, and a stock market that was up fivefold. In February 1995, Jane Ingraham wrote in The New American that Mexico's fiscal policy was in some respects "superior and saner than our own wildly spendthrift Washington circus." Mexico received enormous amounts of foreign investment, after being singled out as the most promising and safest of Latin American markets. Investors were therefore shocked and surprised when newly-elected President Ernesto Zedillo suddenly announced a 13 percent devaluation of the peso, since there seemed no valid reason for the move. The following day, Zedillo allowed the formerly managed peso to float freely against the dollar. The peso immediately plunged by 39 percent.5
What was going on? In 1994, the U.S. Congressional Budget Office Report on NAFTA had diagnosed the peso as "overvalued" by 20 percent. The Mexican government was advised to unpeg the currency and let it float, allowing it to fall naturally to its "true" level. The theory was that it would fall by only 20 percent; but that is not what happened. The peso eventually dropped by 300 percent – 15 times the predicted fall.6 Its collapse was blamed on the lack of "investor confidence" due to Mexico's negative trade balance; but as Ingraham observes, investor confidence was quite high immediately before the collapse. If a negative trade balance is what sends a currency into massive devaluation and hyperinflation, the U.S. dollar itself should have been driven there long ago. By 2001, U.S. public and private debt totaled ten times the debt of all Third World countries combined.7
Although the peso's collapse was supposedly unanticipated, over 4 billion U.S. dollars suddenly and mysteriously left Mexico in the 20 days before it occurred. Six months later, this money had twice the Mexican purchasing power it had earlier. Later commentators maintained that lead investors with inside information precipitated the stampede out of the peso.8 These investors were evidently the same parties who profited from the Mexican bailout that followed. When Mexico's banks ran out of dollars to pay off its creditors (which were largely U.S. banks), the U.S. government stepped in with U.S. tax dollars. The Mexican bailout was engineered by Robert Rubin, who headed the investment bank Goldman Sachs before he became U.S. Treasury Secretary. Goldman Sachs was then heavily invested in short-term dollar-denominated Mexican bonds. The bailout was arranged the very day of Rubin's appointment. Needless to say, the money provided by U.S. taxpayers never made it to Mexico. It went straight into the vaults of Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and other big American lenders whose risky loans were on the line.9
The late Jude Wanniski was a conservative economist who was at one time a Wall Street Journal editor and adviser to President Reagan. He cynically observed of this banker coup:
There was a big party at Morgan Stanley after the Mexican peso devaluation, people from all over Wall Street came, they drank champagne and smoked cigars and congratulated themselves on how they pulled it off and they made a fortune. These people are pirates, international pirates.10
The loot was more than just the profits of gamblers who had bet the right way. The pirates actually got control of Mexico's banks. NAFTA rules had already opened the nationalized Mexican banking system to a number of U.S. banks, with Mexican licenses being granted to 18 big foreign banks and 16 brokers including Goldman Sachs. But these banks could bring in no more than 20 percent of the system's total capital, limiting their market share in loans and securities holdings.11 They wanted the whole enchilada. By 2004, all but one of Mexico's major banks had been sold to foreign banks, which gained total access to the formerly closed Mexican banking market.12
The value of Mexican pesos and Mexican stocks collapsed together, supposedly because there was a stampede to sell and no one around to buy; but buyers with ample funds were sitting on the sidelines, waiting to pick over the devalued stock at bargain basement prices. The result was a direct transfer of wealth from the local economy to international money manipulators. The devaluation also precipitated a wave of privatizations (sales of public assets to private corporations), as the Mexican government tried to meet its spiraling debt crisis. In a February 1996 article called "Militant Capitalism," David Peterson blamed the rout on an assault on the peso by short-sellers. He wrote:
The austerity measures that the U.S. government and the IMF forced on Mexicans in the aftermath of last winter's assault on the peso by short-sellers in the foreign exchange markets have been something to behold. Almost overnight, the Mexican people have had to endure dramatic cuts in government spending; a sharp hike in regressive sales taxes; at least one million layoffs (a conservative estimate); a spike in interest rates so pronounced as to render their debts unserviceable (hence El Barzon, a nation-wide movement of small debtors to resist property seizures and to seek a rescheduling of their debts); a collapse in consumer spending on the order of 25 percent by mid-year; and, in brief, a 10.5 percent contraction in overall economic activity during the second quarter, with more of the same sure to follow.13
By 1995, Mexico's foreign debt was more than twice the country's total debt payment for the previous century and a half. Per-capita income had fallen by almost a third from a year earlier, and Mexican purchasing power had fallen by well over 50 percent.14 Mexico was propelled into a crippling national depression that has lasted for over a decade. As in the U.S. depression of the 1930s, the actual value of Mexican businesses and assets did not change during this speculator-induced crisis. What changed was simply that currency had been sucked out of the economy by investors stampeding to get out of the Mexican stock market, leaving insufficient money in circulation to pay workers, buy raw materials, finance loans, and operate the country. It was further evidence that when short-selling is allowed, currencies are driven into hyperinflation not by the market mechanism of "supply and demand" but by the concerted action of currency speculators. The flipside of this also appears to be true: the U.S. dollar remains strong despite its plunging trade balance, because it has been artificially manipulated up by the Fed. (More on this in Chapter 33.) Market manipulators, not free market forces, are in control.
International Pirates Prowling in a Sea of Floating Currencies
Countries around the world have been caught in the same trap that captured Mexico. Henry C K Liu calls it the "Tequila Trap." He also calls it "a suicidal policy masked by the giddy expansion typical of the early phase of a Ponzi scheme." The lure in the trap is the promise of massive dollar investment. At first, returns are spectacular. But as with every Ponzi scheme, the returns eventually collapse, leaving the people massively in debt to a foreign banking cartel that will become their new economic masters.15 The former Soviet states, the Tiger economies of Southeast Asia, and the Latin American banana republics all succumbed to these rapacious tactics. Local ineptitude and corrupt politicians are blamed, when the real culprits are international banking speculators armed with tsunami-sized walls of "credit" created on computer screens. Targeted countries are advised that to attract foreign investment, they must make their currencies freely convertible into dollars at prevailing or "floating" exchange rates, and they must keep adequate dollars in reserve for anyone who wants to change from one currency to another. After the trap is set, the speculators move in. Speculation has been known to bring down currencies and national economics in a single day. Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa, writes:
The media tends to identify these currency crises as being the product of some internal mechanism, internal political weaknesses or corruption. The linkages to international finance are downplayed. The fact of the matter is that currency speculation, using speculative instruments, was ultimately the means whereby these central bank reserves were literally confiscated by private speculators.16
While economists debate the fiscal pros and cons of "floating" exchange rates, from a legal standpoint they represent a blatant fraud on the people who depend on a stable medium of exchange. They are as much a fraud as a grocer's scales with a rock on it. If a farmer's peso was worth thirty cents yesterday and is worth only five cents today, his dozen eggs have suddenly shrunk to two eggs, his dozen apples to two apples. The very notion that a country has to "defend" its currency shows that there is something wrong with the system. Inches don't have to defend themselves against millimeters. They peacefully co-exist side by side on the same yardstick. A sovereign government has both the right and the duty to calibrate its medium of exchange so that it is a stable measure of purchasing power for its people. How a stable international currency yardstick might be devised is explored in Section VI.
The Tequila Trap and "Free Trade"
The "Tequila Trap" is the contemporary version of what Henry Carey and the American nationalists warned against in the nineteenth century when they spoke of the dangers of opening a country's borders to "free trade." Carey said sovereign nations should pay their debts in their own currencies, issued Greenback-style by their own govern-ments. Professor Liu also advocates this approach, which he calls "sovereign credit." Carey called it "national credit," something he defined as "a national system based entirely on the credit of the government with the people, not liable to interference from abroad." Carey also called it the "American system" to distinguish it from the "British system" of free trade.
Abraham Lincoln was forging ahead with that revolutionary model when he was assassinated. Carey and his faction, realizing the country was facing the very real threat that the banking interests that had captured England would also capture America, then moved to form a bulwark against this encroaching menace by planting the seeds of the American system abroad. In the twentieth century, the British system did prevail in America; but the American system was quietly taking root overseas . . . .
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, MEXICO, NEOCOLONIALISM
Read more...
COMMENT - This must be an older article, but it is always interesting to precisely nail down who owns (or owned) what. This article has no date attached to it.
De Beers' Overhaul of Diamond Industry Boosts Demand, Profits
Feb. 2 (Bloomberg) -- De Beers, the world's biggest diamond company, started the decade by curbing its practice of buying competitors' gems to prop up prices, seeking instead to bolster demand in the $55 billion retail market.
This year, De Beers forecasts demand will increase faster than economic growth, and analysts including Jack Jones at CIBC World Markets expect prices to rise after gaining 10 percent last year. Throughout the industry, spending on marketing rose to $420 million last year, double the figure two years earlier.
The initiative by Kimberley, South Africa-based De Beers, together with economic growth in the U.S. and Asia, is also helping competitors in the $8 billion rough diamond industry. ZAO Alrosa, which produces a fifth of the world's uncut diamonds, said sales rose 22 percent last year. Retailers such as Tiffany & Co. report rising demand for diamond jewelry.
``It's a transition from a supply-controlled market to a demand-driven market,'' said Chaim Even-Zohar of Tel Aviv-based industry consultant Tacy Ltd. ``The rough market is very hot and in the present environment there will certainly be room for significant price increases for rough diamonds.''
Anglo American plc, the world's second-largest mining company, and the Oppenheimer family each own 45 percent of De Beers, with a venture of the Botswanan government holding the remaining 10 percent. Ernest Oppenheimer, who founded Anglo in 1917, became chairman of De Beers in 1929 and set up a cartel that supported prices by buying competitors' stones.
Shares of Anglo American rose 8 pence, or 0.6 percent, to 1,249 pence Friday in London. The stock has gained 50 percent in the past 12 months, compared to a 41 percent advance for the nine- member FTSE ASX Mining Index.
De Beers Inventory
De Beers, which sells 60 percent of the world's uncut diamonds, has reduced its inventory by about $1 billion of gems annually for the past three years and should report a ``large'' decline when it releases 2003 sales on Thursday, said John Meyer, an analyst at Numis Securities Ltd. in London.
The company will report sales of about $5.4 billion, said Jones of CIBC. De Beers's sales rose 16 percent to $5.15 billion in 2002. Rio Tinto Group today reported earnings from its diamond business rose 79 percent to $113 million last year, contributing 7.5 percent to overall net income.
Coupled with the decline in inventories, De Beers has been shrinking the number of diamond cutters to whom it sells gems and prodding clients to spend more on advertising. Marketing expenditures by the industry, excluding De Beers, rose to $240 million last year, from $50 million in 2001, Tacy estimates.
The change in the industry's distribution structure has spurred cutters to seek supplies elsewhere, helping push up rough diamond prices. Alrosa, a state-owned Russian company, increased prices by 1.5 percent in January.
Rising Demand
Demand for diamonds has grown an average of about 2.9 percent annually for the past five years, said Gareth Penny, marketing director for De Beers.
Sales are increasing fastest in nations such as China, whose economy expanded 9.1 percent last year, the fastest pace in six years. Demand is also being helped by the dollar's drop against currencies such as the euro. Since diamonds are traded internationally in dollars, declines in the U.S. currency make them cheaper for people in other countries.
``It's extraordinary what the diamond industry has achieved in the last four or five years,'' Penny said in an interview. ``We have been outperforming GDP growth. There was only one year in the 1990s when that happened.''
In an effort to tap that demand companies such as Rio Tinto Group, the world's third-biggest mining company, and Aber Diamond Group have increased production.
Rio Tinto
Rio and Aber are partners in the Diavik mine in Canada, built under a lake near the Arctic Circle. Diavik will likely produce 7 million carats this year, double last year's supply, said Keith Johnson, head of Rio's diamond unit. About 120 million carats of gem, near-gem and industrial quality diamonds are produced worldwide each year.
Rio also owns Australia's Argyle mine, source of about 90 percent of the world's pink diamonds.
BHP Billiton, the world's biggest mining company, is looking to expand its diamond business because of profit margins that run at 35 percent for the Ekati mine in Canada, which it controls. The margins spur producers to mine at full capacity, said Marcus Randolph, head of BHP's diamonds and specialty products unit.
``It's one of the reasons why when demand picks up, you actually see such a strong market,'' he said. ``There's no latent production capacity.''
Synthetic Diamonds
In the future, diamond miners may face competition from synthetic gems manufactured by machines that use high temperatures and pressures up to 800,000 pounds per square-inch.
Companies such as Sarasota, Florida-based Gemesis Corp. may produce as many as 100,000 carats of diamonds larger than one carat within three years, equal to about 8 percent of the current market for large gems, said Even-Zohar of Tacy Ltd.
``This is the real reason why synthetics are such a great concern to the industry,'' he said. ``If the prices of the most expensive diamonds come under pressure, it will impact on all ranges.''
The scale of De Beers' market dominance may also be challenged by a pending European Union antitrust decision on an agreement it has to buy $800 million of stones annually from Alrosa. A decision should come in the middle of this year and it probably won't be favorable, Even-Zohar said.
Diamond Brands
Marketing initiatives diamond miners have undertaken to gain a share of the retail market and protect themselves from charges that gem sales fund civil wars in Africa may help them fend off future challenges.
BHP Billiton has joined other diamond producers in developing new marketing initiatives, introducing the AURIUS and CanadaMark brands in an effort to reassure consumers about the origin and quality of gems.
Other producers are moving into retail. De Beers is partnering with LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA in a venture that includes a store in London's Bond Street. Toronto-based Aber Diamond in November said it intended to buy a majority interest in Harry Winston Inc., which has supplied jewels to celebrities including Madonna, Elizabeth Taylor and Halle Berry.
Rosy Blue, a company that buys gems from De Beers and accounts for about 7 percent of the rough diamond trade, last year started ventures with designers such as Vera Wang.
Amsterdam-based Gucci launched its first line of jewelry, including diamond jewelry, in 1998. It now has annual sales of $100 million.
That's part of a wider trend for fashion houses to offer branded jewelry. Only about 5 percent of jewelry sales are currently in the branded category, according to Sagra Maceira de Rosen, from J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. in London.
``One of the key initiatives in the diamond world is the branding of diamonds and one of the biggest trends in jewelry is the trend to brand diamonds,'' Rosen said. ``There's a huge opportunity. Everybody is rushing to do jewelry.'
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, DEBEERS, DIAMONDS, MINING
Read more...
Anglo gets rid of the weight on its shoulders
JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA - Apr 24 2012 11:27
Mining house Anglo American has sold the South African arm of steelmaker Scaw Metals for $440-million to an investment consortium in a long-awaited deal, bringing proceeds from its drive to divest non-core assets to $3.7-billion over two years.
The sale of Scaw South Africa, an integrated steelmaker which produces specialised components for mining, rail and other industrial sectors, was the last major element of a push to refocus Anglo on its core mining business.
Tuesday's sale, to a group led by South Africa's government-owned Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) and including a consortium of black economic empowerment (BEE) investors, virtually completes that 2009 divestment plan.
Anglo's last significant outstanding deal is the exit from its Tarmac construction materials business through the joint venture between Tarmac UK and cement maker Lafarge, agreed in 2011 but currently on ice pending a decision from British regulators which could come as early as next week.
Stifling competition
Britain's Competition Commission said in February that the joint venture between Anglo and Lafarge would damage competition in the market for construction materials but the companies have said the regulator's worries can be "remedied".
Anglo had sold Scaw Metals' international business to Onesteel in December 2010 for $932-million.
The sale of Scaw South Africa, to the consortium which includes existing Scaw investors Izingwe Holdings, Shanduka Resources and the Southern Palace group of companies, brings the total proceeds from the Scaw Metals Group sale to $1.4-billion.
Analysts welcomed the deal as a positive one, with Liberum placing the total Scaw proceeds as equivalent to 6.6 times the 2010 core earnings, the last year of Scaw's full contribution.
Anglo shares were up 0.5% at 2 307 pence, in line with the broader UK mining sector.
Other non-core assets sold over the past two years include Anglo's zinc portfolio, sold to India-focused miner Vedanta, Tarmac's European business and undeveloped Australian coal assets. -- Reuters
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, DEBEERS, SCAW LTD
Read more...
Unki Platinum ownership plan accepted
08/04/2012 00:00:00
by Reuters
ZIMBABWE is happy with a plan proposed by Anglo American Platinum, the world's top producer of the precious metal, to sell a 51 percent shareholding in its Unki project to locals in terms of the country's empowerment law, a minister said on Sunday. President Robert Mugabe is championing the law, which requires all foreign firms, including mines and banks, to sell majority stakes to Zimbabweans.
Empowerment Minister Saviour Kasukuwere wrote in the state-controlled Sunday Mail newspaper that Amplats had submitted its proposals, detailing how it sought to comply with the law.
"As implementers, the latest plan by Anglo Platinum Unki, is reflective of the positive co-operation we are now enjoying," Kasukuwere wrote.
"We are happy with the 51 percent plan presented by July Ndlovu, the Unki chairman."
On Thursday, Kasukuwere increased pressure on miners when he issued a statement declaring that the state now owned 51 percent of firms that had not complied with the local ownership laws.
His statement was, however, quickly contradicted by Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai, Mugabe's partner in a shaky coalition, who said the minister had no power to expropriate mines.
The empowerment crusade is widely seen as a tactic by Mugabe's ZANU-PF party to raise cash for elections that may come this year.
['Widely seen' by whom? That's a political statement, intended to badmouth the indigenisation process. Provide proof. On the other hand, this is Reuters. - MrK]
In his letter, Kasukuwere, a senior ZANU-PF official, also sought to highlight his party's difference with Tsvangirai's MDC over the empowerment policy.
Johannesburg-listed Impala Platinum, the world's second-biggest platinum producer, bowed to pressure last month to surrender half its Zimplats unit, although details of the transfer have not yet been worked out.
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, INDIGENIZATION AND EMPOWERMENT ACT (ZIMBABWE), PLATINUM, SAVIOUR KASUKUWERE
Read more...
COMMENT - " The four diamond mines in Marange have contributed to the fiscus in their first three years of operations more than double of what all the
Anglo-American, De Beers, Lorhno [Lonrho], Rio Tinto, Ashanti and Zimplats mines have paid into the fiscus since the arrival of the Pioneer Column. NANGO must now re-direct its firepower accordingly." If you look closer into the ownership of these companies, you will find there are only a few who own their shares. Which should tell you all you need to know why there has been a decade long global hate campaign against the country of Zimbabwe.
For instance, Anglo-American was founded by sir Ernest Oppenheimer and John Pierpont Morgan, De Beers was originally financed by NM Rothschild, Rio Tinto is owned by NM Rothschild, Zimplats is owned by Implats whose CEO David Brown was an executive at Rothschild South Africa as was the CFO for Implats' Zimbabwean Kameni project. All roads lead to the Rothschilds. This is not an anti-semitic observation, it is about simple analysis of what is going on. I can completely undertand how someone would mistake this for anti-semitism, because you have to wade through yards of anti-semitic material to find the facts, including strange demonisation that sounds like the writings of a paranoid-schizophrenic (glowing eyes, really), and unconfirmable allegations about secret societies. Much of which can even be a smokescreen thrown up by the Rothschilds themselves. So let's not allow them to hide behind 'the Jews', 'Wall Street' or 'bankers' in general again. This is all about the Rothschild family and their business practices.
I haven't found what the Rothschild link to Goldman Sachs is, but like Goldman Sachs, they specialize in ripping off their customers ('muppets'), cheating on taxes and leaving no value 'on the table', to use a gambling metaphore. Anglo-American De Beers was the core of economic activity in South Africa before, during and after apartheid. When the talk was of 'defending capitalism' and 'fighting communism' in reality this meant the protection of Anglo-American De Beers as a privately owned company, instead of a state owned company. They are behind the destruction of the Zimabwean currency through financial manipulation (Section 4C of the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001), in order for AADB to get it's hands on Zimbabwe's diamond and platinum reserves.
Marange: It’s now time for NGOs to move on
By Tafadzwa Musarara
Last updated on: March 22, 2012
“Mr. Chairman, I say with authority that the Zimbabwe government have and will never treat the Marange diamond fields classified and shut it from any well meaning persons or organisations. It remains my government’s pledge to give access to the civil society.
“Further, Mr. Chairman, I would like to remind fellow plenary participants that it is the Zimbabwean government that proposed the roadmap in Swapokmund for the certification of our mining operations in Marange which include, inter alia, cooperation with progressive civil society.”
Obert Mpofu addressing the Kimberly Process 2010 Jerusalem Plenary.
This statement reverberated in my mind as we negotiated the dusty and steep road into the Marange diamond fields during the civic society tour of the facility on March 7, 2012.
This trip was historic because it was the first official visit into the famous diamond fields by all members of the civic society including my brother and friend Farai Maguwu, who had won European awards for reporting on the “human rights abuse” and the “opaque mining operations” by Mbada and Marange resources.
It was also historic that the National Association of Non Governmental Organisations’ (NANGO) former KPCS focal committee members were seeing the operations for the first time together with all other civic groups that had not made reports about the goings on in this world’s most potent diamond deposit valley.
Personally, I anticipated that Maguwu, whom I was paired with, was going to tell me more about the operations given his reports on the area that made world headlines and caught the attention of Downing Street and the White House. Unfortunately, the brother was blank!
The dispensation granted by Mpofu to allow civic society access to Marange diamond fields is also in compliance with KP’s administrative decision which states that, “KP civil society coalition representatives in Zimbabwe will have access to the Marange area so as to allow continued reporting on KPCS implementation.”
The aim and objective of this trip was very clear: to allow civil society to see and assess the diamond extractive processes by the four mines, namely Mbada Diamonds, Marange Resources, Anjin and DMC. Accordingly, the top management of the mines took us around and fielded questions from the media and civic society.
The visit also confirmed that indeed the four companies earned the KP certification. Without any doubt, no diamond operations in the world has more sophisticated and state-of- the art artillery like what we saw. The closed camera population per square meter outnumbers that of the Big Brother TV show.
The ore is guarded by armed guards, police’s CID unit, camera monitoring rooms both in Marange and in Harare. The electric fence forms a thick forest that bars illegal miners from entering the designated diamond fields. The body searches both manual and electronic are just thorough and you have to hide any charms that might be in your person because nothing is sacred.
I was privileged to be chosen to get into the sorting rooms to see the diamond stones being sorted. The process is so complex that even the sorter cannot touch the stones with bare hands. The stones are dropped into a special can, which will shut when full and can only be opened in Harare. When violated, the can will lock and cannot be force opened whatsoever.
We also noticed that the entire Marange area had demilitarised in compliance with the KP administrative decision of 2009 as we noticed that private security personnel were in charge of all security arrangements. No cases of beatings by the military were recorded in the 18 months and this was also vouched by Tiseke Kasambala of Human Rights Watch during her interview with the CNN.
The relocations of the families in Chiadzwa to Arda Transau exceed the minimum requirements of the United Nations Vancouver Declaration Human Settlements 1803. The relocation saw families move from a semi-arid region to an area which falls under region two endowed with arable land and much better rainfall patterns. The houses built are spacious and meet the demanding needs of polygamous settings. All the sons of these families will also benefit from the scheme, as they will also have their own houses built for them upon marrying.
The entire civic society groups that went on this tour knew before the tour that the event was a guided one. The Marange diamond fields are protected areas in terms of the law and you cannot expect anyone to be allowed to have free reign.
The NANGO civil society groups issued a press statement in less than 24 hours after end of the visit. How discourteous! Having been allowed by government of Zimbabwe access into the Marange Diamond fields to asses on their own the extractive operations, NANGO must have submitted their report to the Ministry of Mines highlighting their concerns and observed the audi alteram partem rule. Yes, hear the other side before making your charges public.
This unfortunate character of some of the western-funded organisations not to afford the other side or the “accused” the right of reply was epitomised by Farai Maguwu who alleged that there was mass killings in Marange sponsored by the diamond mining companies without giving them opportunity to respond.
“I want to put it on record, Mr. Chairman, that the civil society movement in Zimbabwe has been sadly hijacked by some of our mediocre brothers who have never excelled in life and want to feast on crisis creation in Zimbabwe. Facts fabrication is their specialty. We will defeat them intellectually,” said Mpofu at the Jerusalem conference.
The four diamond mines in Marange have contributed to the fiscus in their first three years of operations more than double of what all the Anglo-American, De Beers, Lorhno, Rio Tinto, Ashanti and Zimplats mines have paid into the fiscus since the arrival of the Pioneer Column. NANGO must now re-direct its firepower accordingly.
Tafadzwa Musarara is the chairman of Resources Exploitation Watch. Can be contacted on musarara@yahoo.com
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, DEBEERS, IMPALA PLATINUM, MINING, ZIMPLATS
Read more...
COMMENT - Isn't it great? :) Those 'analysts' need to declare their financial interests. It is almost touching how they call the PM 'Morgan', and tell the world how much he loves Anglo-American Corporation. :))) All the 'hate Mugabe' propaganda of the last decade has been nothing more than the fear of losing the transnational corporation's (Anglo-American De Beers, for instance) death grip on Africa's resources. And using their positions in the international media to make this campaign happen.
And isn't Reuters supposed to be an independent news agency? Oh I forgot, they are owned by the same people who are the largest single shareholder in Anglo-American De Beers, the world's largest diamond miner, and Zimbabwe owns 20% of the world's known diamond reserves.
The very same family that also owns Rio Tinto, and it's Murowa
diamond mine. Feel the radicalism. ;)
Zanu PF buoyed by Implats capitulation
14/03/2012 00:00:00
by Reuters
THE capitulation of a major platinum miner to Zimbabwe's demand to hand over a majority stake to local black investors will
embolden President Robert Mugabe's Zanu PF party to pressure other foreign companies ahead of elections expected this year.[Right, because 51% ownership of foreign corporations in Zimbabwe and them paying taxes is all about paying for the next elections. Poor Zimplats. - MrK]
Other miners are likely be
targeted to
fill Zanu PF election campaign coffers while the policy will be
wrapped in the flag of liberation and portrayed as a hammer blow to the last remnants of white colonial rule, analysts said.
South Africa-based Impala Platinum, the world's second largest platinum producer and the biggest foreign investor in the country, bowed on Tuesday to Zimbabwe's pressure to surrender a 51 percent stake in its Zimplats unit, a cave-in that followed months of wrangling.
Platinum's spot price has been soaring and shot past gold on Tuesday.
Mugabe, 88 and in power since Zimbabwe gained independence from Britain in 1980, and top Zanu PF officials have been hit with international sanctions after being accused of using political violence to stay in power.
[The country and government were hit with economic sanctions in 2001, which came into force in 2002, called the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001. - MrK]
One of Africa's longest-serving leaders, Mugabe is pushing for elections this year,
[The dictator! The despot! How dare he push for elections? The humanity. - MrK]
one year ahead of schedule,
[Ahead of whose schedule? The MDC's? Downing Street's? - MrK]
arguing the unity government he formed with Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) leader Morgan Tsvangirai after a violent 2008 vote has broken down.
"This is more about Zanu PF not having ready access to cash ever since the MDC took control of the finance ministry," said Tara O'Connor of Africa Risk Consulting.
"And dollarisation (of the economy) has taken away Zanu PF's ability to print money and decimated the power of the central bank. They are strapped for cash and the mining industry has become the next target to fund the Zanu PF patronage system," she added.
[Which is really what dollarisation (or euro-isation) were all about - taking the power to regulate the money supply away from national governments. - MrK]
Zanu PF has been criticised over the past decade for patronage when seizing white-owned farms. Many farms are now in the hands of party loyalists instead of the landless black peasants who were supposed to benefit.
[And we all know the veracity of those claims. Over 200,000 families have received land under the Fast Track alone, another 150,000 under the Willing Buyer, Willing Seller program before it. The slur was that land went from 6,000 white farmers, to 5,000 'friends and cronies of Mugabe'. The entire Economist financed hitjob called 'Mugabe And The White African' is based on that premise. However, if you read Prof. Ian Scoones book, based on an actual survey of 400 farms, only 3% of recipients in Masvingo Province could be described as connected to the security state or ZANU-PF leadership - 'friends and cronies of Mugabe', as the slur goes. Also see from this article here: Myth 2: The beneficiaries of Zimbabwean land reform have been largely political ‘cronies’ This is the data from AGRITEX/World Food Program/Food and Agriculture Organisation:
OLD RESETTLEMENT (WBWS): 159,985
FAST TRACK
A1 145,000
A2 29,902
SMALL SCALE COMMERCIAL FARMERS
29,902
LARGE SCALE COMMERCIAL FARMERS
920
Source: AGRITEX, World Food Programme, Food and Agriculture Organisation (UN); table 2. Agricultural land utilization pattern, 2006/07
And this is the data for 5 years ago, even more people have been resettled today. - MrK]
Analysts said the big winner from the Implats move was Empowerment Minister Saviour Kasukuwere, a Zanu PF stalwart, while MDC leader, Prime Minister Tsvangirai, was a clear loser.
Victory
"It will be construed as a big political victory for Mugabe and Zanu PF and defeat for Tsvangirai who has been saying such actions will hurt the economy," said Tony Hawkins, a professor at the University of Zimbabwe's Graduate School of Business.
[And how old is the geriatric rhodesian Tony Hawkins, now age is an ok issue to condemn candidates by? - MrK]
"The guys (Zanu PF) will have certainly been emboldened and will look to extend this to the other mines," he said.
Other companies in the firing line now include Mimosa, a 50-50 joint venture between Implats and Aquarius Platinum , and Rio Tinto's Murowa diamond mine.
Zanu PF has also been accused of profiting from the Marange diamond fields, where human rights groups estimate
[Estimate based on what? The same way they 'estimated' thousands of deaths during the last election? - MrK]
at least 200 artisanal, or small-scale, miners were killed in 2008 when Zimbabwe's security forces seized the workings. Mugabe's government has denied this.
The valuation of the Implats stake transfer has not been worked out and the murkiness surrounding the agreement has raised questions about where the funds will really go.
But 31 percent of the total is nominally earmarked to go to the state's National Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Fund, which is Zanu PF-controlled. Ten percent will go to local communities and 10 percent to Zimplats employees, according to the agreement announced by both sides.
The nationalisation drive also plays to the narrative Zanu PF wants to weave for the election: the black liberation movement recovering assets seized by white colonialists.
[Apparently that is more than 'a narrative'. More editorialising by Reuters' anonymous writer. - MrK]
"Mugabe is determined to show that he is the true Africanist taking back all the land and resources that whites have stolen. This is the image he wants to create," said Allister Sparks, a Johannesburg-based independent political analyst.
['A true Africanist'? Interestingly, Ben Freeth (Mugabe And The White African) equated Pan-Africanism with 'this hatred of the white man you have'. Pan-Africanism is the 'racism' they are talking about when they accuse Africans of 'being racist'. - MrK]
In contrast, Zanu PF has persistently portrayed Tsvangirai, a former miner, as a puppet of white capital.
"Morgan loves the mining industry because he was a miner and was given his start in life by Anglo American. He is a miner at heart but he sees both sides of the picture and this policy is not good for the workers or investors," said Tsvangirai biographer Sarah Hudleston.
[In fact, 'Morgan' loves Anglo-American so much, that he and his MDC helped to draw up the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001, which destroyed the Zimbabwe Dollar from Jan. 1st 2002 onwards. Even though it ended up killing thousands of Zimbabweans from preventable diseases. Yes Sir, Morgan Tsvangirai loves Anglo-American. - MrK]
Control
The ruling Zanu PF welcomed the Implats decision. "We are absolutely delighted. We have said this time and again, that we need to control our economy and resources," said spokesman Rugare Gumbo.
"The opposition (MDC) has no programme. I do not take them seriously, they don't understand the dynamics of liberation and they are just parroting their masters' line of thinking," Gumbo added.
Zimbabwe is not the only African country that is pushing for a bigger share of state ownership in resources and so the Zanu PF nationalisation march can also be portrayed as part of a wider Africanist agenda.
[No, really? So it may not be all about financing the next elections? - MrK]
But while mineral-rich countries from South Africa to Ghana are trying to get a bigger slice of their resource pie, Zimbabwe stands out for its radicalism.
"Zimbabwe always provides us with an extreme example of things happening elsewhere. Resource nationalism is not unique to Zimbabwe, it is happening across the continent. But Zimbabwe is just taking it to extreme levels," said O'Connor.
COMMENTS
RG_M
Tara O'Connor, Allister Sparks, Sarah Hudleston, Tony Hawkins......Can anyone see how interesting the Rhodesians are no longer asking the MDC-T to talk on their behalf now? They feel betrayed by the MDC-T because ZANU PF is scoring major blow-out successes.
Re-read the article again critically and you will see how even Tsvangirai's photographer is diving into directly demonising ZANU PF......They know that ZANU PF's ambitious Empowerment drive is real and it will bring about proper and lasting wealth, lasting prosperity for Blackie!!!! The whole article by Ed Stobbart is very similar to an article on the Wall Street Journal today.
I think this is the time the nation needs to be on high alert.....I am convinced the Rhodesians are going to their PLAN B if those in the know know what I mean. These guys were quite convinced that Implats was not going to budge.....now this has opened the floodgates.
The tone from the many whites who have commented here is definitely angry....even more angry than sender52......now compare their tone to Tsvangirai's statement in the Herald today that sanctions must be removed completely because they are hindering economic progress. Conflicting stance from the MDC-T and their handlers......could this be evolution of the MDC-T?
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, DEBEERS, IMPALA PLATINUM, INDIGENIZATION AND EMPOWERMENT ACT (ZIMBABWE), NEOCOLONIALISM, NEOLIBERALISM, RIO TINTO, RUGARE GUMBO, ZANU-PF, ZIMPLATS
Read more...
COMMENT - Cecil Rhodes: " “Africa is still lying ready for us,” he wrote. “It is our duty to take it. It is our duty to seize every opportunity of acquiring more territory and we should keep this one idea steadily before our eyes-that more territory simply means more of the Anglo-Saxon race; more of the best, the most human, most honorable race the world possesses.” "
Some mentalities don't die. See Mugabe And The White African, for example. - MrK
AFRICA: The Legacy of Cecil Rhodes' Anglo-American Empire
by Dan Gordon
Global Research, March 12, 2012
"Click this Button or African children will die”: How the “Kony 2012” video drafted a Facebook army to support the militarization of Africa”
In 1877 the British Empire was at the height of its glory, the Spanish Empire would soon collapse, and a young Oxford student named Cecil Rhodes was gripped by a sudden religious vision. Rhodes scrawled out a manifesto. In it, he called for an “Anglo-American Empire” that would begin in the heart of Africa and spread out to conquer the known world.
“Africa is still lying ready for us,” he wrote. “It is our duty to take it. It is our duty to seize every opportunity of acquiring more territory and we should keep this one idea steadily before our eyes-that more territory simply means more of the Anglo-Saxon race; more of the best, the most human, most honorable race the world possesses.”
Rhodes went on to found the DeBeers diamond cartel
[Funded by the Rothschild banking dynasty, NM Rothschild & sons to be precise - still the single largest shareholder of Anglo-American De Beers, especially after Anglo bought out the Oppenheimers of their shareholdings. Anglo-American was founded by Cecil Oppenheimer and JP Morgan. - MrK]
and devote his company’s vast wealth to the colonial project in Africa. He couldn’t have known that, just over a century later, a new invention called the Internet would be tweaking his message, smoothing out his more inflammatory language, and sending his ideas around the globe through YouTube and Facebook. Nor would he ever had imagined that the first black president of the United States would be the one to carry his vision to its ultimate conclusion, under the guise of “humanitarian intervention.”
Fast-forward to March of 2012, when the non-profit “TRI” launched an online video called “Kony 2012.” Filled with lightning cuts, footage of battle-scarred African children, and tearful appeals to emotion, the movie rallies its viewers around a single goal: stopping the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and its leader Joseph Kony. With the help of the U.S. military, of course. And Oprah Winfrey.
At first glance, that’s not such a bad idea. After all, the Lord’s Resistance Army has kidnapped perhaps thousands of Ugandan children and forced them into their militia in their bid to topple the Ugandan government. The fact that the movie ignores, however, is that Uganda’s government, and its U.S.-backed leader, Yoweri Museveni, doesn’t appear to have a much better record when it comes to human rights.
After all, Museveni was recruiting child soldiers to serve in the Ugandan military before the LRA unleashed its guerrilla war against the government. His success is probably what inspired Koney to take up the same tactics. So why does “Kony 2012” try to pin the blame squarely on the LRA for a war in neither side seems to be a friend of the Ugandan people?
It’s because Museveni is a willing tool of U.S. foreign policy. His troops are helping the Obama administration back up an impotent government in Somalia, a regime so mistrusted by its people that it has no power outside of Mogadishu. Because Museveni plays ball with the United States, he is given a free pass, just like Ethiopia’s Zenawi, to commit human rights abuses. Meanwhile, African leaders who try to pursue an independent economic policy like Sudan’s Al-Bashir and Libya’s now-dead Gadhafi are rewarded with NATO bombs and arrest warrants by the International Criminal Court.
“Kony 2012” is a crafty piece of propaganda. It happens to have been released at just the right moment in history. The movie’s narrator warns “this movie will expire at the end of 2012.” Of course, it’s just a coincidence that Obama is running for re-election this year. It’s also a coincidence that the “Kony 2012” signs the group has created to publicize their campaign are the same color as Shepard Fairey’s iconic “Hope” posters that swept Obama into office. The camera often makes shy glances towards shots of the “Kony” and “Obama” posters next to one another. The message is clear: elect one man and you will defeat the other.
Never before has subliminal programming been so blatant. If the makers of the film are truly concerned about stopping violence in Africa, they might want to question the film’s premise-that the 100 U.S. Special Forces Obama sent to Uganda in October of last year are actually there to fight the LRA. After all, according to the UN, the Ugandan military has whittled the LRA down to a mere 200 fighters. With only two guerrillas for every special ops soldier, you would think the war would have been over in a weekend.
Another fact the film neglects to mention is that Uganda’s government announced the discovery of large oil deposits in the northern part of the country last spring. Of course, this is probably a coincidence and has nothing to do with Obama’s decision to send special forces to Uganda several months later, despite the fact that the LRA has shifted their operations to the neighboring Congo.
According to the makers of the film, rather than questioning the true motive of sending troops to Africa, we should use whatever means necessary to pressure the U.S. to beef up its military presence in the region. To do this, the group has hijacked the language and imagery of the anti-globalization movement. Dropping banners, wheatpasting posters at night, holding rock concerts, and raising your fist in the air all become “subversive” ways to fight for escalating our military presence in Uganda.
Cecil Rhodes would be smiling in his grave.
Dan Gordon is a freelance writer living in Washington, D.C. You can follow him on Twitter at @iamdangordon or contact him at upagainstthewalrus@riseup.net
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, CECIL RHODES, COLONIALISM, DEBEERS, GLOBALISATION, NEOCOLONIALISM, OIL, PROPAGANDA, UGANDA, YOWERI MUSEVENI
Read more...
Anglo-American gets De Beers in
By Ben Shore
Date: Friday 04 Nov 2011
In a deal rich in historical significance, mining giant Anglo-American has acquired a controlling stake in the diamond producer De Beers for $5.1bn.
The bare numbers hardly do the deal justice but in essence Anglo-American, which has been a shareholder in De Beers since 1926, will buy the Oppenheimer family's 40% stake in the firm, thus ending the family's involvement after 80 years.
Sir Ernest Oppenheimer was actually one of the founders of Anglo-American back in 1917, along with a certain J.P. Morgan. Oppenheimer then took control of De Beers in 1927. The histories of these two firms have been intertwined ever since, right through the momentous years of apartheid and the ending of white rule in South Africa.
To understand this deal from the Oppenheimer family's perspective, one needs to be aware of the racial politics that underpin De Beer's operations in Botswana, Namibia and South Africa. The time when a single white family could comfortably hold sway over such important economic assets in Africa may well have passed. It simply doesn't look good and in Africa there are significant risks in not looking good (ask many of the white Zimbabwean farmers evicted from their lands).
[Racial politics? Doesn't look good? The fact that tens of billions of dollars are alienated from the continent goes a bit deeper than that. It goes to fundamental questions like - will Africa be allowed to develop at all? Or will it's riches merely pad the Swiss accounts of the trillionairs? - MrK]
With that in mind and with diamond prices buoyant, cashing in for $5.1bn makes a lot of sense. It also helps the Oppenheimer family diversify their investments.
For Anglo-American, the problem with De Beers has always been about value. It already owned 45% of De Beers but as de Beers is a private company establishing exactly how much that 45% was really worth was never easy. Well now we know. This deal values De Beers at $12.75bn, with Anglo's stake worth $10.8bn. There is, of course, always a chance Anglo could decide to cah in itself and list De Beers as a separate entity. If that happens in the next year the transaction agreement gives the De Beers family a 20% listing bonus over and above the $5.1bn they have already pocketed (falling to 10% if the public offering takes place in two years)
The slight complication is that the Republic of Botswana has pre-emption rights to acquire up to 25% of De Beers. If that happens the Oppenheimer family would have to return 25% of the transaction value.
Crucially, the CEO of De Beers, Phillippe Mellier is expected to stay at the helm.
Commenting on the transaction Nicky Oppenheimer said:
"This has been a momentous and difficult decision as my family has been in the diamond industry for more than 100 years and part of De Beers for over 80 years. After careful and deliberate consideration of the offer, and what is in the best interests of the family, we unanimously agreed to accept Anglo American's offer.”
For her part, Cynthia Carrol Chief Executive of Anglo American, said:
"This transaction is a unique opportunity for Anglo American to consolidate control of the world's leading diamond company - De Beers. Today's announcement marks our commitment to an industry with highly attractive long term supply and demand fundamentals.”
Anglo-American's shares were up 1.72% in early trading on news of the deal.
BS
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, DEBEERS
Read more...
COMMENT - It's all about the diamonds.
De Beers hit by cheaper Zim diamonds
02/02/2012 00:00:00
by indiatimes.com
PRICES of rough diamonds from De Beers and Russia-based Alrosa last month took a knock in India’s diamond city of Surat, easing up to 10 percent, especially in the low range category, because of competition from Zimbabwe stones.
In addition, the low range diamond boxes of the leading giant diamond mining companies were selling at discounted rates by up to 25 percent in Surat and Mumbai. Industry leaders say Zimbabwe diamonds are about 50 percent cheaper than those from other sources.
Zimbabwe diamonds started to flow into the world's biggest diamond cutting and polishing hub in Surat from November 2011 after the international diamond regulatory body Kimberly Process (KP) allowed their exports from the controversial Marange fields.
[If the Eastern DRC is not 'controversial', and remember no one is calling DRC diamonds 'blood diamonds', even with a death toll of an estimated 6 to 8 million people, you know that trying to classify Zimbabwe's diamonds as such is purely political. And this article shows why - control of the diamond market. - MrK]
About 30 percent of the diamond pieces currently manufactured in Surat are Zimbabwe stones.
Aniruddha Lidbide, a diamond analyst said: "The giant mining companies seem to be under price and sale pressure since November 2011, when the Zimbabwe goods started to enter India.
“India is the biggest consumer of low-range goods and thus the prices are likely to decrease further in 2012."
De Beers, Alrosa, Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton account for 70 percent of the total production of rough diamonds in the world.
[De Beers and Rio Tinto are both owned by the Rothschild banking dynasty. BHP Billiton does not seem to be connected to them, but is the world's biggest miner. For most of the 20th century, De Beers was owned jointly by the Oppenheimer family. According to Nicky Oppenheimer, the former owner of De Beers, on the BEE: "This was the first major ownership change for De Beers in over a century. Of the legislation Oppenheimer said: "De Beers is here to make a profit, but we must benefit the people and communities where we operate." Local people have to benefit? Try and sell that to the Anglo-American bankers who live thousands of miles away and who are only in it for profit maximisation and especially industry control. Add in a global diamond market share loss of 55% (from 95% of the global market to 40% today), and the Oppenheimers are now nearly completely out of De Beers, forced out by Anglo American's Cynthia Carroll. See the article Carats To Carrots - De Beers No Longer Jewel In Crown. - MrK]
In 2010, the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS) estimated the world production of rough diamonds at 133 million carats.
De Beers has a share of 26 percent by volume and 35 percent by value, Alrosa has 28 percent share by volume and 25 percent by value, Rio Tinto has 11 percent share by volume and 10 percent by value and BHP Billiton has a 2 percent share by volume.
In 2010-11, India imported rough diamonds worth $11 billion, out of which more than 50 percent were of low-range quality. Gems and jewellery exports for 2010-11 jumped 47% to $43 billion from $29.4 billion in the previous year.
According the diamond industry report 2011, Zimbabwe's diamond output would continue to grow.
The country has a stock pile of 4.5 million carats of diamonds valued at $4-5 billion.
Currently four diamond mining firms operate in the Chiadzwa fields - Marange Resources, Mbada Diamonds, Anjin and Diamond Mining Corporation. The country stands to earn more than US $2 billion per year from the three Marange mines that have been permitted to sell so far.
Sanjay Kothari of Gems and Jewellery Export Promotion Council added: "The quality of Zimbabwe diamonds is different from those offered by DTC, Alrosa and even Rio Tinto.
“It is true that Indians have benefited from Zimbabwe goods, but this will not trigger any reduction in the rough prices in the long run."
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, DEBEERS, DIAMONDS, MARANGE DIAMOND FIELDS
Read more...
ZDERA ILLEGAL (Now Proven Beyond Doubt!!)
Submitted by admin on Sun, 12/11/2011 - 10:52
NEW YORK - The
United States has effectively banned diamonds from Marange by adding two mining companies there, Marange Resources and Mbada Diamonds, onto its sanctions list.Marange Resources is a subsidiary of the Zimbabwe Mining Development Corporation (ZMDC) which was already on the sanctions list while Mbada is a private company which is in a joint venture with the ZMDC. The United States imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe under its Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001 which sought regime change in Zimbabwe.
Although the US argues that the sanctions are targeted at individuals and companies on its sanctions list, the sanctions are in effect targeted at the country as a whole because the act forbids international financial institutions like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the African Development Bank from lending money to Zimbabwe unless this is approved by the US government.
For the precise text of the Bush Administration era Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001, S.494 of the 107th US Congress, sponsored by the Republican Bill Frist, co-sponsored by Hillary Clinton (now US Secretary of State), Joe Biden (now Vice President of the United States), Russ Feingold (former Senator), and the late Jesse Helms (segregationist, supporter of apartheid and UDI):
SEC. 4. SUPPORT FOR DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY.
(c) MULTILATERAL FINANCING RESTRICTION- ... the Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the United States executive director to each international financial institution to oppose and vote against--
(1) any extension by the respective institution of any loan, credit, or guarantee to the Government of Zimbabwe; or
(2) any cancellation or reduction of indebtedness owed by the Government of Zimbabwe to the United States or any international financial institution.
Notice that, rather than 'targeting' individuals or companies, ZDERA mentions "the Government of Zimbabwe", not once, but twice, making these economic sanctions not 'targeted' but blanket. Which, when done outside of the United Nations, is a violation of international law. - MrK]
The ban on Marange diamonds was lifted last month by the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme at its meeting in Kinshasa.
The United States abstained from the vote.
The United States becomes chair of the KP from next month with South Africa, which has been opposed to the ban, as the vice-chairman. South Africa will automatically become chair in 2013.
Decisions in the KP are by consensus and Zimbabwe, together with its Southern African Development Community colleagues, stopped the US from becoming vice-chair to the Democratic Republic of Congo because of its stance on Zimbabwe diamonds.
Another diamond mining company Chinese-owned Anjin, also has KP approval but was not on yesterday’s US list.
Zimbabwe is already one of the top 10 diamond producers and there have been accusations that the West was barring Zimbabwe diamonds from the open market to protect their own operations.
The African Diamond Producers Association this week said the KP’s operations were suspiciously engineered by a former diamond mining monopoly and was imprudently promoted by the US State Department,
[US State Department - headed by former Senator Hillary Clinton, along with Joe Biden a co-sponsor of the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001, which destroyed the Zimbabwe Dollar when it went into effect on Jan. 1st 2002 and onwards. - MrK]
which had a dream of not only altering African diamond policy, but also possessed an inherent aspiration to covertly command diamond guidelines worldwide.
“In addition, the KP has historically been ill-advised by global diamond organisations that represent and profit from the retail or back end of the global diamond industry.
“This is where most of the diamond proceeds are brought to fruition and this is also where African diamond producers suffer from most of their dissatisfaction,” ADPA said.
ADPA which was literally calling for the disbandment of the KP added: “The ADC (African Diamond Council) is fed up with KP’s reckless justification, baffling delays to redefine or re-outline preceding terminology and in recent times, diamond producers have also lost patience for the redundancy we’ve observed in these regimented diamond meetings, seminars and conferences over the 3 years.
“African Diamond Producers refuse to prop up a botched system or scheme that deviously exploits the front end of the diamond industry while coaxing urbanized nations to assign integrity to it.
ADC members have finally realized that they have more control to renovate our industry than Kimberley Process does, so any dilemma that we currently possess as an organisation will be resolved internally prior to seeking external or global support.”
Right now Zimbabwe can do without the United States as its current production cannot meet demand from India alone.
Though the United States is currently the biggest market for jewellery, it will soon be overtaken by China which is now the world’s second largest economy and could overtake the US within 20 years.
Labels: ANGLO-AMERICAN, DEBEERS, KIMBERLEY PROCESS, SANCTIONS, ZDERA
Read more...
