Opinion: Does Berlin want Russian forces closer to its borders?

Ever since the Russian-Belorussian invasion of Ukraine, which has now been going on for over a 100 days. The Russians has already annexed Crimea in 2014 and been since then inciting rebels and separatist in the Donbass regions. Therefore, the war with Russia was started long before the sudden day in February this year.

The Western nations could see this coming and the allies of the European Union could have supported the Ukrainians earlier. Kremlin and President Putin has used the expansion and adding more members of the NATO as an excuse to takeover or control the former USSR republic’s. This is because Putin wants an empire and revive the “greatness” of the Soviets. That is more important to him than the NATO expansion or anything else.

The ones speaking of a realignment have spoken to soon. The EU and NATO is on the backbone in concern to Ukraine. Yes, certain member-states are going far and beyond to support Kyiv. This being the Baltics, Poland and others who is possibly in the firing-line when Moscow is done with Ukraine. This being Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia and so on. There is so many nations in the Eastern Europe and Eurasia, which could easily be invaded next. That is even Georgia, Azerbaijan or Kazakhstan.

While we have seen Berlin being the ugly cousin of Budapest. Berlin is all vibes and no true support. Germany is slow or blocking donated military equipment. Heck, the United States of America also blocked fighter-jets donated from Poland to Ukraine. While Germany has favoured being a close trading partner with Russia and only sanctioned things which isn’t hurting the economy. That’s why there is no difference between Orban or Scholz at this point. They are the same, but just a different package.

However, the Germans should wonder if they want Russian soldiers on their borders? Because, Putin believes the former USSR republics belongs under his influence and control. That’s because they are “colonies” and cannot make “sovereign decisions”. So, who knows if Moldova or another nations can get into the frontline after Ukraine. Berlin should feel responsible for that. They could have avoided it and ensured the Defence of Ukraine was up to speed. Nevertheless, the Germans and the “soft” allies who are trying to “save face” of the warlord in Moscow.

We have seen high ranking officials in Russia speaking of Poland and Kaliningrad. They have talked of corridors and whatnot. So, the Russians could easily get very close to German borders. Who knows if Putin feel attached and that the Russians are righteous owners of the former territory of DDR. Have the leaders of Berlin thought of that? The republic got united after the fall of the Berlin wall, but with people like Vladimir you can never know if he thinks Moscow should have a vassal-state and a capital of Eastern zone of Berlin itself. Therefore, this is just speculations, but never underestimate a warlord like Putin.

That Scholz wants to do soft-diplomacy is fine, but the solidarity talk and vibes aren’t saving people in Ukraine. Neither is it saving or helping the cause of the Western world. No, it is just showing how despicable he is and this is why his just another nationalist like Orban. His more worried about the industries in Germany, than the war happening in parts of Ukraine. The war that can easily go further if the Russians bleed the Ukrainian out. That can happen if they are not getting proper weapons or the capacity to retaliate towards the Russian army.

It seems like the Germans and their leaders wants to be Putin’s friends and not the real allies of the free world. That’s a tragic look. As they are more into the posh words, but inaction in concern to the plights of Kyiv. Instead the German bureaucracy and arms industry isn’t helping in the midst of war. Nevertheless, if it doesn’t do now. Maybe it has to later step up when it gets even closer to its border. They could have stopped it and given what Kyiv needed. However, that was to much to ask. So, now a while later… the Russian forces gets closer to Berlin, which I don’t think the Germans really wants. Peace.

Opinion: Macron is turning himself into an Orbán-Light

“We must not humiliate Russia so that the day when the fighting stops we can build an exit ramp through diplomatic means” (…) “I am convinced that it is France’s role to be a mediating power” – President Emmanuel Macron

We know that Budapest and Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is an ally of President Vladimir Putin. That has been shown over the years and Fidesz is preferring close ties to Kremlin and Moscow. French President Macron has had countless of phone-calls and wanting to be a significant player in the war in Ukraine ahead of the polls in France and now after. This is very clear and he doesn’t even try to deny that.

Macron has clearly not seen what sort of means, efforts or the total destruction, which the Russian invasion of Ukraine brings. Neither does he seem affected by the extra judicial killings or the raping of innocent woman. He doesn’t mind the total destruction of towns, citizens and townships. That isn’t troublesome. Neither is the massacres and mass-graves made by the Russian invading forces.

Why do I say that?

Well… Macron is yet again afraid of humiliating the Russians. He is afraid that Putin is looking stupid and dumb. Macron is deeply afraid of how Putin will react or feel. If Putin will feel hurt or suffer, because he waged a war on a false premise. Where he has ensured total devastation and destruction of parts of Ukraine.

Macron in these sorts of statements are more directly concerned with Kremlin and Russia. His not considering the plights, the pains or the suffering caused on Kyiv. That’s where his heart should lay and not consider the costs, which is directly coming home to roost as a consequence of actually invading a neighbouring country.

The war has now been going on for 101 days. The war has been going on from since February 2022. The Russian and Belorussian allies has used all means, tactics and methods of war to win. They have not speared anyone no mind and killed civilians in action. There is nothing that they are not willing to commit or do. That’s why reading to save face of Russians after this is outrageous. It is obnoxious.

Macron is worried about his friend and fellow President Putin. These actions could just be of a man who is associated with Orbán. That’s why I call Macron an “Orbán-Light” like a soda or a beer with lesser calories or sugar. Since, his the diet edition of a beverage in concern to the Prime Minister of Hungary.

The French President is now losing face. His looking like Putin’s little puppet. This is neither powerful nor smart. It is actually foolish. Macron and his European allies should boost the military and ties to Kyiv. Instead, his soft on Putin and Kremlin. That is just disregarding the fight for freedom and territorial integrity of which is justified in the sense of Ukraine.

Macron would easily given away Donbas to Kremlin to buy “peace”. However, we know that is a waste. Because, taking Crimea wasn’t enough. Therefore, Moscow and Kremlin will carve up more territory in Ukraine if they could. That’s why this war was issued and to get a friendly proxy-regime installed in Kyiv. Peace.

Opinion: Draghi, Macron and Scholz are all copying Orbán [on their way of handling Ukraine]

The last few days European leaders across several nations has shown the same sort of sentiment that we have gotten used to from Budapest, Hungary. That Prime Minister Viktor Orbán doing favours and playing second fiddle to Kremlin is nothing new. However, reading and seeing reports from else where is shocking.

We have seen that the Italian politicians, not only Silvio Berlusconi defending Russia and their interests in Ukraine. This has also been done by the Prime Minister Mario Draghi who has come with a plan to where Ukraine cedes territory to Russia and follows their perimeter for peace. The pointed plan could have been written by the Russian and been hackwork from them. Since, it would give everything Vladimir Putin wishes and humiliate the defending nation Ukraine. Who has not only lost sovereign territory, but also given way to the invader. In such a way that their sacrifice was done for nothing and Moscow got their will. This would be like the Ukrainian saying the Italians should give up Trieste or the nearby region there to Austria or Hungary, since it belonged to the House of Habsburg in the past. Therefore, doing this is ill advised and will do no good to Kyiv.

While the newly elected French President Emmanuel Macron has already been afraid that Putin might loose face in the conflict. He has furthered his ideals that the Ukrainian could cede territory as well. This is a continuation of the favourable ideals of the European leaders to buy “peace” buy giving away territory which isn’t theirs. Not like the French has ever given away territory or pieces of land without retaliating or giving unfavourable agreements. Just ask Haiti or any other former colony, which is still connected to it by Monetary Unions or having their gold reserves in Paris. Therefore, the French should respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine, as it values its own. Unless, the French wants to donate territories to the United Kingdom or anyone else for that matter.

Macron has to further the lack lustre support of Kyiv, as he has said the Ukrainian state will take years or decades to be able to join or be a part of the European Union. That means the shallow basis of the solidarity to Ukraine is only skin-deep. Only a show for the voters ahead of the polls. Because, everything else is indirect support of Moscow from the likes of Macron. He is just as spineless and hopeless as Orbán. You would think Ukraine could bring European values and as a unifying ally in the East. However, they have not only fought for their sovereignty, but their own independence to chose allies. Allies who is halting or not understanding their needs. Therefore, they are instead being weak and tolerant towards an imperial and fascist force under the banner Z from Russia.

German Chancellor Olof Scholz have been slow, bureaucratic and done as little as possible. Only spoken of solidarity and haven’t even tried to dig deep with financial sanctions of Russia. Neither has the German nation supported heavily the needs of arms and equipment in the self-defence of Ukraine. It has taken forever to give them anything and it had to be done while negotiating with own military industry.

Scholz continues where Macron left off and not promising help to fast-track Ukraine into the EU. The longer that takes and the harder the possibility to join for the fighting nation. The more it is a target and a possible victim of Russian aggression. It just like Rome, Berlin or Paris doesn’t understand that. They are not on the border with Russia and haven’t the threat close to it. This is why they can play second fiddle and take it easy.

That’s the reason why the Baltic’s have defended Kyiv and directly supported it wholeheartedly. The same can be said about Polen. These four nations have been giving and showing direct support beyond their means. While the big-power of the European Union are showing the same sort of hesitation and slow moving capacity, which only benefits Russia. That’s the sort of thing you would expect from Budapest.

That Macron, Scholz and Draghi all could be distant cousins of Orbán. They are acting like close relatives and family. As they are just so friendly to Moscow and Kremlin. While being so careful to help or show solidarity with Ukraine. It is like they don’t understand what is going on or what’s at stake. If they let the EU Membership gong for a decade or so. That buys Russia time to return again before Kyiv is accepted. Just like the NATO is hesitant too.

If the Europeans really cares about Ukraine and wants to safeguard it. They should be less caring about the villain and the violator of Ukraine. The ones that is killing, raping and destroying their homeland on a daily basis. The Ukrainian people is the victims and the ones bravely fighting for their freedom.

To read such statements, citations and whatnot from leaders of Europe isn’t what Ukraine needs at this point of time. Especially, if these leaders cares about the integrity and independence of Ukraine. Secondly, if Ukraine is a partner and an ally of Europe. Why not allow it into the common market and be a part of the European Union?

Instead, these leaders are acting like Ukraine is the lost member of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), which is what Russia wants and then it would in its sphere of influence; instead of turning to Europe. Because, I can assure you that Putin would have accepted Kyiv in that hegemony yesterday to boost the EAEU collective. Therefore, the EU and the European leaders should seize the moment and grab the opportunity. In such a way it can safeguard an ally and a nation in need. Instead of toying around and giving a carrot without fulfilling anything. That is insincere and injustice towards Ukraine.

Ukraine needs Europe and Europe needs Ukraine. They are connected and right now Ukraine is on the frontline and fighting for Europe. Because, if Ukraine fails and Russia still have a drive. They could easily continue to their war elsewhere in their path for imperial glory. Therefore, seeing and hearing this from the heads of state of Europe. Its disappointing and these people should know better, but that’s apparently to much to ask.

Who knew that these gentlemen was inspired and following Orbán’s lead? Nobody knew that before, but the conflict and war in Ukraine exposed them all. They are all have a little Orbán at heart. Peace.

Opinion: Macron should be concerned saving his own face – not delegate sovereign Ukrainian territory to Russia

“Interviewed by Italian TV Rai1, Zelensky confirmed that Macron has proposed for Ukraine to give up some territory to Russia in order to present a face-saving option for Putin. Zelensky said it’s out of the question. Macron is the one who needs to save his face after this” (Visegrád 24, 13.05.2022).

The newly elected French President Emmanuel Macron is sounding like a Kremlin apologist. Would have anticipated this from some of the Russian buddies in Budapest, but not from Paris. However, the war in Ukraine is only showing who is pandering to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Macron is one of them and he is willing to give up territory to appease Putin. The French President is willing to make a new Munich Agreement of 1938 to appease the Russian dictator of the day. The same way several powers within Europe defended Germany’s rights at that time to territory within Czechoslovakia. They did that to settle and give Europe peace, but we knew that wasn’t enough for Hitler. We can most likely say that giving Donbas or the two separatist regions within Ukraine to Russia will not give Europe peace in 2022. It is only postponing it and possible gives Moscow more reason to invade the whole of Ukraine, which it is currently trying to do.

That’s why Macron shouldn’t be concerned about saving the face of Putin. He should be worried about the innocent civilians, the destruction and the war-crimes happening within Ukraine. That’s would make sense, but his instead wanting to do a Neville Chamberlain move and settle grievances in regards to Putin, instead of listening to Kyiv. That is very obvious here and we all know what Hitler did to the rest of Czechoslovakia.

Also, in this manner… Macron should be worried about his own sovereign territories and integrity, as there are independence movements and resistance on the island of Corsica. That is something he has to deal with. Corsica must be listened too and there is possibly talks of some “autonomy” but we don’t know what is happening with that. Therefore, he should be concerned there and possibly not lose face over that himself.

The French President should try to talk to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. He should try to understand the devastation of the war. The French President should understand the constant threat and how the Russians has violated Ukraine for years. The French President should study and understand how the Russians has breached the Budapest Memorandum and also the Minsk Agreement. Therefore, he shouldn’t pander to Putin, but listen to the needs of Ukraine.

It is really despicable of Macron as the Ukrainian are defending their rights. I wonder, if the French would give up any territories or even some of their influence in former colonies even? Isn’t just a little while ago, the French called out Bamako and their acts of ceasing relations or even military agreement with them. That is just showing the double standard of the French and old French Empire.

Macron should be concerned about France and Corsica at this point. In the mean time, he should use the strength and greatness of France to support Ukraine. Not be there as an unknown ally of Putin. That is just wrong and in the midst of war. Macron should be a brother to Zelensky and not be a buddy to Putin. Unless, he wants to be allied with dictators and support them.

We know the French supports the likes of Paul Biya, Faure Gnassingbe and others in the former West African Colonies. So, it would fit the programme of Paris. However, we would think the French had more foresight, but clearly not. Peace.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson letter to President Emmanuel Macron (25.11.2021)

A Rebuttal to Friedman: There is no “lid on Africa” also addressing his misconception on Migration!

The Cambridge Dictionary defines “taking the lid off” as: “to cause something bad that was previously kept secret to be known by the public” (Cambridge Dictionary, Cambridge University Press). A writer like Thomas L. Friedman in the New York times should know this perfectly well, as he used this term in his column ‘ Opinion Can I Ruin Your Dinner Party?’ published on the 7^th August 2018. This is the reason for why I writing this. Because of two paragraphs that needs to be addressed, I will first let his words speak, before showing what the EU says about the matter. As a European, the American writer doesn’t make sense.

The key part was:

“Toppling Qaddafi without building a new order may go down as the single dumbest action the NATO alliance ever took. It took the lid off Africa, leading to some 600,000 asylum seekers and illegal migrants flocking to Italy’s shores in recent years, with 300,000 staying there and the rest filtering into other E.U. countries. This has created wrangles within the bloc over who should absorb how many migrants and has spawned nationalist-populist backlashes in almost every E.U. country” (Thomas L. Friedman – ‘Opinion Can I Ruin Your Dinner Party?’ 07.08.2018 link: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/07/opinion/can-i-ruin-your-dinner-party.html).

I don’t know in which world Friedman is residing, but the words of the EU, Zelesa and MPC are clearly not opening any jars of uncertainty. Yes, there been a growing amount of illegal and non-asylum seekers through the United Nations or Bilateral Organizations, which they have come from War-Zones as in the past. As the EU Member States takes their quota of refugees and asylum-seekers as a global task of helping people in need, as that cannot happen where they are or they are living in temporary shelters awaiting hopefully a helpful nation to become their guardian. However, no else is saying it is NATO fault or even the fall Qaddafi, which is the reason for crossing across the Mediterranean sea. There is more porous borders as well as the conflict in the Sahel Region that has continued. These are all reasons for the transport of refugees from the rest of the Sub-Saharan Africa. However, there was never a lid to be taken of the continent.

The EU Science Hub states:

“Between 2008 and 2016, the total annual number of African migrants remained stable. However, legal immigration was declining in this period, while the number of irregular arrivals and asylum claims of Africans increased. Irregular arrivals of Africans via the Mediterranean started to decline again in 2017.In Europe, the majority of African immigrants come from North Africa, with most people making the move to reunite with family members already settled in a European country” (EU Science Hub – ‘New perspectives on African migration’ 01.07.2018 link: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/news/new-perspectives-african-migration).

EU Project opened more nations for Immigration:

“Clearly, African immigration to Europe was marked by increasing diversification both in the number of countries sending and receiving the immigrants. Particularly remarkable was the emergence of the southern European countries, principally Italy, Portugal, and Spain, themselves longstanding emigration countries, as immigration countries. This was as much a product of the improving economic fortunes in these countries and their integration into the prosperity and political sphere of Western Europe as it was of mounting immigration pressures on their borders to the east and the south. Enclosed in a new European transnational space, new identities of ethnicity and citizenship began to emerge that entailed creating both symbolic and material borders to keep away or distinguish the immigrants. The Europeanization of these countries and the rebordering of the Mediterranean that it implied required the separation and stigmatization ofimmigrants from the global South (Suarez-Navaz, 1997; Royo, 2005)” (Paul Tiyambe Zeleza – ‘Africa ‘s Contemporary Global Migrations: Patterns, Perils, and Possibilities’ P: 39, June 2010).

Migration Profile – Libya:

“Despite Libya being, first and foremost, a country of immigration, the deterioration of immigrants’ conditions in the country has also made it an important country for transit migration and particularly for the many migrants trying to reach Malta and the Italian Isle of Lampedusa As to emigration patterns, Libya has never recorded significant outward migration flows. However, during the 2011 unrest, there was an upsurge of Libyan nationals fleeing the country. According, though, to the authorities in neighbouring countries, the great majority are believed to already have returned to Libya” (…) “To conclude, two considerations can be made about the impact of the Libyan crisis on international migration movements. On the one hand, Sub Saharan nationals were without any doubt the people most at risk, both in Libya and at the borders (where repatriation activities led to an impasse). On the other hand, the capacity of neighbouring African countries to manage the crisis in terms of the reception of migrants was remarkable. (IOM, 2012)” (Migration Policy Center – ‘MPC – MIGRATION PROFILE Libya, June 2013).

As we can really see, is that what Friedman is saying is wrong. The African Migration to Europe has lasted long. That is not new and has usually followed to the previous Colonizers of the ones migrating. However, with the change of he European Union, has changed that pattern, but not opened up something. The Libyan Crisis and fall of Qaddafi have had is effect. However, the results by the EU and the IOM are stating not as bad as previously stated. Also that the “illegal” are rising, but less of the direct asylum-seekers, meaning their means and ways has changed, but the end-game are more of the same. They are still fleeing from crisis and wars in Sub-Saharan Africa, but they doing so by the shores of Northern Africa crossing into EU Countries.

So, the taking the lid off by invading and deposing Qaddafi seems like far-fetched. That is a lie, also a relic of the past, as Friedman sounds like they opened a box with a box-opener. This was simply done with getting rid of one dictator. He seems like that is the reason for the whole transit in Libya, not the whole conflict within the continent and neither the true nature of it all. As people are doing whatever they can to get shelter and hope for the future, because the International Community isn’t reacting or caring about the oppression in their nations. They are forgotten and know they will not get help, as the Western Powers are boasting these leaders who oppress and then people want to flee from these shores.

No lid was taken, it was never a lid there to begin with? Are there a lid that was opened so that United States could have space for all the slaves in the past? Or is there a lid taken of the brain of Trump? We all, the rest of the world really want to know.

Enough of this nonsense. Peace.

The European Council plans to move more migration management outside its borders!

The European Council in the draft note before the next general meeting. Is establishing mechanisms, which would ensure that less tries to cross the oceans to get to safe harbour in Europe. This by both giving financial aid possibly and make the Border States have settlements of asylum-seekers and whatnot.

“The European Council will also strengthen EU external instruments on migration in the context of the negotiations on the next Multiannual Financial Framework, in particular so as to ensure effective cooperation with countries of origin and transit. To this end, the external components of the internal, border, asylum and migration funds should include a dedicated external migration management window specifically geared towards stemming irregular migration flows” (Council of the European Union – European Council meeting (28 June 2018) – Draft conclusions -8147/18, 19.06.2018).

This is really nasty stuff, that the European Union continues to purge like this and with these methods. Actually, making sure the refugees and asylum-seekers are stationed in Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt and everything else bordering at sea towards Europe. There is lack of heart and with intent of shattering people’s dreams of possible refuge. That is what this is.

They are planning external migration management to stop the flow of people crossing into their borders. That means an invisible wall with functions and mechanisms stopping the ones trying to seek refuge. Just think about that, the sovereign states on the borders are bushwhacked by the EU and also most likely pushed by the funds their way as a bargain. Both parties with no consideration of the implications on the lives on the ones fleeing war-zones and civil-wars, famine or any sort of disaster that are creating all the reasons for fleeing on humanitarian grounds. Still, the EU will use these states as buffers and shield itself from people coming.

We can all see with this, the precious and deep scars, the evidence of control and also extending boundaries, just so, the ones in need cannot cross into refuge. They cannot get shelter or hope for the future, but live in oblivion, outcast in their own homeland and not welcome at the destination either. It is just a sad story of our time and the lack of compassion within the leadership of our representatives as well. Peace.

Opinion: G6+1 Dumb-ass!

What have we learned this week? That President Donald J. Trump is douche, a spoiled brat in a toy-store and not understand the G7 Summit. He the one that does stuff and makes things off on the spot. He might be able to trick foolish inbreed rural Americans, but the whole wide world; he cannot trick like that. Especially not career leaders like the ones participating in the G7 Summit in Canada.

The other nations was prepared to write a statement without Trump. The other world leaders at the summit are Angela Merkel, Justin Trudeau, Emmanuel Macron, Donald Tusk, Jean-Claude Junker, Theresa May, Shinzo Abe and Giuseppe Conte. This is leaders from Germany, Canada, France, European Union, United Kingdom, Japan and Italy.

That means that Trump has insulted the world and he doesn’t care about his allies. Trump has shown it. All in his tweets and his actions. That he didn’t have the ability to sign a communique that rest was favorable of signing. Trump wanted to isolate himself, he acted like a douche, came late to meetings, came late to the G-7 and also left early. Nothing with this man shows respect of the allies. He also came with demands to other before arriving. To add another member, without any clear reason, like it was a bidding he had to do. Because he had promised his friend Vlad before the Summit.

The Charlevoix G7 Summit Communique states this concerning trade:

“We acknowledge that free, fair and mutually beneficial trade and investment, while creating reciprocal benefits, are key engines for growth and job creation. We recommit to the conclusions on trade of the Hamburg G20 Summit, in particular, we underline the crucial role of a rules-based international trading system and continue to fight protectionism. We note the importance of bilateral, regional and plurilateral agreements being open, transparent, inclusive and WTO-consistent, and commit to working to ensure they complement the multilateral trade agreements. We commit to modernize the WTO to make it more fair as soon as possible. We strive to reduce tariff barriers, non-tariff barriers and subsidies” (Charlevoix G7 Summit Communique, 09.06.2018).

This part of the Communique is in direct challenge to the sudden move of Trump to impose trade-sanctions on these nations that he meet days after. That is really a bold move to impose tariffs on aluminum and steel. Certainly, the nations who got this will impose tariffs on the US produced products to counter measure. Clearly, the trade-war is created in the mind of Trump. So this will affect ordinary civilians world over and not the wealthy. They usually get away with this. Maybe, that is one of the foolish reasons for Trump passing his chance of being loyal to his allies. That he couldn’t be friendly or even be reasonable.

That is why he is isolationist and a dumb-ass, the losers isn’t the world, but United States. The US Government are really trading their favorable position and making their situation worse. The lack of tact and diplomatic spat with allies. Trump is really an insensitive lying ass-hat who should know how to carry himself. Instead he lies about Trudeau after the Summit. He is putting himself in the spotlight and acting like a TV-Star. Not as a representative of the US. That is why he is losing for himself and for his Republic.

It is weird, but instead of showing strength or greatness, he is showing weakness and lack of finesse. This was a G6 Summit with an added dumbass!

Trump, you we’re able to fool America, but your not able to fool the world. Peace.

President Macky Sall is a bit to friendly to the Colonial French!

“With the French colonization, we had positive things” – President Macky Sall

The Senegalese President Macky Sall is out again, being super-friendly to the French. Even saying again that the Colonizer did lots of good to Senegal. The Republic and the people should be ashamed by the man. That he is so little sovereign and with pride over his own republic. If he was Paul Biya, I would understand, he should praise Switzerland and the mountain resorts he resides at. But I will not digress more. President Sall has again praised France. It is like you wonder how much money they are doling him and what sort of business-deals he has done with French Companies. Since he is a bit to friendly with them. Especially knowing the history of France in Senegal. You should figure out, that you can be cordial with them, but not so lovable.

First show some older clips, to show that this isn’t new from the President. So the ones that is shocked about recent statements as of this week. This is his M.O. and what he does. He has been like this before and said similar things, even if the French was imperialistic and still is, with their reach and demeaning control of the currency market in West Africa. Which the Republic of Senegal is under and their monetary policies are controlled by, therefore, I would expect more reluctant view of France, but Sall is different. He prefers and just see goodness from the French.

BWOG Staff reported in 2013:

“President Sall painted his vision for African Economic growth, insisting that philosophers like Fukuyama and Hobbes paint a picture of man “as a wolf to other men.” He insisted that predatory economic practices be reined in and saw little merit in criticism of African debt by countries “that are in huge debt themselves!” “We cannot validate the voice of the future with tools from the past,” he went on, claiming that innovative investment, not empty charity, was the real path to growth. He claimed that 4/5ths of African countries were experiencing growth above the world average and insisted that a common currency for eight West African is the right move. The one positive aspect of colonialism is that it united those countries oppressed by the same power” (BWOG Staff – ‘LectureHop: Macky Sall, the President of Senegal’ 28.09.2013 link: http://bwog.com/2013/09/28/lecturehop-macky-sall-the-president-of-senegal/).

An interview with Sall in 2013:

“What role should countries such as Senegal play in regional security compared with outside actors such as the United States and France? We cooperate with France, which is an ally and a friend. It is of course a former colonial power. But France understands the stakes in and the sociology of our countries. The United States also has a security policy in the region, and it is our partner through africom [the U.S. Africa Command] and everything that it does in terms of military cooperation with various countries” (…) “So can Africa take care of its own problems now? No. Africa cannot handle its own problems, because we are not yet at the point where we have the logistical capabilities to deploy troops in case of emergency. It’s simply a matter of means, not a matter of men” (Mercredi – ‘A Conversation With Macky Sall’ 28.08.2013 link: https://www.ndarinfo.com/A-Conversation-With-Macky-Sall_a6291.html)

Northern Senegal farmers:

“Under French rule, the poor farmers of Northern Senegal were forced by oppressive economic policies to resort to the monoculture of peanuts and rice. The legacy of colonialism on traditional farming practices was the desertification of the delicate Sahel soil and a devastating famine in the late twentieth century (Kloby 103). In what was once a civilization of communal living and bartering, the French instituted elements of capitalism that would best serve the European metropole. Instead of nurturing a complete capitalist system and educating the local populous about the newly developed concepts of industrialization and economic theory, the Europeans exploited the rich resources of both land and people to further advance their own development (Rodney 112)” (Emma Anderson – ‘COLONIZATION AND SENEGAL’ 10.07.2013 link: https://www.globalcitizenyear.org/updates/colonization-and-senegal/) .

As you see, President Sall has a favorable view, maybe he is caught up in the view of French Embassy of Senegal in Dakar, which writes on their page about their relationship:

“After more than three centuries of uninterrupted relations, France and Senegal have remained since the independence of very close nations. A shared history, a tradition of cooperation in all fields, a constant flow of human and material exchanges in both directions, confirm this proximity. The strong bond that President Léopold Sédar Senghor had with our country has been perpetuated by his successors, President Abdou Diouf, President Abdoulaye Wade, and President Macky Sall since April 2012. France intends to remain alongside Senegal, which is the largest recipient of French aid in sub-Saharan Africa. It is in all these areas, but also in that of our cultural and human exchanges, woven through three hundred and fifty years of history, that the exceptional relations of friendship between France and Senegal are manifested” (La France au Senegal – ‘Relations politiques’ 21.06.2017).

Therefore, you can see that the exceptional relationship is evident in the way Sall is defending the colonial works that French did in Senegal, as they didn’t do it to control and get their imperial control of Senegal. That should be insulting to Sall, but you can wonder why he see it so favorable. Because he shows such defense and defense of the assimilation and the policies done by French Colonial Administrations, which was done for the betterment of Paris and not for the betterment of Dakar. That was just dumb-luck if the policies created something good for Dakar, because the end-game in the colonial enterprises are for the betterment of the empire, not for the colonies. They are the means to an end.

That is why Sall is so French friendly and defending the demeaning and insulting policies of the Colonial French. Which the Senegal republic has inherited and is still under supervision of the French. As their monetary policies and other government framework are still monitored by the French and the French Treasury in Paris. Therefore, the Senegal Government have less control and have less powers of their own, as long as they are following guidelines from the French on how the Central African Franc (CAF) is.

The Senegalese are the ones that following similar steps as in France, but have politicians that are blindly also following the French. This is all in deliberate way of still having not only influence, but actual control of the territories they used reign supreme over. That is what the French is doing. Therefore, President Sall is a bit to friendly and defending the French. I just don’t get it. I don’t. But that is just me though. Peace.