Main Edition
US
FR
Reports of violence breaking out in Africa rarely raise eyebrows in the West these days. Perhaps we feel it has little to do with us, whatever the West’s historical responsibilities for the continent’s problems. But as the recent events in Sudan demonstrate, this is no longer the case. The turmoil unfolding there is of far more importance to us than we might think.
While the fighting in Sudan is, on the face of it, little more than a power struggle between the two rival factions that control the country, there is also an important international and geopolitical dimension to the conflict. At its heart is the great powers’ competition for influence over the continent — what has been called the “new scramble for Africa”.
Given its vast natural resources, including gold, its agricultural wealth and its geopolitically strategic location, Sudan has long attracted regional and international power plays. In recent years, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Israel have all been cultivating economic and political ties with the country’s leadership — and its two warlords in particular.
One country, however, stands out for its “special relationship” with Sudan: Russia. Putin made sure to cultivate an alliance with the country’s former leader, Omar al-Bashir, deploying the infamous Wagner Group in 2017 to provide him with political and military support. More importantly, that same year, al-Bashir signed a military cooperation agreement with Russia which included allowing the Russians to establish a military base along the Red Sea, ensuring a permanent presence for the Russian Navy in a crucial region and easy access to the Indian Ocean.
Al-Bashir was overthrown in 2019, before the agreement came into play, but Russia maintained good relations with the new administration’s military leaders, especially Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, better known as Hemedti, whose Rapid Support Forces control the country’s gold mines. The transitional military-civilian government confirmed the decision to allow Russia to establish a base in 2020, but backtracked the following year under pressure from the US. However, once the civilian members of government were purged in yet another coup, in 2021, the agreement was revived.
Today, there is no indication that the issue of the naval base played a role in the recent outbreak of fighting, nor are any of the major foreign players openly backing either of the two warring factions. But if one side should explicitly align itself with, say, Russia, the conflict could easily turn into another front of the proxy war between the West and Russia, alongside Ukraine, with potentially disastrous consequences for the entire continent.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThe West’s historical responsibility….. Yawn. Africa was more violent before Western colonialism and would presumably be more violent today if we had of left them to their own devices.
Whenever I see that line about the West still having responsibility to Africa, I can’t help but think it’s a tacit admission that colonialism was all that was holding the thing together and therefore, Europeans need to step in and supervise the governance of these countries. Can’t imagine it would go down well if you were so up-front about it though.
Indeed, some Africans have gone on the record lamenting the premature dissolution of the colonial empires. Add to that premature dissolution the advent of various communist and socialist regimes in their wake and the disintegration of the continent was more or less guaranteed. A writer called Gregor Dallas is very good on this subject, but I don’t know whether he is still in print.
Paul Kenyon’s “Dictatorland” is a well-researched volume on post-colonial Africa. A depressing but instructive read.
Paul Kenyon’s “Dictatorland” is a well-researched volume on post-colonial Africa. A depressing but instructive read.
Indeed, some Africans have gone on the record lamenting the premature dissolution of the colonial empires. Add to that premature dissolution the advent of various communist and socialist regimes in their wake and the disintegration of the continent was more or less guaranteed. A writer called Gregor Dallas is very good on this subject, but I don’t know whether he is still in print.
Whenever I see that line about the West still having responsibility to Africa, I can’t help but think it’s a tacit admission that colonialism was all that was holding the thing together and therefore, Europeans need to step in and supervise the governance of these countries. Can’t imagine it would go down well if you were so up-front about it though.
The West’s historical responsibility….. Yawn. Africa was more violent before Western colonialism and would presumably be more violent today if we had of left them to their own devices.
Denying this is taking place leaves this article with very little integrity.
The funny thing about unherd is that independent thinkers who dismiss the MSM narrative on one thing, fully accept it on another. The Africans themselves are happy with Chinese investment and China is popular there.
Yes the Chinese are keen to remind the Africans that if they chop up the Chinese investors then they’ll be back under the Yankee/Brit overlords and so back where they started – and no-one in Africa – be they prince or pauper, wants that.
I’m uncertain how you know this and reach that conclusion. Did you ask the people of Zambia and Malawi about the crippling Chinese debts? Do you know why Congo exports all it’s raw cobalt to China for production?
Yes the Chinese are keen to remind the Africans that if they chop up the Chinese investors then they’ll be back under the Yankee/Brit overlords and so back where they started – and no-one in Africa – be they prince or pauper, wants that.
I’m uncertain how you know this and reach that conclusion. Did you ask the people of Zambia and Malawi about the crippling Chinese debts? Do you know why Congo exports all it’s raw cobalt to China for production?
This is not the only instance in this article that reduces its integrity to little or nothing. It presents a typically bigoted, anti-White. Woking Class narrative of colonial Africa. China is systematically raping Africa of its natural resources, including the near extinction of Rhinos for their horns. To claim that Africans are happy with China and its ‘investments’ is risible. The people (as distinct from their corrupt, evil leaders) of the one country with which I am familiar, and which suffers a substantial Chinese presence, detest them.
And as for the term ‘liberation struggle’ as applied to Africa, that is a well-worn, misleading trope. Those conflicts did not liberate their peoples; they were wars of acquisition – a means of stealing the wealth created by others without having to work for it, and getting others to die for it in the process. The leaders of the so-called liberation movements (Comrade Mugabe of Zimbabwe was an archetype) enriched themselves massively through plunder while their ‘liberated’ populations lost their basic rights and descended into poverty, starvation and terror.
This article lacks credibility as well as integrity.
The funny thing about unherd is that independent thinkers who dismiss the MSM narrative on one thing, fully accept it on another. The Africans themselves are happy with Chinese investment and China is popular there.
This is not the only instance in this article that reduces its integrity to little or nothing. It presents a typically bigoted, anti-White. Woking Class narrative of colonial Africa. China is systematically raping Africa of its natural resources, including the near extinction of Rhinos for their horns. To claim that Africans are happy with China and its ‘investments’ is risible. The people (as distinct from their corrupt, evil leaders) of the one country with which I am familiar, and which suffers a substantial Chinese presence, detest them.
And as for the term ‘liberation struggle’ as applied to Africa, that is a well-worn, misleading trope. Those conflicts did not liberate their peoples; they were wars of acquisition – a means of stealing the wealth created by others without having to work for it, and getting others to die for it in the process. The leaders of the so-called liberation movements (Comrade Mugabe of Zimbabwe was an archetype) enriched themselves massively through plunder while their ‘liberated’ populations lost their basic rights and descended into poverty, starvation and terror.
This article lacks credibility as well as integrity.
Denying this is taking place leaves this article with very little integrity.
The port, road or railway has one purpose: to extract a resource (hardwood, mineral or whatever) at a fraction of its true cost with proceeds going into pockets of the connected few (African and non-African). If true, the author hasn’t explained how Africa is the winner. This, mind you, is a question Africans need also ask themselves.
Maybe the west should be doing the same thing. Instead of lecturing and bombing them, we should invest in projects that benefit everyone involved. If China isn’t doing much more than unilaterally exploiting their resources, it should be a low bar to jump over.
‘At a fraction of its true cost’ is meaningless. For many of these mineral deposits building the infrastructure is the biggest cost involved in extracting the metal; without the railway line to the port the deposit has no value, cannot be exploited. Chinese companies, using mainly Chinese labour, can build the railways much cheaper than Western companies can. The host country gains by having infrastructure built that otherwise wouldn’t be, plus royalties on the eg iron ore exports. Or they can use the threat of the Chinese alternative to get better terms out of RTZ or whoever.
Hi Tim. A friend travelling along one such highway reported truck after truck piled high with priceless hardwood heading for the coast. This fact is not ‘meaningless’. Not does each tree as part of its habitat have ‘no value’. If I understand you correctly that ‘the host country … benefits’, my question is for how long?
Guess, they aren’t greenies either… The West is bending backwards about sustainability, while masses of precious hardwood trees are piled high on trucks (I am pretty sure those aren’t electric either) and shipped away, bringing hard cash to African dictators and elites. Wonder how much the broad African population benefits from all of that.
OK Hendrik, I now see that you meant ‘a fraction of its true value’. The value of a natural resource to its host country may indeed be very different to its cost of extraction, and this is more likely to be true of your example ‘priceless’ hardwood compared to mine, iron ore deposits. My point that providing the infrastructure is often the biggest component of the production costs of raw materials is not disproven by your view of ‘priceless’ trees.Of course, if you mean literally what you say than it is rather difficult to compare extraction costs with ‘priceless’ materials.
Guess, they aren’t greenies either… The West is bending backwards about sustainability, while masses of precious hardwood trees are piled high on trucks (I am pretty sure those aren’t electric either) and shipped away, bringing hard cash to African dictators and elites. Wonder how much the broad African population benefits from all of that.
OK Hendrik, I now see that you meant ‘a fraction of its true value’. The value of a natural resource to its host country may indeed be very different to its cost of extraction, and this is more likely to be true of your example ‘priceless’ hardwood compared to mine, iron ore deposits. My point that providing the infrastructure is often the biggest component of the production costs of raw materials is not disproven by your view of ‘priceless’ trees.Of course, if you mean literally what you say than it is rather difficult to compare extraction costs with ‘priceless’ materials.
Hi Tim. A friend travelling along one such highway reported truck after truck piled high with priceless hardwood heading for the coast. This fact is not ‘meaningless’. Not does each tree as part of its habitat have ‘no value’. If I understand you correctly that ‘the host country … benefits’, my question is for how long?
Maybe the west should be doing the same thing. Instead of lecturing and bombing them, we should invest in projects that benefit everyone involved. If China isn’t doing much more than unilaterally exploiting their resources, it should be a low bar to jump over.
‘At a fraction of its true cost’ is meaningless. For many of these mineral deposits building the infrastructure is the biggest cost involved in extracting the metal; without the railway line to the port the deposit has no value, cannot be exploited. Chinese companies, using mainly Chinese labour, can build the railways much cheaper than Western companies can. The host country gains by having infrastructure built that otherwise wouldn’t be, plus royalties on the eg iron ore exports. Or they can use the threat of the Chinese alternative to get better terms out of RTZ or whoever.
The port, road or railway has one purpose: to extract a resource (hardwood, mineral or whatever) at a fraction of its true cost with proceeds going into pockets of the connected few (African and non-African). If true, the author hasn’t explained how Africa is the winner. This, mind you, is a question Africans need also ask themselves.
“According to some studies Russia and China remain popular in Africa” . Wonder why 99% of African migrants and refugees want to flee/immigrate to Western countries. Haven’t heard about masses of refugees trying to get to Russia or China. Wonder why, if those countries are so popular? Maybe this survey was done amongst African dictators?
Yep African migrants drift towards the West as they want to tap into the plunder accumulated over centuries by ‘civilising’ pale skinned hominids.
Allow me to post a comment from someone who actually lives in Africa. The reason why Africans choose Europe ahead of China and Russia is simply because of the social welfare benefits the European countries provide – it is purely an economical decision and I assume it is the same for the millions “migrating” to the USA. Whilst the Global South may desire the mirage of the “great” Western lifestyle, they do not trust the West and no one can blame them.
I call you out. They come to the West for many reasons – freedom, culture, family ties, ability to earn money, adventure, escape from desperation. I very much doubt that being able to scrape by on welfare payments, in a cold foreign country, is their North Star. I assume that a big part of wanting to live in, or just visit a country is that you ‘trust’ it on many levels – not to imprison or harass you for your politics or identity. ‘They do not trust the West’ is a meaningless generalisation that manages to fit 4 or 4 critical errors in just 6 words – impressive.
I call you out. They come to the West for many reasons – freedom, culture, family ties, ability to earn money, adventure, escape from desperation. I very much doubt that being able to scrape by on welfare payments, in a cold foreign country, is their North Star. I assume that a big part of wanting to live in, or just visit a country is that you ‘trust’ it on many levels – not to imprison or harass you for your politics or identity. ‘They do not trust the West’ is a meaningless generalisation that manages to fit 4 or 4 critical errors in just 6 words – impressive.
Do Russia and China actually allow impoverished immigrants into their countries?
Because it’s easy to do so.
Yep African migrants drift towards the West as they want to tap into the plunder accumulated over centuries by ‘civilising’ pale skinned hominids.
Allow me to post a comment from someone who actually lives in Africa. The reason why Africans choose Europe ahead of China and Russia is simply because of the social welfare benefits the European countries provide – it is purely an economical decision and I assume it is the same for the millions “migrating” to the USA. Whilst the Global South may desire the mirage of the “great” Western lifestyle, they do not trust the West and no one can blame them.
Do Russia and China actually allow impoverished immigrants into their countries?
Because it’s easy to do so.
“According to some studies Russia and China remain popular in Africa” . Wonder why 99% of African migrants and refugees want to flee/immigrate to Western countries. Haven’t heard about masses of refugees trying to get to Russia or China. Wonder why, if those countries are so popular? Maybe this survey was done amongst African dictators?
Oh please. The West has poured money and resources into that cesspit expanse for centuries and it’s still a primeval snake pit. “Young continent”? What is Fazi on about? I have it on good authority that mankind began there. Obviously, the smart ones took a look around and said let’s get the h*ll out of here.
Africa is 1000 years behind in every facet of its existence, and is back on its way to being enslaved by Chinese money, and Indian money, and ultimately their control… whilst we sit back and worry about even discussing, yet alone doing anything about it for fear of being called ” racist”…..
We used to call it “The Dark Continent “, perhaps we should do so again?
We used to call it “The Dark Continent “, perhaps we should do so again?
The ‘smart’ ones went north, became white due to
vitamin D deficiency, learnt to swim and became us.
The others turned south and became Kalahari Bushmen.
Here endeth the history of the World.
“Young Continent” meant that the population is rather age young. Many people to use for labour and not a lot of legacy aging population to take care of.
Quite so. Probably only two countries in the entire continent come anywhere near to what could be called “reasonably well-governed” – Botswana and Namibia. Tunisia used to be.
Africa is 1000 years behind in every facet of its existence, and is back on its way to being enslaved by Chinese money, and Indian money, and ultimately their control… whilst we sit back and worry about even discussing, yet alone doing anything about it for fear of being called ” racist”…..
The ‘smart’ ones went north, became white due to
vitamin D deficiency, learnt to swim and became us.
The others turned south and became Kalahari Bushmen.
Here endeth the history of the World.
“Young Continent” meant that the population is rather age young. Many people to use for labour and not a lot of legacy aging population to take care of.
Quite so. Probably only two countries in the entire continent come anywhere near to what could be called “reasonably well-governed” – Botswana and Namibia. Tunisia used to be.
Oh please. The West has poured money and resources into that cesspit expanse for centuries and it’s still a primeval snake pit. “Young continent”? What is Fazi on about? I have it on good authority that mankind began there. Obviously, the smart ones took a look around and said let’s get the h*ll out of here.
Africa, South America and parts of Asia have been the scene of Western (more recently US) political and economic meddling for generations and the results haven’t always been pretty for the locals. Awkward questions have often been fobbed off with “He may be a tin-pot dictator but he’s our tin-pot dictator”
Is it surprising or disappointing to see that Russia and China can and do play the same game and have been for years? Does anyone still think that nothing happens in Africa unless the US signs off on it? The West is fully engaged in using the cult of climate hysteria to solidify central planning political power. Much of the “science” has been either questioned or de-bunked entirely yet the propaganda and witch-hunts continue apace. It is China and Russia that are securing the supplies of natural resources essential to implement Western eco-diktats like Net-Zero. Are those deals fair and equitable? Probably not. Are they debt traps? Probably. But these deals are getting done and the Belts and Roads are actually being built.
Conversely, I invite you to behold Canada’s narcissistic sock model Trudeau. Canada just guaranteed Volkswagen $13B in subsidies for an EV battery plant. That announcement follows the uncharacteristically frank statement by Trudeau that Canada will probably never meet its NATO spending commitment (he’s somewhat less frank about admitting Canada hasn’t met any emissions targets). He was recently in New York crowing about this deal. The deal is secret (of course) but Trudeau claims Canada is such a wonderful place to do business that VW actually turned down more money from the US (Translation: Canada has made concessions that even the US wouldn’t consider). Meanwhile Canada has large lithium deposits that will endure years of regulatory reviews and court challenges before they ever see the light of day.
Clearly, Canada is not a global player but IMO this sort of reality-defying pretzel logic is indicative of Western leadership right now and clearly the BRICS + countries are taking advantage of it.
Well said. Trudeau gleefully jumps on the subsidy bandwagon because he’s an idiot. How long before that $13 billion boondoggle bites canada in the ass? Five years maybe? If you’re serious about EVs and renewables, start mining the minerals needed in their production. It’s the one natural advantage Canada has over other nations.
Canada does have Li deposits, but, with the exception of possible brine deposits in Sascathewan, they are all relatively small hard-rock (pegmatite) deposits. These deposits are dwarfed by the giant dry-lake, “solar” deposits in Chile, Argentina and Bolivia which currently control world-wide Li production. Canada is a minor player in world-wide Li production.
Well said. Trudeau gleefully jumps on the subsidy bandwagon because he’s an idiot. How long before that $13 billion boondoggle bites canada in the ass? Five years maybe? If you’re serious about EVs and renewables, start mining the minerals needed in their production. It’s the one natural advantage Canada has over other nations.
Canada does have Li deposits, but, with the exception of possible brine deposits in Sascathewan, they are all relatively small hard-rock (pegmatite) deposits. These deposits are dwarfed by the giant dry-lake, “solar” deposits in Chile, Argentina and Bolivia which currently control world-wide Li production. Canada is a minor player in world-wide Li production.
Africa, South America and parts of Asia have been the scene of Western (more recently US) political and economic meddling for generations and the results haven’t always been pretty for the locals. Awkward questions have often been fobbed off with “He may be a tin-pot dictator but he’s our tin-pot dictator”
Is it surprising or disappointing to see that Russia and China can and do play the same game and have been for years? Does anyone still think that nothing happens in Africa unless the US signs off on it? The West is fully engaged in using the cult of climate hysteria to solidify central planning political power. Much of the “science” has been either questioned or de-bunked entirely yet the propaganda and witch-hunts continue apace. It is China and Russia that are securing the supplies of natural resources essential to implement Western eco-diktats like Net-Zero. Are those deals fair and equitable? Probably not. Are they debt traps? Probably. But these deals are getting done and the Belts and Roads are actually being built.
Conversely, I invite you to behold Canada’s narcissistic sock model Trudeau. Canada just guaranteed Volkswagen $13B in subsidies for an EV battery plant. That announcement follows the uncharacteristically frank statement by Trudeau that Canada will probably never meet its NATO spending commitment (he’s somewhat less frank about admitting Canada hasn’t met any emissions targets). He was recently in New York crowing about this deal. The deal is secret (of course) but Trudeau claims Canada is such a wonderful place to do business that VW actually turned down more money from the US (Translation: Canada has made concessions that even the US wouldn’t consider). Meanwhile Canada has large lithium deposits that will endure years of regulatory reviews and court challenges before they ever see the light of day.
Clearly, Canada is not a global player but IMO this sort of reality-defying pretzel logic is indicative of Western leadership right now and clearly the BRICS + countries are taking advantage of it.
Except for the Suez Canal and South Africa, does anyone even care? The other countries are money sucks. Let Russia and China have them.
Except for the Suez Canal and South Africa, does anyone even care? The other countries are money sucks. Let Russia and China have them.
African diplomats are beginning to hint at something openly that they have only previously said off the record: the US cultural imperialism, specifically on abortion and LGBT issues, has altered their behavior. The way most would express it is: “A condition of Chinese aid is that we don’t interfere in China’s business. the US requires us to alter our internal laws to conform to Western views of sexuality. This is politically impossible in our societies, which are quite traditional, so we turn to China as the path of least resistance.” (This is paraphrased from a report by Rod Dreher several years ago.)
The American State Dept needs to decide which flag it serves: the stars and stripes or the rainbow. Their ideological devotion to the latter is starting to impact the foreign policy strength of the former.
African diplomats are beginning to hint at something openly that they have only previously said off the record: the US cultural imperialism, specifically on abortion and LGBT issues, has altered their behavior. The way most would express it is: “A condition of Chinese aid is that we don’t interfere in China’s business. the US requires us to alter our internal laws to conform to Western views of sexuality. This is politically impossible in our societies, which are quite traditional, so we turn to China as the path of least resistance.” (This is paraphrased from a report by Rod Dreher several years ago.)
The American State Dept needs to decide which flag it serves: the stars and stripes or the rainbow. Their ideological devotion to the latter is starting to impact the foreign policy strength of the former.
Putin and Xi are both shrewd and acting without scruples or restraint. The West hasn’t a prayer, hamstrung as it is by white guilt, fear of upsetting minority interests, domestic crisis and crumbling economies. Sorting out Africa is an unaffordable luxury amid our self-induced chaos and certainly not going to win anyone a general election.
Putin and Xi are both shrewd and acting without scruples or restraint. The West hasn’t a prayer, hamstrung as it is by white guilt, fear of upsetting minority interests, domestic crisis and crumbling economies. Sorting out Africa is an unaffordable luxury amid our self-induced chaos and certainly not going to win anyone a general election.
“While the fighting in Sudan is, on the face of it, little more than a power struggle between the two rival factions that control the country, there is also an important international and geopolitical dimension to the conflict.”
Note that Madame Coup de’etat Vicky Nuland recently paid a visit there, clearly red-faced about the Ruskies planning a mil base in Sudan.
The proposed Russian base was the driver for renewed US interest in the country
A poor article that is quite out of step with the realities of Africa today. China’s influence is diminishing for example and most African’s dislike China and its people for their generally racist, ruthless and unscrupulous behaviour, which often serves to displace the locals economically. Only the political classes, who profit most from the relationship enjoy the merits of Chinese involvement in Africa. The West’s influence has faded largely because it doesn’t facilitate or accept corruption that is associated with most Chinese deals
As for US military adventures in Africa, they have little to do with China. The US today is focused on trying to limit the scourge of Islamic terrorism in all its guises and has been for some time.
The proposed Russian base was the driver for renewed US interest in the country
A poor article that is quite out of step with the realities of Africa today. China’s influence is diminishing for example and most African’s dislike China and its people for their generally racist, ruthless and unscrupulous behaviour, which often serves to displace the locals economically. Only the political classes, who profit most from the relationship enjoy the merits of Chinese involvement in Africa. The West’s influence has faded largely because it doesn’t facilitate or accept corruption that is associated with most Chinese deals
As for US military adventures in Africa, they have little to do with China. The US today is focused on trying to limit the scourge of Islamic terrorism in all its guises and has been for some time.
“While the fighting in Sudan is, on the face of it, little more than a power struggle between the two rival factions that control the country, there is also an important international and geopolitical dimension to the conflict.”
Note that Madame Coup de’etat Vicky Nuland recently paid a visit there, clearly red-faced about the Ruskies planning a mil base in Sudan.
“whatever the West’s historical responsibilities for the continent’s problems”
When is the Far Left going to grow up and understand that black adults are…….adults.
Africa is responsible for its own problems.
They are not children. They don’t need Marxist morons to babysit them.
“whatever the West’s historical responsibilities for the continent’s problems”
When is the Far Left going to grow up and understand that black adults are…….adults.
Africa is responsible for its own problems.
They are not children. They don’t need Marxist morons to babysit them.
Small wonder that China and Russia find it so easy given:
1) Both are instinctively more in tune with, shall we say, African “business culture”
2) UK and US development aid comes with lectures attached
3) The new Western colonialism is green colonialism with, for example, Afrimex Bank being pressured to cease oil and gas lending and development aid inevitably being tied wind and solar even to African governments who rely on O&G for a large slice of their revenue.
Small wonder that China and Russia find it so easy given:
1) Both are instinctively more in tune with, shall we say, African “business culture”
2) UK and US development aid comes with lectures attached
3) The new Western colonialism is green colonialism with, for example, Afrimex Bank being pressured to cease oil and gas lending and development aid inevitably being tied wind and solar even to African governments who rely on O&G for a large slice of their revenue.
We certainly need to do better in Africa but, no, it isn’t all driven by post-colonial grievance.
https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/may-2023/why-russia-is-still-in-business/
We certainly need to do better in Africa but, no, it isn’t all driven by post-colonial grievance.
https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/may-2023/why-russia-is-still-in-business/
If Wagner are operating in dozens of African countries then surely they would also have bases and depots spread around the continent? Why is this seemingly not worthy of a mention in the article while the American bases are worthy of scorn?
If Wagner are operating in dozens of African countries then surely they would also have bases and depots spread around the continent? Why is this seemingly not worthy of a mention in the article while the American bases are worthy of scorn?
Interesting discussion on YouTube featuring Douglas Murray called ‘uncanceled history’ about colonialism, paints a more logical and realistic picture of it than is touted by the left.
Interesting discussion on YouTube featuring Douglas Murray called ‘uncanceled history’ about colonialism, paints a more logical and realistic picture of it than is touted by the left.