Googling 'pacte colonial' and other terms does not get me far outside the blogosphere. No wiki, hardly anything on Google Scholar. The World Bank never seems to have written an opinion about it. Hard to believe, at least in this form.
As a counter example, I Googled for Chinese investments in those countries, and found a lot of information / news. That seems to run against the 'Ownership of natural resources'-paragraph.
A last thought: it's about monetary operations for the workings of a common currency. You don't exactly lose money when depositing it at a central bank. The system they describe in pretty harsh terms (google it) , sounds like a scheme pretty normally practiced between banks and central banks.
I had better luck googling "colonial pact". I think the worry is African's money deposited into French reserve bank is used to invest in African infrastructure, and part of the profits kept by the French (and the shareholders of the named company) themselves and the other part remain forever unavailable to the member countries themsevles.
I tried the other languages as well. All the same authors, same pieces rehashed. Nothing like a source to base your opinion on, imho. I'd even trust Krugman at this point ;) I don't read French easily, but even Google Scholar seems to hold the same coloured content.
On the contents: a central bank scheme indeed. And in normal circumstances your central banks profits fill the coffers of your state. In this case the problem is the profits are not divided among stakeholders, only to the shareholder (the French).
Well the solution is 'simple': start your own currency. My impression is that those countries greatly benefit from a more stable currency (haven't looked it up at Bloomberg), since there is an implicit guarantee from the French state (is there?). We need a more total picture (costs and benefits) in order to be able to form somewhat of an opinion.
Interesting. I wonder if this is related to an event on the same theme... there was a report last year about an Air Algerie McDonell Douglas 83 (MD-83) plane being downed - some reports suggest by bomb despite weather allegations - while flying over Mali. The plane was allegedly carrying France's three highest ranking military intelligence officers for Africa from Burkina Faso to Algeria plus 30 other French military. The crash site was hurriedly secured by the French military with 30 French soldiers flown in for purpose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Alg%C3%A9rie_Flight_5017#P...
This was a good read. I had no idea any of this was going on. Though I still don't understand why the ex French colonies just don't say no. It's not like France would send in the army. I'm guessing France would confiscate 85% of their reserves and that is enough of a deterrent?
> Though I still don't understand why the ex French colonies just don't say no.
Economic & political pressure. If they break "agreements" they might find themselves with sanctions. Now they can't sell the cocoa or the oil. Or France would play one country against each -- "start a conflict with your neighbor in exchange for ... something"
I'm not an expert, but losing France as a customer of cocoa (especially now after the panic about dwindling supplies, see http://www.ibtimes.com/chocolate-crisis-world-running-out-co...) doesn't seem like a huge deal. :) Also "oil" is generally pretty salable, there ought to be other customers.
If losing France would mean an EU embargo - which is a bit doubtful IMO - that would be more significant. But I don't think it's feasible to say that France could prevent a former colony from selling oil when we see that the so-called Islamic State in Syria and Iraq - way beyond pariah - makes significant profits in oil sales.
France has a lot of troops in africa, protecting civilians whenever a civil war erupts ( like in operation licorne in cote d'ivoire) , or more recently in mali, to fight against djihadist groups spreading chaos.
This article reads like propaganda to me. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that france still has unjustified commercial priviledges,espeically in the oil business, but the monetary things reads like a complete misunderstanding of central bank monetary stability policies ( franc cfa is exceptionnaly stable compared to the poor politicial stability of the area).
As a french I really don't understand why French government doesn't do massive long term investment in Africa other than simple explotation of natural ressources. As many study says Africa is the future Asia with >8% growth and huge amount of population [1]. Even if there is a eavy colonial past and really bad things as Rwanda we share a language and some values.
(disclaimer: French here) Well, France will not wage war if these countries leave the CFA. France gains some control, and these countries enjoy the benefits of a stable currency. It is probably not the most ideal situation, but what alternatives are proposed?
Except that all who opposed were mysteriously assassinated? I'm not one to quickly jump on conspiracy theories, but it sure looks like France is not in a healthy relationship with these countries.
Slightly related, is it true that the currencies in CFA are significantly more stable than those of surrounding countries? And are the inhabitants wealthier for it?
It's an ethical question. The argument of greater stability could be used to posit positive outcome for full traditional colonization as well.
What we should ask: How much of the 60B Euro per month the ECB is using for QE in the Eurozone now is being put toward these African countries whom are so closely tied to the Euro?
23 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 70.3 ms ] threadAs a counter example, I Googled for Chinese investments in those countries, and found a lot of information / news. That seems to run against the 'Ownership of natural resources'-paragraph.
A last thought: it's about monetary operations for the workings of a common currency. You don't exactly lose money when depositing it at a central bank. The system they describe in pretty harsh terms (google it) , sounds like a scheme pretty normally practiced between banks and central banks.
On the contents: a central bank scheme indeed. And in normal circumstances your central banks profits fill the coffers of your state. In this case the problem is the profits are not divided among stakeholders, only to the shareholder (the French).
Well the solution is 'simple': start your own currency. My impression is that those countries greatly benefit from a more stable currency (haven't looked it up at Bloomberg), since there is an implicit guarantee from the French state (is there?). We need a more total picture (costs and benefits) in order to be able to form somewhat of an opinion.
http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/26503/do-african...
http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-04-17/african-mone...
Economic & political pressure. If they break "agreements" they might find themselves with sanctions. Now they can't sell the cocoa or the oil. Or France would play one country against each -- "start a conflict with your neighbor in exchange for ... something"
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/perspective/analysis/2014/08...
This article reads like propaganda to me. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that france still has unjustified commercial priviledges,espeically in the oil business, but the monetary things reads like a complete misunderstanding of central bank monetary stability policies ( franc cfa is exceptionnaly stable compared to the poor politicial stability of the area).
[1]: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/05/the...
Slightly related, is it true that the currencies in CFA are significantly more stable than those of surrounding countries? And are the inhabitants wealthier for it?
What we should ask: How much of the 60B Euro per month the ECB is using for QE in the Eurozone now is being put toward these African countries whom are so closely tied to the Euro?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/12/us-france-graft-id...