AfricaFocus Bulletin
January 23, 2017 (170123)
(Reposted from sources cited below)

Editor’s Note

“Eskom, accused of overly cozy ties with the Guptas featured heavily
in the report, with 916 mentions. … it’s Eskom’s chief executive,
Brian Molefe, who comes out looking the worst. According to cell
phone records, Molefe had 58 phone calls with the eldest of the
Gupta brothers, Ajay Gupta, between August 2015 and March 2016, just
before the Guptas purchased South Africa’s Optimum coal mine for
2.15 billion rand ($160 million). Eskom, which prepaid the Gupta’s
Tegeta Exploration and Resources 600 million rand for coal, had been
accused of helping to finance the Guptas’ coal mine deal through
preferential treatment.” – Quartz Africa

For a version of this Bulletin in html format, more suitable for
printing, go to http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/saf1701.php, and
click on “format for print or mobile.”

To share this on Facebook, click on
https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/saf1701.php

In South Africa, as elsewhere in countries both large and small, the
debates about government energy policy are often framed in terms of
what is best for the “national interest.” But few doubt that behind
these choices between renewable energy options and others (fossil
fuels or nuclear energy), there are also private interests, whose
roles in the management of the state are not new but are becoming
more and more blatant (see below on links on the common stakes of
the incoming Trump administration and Russia’s Putin in promoting
fossil-fuel interests).

Concentrating on this aspect of what is termed “state capture” in
South Africa, this AfricaFocus Bulletin includes (1) brief excerpts
from the 355-page report on “State of Capture” from Public Protector
Thuli Madonsela; (2) an article with a summary of the report from
Quartz Africa, and (3) an article from The Conversation on the state
capture issue and its effects on plans for nuclear energy.

Two recent articles with background on the energy debate include:

le Cordeur, Matthew, “5 reasons why Eskom is wrong about renewables
costs – CSIR,” Jan 12, 2017 http://www.fin24.com – direct URL:
http://tinyurl.com/jmpts84

“Eskom delaying R50 billion renewable energy plan to push nuclear
goals,” Jan 10, 2017, http://businesstech.co.za – direct URL:
http://tinyurl.com/zcqku94

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Just Announced re State Capture in Mozambique

Watch live on youtube January 25
Zitamar News and Africa Research Institute present:
A Webinar on Mozambique’s Debt Crisis
Wednesday 25 January – 15:00 Maputo / 13:00 London / 08:00 New York

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Trump Election: Intersecting Explanations
http://www.noeasyvictories.org/usa/trump-win-reasons.php

Observations (second installment), Jan 23, 2017

In the period between the election and the inauguration, the
highest profile debate about reasons for the Trump electoral win was
about Putin’s intervention. But that debate produced more heat than
light, while key issues such as the common interests of Putin and
the Trump administration in promoting the fossil-fuel industry
received only marginal attention.

See http://noeasyvictories.org/usa/putin-intervention.php for  short
observations and database entries for 31 sources to date.

Articles on the fossil-fuel connection in particular include:

Joe Romm, “Did Putin help elect Trump to restore $500 billion Exxon
oil deal killed by sanctions?,” ThinkProgress, Jan 8, 2017
http://tinyurl.com/z6d45ub

Rachel Maddow, 5-minute video on ExxonMobil & Russia deal, Dec. 20,
2016 at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n60SzMzjXog

Alex Steffen, “Trump, Putin and the Pipelines to Nowhere
You can’t understand what Trump’s doing to America without
understanding the ‘Carbon Bubble’,” Dec 15, 2016, http://medium.com
– Direct URL: http://tinyurl.com/hb2xnc6

++++++++++++++++++++++end editor’s note+++++++++++++++++

“State of Capture”: A Report of the Public Protector

14 October 2016

Full 355-page report in pdf available at http://tinyurl.com/jffpskt

5. Evidence and Information Obtained

Introduction

5.1. The Gupta family, originating from India, arrived in South
Africa in 1993. They  established businesses in South Africa with
their notable business being a computer  assembly and distribution
company called Sahara Computers. The family is led by  three
brothers Ajay Gupta who is the eldest, Atul Gupta and Rajesh Gupta
who is  the youngest. Rajesh is commonly known as “Tony”. According
to a letter submitted  to my office, total revenues from their
business activities for the 2016 financial year  amounted to R2,6
billion, with government contracts contributing a total of R235
million of the revenues.

5.2. They later diversified their business interests into mining
through the acquisition of  JIC Mining Services, Shiva Uranium and
Tegeta Exploration and Resources,  Optimum Coal Mine and
Koornfontein Coal Mine. They also started a media  company called
TNA Media, which publishes a newspaper called The New Age and  owns
a television channel called ANN7.

5.3. The Gupta family are known friends of the President Zuma.
President Zuma has  openly acknowledged his friendship with them,
most notably during a discussion in  the National Assembly on 19
June 2013 where he admitted that members of the  Gupta family were
his friends. Mr Ajay Gupta (“Mr A. Gupta), also admitted to being
friends with President Zuma when I interviewed him on 4 October
2016.

5.4. President Zuma’s son, Mr Duduzane Zuma (“Mr D. Zuma”) is a
business partner of  the Gupta family through an entity called
Mabengela Investments (“Mabengela”).  Mabengela has a 28.5% interest
in Tegeta Exploration and Resources (“Tegeta”).  Mr D. Zuma is a
Director of Mabengela.

5.5. Members of the Gupta family and the President Zuma’ son, Mr D.
Zuma, have  secured major contracts with Eskom, a major State owned
company, through  Tegeta. Tegeta has secured a 10 year coal supply
agreement (“CSA”) with Eskom  SOC Limited (“Eskom”) to supply coal
to the Majuba Power station. The entity has  also secured contracts
with Eskom to supply coal to the Hendrina and Arnot power  stations.

5.6.  Eskom CEO, Mr Brian Molefe (“Mr Molefe”) is friends with
members of the Gupta  family. Mr A. Gupta admitted during my
interview with him on 4 October 2016 that  Mr Molefe is his “very
good friend” and often visits his home in Saxonwold.

5.7. The New Age newspaper has also secured contracts with some
provincial  government departments and state owned entities, most
notably Eskom and South  African Airways (“SAA”).

5.8. The Gupta family recently purchased shares in an entity called
VR Laser Services  (“VR Laser”). VR Laser has major contracts with
Denel SOC Limited (“Denel”), a  State owned armaments manufacturing
company. VR Laser has also partnered with  Denel to apparently seek
business opportunities abroad.

5.9. During March this year, Mr Jonas issued a media statement
alleging that he was  offered the position of Minister of Finance by
members of the Gupta family in  exchange for executive decisions
favourable to the business interests of the Gupta  family, an offer
which he declined. The Gupta family has denied the allegations  made
by Mr Jonas.

5.10. At the time Mr Jonas is alleged to have been offered a Cabinet
post as Minister of  Finance, Mr Nene was occupying the post. Mr
Nene was removed from his post on  9 December 2015 by President Zuma
and replaced with Minister Van Rooyen.  Minister Van Rooyen was
replaced by Minister Gordhan on 14 December 2015 as  Minister of
Finance, 4 days after his appointment.

5.11. Following Mr Jonas’ statement, Ms Mentor also issued a
statement to the press  alleging that she was also offered a Cabinet
post by members of the Gupta family in  exchange for executive
decisions favourable to their business interests, an  allegation
denied by the Gupta family.

5.12. The former CEO of Government Communication and Information
System (“GCIS”),  Mr Themba Maseko also issued a statement alleging
that members of the Gupta  family pressured him into placing
government advertisements in the New Age  newspaper. Mr Maseko
further alleged that President Zuma asked him to “help” the  Gupta
family.

**********************************************

What the “State Capture” report tells us about Zuma, the Guptas, and
corruption in South Africa

Lynsey Chutel and Lily Kuo

Quartz Africa, November 2, 2016

What the “State Capture” report tells us about Zuma, the Guptas, and corruption in South Africa

It’s the report that confirms South Africa’s worst fears about
corruption: that the state has been captured. In 355 pages, former
public protector Thuli Madonsela and her team of investigators
outline in detail just how much control the Gupta family, a wealthy
Indian immigrant family, has over South Africa’s resources. The
Guptas’ close friend, president Jacob Zuma, as well as two ministers
implicated in the report, went to court to stop its release. But it
was finally released on Nov. 2, after protests and a court battle.

The report is potentially damning for Zuma, offering proof that he
sanctioned the use of state companies for personal enrichment. But
now the real reckoning begins, as a web of corruption around Zuma,
the Guptas, and at least three ministers begins to unravel.

Hiring and firing ministers in the Guptas’ house

The report contains a detailed interview with deputy finance
minister Mcebisi Jonas, who alleges that the Guptas offered him the
finance minister’s post weeks before Zuma was to shuffle three
finance ministers in one week. Jonas was driven to the Guptas’ home
by the president’s son Duduzane Zuma, where he was met by Ajay
Gupta.

Ajay Gupta allegedly told Jonas they’d been keeping tabs on him and
wanted him to be their man in the treasury. Ajay Gupta revealed that
they’d already made 6 billion rand ($443 million) from dealings with
the government, and wanted to make at least 2 billion rand more
(about $147 million). When Jonas refused, they tried to sweeten the
deal with 600 million rand (about $44 million) and an extra 600,000
rand ($44,318) in cash, right there. Jonas declined the money, and
months later became the whistle-blower that launched this
investigation when he revealed his story in March.

Vytjie Mentor, who came out after Jonas with an account of how the
Guptas tried to offer her the job of minister of public enterprises,
in charge of state-owned companies, also details her exchange with
the family. According to the report (p.89), Mentor was told during a
meeting in October last year at the Guptas’ home that she would go
from an ordinary parliamentarian to cabinet minister in a week. All
she had to do was make sure South African Airways dropped their
route between Johannesburg and Mumbai, making way for the Gupta-
linked carrier Jet Airways. Mentor declined. She was surprised to
see the president himself emerge from an adjacent room, who said
“it’s okay girl…take care of yourself,” as he personally escorted
her out.

According to the report, the Guptas also have the power to fire
ministers seen as stumbling blocks to their plans. Former finance
minister Nhlanhla Nene’s insistence on sticking to the rules cost
him his job. As did Barbara Hogan, former minister of public
enterprises, who refused to allow outside influence in appointments
of board members of state-owned South African Airways, Transnet, the
national rail, and Eskom, the state power utility (p. 89, 90). On an
official visit to India, Hogan said she was shocked to find the
Guptas running proceedings. She was relieved of her duties a few
months later.

Des van Rooyen, the unknown parliamentarian who became finance
minister for a few days after Nene, went to court in a bid to delay
the report, fearing it would implicate him. And it has. His phone
records show that van Rooyen visited the Guptas’ home seven days in
a row before he was appointed as finance minister. He was later
moved to a less prominent ministry. Van Rooyen has denied any
wrongdoing.

Negotiating on behalf of the Guptas

Mining minister Mosebenzi Zwane also tried to have the report
delayed, saying it was hastily prepared and that he had not been
given time to respond. According to the report (p. 124, 125), Zwane
travelled to Switzerland on behalf of the Guptas to smooth over
their acquisition of a troubled coal mine from multinational
commodity trader Glencore, helping the Guptas become one of the main
coal suppliers for state utility Eskom. Zwane allegedly helped
facilitate the deal by accompanying delegates from a Gupta resources
company, Tegeta, to Zurich, according to a flight itinerary obtained
by the public protector. Zwane could not be interviewed in time for
the report, but should be allowed to give his version in subsequent
investigations, the report says.

Eskom: Keeping the lights on for the Guptas

Eskom, accused of overly cozy ties with the Guptas featured heavily
in the report, with 916 mentions. Lynn Brown, who became the
minister in charge of South Africa’s state owned enterprises, is
implicated in the report for allowing the appointment of a lame-duck
board that turned a blind eye to murky deals made at the energy
monopoly.

But it’s Eskom’s chief executive, Brian Molefe, who comes out
looking the worst. According to cell phone records, Molefe had 58
phone calls with the eldest of the Gupta brothers, Ajay Gupta,
between August 2015 and March 2016, just before the Guptas purchased
South Africa’s Optimum coal mine for 2.15 billion rand ($160
million). Eskom, which prepaid the Gupta’s Tegeta Exploration and
Resources 600 million rand for coal, had been accused of helping to
finance the Guptas’ coal mine deal through preferential treatment.

The report concludes (p, 20), “it appears that the sole purpose of
awarding contracts to Tegeta to supply Arnot Power Station, was made
solely for the purposes of funding Tegeta and enabling Tegeta to
purchase all shares in OCH [Optimum Coal Holdings]. The only entity
which appears to have benefited from Eskom’s decisions with regards
to [the Optimum coal mine deal] was Tegeta.” Cellphone records also
put Molefe in the Saxonwold area, where the Guptas live, 19 times
between August and November 2015 and phone calls between Molefe and
Ronica Ragavan, head of the Gupta’s holding company, Oakbay
Investments. Justifying these calls and visits, Ajay Gupta told
Madonsela in an interview last month that Molefe is his “very good
friend” who often visits the Gupta compound. But Madonsela says
these records show “a distinct line of communication between Molefe
of Eskom, the Gupta family and directors of their companies… These
links cannot be ignored as Mr Molefe did not declare his
relationship with the Guptas.” Eskom hasrefuted any allegations of
wrongdoing. “We do believe everything that we’ve done so far was
above board,” spokesman for the utility, Khulu Phasiwe, told a local
radio station.

Advertising with the Guptas

Themba Maseko, former chief executive of government’s communications
agency, in charge of a media buying budget of 600 million rand a
year, said he was pressured by the Gupta family to place government
ads in their newspaper the New Age. Maseko was also one of the
whistleblowers who took his story to the media in March.

In an interview with Madonsela in August, Maseko said he was on his
way to a meeting with the Guptas in late 2010 when the president
called him on the phone to say, “The Gupta brothers need your help,
please help them.” During the meeting with Ajay Gupta, Gupta told
Maseko that he wanted government advertising channeled to his new
newspaper, the New Age. According to Maseko’s account, the
government official told Gupta that he could not decide where
government departments advertise. Gupta responded that this was not
a problem. He would instruct the departments to advertise in the
newspaper

According to Maseko’s account, Gupta instructed Maseko to tell him
“where the funds are and inform the departments to provide the funds
to you and if they refuse, we will deal with them. If you have a
problem with any department, we will summon ministers here.” Later
when Maseko refused to take a meeting with a New Age staff, Gupta
told Maseko, “I will talk to your seniors in government and you will
be sorted out.” Maseko was fired a few months later.

A bright spot: Integrity in the Treasury

The report shows how the Guptas’ plans were repeatedly thwarted by
officials in the treasury (p. 131, 132, and 94). The National
Treasury, in charge of approving deals linked to state-owned
enterprises, stuck to the rules of procurement and public finance.
Treasury officials questioned the Eskom coal deal with Tegeta.
Unable to stop the initial deal, they succeeded in blocking an
extension of the Tegeta contract. These obstructions appear to have
frustrated the Guptas and cost Nene his job. Many speculate that
current finance minister Pravin Gordhan’songoing legal battles are
related to the treasury’s resistance to the Guptas influence.

What next?

Zuma, the ministers, and the Guptas have yet to respond to the
damning allegations in the report. Madonsela has since left office,
with state capture report serving as her parting shot in a seven-
year battle against corruption. Still, she’s left instructions on
how to use with her findings. Her successor, who has already
started, should bring potentially criminal accusations in the report
to the National Prosecuting Authority and the police’s Directorate
for Priority Crime Investigation, better known as the Hawks.

Madonsela has also recommended that the report be taken further by a
commission of inquiry, headed by a judge appointed by the chief
justice of South Africa’s constitutional court, Mogoeng Mogoeng.
There are concerns that the prosecuting authority and the Hawks have
been compromised. (They have spearheaded the fraud case against
finance minister Gordhan.) But the public’s hopes lie in the chief
justice, who has spoken out harshly against the abuse of power
before.

“Public office bearers ignore their constitutional obligations at
their peril. This is so because constitutionalism‚ accountability
and the rule of law constitute the sharp and mighty sword that
stands ready to chop the ugly head of impunity off its stiffened
neck,” Mogeng said in March when he ruled against the president over
his use public funds used to renovate his personal compound in
Nkandla.

*******************************************************

How the state capture controversy has influenced South Africa’s
nuclear build

Harmut Winkler

The Conversation, May 26, 2016

http://tinyurl.com/jgrjcz8

South Africa is facing a critical decision that could see it
investing about R1 trillion – or US$60 billion to $70 billion – in a
fleet of new nuclear power stations. Proponents argue that it will
greatly increase electrical base-load capacity and generate
industrial growth. But opponents believe the high cost would cripple
the country economically.

What should be an economic decision has now been clouded by
controversy, with political pressure to push through the nuclear
build and the increasingly apparent rewards it would bring to
politically linked individuals.

The nuclear expansion programme needs to be considered exceptionally
carefully given that the required financial commitment is roughly
equal to the total South African annual tax revenue. Loan repayments
could place a devastating long-term burden on the public and on the
economy as a whole.

South Africa’s energy needs

South Africa is in the process of massively expanding and
modernising its electricity generation capacity. The government-
driven Integrated Resource Plan aims to increase total capacity from
42,000MW (peak demand of 39,000MW) to 85,000MW (peak demand of
68,000MW) in 2030. A key component of this plan is the construction
of facilities to produce 9,600MW of nuclear power. However, this
aspect of the plan has been challenged.

The biggest concern is that nuclear power is too expensive for the
country. The debate gained momentum when the 2013 update to the
2010-2030 electricity plan found that electricity demand is growing
slower than originally anticipated. Peak demand in 2030 is now
expected to range between 52,000 MW and 61,000 MW. There is
consequently widespread belief that new nuclear power stations can
be delayed considerably.

South Africa’s energy generation options

South Africa has had remarkable success with speedy, cost-effective
installation of renewable energy power plants. In addition to this,
technologies for harvesting South Africa’s plentiful wind and solar
energy resources are rapidly becoming cheaper, raising the question
of whether the country should not invest more in these options
rather than in going nuclear.

The argument that nuclear energy provides a stable base load,
independent of weather conditions, is mitigated by improvements in
energy storage technologies. But also by the fact that South Africa,
with its large coal power production, has a proportionally higher
base load than many highly developed industrialised countries. The
pro-nuclear option is therefore not unavoidable, as nuclear
proponents suggest, but rather a matter for thorough economic
consideration.

Zuma and the Russians

The nuclear debate gained a political dimension when President Jacob
Zuma and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, started to develop
an unusually close relationship. It culminated in an announcement
that the Russian nuclear developer, Rosatom, had been awarded the
potentially highly lucrative contract to build the new reactors. The
agreement was later denied.

Rosatom was considered the preferred contender, with other bidders
only there to lend the process legitimacy, according to some
observers. The lack of transparency surrounding the process, coupled
with a history of corruption in South African mega-projects like the
arms deal, has made the whole scheme seem suspicious to the broader
public.

A thickening plot

A crucial thread in this saga involves the Shiva uranium mine, about
30km north-west of Pretoria, the country’s executive capital. It
originally belonged to a company called Uranium One, a subsidiary of
Russia’s Rosatom. It was sold in 2010 to Oakbay Resources, a company
controlled by members of the politically connected Gupta family and
the president’s son, in a deal that greatly surprised economists.

The mine was deemed unprofitable and thus unattractive to other
mining companies. But it was still considered worth a whole lot more
than the R270 million paid by Oakbay. The mine would, however,
become highly profitable if it became the uranium supplier to the
new nuclear power stations. Oakbay and its associates therefore have
a very strong incentive for this nuclear build to happen.

It is here that the nuclear build drama feeds into the recent major
controversy surrounding alleged state capture, meaning a corrupt
system where state officials owe their allegiance to politically
connected oligarchs rather than the public interest. This was
highlighted by the shock dismissal of Finance Minister Nhanhla Nene,
a reported nuclear build sceptic, but also by subsequent allegations
of ministerial positions being offered to people by members of the
Gupta family.

Political, legal and civil opposition

The nuclear build’s association with the Zuma faction in the ruling
African National Congress (ANC) will be a political hot potato for
decades to come. The whole scandal also offers potential opportunity
to opposition parties. With increasing evidence of individuals
benefiting, opposition parties have found another spot to exploit,
as they did with Nkandla. A post-Zuma government would find it most
convenient to simply dissociate itself from the whole scheme.

The South African courts have been used very effectively by pressure
groups in the past. Already a number of environmental groups have
initiated legal applications, and these might end up being escalated
to the Supreme and Constitutional Courts. This will delay any
building initiative by years.

The South African experience with the 2010 World Cup has shown that
mega-projects can come to fruition when there is broad overall
support for the initiative. At the same time, South Africans can be
very disruptive and obstructive when this is not the case. For
example, the public opposition to e-tolling, an electronic toll
collection on certain roads.

The two leading opposition parties, the Democratic Alliance and the
Economic Freedom Fighters, have already expressed their strong
criticism of the planned nuclear build. Their supporters and civil
society in general have demonstrated their capacity for mobilisation
around specific issues. So the potential for an anti-nuclear protest
movement cannot be discounted.

A negative nuclear outlook

Building these plants is a risky business proposition, especially
for Rosatom, which is implicated in the developing scandal. The
recent political mood swing against state capture and a likely
credit rating downgrade add to the risk.

Rosatom has suggested a nuclear build financing option that
effectively amounts to it providing a loan. It is, however,
conceivable that a future government may not honour debt repayments
if there is a view that the construction deal was secured
irregularly.

The narrow public support base and downright hostility in some
quarters to a nuclear build has already effectively stalled local
nuclear construction plans. The level of controversy, high costs and
potential for further disruption mean that the planned
implementation could only proceed under severe social strain.

Such a scenario could very well cost the ruling ANC the 2019
national elections. And the party is becoming increasingly aware of
this. As such, it is posited that the nuclear build will not happen
any time as soon as planned.

*****************************************************

AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with a
particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.

AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org

by James Thompson

It was a chilling moment when I woke up to a surreal New World in which Donald Trump had been elected President of the United States (POTUS) the night before.

Just like one of the disjointed scenes from the 1971 Monty Python movie “And Now for Something Completely Different”, the present absurd reality shocks us out of the previous absurd reality. The previous buffoon has been jettisoned and a new buffoon takes the stage.

Now we are confronted with a new POTUS that some on the left characterize as a right-wing, authoritarian populist. It is too early to tell whether he is a true fascist since he has never held public office before. There can be no question that many of the kooks and clowns he has appointed to his new administration are open fascists. However, “one swallow does not make a summer.” The world will soon find out if the US people have elected a true fascist to head their government.

Meanwhile, the vanquished social Democrats in the United States refuse to be excluded from the buffoonery. The buffoon-elect is no stranger to bad ideas and bad policy. He has a terrible history of vicious public attacks on people with disabilities, women, racial minorities, immigrants, i.e. you name it, and he has attacked it. He advocates dismantling government programs and replacing them with privatization schemes which only benefit the wealthy. He has put his foot in the middle of almost all important domestic economic issues.

Do the so-called “progressive” forces in the United States call out the new buffoon in the White House on these issues? When you listen to the mainstream media, do you hear about the new POTUS’ absurd stance on these issues?

No, all you hear about are the unfiltered delusions of the progressive left about the Russians hacking poor, innocent little Hillary and causing her Majesty to lose an election that was hers to lose. All you hear about is the Russian state propaganda machine which has poisoned the minds of innocent Americans and turned them into agents of Putin.

Never before has one man had such pervasive control over the minds of Americans. Putin has been turned into a modern day Rasputin, Hitler and Darth Vader all combined into an evil individual who threatens the very survival of the American way of life. Indeed, Putin and Trump are accused of threatening “American democracy.”

Trump, in spite of his repugnant racism, sexism, misogyny, xenophobia, etc., has resisted the demonization of the Russians and has argued against the social Democrats’ rush to war with the Russians. In this regard, Trump has assumed the role of the little Dutch boy with his finger in the dike.

Trump seems to get it that war with Russia would be the end of capitalism, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat in short order.

This position infuriates the most reactionary sector of the US bourgeoisie.

So, what do the social Democrats do? In an opportunistic orgy they attempt to savage Trump in an effort to please the most reactionary sector of the US bourgeoisie. By attacking Trump’s peaceful tendencies towards Russia, they prove without a doubt that the social Democrats in the United States view their alliance with the most reactionary sector of the US bourgeoisie to be more important than their alliance with the US working class.

A war with Russia would definitely benefit the US bourgeoisie but would be devastating and catastrophic for the US working class.

The US social Democrats continue unashamedly with their historical motto “Profits before People.”

No one knows whether they will be successful in pushing the new buffoon-elect into starting a new war.

They must believe that great treasure awaits them if they please their evil Masters.

Meanwhile, the US working class is stuck in a swamp full of alligators.

Will the US working class continue to cleave to the social Democrats? The next four years should tell the story.

Fascism

by James Thompson

Let’s examine Georgi Dimitrov’s classic definition of fascism:

Fascism has also been described as “the open terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic and most imperialist elements of finance capital.” According to Georgi Dmitrov in a collection of his reports in 1935 and 1936 Against Fascism and War, fascism is “the power of finance capital itself. It is the organization of terrorist vengeance against the working class and the revolutionary section of the peasantry and intelligentsia. In foreign policy, fascism is jingoism in its most brutal form, fomenting bestial hatred of other nations.”

Let’s break down this classic definition into its key components:

1. An open terroristic dictatorship of the bourgeoisie

The bourgeoisie represents the most reactionary sector of the population. The bourgeoisie displays astounding unity in its effort to fight for the interests of the bourgeois class. The bourgeoisie always fights against the interests of the working class. This is why the working class has been subjugated to abject poverty. The bourgeoisie is not shy about employing terroristic tactics to oppress the working class. Indeed, the bourgeoisie has been very effective in destroying any efforts to fight for the interests of the working class.

2. A dictatorship of the reactionary sector of the population

Although the bourgeoisie represents the most reactionary sector of the population, they, the 1%, could not survive without the support of the general reactionary sector of the population. Currently, the bourgeoisie has the steadfast support of large numbers of sycophants, opportunists and revisionists. In the most recent electoral cycle (2016), 47% of people who voted expressed their support for extreme reaction.

3. A dictatorship of chauvinism

Chauvinism is an expression of the belief of superiority of certain sectors of the population over others. The bourgeoisie inherently views itself as superior to everyone else. The bourgeoisie represents an extremely small sector of the population, however they have the support of large numbers of opportunists. In the most recent electoral cycle (2016), 47% of the population who voted expressed their support for extreme chauvinism.

4. A dictatorship of imperialism

Imperialism is a strategy of subjugating the working people in other sovereign nations to the will of the bourgeoisie. It is a fight to the death for cheap labor, appropriation of natural resources and ultimately, global domination. Extreme chauvinism dictates hatred of other nations and minority sectors of the population. Terroristic tactics are used under fascist governments to destroy resistance and maximize profit for capitalist enterprises around the globe. Under fascism, working class and revolutionary resistance around the globe are mercilessly suppressed “by any means necessary.” The needs of working people around the upload are ignored and the demands of the capitalists receive first priority. “The ends justify the means” is the slogan of fascist perpetrators. Fascists also seek to confuse people by conflating fascism with socialism and/or communism. The differences between fascism and socialism/communism are stark and unmistakable.

5. Finance capital

According to Wikipedia:

Finance capitalism or financial capitalism is the subordination of processes of production to the accumulation of money profits in a financial system.^[1]

Financial capitalism is thus a form of capitalism where the intermediation of saving to investment becomes a dominant function in the economy, with wider implications for the political process and social evolution:^[2] since the late 20th century it has become the predominant force in the global economy,^[3] whether in neoliberal or other form.^[

Finance capitalism subjugates industrial production to the maximization of profits. In order to achieve the maximization of profits, Karl Marx has proven that the capitalists must seek the cheapest labor possible.

It is no secret that Donald Trump transported Polish workers to the USA in order to construct the buildings he owns. It is easy to surmise that his agenda was to secure the cheapest labor possible in order to complete his building projects.

The working class around the world is waiting to see if a Donald Trump administration meets all the criteria of fascism. The working class around the world is also considering its options to oppose fascism in all its forms. The recent demonstrations in the USA epitomize the possibilities for resistance. The question is “Will the working class be able to continue its resistance to fascist extremism?”

AfricaFocus Bulletin
November 10, 2016 (161110)
(Reposted from sources cited below)

Editor’s Note

“Africa is already burning. The election of Trump is a disaster for
our continent. The United States, if it follows through on its new
President’s rash words about withdrawing from the international
climate regime, will become a pariah state in global efforts for
climate action. This is a moment where the rest of the world must
not waver and must redouble commitments to tackle dangerous climate
change,”  Geoffrey Kamese, Friends of the Earth Africa.

For a version of this Bulletin in html format, more suitable for
printing, go to http://www.africafocus.org/docs16/ren1611.php, and
click on “format for print or mobile.”

To share this on Facebook, click on
https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=http://www.africafocus.org/docs16/ren1611.php

[This version of this AfricaFocus Bulletin sent out by email contains
only brief excerpts from each article. For more extensive excerpts,
read on-line at http://www.africafocus.org/docs16/ren1611.php; for
full articles go to the link cited in each case.]

There is no doubt that the election of Donald Trump poses an extreme
threat to action on climate change, as on a host of other
interconnected issues. But, in this case, as in many others, it is
important to remember that a U.S. president, no matter how powerful,
is only one of the forces affecting the outcomes.

Yes, this is a major setback, but the threat did not begin with
Trump and the struggles to combat it must and will continue – on
multiple fronts. While no one organization or movement can fight on
all fronts, those forces fighting for justice and for a future for
our planet must have a vision of a wider background than one U.S.
presidential election.

The context is not only the United States, but the world. And the
arenas are not only political (at multiple levels of government, and
even within the executive branch of the federal government itself),
but also technical, economic, and activist (from divestment to
protest sites such as the Dakota Pipeline). No one organization or
even movement can be on all fronts at once, but together we must
find ways to strategies embedded in a wider vision rather than
engage in fruitless debates about which action track is the “most
important.”

This AfricaFocus Bulletin consists of excerpts from a selection of
statements and articles illustrating the multiple tracks on which
action to combat the threat of global warming can and must take
place, globally, in Africa, and in the United States.

* The first two statements are reactions from climate activists to
the additional threat posed by the election of Donald Trump.

* The third highlights the continuing technical and economic success
of cheap off-grid and mini-grid solar in Africa, which is now
estimated to be reaching 10% of the 600,000 Africans living off
national  electricity grids.

* The next provides a summary of both the necessity and the economic
and technical viability of a comprehensive transition away from
fossil fuels, from Oil Change International and a coalition of
related organizations.

* The fifth is an open letter from climate activist groups to the
Equator Principles Association of banks committed to social
responsibility principles, calling for withdrawal of support for the
Dakota Access Pipeline.

* The sixth is an update from the International Energy Agency,
revising upwards its projections for growth of renewable energy
worldwide.

* And the last is a report from South Africa’s Council for
Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) noting that “new power
from solar PV and wind today is at least 40% cheaper than that from
new baseload coal today.”

For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on the environment and climate
issues, visit http://www.africafocus.org/intro-env.php

Other background articles worth noting:

“There’s no way around it: Donald Trump is going to be a disaster
for the planet,” Vox, Nov 9, 2016
http://tinyurl.com/oturdlb

“10 Ways You Can Help the Standing Rock Sioux Fight the Dakota
Access Pipeline”

25 Snapshots from the Stillwater Pow Wow

++++++++++++++++++++++end editor’s note+++++++++++++++++

“Deep breaths. Now let’s plan the fight ahead,” 350.org, Nov 9, 2016

[Excerpts: full text at
https://350.org/deep-breaths-now-lets-plan-the-fight-ahead/]

Here’s what I’m keeping in mind right now:

* This is a global movement. It’s more important than ever to
remember our connection with people in literally every country who
are fighting the fossil fuel industry right now — many in the
toughest conditions imaginable. I believe in our collective power
like nothing else.

* The fossil fuel industry is in a fight for its life. When we
expose their lies, stop their pipelines, divest from their stocks
and take away their social license — they fight back. Their
investment in this election was no secret, and they’re going to
double-down in its aftermath.

* Local fossil fuel resistance is taking root everywhere. Not only
has the fight against the Dakota Access pipeline spread like
wildfire, but other campaigns against fracking, pipelines, and coal
are too many to name. None of us are giving up or going home today.

********************************************************

Global Community Must Unite Against Trump to Avoid Climate
Catastrophe

Friends of the Earth International

Joint Press release

9 November 2016

http://tinyurl.com/pe4u693

As news of Donald Trump’s victory in the US Presidential Election
reached Marrakech, climate justice groups gathered at the COP22
United Nations annual climate change talks reacted:

“Whilst the election of a climate denier into the White House sends
the wrong signal globally. The grassroots movements for climate
justice – Native American communities, people of color, working
people – those that are at this moment defending water rights in
Dakota, ending fossil fuel pollution, divesting from the fossil fuel
industry, standing with communities who are losing their homes and
livelihoods from extreme weather devastation to creating a renewable
energy transformation – are the real beating heart of the movement
for change. We will redouble our efforts, grow stronger and remain
committed to stand with those on the frontline of climate injustice
at home and abroad.. In the absence of leadership from our
government, the international community must come together redouble
their effort to prevent climate disaster,” said Jesse Bragg, from
Boston-based Corporate Accountability International.

“For communities in the global south, the U.S. citizens’ choice to
elect Donald Trump seems like a death sentence. Already we are
suffering the effects of climate change after years of inaction by
rich countries like the U.S., and with an unhinged climate change
denier now in the White House, the relatively small progress made is
under threat. The international community must not allow itself to
be dragged into a race to the bottom. Other developed countries like
Europe, Canada, Australia, and Japan must increase their pledges for
pollution cuts and increase their financial support for our
communities,” said Wilfred D’Costa from the Asian Peoples’ Movement
on Debt and Development.

[continued on-line http://www.africafocus.org/docs16/ren1611.php]

***************************************************************

As prices plunge, Africa surges into clean, cheap solar energy

Maina Waruru

Mail and Guardian, 12 Oct 2016

http://tinyurl.com/nu7f9v8

Solar systems in Africa can now provide electricity for many
households for as little as $56 a year.

Last August Kenya won $36 million in support from France to put in
place 23 mini-grid systems in northern Kenya that will use solar
panels, wind or a combination of the two. (Bloomberg) Last August
Kenya won $36 million in support from France to put in place 23
mini-grid systems in northern Kenya that will use solar panels, wind
or a combination of the two. (Bloomberg) Until almost two years ago,
James Mbugua, a farmer living in Karai, a village on the outskirts
of Kenya’s capital, relied on kerosene to light his house, and a car
battery to power his television so he wouldn’t miss the news.

Part of the reason he couldn’t plug into the power grid, despite
being so close to Nairobi and in an area where electricity is
readily available, is that he lives on government land as a
squatter, with no papers to show he owns the 70-foot by 80-foot
parcel where he has put up a makeshift house.

Now, however, he has found an alternative: An affordable solar
system to power his home.

“I could not go on like that and had to seek an alternative way of
lighting my house and I discovered that with only $150 I could use
solar to light my house and power the television plus radio,” he
told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

The money for the purchase, he said, came from a loan from his
community savings group, which asks members to contribute $5 a month
and then offers loans from that pot of cash.

The father of five grown children is one of the millions of people
across Africa who are taking advantage of falling prices of home
solar panel systems to get cheaper, cleaner and more reliable
energy.

According to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), home
solar systems in Africa can now provide electricity for many
households for as little as $56 a year – a cost lower than getting
energy from diesel or paraffin.

Of the estimated 600 million people living off-grid in Africa, about
10 percent of them are now using off-grid clean energy to light
their homes, according to IRENA statistics.

[continued on-line http://www.africafocus.org/docs16/ren1611.php]

******************************************************

The Sky’s Limit: Why the Paris Climate Goals Require a Managed
Decline of Fossil Fuel Production

Greg Muttitt, September 22, 2016

Oil Change International, in collaboration with 350.org, Amazon
Watch, APMDD, AYCC, Bold Alliance, Christian Aid, Earthworks,
Équiterre, Global Catholic Climate Movement, HOMEF, Indigenous
Environmental Network, IndyAct, Rainforest Action Network, and
Stand.earth

http://priceofoil.org/2016/09/22/the-skys-limit-report/

September 2016

Press Release

A new study released by Oil Change International, in partnership
with 14 organizations from around the world, scientifically grounds
the growing movement to keep carbon in the ground by revealing the
need to stop all new fossil fuel infrastructure and industry
expansion. It focuses on the potential carbon emissions from
developed reserves – where the wells are already drilled, the pits
dug, and the pipelines, processing facilities, railways, and export
terminals constructed.

Key Findings:

The potential carbon emissions from the oil, gas, and coal in the
world’s currently operating fields and mines would take us beyond
2deg C of warming.

The reserves in currently operating oil and gas fields alone, even
with no coal, would take the world beyond 1.5°C.

With the necessary decline in production over the coming decades to
meet climate goals, clean energy can be scaled up at a corresponding
pace, expanding the total number of energy jobs.

Key Recommendations:

No new fossil fuel extraction or transportation infrastructure
should be built, and governments should grant no new permits for
them.

Some fields and mines – primarily in rich countries – should be
closed before fully exploiting their resources, and financial
support should be provided for non-carbon development in poorer
countries.

This does not mean stopping using all fossil fuels overnight.
Governments and companies should conduct a managed decline of the
fossil fuel industry and ensure a just transition for the workers
and communities that depend on it.

[continued on-line http://www.africafocus.org/docs16/ren1611.php]

***************************************************************

An open letter to the Equator Principles Association

Civil society groups call for stronger climate commitments in EPs
and a halt to financing the Dakota Access Pipeline

By: BankTrack,Friends of the Earth US,others & RAN

For full version, including signatories and references, visit
http://www.banktrack.org/ – Direct URL: http://tinyurl.com/p4pwhpr

Nov 7 2016

[For contact on this letter: johan@banktrack.org)]   To:  Mr. Nigel
Beck, Standard Bank, Chair of the Equator Principles Association,
All Equator Principles Financial institutions (EPFIs)

Concerning:  Equator Principles climate commitments, and EPFI
financing of the Dakota Access Pipeline, for discussion at your
Annual Meeting and Workshop in London

Dear Mr. Beck,

The undersigned organizations are writing to you, as Chair of the
Equator Principles Association, to urge the Association at its
upcoming Annual Meeting in London to address two distinct and
important issues:

* Equator Principles Financial Institutions (EPFIs) must take long
overdue, concrete steps to strengthen their climate commitments.

* Our deep concern about the involvement of a substantial number of
EPFIs in the financing of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL).

[continued on-line http://www.africafocus.org/docs16/ren1611.php]

************************************************************

IEA raises its five-year renewable growth forecast as 2015 marks
record year (Paris)

International Energy Agency 25 October 2016

https://www.iea.org – Direct URL: http://tinyurl.com/h6x3qrc

The International Energy Agency said today that it was significantly
increasing its five-year growth forecast for renewables thanks to
strong policy support in key countries and sharp cost reductions.
Renewables have surpassed coal last year to become the largest
source of installed power capacity in the world.

The latest edition of the IEA’s Medium-Term Renewable Market Report
now sees renewables growing 13% more between 2015 and 2021 than it
did in last year’s forecast, due mostly to stronger policy backing
in the United States, China, India and Mexico. Over the forecast
period, costs are expected to drop by a quarter in solar PV and 15
percent for onshore wind.

Last year marked a turning point for renewables. Led by wind and
solar, renewables represented more than half the new power capacity
around the world, reaching a record 153 Gigawatt (GW), 15% more than
the previous year. Most of these gains were driven by record-level
wind additions of 66 GW and solar PV additions of 49 GW.

About half a million solar panels were installed every day around
the world last year. In China, which accounted for about half the
wind additions and 40% of all renewable capacity increases, two wind
turbines were installed every hour in 2015.

“We are witnessing a transformation of global power markets led by
renewables and, as is the case with other fields, the center of
gravity for renewable growth is moving to emerging markets,” said Dr
Fatih Birol, the IEA’s executive director.

[continued on-line http://www.africafocus.org/docs16/ren1611.php]

*****************************************************

Comparative Analysis: The cost of new power generation in South
Africa

Chris Yelland

Daily Maverick, 9 November 2016

http://tinyurl.com/nbdwh3o

In a presentation dated October 14, 2016, the head of CSIR’s Energy
Centre, Dr Tobias Bischof-Niemz, and Ruan Fourie, energy economist
at CSIR’s Energy Centre, provide a comparative analysis for new
power in South Africa based on recent coal IPP bid price
announcements by Minister of Energy Tina Joemat-Pettersson on
October 10, 2016, and other data.

This study is seen as important for any review of the draft update
to the Integrated Resource Plan for Electricity (Draft IRP)
currently in progress by the Department of Energy (DoE).

The Draft IRP was to have been presented to the Cabinet last week,
and thereafter made available to the public for comment, but this
has since been delayed, with no further dates being given.

Since the previous due date of end March 2016, the request for
proposals (RFP) for the proposed 9.6 GW new nuclear build in South
Africa has also been further delayed from the revised issue date of
end September 2016.

However, it is known that in the meantime various stakeholder
structures reporting to the Minister of Energy are currently
reviewing the Draft IRP and its proposals for new renewable,
baseload coal and nuclear power, and making further input and
recommendations.

The CSIR study shows the significant reduction in the cost of energy
from wind and solar PV generation technologies in South Africa since
submission of bids for Window 1 of the renewable energy IPP
programme (REIPPP) on November 4, 2011, to those of the expedited
round of Window 4 on November 4, 2015.

The result of this reduction is that new power from solar PV and
wind today is at least 40% cheaper than that from new baseload coal
today.

[continued on-line http://www.africafocus.org/docs16/ren1611.php]

*******************************************************

AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with a
particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.

AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org