How unfair is the global economic strategic game?

BlackEconomics.org®

It is common knowledge that the current global economic strategic game is characterized by the general economic exploitation of the South by the North. The North thrives on its highly valued advanced technological economies, which are often made possible – in part – by low-value primary factors of production from the South. This is particularly true for the participation of African countries in the global economic strategic game. This result is “common knowledge” in the sense that the subject is briefly discussed as just described. to satiety. However, it is rare to discuss how the countries of the North plan to perpetuate this exploitation.

It is common knowledge that African countries are blatantly exploited even when they participate in commodity cartels. In theory and in theory, economic cartels are supposed to give their members increased market power. However, even commodity cartels offer little additional power to African countries over international commodity prices, and they generally have limited ability to introduce their raw materials to international markets. Given their current economic situation and the expectations of their citizens, many African countries are at the mercy of countries that have significantly greater economic power in the global economic strategic game.

Today, the Global North is rapidly advancing into a new technologically advanced era while the Global South languishes in an economic quagmire that often features relatively low levels of real economic growth, high inflation, low levels of accumulated human, cultural and physical capital, and high levels of debt.

Despite this ongoing saga of exploitation, most African countries display a persistent willingness to engage as willingly exploited economic agents in the rigged and unfair global economic strategy game. The reason for this attitude is, of course, “convergence.” In other words, some African countries expect future conditions to evolve in such a way that their economies will grow rapidly enough to surpass those of the Global North in relative size and quality. Historical evidence abounds that such an outcome is possible: South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, China, India, etc. All of these economies have reached high levels of development, sophistication, and maturity in the last 60 years—if not completely, then at least in a generalized way. But Africa is not Asia, and today it is said to be experiencing neocolonialism.

A pertinent question that African nations and Black Americans seeking to invest in or return to the African continent should ask themselves is not only whether convergence is a valid theoretical construct, but whether the prospects for widespread convergence within a reasonable time frame have already been ruled out?

What do we mean by “excluded”?

First, it must be considered that planet Earth does not contain an unlimited supply of important minerals (e.g., gold, silver, copper, nickel, iron ore, uranium, magnesium, bauxite, cobalt, rare earths, etc.) that are necessary for a favorable level of material economic development such as that characterized by the current Global North.1 And, yes, there may be future innovations in the artificial or other production of substitutes for some of these important minerals, and improvements in the recycling of existing minerals are likely. Furthermore, a high level of material economic development could be redefined.

Second, it will be possible to market current reserves of these important minerals only at increasingly high costs. Consequently, countries in the South may find it increasingly unprofitable in the short term to consume the important minerals they produce; in other words, it may be profitable for them only to export these minerals.

Third, future demand for minerals and other resources could exceed available supply. Specifically, demand for these minerals is expected to be continuous and persistent from the Global North. In addition, countries in the Global South seeking to converge to the Global North will need minerals to produce relatively identical physical replicas of the economies of the Global North. As a result, total demand for minerals and other resources could exceed global availability at prices affordable to countries in the Global South.

If the above conditions prevail, then realistic prospects for convergence of the Global South with the Global North are ruled out: it will not and cannot happen unless the material world is transformed, current knowledge in physical science is outdated, and/or economic convergence is achievable through some other currently unknown path, structure, or form.

An important question arises for both the South and the North: how will economic agents revise their strategy when they realize that convergence is not on the agenda? Logically, the South could withdraw from the global economic strategic game. Such a response should motivate the North to seek to impose its will on the South. However, history tells us the story of a European North defeated by an African and Middle Eastern South (i.e. the Crusades).

But new elements are coming into play in a potential South-North global conflict in the near term. Today, the Global North includes a largely European component, but also a new member of the Global North that does not align perfectly with its European counterparts, namely the BRICS countries. On the other hand, the Global South includes Africa and the Middle East, the African and Middle Eastern diaspora, and some countries in South and Southeast Asia that may or may not align closely with the new member of the Global North (BRICS).

The operational implementation of this strategic game is somewhat complicated and the final outcomes are not easily predictable. The North, originating in Europe, is a given, but to what extent can it convince the BRICS to fully enter its circle to oppose the Global South? Similarly, to what extent can the BRICS take the South and the South of South Asia under its wing to protect and utilize them? But the real concern of the Global South is not whether African and Middle Eastern nations can resist the North, originating in Europe, the BRICS and their closely allied Global South members. Rather, the concern is whether the Global South can convince the African and Middle Eastern diaspora to serve as an important strategic actor in the struggles to retain valuable and high-value mineral resources, to obtain deserved reparations for their historical economic exploitation, and/or to impose general suffering on its opposition.

Let us not forget that the African and Middle Eastern diaspora is present everywhere: in North America, South America, the Caribbean, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and parts of Asia. To what extent can this African and Middle Eastern diaspora forge sufficient racial/ethnic unity and use it to strengthen and enhance the position of Africa and the Middle East in the Global South?

The strategic position of the African and Middle Eastern diaspora worldwide could constitute a formidable force against the countries of the North, from Europe and the BRICS. It is difficult to focus on defeating an external enemy when there are internal adversaries, however small or formidable. An internal enemy is a pure vulnerability.

It seems that the North, which emerged from Europe and the BRICS, has not been a particularly astute long-term economic strategist – a fact it is beginning to realize. It has not only exploited the valuable mineral resources of the Global South, but has also sought to profit from its supply of human capital. The latter is a Trojan horse filled with the Global South’s African and Middle Eastern diaspora.

Accordingly, the ultimate outcome of the economic strategies of the North and the South in response to the exposure of the convergence error depends on many factors, the most important of which is how the African and Middle Eastern South and its global diaspora interpret the deception of all elements of the North. If the South is deeply dissatisfied with this long-standing deception, then this anger, if channeled judiciously and strategically, could be enough to reverse the fortunes of the North and precipitate a new world order.

1 Our non-exhaustive search reveals that there is no unified, publicly available global data source on the total known reserves of minerals and other important non-produced resources that are used for economic production and development. Furthermore, we were able to identify only one analysis that considers current reserves and potential demand in a medium-term context (to 2050). (See Jane Hammarstrom, et al., (2021), Assessment of Undiscovered Copper Resources of the World, 2015, US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185160 (Ret. 071124).) The analysis focuses on copper and indicates that there is likely to be sufficient global supply of copper until at least 2050. However, it is well known that the supply of some important minerals will be insufficient in the medium term. Hence the present essay which examines what can happen in the event of insufficient supply. It follows that a thorough analysis is absolutely necessary to confirm which important minerals reflect adequate or inadequate supplies in the long term.