Day 6: Angola

[Tetro Kornbluth]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angola



One of the two large Lusophobe countries in Southern Africa. An Oiligarchy ruled, as predictable as clockwork, by a one-time Communist Party. One of the least equal societies in the world. Government is very close to China. Portuguese is widely spoken across the country, in many places as a first language.



(Starting this early because I'll be away this weekend)

[they don't love you like i love you]

Has the second largest white population in Africa.

[politicus]

Has the second largest white population in Africa.

Yeah there is a net migration from Portugal.

[Famous Mortimer]

Recently read both of Piero Gleijeses' books on the Cuban intervention in Angola, Conflicting Missions: 1959-1976 (which actually covers Cuban foreign policy in the whole of Africa) and Visions of Freedom: 1976-1991. They were both very good, in depth and even handed.

I feel quite well versed on the subject now. If anyone has any questions, I'd love to discuss them in depth.

[Storebought]

I think Jonas Savimbi's murder was the best thing that happened to Angola in modern times.

---

Reportage from Angola by the west tends to reflect a great deal of "shade." After losing the colonial war, then losing a decades-long Communist insurgency -- a nation choked with land mines and blacked-out cities -- the west practically condemned Angola to become a new Liberia or DR Congo. (Journeyman Films documentaries about Angola made from late 1990s all but decree it). Instead of submitting to immiseration, its ruling Marxist family dynasty decides to sell out to China, and the country subsequently thrives, developing faster in 10 years of Chinese intervention than it did in 400 years as a Portuguese/South African colony. Angola did everything wrong and anti-western, and has not suffered any visible consequence, leaving the western media to bang on instead about "corruption."

That said, I believe that authoritarian regimes will always fail in the end, but the way US and British media report about Angola in particular makes me suspect that they want state failure as a desired outcome.

[Famous Mortimer]

If you measure economic success solely by the profits of multinational corporations, yeah, Angola is "thriving". Most people are still poor though. Most of the country still has no infrastructure. The MPLA has not done a good job. Sure, they've done a better job than some other African governments (not saying much) and they were far and away the best option in the Civil War, but let's not get carried away.

[Famous Mortimer]

the way US and British media report about Angola in particular makes me suspect that they want state failure as a desired outcome.

1) The US and British media never report on Angola.

2) Why would they want a state failure? The Angolan government has a lucrative relationship with international big business. State failure would be bad for the bottom line. You think the West wants to bring down Angola because 40 years ago it feigned non-aligned Marxism? Hell, even back when they were actively feigning non-aligned Marxism, Chevron and BP and Exon were already in bed with the MPLA and trying to restrain the Reagan administration. 

[Storebought]

the way US and British media report about Angola in particular makes me suspect that they want state failure as a desired outcome.

1) The US and British media never report on Angola.

2) Why would they want a state failure? The Angolan government has a lucrative relationship with international big business. State failure would be bad for the bottom line. You think the West wants to bring down Angola because 40 years ago it feigned non-aligned Marxism? Hell, even back when they were actively feigning non-aligned Marxism, Chevron and BP and Exon were already in bed with the MPLA and trying to restrain the Reagan administration.  

The Economist reports fairly often about Angola. UK publications are my sources of most of the info about the economic development of the country. Granted, the only mainstream American media that reports anything at all about Africa is the NY Times, but by US media I broaden my description to include US documentary producers like Vice and such.

I disagree with the second paragraph. The oil Chevron extracted in those days was used to fund Savimbi -- if he weren't there, then Chevron would not have been allowed to operate there. And to the broader point: nearby DR Congo barely functions as a government outside the capital and the big cities, yet multinational and Chinese mining companies still operate there.

[Famous Mortimer]

I'd like to see some evidence Chevron was funding Sivimbi. It doesn't make sense. They literally signed contracts with the Angolan government. South Africa attacked their plants. Additionally, conservatives in America led a campaign to boycott Chevron.

[Storebought]

I'd like to see some evidence Chevron was funding Sivimbi. It doesn't make sense. They literally signed contracts with the Angolan government. South Africa attacked their plants. Additionally, conservatives in America led a campaign to boycott Chevron.

You're right. Chevron was able to operate in Angola even during the worst of the civil war period by defending its rigs with Cubans (which was the source of the conservative boycott). Firestone operated its plantations during most of the Liberian civil war as well. Western companies find ways to obtain profit in strife-ridden, failing countries.

[Storebought]

I am not arguing that Santos is not a kleptocrat (but I do deny he is a second Mobutu) and a great representative of 'sit-tight' African leadership, but it cannot be denied that he has governed his country more conscientiously than more western-oriented African leaders. Those improvements in national GDP per capita, literacy rates, and in health delivery for rural people in the past twenty years are demonstrable -- Angola has progressed since the dark days of 1985 -- and cannot be handwaved as just reflecting the general improvement in the African economic climate. Furthermore, many of the criticisms about Angola's wealth inequality can just as well be leveled against Namibia or Botswana.

[Famous Mortimer]

Sure, I think we're mostly in agreement but it's a matter of emphasis. The MPLA haven't been terrible but don't give them too much credit just because they had a bit of revolutionary chic in the 70s.

I imagine things would have been better if Lúcio Lara had become president instead of dos Santos. Lara, who I believe is still alive but super old, was leader of the MPLA's social democratic wing and he was actual Neto's number two. He was passed over in favor of dos Santos though because he was half White and had a White wife, and they thought that wouldn't go over well.

[Famous Mortimer]

Interesting fact about China and Angola. China actually backed all the main factions in Angola's war at one point or another.

Most famously, they backed UNITA very briefly in the late 60s. This is probably most well known because of how comical it is. UNITA flirted with Maoism but then when the money dried up, they turned conservative, although they forgot to take the word "socialism" off their flag. Really though, of all the parties, China's involvement with UNITA was the shortest.

After that, China kinda sorta backed the MPLA in the early 70s. Or rather, the Soviet Union was convinced the MPLA had gone Maoist. The MPLA was interested in legitimate non-alignment, not just being pro-Soviet with a third world veneer. This angered the Soviet Union so they started backing a rival MPLA faction made up of bush commanders. These commanders attacked the MPLA leadership for being too White and Westernized. Ironic since they themselves were backed by the White Soviet Union and the leadership was supposedly backed by fellow third worlders China. Ultimate the leadership challenge failed though, mostly because the Soviets found the bush faction too uneducated and hard to control. They grudgingly returned to backing the mainstream MPLA and then China followed suit by withdrawing its support.

By the time the Civil War actually started, China had decided to back the FNLA, as it was considered a more professional, serious challenger to Soviet influence. That was, of course, a very wrong calculation. FNLA was wiped out in the first year of the War. By that time though, Mao was dead and China didn't have any interest in backing anyone else.

Of course now, the MPLA and China are buddy buddy.