114
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by SeventyTwoTrillion@hexbear.net to c/news@hexbear.net

Image (source here) is of a section of the Yarlung Zangbo river, which forms the deepest canyon on the planet.


The idea of doing any sort of general preamble for China is a little absurd given how ubiquitous they are in economics and politics, so I'm just going to hop right in to a recent news item of interest: China is working on the construction of an enormous new hydropower project in Tibet (@Metabola@hexbear.net had brought this up just before the last news mega ended).

This project (consisting of, I believe, five dams) will be overall three times larger than the Three Gorges Dam, will cost $167 billion, and will supply 70 GW (by itself more power than several significant countries generate). There are, of course, meaningful concerns regarding concerning environmental damage, but helping to avert catastrophic climate change seems worth it. The news coming out of the clean energy sector of China has getting only more encouraging over the last few years, even as the fully neoliberalized Europe and America descend into climate skepticism and refuse to adequately fund projects that could avert the worst of climate change.

Geopolitically, given recent India-China tensions (for example, sending Pakistan the equipment to shoot down Indian jets, as well as run-of-the-mill border tensions) one expects India to not receive the news very well, as the river upon which the dam is being constructed proceeds to flow into Arunachal Pradesh. But from what I understand of the Indian hydrological situation (which is, admittedly, not much), I don't think enough of the water in India comes from the river for China to hypothetically cause any kind of water shortages in India - the monsoons seem to supply plenty of freshwater all by themselves. Nonetheless, as with all Chinese news, wild fearmongering abounds.


Last week's thread is here.
The Imperialism Reading Group is here.

Please check out the RedAtlas!

The bulletins site is here. Currently not used.
The RSS feed is here. Also currently not used.

Israel-Palestine Conflict

If you have evidence of Israeli crimes and atrocities that you wish to preserve, there is a thread here in which to do so.

Sources on the fighting in Palestine against Israel. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:

UNRWA reports on Israel's destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.

English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.

English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.

Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Sources:

Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.

Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.

Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:

Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.

https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.

Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:

Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.


top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] grandepequeno@hexbear.net 8 points 1 hour ago

eu-cool To those familiar with the recent EU-US deal, can you find a materialist reason for European political elites to see the deal as a power move on their part?

Here are the explanations I've seen so far

1-Ends trade war instability so they're happy, even with a pre-emptive defeat.

2-Their personal wealth is based on the EUR and GBP being an integral part of the dollar system. Their loyalty is primarily to dollar hegemony and American oligarchs provide the ideological apparatus that sustains their rule

3-Fracture between national political elites and their predecessors who they kicked upstairs to be Eurocrats, with the latter trying to leverage whatever they can to burn the former regardless of consequence (you can find plenty of national elites that support this shit though)

4-Post-Maastricht integration failed to forge the cohesive transnational class capable of interest articulation. The mental result is mindless Atlanticism on every level

5-They self-consciously view themselves as local satraps within global US empire. There’s no way for them to stand up to American aggression. By definition.

6-Nothing complicated. Simply put, Europe thrives on American demand, and there’s no alternative that isn’t a half leap into the void. You settle for an emperor who raises your tariffs and hope he doesn’t crush you.

Which one/ones do you think it is, do you have your own theory and how is your day going? Feel free too only answer that last one

[-] 3rdWorldCommieCat@hexbear.net 2 points 1 hour ago

3, 5 and 6 make the most sense to me but I'm not an expert by any means.

[-] SeventyTwoTrillion@hexbear.net 5 points 1 hour ago
[-] Redcuban1959@hexbear.net 13 points 2 hours ago

Italian Senator Antonio Misiani (Democratic Party, SocDem) says that the tariff agreement with the United States represents the European Union's unconditional surrender. Several sectors of the economy will need subsidies from the governments of the bloc's countries to avoid job cuts.

  • Telegram
[-] Lovely_sombrero@hexbear.net 69 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

tldr of the US-EU trade deal;

The EU will buy a trillion dollars in US weapons, remove all tariffs on US goods and services, reduce safety & environmental standards for imported US vehicles. EU promises to invest $750 billion in the US. In exchange the US will impose 15% tariffs on all imports from the EU, as opposed to the current 10% tariff on EU products.

[edit] the EU also commits to buying $750 billion of US natural gas.

[-] jackmaoist@hexbear.net 33 points 7 hours ago

This feels like an unconditional surrender lol

[-] someone@hexbear.net 11 points 2 hours ago

The European ruling class has no loyalty to anything but their wealth, and their wealth is mostly denominated in USD.

[-] Redcuban1959@hexbear.net 6 points 2 hours ago

thats what some euro mps are saying lol

[-] sodium_nitride@hexbear.net 48 points 12 hours ago

This sounds like a satire.

It's a satire right?

RIGHT?

[-] redchert@lemmygrad.ml 42 points 12 hours ago

Part of the course. NATO & EU is the american version of the delian league with some corinth league flavor.

After all the us literally destroyed vital energy infrastructure of the largest economy of europe and then nothing happened. They are puppets through and through. One empire.

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 45 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

It is not entirely fair to say that Europe was mere puppets to the US, even though much of their imperialist streaks did align with the US interests and even benefited from the US being the hegemon. They did attempt to challenge the US numerous times, and were beaten back again and again. This would imply that the US is only winning because everyone is too stupid to challenge it.

The French did try to force the US into exchanging its hugely over-spent dollars they collected during the Vietnam War into gold in 1971, and Nixon simply said he’s not going to pay, and abruptly ended the Bretton Woods arrangement. Everyone thought the dollar would be worthless now that it’s not tied to gold, well, turns out it didn’t.

The US understood that denying Europe their energy sovereignty is key to making the Europeans cave, and this is very much reflected in the geopolitical conflicts that occurred over the past few decades.

When Saddam attempted to sell its oil in euro in the late 1990s, Iraq was “conveniently” invaded in 2003.

When the Germans attempted to build the Nord Stream pipeline to obtain cheap natural gas from Russia in 2011, the Maidan Revolution in Ukraine immediately erupted in 2013, creating instability and difficulties to the European economy.

This still did not deter Merkel, and a second Nord Stream line finally finished its construction in 2021 - guess what happened the next year?

The pattern recurs. If the EU does not have its monetary sovereignty and energy sovereignty, it cannot really do anything in realistic terms.

It’s also the same when I see people blaming Global South countries for not standing up to the US, and while it’s true the comprador class very much benefited from the US imperialism over the wellbeing of its own people, you have to ask the question of why couldn’t the left do anything in those countries? You are going against coups, economic sanctions and global institutions that deny you access to the global markets controlled by the US hegemon. Seeing what happened in countries like Libya and more recently Syria, and when the great economies (looking at you, China) refuse to do anything to alleviate the crisis in Gaza, most countries would rather keep the peace than to suffer the worse fate of mass poverty inflicted upon them.

I honestly do not think that Israel would be allowed what they’re doing in Gaza today if the USSR was still around.

[-] Boise_Idaho@hexbear.net 15 points 6 hours ago

I honestly do not think that Israel would be allowed what they’re doing in Gaza today if the USSR was still around.

Considering how much the SU has historically done to prop up the Zionist entity and how much they had to constantly combat weaponized accusations of "antisemitism" against Soviet Jews throughout its entire existence, I seriously doubt they would do much. It's the same reason why Iran isn't as hard as Azerbaijan as it should be (A quarter of Iran's population is Azerbaijanis).

If one looks at history instead of propping up an platonic ideal of Soviet foreign policy, most socialist countries outside of the DPRK didn't do much to Palestine in the end and the SU was no exception. The real alternate history timeline is if the UAR still existed and pan-Arabism hadn't been ideologically defeated. There would've been no genocide in Gaza because a UAR would immediately invade the Zionist entity through its Egyptian border.

With the ideological defeat of pan-Arabism and the failure of Marxism-Leninism to truly take root in WANA, there lacks a real sect-agnostic ideological alternative against a particular sect being elevated against all other sects. The real weakness of Hamas is that it's run by Sunni. The real weakness of Hezbollah and Ansarallah is that it's run by Shia. The real weakness of the IRI is that it's a Shia Islamic Republic.

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 4 points 1 hour ago

Maybe I am coping but I also think that socialist movements across the Global South would not crumble like they are today if the USSR is still around.

[-] AlHouthi4President@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 hour ago

The collapse of the Soviet union saw a massive influx of Jewish Soviet scientists into occupied Palestine that over doubled their number of PhD per capita. Most of them had to immediately enter workforce due to lack of universities in the colony. So basically they got put to work researching big agriculture and weapons of extermination.

If the USSR never fell then the entity would not be the technological RnD powerhouse that it is.

[-] grandepequeno@hexbear.net 15 points 4 hours ago

SU has historically done to prop up the Zionist entity

That history has a clear cut-off point though

[-] jack@hexbear.net 26 points 10 hours ago

I honestly do not think that Israel would be allowed what they’re doing in Gaza today if the USSR was still around.

ussr-cry

[-] FALGSConaut@hexbear.net 31 points 8 hours ago

It's that bit from WTYP. The American government works on a series of checks and balances, those are the judicial branch, the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the Soviet Union

[-] RedSailsFan@hexbear.net 26 points 11 hours ago

When the Germans attempted to build the Nord Stream pipeline to obtain cheap natural gas from Russia in 2011, the Maidan Revolution in Ukraine immediately erupted in 2013, creating instability and difficulties to the European economy.

what makes them seem like puppets is that they are enthusiastic partcipants in stuff like the maidan coup, like didnt merkel pretty much gleefully admit they were fucking over russia and that the minsk agreements were shams? why do this if russia is your only option to break away from the US?

[-] trompete@hexbear.net 17 points 6 hours ago

In 2014, Merkel, and whoever the French president was at the time, made some compromise with Yanukovych and Putin, where they removed the parts of the EU association agreement that Russians objected to the most. One day later someone started shooting up the place and Yanukovych had to flee.

She, and again the French, later also did beg Putin to sign Minsk II.

Merkel gave an interview in 2022, where she was questioned why she did all this compromising, wasn't that like a mistake? Basically being accused (this happened lots at the time) of having been soft on the Russians. To which she replied (paraphrasing), it's always worth trying for peace and those Minsk agreements did buy Ukraine time now didn't they?

This isn't gleeful boasting, and more like a post-hoc defense of her actions. I mean why would she do the Nordstream if the plan was to go to war with Russia?

I do agree though the establishment is politically captured, some more than others, and many are true believers in US exceptionalism. I mean Merkel could have tried to stand up to the Americans and never did. They do their own little deals with the Russians, the US and Brits ignore and sabotage that, and they just go along with that without saying a peep.


Translation of relevant part of the interview (archive):

(emphasis mine)ZEIT: Are you asking yourself whether the years of relative calm were also years of failures and whether you were not just a crisis manager, but in part the cause of crises?

Merkel: [... something about climate change ...] Or let's look at my policy with regard to Russia and Ukraine. I have come to the conclusion that I made my decisions at the time in a way that is still comprehensible to me today. It was an attempt to prevent just such a war. The fact that this was not successful, does not mean that the attempts were therefore wrong.

ZEIT: But you can think it plausible how you acted in earlier circumstances, and still consider it wrong today, in view of the consequences.

Merkel: But that presupposes that you also say what exactly the alternatives were at the time. I thought the initiation of NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia, which was discussed in 2008, was wrong. The countries did not have the necessary prerequisites for this, nor had the consequences of such a decision been fully thought through, both with regard to Russia's actions against Georgia and Ukraine and with regard to NATO and its rules of engagement. And the 2014 Minsk Agreement was an attempt to give Ukraine time.

It also used this time to become stronger, as can be seen today. The Ukraine of 2014/15 is not the Ukraine of today. As we saw in the battle for Debaltseve (railroad town in Donbass, Donetsk Oblast, editor's note) at the beginning of 2015, Putin could have easily overrun it back then. And I very much doubt that the NATO states could have done as much back then as they do today to help Ukraine.

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 31 points 10 hours ago

Europe is treating Russia like a gas station and they’re merely “doing Russia a favor” by purchasing energy from them: “If Russia couldn’t sell their oil and gas, then the Russian economy will COLLAPSE. Hence, Russia WILL fold.”

Surprise surprise Russia’s economy didn’t collapse when Europeans stopped buying their energy, and it turns out that Europe needs Russia more than the other way around lol.

[-] RedSailsFan@hexbear.net 11 points 7 hours ago

pride goeth before the fall as they say, i suppose

[-] jack@hexbear.net 43 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Jfc, Europe is so pathetic

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 34 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

To be fair, there’s nothing the EU could do. Trump’s global tariffs inevitably forced China to dump their goods into the EU market, which appeared to be the final nail in the coffin for the EU to cave to the US demand.

If we really want to talk in historical terms, the sins of the EU really began the moment Europe robbed the post-Soviet states in the 1990s by monetizing their collapsing industrial assets into the finance capital that formed the EU and the eurozone. Pitching the euro as the challenger to the dollar’s dominance immediately painted themselves as a target to the US empire.

What Europe did to the USSR, the US is doing to them. This has been the case since the Balkan conflicts that erupted in the periphery in the late 1990s, the Nord Stream destruction was simply the most recent of such aggression from the empire itself.

And their continual mentality of treating Russia as nothing more than a gas station, taking advantage of Russia (literally how the Ukrainian civil war started back in 2014) instead of treating it as an equal partner, ultimately accelerated their own demise.

As I have said many times before, what could have been an alternative timeline would be China solving its own economic downturn by successfully transitioning into a domestic consumption economy and absorb the global surplus goods. That would have blunted the US financial aggression and Europe and many Global South countries would probably not have to cave to Trump today. Unfortunately, China is still very much trapped by the neoliberal thinking and I don’t see them shifting away anytime soon (in which sense, China’s overcapacity is weaponized to kill the other export economies the moment the US threatened to pull back its consumption with tariffs), so we’re still in the neoliberal timeline and likely with a new status quo after US and China have reached their own compromises with one another.

Europe though, is poised to be the biggest loser in this latest reconfiguration of global capitalism. Trump’s main thing is to reduce the trade deficit and it looks like Europe is going to give him that.

[-] SkingradGuard@hexbear.net 9 points 4 hours ago

Honestly this just makes me depressed, if we can't hope on the largest socialist nation to ever exist to do what is necessary, what hope is there for everyone else in the world? Everyone who attempts to overthrow captialism will inevitably buckle under the pressure of Empire... 🥲 Our only hope is if the USA and it's vassals collapse without taking the whole world with it in nuclear fire.

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I mean, you play with the cards you are dealt with. But ultimately, the so-called “socialists” in the Imperial Core seem too comfortable to want to commit to radical actions. They want to have a revolution but one that doesn’t involve enduring hardships or having to give up their treats. They want a revolution that falls on their lap.

Hence, they are more interested in peaceful protests, changes through the ballot boxes, and calling out other internet leftists for not supporting Palestine enough, because deep down that’s the extent of as far as they are comfortable with doing. Going further than that would mean a life of being hunted down by the feds and organizing underground, like actual communists had to do throughout history, and giving up the comforts they have so much enjoyed in the developed world.

[-] redchert@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 1 hour ago

The empire is weakening and collasping. That never meant that the us isnt able to snap back its vassals into their place nor does it mean they arent unable to do vast damage during its decline.

Their actions right now will make it harder for them in the future. It also dissolves Europe as an imperial rival, makes anti-west forces have more prominence inside europe, and makes it easier for them to later join as equals in a post-empire world.

[-] IceWallowCum@hexbear.net 19 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

I wonder how much of this reconfiguration/new status quo we're seeing is a conscious gearing up for hot war in 10-20 years. I also wonder if, this being the case, China's decisions will look sound in hindsight

[-] redchert@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 1 hour ago

I doubt it will take 20 years for the us-china war. Many say 2027-early 2030s

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 29 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

I’m surprised by how entrenched neoliberal thinking is still in China today. You wouldn’t thought that the Ukraine war would have taught them the lesson.

Xi’s proposal for the Dual Circulation economy in 2020 to balance out export with domestic consumption is now a confirmed failure - nearly five years on, China is now still the world’s number 1 trade surplus country, in fact with a record $1 trillion annual surplus while neutered domestic consumption is causing deflation which is a very big problem in itself. I cannot even run cover for them anymore.

Honestly both Russia and China have both been a disappointment in the last few years. Both showed so much promises in the beginning of the Ukraine war. But it’s also a lesson for the left here, which is how difficult it is to get rid of liberals once they are entrenched in the system. Perhaps now you would have seen Stalin’s brutal purge in a more different light.

[-] grendahlgrendahlgen@hexbear.net 5 points 2 hours ago

Is there something you think China could have done differently in the past few years to avoid the status quo, or was the die cast by market liberalization decades ago?

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Yes, as I have said many times in the past.

The US hegemony was at its weakest in the months immediately after Putin invaded Ukraine. The backlash of sanctions and the spike in energy prices prompted Biden to raised interest rates (to 5% within a year). Many Global South countries back then were seriously looking to de-dollarize.

In August 2022, Russia cancelled $23 billion of African countries’ debt. China also showed some progress by waiving the interest-free loans for 17 African countries.

However, they did not keep going. For one, China could use $800 billion of its vast dollar reserves ($3.3 trillion) to pay off Africa’s foreign debt, then immediately flood the region with newly created yuan, Marshall Plan-style, to give the African countries the money to purchase Chinese goods.

This will raise the wages of Chinese workers (thereby eliminating the low consumption and deflation problems altogether), but most importantly, this will increase the purchasing power of the Chinese working class (which I remind you, is only half of the South Korean working class and did not even approach the purchasing power of Japanese working class in 1990) that will enable them to purchase the goods from those Global South countries, driving growth in those regions and raising the income of the working class there too (replacing the consumer role that has played by the US for decades).

By transitioning into a domestic consumption economy, China not only solves its own deflation and overcapacity problems, it also reduces its own dependency and the reliance of many Global South countries on the US, therefore the power of the dollar will no longer be as effective or coercive as it has been.

The downside is that China will have to give up its export-oriented industry and those labor and resources will have to be re-allocated to internal development, like provision of healthcare and welfare to their own people, instead of making cheap goods for Westerners to consume just to collect the dollars that they couldn’t use anyway (hence the trade surplus).

This is also very different from Chinese investments in those countries, like the Belt and Road Initiative, because those investments do not necessarily come with the consumption demand for the expanded productive capacity in those countries. As a result, those countries still have to sell their goods to the US or other wealthy Western countries as China does not have the desire to give up its export industries and also, its working people does not have the purchasing power, to buy from them.

[-] redchert@lemmygrad.ml 24 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Pitching the euro as the challenger to the dollar’s dominance immediately painted themselves as a target to the US empire.

That endeavour was stillborn and existed solely in the abstracts and maybes. Since 1945 the us had loyal puppets on the continent. The Suez crisis did reveal the last sovereign empires of europe to be a sham. The inclusion of the UK into the EC later was another nail in the coffin, because they always acted in the americans interest and made sure the continent could never truly challenge the us. Even worse is that the EC itself was basically an futile attempt of France to bind Germany and Italy to itself and use them to remain relevant as they were considered the “least” victorious of the allied powers. Which was flawed as Germany and Italy in their post 1945 form are compromised entities build on the whims of the primarily america.

The game could be played back even further. Both the UK and France became dependent on us financial power during the world wars, the modern us empire was created when the UK essentially loaned out its empire, South Africa during the 1920s tried open up the British economic sphere to the dollar. Churchill born of a transatlantic union himself was an major advocate for closer ties. So the reduction of europe into vassalage was in utero as far back as the 1913, when Germany and the USA passed the UK as the largest economies in the world. Combined with the Berlin-Bagdad railway, this was a hidden cause for WW1, because it would have destroyed the monopoly of the suez canal.

Ironically now another Anglophone Empire is fearing being passed by another surpassing economic power which has infrastructure projects that will destroy the former empires stranglehold over trading routes. History does repeat indeed.

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 24 points 12 hours ago

Oh yes it goes way back, but we’re being generous here since the neoliberal designs of the EU itself - which was only made possible as a consequence of the fall of the USSR - directly contributed to its own demise today.

[-] revolut1917@hexbear.net 47 points 14 hours ago

Situation continues to worsen in Burkina Faso https://x.com/WerbCharlie/status/1949527898387620017

🇧🇫|#BurkinaFaso: JNIM fighters seemingly entered the centre of Pibaoré earlier today, with footage showing them posing with and desecrating an AES roundabout. These new landmarks are inadvertently becoming a way for the group to show it has successfully overran an urban area.

[-] SkingradGuard@hexbear.net 15 points 4 hours ago

I'm sure the CIA and Europeans have nothing to do with this...

[-] 3rdWorldCommieCat@hexbear.net 15 points 4 hours ago

Really hope they don't manage to pull a Jolani and take over any AES state.

[-] redchert@lemmygrad.ml 29 points 12 hours ago

I am sure france/us must support them in some way. Because they have been gaining territory in all three AES states faster than ever before.

[-] revolut1917@hexbear.net 24 points 11 hours ago

Not really other than in the sense that this insurgency is a long term result of the chaos in Libya and subsequently Mali. AFRICOM doesn't really benefit from JNIM seizing control of a large swathe of the Sahel, neither do France's remaining satellites in West Africa. The fact is that JNIM is a politically intelligent and effective organisation that does a lot to ingratiate itself with local people. They have established social programs in the regions they hold. After decades of rural people being ignored and actively impoverished by the central govts, this is a powerful point of attraction, and Traore's attempts to reverse this trend are coming too late and too little (Mali and Niger's juntas aren't doing much at all).

I think that what would more likely happen is that the US gets directly involved in fighting the insurgencies alongside the AES, which have been more open to US co-operation than most realise (the anti-imperialist sentiment there is more anti-French specifically, finding the outright racism and outdated attitudes of the French harder to deal with). In a year or two I could see the insurgencies toppling a government and that precipitating a deal where the US supplies direct assistance in exchange for some concessions, maybe getting the Russians out of the region, maybe economic concessions. That's just my own view ofc.

[-] redchert@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 hour ago

I feared this possibility. The us did something similar to Gabon. Replacing french interests with their own, hell even zio-stronghold togo uses anti-imperalist talking points as a veil. It could be that Traoré might get replaced by someone within his own faction that might be more pro-us, claiming that the "russians" didnt help the situation.

Ironically the tensions between the sahelians and the more southern peoples were caused by lackluster french neocolonial regimes, bad agricultural policies and increasing desertification & population growth.

[-] Lemmygradwontallowme@hexbear.net 14 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Are you familiar with the AES situation, somewhat personally through relatives in there, a friend so to speak?

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
114 points (98.3% liked)

news

24196 readers
844 users here now

Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.

Rules:

-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --

-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --

-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --

-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --

-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--

-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--

-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --

-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS