Why the Sudden Rush Into Africa? It’s the Oil

Kenya, Libya Uganda and Nigeria are thousands of miles removed from that toilet of European tension known as Ukraine, but as drama unfolds in Eastern Europe, their destinies could be closely aligned.

In essence, the more Russian President Vladimir Putin puts the grip on Russian gas prices, the more Western powers—from NATO to the United States—feel squeezed and desperate enough to look for oil elsewhere. Africa fits a nice profile for that. Suddenly, there’s a new sense of urgency on the continent, with the United States stepping up its military and economic engagement posthaste since Putin made his Crimean power grab.

Before Putin could move to checkmate the West on the geopolitical chess map, President Barack Obama moved a few pieces to the Motherland. It’s an interesting gamble, considering Africa has less than 10 percent of proven global oil reserves. Yet, in the search for alternative sources of energy, the potential returns of intervention in Africa are fairly fast and enormous. Where the Middle East, cradle of oil booms, is volatile and where Shale Country, USA, is still in its infancy, Africa presents a quick-fix solution for petroleum hungry Western countries that don’t have time for renewable-energy cars to fully penetrate their markets. Africa’s not ideal, but it’s much more manageable than al-Qaida networks in the Middle East and a cranky Russian dictator on a Black Sea power trip.

Oil-spilling BP can tell you all about it, “project[ing] Africa will experience the world’s fastest regional energy demand growth [with] combined oil and gas production in Africa between today and 2035, bigger than in any of the BRIC countries.”

If BP has snake eyes on Africa, best believe everyone else does. Within a month of Crimea, additional U.S. “special forces” troops ended up in Uganda to augment a hundred already there in a hunt for war-lusting Lord’s Resistance Army leader Joseph Kony. And to top that, the Pentagon sent in four freshly minted futuristic V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor hybrids to show we mean business.

“Please note that the deployment of these aircraft and personnel does not signify a change in the nature of the US military advisory role in this effort. African Union-led regional forces remain in the lead, with U.S. forces supporting and advising their efforts,” Daniel Travis, the U.S. Embassy spokesman in Uganda, deadpanned several days ago. Which could mean that Ugandan jungles are getting lit up like that epic battle scene in Avatar.

But the sudden speed between Putin’s power act and the move of well-armed U.S. troops to Uganda and elsewhere in Africa is more than just a nicely photo-opped humanitarian play. Critical strategic interests in Africa are suddenly on a front burner in the race for energy. Uganda, to unknowing Americans who can’t point to it on a map, might seem obscure, but it’s not. It’s actually part of an emerging and fast-growth East Africa Federation that includes Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda and Burundi. As a recent Stratfor analysis (subscription only) noted “[n]ew oil and gas exploration projects, along with the potential establishment of a manufacturing base in East Africa, have created an interest in pipeline projects to carry natural gas and crude oil to export markets or refineries.”

Renewed strategic positioning in Africa is, of course, nothing new. The George W. Bush administration was dropping $5 billion a year into HIV/AIDS and malaria-prevention programs, essentially softening the landscape for the eventual expansion of AFRICOM, the U.S. military command for Africa. Hence, it was no surprise to find American planes blasting holes in Libya, drone bases in far-flung places like Niger, Djibouti, Burkina Faso and South Sudan, and U.S. intelligence supporting French troops in Mali. Folks like Muammar Qaddafi needed to get out of the way, and now it’s U.S. naval ships stopping renegade Libyan oil tankers from sending black market fuel to North Korea (“That’s our oil, son, give it back”).

The headline fight against rising Islamic terrorist tides in Africa is a good pitch story. But the lesser known—yet more important—story is the continental energy rush gradually unfolding in Africa. Western powers, already irritated by China’s aggressive entry into African markets—highlighted by billions of dollars in investment and a $200 million “gift” to build a shiny new African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia—are stepping up their game before the rising Asian power dominates the whole thing.

That’s happened quite fast between slow increases in U.S. troops on African soil to the presence of more than 2,000 French troops patrolling the war-torn Central African Republic. And just a few weeks ago, the European Union nervously announced the commitment of an additional 1,000 troops, which struck many as odd, given Europe’s current preoccupation with Russian troops on its doorstep. Folks seem awfully pressed to stabilize that region, which, incidentally, neighbors Uganda and isn’t all that far away from Nigeria—another African country that accounts for 5 percent of U.S. oil imports.

In essence, Africa is becoming refrontiered, the next—but already charted—neocolonial play with subtle shades of humanitarianism and economic growth to make it look good. Make no mistake about it: There are real geopolitical intentions at work. Hunting down warlords and preventing Rwanda genocide redux is, of course, needed foreign policy common sense. But these are belt-tightening times for governments and their militaries (including ours). No one’s investing in Africa just to get good PR and a U.N. shout-out.

10 Comments on "Why the Sudden Rush Into Africa? It’s the Oil"

rockman on Mon, 14th Apr 2014 3:50 pm 



Wow! This is great. The US has figured out Africa might play a vital energy world in the future. Just a shame we didn’t see the potential before China and other foreign Big Oils began making the moves on Africa many years ago. Let’s see how the EIA views the US opportunity in the “virgin” continent:

“Africa boasts with a long list of oil producing countries. According to data from the EIA from 2010, 16 of the 54 countries in Africa are exporters of oil, namely Nigeria, Angola, Libya, Algeria, Sudan, South Sudan, Equatorial Guinea, Congo (Brazzaville), Gabon, Chad, Egypt, Tunisia, Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and Mauritania.
Africa’s oil history stretches over a period of several decades, in some places it is even a century old. Presently, there are about 500 oil companies that participate in African hydrocarbon exploration.”

All well and good that the US has been sending aid to Africa. At the same time a half thousand companies having been spending capex on African concessions. BTW: total African oil/NG concessions currently controlled by the US = zero.

noobtube on Mon, 14th Apr 2014 4:32 pm 



I wonder how many of these oil companies are owned by Africans.

Or, have the leeches and parasites descended on Africa after ruining their own lands?

J-Gav on Mon, 14th Apr 2014 4:36 pm 



Not only oil, though. Also land and a sh%@t-load of other un or under-developed resources …

Plantagenet on Mon, 14th Apr 2014 7:15 pm 



Whats the big deal?

They give us oil–we give them coca-cola and Wal-mart and cell phones.

Its win-win!

Northwest Resident on Mon, 14th Apr 2014 8:25 pm 



Has anybody here ever watched “Blood Diamond”? It is a GREAT movie, IMO, and one of my favorites. What about the scene where the two main characters are walking through a village that had just been raped and pillaged, bodies lying everywhere while grass huts burn, and they come across a survivor who says “thank God they haven’t found oil here yet.”

Africa is there for the plundering — that’s the way the financial wolf pack sees it. Slaves, diamonds, large game whose heads look great on trophy walls, ivory, oil — it is all there, just waiting to be taken. Untold wealth, extracted at the cost of untold misery for the residents of Africa — a minor consideration to those doing the taking.

And as goes Africa, so goes the rest of the world — just one big pile of resources waiting to be plundered, used up, devoured.

And that is sick…

penury on Mon, 14th Apr 2014 9:36 pm 



And just think this morning the White House admitted that the U.S. has been involved in combat in Africa for several years.

rockman on Mon, 14th Apr 2014 9:58 pm 



“I wonder how many of these oil companies are owned by Africans.” It’s an even better deal then owning the companies: they own the mineral rights. Based upon the revenue supplied by foreign oil companies the people of Equatorial Guinea are the richest per capita in Africa and some of the richest on the planet. Unfortunately most of the population lives in horrible poverty thanks to their homicidal dictator for life. The people would be far better off if Exxon controlled the country instead of an African.

noobtube on Mon, 14th Apr 2014 11:15 pm 



Corporations in charge are the solution?

Yeah, no one way that can end badly.

DC on Tue, 15th Apr 2014 2:40 am 



“The people would be far better off if Exxon controlled the country instead of an African.”

I am sure you’re right about that RM….

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Equatorial_Mobil%E2%84%A2

rockman on Tue, 15th Apr 2014 2:12 pm 



DC – And it’s not like the buyers of EG oil (50% US – 50% EU) don’t know the situation and have no trouble accepting it. Except for pieces in Amnesty International you can’t find much about the politics of the country. Especially any internal criticism: El Presidente amended the constitution a few years ago to allow him to execute anyone he chooses without even a make believe trial. His logic: since he’s in direct communication with God (very catholic country) then if God didn’t want them dead He would say so.
Granted Exxon doesn’t do anything to interfere with his rule but neither do the US and EU govts. We wouldn’t even have to fire a shot to take over: El Presidente doesn’t give his soldiers ammo…just machetes. But as long as the oil flows these govts are very accepting of the zero human right the people have.