The selectivity of the orange revolutions

It seems to be far in the history of the remaining colonial era when the world was divided between the metropolises in certain proportions. African the continent was under the protectorate of Portugal, France, Germany, Britain and some other European nations. For the Caribbean islands "keep an eye" of Spanish, French, English and a bit later — the Americans. Situation was in South America, where countries colonizers tried to grab for themselves territorial bigger pieces and "fatter".

The twentieth century began to fail as if the world's population to realize that the ideology of the slave-holding and colonial nature of the world can no longer be overriding political principles on the planet. Take a ride on the wheel of the world sovereignty, which in historical literature often referred to as "the parade." One by one, began to take independent African countries: Morocco — from France and Spain (1956), Nigeria — from England (1960), Mali — from France (1960), South Africa — from England (1961) Mozambique — from Portugal (1975). This list could go on for a very, very long time. In some cases, the same independence of African countries was heavily supported by China and the Russian Union, while supported not only on paper, and what is called, in the real and technical terms. In some places, the transition from colony to independence was virtually painless, and in some places the bloody strife can not calm down until the present time.

For example, gained its independence from the British Crown in 1960, the authorities were not able to use the new freedoms in Somalia. Even with the active support of the country's currency from the Soviet Union, the management Somalia managed to put it mildly, to quarrel with Moscow, allowing just a paranormal move — attacking in 1977 to the neighboring Ethiopia, which in those years was also a similar rate of new African socialism. In the end, the fact that the Somali government has to control the sudden Russian opponent assistance from the Soviet Union ended, which led to the beginning of large-scale civilian war that has been heated to the same frequent droughts that led to bolshennomu hunger. Hitherto Somalia can not return to a state of peace, and for the moment, in fact the case, even the very existence of such countries can be put under the swing, as on its territory as a result of incessant strife there have been several conflicting parts: Puntland, Somaliland, Dzhubalend, Galmudug, Azania and a number of others that are controlled, in fact, the Islamist groups.

Afield Somalia there are rich deposits of minerals, development of which now lack the ability to deal with. There have been explored significant supplies of uranium ore, titanium, iron, thorium and other metals. The IMF estimates that these provisions could be engine Somali economy and bring the country's GDP per capita which is the least $ 100 a year (if then generally it makes sense to read about this concept as GDP) for leading position in the region. Now the country's reigning anarchy and famine, and polulegitimnye favorites, which, by the way, have a dual Somali-American and Somali-British citizenship (nationality) obviously can not take the country out of this impasse.

And after all that surprisingly, it's to do with the strife-torn inside Somalia, speak out so that the public, which is now so concerned about the democratic neuvvyazkami in Syria, Belarus and Russia. Silent excessively democratic media, which for some reason perish in one metropolitan detention center care in the hundreds of times more than the millions of deaths from starvation and Islamist killings in several African countries. Oh yeah … forgot, Somalia is at the moment a triumph of democracy, because the power is planted naidemokratichneyshy Abdiveli Muhammad Ali, which graduated from Harvard. But the West did basically what this policy sends a bureaucrat, and what is the financial situation in the country — the main thing that was sitting on the highest post of "my people." Because the West's position in relation to many African states about this: while it may knock on our economic status? No? Means everything is on the right democratic way … In general, the position by today's standards is very pragmatic.

Except Somalia in modern Africa and many other countries, which are now clearly do not know what to do with their own independence. Having sovereignty in 1980, continues to slip into complete poverty Zimbabwe. And as if all this is the country in order to reincarnate his life people completely for yourself prosperous: deposits of diamonds, copper, bauxite, emeralds, gold, rare earth metals, beautiful land that could become real African tourist centers and bring in large revenues to the treasury. But the whole problem of the fact that country is one of the lowest levels of income per capita, according to IMF estimates the average annual GDP per capita is about $ 170. State controls a quarter of a century, President Robert Mugabe which once finished the English Institute. And it is even (oh nightmare!) Mugabe once allowed himself to avoid unflattering expressions in the address control of the United States of America, but it is striking that the State Department is not in any way concerned about any democratic state in this country, nor any of its Straseni underdevelopment.

You can continue to keep a list of countries in which, quite frankly, with the observance of democratic norms heavy, with mineral-rich, and the West somehow it skips past him. Neuzh there, in white-washed cabinets Washington broke vaunted democratization of the planetary gear. Just this mechanism extends to those areas that may, one way or another, hurt narrow cardboard substance entitled buck. Well, if by "democratization" buck neither hot nor cold, and such gentlemen as Mugabe can even sit still half a century without fear get nasty orange …

Like this post? Please share to your friends: