How our incoming secretary of state helped to enrich Africa’s nastiest dictatorship

[TomSea]

How our incoming secretary of state helped to enrich Africa’s nastiest dictatorship
 By Tutu Alicante February 1

Tutu Alicante is executive director of EG Justice, a nonprofit that promotes human rights and democratic values in Equatorial Guinea.

Rex Tillerson’s confirmation hearing for secretary of state on Jan. 11 was — as anticipated — saturated with hard-hitting questions about climate change and his cozy relationship with Russia’s oligarchy. But several senators also raised incisive questions about ExxonMobil’s role in my homeland, Equatorial Guinea, noting that Tillerson’s company helped to sustain, enrich and embolden a dictator and the circle of family and sycophants who surround him. Tillerson feigned ignorance, danced around the questions, and even avoided mentioning the country by name.

“I have no direct knowledge of that,” Tillerson replied to a question from Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.). To Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), he claimed: “I’d have to review for my memory the circumstance you’re talking about.” Why would Tillerson dodge questions about a nation where, just two years ago, his company pompously celebrated its 1-billion-barrel-production threshold?

An inconvenient truth: Exxon enables kleptocracy in Equatorial Guinea.

In the 20 years after the 1991 oil discovery in Equatorial Guinea, the country’s GDP grew from $130 million to $2.3 billion. This sudden growth was singularly fueled by the petroleum industry, with ExxonMobil drilling in the largest proven oil reserve. Overnight, Equatorial Guinea went from a repressive, corrupt, poor and isolated nation to a filthy-rich — but still tyrannical and obscure — darling of the West. Today, Equatorial Guinea has the highest GDP per capita of any sub-Saharan country, yet nearly two-thirds of the population lives in extreme poverty. Spending on health, education and other social sectors remains below the Central Africa regional average. Infant mortality rates rival those of Afghanistan.

Continued: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2017/02/01/how-our-incoming-secretary-of-state-helped-to-enrich-africas-nastiest-dictatorship/?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.00b6343f98f7

[IsailedawayfromFR]

This is an editorial and needs to be placed under that category.

A very biased article that has a lot of problems with it.

Since its source is the Wash Post, that is to be expected.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

A very biased article that has a lot of problems with it.

What are your problems with it, exactly?

[Bigun]

This is an editorial and needs to be placed under that category.

A very biased article that has a lot of problems with it.

Since its source is the Wash Post, that is to be expected.

The Washington Compost is pissed because the big discovery of oil in Guinea greatly undermines Obama's favorite bus driver over in Venezuela!  They HATE that!
 

[IsailedawayfromFR]

What are your problems with it, exactly?

Oh, a few.

How about the line "saturated with hard-hitting questions about climate change and his cozy relationship with Russia’s oligarchy." in the first sentence?

Go back and read the transcript of the hearing for Hillary Clinton's nomination for SOS before the same committee http://www.cfr.org/elections/transcript-hillary-clintons-confirmation-hearing/p18225 and see if there was ever any talk about the "cozy relationship" between Clinton's foundation and any countries.  Gee, I wonder why?

Reading on, "incisive questions"?  What drivel.  Does anyone believe this is reporting or editorializing?

The entire premise of the article is that Exxon was just trying to get rich by making a dictator rich and intentionally not allowing the country's income from oil and gas get to the people of EG.  Does anyone but me see a problem here?  If you do business in EG, who do you pay if not the government of that country?   I worked for an international company in many different venues and we ensured we always paid the government power whether it was the Saudis, Gadhhafi, or the Russian Oligarchs.  Do you really have a choice?

Is Exxon the one responsible for kleptocracy?  I daresay that more countries on this earth have despicable rulers than not.  Does that mean no one should do business with them?

Once again the phraseology "I have no direct knowledge of that,”  Go back and read the many times that Hillary answered similarly.  Was that reported in similar manner?

How about "Why would Tillerson dodge questions about a nation where, just two years ago, his company pompously celebrated its 1-billion-barrel-production threshold?"

Good grief, is this real reporting or just placing a target onto someone's chest hoping the bullseye is seen by those who can shoot?

All of this is just in the first portion of the article.  It keeps going on.

My bottomline is that Exxon is a big company.  It does business in many many countries.  Singling out one company and attempting to show it is an enabler of corruption the way this author tries to do minimizes the reality of the world's way of transacting business around the world.

If we wish to just shut down our businesses with places like EG, does one think the people there will be better or worse off?

I know Exxon.  I worked awhile for them.  They are the quintessential US oil company in the world. I would trust them and their judgement well before other US companies that do international ventures, and sure as hell trust them more than Chinese, Middle Eastern or Russian companies in places like EG.
@Weird Tolkienish Figure

[The_Reader_David]

What are your problems with it, exactly?

Not sure what his problems with it are, but I would observe that "Africa's nastiest dictatorship" is surely a matter of opinion, rather than fact, given the parade of horribles one can produce from among Africa's dictators.

[geronl]

Not sure what his problems with it are, but I would observe that "Africa's nastiest dictatorship" is surely a matter of opinion, rather than fact, given the parade of horribles one can produce from among Africa's dictators.

True that. We should also point out that Tillerson was head of Exxon, which was one of the biggest lobbyists in DC, a few years ago it spent $18 million lobbying in a single year.

[XenaLee]

Not sure what his problems with it are, but I would observe that "Africa's nastiest dictatorship" is surely a matter of opinion, rather than fact, given the parade of horribles one can produce from among Africa's dictators.

Yeah....that would be some pretty stiff competition in that contest, wouldn't it. 

The article is BS, which is to be expected coming from the WaaaaPo.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

True that. We should also point out that Tillerson was head of Exxon, which was one of the biggest lobbyists in DC, a few years ago it spent $18 million lobbying in a single year.

Which means nothing.

The bigger the company, the larger the lobbying effort.

Want to see some real lobbying?  Try the lobbying amounts for the top ten in 2016.

BTW, Exxon did not even make the top ten or even 15.

US Chamber of Commerce                                        $103,950,000
National Assn of Realtors                                          $64,821,111
Blue Cross/Blue Shield                                          $25,006,109
American Hospital Assn                                          $20,970,809
Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America   $19,730,000
American Medical Assn                                           $19,410,000
Boeing Co                                                                   $17,020,000
National Assn of Broadcasters                                   $16,438,000
AT&T Inc                                                                   $16,370,000
Business Roundtable                                                   $15,700,000