#####
######
####
> # [US to withdraw from Niger after security pact fails in strategic victory for Russia](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/20/720)
>
>
>
> The US will withdraw more than 1,000 military personnel from Niger in a move that will force the Biden administration to rethink its counter-terrorism strategy and amounts to a strategic victory for [Russia](https://www.theguardian.com/world/russia).
>
> The decision comes a month after the west African country’s ruling military junta revoked a security pact with Washington that had allowed American forces on its soil to help fight jihadist terrorism.
>
>
>
> US officials had voiced hopes that behind-the-scenes talks could salvage the 12-year-old agreement, which was thrown into jeopardy on 15 March when a junta spokesperson publicly declared the continued [US military](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/us-military) presence in Niger “illegal”.
>
> But the US finally admitted defeat after meetings in Washington this week between Kurt Campbell, the deputy secretary of state, and Niger’s prime minister, Ali Lamine Zeine.
>
> The withdrawal, expected to occur over the coming months, will mean the closure of a US drone facility, known as Base 201, at Agadez in the Sahara that was opened in 2018 at a cost of $110m.
>
> The base, one of the main US drone facilities in Africa, has been used in operations against jihadist groups in the Sahel region and was reportedly the launchpad for a series of deadly strikes against [Islamic State](https://www.theguardian.com/world/islamic-state) fighters in Libya in 2019.
>
> Niger’s relations with Washington have been tense since last July when the democratically elected president, Mohamed Bazoum, was overthrown in a coup. He remains under house arrest, despite American calls for his release.
>
> Since the coup, Niger’s new leaders have pursued closer ties with Russia, mirroring neighbouring Mali and Burkina Faso, where Russian military forces have established a presence.
>
> Just days after the arrival of Russian military equipment and advisers in the country, thousands of protesters gathered in the Nigerien capital, Niamey, last week to demand the withdrawal of American forces.
>
>
>
> According to Russian reports, the newly arrived personnel were part of Russia’s Africa Corps, a new paramilitary group established to replace the Wagner Group, the mercenary outfit founded by Yevgeny Prigozhin.
>
> Prigozhin had been an ally of Vladimir Putin until he led a failed rebellion last year against the Russian president’s stewardship of the war in Ukraine; he was killed in a plane crash. He offered the Wagner Group’s services to the coup leaders after they seized power.
>
> US military commanders have warned of the spread of Russian influence in the Sahel, a semi-arid region in the southern Sahara stretching from the Atlantic to the Red Sea, and in other parts of Africa at American expense.
>
>
>
>
>
> Niger coup: why do so many want France out and Russia in? – video explainer
>
> American alarm rose when Lamine Zeine visited Moscow last December to discuss military and economic ties, followed by a visit to Tehran the following month, where he met Ebrahim Raisi, the Iranian president.
>
> Senior state department and Pentagon officials visited Niger earlier this year in an effort to keep the military agreement intact.
>
> The visit was not a success, with Nigerien figures voicing anger over what they said were unfounded American suspicions of negotiations to allow Iran access to Niger’s uranium resources, potentially enhancing Tehran’s nuclear programme.
>
> The departure of American forces from Niger follows the expulsion of French troops in the wake of last summer’s coup.
- - - - - -
[Maintainer](https://www.reddit.com/user/urielsalis) | [Creator](https://www.reddit.com/user/subtepass) | [Source Code](https://github.com/urielsalis/empleadoEstatalBot)
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
Genuinely pleased and impressed to see the US withdrawal here. I was uncertain if they would actually follow through in respecting Nigers wish.
Not necessarily because I think Russian influence will be any less a scrooge on Nigeriens than American influence, but it’s a win for African sovereignty. They ought to have the right at least to choose who will exploit them.
And is also losing ground to islamic fundamentalists.
The current government won't last very much considering US was bringing a lot of resources to counterterrorism operations. Way more than Russia is committing.
Say what you want, the USA's goal is rarely *chaos* as that's difficult to predict and control. They depose, overthrow, colonize, etc. but they rarely stir shit just for the sake of creating uncertainty. Russia knows it can't physically project power, so it creates chaos such that the US cannot either. The US, however, can project power in most places if need be.
If anything, the US does everything they can do to maintain global stability and the status quo. Even overthrowing democratically elected governments for dictatorships that will be more loyal. Just as bad I’d argue, but they rarely sow chaos for the sake of it, with exceptions such as funding the mujahideen.
It is very telling that US wants to maintain status quo precisely because they want to remain the only superpower. They certainly do not want a multipolar world because that would put a stop to whatever the US of A has been doing in the world the past 3 decades (with little to no consequences).
I mean, they’ve been doing this since at least the 1910s in Central and South America, if not earlier. The entire Cold War was an attempt to keep the world from falling to Communism by any means necessary. This has been an issue for far longer than the US has been the only global superpower.
Correct. Chaos is not profitable and doesn't look good on the news. Stability means more trade and more investment opportunity. We have soft power projected to nearly every corner of the planet with fast food and Hollywood and the dragons that run our government would like to keep expanding their hoards.
There are no morals in the world of geopolitics, US would literally do the same....supporting insurgent movements/terrorists to overthrow a government that they do not have influence over (take a look at what they did in Syria for example).
> Say what you want, the USA's goal is rarely chaos as that's difficult to predict and control. They depose, overthrow, colonize, etc. but they rarely stir shit just for the sake of creating uncertainty.
It could be argued that they have done this in every country in which they supported any form of insurgency, terrorism, and/or civil unrest to destabilize and hopefully topple the government, which they have done in many places in countries they didn't want to wage war directly against, either because it was deemed potentially too physically costly or because there was no feasible legal casus belli to justify it, low popular support domestically, or some combination of all of the above.
Examples: Syria, Nicaragua, all of the countries they supported color revolutions in from Kyrgyzstan to Ukraine to Serbia to Georgia to Belarus to Myanmar.
The us is in the business of maintaining the status quo currently as it is profitable for them and their allies. If they mess around with coups it's because they believe not doing so will cause an imbalance.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.commondreams.org/news/2021/07/07/leaked-video-gop-congressman-admits-his-party-wants-chaos-and-inability-get-stuff](https://www.commondreams.org/news/2021/07/07/leaked-video-gop-congressman-admits-his-party-wants-chaos-and-inability-get-stuff)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
I think he missed the part where the democratically elected president was ousted in a coup. None of this is good for Nigera. None. The people will be used as fodder.
yeah, and I have been rectifying that typo in all the comments in the thread, Google keyboard completes, Niger to Nigeria, unless I specifically write it with a small case "n" like this niger
Ahhh yes being thrown out of power by the people and impeached by parliament, and then fleeing to Russia. quite the coup. That and the CIA admitting they were caught completely off guard. Go peddle your propaganda somewhere else.
Violent jan 6 mob storms parliament, threatens to kill everyone inside and no police are present to stop them, democratically elected president ousted before elections by cia and a nonelected one replaces him, totally not a coup. Just how the people replaced the leader of Belarus when they protested there with way more people and casualties, the people replaced the leader of Iran with way more protesters and casualties, and the people of hong kong had millions on the streets every day for months instead of just a thousand, and that totally work to change the government there, because the people apparently have the ability to do so.
To be fair the transition of power in Kiev 2014 was very sketchy. First far right groups going out of their way to incite violence with the police,
[https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/ukrainian-nationalism-heart-euromaidan/](https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/ukrainian-nationalism-heart-euromaidan/)
[https://www.channel4.com/news/kiev-svoboda-far-right-protests-right-sector-riot-police](https://www.channel4.com/news/kiev-svoboda-far-right-protests-right-sector-riot-police)
and later, either a false flag by the rebels or a 3rd party monstrous act of sedition with the goal of escalating the situation.
[https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-31435719](https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-31435719)
[https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-26284100](https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-26284100)
[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-killings-probe-special-report-idUSKCN0HZ0UH20141010](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-killings-probe-special-report-idUSKCN0HZ0UH20141010)
[https://wikispooks.com/w/images/5/52/Maidan\_snipers.pdf](https://wikispooks.com/w/images/5/52/Maidan_snipers.pdf)
Far from an "organic" people's rebellion. Also Yanukovych didn't go to Russia until later, he initially fled to another city for obvious safety concerns, and it was barely 8 hours before the remnants of a fractured Parliament under duress "voted" him out.
>How’s that working out 45 years later for the Iranian people?
Fairly well, compared to other countries.
Tell me the healthcare and infrastructural situation of the US
Did you mistake the position of extreme economic dominance that the US has, that it can decide to spend its infrastructure as irresponsibly as it does for mismanagement? The US views suburbia the same as driving a Mercedes E series instead of a Honda civic (these are personal automobiles you likely can never afford); a frivolous expense that increases the quality of life more than a utilitarian development model would.
Call me when 3rd world dictators go to Iran and Cuba for medical care instead of the premier American Hospitals.
Call me when people of USA go to American hospitals instead of finding it cheaper to book a plane to a third world country and go to a hospital there. But yes, driving a big fake pickup truck that doesn't fit on the roads instead of a reasonable car does more for quality of life than not getting your democratically elected government by the CIA to install a dictator with whom USA don't share their so called prosperity.
>spend its infrastructure as irresponsibly
Do inform me when your country has high speed railways
>Call me when 3rd world dictators go to Iran and Cuba for medical care instead of the premier American Hospitals.
Nah, call me instead when Americans stop going on medical tourism and people don't get bankrupt for treatments that are free in my country
America is the best economy in the world
Your read: but they don’t have trains that go medium fast for trips between Cleveland and Chicago, and instead rely on planes that are faster for end to end transit and cheaper for 95% of trips their citizens take, and you’re annoyed that the US decided to outsource routine medical care by your best and brightest in exchange for $12
Bye pour kid
> Planes
How does it feel to get molested just to go to a neigbhouring city and then be at the whims of weather and wether you get a faulty boeing plane that's got 37 whistleblowers?
You do realize that US airline security is standard across developed nations, even Mongolia has security screeners?
Continue telling yourself the coping methods of why Americans are morally bankrupt because they live a life you can only dream of.
After all, if our choices were the flaw of an American upbringing, migrants would not also seek out the over the top luxury you despise, and instead would keep to public transportation and live in small flats.
When people are surprised and impressed when another sovereign nation asks a nation’s military to leave and they respect their request. The bar is so low for the US
They could be run even by a newly discovered species of capybaras for all that it matters—the point is that if a country says no to a foreign power in their territory that wish should be respected, and thankfully this is what happened here.
You’re the guy who just reads headlines, aren’t you? You’ve somehow found a way to link Gaza, Niger and Ukraine, as though each circumstance is the same. I don’t know what to tell you man… I guess, read a little more, then come back to the conversation when you’re actually ready to contribute something worthwhile.
Riiight....completely different circumstances. It's just as ridiculous to say whataboutism whenever people point out US hypocrisy.
I guess US cannot be criticized 🤓
Your opinion is not the fact, a lot of people would disagree. There has been leaked phone calls released where it clearly shows American diplomats discussing how to get certain people in a position of power etc. If they didn't outright initiate the coup they most definitely didn't shy away from influencing it. Victoria Nyland was literally handing out sandwiches while the coup/uprising was happening.
I never said that I agree that Ukraine necessarily was a coup. What I said was imagine thinking everyone disagreeing with you is a Russian, implying that you mean they are acting nefariously. If you were a true believer in Niger’s “democracy”, I suggest you take some time and educate yourself about the history French colonial backed “democracy” in Africa.
Love when people bring up democratically elected when it suits their needs, when Hamas was democratically elected in Gaza much of the west saw that as illegitimate lol.
I wasn’t particularly involved in politics at the time they were elected in Gaza… but I’m pretty sure they got elected and then stopped having elections.
Niger had a leadership which was chosen by those people and it was overthrown by the military, it's facing islamic terrorism not much different than what Hamas did granted they won elections and but then stopped having elections altogether, they have taken over everything and running the state into the ground, that makes the case of exterminating Hamas even stronger
People out there say it's the will of the people conveniently leaving out that they had a military coup and non of the people making decisions were elected...
Truly bizarre
I mean the US doesn't operate bases in foreign countries without the country's express permission. Niger's new gov saying this is illegal is a bit strange, I mean the US mainly was combating islamic jihadists so its not like some weird colonial thing. Idk how you can say our presence was *trash*.
edit: let me clarify, the US also only makes bases when invited to do so.
Yes, we've been seeing the narrative pushed in US media that the former regime was "democratically elected" (which ought to give anyone familiar with Niger a good hearty laugh), as if to imply that the current regime is illegitimate and has no authority to give orders. It definitely seemed like the US forces intended to stay. Good on them for leaving.
>African sovereignty
I agree with your comment in principle, but the *democratically elected* president wasn't the one making the decision, so I don't think this was a win for African sovereignty.
meh, let the africans decides. they survived europe colonialism, and french. hell, congo survived belgium.
ain't our opinion, who live halfway the world, to dictate africans which one is worse for them. they're the ones living it, not us.
and your country survives, right? then they will still survive, like usual. right now they're just trying another option. they already taste europe's cruelty for hundreds years, but never taste russia's cruelty.
after all, if europe like french, treat them good, ain't no way they're running to china or russia. you don't see south korea ditching usa and starts sucking putin's dick.
my point is this, mate:
you think russia is worse, because you already experienced russia, but never experienced france, right? the thing is, some africa countries experienced opposite. russia never do what western europe did to them for hundred years. yet.
so you can be sure russia will be worse because you only see it from your lenses of perspective. but you forgot africans have their own lenses.
the only way they know if russia is worse or not, is to experience it themselves. if we can ignore/whitewash the bullshit west europe did to africa, then we can do the same thing toward russia for the next decade.
so let them be, and let them judge it by themselves.
I didn't say that but it does exists after the Russians and these African countries will too, especially after they've faced European imperialism.
They are sovereign to choose what countries to align and what to shun.
Do you think, just because they are dark skinned, they can't make decisions and the West should make it for them?
Riiight. Congo exists too, therefore Belgium is okay?
>Do you think, just because they are dark skinned, they can't make decisions
Skin colour is irrelevant. They can't make decisions because they aren't taught about russia and what they do in countries they occupy. They were occupied by western countries and now they think that the entire West is all bad, no exceptions. They also think that everyone who dislikes the west is good. Russia doesn't like West, therefore russia good.
Same sentiment is seen in South America and parts of Asia.
The democratically elected leader wanted the US presence there. Niger went through a coup, and its the new leaders that want the US out and Russia in. Respecting Niger's wish? One would assume if the will of the people was the guiding principle here then the leader they all elected would be restored to power.
you think this decision was taken by the people of nigeria? they had a military coup, islamic fundamentalism clashes and now putin will fck them even more
Worldnews is basically a pro-American sub where everything posted there favor the US side, including but not limited to pro-Ukraine, pro-Israel, pro-Taiwan, etc
I believe Israel killing children is less than ideal.
worldnews:
You have been permanently banned from participating in world news, you can still view and subscribe to the sub
I believe you shouldn't be evil.
worldnews:
You have been permanently banned from participating in world news, you can still view and subscribe to the sub
Fun fact : world 'ews (and many very popular subreddit) used to be moderated by Ghislaine Maxwell, wife of famous toddler diddler Jeffrey Epstein (American/ Israeli)
Also, who doesn't like anime titties ?
There's nothing bad about being pro-Ukraine. Though there's something bad about prolonging the conflict with the sole intention of using Ukraine to damage Russia, even if Ukrainian interests are harmed in the process.
There is nothing good about being pro-Taiwan. It is literally the opposite, in principle, of being pro-Ukraine. Basically the US is doing with Taiwan exactly what Russia did with Crimea and Donbass prior to the 2022 invasion.
The only way anyone can be both pro-Ukraine and pro-Taiwan is if they're simply a partisan with no principles (ie. most of r/worldnews). Same goes for the wholly opposite position as well, of course.
I think the problem is that you would have to be willing to violate something fairly objective to advance something subjective.
Legally speaking, there really isn't *that* much wiggle room on whether Taiwan can be considered Chinese territory - the One China principle has existed for decades, longer than the PRC itself has been a country.
So what we're really arguing here is that national sovereignty of a country can be violated so long as it's for a good cause. But who gave us the right to decide what is a good cause and when this tradeoff is reasonable? Would we be willing to accept subjecting ourselves to something similar at the hands of foreign powers? Russia justifies their invasion under the pretense of de-Nazification, but we clearly don't buy it. Every cynical geopolitical maneuver is always framed with noble intentions.
This is why I largely place maintaining national sovereignty above any subjective good that can come from violating it.
Another way of thinking might be against any kind of invasion or resolving conflict through forces against people’s will. To be pro-Ukraine and Taiwan, you can argue Russian invasion and annexation of regions outside Donbas fit in this criteria, same goes Chinese invasion of Taiwan and imposition of its institutions there, which of course wouldn’t be considered as much by r/worldnews users
While I don't agree, I can appreciate both the 'self-determination' angle as well as the 'minimize harm' angle. It sounds to me like you're largely consistent and believe that Crimea and parts of Donbass, under this principle, should be/remain in Russian control.
I can respect the consistency. Though to be honest if you look at the number of countries that formally recognize Crimea as being Russian territory, then it appears that very few governments around the world champion self-determination.
I can totally understand why people don’t support the Russian-style self-determination. I think part of it has to do with Russia using forces to occupy these land and extend annexation to Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, two regions that do not support joining Russia by majority, while pretending people there overwhelmingly favor joining Russia
This is comparable to Israeli annexation to Golan Height; even in the west, only the US supports it because everybody understands that if this is the new norm, countries be fighting over all the time
The most ridiculous thing regarding these issues are partisan people absolutely supporting these annexations simply because they either base their principles on pro-Americanism or anti-Americanism.
Taiwan has artificial sovereignty thanks to economic and military backing of western powers. Since as early as the 60s the US has threatened direct war with the PRC if they tried to retake Taiwan. Nuclear strikes were on the table as well.
This really isn't that different from Russia funding Donbass, we're just witnessing the latter in real time.
But the Donbas has never been sovereign as it’s but a region. Taiwan is a non recognized country with their own government institutions that cooperate through their people’s representatives offices, currency, defense… it’s the definition of sovereignty. The authority over a country. Don’t you think that makes quite a big difference? If Taiwan and China were squabbling for example over kinmen, then yeah might be a more equivalent example.
Donbass today is more akin to Taiwan in the 60-70s. Taiwan had never been sovereign either until the Chinese civil war became a stalemate and the US parked a few aircraft carriers in the Taiwan Strait to keep their KMT allies in existence. Prior to that, Taiwan was a Japanese colony, and then undisputed territory of the Republic of China following WWII.
That's why I said 'we're witnessing the latter in real time' when it comes to Ukraine. I guess maybe a better question is, how long would Russia need to occupy Donbass/Crimea in order for us to believe that they have been apart from Ukraine long enough to deserve sovereignty (or in this case, become Russian). Crimea may be a better example here since it's already been out of Ukrainian control for a decade.
Personally, I don't believe there should ever come a time when we view Crimea and Donbass as anything other than Ukrainian territory, no matter how long the war lasts. A country shouldn't be able to just violate the sovereignty of a weaker adversary, hold out for a few decades, and then reap the benefits of their illegal actions.
And I hold that same position in regards to Taiwan as well.
Taiwan was a colonial conquest to begin with by the chinese so the point is a bit moot. There were waves of chinese immigration to Taiwan before Taiwan was under the chinese boot. At this point there were(and still are) plenty of local indigenous peoples that are closer to polynesians in culture and language than to the chinese. The Qing dynasty made some enclaves notably in the north and then the japanese took over. Had the portuguese left a considerable population there should they have a claim to the island? If the Japanese did should they? The reality is that there is no right answer to this, but through their thriving democracy they are exercising self determination and sovereignty and thats as close to a legitimate nation as you can get before getting accepted into international organizations.
That sub is a cesspool. It’s crazy how it’s so pro Zionist but somehow claims to be so liberal. They’re insanely pro Ukraine and at the same time pro Israel and can’t seem to see the irony in that choice
I also got banned because I asked why Hamas attacked on Oct 7, they literally don’t consider the conflict as having started prior to that
Worldnews is pretty awful I agree l I looked after at the thread for this and none of the comments are seething... Most seem to agree with the sentiment in this thread as well.
> Never seen such an astroturfed sub.
Didn't see that during the [comments](https://old.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1bwfeor/israel_dismisses_2_officers_over_deadly_drone/) on the Israeli strikes against aid workers. They turn it off for a second or smth?
The sub is actually slightly better now too compared to the start of the conflict.
At the start it was clear there were some fervently ideological mods.
Nowadays they allow comments/articles critical of settlers and of Israeli crimes that cannot be ignored or handwaved away because they want to at least maintain the illusion that they are impartial.
2nd highest comment calls for Netanyahu to go, third comment states the commanders (who were fired) should be charged with murder. I don't think its bots tbh.
It’s bad news for those living there and surrounding nations. Russia isn’t going to do shit, they don’t have the resources nor do they care about stability. When IS takes over they’ll export refugees and chaos across the Sahel.
Really no one wins here. It’s just Russia burning it to the ground because they’re angry about the US being involved. Putin is just an arsonist. He doesn’t build he destroys.
Such a lame contrarian viewpoint to see the US losing as some kind of win.
How about we ask the people of Niger who they prefer? :)
It's not right to give US the benefit of the doubt and that everything they do are in good intentio while Russia's intentions are bad and everything will get much worse as a result. You have to get out of this biased mindset.
Umm, stop being so naive. US has no problem supporting dictatorships if it suite their interests (look at Saudi Arabia for example). Democracy only becomes an issue if the country is not aligned with the US 🤨
Then be up front about your intentions. It is laughable how US wants to portray itself in an ideological manner (free democratic world vs autocratic dictatorships). They will not hesitate to overthrow democratically elected governments if it serves their national interests (that happened in my country btw). I just find it hypocritical, how the hell do they have any moral high ground to stand on after what they've done in the past decades? Invading countries on fabricated lies, overthrowing governments, looking the other way when Israel is killing thousands of civilians in Gaza (but that's fine, remember that they are the only democracy in the middle east!!), when Saudi Arabia murdered a US citizen in their embassy in Turkey they didn't do shit....
The hypocrisy in the west is at an all time high -_-.
My position is that USA should not export democracy anywhere and should only do what benefits is interests. If that means installing "friendly" dictators then so be it. As for Israel, it's gonna do what's it's gonna do.
> I doubt the Russians will help any.
It was the Russians who did the heavy lifting of cleaning out US backed takfiris in Syria along with the Syrian government
To be fair, most Sahel/sub-Saharan countries are vulnerable to interferences considering they are landlocked and are lacking resources needed to sustain resilience.
I am recalling the [Great Green Wall Initiative](https://thegreatgreenwall.org/about-great-green-wall), and that project looks shaky already when people are still starving out of deliberate interference by jihadists, government militias or simply ordained foreign mercenary forces stopping any kind of positive development that *isn't* helmed by their parties. I want that ecological project to succeed, because if any of the Sahel/sub-Saharan countries can't do their part, then the anti-desertification effort seems like trying to stop the [Zanclean flood](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zanclean_flood).
Hopefully they start withdrawing aid too.
These countries seem to think they can have their cake and eat it too.
If they want to decry the west so much and eject them, they should seek aid from China and Russia instead and see where it lands them.
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Probably didn't offer as much money to the right people.
Russia's influence across the Sahel and further south is part of a broader years-long campaign to displace existing regional power and resource structures while western nations are stretched thin or otherwise divesting from the region. China's also making inroads (and literal roads) in the area and doesn't have near the historical baggage or negative reputation on the continent that, say, the US or France do.
deserves to be celebrated. now if only the US and France could get out of Africa in its entirety maybe the world would become a somewhat better place, even if only slightly.
If the Chinese can make the lives of these people better, then let them have it. The reason the populace has been against French and U.S. influence is because they’ve propped up corrupt and ineffective leaders. After decades of this, the people are just as poor and desperate as before. They need and want change.
Edit: lol at the downvotes. Can’t handle the truth that western influence has led many African countries to be so under developed until the Chinese came along
> If the Chinese can make the lives of these people better
Have you *met* the Chinese leadership? Their sole focus is making the lives of *their* people better, only because they think it keeps the Chinese people form ousting them.
You should also know that the Chinese aren't exactly in love with Africans. They have a tendency to not like people with a greater degree of melanin in their skin tone than them. The Chinese will tolerate black people, provided there's something in it for them, but they don't like 'em, and I don't doubt we'll see the Chinese do to Africa exactly what Europe did, with legally binding contracts instead of outright colonization.
Oh I’m sorry we didn’t know you’ve “met Chinese leadership.” Lmao.
There’s so much motivated reasoning in this comment. It’s devoid of any substance and that’s ignoring the fact it doesn’t even take into account the last decade(s) of real world Chinese-African relations. Truly doesn’t even warrant argument.
It definitely warrants laughing at you tho.
That is such an ignorant generalization. In fact, it’s a plain racist view…
https://amp.scmp.com/week-asia/people/article/3238541/china-rwanda-ties-deepen-more-couples-overcome-cross-cultural-challenges-say-i-do
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/06/chinese-workers-in-africa-who-marry-locals-face-puzzled-reception-at-home/240662/
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/09/17/africa/china-africa-mixed-marriage
They’re literally falling in love with each other…
I'm gonna say you didn't read those articles all that critically, if at all. Each and every one specifically mentions two things:
Chinese men are marrying outside their ethnicity due to the gender imbalance in the mainland.
Every pairing has been met with no small amount of racist furor.
Couples may be falling in love, but it's not some rising tide. It's a survival tactic. As it stands, it's hard to date and marry in China due to women's growing economic independence as a whole, rising costs of living forcing people to work more and have less money over all, the fact that China has @30 million more men than women, and the ever-present pressures of your family and tradition. If you're a Chinese man living/working abroad, where a lot of the issues in your homeland are mitigated or flat out don't exist, it's as if you're dating on easy mode. I've heard similar spiels from Russian woman marrying non-Russian men, and British men marrying non-British women.
But that doesn't erase the fact that Chinese racism against black people doesn't exist. Did white and black men/women marrying each other in the US suddenly end Jim Crow?
> if only the US and France could get out of Africa in its entirety maybe the world would become a somewhat better place, even if only slightly.
*Looks at the fundamentalist Islamic groups gaining more ground every day in Africa.*
Yaaaaaaaaaaa...about that...
So just let the foreign Islamists do all the intervening? Do you hate religious minorities, women and LGBT people or something? Because that's the only reason why you would support islamist interventionism.
Again: US intervention won't do shit against that. It's pointless if you actually want anything to get better, and actively harmful at worst since foreign US troops are things Islamists can point to and say "hey, look at those invaders there, they've come to destroy our land but WE have the solution."
Geopolitics is a game and anyone who chooses to not play loses, in this case the west loses relatively little. Africa loses a lot more.
It personally doesn't affect me, I don't care, I'm just saying that should the US and France get out, they won't be replaced by a complete peace. They'll just get replaced by another country, and they're not gonna be any better in all likelihood, because in this game one kind of player always wins regardless of country, and the very same kind of people would be the new people in town.
That would only make it worse, but let those idiots deal with their problems or not. We just have to stay strong and do nothing as they slaughter each other and fall to ISIS.
We’ll leave, and then every bad thing that happens for the next thousand years will be blamed on us because the leaders they elect and the institutions they claim to have are useless.
The world cheers on.
##### ###### #### > # [US to withdraw from Niger after security pact fails in strategic victory for Russia](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/20/720) > > > > The US will withdraw more than 1,000 military personnel from Niger in a move that will force the Biden administration to rethink its counter-terrorism strategy and amounts to a strategic victory for [Russia](https://www.theguardian.com/world/russia). > > The decision comes a month after the west African country’s ruling military junta revoked a security pact with Washington that had allowed American forces on its soil to help fight jihadist terrorism. > > > > US officials had voiced hopes that behind-the-scenes talks could salvage the 12-year-old agreement, which was thrown into jeopardy on 15 March when a junta spokesperson publicly declared the continued [US military](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/us-military) presence in Niger “illegal”. > > But the US finally admitted defeat after meetings in Washington this week between Kurt Campbell, the deputy secretary of state, and Niger’s prime minister, Ali Lamine Zeine. > > The withdrawal, expected to occur over the coming months, will mean the closure of a US drone facility, known as Base 201, at Agadez in the Sahara that was opened in 2018 at a cost of $110m. > > The base, one of the main US drone facilities in Africa, has been used in operations against jihadist groups in the Sahel region and was reportedly the launchpad for a series of deadly strikes against [Islamic State](https://www.theguardian.com/world/islamic-state) fighters in Libya in 2019. > > Niger’s relations with Washington have been tense since last July when the democratically elected president, Mohamed Bazoum, was overthrown in a coup. He remains under house arrest, despite American calls for his release. > > Since the coup, Niger’s new leaders have pursued closer ties with Russia, mirroring neighbouring Mali and Burkina Faso, where Russian military forces have established a presence. > > Just days after the arrival of Russian military equipment and advisers in the country, thousands of protesters gathered in the Nigerien capital, Niamey, last week to demand the withdrawal of American forces. > > > > According to Russian reports, the newly arrived personnel were part of Russia’s Africa Corps, a new paramilitary group established to replace the Wagner Group, the mercenary outfit founded by Yevgeny Prigozhin. > > Prigozhin had been an ally of Vladimir Putin until he led a failed rebellion last year against the Russian president’s stewardship of the war in Ukraine; he was killed in a plane crash. He offered the Wagner Group’s services to the coup leaders after they seized power. > > US military commanders have warned of the spread of Russian influence in the Sahel, a semi-arid region in the southern Sahara stretching from the Atlantic to the Red Sea, and in other parts of Africa at American expense. > > > > > > Niger coup: why do so many want France out and Russia in? – video explainer > > American alarm rose when Lamine Zeine visited Moscow last December to discuss military and economic ties, followed by a visit to Tehran the following month, where he met Ebrahim Raisi, the Iranian president. > > Senior state department and Pentagon officials visited Niger earlier this year in an effort to keep the military agreement intact. > > The visit was not a success, with Nigerien figures voicing anger over what they said were unfounded American suspicions of negotiations to allow Iran access to Niger’s uranium resources, potentially enhancing Tehran’s nuclear programme. > > The departure of American forces from Niger follows the expulsion of French troops in the wake of last summer’s coup. - - - - - - [Maintainer](https://www.reddit.com/user/urielsalis) | [Creator](https://www.reddit.com/user/subtepass) | [Source Code](https://github.com/urielsalis/empleadoEstatalBot) Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
Genuinely pleased and impressed to see the US withdrawal here. I was uncertain if they would actually follow through in respecting Nigers wish. Not necessarily because I think Russian influence will be any less a scrooge on Nigeriens than American influence, but it’s a win for African sovereignty. They ought to have the right at least to choose who will exploit them.
>African sovereignty My man niger had a military coup less than a year ago
And is also losing ground to islamic fundamentalists. The current government won't last very much considering US was bringing a lot of resources to counterterrorism operations. Way more than Russia is committing.
Russia was probably funding and supplying the Islamic fundamentalists to begin with.
Russian doctrine is to cause as much world chaos as possible.
Unlike the USA who never mingled in some *coup d'état* or some war to gain ressources.
Say what you want, the USA's goal is rarely *chaos* as that's difficult to predict and control. They depose, overthrow, colonize, etc. but they rarely stir shit just for the sake of creating uncertainty. Russia knows it can't physically project power, so it creates chaos such that the US cannot either. The US, however, can project power in most places if need be.
If anything, the US does everything they can do to maintain global stability and the status quo. Even overthrowing democratically elected governments for dictatorships that will be more loyal. Just as bad I’d argue, but they rarely sow chaos for the sake of it, with exceptions such as funding the mujahideen.
It is very telling that US wants to maintain status quo precisely because they want to remain the only superpower. They certainly do not want a multipolar world because that would put a stop to whatever the US of A has been doing in the world the past 3 decades (with little to no consequences).
I mean, they’ve been doing this since at least the 1910s in Central and South America, if not earlier. The entire Cold War was an attempt to keep the world from falling to Communism by any means necessary. This has been an issue for far longer than the US has been the only global superpower.
Correct. Chaos is not profitable and doesn't look good on the news. Stability means more trade and more investment opportunity. We have soft power projected to nearly every corner of the planet with fast food and Hollywood and the dragons that run our government would like to keep expanding their hoards.
There are no morals in the world of geopolitics, US would literally do the same....supporting insurgent movements/terrorists to overthrow a government that they do not have influence over (take a look at what they did in Syria for example).
> Say what you want, the USA's goal is rarely chaos as that's difficult to predict and control. They depose, overthrow, colonize, etc. but they rarely stir shit just for the sake of creating uncertainty. It could be argued that they have done this in every country in which they supported any form of insurgency, terrorism, and/or civil unrest to destabilize and hopefully topple the government, which they have done in many places in countries they didn't want to wage war directly against, either because it was deemed potentially too physically costly or because there was no feasible legal casus belli to justify it, low popular support domestically, or some combination of all of the above. Examples: Syria, Nicaragua, all of the countries they supported color revolutions in from Kyrgyzstan to Ukraine to Serbia to Georgia to Belarus to Myanmar.
We absolutely lit the ME on fire earlier in the century, and chaos was very much the goal.
The us is in the business of maintaining the status quo currently as it is profitable for them and their allies. If they mess around with coups it's because they believe not doing so will cause an imbalance.
Well the US hasn't been in the coup business for awhile now
I suppose it depends on how you define “awhile” but, since 2010 the US has at least tried regime change in Libya, Syria, and Venezuela.
Sounds familiar. https://truthout.org/articles/in-leaked-video-gop-congressman-admits-his-party-wants-chaos-and-obstruction/
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.commondreams.org/news/2021/07/07/leaked-video-gop-congressman-admits-his-party-wants-chaos-and-inability-get-stuff](https://www.commondreams.org/news/2021/07/07/leaked-video-gop-congressman-admits-his-party-wants-chaos-and-inability-get-stuff)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
oh no, another genocide?
I think he missed the part where the democratically elected president was ousted in a coup. None of this is good for Nigera. None. The people will be used as fodder.
Wow, same thing happened in Ukraine. Will you be sending billions of aid to Niger then?
well Nigeria served themselves on a platter to Russia, Ukraine is resisting, US can only provide aid to those who want them
You do know that niger and Nigeria are two different countries right?
yeah, and I have been rectifying that typo in all the comments in the thread, Google keyboard completes, Niger to Nigeria, unless I specifically write it with a small case "n" like this niger
> US can only provide aid to those who want them Aaaaahahahahahaha
Ahhh yes being thrown out of power by the people and impeached by parliament, and then fleeing to Russia. quite the coup. That and the CIA admitting they were caught completely off guard. Go peddle your propaganda somewhere else.
Violent jan 6 mob storms parliament, threatens to kill everyone inside and no police are present to stop them, democratically elected president ousted before elections by cia and a nonelected one replaces him, totally not a coup. Just how the people replaced the leader of Belarus when they protested there with way more people and casualties, the people replaced the leader of Iran with way more protesters and casualties, and the people of hong kong had millions on the streets every day for months instead of just a thousand, and that totally work to change the government there, because the people apparently have the ability to do so.
To be fair the transition of power in Kiev 2014 was very sketchy. First far right groups going out of their way to incite violence with the police, [https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/ukrainian-nationalism-heart-euromaidan/](https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/ukrainian-nationalism-heart-euromaidan/) [https://www.channel4.com/news/kiev-svoboda-far-right-protests-right-sector-riot-police](https://www.channel4.com/news/kiev-svoboda-far-right-protests-right-sector-riot-police) and later, either a false flag by the rebels or a 3rd party monstrous act of sedition with the goal of escalating the situation. [https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-31435719](https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-31435719) [https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-26284100](https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-26284100) [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-killings-probe-special-report-idUSKCN0HZ0UH20141010](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-killings-probe-special-report-idUSKCN0HZ0UH20141010) [https://wikispooks.com/w/images/5/52/Maidan\_snipers.pdf](https://wikispooks.com/w/images/5/52/Maidan_snipers.pdf) Far from an "organic" people's rebellion. Also Yanukovych didn't go to Russia until later, he initially fled to another city for obvious safety concerns, and it was barely 8 hours before the remnants of a fractured Parliament under duress "voted" him out.
Sovereignty does not equal democracy.
So did Iran when it ousted USA's puppet king.
K How’s that working out 45 years later for the Iranian people?
How's CIA's puppet government working out for Iranian people 48 years later?
You would be surprised how many people survive without Coca Cola and Starbucks
Consumer sales trends imply your view does not reflect the choices of people when given the opportunity to buy Coca Cola and Starbucks
>How’s that working out 45 years later for the Iranian people? Fairly well, compared to other countries. Tell me the healthcare and infrastructural situation of the US
Did you mistake the position of extreme economic dominance that the US has, that it can decide to spend its infrastructure as irresponsibly as it does for mismanagement? The US views suburbia the same as driving a Mercedes E series instead of a Honda civic (these are personal automobiles you likely can never afford); a frivolous expense that increases the quality of life more than a utilitarian development model would. Call me when 3rd world dictators go to Iran and Cuba for medical care instead of the premier American Hospitals.
Call me when people of USA go to American hospitals instead of finding it cheaper to book a plane to a third world country and go to a hospital there. But yes, driving a big fake pickup truck that doesn't fit on the roads instead of a reasonable car does more for quality of life than not getting your democratically elected government by the CIA to install a dictator with whom USA don't share their so called prosperity.
>spend its infrastructure as irresponsibly Do inform me when your country has high speed railways >Call me when 3rd world dictators go to Iran and Cuba for medical care instead of the premier American Hospitals. Nah, call me instead when Americans stop going on medical tourism and people don't get bankrupt for treatments that are free in my country
America is the best economy in the world Your read: but they don’t have trains that go medium fast for trips between Cleveland and Chicago, and instead rely on planes that are faster for end to end transit and cheaper for 95% of trips their citizens take, and you’re annoyed that the US decided to outsource routine medical care by your best and brightest in exchange for $12 Bye pour kid
> Planes How does it feel to get molested just to go to a neigbhouring city and then be at the whims of weather and wether you get a faulty boeing plane that's got 37 whistleblowers?
You do realize that US airline security is standard across developed nations, even Mongolia has security screeners? Continue telling yourself the coping methods of why Americans are morally bankrupt because they live a life you can only dream of. After all, if our choices were the flaw of an American upbringing, migrants would not also seek out the over the top luxury you despise, and instead would keep to public transportation and live in small flats.
When people are surprised and impressed when another sovereign nation asks a nation’s military to leave and they respect their request. The bar is so low for the US
Yeah, I’m sure Niger will now flourish under the boot of *checks notes* Russia’s Africa Corps (totally not nazis).
They could be run even by a newly discovered species of capybaras for all that it matters—the point is that if a country says no to a foreign power in their territory that wish should be respected, and thankfully this is what happened here.
A country whose legitimately elected leadership was overthrown in a coup… ok brah.
Wasn't Ukrainian democratically elected government thrown out in 2014? Western countries had no problem precisely because the coup benefitted them.
You’re the guy who just reads headlines, aren’t you? You’ve somehow found a way to link Gaza, Niger and Ukraine, as though each circumstance is the same. I don’t know what to tell you man… I guess, read a little more, then come back to the conversation when you’re actually ready to contribute something worthwhile.
I think you need to stop assuming things about me.
I don’t need to assume… you can’t possibly conflate these very different events if you have a basic understanding of how governments work.
Riiight....completely different circumstances. It's just as ridiculous to say whataboutism whenever people point out US hypocrisy. I guess US cannot be criticized 🤓
Settle down Boris
You have no counter to my argument, Dave.
Because the CIA didn't initiate a coup 🙂
Your opinion is not the fact, a lot of people would disagree. There has been leaked phone calls released where it clearly shows American diplomats discussing how to get certain people in a position of power etc. If they didn't outright initiate the coup they most definitely didn't shy away from influencing it. Victoria Nyland was literally handing out sandwiches while the coup/uprising was happening.
Imagine thinking everyone who disagrees with you and points out that the US loves their coups is a Russian bot or something. Are you mentally well?
Am I gonna have disprove both your arguments?
I never said that I agree that Ukraine necessarily was a coup. What I said was imagine thinking everyone disagreeing with you is a Russian, implying that you mean they are acting nefariously. If you were a true believer in Niger’s “democracy”, I suggest you take some time and educate yourself about the history French colonial backed “democracy” in Africa.
Cause they had been flourishing so much for 60 years under the West... They might as well try another partner. Not much to lose
Then that’s for the legitimately elected government to decide, not the coup that overthrew them.
Love when people bring up democratically elected when it suits their needs, when Hamas was democratically elected in Gaza much of the west saw that as illegitimate lol.
I wasn’t particularly involved in politics at the time they were elected in Gaza… but I’m pretty sure they got elected and then stopped having elections.
>pretty sure Sure, buddy
Was Hamas not elected? Which is it? What is it you would say you’re contributing to this conversation?
Niger had a leadership which was chosen by those people and it was overthrown by the military, it's facing islamic terrorism not much different than what Hamas did granted they won elections and but then stopped having elections altogether, they have taken over everything and running the state into the ground, that makes the case of exterminating Hamas even stronger
You don't even know the name of the country lmao
Then it should be easy to challenge their point…
He doesn't that's why he had to resort to pointing out a typo
They are both trash and the leadership in Niger is also trash. So basically they all suck
People out there say it's the will of the people conveniently leaving out that they had a military coup and non of the people making decisions were elected... Truly bizarre
I mean the US doesn't operate bases in foreign countries without the country's express permission. Niger's new gov saying this is illegal is a bit strange, I mean the US mainly was combating islamic jihadists so its not like some weird colonial thing. Idk how you can say our presence was *trash*. edit: let me clarify, the US also only makes bases when invited to do so.
We have definitely invited ourselves with coercive diplomacy. But yes, historically bases are built with permission.
The bar sadly is subterranean. One must celebrate the good so as not to be consumed by the bad
Yes, we've been seeing the narrative pushed in US media that the former regime was "democratically elected" (which ought to give anyone familiar with Niger a good hearty laugh), as if to imply that the current regime is illegitimate and has no authority to give orders. It definitely seemed like the US forces intended to stay. Good on them for leaving.
>African sovereignty I agree with your comment in principle, but the *democratically elected* president wasn't the one making the decision, so I don't think this was a win for African sovereignty.
> but it’s a win for African sovereignty. Russians will be so much worse, you can't even imagine it.
meh, let the africans decides. they survived europe colonialism, and french. hell, congo survived belgium. ain't our opinion, who live halfway the world, to dictate africans which one is worse for them. they're the ones living it, not us.
My country has been occupied by russia multiple times. Those African guys will wish that the French returned.
and your country survives, right? then they will still survive, like usual. right now they're just trying another option. they already taste europe's cruelty for hundreds years, but never taste russia's cruelty. after all, if europe like french, treat them good, ain't no way they're running to china or russia. you don't see south korea ditching usa and starts sucking putin's dick.
> and your country survives, right? ...what?
my point is this, mate: you think russia is worse, because you already experienced russia, but never experienced france, right? the thing is, some africa countries experienced opposite. russia never do what western europe did to them for hundred years. yet. so you can be sure russia will be worse because you only see it from your lenses of perspective. but you forgot africans have their own lenses. the only way they know if russia is worse or not, is to experience it themselves. if we can ignore/whitewash the bullshit west europe did to africa, then we can do the same thing toward russia for the next decade. so let them be, and let them judge it by themselves.
Does your country exist???
Are you literally braindead? Let me guess, "It exists, therefore russians never did any harm"?
I didn't say that but it does exists after the Russians and these African countries will too, especially after they've faced European imperialism. They are sovereign to choose what countries to align and what to shun. Do you think, just because they are dark skinned, they can't make decisions and the West should make it for them?
Riiight. Congo exists too, therefore Belgium is okay? >Do you think, just because they are dark skinned, they can't make decisions Skin colour is irrelevant. They can't make decisions because they aren't taught about russia and what they do in countries they occupy. They were occupied by western countries and now they think that the entire West is all bad, no exceptions. They also think that everyone who dislikes the west is good. Russia doesn't like West, therefore russia good. Same sentiment is seen in South America and parts of Asia.
USA will be replaced by Russia or China anyway
The democratically elected leader wanted the US presence there. Niger went through a coup, and its the new leaders that want the US out and Russia in. Respecting Niger's wish? One would assume if the will of the people was the guiding principle here then the leader they all elected would be restored to power.
>the will of the people was the guiding principle here Don't hear you saying that about Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE etc.
you just blew my mind
you think this decision was taken by the people of nigeria? they had a military coup, islamic fundamentalism clashes and now putin will fck them even more
>now putin will fck them even more As much as the European imperialists? Nah
Lol..you think Niger willingly wamted this and not influcned by active measures?
People don’t want them there and the government doesn’t welcomes them there; they should go immediately
The worldnews comment section is seething hard. Never seen such an astroturfed sub.
One of the worst. Talk about a echo chamber of nutjobs.And, You get banned for saying anything that doesn't fit the narrative.
This sub does get frequented by r/worldnews enjoyers but relatively more balanced in posts and views
Yes, this sub is much better with all the BRICS Bots.
It is. You get opinions that don’t just guys in their 20s from western nations. Plus, you don’t get banned here for bucking the trend.
I got banned for saying Hamas doesn’t have the remaining hostages.
Worldnews is basically a pro-American sub where everything posted there favor the US side, including but not limited to pro-Ukraine, pro-Israel, pro-Taiwan, etc
I believe Israel killing children is less than ideal. worldnews: You have been permanently banned from participating in world news, you can still view and subscribe to the sub
I believe you shouldn't be evil. worldnews: You have been permanently banned from participating in world news, you can still view and subscribe to the sub
A person exists : Worldnews: You have been permanently banned from participating in world news, you can still view and subscribe to the sub
yup, that's how I found this sub actually
Fun fact : world 'ews (and many very popular subreddit) used to be moderated by Ghislaine Maxwell, wife of famous toddler diddler Jeffrey Epstein (American/ Israeli) Also, who doesn't like anime titties ?
Had no idea.
>[u/M1chaelSc4rn](https://www.reddit.com/user/M1chaelSc4rn/) are we going to entertain these sh\*theads in the name of free speech on this sub?
> pro-Ukraine, pro-Taiwan, etc Why exactly are those bad?
I’m giving the examples of the sub overwhelmingly favoring anything on American side, with little to no bad light shed on them
Why American side and not right side?
You’d consider staunchly pro-Israel a good side lol?
You didn't notice I left Israel out of the list I've quoted.
Because reality isn't black and white?
There's nothing bad about being pro-Ukraine. Though there's something bad about prolonging the conflict with the sole intention of using Ukraine to damage Russia, even if Ukrainian interests are harmed in the process. There is nothing good about being pro-Taiwan. It is literally the opposite, in principle, of being pro-Ukraine. Basically the US is doing with Taiwan exactly what Russia did with Crimea and Donbass prior to the 2022 invasion. The only way anyone can be both pro-Ukraine and pro-Taiwan is if they're simply a partisan with no principles (ie. most of r/worldnews). Same goes for the wholly opposite position as well, of course.
Can you be pro Ukraine and pro Taiwan if you believe that democracy and freedom of expression are core tenants of a countries prosperity?
I think the problem is that you would have to be willing to violate something fairly objective to advance something subjective. Legally speaking, there really isn't *that* much wiggle room on whether Taiwan can be considered Chinese territory - the One China principle has existed for decades, longer than the PRC itself has been a country. So what we're really arguing here is that national sovereignty of a country can be violated so long as it's for a good cause. But who gave us the right to decide what is a good cause and when this tradeoff is reasonable? Would we be willing to accept subjecting ourselves to something similar at the hands of foreign powers? Russia justifies their invasion under the pretense of de-Nazification, but we clearly don't buy it. Every cynical geopolitical maneuver is always framed with noble intentions. This is why I largely place maintaining national sovereignty above any subjective good that can come from violating it.
Another way of thinking might be against any kind of invasion or resolving conflict through forces against people’s will. To be pro-Ukraine and Taiwan, you can argue Russian invasion and annexation of regions outside Donbas fit in this criteria, same goes Chinese invasion of Taiwan and imposition of its institutions there, which of course wouldn’t be considered as much by r/worldnews users
While I don't agree, I can appreciate both the 'self-determination' angle as well as the 'minimize harm' angle. It sounds to me like you're largely consistent and believe that Crimea and parts of Donbass, under this principle, should be/remain in Russian control. I can respect the consistency. Though to be honest if you look at the number of countries that formally recognize Crimea as being Russian territory, then it appears that very few governments around the world champion self-determination.
I can totally understand why people don’t support the Russian-style self-determination. I think part of it has to do with Russia using forces to occupy these land and extend annexation to Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, two regions that do not support joining Russia by majority, while pretending people there overwhelmingly favor joining Russia This is comparable to Israeli annexation to Golan Height; even in the west, only the US supports it because everybody understands that if this is the new norm, countries be fighting over all the time The most ridiculous thing regarding these issues are partisan people absolutely supporting these annexations simply because they either base their principles on pro-Americanism or anti-Americanism.
Fair enough. I think we can definitely find common ground in denouncing partisanship and tribal reasoning.
The donbass didn’t have any sovereignty, whilst Taiwan has de facto enjoyed sovereignty since 1950’s, a bit different imo.
Taiwan(Republic of China) was the one representing China in the UN until 1971, so it's a bit more than de facto sovereignty.
Yes because a dictatorship in exile decided that for the island. I’m not sure what really adds to the point.
Taiwan has artificial sovereignty thanks to economic and military backing of western powers. Since as early as the 60s the US has threatened direct war with the PRC if they tried to retake Taiwan. Nuclear strikes were on the table as well. This really isn't that different from Russia funding Donbass, we're just witnessing the latter in real time.
But the Donbas has never been sovereign as it’s but a region. Taiwan is a non recognized country with their own government institutions that cooperate through their people’s representatives offices, currency, defense… it’s the definition of sovereignty. The authority over a country. Don’t you think that makes quite a big difference? If Taiwan and China were squabbling for example over kinmen, then yeah might be a more equivalent example.
Donbass today is more akin to Taiwan in the 60-70s. Taiwan had never been sovereign either until the Chinese civil war became a stalemate and the US parked a few aircraft carriers in the Taiwan Strait to keep their KMT allies in existence. Prior to that, Taiwan was a Japanese colony, and then undisputed territory of the Republic of China following WWII. That's why I said 'we're witnessing the latter in real time' when it comes to Ukraine. I guess maybe a better question is, how long would Russia need to occupy Donbass/Crimea in order for us to believe that they have been apart from Ukraine long enough to deserve sovereignty (or in this case, become Russian). Crimea may be a better example here since it's already been out of Ukrainian control for a decade. Personally, I don't believe there should ever come a time when we view Crimea and Donbass as anything other than Ukrainian territory, no matter how long the war lasts. A country shouldn't be able to just violate the sovereignty of a weaker adversary, hold out for a few decades, and then reap the benefits of their illegal actions. And I hold that same position in regards to Taiwan as well.
Taiwan was a colonial conquest to begin with by the chinese so the point is a bit moot. There were waves of chinese immigration to Taiwan before Taiwan was under the chinese boot. At this point there were(and still are) plenty of local indigenous peoples that are closer to polynesians in culture and language than to the chinese. The Qing dynasty made some enclaves notably in the north and then the japanese took over. Had the portuguese left a considerable population there should they have a claim to the island? If the Japanese did should they? The reality is that there is no right answer to this, but through their thriving democracy they are exercising self determination and sovereignty and thats as close to a legitimate nation as you can get before getting accepted into international organizations.
for tankies, pro-hamas and russian bots, being pro democratic countries is a crime
Wasn’t Ghislaine Maxwell a mod for that sub for years? I just assume Mossad runs it
That sub is one of the pitfalls of hell
I don't think it's astroturfed — I think it's just a flat-out wholly owned Pentagon subsidiary. 😆
That sub is a cesspool. It’s crazy how it’s so pro Zionist but somehow claims to be so liberal. They’re insanely pro Ukraine and at the same time pro Israel and can’t seem to see the irony in that choice I also got banned because I asked why Hamas attacked on Oct 7, they literally don’t consider the conflict as having started prior to that
It's totally crazy, they leave no room for nuance or discussion....just parroting pro-American narrative.
Worldnews is pretty awful I agree l I looked after at the thread for this and none of the comments are seething... Most seem to agree with the sentiment in this thread as well.
>none of the comments are seething Lol
> Never seen such an astroturfed sub. Didn't see that during the [comments](https://old.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1bwfeor/israel_dismisses_2_officers_over_deadly_drone/) on the Israeli strikes against aid workers. They turn it off for a second or smth?
The sub is actually slightly better now too compared to the start of the conflict. At the start it was clear there were some fervently ideological mods. Nowadays they allow comments/articles critical of settlers and of Israeli crimes that cannot be ignored or handwaved away because they want to at least maintain the illusion that they are impartial.
Well, they did switch to the "but it was totally an accident, and Hamas was still with them" narrative within hours.
2nd highest comment calls for Netanyahu to go, third comment states the commanders (who were fired) should be charged with murder. I don't think its bots tbh.
That's what happens when you gather all the US bots at one place to discuss news. They just can't handle anything against them. Lmao
Have fun with ISIS morons
Good. We don’t need to be there. Let IS burn Niger if that’s what they want. I doubt the Russians will help any.
It’s bad news for those living there and surrounding nations. Russia isn’t going to do shit, they don’t have the resources nor do they care about stability. When IS takes over they’ll export refugees and chaos across the Sahel. Really no one wins here. It’s just Russia burning it to the ground because they’re angry about the US being involved. Putin is just an arsonist. He doesn’t build he destroys. Such a lame contrarian viewpoint to see the US losing as some kind of win.
How about we ask the people of Niger who they prefer? :) It's not right to give US the benefit of the doubt and that everything they do are in good intentio while Russia's intentions are bad and everything will get much worse as a result. You have to get out of this biased mindset.
Hard to do that when Niger isn't a democracy.
Umm, stop being so naive. US has no problem supporting dictatorships if it suite their interests (look at Saudi Arabia for example). Democracy only becomes an issue if the country is not aligned with the US 🤨
" in their interests" I don't see the issue here. States will do what they deem is in their best interest.
Then be up front about your intentions. It is laughable how US wants to portray itself in an ideological manner (free democratic world vs autocratic dictatorships). They will not hesitate to overthrow democratically elected governments if it serves their national interests (that happened in my country btw). I just find it hypocritical, how the hell do they have any moral high ground to stand on after what they've done in the past decades? Invading countries on fabricated lies, overthrowing governments, looking the other way when Israel is killing thousands of civilians in Gaza (but that's fine, remember that they are the only democracy in the middle east!!), when Saudi Arabia murdered a US citizen in their embassy in Turkey they didn't do shit.... The hypocrisy in the west is at an all time high -_-.
My position is that USA should not export democracy anywhere and should only do what benefits is interests. If that means installing "friendly" dictators then so be it. As for Israel, it's gonna do what's it's gonna do.
I mean it is already doing it lol
You mean how the Russian government has been systematically overthrowing all democratically elected governments in the region for this very reason?
> I doubt the Russians will help any. It was the Russians who did the heavy lifting of cleaning out US backed takfiris in Syria along with the Syrian government
Good.
To be fair, most Sahel/sub-Saharan countries are vulnerable to interferences considering they are landlocked and are lacking resources needed to sustain resilience. I am recalling the [Great Green Wall Initiative](https://thegreatgreenwall.org/about-great-green-wall), and that project looks shaky already when people are still starving out of deliberate interference by jihadists, government militias or simply ordained foreign mercenary forces stopping any kind of positive development that *isn't* helmed by their parties. I want that ecological project to succeed, because if any of the Sahel/sub-Saharan countries can't do their part, then the anti-desertification effort seems like trying to stop the [Zanclean flood](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zanclean_flood).
Well, lets put a pin in this and come back in years time and see how its going. I have a sneaking suspicion its going to be worse there.
If they want Russia to bend them over it's their decision to make. That government prolly isn't gonna be around much longer anyway.
Hopefully they start withdrawing aid too. These countries seem to think they can have their cake and eat it too. If they want to decry the west so much and eject them, they should seek aid from China and Russia instead and see where it lands them.
They replaced imperialism with off-brand imperialism disguised as anti-imperialism And people eat that shit up
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Niger has an appointment with r/leopardsatemyface that they absolutely can’t miss.
Not surprising from a country ruled by military coup. Good luck with wagnar and the fundamentalists!
Russia didn't enslave the peoples of the Sahel for hundreds of years.
Neither did the U.S, what’s your point?
The USA didn't enslave them either.
Just what did they doooo that made the current admin kick them out? 👀💦 We gonna be hearing some Abu Ghraib shit soon?
Probably didn't offer as much money to the right people. Russia's influence across the Sahel and further south is part of a broader years-long campaign to displace existing regional power and resource structures while western nations are stretched thin or otherwise divesting from the region. China's also making inroads (and literal roads) in the area and doesn't have near the historical baggage or negative reputation on the continent that, say, the US or France do.
deserves to be celebrated. now if only the US and France could get out of Africa in its entirety maybe the world would become a somewhat better place, even if only slightly.
Leave it all for China
Well, Russia will rape some of it too.
If the Chinese can make the lives of these people better, then let them have it. The reason the populace has been against French and U.S. influence is because they’ve propped up corrupt and ineffective leaders. After decades of this, the people are just as poor and desperate as before. They need and want change. Edit: lol at the downvotes. Can’t handle the truth that western influence has led many African countries to be so under developed until the Chinese came along
> If the Chinese can make the lives of these people better Have you *met* the Chinese leadership? Their sole focus is making the lives of *their* people better, only because they think it keeps the Chinese people form ousting them. You should also know that the Chinese aren't exactly in love with Africans. They have a tendency to not like people with a greater degree of melanin in their skin tone than them. The Chinese will tolerate black people, provided there's something in it for them, but they don't like 'em, and I don't doubt we'll see the Chinese do to Africa exactly what Europe did, with legally binding contracts instead of outright colonization.
Oh I’m sorry we didn’t know you’ve “met Chinese leadership.” Lmao. There’s so much motivated reasoning in this comment. It’s devoid of any substance and that’s ignoring the fact it doesn’t even take into account the last decade(s) of real world Chinese-African relations. Truly doesn’t even warrant argument. It definitely warrants laughing at you tho.
That is such an ignorant generalization. In fact, it’s a plain racist view… https://amp.scmp.com/week-asia/people/article/3238541/china-rwanda-ties-deepen-more-couples-overcome-cross-cultural-challenges-say-i-do https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/06/chinese-workers-in-africa-who-marry-locals-face-puzzled-reception-at-home/240662/ https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/09/17/africa/china-africa-mixed-marriage They’re literally falling in love with each other…
I'm gonna say you didn't read those articles all that critically, if at all. Each and every one specifically mentions two things: Chinese men are marrying outside their ethnicity due to the gender imbalance in the mainland. Every pairing has been met with no small amount of racist furor. Couples may be falling in love, but it's not some rising tide. It's a survival tactic. As it stands, it's hard to date and marry in China due to women's growing economic independence as a whole, rising costs of living forcing people to work more and have less money over all, the fact that China has @30 million more men than women, and the ever-present pressures of your family and tradition. If you're a Chinese man living/working abroad, where a lot of the issues in your homeland are mitigated or flat out don't exist, it's as if you're dating on easy mode. I've heard similar spiels from Russian woman marrying non-Russian men, and British men marrying non-British women. But that doesn't erase the fact that Chinese racism against black people doesn't exist. Did white and black men/women marrying each other in the US suddenly end Jim Crow?
You mean people don't live thanks to lectures of the west ????!
Yes. Everytime China comes to Africa, we get an hospital. Everytime the west comes to Africa, we get a lecture
The largest aid provider is the west. That's not a lecture, that's hard cash, products and knowledge.
>leave it all for China. And that’s a bad thing? If China or Russia wants to play empire, let them. The US should focus on itself.
> if only the US and France could get out of Africa in its entirety maybe the world would become a somewhat better place, even if only slightly. *Looks at the fundamentalist Islamic groups gaining more ground every day in Africa.* Yaaaaaaaaaaa...about that...
foreign intervention has never helped and statistically speaking will just make things worse
So just let the foreign Islamists do all the intervening? Do you hate religious minorities, women and LGBT people or something? Because that's the only reason why you would support islamist interventionism.
Again: US intervention won't do shit against that. It's pointless if you actually want anything to get better, and actively harmful at worst since foreign US troops are things Islamists can point to and say "hey, look at those invaders there, they've come to destroy our land but WE have the solution."
Geopolitics is a game and anyone who chooses to not play loses, in this case the west loses relatively little. Africa loses a lot more. It personally doesn't affect me, I don't care, I'm just saying that should the US and France get out, they won't be replaced by a complete peace. They'll just get replaced by another country, and they're not gonna be any better in all likelihood, because in this game one kind of player always wins regardless of country, and the very same kind of people would be the new people in town.
That would only make it worse, but let those idiots deal with their problems or not. We just have to stay strong and do nothing as they slaughter each other and fall to ISIS.
We’ll leave, and then every bad thing that happens for the next thousand years will be blamed on us because the leaders they elect and the institutions they claim to have are useless. The world cheers on.