Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Nicholas Heinamann's avatar

Moore is right that the opportunity is real and that schadenfreude is not a development strategy. But there is a question his piece leaves open. Climbing the value chain from raw commodity to processed good captures more African value — and that matters. What it does not change is the underlying relationship with the asset base. The ore still depletes. What Costa Rica demonstrated is that a parallel value chain exists — built not on processing raw materials further but on restoring the natural asset base and building value from soil outward. Forest cover recovered from 21 percent to 57 percent. The nature-based economy that emerged outperformed what extraction generated on the same land. Africa has more degraded land, more restoration potential, and more traditional ecological knowledge than any continent on earth. Moore's value chain and that one are not in competition. They are complementary. But only one of them compounds. I wrote about what that looks like here https://substack.com/home/post/p-202919174

ChinArb's avatar

This is the rare piece that names the leverage instead of just the grievance. The argument Nkrumah and Amin made for generations — that a continent exporting ore and importing finished goods hits a structural ceiling — was dismissed as ideology until Europe started saying it about itself. You're right that the schadenfreude is earned and that it isn't a strategy. The value-chain climb you lay out — pelletization at Buchanan, alumina in Guinea, precursors in the Copperbelt, cocoa butter instead of beans — is the correct instruction. No disagreement on what Africa should do.

My one question is about who Africa is negotiating with.

Your essay treats Europe as the counterparty — Europe needs diversified partners, so Africa now has leverage. But look at what Europe would have to put on the table for that leverage to cash: low-cost capital, energy infrastructure, technology transfer, refining ecosystems, logistics. That is precisely the capability set Europe is losing. Germany's single largest export line to China is now unwrought gold — from a country with no gold mines. A manufacturing core that is selling its vaults to keep importing finished goods is in no position to finance someone else's climb up the value chain. You can only pull another region upward if you are standing higher yourself. Europe is sliding down the same slope it's warning Africa about.

So Macron's turn isn't moral, and I'd add it isn't really a turn toward Africa either. It's a search for a refining layer not controlled by Beijing — because the bloc can no longer build or hold that layer at home. That's not leverage Africa can negotiate against. It's desperation Africa can be absorbed into, under exactly the updated rhetoric you warn about.

The harder fact: the entity that is actually financing ports, rail, refineries, and precursor plants across the continent — at terms no European development bank will match, precisely because it isn't pricing for ROI — is the system Europe is trying to find an alternative to. I argued in The Strait of Hormuz Chokehold that in a supply-chain conflict the question is never who wins the argument; it's who is still physically able to deliver when the speeches end. Europe can deliver the speech about African industrialization. The capacity to actually build it sits, inconveniently, on the other side.

None of this cancels the agency in your piece. It sharpens it. The climb is right. The leverage is real. But leverage is only as good as the counterparty's ability to pay — and choosing which system you climb with may be the most consequential industrial decision African governments make this decade. The danger isn't that Africa stays extractive. It's that it renegotiates its extraction with a partner who has nothing left to refine it with.

【The Strait of Hormuz Chokehold: Who is Falling, and Who Will Stand Last】https://chinarbitrageur.substack.com/p/the-strait-of-hormuz-chokehold-who?r=71ctq6

1 more comment...

No posts

Ready for more?