A recent survey done in Africa suggests that the approval ratings of China and Russia have surpassed the approval ratings of America in Africa

  • China and Russia surpass the U.S. in approval ratings in Africa.

  • U.S. approval ratings in Africa at 56%, lagging behind China (58%) and Russia (64%).

  • Russia’s increasing popularity is attributed to arms sales, military training, and economic initiatives in Africa.

The survey which involved 130 countries globally saw a global increase in America’s disapproval ratings from 33% in 2022 to 36% in 2023. However, the US’s approval ratings between the same period remained the same at 41%.

In Africa however, the US’s approval rating stands at 56%, with China and Russia having 2% and 8% more respectively. ⠀

In Uganda, Gambia, and Kenya the approval rating of the US dropped by 29, 21 and 14 percentage points, respectively. With 23% and 25%, respectively, Libya and Somalia had the lowest scores. ⠀

As the US media recently claimed, citing an anonymous US source, Moscow may be able to address the continent’s urgent security demands through arms sales that exceed Washington’s capacity, which might account for Russia’s increasing popularity in Africa. ⠀

Russia has been on a mission to increase its influence in Africa. In addition to military ties, Russia has initiated a number of economic initiatives with the continent, including the building of a House of Africa in several of its states, shipments of free grains to the continent, nuclear deals, and more.

  • davel [he/him]@lemmy.mlEnglish
    143·
    8 months ago

    USAID isn’t lazy, it’s a constituent part of US imperialism. Samantha Power is a war criminal. Three women, loads of lies and the destruction of Libya

    Mapping U.S. Imperialism

    U.S. imperialism has also been built through “soft power” organizations like USAID, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), World Bank, the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the Organization of American States (OAS). These nominally international bodies are practically unilateral in their subservience to the interests of the U.S. state and U.S. corporations. In the 1950s and ‘60s, USAID (and its precursor organizations) made “development aid” to Asian, African, and South American countries conditional on those countries’ legal formalization of capitalist property relations, and reorganization of their economies around homeownership debt. The goal was to enclose Indigenous land, and land shared through alternate economic systems, as a method of “combatting Communism with homeownership” and creating dependency and buy-in to U.S. capitalist hegemony (Nancy Kwak, A World of Homeowners). In order to retain access to desperately needed streams of resources (e.g. IMF “loans”), Global South governments are forced to accept resource-extraction by the U.S., while at the same time denying their own people popularly supported policies such as land reform, economic diversification, and food sovereignty. It is also important to note that Global South nations have never received reparations or compensation for the resources that have been stolen from them–this makes the idea of “loans” by global monetary institutions even more outrageous.