[HN Gopher] Frontex Files
___________________________________________________________________
Frontex Files
Author : ruph123
Score : 168 points
Date : 2021-02-07 14:59 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (frontexfiles.eu)
(TXT) w3m dump (frontexfiles.eu)
| meibo wrote:
| Why is lobbyism not a solved problem? Why is it not yet more
| scrutinized than it should be? Peace and freedom in all western
| countries is at stake because there is no accountability.
|
| Is money that powerful? What else can we do than to vote
| carefully?
| [deleted]
| ziftface wrote:
| The only people in a position to reduce corruption have an
| interest in it. It's a story as old as time.
| 1MachineElf wrote:
| Maybe it's just my own ignorance, but in the EU context, I
| don't understand the difference between a company "lobbying" an
| agency like Frontex versus a company having a "government sales
| team" doing "customer outreach" to Frontex?
| PeterisP wrote:
| The usual definition of lobbying involves meetings with
| various interested 'stakeholders' who are _not_ aiming for a
| vendor /customer relationship; sales meetings and tenders for
| goods or services are something separate than someone getting
| their word in about policy.
|
| One other thing that surprised me in this article is the
| inclusion of "representatives of EU border control agencies
| to these meetings, but also international organizations such
| as Interpol, Europol and the OSCE, as well as representatives
| from countries known for their brutal border control
| policies" - I would definitely consider meetings with
| relevant state institutions from EU countries (which are
| partners of Frontex) and non-EU countries (which are
| generally doing equivalent functions as Frontex) as something
| entirely distinct from lobbying.
| bberenberg wrote:
| Because lobbying is currently a solution, not a problem. While
| we see that it causes problems, formal lobbying structures were
| set up specifically so that we can see what is happening.
| Without the framework we have today, it happens anyways but
| more in backrooms with less oversight. For example, if instead
| of formal meetings where FOI requests can get access to
| documents like listed on the website, this was all done at
| someones home at a private dinner would we the general public
| be better off?
|
| To be clear, I agree that we need to improve the situation,
| however ignoring that lobbying is better than what came before
| it isn't particularly helpful. Influence is a core component of
| social power structures. You can't legislate it away.
| sdoering wrote:
| As discussed in the Frontex papers, the problem here is, that
| Frontex does not even comply with EU lobbying regulations.
| They go around them as if these just don't apply to them.
|
| So even if there are regulations in place, as long as
| institutions not facing dire consequences for noncompliance,
| the rational thing to do as a member of such an institution
| is to ignore said regulations.
|
| As long as the negative consequences of your actions are
| minimal at best while some form of positive consequences are
| very likely, why comply with regulations.
| bberenberg wrote:
| I absolutely agree. And we need to do better in terms of
| enforcement. What I was trying to convey was that by
| formally allowing lobbying it gives us more power to do
| something about it. Same reasoning for why drug
| legalization works better than prohibition.
| sdoering wrote:
| Absolutely. And the lobby register is a step in the right
| direction. Albeit be it a small one.
|
| More steps need to follow and strong enforcement.
| jeofken wrote:
| Governments are violent monopolistic organisations, and
| lobbying is a natural reaction to this. No morality or value
| creation is to be found anywhere near it.
| xvedejas wrote:
| Some governments manage to be less violent than others. I'm
| not sure that that affects the degree to which lobbying
| works.
| brnt wrote:
| Democratic goverment is the best way the people have at
| organising their society.
|
| Devolving power to organisations that by their nature
| represent fewer than the whole population and aren't under
| any form of democratic control are nowhere near what we
| should want.
|
| Unless you're a rich billionaire who can afford lobbyists of
| course.
| mperham wrote:
| Sounds like the EU has its own ICE now?
| finiteseries wrote:
| Nah, they're not there yet. ICE has two separate parts,
| deportations, and a mini FBI [0]. All federal agents, but not
| dependent on the border.
|
| This is like a federal CBP x Coast Guard that also works with
| the Texas Border Patrol & Texas Coast Guard, the California
| Border Patrol & Florida Coast Guard, etc
|
| [0] - Homeland Security Investigations (small, quiet,
| transnational), deals with e.g. cartels, movie piracy, the FBI,
| child porn, while Enforcement and Removal Operations (big,
| loud, domestic) deports. There is some tension.
| odiroot wrote:
| It's really worrying that there's some concentrated effort to
| take Frontex down.
| sdoering wrote:
| Why is journalistic reporting on supra governmental entities a
| concerted effort to take this entity down.
|
| In a democracy journalism is the fourth power. It is a vital
| part of checks and balances.
|
| Using loaded comments to discredit journalistic reporting on
| governmental misdoings feels somehow as if there is an agenda
| hidden behind such comments.
| emteycz wrote:
| It's more worrying that there is concentrated effort to further
| Frontex's power.
| CameronNemo wrote:
| Whenever a standing armed force is built up, you should be
| worried.
| arendtio wrote:
| Frontex has been criticized for their methods for years and now
| it becomes obvious that they are not just doing their job in a
| morally questionable way, but also don't comply with EU
| regulation. This is a step forward.
|
| Just to be clear, I am not saying that there doesn't need to be
| someone who cares about the border control, but the way Frontex
| is doing it is just wrong.
| tasogare wrote:
| Frontex is being criticized for using shady methods but I
| don't see any criticism towards illegal immigrants who aren't
| respecting the immigration laws in the first place. Double
| standards as usual.
| j-pb wrote:
| The difference between private citizens violating
| administrative laws and government entities violating
| humanitarian laws of their own constitutions should be
| immediately obvious to you.
| lampe3 wrote:
| What is worrying about that?
| finiteseries wrote:
| _Why is it problematic for Frontex to meet with weapons
| companies?_
|
| "A new regulation passed by the European Parliament in the spring
| of 2019 stipulates that Frontex is to have a "standing corps" of
| 10,000 by 2027, and it is allowed to equip border agents with
| handguns.
|
| The problem is that no legal regulations permit members of an EU
| agency to carry firearms."
|
| _Why are lobbyists so interested in Frontex?_
|
| "...In addition: Since 2019, Frontex has been permitted to own
| and acquire airplanes, drones and firearms."
|
| -
|
| So the concern is that Frontex is being "too forward" in
| acquiring weapons it's allowed to own, but not carry for some
| reason, while also being dishonest/misleading about meeting with
| vendors, correct?
|
| Biometric usage, and meeting with other border agencies instead
| of human rights groups aside.
| zepatrik wrote:
| Wow this is just unacceptable.
|
| > The Problem - Migrants (slide two in the gallery on the landing
| page)
|
| You know that this is an important topic because "ZDF (former
| Neo) Magazin Royal" is behind that. They are an kind of
| investigative satire format, unfortunately topics like these are
| not too funny... But very good work from their side.
|
| Frontex was always suspected and accused for not following any EU
| moral and legal processes, this is just a proof and absolutely
| unacceptable.
| mimischi wrote:
| I'd say they are the German version of "Last Week Tonight with
| John Oliver"
| usrusr wrote:
| Certainly a very strong influence, much stronger now than
| before the 2020 hiatus/reboot, but it still retains more
| classic late show elements than Last Week Tonight (e.g. the
| stage band)
| morsch wrote:
| The slide is part of the SafeShore project ( _System for
| detection of Threat Agents in Maritime Border Environment_
| [1][2]), which received ~5 million EUR in grants, the largest
| beneficiary being an Isreali defense contractor. I'm not
| entirely sure what it bought us, I'm certain it included a PDF
| report and a few powerpoint slides.
|
| One of many (MANY) grants under H2020-EU.3.7. _Secure societies
| - Protecting freedom and security of Europe and its citizens_
| programme with a total budget of 1.7 billion EUR[3].
|
| Another example chosen at random[4]: _Improving the
| Effectiveness of the Capabilities (IEC) in EU conflict
| prevention_ , 2 million EUR, beneficiaries seem to be
| universities and think tanks. Another one? Ok[5]: _EfficieNT
| Risk-bAsed iNspection of freight Crossing bordErs without
| disrupting business_ , ~7 million EUR, 1.3 million of which
| went to -- for some reason -- the French government owned
| nuclear power research think tank CEA, other beneficiaries
| include manufacturers of things like airport metal detectors
| who apparently need millions of EU funds to improve their own
| products.
|
| The H2020 in H2020-EU.3.7. is Horizon 2020[6], the 2014-2020
| research funding framework (2014-2020 was a EU budget cycle,
| the current one is 2021-2027), which had an overall budget of
| an "estimated EUR80 billion of funding".
|
| What's my point? I have no point, really, I don't know a lot
| about EU research funding in general or this domain in
| particular, but it was interesting to look this stuff up and if
| nothing else it's nice to see that these things are out in the
| open for anybody to look up, even if virtually nobody does.
| Given how much money is being _spent_ here, I can 't help but
| wonder what kind of fraction of a fraction civil society is
| spending checking up on all of these projects.
|
| [1] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/700643
|
| [2] http://safeshore.eu/, defunct, apparently 5 million wasn't
| enough to buy the domain for more than 4 years; working
| snapshot from late 2020:
| http://web.archive.org/web/20201128133711/http://safeshore.e...
|
| [3] https://cordis.europa.eu/programme/id/H2020-EU.3.7.
|
| [4] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/653371 from the page
| with all H2020-EU.3.7. programs
| https://cordis.europa.eu/search?q=contenttype%3D%27project%2...
|
| [5] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/883424
|
| [6]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_Programmes_for_Resea...
| quink wrote:
| For a bit of a background for non-German folks and particularly
| Australians... that's a "government-run", "federal" broadcaster
| publishing this. Sounds like shooting your own foot? No.
|
| The Basic Law of Germany, approved by the Western allies in 1949,
| included telecommunications as a responsibility of the federal
| government. And so the federal government thought to create a
| television service to compete with those of the states. The
| states sued and won in the constitutional court - saying that
| telecommunications only referred to infrastructure and delivery,
| definitely not the content (think fascism and communism as to
| why). The resulting corpse was used by the states as a foundation
| for a new broadcaster formed through a state treaty.
|
| Germany is part of the EU and thus Frontex. The individual states
| of Germany organised a sister organisation, ZDF, to the Federal
| Republic of Germany itself and it isn't.
|
| One reason I mention all this is because we've got a broken media
| environment unlike Germany here in Australia with a vast amount
| of media concentration. And the constitutionality of the ABC is
| based on the constitution saying that telephones and the postal
| service fall under the responsibility of the federal government.
| The ABC isn't Australia Post or Telstra. Yet somehow we all just
| went along with the premise. So this is what happened here in a
| similar situation:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_Files_(Australia) - a police
| raid, the federal government applying pressure and a chilling
| effect for all future publications. The top three options in
| Australia for a 'stop the boats' leak like this would be 1. a
| broadcaster under a massive _chilling_ _effect_ by the 'stop the
| boats' government, 2. Rupert Murdoch or 3. Nine, with Costello in
| charge, who was literally the deputy 'stop the boats' guy.
| Horrifying.
|
| So when I see comments like
|
| > It's really worrying that there's some concentrated effort to
| take Frontex down.
|
| No, this leak comes from the constituent states of Germany being
| concerned by a "superior" power doing things that they haven't
| been authorised to do. Whether it's the Federal Republic of
| Germany deciding to start a public broadcaster despite the states
| (and Allied powers) not having agreed to that being its
| responsibility or whether it's the European Union starting a
| military (which it's not allowed to do) it's the same thing. It
| might be a concentrated effort, whatever - it doesn't matter -
| because it's a constitutional necessity. This leak here is an
| extremely important part of the process that all "inferior"
| constituent parts of something should engage in to keep the
| greater parts in check.
|
| Something the constituent states of Australia should take more
| seriously.
| Vinnl wrote:
| > this leak
|
| AFAICS it's not a leak, but a regular freedom of information
| request. And I'm not too familiar with how German media works,
| but if it's anything like the Dutch national broadcaster, it's
| not actually the states that are pursuing this, but journalists
| on their own accord.
| quink wrote:
| You guys need to be careful, having given the responsibility
| for funding public broadcasting to the government. That's
| dangerous.
| snicksnak wrote:
| > telephones and the postal service fall under the
| responsibility of the federal government
|
| Same thing as in germany, article 73 (7)
|
| To be precise, this is not a leak, those documents were
| obtained via EU's freedom of information law.
| quink wrote:
| You're right, I had missed that. I had watched the original
| segment but evidently missed that part. Partly probably by
| design because how the information was obtained and collated
| kind of distracts from the subject matter.
| conformist wrote:
| In addition to that, German public-service broadcast is
| supposed to be independent. It is not state-TV. Politicians
| attempts to influence content and programming are generally
| frowned upon. This is reflected in the supervising board and
| television board consisting of a broad mixture of appointees,
| both political and not [1]. The board does not have direct
| influence on editorial decisions [2] (in German). [1]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZDF#Supervising_board [2]
| https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/fragen-an-das-zdf-108.html
| krylon wrote:
| EU immigration policy is a disgrace. We like to sneer at Donald
| Trump and his supporters, but what the EU is doing in the
| Mediterranean sea is just as bad as building a wall. Maybe even
| worse, given the number of people that drown every year.
|
| Letting hundreds of people die each year in order to "discourage"
| others is no way to deal with this situation. In Germany, we put
| former GDR soldiers on trial and into jail for shooting people
| trying to flee into Western Germany. How is this different?
| the_mitsuhiko wrote:
| > In Germany, we put former GDR soldiers on trial and into jail
| for shooting people trying to flee into Western Germany. How is
| this different?
|
| Frontex does not shoot people.
| arendtio wrote:
| Well, not yet but since they are interested in buying
| firearms that future doesn't seem to be so far away.
| krylon wrote:
| No, they let them drown, they purposefully buy drones and
| aircraft instead of ships so they do not have to rescue them.
|
| It may not be quite the same, but it hardly measures up to
| the moral standards the EU likes to claim to stand for.
| guerrilla wrote:
| > Frontex does not shoot people.
|
| That wasn't the claim. The argument was that they kill people
| and that we've punished border guards who kill people before,
| so why not now. Shooting was just an example of killing.
| lampe3 wrote:
| So for you it depends on how you kill people?
| blub wrote:
| The EU has a quite reasonable (and rather lax) immigration
| policy, assuming that people come to the EU legally or move
| between EU countries.
|
| People that get smuggled across the Mediterranean on a dinghy
| are a very special case and bear the main responsibility for
| their fates.
| krylon wrote:
| As TFA points out, Frontex routinely and systematically
| ignores/breaks both European and international law. We do not
| deny medical treatment to people that get in car accidents,
| even if they caused the accidents themselves by driving
| recklessly.
|
| If the EU wants to keep migrants from Africa out, fine, but
| letting hundreds of people drown each year in order so send a
| message is not acceptable, ethically or legally.
| blub wrote:
| Maybe I missed something because I read with JS turned off,
| but in the article I read, Frontex is accused of meeting
| with lobbyists. Certainly fishy and morally dubious, but
| hardly unusual for the EU or for Germany for that matter.
| What laws are they _systematically_ breaking and how is
| that connected to people drowning?
|
| For the record the EU has an obligation to look into asylum
| claims made in the EU and reject or accept them as
| applicable. On the other hand, it turns out many are
| approved even if not valid and the EU is barely able to
| deport anyone, illegal migrant or not. Basically whoever
| gets into the EU has a good chance to stay there, even if
| they don't have that right, so it's no wonder the EU is
| trying to deter more people from coming because this is
| putting immense stress especially on Western European
| societies and causing conflicts.
|
| EU countries (and I think all countries) have a separate
| obligation to rescue people in distress at sea. The fact
| that someone is drowning in the middle of the Mediterranean
| is not a concern of the EU, as crass as that may sound -
| one rescues whoever is in trouble near one's ship. Still
| the EU is going above and beyond and is also sponsoring
| rescue missions that fish people out of the sea. Obviously
| not everyone makes it.
| lampe3 wrote:
| Okay so how do you come to the EU when you from Africa?
|
| Or if you are from the far east?
|
| Please enlighten me.
|
| Oh wait either you go through turkey where we don't even know
| whats happening with these people or you get pushed back on
| the Mediterranean sea by frontex.
|
| yeah sounds super lax to me...
| tasogare wrote:
| > Okay so how do you come to the EU when you from Africa?
|
| Go to an EU country ambassy and ask a visa like anyone. If
| rejected, get the hint and don't come.
| niczem wrote:
| ... that also worked out pretty well in the 1930s for all
| the jewish people trying to flee europe.
| LunaSea wrote:
| You apply for a visa like every other country in the world.
| oytis wrote:
| There are no visas for refugees.
|
| Most of Europe indeed has very progressive law regarding
| the asylum, but very hypocritical enforcement practice -
| you can get a refuge or at least a permission to stay for
| a prolonged time once you get across the border (even
| "illegally"), but a lot of people are going to try to
| stop you from doing that.
|
| So basically what Frontex does is protecting Europe from
| legal obligations that Europe voluntary committed to.
| What's even more dangerous, it's not under control of any
| single European government, so control over it by human
| rights activists and through political means is
| complicated.
| blub wrote:
| The people coming in aren't playing fair: many are not
| refugees and are transiting safe countries (including EU
| countries) to apply for asylum in their favorite country.
| It's understandable that they're desperate, but the EU
| doesn't have to accept that.
|
| Of course there's a lot of people trying to stop them,
| because what those migrants are doing is not according to
| the spirit of the asylum laws and it's threatening to
| seriously harm the social harmony of the countries
| receiving them. A significant number of EU citizens do
| not want migration from outside of the EU, unless the EU
| benefits (highly-educated specialists, etc) and those
| people integrate into their host countries. This conflict
| has been smouldering within Western Europe in particular
| for many years and I have the feeling that tensions have
| been rising strongly in the past years.
| lampe3 wrote:
| Try that in a country where there is no real goverment
| anymore or you are on the wrong side of history or you
| just have the wrong religion or you don't have enough
| money to buy a visa because you need to first bribe a lot
| of people or your country is a warzone and there is no
| gov anymore.
|
| Yes you can apply for a visa but try that without any
| papers...
|
| Or if someone gangs have taken away your passport and
| other ID documents...
|
| Or someone comes to your home and threatens you that if
| you don't fight for them they will kill your family...
|
| yeah apply for a visa... which can take years... <irony>
| good comment! </irony>
| zokier wrote:
| Seeking asylum and immigration are two very different
| processes.
| niczem wrote:
| ... no sh*t sherlock?!
|
| To legally claim asylum in a schengen state which has no
| external border to non-schengen states you literally have
| to fall out of the sky or travel into the country on a
| tourist visa.
|
| Guess what happens in the moment a crisis breaks out like
| it happened in Syria? Yes right, all the wealthy northern
| european states do not give out tourist visas anymore.
| zokier wrote:
| But the sub-thread was about _immigration_ policies, not
| about _refugee_ policies. It is perfectly consistent to
| have simultaneously lax immigration policy and harsh
| refugee policy (or vice versa).
| LunaSea wrote:
| They aren't tourists to that seems to make sense.
|
| They can however apply for refugee status in the closest
| refugee camp outside of Syria, usually in Turkey.
| niczem wrote:
| But there is also no possibility to ask for asylum in an
| embessy. Asylum is a right given by the constitution in
| germany and its not possible to fullfill this right
| because of the european border politics.
|
| Sure you can go to turkey - where you have no chance to
| legalize your status in mid- or long term. Where your
| children are not allowed to go to school.
| LunaSea wrote:
| So because Turkey doesn't accept them Europe should?
|
| A constitution doesn't allow for blanket emigration.
|
| There is always paper work involved to justify and
| motivate the request as well as quotas.
|
| Countries can't afford to house and feed limitless
| amounts off refugees.
| blub wrote:
| AFAIK the EU isn't neighboring any countries without
| governments or which are a war zone. So in theory, there
| should be very very few people seeking refugee status in
| the EU - the odd individuals persecuted for their
| political beliefs or religion. There's a process for that
| which was working quite fine, before being subverted by
| economic migrants trying to gain refugee status, or
| actual refugees avoiding safe countries along the way and
| applying in Europe. So ironically exactly those
| persecuted people may have to wait much longer to clarify
| their status.
|
| The fact that someone lost their papers or had them
| stolen is their problem. The EU isn't responsible for
| solving everyone's problem, in fact the political
| conflicts within the EU are mainly caused by EU countries
| pretending that they can.
| mrweasel wrote:
| There's a huge difference between refugees, which is what
| you'd be if your country is indeed a war zone. The EU
| doesn't deal well with refugees, but let's face it, many
| refugees also don't want to be granted asylum in Romania,
| they want to do to France or Germany.
|
| Part of the problem is that refugees and migrants mixes
| at the borders. EU is also terrible at managing refugees,
| mostly due to not being able to agree to distribute the
| refuges equally across the member states. Of cause that
| would provoke some people, because apparently Slovakia or
| Bulgaria isn't better than living in a war zone, but
| Sweden and Germany is.
| emteycz wrote:
| Yes, living in Slovakia can be as bad as living in a
| refugee camp even for Slovak citizens. It's rather
| obvious that people want to have better life, not the
| same they had - especially given Slovakian attitude
| towards non-white people.
| c06n wrote:
| I had a colleague from Cameroon (in Germany). He applied
| for a study visa, studied here, applied for a work visa,
| worked here, applied for German citizenship, got it. Same
| for people from Egypt and Nigeria I have met.
|
| People who claim there are not legal ways are ignorant or
| deceptive.
| liaukovv wrote:
| Is africans coming to europe some sort of human right owed
| to them by europeans?
| Bouncingsoul1 wrote:
| Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
| states that "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy
| in other countries asylum from persecution."
| blub wrote:
| The critical point is that people are traversing several
| countries or seas to apply for asylum in the EU. This is
| obviously not following the spirit of the applicable laws
| which were designed for avoiding humanitarian tragedies
| in neighboring countries.
|
| Many aren't even persecuted, just poor, lacking education
| and desperate.
| liaukovv wrote:
| Do they get to pick and choose where to flee?
|
| This is way too broad to be useful
| kyriakos wrote:
| I disagree. I am living in Cyprus and we received 1848/mil
| population asylum seekers in 2020 alone. We have by far the
| highest number of asylum seekers of any EU country (more than
| double from Greece which made the news). We really do nothing
| but letting them walk in at this point even if most of them are
| financial refugees from africa rather than war-torn areas.
| iagovar wrote:
| Go and rent a place in one of the many places that do receive
| this waves of migrants. Talk to people.
| arendtio wrote:
| The problem is everybody is looking at the symptom and wants
| to keep the poor people from moving to new places, yet nobody
| seems to care about the causes why they are leaving their
| homes.
|
| One example is the European food industry that exports milk
| products to Africa and disrupts the local economy, so people
| loose their jobs. But instead of regulating our industries to
| allow African countries to build up their own economies, we
| ramp up our forces to let those poor people die in the moat
| we call the Mediterranean.
|
| Instead of looking at the migrants, we should ask, what we,
| our organizations and especially our corporations are
| contributing to the problem. After all, how many rich
| migrants have you seen and how often are poor people the ones
| who control the situation?
| liaukovv wrote:
| Shouldn't africans solve their own problems?
|
| Isn't that what decolonialization was all about? I find
| your point of view rather insulting, implying that big
| white saviour must come and what? Build functioning society
| from outside? Impose "correct" government? Maybe send waves
| of missionaries to teach them how to live?
| arendtio wrote:
| In principle, you are right and this should at least be
| done in cooperation with African states. But it isn't
| about being a savior or missionary, it is about not being
| a bully.
|
| Simply letting advanced industries compete with local
| farmers isn't going to work out. In Europe, twelve people
| can run six farms with hundreds of cows each. In Africa
| twelve people work with two cows. In addition, European
| farmers receive subsidies, so that they work with lower
| cost and can compete with Chinese factories.
|
| I am not sure how much African politicians can do alone
| about such dynamics. And as the migration problem shows
| us, we have shared interests here.
| liaukovv wrote:
| We already have a success recipe in form of china and
| other asian nations.
|
| They start in position at the bottom of the economic food
| chain and work their way up, acquiring know-how and
| finding their place in the world. Charity is not
| necessary and probably harmful.
| malthejorgensen wrote:
| Colonialism still exists in the form of lopsided trade
| economics.
|
| Most of Africa is not able to trade freely with EU,
| creating a favorable economic situation for the EU. I'm
| not sure the milk example is a good one, but historically
| (post-colonialism) most value gained from mining in
| Africa has been gained by companies in the EU -- not much
| value gained for the African countries and citizens. This
| is due to the lopsided trade agreements but also
| corporate exploitation of the African countries.
|
| The African countries needs our help in the form of
| proper free-trade agreements, and in the form of us not
| meddling with their natural resources.
|
| Source:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bilateral_free-
| trade_a...
| liaukovv wrote:
| Europe deciding on both parts of trade agreements is
| literally colonialism.
|
| If africans don't like current trade agreements they are
| free to exit them and negotiate with chinese instead.
| lampe3 wrote:
| Yes I believe they are pretty annoyed by all of them and yeah
| they live in bad conditions.
|
| But that enough for having an company that kills? people?
|
| Maybe we should try to solve the problem in another way...
| Tepix wrote:
| Pushback has got to stop and the people responsible for it have
| to face justice.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-02-07 23:01 UTC)