Translated from Russian to English - www.onlinedoctranslator.com 

                It is useless to wait decades for miracle investments.

          The reform will do everything “by itself” in a few years.

There is a fashionable, but, in my opinion, critically erroneous opinion that Africa is doomed to a second Chinese (Japanese, Singaporean, Israeli, Indian, etc.) “economic miracle”.

Why is this an error?

There are 2 main international forces: Western (Anglo-Saxon = European) culture and Eastern (Russian + Chinese = Eastern) culture.

These forces have been in continuous war since the beginning of the 20th century. After the defeat of Western culture in direct military conflicts:

                civil war in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century,

                The Second World War,

                in China and Korea, in Cuba, in the 70s in Vietnam, -

the war was moved to the economic and psychological aspects of the life of peoples.

The West began to limit the growth of USSR influence as follows:

determined the list

                a) countries-regions bordering the USSR, which, due to their level of development, made it possible to make decent profits: Japan, China, India, the Balkans, Turkey, Europe, Scandinavia

                b) and points of growth of USSR influence that are far from the USSR, but potentially dangerous for the West: Israel, Egypt, Algeria, etc. .

and began to raise the level of consumer life of the population of those countries so that it was higher than the consumer level in the USSR.

Countries:

technologies were transferred en masse for free: example - Japan and Israel,

gratuitous financial assistance was provided on an unprecedented scale: Japan, Israel (which even today would be bankrupt without multi-billion dollar annual injections, both from governments and non-governmental entities).

We find that the direction of investment was determined not so much by private benefit, how much macroeconomic (political) benefit at the level of economies of the entire planet.

Let's look at the statistics.

Let's take as a basis the investments of the richest economy in the world - the USA:

US foreign investment > investment of all other capitalist countries combined. ([1]

In 2006, US investment in Africa amounted to <1% of all outgoing investment: $22 billion

a little more than 1.3% is invested in potential enemies of the United States - the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, including Russia and other CIS member countries.

That is, in 2006, the United States perceived Africa as a completely uninteresting destination.

Why ?

Firstly. because Africa had NO influence on “stopping” the influence of the East (Russia).

Secondly, what industries did the United States invest in during those decades?

                1970-1989 → manufacturing industry

                1990-2006 → into the service sector * into states with high profitability of consumer values: rich states: for 17 years ↑ in 9! once.

Is there a country in “black” Africa where the population has high purchasing power?

                Conclusion No. 1:

It is NOT PROFITABLE for the United States (and the entire team of rich countries) to invest in the consumer sector of “black” Africa,

and therefore for economic purposes they WILL NEVER be invested.

                The second area of US investment (and the team) was in the manufacturing industry, but in the knowledge-intensive industries: chemistry, electronics, etc.

What do we have in this regard in “black Africa”? Almost zero!

                Conclusion No. 2:

It is NOT PROFITABLE for the US (and the entire team of rich countries) to invest in the manufacturing sector (even at the manufacturing level) in “black” Africa,

and therefore for economic purposes they WILL NEVER be invested

                That is, Africa is absolutely the richest countries economically! not interesting.

The opinion that the “rich” will not survive without Africa’s resources is a mistake: the world has plenty of all resources. But, without money from the “rich” Africa will definitely not survive!

                But maybe political changes will lead to increased investment?

From 2006 to 2024, great changes took place in the West-East conflict in favor of the East.

And how have investments in Africa changed from those and from others combined for 2021-2023?

Table 1: Investments, billion $ : ([2] + [3]

                sources: [4] + [5]

The fact that Europe (before the world war) is shifting its economy away from Russia - to the USA, China, etc. - is known to everyone,

But, with regards to Africa, no good trend is visible.

I suggest looking at the numbers from a new perspective: how PROBABLE is it that “the train will MOVE”:

That. in Africa, the “Phenomenon of Growing Investments” is from the general phenomenon: “Africa + Asia”, - = 1/5. To hope that investments will grow similar to the Asian region, the share of the Phenomenon in Africa must be at least 1/3, that is, 50% more, and CONSTANTLY.

The phenomenon cannot theoretically grow 1.5 times due to chance (: persuasion, conjuncture, inter-clan divisions), only as a result of the emergence of certain new global patterns.

This means that until the political interests of the Powers That Be consider Africa important for the struggle among themselves, until then, none of the Parties to the “duel” will invest in Africa qualitatively more than they have today.

                For reference: at the Russia-Africa 2023 event, the representative of Eritrea asked Russia to build factories, but so far I have not heard of anyone agreeing on this. Yes, Russia will be happy to build nuclear power plants, but it is unlikely to build factories.

Running after a “piece of the pie” from the point of view of the development of a continent, or even a large country, is useless: the piece is too small.

Especially when you consider that South Africa has 62 million people. “eats off” a significant part of it.

Note:

If you subtract 10 billion incoming investments from South Africa [6]  and 62 million of its population, then it turns out: