Chad, oil, and human rights

Is this just another instance of the Bush administration playing power politics? Unfortunately, the story did not explore how the pipeline will continue the area's dismal record of human-rights abuses and dictatorship.

About nine million people live in the landlocked nation of Chad. As the fifth-poorest country in the world, it has few natural resources, and per capita income is less than $200 a year. Less than half the population is literate. The president, Idriss Deby, first gained power in a coup in 1990 and has been in power ever since.

According to the State Department, "Deby won a flawed 63 percent first-round victory in May 2001 presidential elections after legislative elections were postponed until spring 2002. Six opposition leaders were arrested (twice) and one opposition party activist was killed following the announcement of election results." Given that Deby has banned gatherings of more than 20 people, how are local communities supposed to voice their opinions on the pipeline? Not to mention that last year the police hurled tear gas into a crowd of 100 women protesting outside the French Embassy.

The pipeline is being financed by the World Bank, which proclaims, "Our dream is a world free of poverty." However, under the leadership of James Wolfensohn, a

former Salomon Brothers investment banker who had never before held any sort of public office, the Bank has continued to fund huge infrastructure boondoggles like highways, dams, and, yes, pipelines.

Most research now, however, supports micro-lending and women's initiatives as the best way to reduce poverty. Along with the kickbacks and corruption that eat up many of the huge projects' budgets, their benefits usually flow to government monopolies and corporations run by family members of the country's leaders rather than the local communities they are supposed to serve.

Go to http://www.rainforestinfo.org.au/wrr39/chadpipe.htm to read a letter about the pipeline to the Bank from 86 NGOs alleging "extra judicial executions, arbitrary arrests and torture," and that "renewed conflict and violence [in Chad] are linked to the prospect of massive oil revenues."

Will Chad be the next Saudi Arabia, home to a militant Islamic government bent on brutally suppressing its own people and propped up by American big oil? It's no coincidence that some of the most significant wellsprings of anti-Americanism from around the world _ e.g., Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Indonesia _ are places where the US has supported repressive regimes. Iran's government is no better, but because the Ayatollah's disgusting politics have estranged him from Washington, Iran is possibly the most pro-US country in the Middle East.

Then there's the environmental impact of this pipeline, which is slated to cut through Cameroon's still-pristine Mb?©r?© Rift Valley and uproot a local tribal population. Don't worry though _ Exxon commissioned an environmental impact report that concludes, ominously, "The Chadian oil reserves might be developed by other investors who are less committed to the level of environmental and socioeconomic protection measures that will be an integral part of the Chad Export Project."

Africa needs investment and development, but this is not the way. Extracting Chad's resources will only profit Deby and his allies, enabling them to continue their stranglehold on the region, purchase more weapons, and enhance their international credibility. More grass-roots initiatives and programs aimed at benefiting individuals, especially minorities and women, should be how the Bank uses its resources in Africa.



Andy Felton is a graduate student in the Economics department.