FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Mining Myth

by BINOY KAMPMARK

It has been a fiction that has held sway for a time.  Mining booms create trickledown wealth.  It is tagged as “sustainable” when it is premised on temporariness.  Natural resources work for countries that possess them in abundance.  Only on the periphery do we see the sense of foreboding that comes with these assets, be it the murder of such leaders as Patrice Lumumba in the Congo over fears that he might have handed over natural resources to the Soviets, or the fear of becoming a two speed economy, one dangerously reliant on commodity prices and extraction dues.

The latter is particularly relevant to the Australian context.  Leaders like proclaiming the country as stable and untouched by the political fractiousness that tends to afflict other countries with similar pools of wealth.  These scions of plunder are attempting to give lessons to other countries in the game, which is much like a thief teaching other thieves how best to open a safe in a sustainable, green way.  This is the message at the Mining for Development Conference taking place in Sydney over May 20 and May 21.

The conference profile reads like a smooth document on dispute resolution and good governance, a manifesto of promise and environmental equilibrium.  Mining, in short, is praiseworthy.  It has had its problems, but the guests are keen to follow such standards as the EITI (Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative), the global standard for transparency of revenues from natural resources.  And it has the blessings of AusAid, thereby surreptitiously linking aid to developing countries with a noble mining sector.  If Coke would sponsor programs on nutrition, this is what it would look like.

A few comments from the International Mining for Development Centre’s director Ian Satchwell are worth noting.  “The history of mining in many developing countries has not been a good one, and countries have done less well than they should from mining and oil and gas extraction in the past” (ABC, May 20).  This may be the understatement of the week.

The next comment is also striking.  “Where many developing countries have fallen short is that they have not had good experience getting mining revenue from mining companies and then the useful application of that revenue into investment in community and infrastructure.”

Is Australia any different from those “developing” economies where mining and development tend to be less matters of accommodation rather than matters of exclusion?  The mining lobby has hardly been amenable to infrastructure oilcurseprojects that have any utility beyond the crude issue of getting more miners and finding more deposits.  Empty pockets need lining.  Local fat cats need feeding.  Even an imposed mining tax has not provided the rewards the government promised.

That does not stop the agitprop from circulating, something that the mining initiates tell each other constantly.  Indeed, leafing through such reports as those of Susan A. Joyce and Mark E. Smith in The Latin American Mining Report (Sep/Oct 2003), the fantastically misplaced praise for not only mining but its sustainable credentials is unmistakable.  For the authors, “mining’s track record is not bad, having been the foundation for some of the biggest sustainable economies on Earth.  This new challenge can in fact be our ally – mining’s belief in its contribution to economic development is a truth that shines well on the industry.”  No mention of local disputes, environmental carnage and political disruption.

History is picked upon at the authors’ convenience – California being one such example. “Mining created the economic engine which opened up a distant and isolated region with lots of other potential – and for which the US had just finished fighting a war with Mexico.”  Right out of manifest destiny’s top drawer.

Then come the benefits mining provides, the collateral benefits that make the authors thrilled that such an enterprise can be economically ennobling – the making of wheel barrows by Studebaker, or the pants by Levi Strauss for miners.  Digging is good for soul, country and economy.  But overall – and let’s scream out the word – it can be sustainable, an astonishing illusion that has assumed the form of holy mantra.

The speakers at the Mining For Development Conference have embraced the sentiment like cult followers of the next fashion.  Professor Paul Collier, fellow of St. Antony’s College, Oxford, recalled the Ashanti Goldfields of Ghana, where the mining enterprise became a treatment enterprise for employees and residents suffering from malaria.  “Mining companies in developing countries often develop roles outside their core competence.”  Let’s just ignore those less savoury roles in mining’s blotted copy book.

The facts of the mining industry remain dark and disturbing.  Deposits are to be found in developing countries that curse them rather than benefit them.  Even the delegates admit that.  Goodness, even the World Bank, in an extensive investigation of over 200 regions, has reached the same, numbingly obvious conclusion.  And an easy point to forget is what developed countries tend to do to the unfortunates who find themselves sitting on unmined wealth. Instability is rarely a one-way street. Corporate complicity with brutal regimes tends to go hand in hand, a point skilfully evaded by the delegates.

The disastrous effects can also be felt in wealthier states, where the oxymoron of “sustainability” is demonstrated with disastrous import.  The Redbank Copper mine on the Northern Territory-Queensland border is one such an example, a mine that leached heavy copper sulphide for two decades that turned Hanrahan’s Creek to a deadly hue of green and blue.  Toxicity levels have killed the creek and potentially threaten pristine wetlands (Northern Territory News, Mar 15).

Michael L. Ross, himself a participant in the proceedings, should know what such wealth does. In 2012, his The Oil Curse: How Petroleum Wealth Shapes the Development of Nations examined the astonishing disparities that oil-rich countries have in terms of stability, the presence of autocracy and the chronic failures to distribute wealth, though he tends to ignore the insatiable appetites of countries all too keen to meddle in such areas as the Middle East. Then there is that gaping lacunae in the literature on what developing countries do with such reserves.

Hunger and insecurity regarding natural resources are terrible motivators, and that lesson should not be missed by those developed countries happy to gain their wealth by their remorseless and ultimately unsustainable digging.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He currently lectures in politics and law at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

 

 

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

More articles by:
May 30, 2016
Ron Jacobs
The State of the Left: Many Movements, Too Many Goals?
James Abourezk
The Intricacies of Language
Porfirio Quintano
Hillary, Honduras, and the Murder of My Friend Berta
Patrick Cockburn
Airstrikes on ISIS are Reducing Their Cities to Ruins
Uri Avnery
The Center Doesn’t Hold
Raouf Halaby
The Sailors of the USS Liberty: They, Too, Deserve to Be Honored
Rodrigue Tremblay
Barack Obama’s Legacy: What Happened?
Matt Peppe
Just the Facts: The Speech Obama Should Have Given at Hiroshima
Deborah James
Trade Pacts and Deregulation: Latest Leaks Reveal Core Problem with TISA
Michael Donnelly
Still Wavy After All These Years: Flower Geezer Turns 80
Ralph Nader
The Funny Business of Farm Credit
Paul Craig Roberts
Memorial Day and the Glorification of Past Wars
Colin Todhunter
From Albrecht to Monsanto: A System Not Run for the Public Good Can Never Serve the Public Good
Rivera Sun
White Rose Begins Leaflet Campaigns June 1942
Tom H. Hastings
Field Report from the Dick Cheney Hunting Instruction Manual
Weekend Edition
May 27, 2016
Friday - Sunday
John Pilger
Silencing America as It Prepares for War
Rob Urie
By the Numbers: Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are Fringe Candidates
Paul Street
Feel the Hate
Daniel Raventós - Julie Wark
Basic Income Gathers Steam Across Europe
Andrew Levine
Hillary’s Gun Gambit
Jeffrey St. Clair
Hand Jobs: Heidegger, Hitler and Trump
S. Brian Willson
Remembering All the Deaths From All of Our Wars
Dave Lindorff
With Clinton’s Nixonian Email Scandal Deepening, Sanders Must Demand Answers
Pete Dolack
Millions for the Boss, Cuts for You!
Gunnar Westberg
Close Calls: We Were Much Closer to Nuclear Annihilation Than We Ever Knew
Peter Lee
To Hell and Back: Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Karl Grossman
Long Island as a Nuclear Park
Binoy Kampmark
Sweden’s Assange Problem: The District Court Ruling
Robert Fisk
Why the US Dropped Its Demand That Assad Must Go
Martha Rosenberg – Ronnie Cummins
Bayer and Monsanto: a Marriage Made in Hell
Brian Cloughley
Pivoting to War
Stavros Mavroudeas
Blatant Hypocrisy: the Latest Late-Night Bailout of Greece
Arun Gupta
A War of All Against All
Dan Kovalik
NPR, Yemen & the Downplaying of U.S. War Crimes
Randy Blazak
Thugs, Bullies, and Donald J. Trump: The Perils of Wounded Masculinity
Murray Dobbin
Are We Witnessing the Beginning of the End of Globalization?
Daniel Falcone
Urban Injustice: How Ghettos Happen, an Interview with David Hilfiker
Gloria Jimenez
In Honduras, USAID Was in Bed with Berta Cáceres’ Accused Killers
Kent Paterson
The Old Braceros Fight On
Lawrence Reichard
The Seemingly Endless Indignities of Air Travel: Report from the Losing Side of Class Warfare
Peter Berllios
Bernie and Utopia
Stan Cox – Paul Cox
Indonesia’s Unnatural Mud Disaster Turns Ten
Linda Pentz Gunter
Obama in Hiroshima: Time to Say “Sorry” and “Ban the Bomb”
George Souvlis
How the West Came to Rule: an Interview with Alexander Anievas
Julian Vigo
The Government and Your i-Phone: the Latest Threat to Privacy
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail