This is the image of the Negro, widely conveyed for centuries and conceptualized by literature, poetry, documentaries, explorers, scientists, authors, archives, fables, the paintings, then later by the Western media in general, the cliché of integrated black fixed by the collective imagination over the centuries, that of the primitive, barbaric Negro, close to the monkey with a chickpea instead of the brain, with a slow evolution, the one we must educate. The one who, as the old national anthem of Cameroon sang, lived in barbarism and that we must little by little emerge from its savagery. The one to whom the white man brought light, civilization and even the good Lord, the one to whom the white man gave a little humanity in short, he made him almost a man, the superior, generous, sensitive being it was the Westerner, master of science and technology, holder of knowledge.
The one who worked to establish human rights. The one who made humanity sacred, who for this reason set up international law. What a picture, what an imposture, what a collective lie, clearly accepted, or at least integrated by everyone.
The truth is quite different when we experience the convulsions of our galaxy, we are far, very far from it. It's time to put an end to this cliché, to this propaganda that Western hegemonism has established as a religion. The danger, the barbarian, the threat to the world is not the African.
With the opening on the planet, with what we called: globalization, the truth is increasingly taking over. It offers the rest of the planet that we have smoked with great theories to form your own opinion, to make the raw reality known and to express it. At the same time, it becomes urgent to raise awareness among Africans so that he no longer leaves himself embark against his will in the battles of the great powers.
As the Cold War intensifies, the world enters into a period of unrest with a risk of a new planetary war, you have to be prepared to stay out. We must understand that those who give lessons are not qualified. They are poorly placed to decide for others.
And their moralistic, paternalistic posture does little to hide their deep motivation. The clothes do not make the man. Beware of cozy salons and their clean-cut dignitaries who adopt humanist postures, they sometimes hide dark designs.
Is a person, a father of a family, endowed with a little love, with a little humanity, can get up like this one morning and throw such a device of death on a city of several million people hoping to cause as many victims as possible? Can a so-called civilized person , in all conscience, lucidly, methodically, organize systematic genocide of a people who do not directly threaten their lives? Does a so-called human being, chosen moreover by his people, can thus, for purely economic calculations, start such a murderous war for ambition alone to take possession of the other's wealth?
You saw them, these American soldiers that they showed on TV when they were going to attack Iraq? But when are we going there? When are we going there?
We've been here for two days already We haven't killed anyone yet! When are we going there? Play with our toys?
We want to burst heads! We want to laugh. Are they men?
No. Are they animals? No, no animal is at that point.
Is it plants? But no, plants are beautiful. Are they stones?
But the stones are perfect. Let's not insult the stones. So what is it ?
Well it's nothing. It's demons. Who are they trained by?
Who are they paid by? But by us. No crisis like the one we face in our Western societies and around the world of today, has no other origin than intellectual and moral failure.
This crisis is old. Maybe it just got worse in recent years, particularly with this war in Ukraine. This Israeli violence against the Palestinians, this entry into the dance of Iran.
Instead of realizing that it is the world peace that is threatened, they continue to show their muscles, to show their strength, they continue to threaten their opponent. They promise to send ground troops to Ukraine. Only States that declare that they have no red line in relation to Russia.
They must then understand that in Russia there will be no line either red compared to these states. If we send ground troops, do we know if on the Russian side, other countries will send ground troops to the other side? Will we have African fighters?
Will we have Asian fighters? Will we have Middle Eastern fighters facing us? in this global South which also wants to settle scores?
Do you remember how the Vietnam War began for the Americans? We started by sending instructors. After four years, there were half a million.
If French troops appear in the conflict zone they will inevitably become targets for the Russian armed forces. Sorry for telling you things bluntly and they annoy me, they annoy me. We are not in a position to confront Russia, we are not in a state.
And Russia? I say it again to those who have never read a history book and to those who read it to remind them: no one can defeat a country that is across seven time zones and who has already defeated both Napoleon and Hitler. Avoid global confrontation.
We will not allow anyone to threaten our country and our strategic forces are always on alert. This is a dangerous situation. But what happens if there is another front that opens?
Have opened the Gaza front and the front in the Middle East, but there are others who can open up. In Korea. In Africa.
And then we will wage war on five continents. This reality must be taken into account. The world is not reduced to the Ukrainian drama and tragedy.
The rule of deterrence is to be based on the principle of mutually assured destruction. That is to say, if one uses the bomb, the other responds and in the end we are all dead. What happens if the French, Mr Macron said “it is not excluded”, Finns and Poles do it.
It's their choice. Will this require NATO consensus? Once again, for me, I avoid assumptions about the future.
Our policy is clear, President Biden's policy is clear. There will be no American troops on Ukrainian soil. Why?
Because for us it's something that will take us closer to a direct conflict with Russia, which we want to avoid. It is not in our interest, nor in the interest of the Allies. But at the same time.
. . Is this, sorry, would this be a sort of twist in the pact, let's say since the cold war, where there is no direct confrontation between the two nuclear powers, the fact that ground troops take place?
For us, it was a matter of national interest. It's not in our interest to have a direct conflict with Russia. It's even closer to home now.
So we have to be ready to do it. But yes, if we want to have peace, we must protect it. This is why we must arm ourselves and this is why we must sometimes be dissuasive and credible towards our adversaries telling them: "if you go too far and threaten my interests, my own safety, so I do not rule out intervening.
" We are in the process of explain that it is necessary to wage war against Russia. But I want someone to explain to me why? How does it threaten France?
How does it threaten France's vital interests? How is the fate of Ukraine vital for France? If you want to stop the fighting in Ukraine, stop supplying weapons.
These fights will end in two months at most. That's all. That's the first thing.
Did you imagine that Russia wanted to attack NATO? Have you lost your mind? Are you stupid like this table?
Who had this idea? It's bullshit. You understand?
Bullshit. We are for international order. The rules.
The United Nations Charter, also signed and ratified by Russia. She violated this charter, and she violates it every day. Russia is as big as 46 times the size of France, has twice the surface area of the United States of America, has 150 million inhabitants.
There were conditions which were discussed between the Russians and the Ukrainians and which were torn apart by Boris Johnson, former British Prime Minister, who called Zelensky and said we will win on the battlefield. We see the result. So, this is a loss of two generations in Ukraine because of this sentence from Mr Johnson.
Today, all these leaders seem more animated by the desire to show their strength than to seek peace. Each seems convinced that he can push the other back. We will not let Russia win.
France cannot shirk its responsibilities. “Slava Ukraini” (Glory to Ukraine) Well, think about it. What do you imagine?
That Russia is going to invade us? Cross six countries to invade France? It does not exist.
There will therefore be direct strikes, first from space, who will cut off the electricity, who will sabotage everything, and then there is war. You don't come out of your hat like a rabbit, the idea of going to war in Ukraine without being prepared at all. If I choose to return to tragic events, murderers, violent people of our contemporary history, it's because this time, the entire planet is threatened.
And believe me, I'm not being dramatic. <font color=#FFD200FF>They need to know that all this</font> <font color=#FFD200FF>can really lead to conflict with</font> <font color=#FFD200FF>the use of nuclear weapons and thus the destruction of civilization. </font> Do you understand, yes or no, that if Ukraine joins NATO and militarily recovers Crimea, European countries will be automatically drawn into a military conflict with Russia?
Of course, the potentials of NATO and Russia are not comparable, we know that. But we also know that Russia is one of the first nuclear powers and, in some of its modern components, even ahead of many other countries. There will be no winner and you will be drawn into this conflict against your will, and you won't even have time to blink when you will have to apply NATO Article 5.
Read Montesquieu, he says: he who makes war must be condemned . But we must even more condemn the one who made the war inevitable. When we meet the conditions for a conflagration, Sometimes all it takes is a small spark to ignite things.
And that is what threatens us today. Because today, we have the feeling, while listening television, that we are on the verge of war. It doesn't feel good to say that.
It is not politically correct, which is what I am going to express, and I know they're going to be hordes of right-thinking, pseudo-guardians of morality to fall on me with all their might. But the facts are stubborn, and they must be named. Western culture, I dare not say the white man, for fear of being accused of racism, is violent.
His civilization is cruel. Even if he has succeeded over the years, despite the numerous killings that he continues to perpetrate throughout the world, despite the violence of which he is regularly the author to pass off for the pacifist, for the protector of human rights, for the civilized being, for the guardian of peace, this does not hide a propensity to destroy radically anything that goes against his interests. Europe from all the continents of the world is the most brutal continent where there have been the most savage wars, it's not Africa, it's not Asia, it's Europe.
Our continent is brutal, savage and can lapse into barbarism. I spare you the numerous crimes of the slave trade with its cohort of women, children, men thrown into the sea or killed on cotton and sugar cane plantations. I will spare you the crimes of colonization with hangings and cut off arms of slaves who did not produce the required quantity of cotton or tobacco, children hanged simply because their parents were unable to produce the quantity of tobacco set by the colon.
I do not mention the bloody battles of conquest carried out on their own soil. I will just briefly mention the mass killings committed in the 20th and 21st centuries with the wildest violence. Imagine that there are half a million dead on the borders of Europe.
Half a million, many of them Ukrainian. But we continue because on the front of Boulevard Saint-Germain, we are very courageous to send young Ukrainians to die. Half a million.
And now the next step is sending troops. It's becoming a co-belligerent in the conflict with, as you said rightly, the issue behind a world war and a nuclear war. And I am 27 years old and I say it very clearly, very clearly: I don't want to go to the front, I don't want to be part of a new one,sacrificed generation.
As of March 1 of this year, when Washington says it deployed 662 intercontinental ballistic missiles equipped with 1419 nuclear warheads to be precise, as well as 800 launchers. Seriously, one must not be normal. You have to have a grain to make such arsenals of death.
You still have to be a little crazy to go to bed one evening with your children in the next room and at the same time develop such devices that can kill in an indiscriminate manner so many people, and be proud of it and show it off like a trophy, like an achievement, a progress. If this is what it means to be developed, if this is what it means to be civilized, perhaps we should refrain from becoming one at home. I'm not saying that the African is better, no, but it is clear over the centuries that the greatest mass killings, the bloodiest genocides planned and executed, are the fact of mostly Westerners, and whites in general.
It's not politically correct to say it that way, I know, but it is an observation that must be named and addressed clearly at some point so that the leaders of the North become aware of it and that their people exert the necessary pressure on them to calm this cruelty instead of wallowing in explanations that comfort them. In human memory, we have not yet witnessed such killings in Africa. It will be said that these Negroes are armed with simple bladed weapons.
Maybe it's better, we should have left it there. The barbarian, the savage who threatens the planet is not the one who is caricatured with a bone in his nose and a spear in his hand, launching into an attack on the animal or enemy. He is the one who coldly programs such devices of death.
It is the one who, in a cold way calculates, organizes these mass killings to show its superiority, to establish its supremacy or monopolize the property of the other. When we go back in history, they are the same which systematically bloody the world. Remember Hitler exterminating the Jewish people by carefully organizing the concentration camps.
And at the same time, Winston Churchill, the British Prime Minister adored by all, war hero, dropping a carpet of bombs on Drsden in Germany. Churchill, at the start of the war, it is said, waged war on the military and not to civilians and ended the war by bombing Drsden. How many deaths?
Drsden? Is that 40,000 to 80,000 deaths in one night? Between 40,000 to 80,000, we don't know, burned alive.
In this madness of men, Westerners have committed so many genocides, they have caused so many deaths that we wonder if human life has the same value for them. When the Americans, even before the atomic bomb, bombed Tokyo, the last time they see Tokyo, it's 100,000 dead. Today, we moved up a gear: nuclear power, which must simply wipe us all out from the surface of the earth at the touch of a button.
They have acquired that right. I find it difficult to respect someone who, under the pretext of nuclear deterrence, uses his ingenuity to create such arsenals. For me, he is the barbarian, and it is incongruous that he is the one who lavishes moral lessons, who speaks of peace, who dictates his rules to others.
When you have so much blood in your hands, we must have the decency not to set ourselves up as a model. We must have the correction not to try to impose once again by force its civilization of violence to the rest of the world. It is regrettable and unacceptable that the collective West continues to pursue hegemonic tendencies that violate blatantly the sovereign equality of nations, justice and equity, as embodied in the Charter of the United Nations.
Everyone agrees that unipolarity has no place in modern world politics and international economic relations. We, Westerners, have confused hegemony and universalism. On the pretext that we were hegemonic we said “our values are universal”.
So we have an overlooking position vis-à-vis the whole world, Africa, especially. Except that Africa no longer accepts it. And this overhanging position will have to be abandoned.
This is the real reason for the distance, for the rejection that the South now shows for the North. This propensity to think that one's concept, one's culture must impose itself on others, that it holds the truth and that it must be universal, that his model must be adopted by others in a forced manner. A biased model that only serves its interests and which he cheerfully rapes when it suits him.
Relations between peoples and between men, they are broken down into three phases: the first is the law to resolve conflicts, it works, it doesn't work. and for it to work, everyone must already agree on the legitimacy of this right, which is not the case. The international law that we brandish, I once said "like the Blessed Sacrament", but a good part of the world does not believe in the legitimacy of this right, and we ourselves do not believe in it only when it suits us.
We could list the cases where we deliberately raped her in recent decades. It is our double standard policy. It is more supported in Africa, not at all.
The coup in Chad is very good. The Son of Debby takes power. It is a coup d'état since he suspends the institutions with the agreement of the French, with the agreement of the French, with the presence of the president who legitimizes, exactly, who goes to the funeral, who legitimizes the coup d'état.
And then you do 1,500-2,000 kilometers, you go west, you go to Mali and then you say: oh well no, The coup d'état is not good. The junta has no legitimacy. These were the words of Jean-Yves Le Dran.
In view of this global threat, I want to say to Generalissimo Lecointre, chief of staff of the armies of France, who sees in Africa one of the greatest threats to Europe. To objectively measure where the real danger is for its continent. This, of course, if he spoke and in all sincerity.
It's up to Africans to protect themselves from the pressure of the cold, which threatens our tranquility with less and less discreet interference. Through arrogance, hegemonism, pride and greed. Now, more than in the past, they want us to take a stand in their conflict.
They want to impose their choice on us. The lesson seems not to have been learned. Today, more than ever, we want to force Africans to take a position for this or that side.
At the end of the day, it is essential that the United States has a footprint on the continent. Even a small amount is enough. The same can be said of investments by American companies Africa is of vital strategic importance to the United States.
We cannot let China or Russia become the preferred security or business partner. You condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine, but you claim the freedom to always deal with Russia. Of course.
Today, in France, Israel has been condemned for some of its actions in Gaza. Did this prevent France from maintaining its relations with Israel? Why do you want to judge us when this happens to Africans?
We don't have to be judged. We have the right to have the friends we want and we are friends to all who want to be our friends. It's as simple as that.
And this is what Africans want to make Westerners understand: to stop importing their squabbles, their clashes into our country. To stop telling us who we should be with or not. In reality, what African youth are rebelling against, and rightly so, it is this attempt to transport their differences to us.
And what is impressive and totally refused by African youth, it's receiving this lesson from people who are convinced that their model must absolutely be ours. We must adopt it as they taught us for so many decades in the conditioning centers that constitute our schools. We must apply their model, and the professorial tone, to say it on the media, is just unbearable, condescending.
Does the fact that it is to the detriment of democracies not bother you? Whether authoritarian regimes? What is democracy?
So there is a difference, when we live in a democracy or in a dictatorship, I assure you there is a big difference. . .
Let me reverse the roles a little. What is democracy? I went to China last May last year, and so I saw Chinese people to whom I spoke aside who told me that they were happy to live in their country and in the system in which they are Who am I to judge this system and say that “it’s not democratic”?
They are unhappy, deported, arrested, tortured. . .
But where do you see this? No, I don't know, honestly? Tian'anmen ?
Yes Tian'anmen but it's a demonstration like any other. There were some here. Were there no demonstrations in Paris which caused deaths?
Times have changed and African leaders, even if we can still blame them for many things, there are some who are gradually distancing themselves, to give ourselves a little freedom of thought than in the past. I know most of them were disappointed. They have too often been the accomplices of the great powers who often served them, sometimes with great zeal.
But today, most certainly under the pressure of public opinion more aware, more informed, more connected, they feel a little freer to take different positions, to listen to their youth. I'm going to tell you today, whether it's at the elite level or youth, the question that arises is: what do we gain in a relationship with Europe? Which dates back several centuries and which has not produced development among us, which did not necessarily help us to transcend our questions of central development, the fight against poverty, employment for young people, for the emancipation of women.
All the heritage of the civilizing mission of the white man, what we're going to have to do is stop this concept of development. We are not in charge of the development of the African continent. That is not the mission of the West, it is the mission of Africans.
What we are in charge of is our interests, our values and it is to build partnerships with those who want to walk a part of the way with us. That's it. So this development, me, as soon as I hear someone talk about development, I know that he is a person who looks down on the Africans who say I will explain to you how to do it.
Do you believe that today, Westerners are in a sin of pride? Apolline de Malherbe, Westerners must open their eyes, on the scale of the historical drama that is playing out before us to find the right answers. Difficult to make Westerners understand that there can be another way of thinking different from theirs when it comes to Africa.
We wish to share with you, in all friendship and trust this morning both our convergences and occupations to try to overcome them. Because the future of our continent will also very clearly depend on our capacity to continue to develop relations with China in a balanced manner, which is our will. China and the European Union, two major players in the world must stick to their partnership, continue dialogue and cooperation, deepen strategic communication, strengthen mutual strategic trust .
Imports into Europe from China have spent, hold on, by 25 billion euros per month at the end of 2019 to more than 40 billion euros at the start of 2022. Meanwhile, we are being warned about the same China. We who are the seventh world power today and who are descending little by little, can we say "we don't want to watch, attend the leading world power of tomorrow.
We are only interested in the second, namely the United States”? How so? So, then.
. . We're going to say "Oh no, we don't hang out with this one"?
It's absurd, huh? The Chinese system, I'm not an admirer of the Chinese system, but you know, in China there are things that are very good and things that are not good. But in the United States too.
When I see retirees in the United States in caravans, when they have more money and they have to work until the day they die, huh? Because there is no retirement, there is xyz, there are no social benefits, there's nothing. Well, maybe it's not exactly the dream country I thought it would be.
It is not China, Russia and Wagner who will provide lasting solutions to very serious difficulties experienced by African countries and their populations. We would not be mature enough, not adults to watch out enough about our interests vis-à-vis them? We would be too bad, too naive and immature to deal with them?
In short, we are only good for trading with the Europeans who looked after our interests so well for so many centuries? If we take the countries, the former colonies of France, for example, throughout West Africa, not only are there no nuclear power plants, not only are there no high-speed railway lines, there is still no access to water, that is to say that we had a policy of non-development that has been put in place. Today, with this paradigm shift, with the emergence of BRICS, we have this policy of mutual development, which moreover creates a geopolitical context extremely complex since the West, which is losing momentum.
. . today see Russia and China launch all-round partnerships with Africa on real projects, concrete measures that really allow Africa to industrialize.
So that poses a problem because the West does not agree and decides to oppose it. Let's be serious and clear so that it is understood by everyone definitively, so that we remove this heavy ambiguity, this false pretense that Western leaders maintain to clear their conscience in front of their populations at the same time as they accomplish their dark designs. Africans are not AGAINST the West, they are FOR Africa.
It's very different. They want to run their own business, without interference from others. They want to have the choice of their partners, of their friends.
We don't need to be for or against another continent or another country. No. It's energy-intensive and doesn't bring in anything.
We are for Africa, which puts us in a constructive, positive position. But the feeling that there is on African soil by the elites, by the new elites, by young people is that, ultimately, is it worth it? Several centuries later, whether we are in a relationship which has not produced what it had, which was initially a violent relationship by the way.
We do not understand what the post-colonial period is. From 1960, until the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1990, there was an integrated system of French politics, military, financial which we call, for short, Françafrique. France believed that we could continue, stay a little, like that.
Everyone was watching the reunification of Germany, no one was watching Africa globalize. We talk about Russia, but you have Turkey, you have the whole world in Africa. And France is completely surprised to see that one does not necessarily want one's cooperation, etc.
And you have this repressed African anachronism which says: now we want other partners, that's all. In fact, we kept a system that we fossilized while Africa evolved, but it did not evolve overnight. That is to say that more and more, this system that we call Françafrique with the CFA franc, military bases, the armies which intervene every time there is a security problem, this system was less and less understood, but finally, it was not from yesterday, it exploded recently, we can say it, but it was necessary.
. . Is there any responsibility on the part of Emmanuel Macron?
Yes, it is a responsibility of François Hollande, of Sarkozy, of François Hollande and also from Emmanuel Macron for not having understood these developments and for not having not steered African policy to adapt it. Obviously, the CFA franc had to be abolished because it is a sovereign competence, monetary questions. Certain military bases probably had to be closed .
It was also necessary to communicate differently. We had to behave differently too. It was not necessary to keep Barkhane with a French army practically occupying Mali for almost ten years, it was necessarily misunderstood by the population, especially if this French army replaces itself to the local army, if it communicates alone as in conquered territory.
All these accumulated errors, all these blunders have ended by making things explode in Mali and by contagion in other countries in the region as well. Diversify by diversifying. You noticed it, there are several missions that have been carried out.
Others are to come to really explore other horizons. Because we want partnerships as we like to say: win-win, honest. If we say I give you this and I want this in return, we discuss, we get along, if it suits us, we do it.
But perhaps we don't want a slightly vague partnership, unclear, unbalanced So this is why we are looking for many other partners in this fight. But there is not a grudge against a particular partner or hatred against a particular partner. Today, you still have a variety of partnership offers, a variety of offers, whether it is China, India, Brazil, Russia, South Africa, Kenya, Nigeria, we will be open to seeing what benefits there are for us, And is that an opportunity for Africa or a risk?
It's an opportunity, you know, the economy, the monopolistic position is never good for the consumer, So there, there is an opening from the point of view of the partnership, before there was only Europe now there are other possibilities, partners who are a little more liquid than Europe, that’s also the reality of things. There's a long time when I think, like most American veterans of the Cold War, that the West has accumulated errors and provocations and blunders. And not out of complacency in relation to the future Russia, which has once again become nationalist but casually.
We won, we won overall, and we don't care a little of what the Russians, the Chinese, the Arabs and the Africans think. If we fight against all these failings, all these interferences, all this contempt is being anti-French or anti-European. So in this case, we do not have the same conception of the notion of “against”.
For example, an element of Françafrique which is nevertheless undeniable is our military bases. Our British friends have a colonial empire two or three times more important than ours in Africa, do not have military bases. Why do we have military bases in Africa?
It is not to defend Africa, it is therefore to intervene in African affairs. If denouncing this French military presence it's being anti-French, so we're not ready to break the deadlock. What Africa is asking is to be left free to make its choices.
That's all. It no longer wants to be at the center of your struggles for interests or influence. It wants to take control of its destiny, to have the right to to make a mistake, to fall, to get up, to walk, to build, but with its own ideas.
This is how we learn. This is how we build ourselves and it is the desire of youth now more educated, more equipped and more open, ready to design and develop your own model. It is known that you cannot fit a square into a circle, and vice versa It is not by insisting that we will get there.
So let's stop putting pressure knowing that it doesn't work and let the creative genius of African youth do its work. I would like to thank you for your loyalty to my YouTube channel which has more and more subscribers, but also for my other digital platforms where you are more and more numerous despite the fake accounts which continue to multiply. Especially since cybercriminals are more and more active and compete of ingenuity to appropriate the work of others.
They have no problem confusing our message. Since the announcement of the imminent arrival of our AFO media channel, there have been a number of many fake accounts. I would like to warn you against these accounts which do not bind us and which are not ours, and which I ask you to denounce.
I would also like to inform you that the different platforms of our AFO channel are now available, i. e. the website with its web TV, Android and iOS applications which you can already download while waiting for our official launch in some months.
To keep it simple and not make a mistake with your smartphone and tablet, like in a restaurant, scan the QR Code that appears on your screen and you will enter directly into the AFO universe. We are waiting for you there because it is a turning point in our shared adventure. Join the AFO universe, the one that offers you the African narrative without complacency but without condescension.
