Junta-led Burkina Faso to nationalise more industrial mines
Burkina Faso plans to increase its control over foreign-owned industrial mines, as the country looks to capture a larger share of revenue from its natural resources.
Burkina Faso plans to increase control over foreign-owned industrial mines to capture a larger share of revenue from natural resources.
Revised mining code and state-owned mining company SOPAMIB strengthen national oversight and participation.
The government took control of two industrial gold mines previously owned by Endeavour Mining.
Burkina Faso plans to increase its control over foreign-owned industrial mines, according to its prime minister, as the country looks to capture a larger share of revenue from its natural resources.
Following in the footsteps of neighbours like Mali and Niger, Burkina Faso revised its mining code last year and established a new state-owned mining company, Société de Participation Minière du Burkina (SOPAMIB), to strengthen national oversight and participation in the sector, Reuters reported.
Burkina Faso used its newly established state-owned mining company, SOPAMIB, to take control of two industrial gold mines previously owned by London-listed Endeavour Mining, in a deal finalized late last year.
In a nationally televised speech on Monday night, Prime Minister Jean Emmanuel Ouédraogo announced that the government intends to further expand its control over the country's natural resources.
Burkina Faso's mining sector reforms have raised concerns among investors, but the country's military-led government argues that change is necessary to maximize revenue from its vast gold reserves and revive an economy strained by years of insecurity.
Gold prices have surged more than 25% this year, driven by global geopolitical tensions and erratic trade policies under U.S. President Donald Trump. In 2023, Burkina Faso, despite ongoing conflict with Islamist militants since 2015, produced over 57 tons of gold.
Major international players in the country include Canada's IAMGOLD and Australia's West African Resources Ltd. However, a newly revised mining code now prioritizes local expertise and suppliers, signalling what the government calls a "revolution" in managing the country's mineral wealth.
Shifting alliances
Since taking power through two coups in 2022, Burkina Faso's military-led government has seen its relationships with Western allies deteriorate.
Like its junta-led neighbors Mali and Niger, the country has increasingly turned to Russia for both security support and economic collaboration.
Just last week, the government granted an industrial mining license to Russian company Nordgold for a new gold project.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
29 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Letters: Sen. Padilla's removal from Noem event indicative of Trump's cynical policies
The slam down, handcuffing and forceful removal of Sen. Alex Padilla from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's press conference on Thursday flows from the violence and unrest caused by President Donald Trump's policies to go after the undocumented immigrants where they work, shop and go to school. Immigrants are not criminals but hard-working people (often in jobs others would not consider) who pay taxes and contribute significantly to our economy. They have been allowed to stay in the United States, often for generations, because they are needed Both political parties have failed to pass legislation that would deal with immigration in an efficient and humane way. The most recent attempt, before the presidential election, would have passed but for the opposition of candidate Trump, who cynically sought to exploit the issue. I fear he is now exploiting the unrest he is causing to use it as a means to declare martial law and gain absolute power. Tom Miller, Oakland Deport the worst I am somewhat appalled by the media describing the disruptions in Los Angeles as mostly peaceful demonstrations protected by free speech, accompanied by pictures of burning cars, looting and attacks on police. If these people want to peacefully join our society, why are some of them waving Mexican and, in a few cases, BLM flags? If they intend to intimidate me, they should return to their own country, self-identified by the flag they are waving. Most of our forebears came here legally and peacefully, including, in my case, some from Mexico. I would be happy with a system that screens potential citizens, and excludes those who want to commit crimes or intimidate those around them. I approve of President Donald Trump's stated goal of deporting the worst first. We need to get rid of those who commit crimes. I would be happy to see new citizens, but not the thugs who intimidate us through their demonstrations. Peter Behr, San Anselmo Newsom is right Regarding 'Trump vs. Newsom an ugly skirmish that benefits both politicians' (Politics, June 10): The story suggests that President Donald Trump's search for dictatorial powers through intimidation, fear and escalating violence, and Gov Gavin Newsom calling this out is simply a tit-for-tat play for the attention of an uninformed public. It is becoming more obvious that Trump is trying to tear down the guardrails of civil society, trash the Constitution and eliminate all opposition. If Gov. Newsom did not express his strong, powerful and articulate opposition to this despicable behavior, he would not be doing his job. The Chronicle must not be afraid to illuminate the fact that Trump is a mortal danger to our democratic way of life. Kanda Alahan, Concord
Politico
44 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump has a plan to remake the housing-finance system. It's baffling to many lawmakers and experts.
GOP lawmakers and the mortgage industry are raising questions about the Trump administration's plans to maintain government control over much of the nation's housing finance system, defying expectations that it would back off. President Donald Trump surprised the industry late last month by pledging to take public Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-controlled companies that stand behind half the $16 trillion residential mortgage market — while preserving an implicit federal guarantee for their solvency. His top housing regulator, Bill Pulte, who oversees the companies, added to the confusion by saying the administration is exploring ways to sell shares while keeping the companies under government authority. The insistence on preserving significant sway over the two mortgage giants, which were seized by the Bush administration during the financial crisis and placed in conservatorship, is setting up a potential rift with Republicans — and possibly even some administration aides who have long worked to reduce the government's footprint in the housing market. 'I want to get them out of conservatorship,' said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), chair of the Senate Banking subcommittee with oversight of Fannie and Freddie. 'But I want to be very careful about how we do it, because we need the secondary market, and we need it to work,' he added, referring to the market where mortgage loans are purchased and sold to investors. Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.), a member of the House Financial Services Committee, said 'we need to continue to investigate recapitalization and releasing' the companies from government control. The question of what to do with Fannie and Freddie has bedeviled policymakers for decades, with Republicans wanting the government to take its hands off housing finance and Democrats fearing that privatizing the firms would destabilize the market and push up mortgage rates. At stake is a potential windfall of hundreds of billions of dollars for an administration that is staring at massive fiscal deficits. The government holds a roughly $340 billion liquidation preference for the two companies, by one estimate — meaning the money would go to the Treasury Department before anyone else in the event of a sale. Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, will meet with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins on June 17 to discuss the future of Fannie and Freddie, underscoring the importance of the issue. Fannie and Freddie don't make loans themselves, but rather purchase them from mortgage companies and bundle them into securities to sell on the secondary market, freeing up the lenders to make more loans. That, plus the government guarantee, helps keep mortgage rates down, supporters say. Trump was widely expected to support privatization, after his first administration worked to prepare the companies for their eventual release. But his latest comments look more like what former President Joe Biden would do, according to Jim Parrott, a nonresident fellow at the Urban Institute and a former economic adviser in the Obama White House. 'In the Biden administration, you could imagine a version of this,' Parrott said. 'The fact that we're hearing about it in this administration, I think, is catching folks by surprise.' The FHFA responded in an email that it is 'studying how, if the President elects to take Fannie and Freddie public, it can be done in the safest and soundest manner which includes keeping them in conservatorship.' It added: 'In any scenario, we will ensure the [mortgage-backed securities] market is safe and sound and that there is no upward pressure on rates.' White House deputy press secretary Harrison Fields said the administration 'is committed to strengthening the Federal Housing Finance Agency to advance the President's mission of restoring the dream of homeownership for all Americans.' Keeping Fannie and Freddie in conservatorship, according to one shareholder, amounts to attaching 'training wheels' as the government figures out how to monetize its stake. 'I think Pulte has probably confused people more than anything with his message,' said Tim Pagliara, a shareholder and author of the book 'Another Big Lie: How the Government Stole Billions from the American Dream of Home Ownership and Got Caught!' 'So the idea, for example, of allowing these entities to operate in conservatorship is a strategy that they probably talked about with the investment bankers on their primary concern, which is mortgage rates going up,' he added. 'It's like putting training wheels on a bike.' The administration's pronouncements have perplexed housing finance analysts who are unsure of what a scheme to take the companies public while keeping them in conservatorship would look like — or whether there would be sufficient investor appetite to make it worthwhile. JPMorgan strategists wrote in a note that they were 'flummoxed' by the comments. 'It's just hard to imagine why anybody would think there would be strong investor interest in that kind of model, unless the government were to convey they were going to run the [government-sponsored enterprises] in a way that's investor-friendly, and I think we're a long way off from that,' Parrott said. David Dworkin, president and CEO of the National Housing Conference, a stakeholders' group, agreed. 'The most important element of a successful stock sale is a board that is truly independent and has a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders,' he said. 'Under conservatorship, that is actually not even allowed. So, without an independent board with a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders, there is no value to the stock.' Still, he said, 'there are far too many comments coming from major players, including the president of the United States, to avoid the conclusion that major action on conservatorship could be in the very near future.' Another housing finance analyst, granted anonymity to frankly discuss the nascent plans, also expressed skepticism about the idea that investors would bite on purchasing shares in conservatorship, with the federal government still owning the vast majority of the asset. 'The direction of that control can change at the next election,' the analyst said. 'Each administration has already demonstrated they want to use Fannie and Freddie in different ways, so what are you investing in?' For the most part, Republican lawmakers are keeping their powder dry as they wait for additional details about the administration's plans. '[Senate Banking Committee] Chairman [Tim] Scott looks forward to hearing more' from Trump and Pulte on their plans for Fannie and Freddie, spokesperson Ben Watson said. Asked if conservatorship should end, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a member of the Banking subcommittee with oversight of Fannie and Freddie, said, 'I don't know.' 'We're going to wait until the first quarter of 2026 to have that conversation,' said Rep. Mike Flood (R-Neb.), chair of the Financial Services housing subcommittee. 'Releasing them from conservatorship, that's one thing, but most of the folks I talked to still want the federal government on the hook.' The first Trump administration worked to build capital at the companies to prepare them for the end of conservatorship, an effort led by then-Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and former Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Mark Calabria. Calabria has returned for Trump 2.0, now in a position with the White House Office of Management and Budget. Two key Treasury officials — Jonathan McKernan and Luke Pettit — also hail from the school of thought that Fannie and Freddie should be released from conservatorship. 'The Treasury Department has not really engaged on this yet — so it does not appear to me that the administration is very far into the analysis of options phase,' Parrott said. 'Until the Treasury Department really engages in any of this meaningfully, it's hard to know where all this lands.'
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Trump wants to score trade deals in Canada. He's unlikely to get them.
President Donald Trump will arrive in the Canadian Rockies on Sunday for a meeting of the world's economic powerhouses facing a potentially calamitous tariff deadline and a burgeoning crisis in the Middle East. But he's unlikely to leave the three-day summit with a breakthrough on either front. Trump is eager to use the G7 meetings to show progress toward an array of trade deals with the U.S.'s most critical allies. The gathering also takes on heightened importance in the wake of an Israeli attack on Iran that sent oil prices skyrocketing and injected fresh uncertainty into the global economy. But Trump officials are struggling to lock down trade pacts that they predicted were imminent in the wake of a first deal with the U.K. nearly a month ago. Even early chatter of a deal with Japan by this week's conference appears unlikely, said two people close to the White House, granted anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. And now, with the U.S. occupied by turmoil in the Middle East, Trump aides and advisers are tempering expectations for what the G7 may ultimately produce. 'Everybody just wants to survive,' said Ivo Daalder, president of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and a former U.S. ambassador to NATO. 'There's not a lot of interest in making deals.' In a call with reporters on Friday, a senior U.S. official granted anonymity to preview the summit offered little in the way of specific goals, saying only that Trump sought to 'make progress' in a range of areas including 'making America's trade relationships fair and reciprocal.' The lowered stakes reflect the plodding pace of negotiations with economic partners since April, when Trump blew up their trade ties in pursuit of new deals that he's insisted must be more favorable to the United States. Leaders across Europe are projecting resolve despite the prospect of punishing tariffs come early July. The reduced expectations also underscore how quickly Trump's return to office has fractured the close Western alliance that the U.S. long claimed to lead. Whereas the G7 once prided itself on speaking with one authoritative voice on critical economic and national security matters, most leaders are now just hoping to escape the summit site in Kananaskis, Alberta, without opening a new front in their fight with Trump, diplomatic experts and others involved in the summit preparations said. The G7 countries have already abandoned hopes of signing a traditional joint statement, upending decades of precedent over worries that Trump and his counterparts are too far apart on a number of key issues. The nations instead plan to issue a handful of 'leaders' statements' on more specific issues where all or most of them can reach agreement. The move averts the risk of a repeat of the last Canada-hosted summit, when Trump in 2018 abruptly rejected the statement via an incensed tweet from Air Force One. Back then, negotiators had spent hours haggling over a single word in a line related to trade amid Trump's vows to impose steeper tariffs on allies, said one of the people close to the White House. But shortly after reaching agreement, then-Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau criticized the U.S. tariffs, enraging Trump and prompting him to pull his support. New Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has sought to sidestep conflict with the rest of his agenda as well, with multilateral meetings on topics like energy security and drug trafficking aimed at emphasizing areas of common ground. As for the White House, it's shied away from making grand promises. A potential trade deal with Japan is unlikely to be finalized. And while officials cautioned that Trump could always broker a surprise agreement in meetings with other world leaders, there's little expectation that the summit will yield more than commitments to keep talking. 'Everyone's in really different spots in their trade relationships,' one of the people close to the White House said of the several parallel efforts to strike new trade agreements. 'I would be shocked if they came out with anything like the U.K.-U.S. framework in that environment.' Still, Trump and his aides view the G7 as a high-profile opportunity to reassert American primacy over even their closest allies, said advisers and others involved in the global preparations. Trump is likely to jump at any chance to demonstrate his administration's strength on the world stage, even if just rhetorically — forcing the rest of the group to decide when to go along and when to risk confrontation. 'A success on the U.S. side would be going to the summit and being seen as not being pushed around by other leaders,' said Caitlin Welsh, a former senior National Security Council official during Trump's first term. The president may get plenty of opportunities to cultivate that image. In addition to trade issues, Trump's response to Israel's attack on Iran will be closely watched for clues as to whether the U.S. will join the fray. Trump is also likely to face greater pressure to impose sanctions on Russia over its war in Ukraine — a step that he's publicly floated but remains reluctant to take. The president on Thursday said he was 'very disappointed in Russia' over its resistance to peace talks. But he quickly added that he was 'very disappointed in Ukraine also' in a sign of the wide gap between Trump's attitude toward the war and the rest of the G7's steadfast support for Ukraine. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who was among those invited by Carney, has vowed to seek another sitdown with Trump at the summit. But even the prospect of a brief meeting has raised some concerns within the G7 over whether it's worth the risk that at any moment Trump and Zelenskyy's relationship could go sideways again — and sink U.S. support for Ukraine in the process. 'The value is only in maintaining the status quo,' Daalder said of discussions with Trump on the topic. But for Trump, the trade war that has consumed his first months in office is just as likely to dominate his three days in Canada. The president is expected to hold a series of bilateral meetings on the summit's sidelines, as the administration tries to push ahead trade deals in differing stages of negotiation. Trump has also tried to up the pressure on his G7 allies, vowing to greenlight a market-rattling return to steep tariffs on July 9 should they fail to clinch agreements in the coming weeks. The push still isn't expected to generate any quick victories in an area where negotiations are often measured in years rather than weeks. Yet allies in the U.S. and abroad are hoping that simply being back at the center of it all, surrounded by world leaders eager for a bit of his time, will prove enough progress for Trump to call off an even more severe trade war. 'He's completely comfortable with an outcome that ends in tariffs,' one of the people close to the White House said. 'But a lot of it depends on whether there's progress being made, and if he feels the countries are serious.' Amy Mackinnon contributed to this report.
