Traoré Sends Blow to Trump as he distributes FREE LAND to his citizens.

Added: 2026-05-18

[00:00:00]We offer this question of the land. I don't know what Donald Trump has to do with South African land because he's never been here. And he must keep his America. We will keep our South Africa.

[00:00:15]That is what he must do.

[00:00:18]South Africa is our land. South Africa belongs to all the people who live here in South Africa. It does not belong to Donald Trump. He can keep his America >> with a historic land reform policy that is changing the country's political and economic landscape. But Kina Faso's revolutionary commander, Captain Ibrahim Tray, has dealt a severe blow to foreign interests. As 2025 gets underway, all land has been fully seized by the Bkina Faso government under his leadership, making it illegal for foreigners to own title deeds. Africa has been rocked by this audacious approach, which has alarmed Western politicians and investors who have long depended on Africa's lacks land laws to close big deals in resource exploitation and agriculture.

[00:01:14]The Burkina B government has adamantly defended the decision, claiming that it is a necessary and strategic measure to safeguard national sovereignty, prevent land exploitation, and ensure that the country's resources are used for the benefit of its people despite critics hastily labeling this policy as dictatorial.

[00:01:35]However, what does this reform actually involve? What effects will it have on foreign interests, enterprises, and Burkina Bay farmers? And above all, why is this policy so critical for Africa in general? Let's now take a closer look at it. A historic land reform bill that permanently transfers property ownership from private individuals, particularly foreign organizations, to the Burkina Faso government was approved by the Burkina Bay Council of Ministers on February 5, 2025.

[00:02:08]President Troy attended the meeting where the measure was legally adopted and Dr. Abu Bakr Nakanabo the Minister of Economy presented the main goals of the reform. Minister Nakanabo announced that land now belongs to the state as a result of this bill. The law proposes three significant modifications to the land ownership structure of Bkina Faso.

[00:02:33]All land is now owned by the state.

[00:02:35]Absolute ownership of land cannot be claimed by any one company or foreign body. Second, title deeds cannot be held by foreigners. They are no longer able to inherit or hold land in Bkina Faso permanently. Three, a system of long-term leases is implemented. Both foreigners and residents can apply for long-term leases which range from 18 to 99 years in place of land ownership mostly for public infrastructure projects, industrial development and agricultural.

[00:03:10]Bkina Faso's traditional land tenure system which was founded on customary land rights is radically changed by this policy. For many years, Bakina Faso's land ownership system was based on customary practices with local communities controlling and allocating land according to ancestral claims.

[00:03:31]Families had a great sense of security over their estates which were passed down through the centuries. But because there was no legal paperwork, this system had serious flaws. Land disputes were prevalent since the majority of landholders lacked official records attesting to their title. While local farmers suffered, elites took advantage of the system and used customary rights to acquire enormous trackcts of property. These individuals included politicians and commercial muggles through dishonest transactions. Western companies, Chinese investors and other foreign organizations coveredly purchased land exploiting lacks land regulations to seize control of resourcerich and productive areas by giving the state full ownership of all land. The new law closes these gaps and gives the government the authority to control and distribute land equitably.

[00:04:28]Although this bill has been criticized as an authoritarian power grab, particularly by Western media and political circles, Bakina Faso is actually regaining its sovereignty over its territory. Multinational firms and foreign governments have been able to exploit Africa's natural resources for far too long due to its lacks land laws with no assistance to the local populace. The Bkina Faso government may now stop international exploitation by putting territory under state control.

[00:05:01]Large swaths of land for commercial farming, mining, or real estate speculation will no longer be available to foreign investors. The state may now more effectively distribute land for industrial developments, agricultural development, and public infrastructure.

[00:05:19]fairly settled land issues. Conflicts between farmers, herders, and indigenous populations can be better handled by centralizing land control. Trow race choice is a component of a larger African battle to retake territory from foreign rule. One of the largest dangers to Africa's sovereignty is the appropriation of land by multinational corporations, investment firms, and even affluent foreign billionaires.

[00:05:47]Take a look at these startling figures.

[00:05:50]Blue Carbon, an investment corporation based in the United Arab Emirates that specializes in carbon offset deals, has purchased 25 million hectares of land spread across five African countries.

[00:06:04]This foreign corporation currently controls 10% of Liberia's entire land area. Foreign interests have been granted 20% of Zimbabwe's land. This continues a trend of exploitation that intensified following the global financial crisis of 2007 to 2008 when international corporations hurried to purchase African lands for agricultural endeavors focused on exports.

[00:06:31]Add your voice to the total liberation of Africa by leaving a comment in the comment section below. Do not forget to like and subscribe for more informative videos like this one. Let's proceed.

[00:06:44]The land reform of Troy stops foreign companies from controlling vital resources in Burkina Faso by cutting off this channel of exploitation.

[00:06:55]Look no further than Mali where President Asimi Goth has been battling against foreign mining dominance to see why Tro's strategy is required. The CEO of the Australian gold mining business, Resolute Mining, was recently detained by Goth's government, revealing the ways in which Western corporations have taken advantage of Africa's abundant natural resources. Only 20% of mining income in Mali go to the Ketchumian government, while 80% go to corporations like Katchik Bar Gold. The same holds true for land. Local farmers suffer as a result of foreign firms acquiring farmland and using it for the hatchik's commercial exports.

[00:07:38]Why should Africa permit foreigners to acquire its land while no African national can purchase land in the US or Europe? This hypocrisy ends with Bkina Faso's land reform. Trore's government is now better equipped to spearhead Bkina Faso's economic reform after seizing complete control of the country's territory.

[00:08:00]The government will be able to expedite the development of highways, factories, and industrial zones. Thanks to this change, can now be constructed without individual land owners interfering.

[00:08:12]Increase the output of agriculture.

[00:08:15]Improve management of large-scale farming operations can guarantee food security and lessen reliance on imports.

[00:08:23]Minimize land disputes. Conflicts between dog farmers, herders, and migrants can be settled more amicably if the government controls the a lotment of land. The land reform movement in South Africa, which has mostly concentrated on red addressing historical injustices, is very different from this state-led approach to land management. On the other side, Bkinaaso is actively shaping its future. Policies from the colonial past that routinely deny the black majority land ownership are the root cause of South Africa's pervasive land inequality.

[00:08:58]The most significant of them was the Natives Land Act of 1913 which was passed during British colonial control and limited black South Africans to 7% of the nation's land. The Native Trust and Land Act of 1936 raised this to 13%. Over 80% of the arable land was under the authority of the white minority who at the time made up less than 10% of the population. The foundation for decades of mass displacement, forced relocation, and economic marginalization was established by these laws which persisted during the apathide era. While the white minority kept large swarfs of agricultural land, millions of black South Africans were forcibly transferred to overcrowded and impoverished homelands, bantoustans, and townships.

[00:09:52]Land ownership remained mostly unaltered even after a pathide was officially abolished in 1994.

[00:10:00]Redistributing land to historically disenfranchised black individuals was the goal of land reform programs implemented by the postapath government.

[00:10:09]However, due to bureaucratic inefficiencies, legal disputes and opposition from affluent landowners, progress was sluggish. The South African government submitted a land expropriation law to address the ongoing imbalance in property ownership. This measure permits the seizure of privately owned land without paying compensation as long as it serves the public interest. The bill, which was approved by the Toman Parliament in late 2023, gives local, provincial, and federal governments the authority to purchase land for a variety of uses, including public housing, urban growth, energy projects, roads, schools, hospitals, infrastructure development, and most importantly, equitable land redistribution to underserved communities.

[00:11:02]The legislation stipulates that all seizures must have a valid reason and expressly forbids arbitrary expropriation and open to judicial scrutiny. The government maintains that the bill is meant to address the stark land imbalances left by apathide and does not specifically target any one race group.

[00:11:23]Donald Trump, meanwhile, has portrayed this statute as a racially motivated property grab that specifically targets white landowners.

[00:11:32]The Trump administration has threatened diplomatic and economic repercussions against South Africa and called the policy a grave violation of human rights. In his yearly state of the nation address, South African President Sorl Ranoposa spoke about these escalating tensions two days earlier.

[00:11:51]His remarks were interpreted as a stark reputation of Washington's meddling, even though he made no mention of Trump specifically.

[00:11:59]>> Witnessing the rise of nationalism, protectionism, the pursuit of narrow interests, and the decline of common cause.

[00:12:11]This is the world that we as South Africa, a developing economy, must now navigate.

[00:12:20]But we are not daunted to navigate our path through this world that constantly changes.

[00:12:28]We will not be deterred.

[00:12:31]We are as South Africans a resilient people and we will not be bullied.

[00:12:43]>> Strong domestic support for the government's land reform initiatives was indicated by the standing ovation. he received in parliament for his speech.

[00:12:53]Soon after, the United States intensified its opposition.

[00:12:57]In addition to halting hundreds of millions of dollars in US financing for South Africa's largest HIV AIDS relief program in the world, Trump put a 90-day freeze on the majority of international aid. While acknowledging the seriousness of this decision, Ramaposa gave the country the assurance that his government was looking into alternate funding options to keep life-saving medical programs from being interrupted.

[00:13:23]When South African-born billionaire Elon Musk entered the discussion with an angry speech, international tensions escalated even more. South Africans were outraged by Musk's remarks, especially Julius Malma and the EFF who see Musk's position as a continuation of Western economic meddling in African affairs.

[00:13:45]Musk used X, formerly Twitter, to demand that Julius Malma, leader of the Economic Freedom Fighters or EFF, be declared an international criminal and that Malima be subject to immediate sanctions. Malima, who is renowned for his candid and unreserved political style, responded with a dazzling biting counterattack against X, disparaging Musk's experience and reputation.

[00:14:13]He responded by accusing Musk of taking advantage of a path era privilege, dismissing Musk's comments as part of a larger western plot to uphold white economic domination and warning that African countries will not put up with Western billionaires meddling in their internal affairs.

[00:14:31]Musk was further censured in a formal statement issued by the EFF.

[00:14:36]They called him a worldwide billionaire lunatic who manipulates world affairs with his financial might. They charged him with demonizing African leadership and protecting Western exploitation.

[00:14:48]Musk and other Western leaders attempting to impose African policies would not scare the EFF. They pledged.

[00:14:56]The conflict between Western interests and South Africa is a component of a broader continental conflict. Leaders like Julius Malima of South Africa and Ibrahim Troy of Bkina Faso are leading a new anti-neo colonial movement that aims to end western economic dominance, bolster African sovereignty and self-governance and oppose foreign imposed policies that put Western interests ahead of African development.

[00:15:24]Leaders in a number of African countries have taken notice of this movement and are calling for a more just international economic system that puts Africa's needs ahead of Western firm's use of it as a resource base. Beyond land ownership, the dispute over South Africa's land reform law has broad ramifications.

[00:15:45]Africa's capacity to maintain its sovereignty in the face of political and economic pressure from the West is being put to the test.

[00:15:53]Economic blackmail is being used by the US through Trump and his supporters to thwart land reform and uphold the status quo. Elon Musk's involvement has brought to light how affluent Westerners influence African policy from afar. The response from South Africa, especially from Ramaposa and Malima, shows that Africans are becoming more resilient in the face of imperialist domination.

[00:16:21]In the end, this conflict is not merely a land dispute. It is a fight for African economic independence, self-determination, and the freedom to shape its own destiny free from outside intervention.

[00:16:34]In the meantime, the West frequently uses Zimbabwe as a warning to other African countries about the dangers of land reform. The fundamental historical and economic realities of Zimbabwe's land war, however, are what they refuse to recognize. Correcting the past is crucial as South Africa and Bkina Faso bravely move on with their respective land reforms. Western opponents have long maintained that Robert Mugabi's decision to recapture land from white farmers was the only factor contributing to Zimbabwe's economic downturn in the 2000s.

[00:17:10]However, that story is not just deceptive. It is also intended to uphold a neoc colonial control structure. The tale of Zimbabwe is not one of Kais leadership or poor economic management.

[00:17:23]It is about a global economic system that is biased against African countries that dare to question the status quo, stolen inheritances, and broken promises.

[00:17:34]To comprehend land reform in Zimbabwe, we need to begin by discussing how black Zimbabweans initially lost their land.

[00:17:43]Land was often taken from native Africans and given to a limited group of European settlers during British colonial control. The Southern Rodesian government supported by the British established the land aortionment act in 1930 which prohibited black Africans from owning land outside of native reserves. These reserves, which made up only 22% of the nation's least arable land, were merely overpopulated, unproductive areas. In the meantime, 51% of Zimbabwe's most productive farmland was owned by a small 4.5% white minority. Over 1 million black Zimbabweans were compelled to share a mere 20 million acres of bare land while just 48,000 white settlers received 50 million acres of good property. These were not merely capricious regulations.

[00:18:37]These intentional acts of economic sabotage made sure that white settlers prospered while black Zimbabweans continued to live in poverty. In its most basic form, colonialism used land as a means of oppression. It is our responsibility to take advantage of any chance to gain additional land. As Cecil Roads himself boldly declared, simply said, "More Anglo-Saxon land translates into more of the greatest, most honorable, and most human species on the planet. Power came with land."

[00:19:11]Europeans and their western supporters maintained power over Zimbabwe's economy thanks to the dominance of white settlers in the fields of agriculture, industry, and banking. Black Zimbabweans were excluded from both land ownership and economic engagement in their own nation. For many years, a protracted and violent liberation movement was brought on by the colonial government's racist land practices.

[00:19:37]The independence of Zimbabwe was not a simple process. Through armed resistance, it was achieved. The armed resistance to white minority rule was led by Robert Mugabi, who was the head of the Zimbabwe African National Union at the time. As was to be expected, the West called him a terrorist, a description they regularly apply to any African leader who defies their authority. In 1980, Zimbabwe attained independence following years of conflict and pressure from other countries. But land was still a controversial topic.

[00:20:14]Although independence had been achieved, foreign firms and white settlers still held the majority of the economic power.

[00:20:22]Britain explicitly promised to stop funding Zimbabwe's land redistribution program in order to guarantee that land was returned to its original owners during the 1979 Lancaster House Agreement which negotiated Zimbabwe's independence.

[00:20:38]In order to rectify the profound historical injustices of land dispossession, Britain initially contributed 44 million in aid for land reform. But this was insufficient.

[00:20:50]Britain was frequently encouraged by the Zimbabwean government to fulfill its commitment. However, Britain formally broke the agreement in 1997.

[00:21:01]"This was a blatant betrayal," said Clare Short, the UK's then international development secretary in an outspoken rejection of Zimbabwe's demands. Given that the land had been stolen in the first place, the agreement's requirement that Zimbabwe's government repurchase stolen land from white farmers at market prices was absurd. Even worse, the very white settlers who had taken the land had determined its value. How was a poor black majority that had been purposefully shut out of the economy for almost a century expected to repurchase the land that had been taken from them?

[00:21:38]The system was intended to malfunction.

[00:21:41]It was evident by the late 1990s that waiting for Britain to keep its commitments was pointless.

[00:21:48]Frustrated by the glacial pace of reform, Zimbabwe's war veterans who had fought for independence started to take farms held by white people. The government responded by acting decisively.

[00:22:01]Zimbabwe's fasttrack land reform policy which permitted the government to take land from white farmers without paying them was formally launched in 2000. The United States and Britain in particular were rocked by this decision because they saw it as a direct challenge to their economic dominance. The European Union and the United States responded by enforcing crushing economic sanctions against Zimbabwe. The sanctions were intended to undermine Zimbabwe's economy and shift public sentiment against land reform, but they were disguised as targeted actions against Mugabi's administration.

[00:22:39]The European Union banned travel and frozen the assets of important Zimbabwean politicians in 2002.

[00:22:47]In 2003, however, US President George W.

[00:22:51]Bush issued an executive order designating Zimbabwe as an exceptional threat to US interests which marked the start of the true economic war. Zimbabwe was essentially barred from the international banking system by this decree.

[00:23:07]Zimbabwe was prohibited from obtaining World Bank and IMF loans. Dealing with Zimbabwean institutions was forbidden to foreign banks. Zimbabwe's industrial development corporation's foreign assets were frozen after it was placed on a blacklist.

[00:23:23]Important commodities like industrial technology, medical equipment and fertilizer could not be imported into Zimbabwe.

[00:23:32]The consequences were disastrous. Under the pressure of these sanctions, Zimbabwe's economy, which was already precarious due to fundamental imbalances from the colonial era, fell apart. The rate of hyperinflation surged and the value of the Zimbabwean currency plummeted. However, Western media deliberately overlooked the disastrous effects of US-led economic warfare and place the blame on Mugabi's economic mismanagement.

[00:24:01]Until those ideals threaten their economic hegemony, the West consistently asserts that it supports democracy, human rights, and fairness. Almost a century of white land theft during British colonial authority was tolerated by the same Western powers that denounced Zimbabwe's land reform as unfair. The United States still won't remove sanctions unless Zimbabwe pays white farmers. How can a country that is struggling economically make amends to the people who profited from colonial land theft? The land reform in Zimbabwe was not flawless. It was hectic and hurried at times. However, it was required. Continued economic enslavement to western powers was the alternative.

[00:24:48]Today, the lessons learned from Zimbabwe are evident as South Africa and Bokina Faso implement their own land reforms.

[00:24:57]Any attempt by African countries to regain economic independence would be met with resistance from the West.

[00:25:04]However, pleading for permission is no longer an option.

[00:25:08]Africa must put its own interests ahead of Western appribation as President Troy has shown. Tell us what you think in the comments section below.