Will China Rip Africa's Face Off?

Before you say it, yes, we've been mildly obsessed here at the Fool this past week with people ripping other people's faces off. This, of course, comes on the heels of the SEC announcement that it has charged Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS  ) with defrauding investors. What this turn of phrase means, as my Foolish colleague Morgan Housel explained vis-a-vis Goldman, is that an investment bank structures deals that will ultimately bilk their clients in order to generate windfall profits for itself.

But if you think Goldman is criminally responsible for how it preyed on others with less information and fewer resources, then perhaps you haven't yet been clued in to China's dealings with Africa. Because it's this latter situation that has the potential to get truly troubling.

China's "stuff" gap
It's no secret that China thirsts for natural resources. That country's demand for oil increased 28% year-over-year in January, a magnitude of increase the International Energy Agency called "astonishing." Further, while China accounts for 20% of the world's population, it consumed just 10% of the world's oil in 2009. As that latter number continues to rise, China will find itself in more and more of a pickle because China's domestic oil production today satisfies just half of domestic demand. In other words, the country's energy security relies on imports -- a reality the government finds very unsettling.

The calculus is similar when it comes to other necessities such as metals, minerals, and food. In the food space, for example, due to urbanization and desertification, China is down to just 1.83 billion mu of arable land (mu is a Chinese measure of land area equal to approximately 667 square meters). This number is just above the 1.8 billion mu minimum the Chinese government has said is required to ensure the nation's food security.

What's concerning, however, is that the situation may be far worse than the government is letting on. China's estimate of domestic arable land has not changed since 2004 even though the country has undergone massive further development since then. The situation has gotten so precarious that the country actually suspended reforestation efforts last summer in order to preserve marginal farmland. All told, China needs a lot of stuff in order to continue to fuel its growth -- stuff it simply does not have access to within its borders.

All your stuff are belong to us
It's against this backdrop that cash-rich, Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs) such as PetroChina (NYSE: PTR  ) , Sinopec (NYSE: SNP  ) , and CNOOC (NYSE: CEO  ) have made resource acquisition in Africa an important part of their business strategies. Recently, that's included a joint venture between PetroChina and CNOOC to buy assets in Ghana, CNOOC's $2.5 billion purchase of Tullow Oil's assets in Uganda, and the $7.3 billion purchase last year by Sinopec of Addax -- whose portfolio included fields in Iraq and West Africa.

More directly, the Chinese government is also signing deals with African governments to secure rights to farmland and mineral resources in exchange for infrastructure building. The highest-profile action here may have been last summer's $9 billion agreement between China and the Democratic Republic of Congo, which delivered to two Chinese SOEs the rights to more than 10 million metric tons of copper and 600,000 tons of cobalt. And while China is delivering on its part of the agreement to build roads in the DRC, a fabulous recent article by Howard French in The Atlantic suggests that Chinese infrastructure construction won't actually benefit the country. First, there's the issue of maintenance (roads in that part of the world won't last more than a few years). Second, there's the fact that the first roads being built aren't useful for the general population or for local industry, but will rather simply connect the country estates of the current political elites to major cities.

This is graft, plain and simple (a practice Chinese business leaders reportedly are not unfamiliar with), and it looks like resource-rich African nations are giving up their natural wealth to China without realizing tangible, lasting benefits.

Word is not bond, but guns are
Of course, African governments are not known for their respect for contracts. Business Insider recently reported on Millicom International's (Nasdaq: MICC  ) experience with the Senegalese government and that country's request for what essentially amounted to a $200 million bribe in order for Millicom to keep its operating license in the country.

Although that case has now gone to international arbitration, note that if an African country tried to "re-negotiate" rights like that with China or one of its SOEs with regard to their natural resource interests, it would find itself staring down not a publicly listed company willing to negotiate, but a desperate, sovereign nation with a fast-growing standing army. In fact, China's state-run English-language Global Times newspaper published an editorial in March advising the world that it is "Time to prepare for China's aircraft carrier." Why would a country like China need an aircraft carrier for any reason other than to protect important interests it now has very far from its borders?

Maybe China and Africa deserve each other
The current generation of Chinese and Africa leaders have been more than happy to swap resources for roads and riches. Yet it's looking more and more that at the end of the day, this does not end well for Africa or for the continent's people. Stripped of its land and its resources, what does that continent have to facilitate growth and development in the 21st century?

Unfortunately, it's unrealistic to expect that China will place African interests above its own. The country's government is all about self-preservation, which requires that it deliver food and fuel to its fast-growing nation. If that means ripping Africa's face off in the process, so be it. I'm not sure even Goldman would be capable of that.

Get Tim Hanson's Global View column every Thursday on Fool.com, or by following him on Twitter.

Tim is co-advisor of Motley Fool Global Gains. He does not own any of the companies mentioned. CNOOC is a Motley Fool Global Gains selection. Try any of our Foolish newsletters today, free for 30 days. The Fool's disclosure policy will not rip your face off.


Read/Post Comments (30) | Recommend This Article (48)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On April 22, 2010, at 11:49 AM, mhonarvar wrote:

    how is this any different from what the USA does...EVERYWHERE

  • Report this Comment On April 22, 2010, at 12:20 PM, anuragupta wrote:

    The list of exploitation of Asian and African nations by Western nations stretching right into the 21st century is a long one and can lead to high tempers. So I will spare the readers here from that discussion. It is amazing when the westerners have nothing left to argue on the ethical side the familiar argument is that it is the fault of the people of the exploited nations to not take matterns into their own hands and weed out corruption from their systems to not let themselves be exploited before accusing the west.

    Let us face it that African nations have been subjugated with interference for milleniums. They have always been considered ripe for expoitation as they are defenseless and have been unable to create sustainable governance and economic systems. China has only gate crashed into this party since it can for the first time in history. Not that it makes it right. It is just that the internal excesses of Western nations have them on the backfoot and they are not being able to exploit the rest of the world as they have for centuries. Chinese deal making is only an eye sore and a case of sour grapes.

  • Report this Comment On April 22, 2010, at 12:39 PM, buynholdisdead wrote:

    Great article Tim ! This give me a better understanding of where China is coming from and helps me make better choices on my investments into China.

    Thanks,

    Andy

  • Report this Comment On April 22, 2010, at 1:05 PM, dsp444 wrote:

    anuragupta,

    I agree with what you said.

    But I have thought about this many time: why ?

    Why is it that so many nations have plundered Africa ? How did it start ? Some would say that human life began in Africa...there are plenty of natural resources on the continent. Why has it failed and Europe and America become so strong? (not the argument of America and Europe plundered Africa - because you have to get to before that ... why was Africa so weak that Westerners were able to plunder it? Why was Africa not stronger and able to plunder Europe? Egypt used to be one of the most powerful nations on earth...

    was it all just "luck"?

    or one or two important ancient events/series of events that sent Africa in a downward spiral to where it was easy to beat down?

    almost nobdy (including myself) will say that the people are inferior.

    is it family/society structure?

    Judeo/Christian ethics (vs the more tribal religions/ethics in Africa)?

    Its easy to blanket a blame on Westerners (or African's) for the problems, but I think that is not fair and too focused on recent events.

  • Report this Comment On April 22, 2010, at 1:41 PM, yzfinance wrote:

    I like the article. It's well formulated, explains the situation, and pretty true to the story.

    I do have a beef against some of the things you mention, however. For example, the sentence "Why would a country like China need an aircraft carrier for any reason other than to protect important interests it now has very far from its borders?" conveys a, let's say, condescending/negative tone. A country like China? What does that mean? Why would a country that just recovered from two centuries of abuse by Western countries want to protect its interests? Why would a country that, despite its economical advances, still lags behind the world's main superpower in military terms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_e..., US spends 4% of GDP on military vs 1.7% for China), want to attain the military technological level attained in other parts of the world since World War II?

    I also don't like the subtitle, "Maybe China and Africa deserve each other". Seeing how China is, as you explain, mostly taking advantage of Africa, what does that imply about Africa? The people there deserve help, not further exploitation. Not with their history.

    Finally, let me conclude by saying that really, I agree with you on the main point: China is taking advantage of Africa. China, through wars and revolution, has learned to be as capitalistic as the developed world, and is now part of the game. They will play as well as we play. We can always whine, but the Chinese government is doing what is right for their people as a whole, regardless of the costs to the others. Is this morally right? No, of course. However, we forced them to be part of this game, didn't we? After the Opium war and the communist witch-hunt, it'd be unfair to now complain about them beating us at our game...

    Oh. And would Goldman Sachs rip the face off of Africa, if it could? You bet.

  • Report this Comment On April 22, 2010, at 5:28 PM, Zinj wrote:

    An interesting read is Guns Germs and Steel - check it out. It offers some thought provoking and plausible explanations for why history has unfolded as it has.

    Spoiler Alert: the author's contention is that most and perhaps all of the reason behind why things are the way they are (rather than the Aztecs crossing the Atlantic and invading Spain) is, fundamentally, due to climate, resource distribution, domesticable species and germ/parasite interchange with neighboring regions.

    I recommend checking it out -- you may or may not agree with some of the author's points, but it's guaranteed to make you think a little bit.

  • Report this Comment On April 22, 2010, at 5:47 PM, xuincherguixe wrote:

    danpuperi

    I'm hardly an authority on the subject but I heard something awhile back that was rather interesting.

    One of the main reasons why Europe became so influential in the world, is because of geography. The Eurasian continent goes East-West, rather than Africa & The Americas which are North-South.

    What this means is, that food in the fashion of crops/livestock were more adaptable. This made it easier for cultures to spread in Eurasia than on other continents.

    Now why that's relevant (you were probably wondering when I'd get here) is because [i]ideas[/i] also were exchanged. Fact of the matter is, Europe was much more superior technology, and so it was easy for it to exploit other nations.

    That's the brief version. The not so brief version is the entirety of recorded history.

  • Report this Comment On April 22, 2010, at 6:51 PM, nonmulta wrote:

    Interesting post. China has been developing the ability to do the same power projection we do, and for similar reasons. The 2009 National Intelligence Strategy refers to China's "natural resource-focused diplomacy and military modernization", a statement that recognizes China's transition from a regional power with an internal focus to a more global one, driven by a need for more resources.

    Africa has been a soft target for strong outsiders for the last few hundred years. Not sure that 'deserve' is going to have much to do with it.

  • Report this Comment On April 22, 2010, at 8:21 PM, xetn wrote:

    Just for comparison, China is going around the world signing up trade agreements, purchasing all types of commodities that it requires, and making long term commitments for natural gas and petroleum (usually 20 year commitments) and engaging the whole world. This, while the US is going around the world telling every country that unless they agree with the US policy, they will just attack you. Instead of building trade relationships and dropping tariffs, they are destroying international trade. Instead of expanding resources, the US is trying to move us back to the middle ages. I am not saying China is better. The Chinese are not opposed to paying "finder fees" to seal a deal, but will prosecuted anyone found attempting this in China (witness the Rio Tinto episode.Although this may be more of a retaliation to the dropped deal).

  • Report this Comment On April 22, 2010, at 8:43 PM, mythshakr wrote:

    Why is Africa the place on earth constantly being exploited? Because most African cultures have never evolved beyond tribalism. Tribalism does not scale and at that point in human history when certain tribes agreed to work together towards common goals, forming the earliest forms of nation-states, tribalism was left behind. Civilization has become the Borg. Tribes lack the ability to effectively interoperate or compete in the nation-state world that has resulted. It is not just true in Africa. The same is true for Native American, Afgan, South American or Asian tribes. For whatever reasons individual tribes chose; religious, familial, ethnic or maintenance of hereditary power structures their lack of assimilation into "civilization" has made them prey for whatever "civilization" demands from them, or to perish.

  • Report this Comment On April 22, 2010, at 8:43 PM, mythshakr wrote:

    Why is Africa the place on earth constantly being exploited? Because most African cultures have never evolved beyond tribalism. Tribalism does not scale and at that point in human history when certain tribes agreed to work together towards common goals, forming the earliest forms of nation-states, tribalism was left behind. Civilization has become the Borg. Tribes lack the ability to effectively interoperate or compete in the nation-state world that has resulted. It is not just true in Africa. The same is true for Native American, Afgan, South American or Asian tribes. For whatever reasons individual tribes chose; religious, familial, ethnic or maintenance of hereditary power structures their lack of assimilation into "civilization" has made them prey for whatever "civilization" demands from them, or to perish.

  • Report this Comment On April 22, 2010, at 9:53 PM, EdT102 wrote:

    I'm not sure this kind of Western thinking is applicable to China. Don't forget Chinese people has recent memories of being foreign colonies. I'm sure they know from experience the pain and suffering the African counties would have if they follow the steps of the Western styled occupation.

    With Chinese SOE's, we will not see greedy exectives of the American style, taking tens of million, hundreds of millions, or even billions of $$$ of compensations. In stead those money become corporate profits, the Chinese government use those money to help poor counties or poor people through out the world. Take look youself, how they can recover so fast from a devastating earthquake affacting tens of millions of people while our hurrican in LA progress little after so many years. What's wrong with this so called democracy?

  • Report this Comment On April 23, 2010, at 1:14 AM, joandrose wrote:

    Mythshakr - you have put your finger directly on the underlying problem with Africa. African leaders are firstly tribal leaders - and secondly national leaders. Tribal loyalties remain paramount throughout Africa.We westerners find this difficult to fully understand.

    This factor, together with the fact that the majority of most national populations are very poorly educated ( or not educated at all ) is a weakness in Africa. Voters do not choose or discriminate between potential leaders on the basis of their ethics/intellectual ability/ability to do the job/track record - the majority of voters are swayed by tribal loyalties/rhetoric/emotion- or just plain threats.

    How do you explain the president of S Africa - Africa's most advanced and powerful country - still regularly dressing in animal skins - prancing and singing "bring me my machine gun" - having three wives,an unknown number of concubines and forty children!

    Africa remains fundamentally tribal - nothing has changed even though the leaders dress in three piece suits and drive 4x4's !

  • Report this Comment On April 23, 2010, at 1:19 AM, joandrose wrote:

    By the way - I have lived and done business in several different African countries over many years - so I speak from experience!

    Unfortunately for Africa there are very few Nelson Mandela's - but a great many Idi Amin's and Robert Mugabe's.

  • Report this Comment On April 23, 2010, at 2:27 AM, Babble100 wrote:

    China is a selfish country. Hopefully that will change as they connect to the world but in the meantime, Africa will pay dearly. The West should do what it can to help Africa protect itself from Chinese exploitation.

  • Report this Comment On April 23, 2010, at 9:14 AM, Melaschasm wrote:

    China's greater involvement in Africa could be a very good thing. As China does increasing amounts of business with Africa, it will bring wealth, technology, and expertise to the people of Africa.

    It is likely that some countries will take advantage of this opportunity to improve the lives of their people, while others will continue to follow the path of keeping all the wealth and power in the hands of a few 'elites'.

    From a Realpoltic standpoint, even if China treats Africa in a mostly fair way, there will be many problems and misunderstandings, which will leave the USA appearing better by comparison. Hopefully US leaders will recognize this as an opportunity to encourage African leaders to treat their people better, and allow more aid to get to the people rather than being confiscated by corruption.

  • Report this Comment On April 23, 2010, at 9:25 AM, catoismymotor wrote:

    Africa was a mess four hundred years ago. It will be the same four hundren years from now. In the end China will just be another colonial power that gives up and goes home.

  • Report this Comment On April 23, 2010, at 11:25 AM, fatbull wrote:

    yzfinance comments are fantastic.

    I add my own thoughts here.

    Infrastructure development has been a hugh boost to the auto industry and other industry related. Just look at how many cars have been sold in the last few years. The new highways are packed with low price cars owned by ordinary working class, especially during holidays and weekends. Vacation home purchase becomes a reality in China because they can drive their fuel efficient cars there in few hours.

    Africa is under developement with help from China and it is a Win-Win situation. This is the developement 21 Centry Africa was waiting for. Whoever is able to offer more than China can offer now will be able to win the contract there. Are unionized american companies able do that? Of course not at this moment.

  • Report this Comment On April 23, 2010, at 1:09 PM, Racovius wrote:

    All you guys, arguing: "How is this different from the west...the Europeans did this and so on..."

    Okay, well i guess we'll just let Africa get stripped of their resources because it is the Chinese turn to take these resources. Afterall, the white man did it, let the Asian man do it too right? That's the argument you guys have. We must be fair after all.

    China has their tentacles EVERYWHERE in Africa. If you've ever been to Addis Abeba, they'll tell you the Chinese build these roads. Ask them what else they build, and they'll say nothing. In Djibouti, the Chinese are there. Only thing they seemed to build was the Stadium.

  • Report this Comment On April 23, 2010, at 1:12 PM, Racovius wrote:

    All you guys, arguing: "How is this different from the west...the Europeans did this and so on..."

    Okay, well i guess we'll just let Africa get stripped of their resources because it is the Chinese turn to take these resources. Afterall, the white man did it, let the Asian man do it too right? That's the argument you guys have. We must be fair after all.

    China has their tentacles EVERYWHERE in Africa. If you've ever been to Addis Abeba, they'll tell you the Chinese build these roads. Ask them what else they build, and they'll say nothing. In Djibouti, the Chinese are there. Only thing they seemed to build was the Stadium.

  • Report this Comment On April 23, 2010, at 2:11 PM, pkt005a wrote:

    Great article Tim

  • Report this Comment On April 23, 2010, at 2:20 PM, viyer00 wrote:

    The blame here lies squarely on the corrupt African heads of state. When you have genocidal psychopaths like Mugabe in power in most African states, obviously foreign powers will exploit the instability when Africa has such rich deposits of natural resources. You cannot blame China for following its national interests. US foreign policy is itself a perverse pursuit of self interests, this is natural.

    Until Africa finds capable leaders (which is a long way off, apparently), they will be doomed to more misery and poverty. The leaders only care about their own wealth. While Africa starves, Mugabe lives quite well. His calculus only involves his benefits and self preservation.

    With the coming climate change that will make it far harder to grow crops, Africa will once again disproportionately suffer. The country, in our lifetimes anyway, appears to be a lost cause.

  • Report this Comment On April 23, 2010, at 6:01 PM, DJDynamicNC wrote:

    @ xuincherguixe: your "east/west" vs "north/south" idea is clever and intriguing, but I don't find it convincing. For one, although Eurasia goes "east/west," geography and climate are wildly different throughout. Ocean currents, mountain ranges, and other local factors create diverse weather patterns similar to those created by the difference in lattitude one finds going "north/south."

    Europe's superior technology was a direct result of the Enlightenment, which embodied the system of thought we now call the Scientific Method. Prior to that systematic approach to knowledge, discoveries were haphazard and isolated, not tied together into one cohesive understanding of reality. It was the advent of scientific thought which made mankind truly rational, and that happened to occur in Europe (and I suspect could just as easily have occurred anywhere human beings gathered).

  • Report this Comment On April 23, 2010, at 11:14 PM, ARJTurgot wrote:

    Some years back National Geographic reported that the majority of the inhabitants of Vladivostok thought they would end up under the government of China within their lifetimes. China is going to prospect the globe looking for resources the same as any other industrial country. But their backyard ends up offering far more for far cheaper prices.

  • Report this Comment On April 24, 2010, at 11:56 AM, EllenBrandtPhD wrote:

    Since most here are interested in stock performance more than political correctness, I just posted this at Seeking Alpha but think it applies here as well:

    Technical Analysis of Propaganda:

    First, some of the solid smaller entities operating in West Africa started showing very good gains immediately after talk of a Lihir bidding war emerged.

    Second, a certain reporter at Mineweb - well-known for his skills at bashing - comes out with an absolutely horrendous story equating the DRC to Hades.

    Third, Freeport, Newcrest, all the bigger South Africans, and even Newmont hint pretty strongly that they are on the hunt again, and the focus of the hunt could be West Africa.

    Fourth, stocks of potential acquirers, particularly Freeport, lagging the rest of the mining sector, while potential takeout candidates in West Africa start moving up again. (And remember, these are "institutional stocks," with very few retail holders, so prices are more or less placed at will by their market makers.)

    I think we are going to see several takeovers of the smaller, more promising entities in the DRC and elsewhere in West Africa this coming year.

    Freeport, Newmont, Newcrest, and the South Africans realize that if they don't make moves fairly soon, the Chinese will beat them to it, and the Chinese have been offering some very good prices elsewhere in the region - i.e. in the energy sector.

    Keep your eyes on West Africa for some time to come.

  • Report this Comment On April 24, 2010, at 2:08 PM, GreatMugabe1 wrote:

    Only Africans can determine their own future. I do not understand why the hell the West is concerned about a relationship between Africa and China.Afterall, China engaged Africa in a dialogue of partnership compared to the unilateral Western Berlin conference of 1885 or the equally arrogant US meddling through Africom and the rest of the psychobabble typical of Western mentality. Learn from China and do so quickly for a new power is fast on the rise. I have consistently argued elsewhere that if Africans were to stop entertain this Western meddling, then the continent is poised for a rise. The West should take its bandaid assistance elsewhere.Africa does no need any more of your "dead aid". Take this from a son-of-the-soil African.

  • Report this Comment On April 25, 2010, at 12:37 PM, TMFMmbop wrote:

    Dead Aid is also a fascinating book by Dambisa Moyo. Highly recommended: http://www.dambisamoyo.com/deadaid.html

    Tim

  • Report this Comment On April 26, 2010, at 7:57 AM, MFMerlin wrote:

    Goldman NOT capable of doing the same as China? I think you underestimate both Goldman's ruthlessness and arrogance. They would do exactly as China is without blinking an eye - and AIG would insure them!

  • Report this Comment On April 26, 2010, at 10:59 PM, lowfatmajia wrote:

    This is a twisted and biased way of thinking of China's roll in world economy and Africa's development.

    China's "stuff" gap - very provocative. But really, what's driving China's thirst for natural resources? It's global scale non-sustainable consumption, especially by the West. China is manufacturing stuff for the entire world's population and will naturally need to import raw materials . If China stop being "workshop of the world" tomorrow, developed countries will just find Vietnam+India+...to take over that roll. That "stuff" gap will always there. I actually think it's good to have China done much of the low-end manufacturing instead of spreading the work around the world. Ever heard of economy of scale?

    "Chinese infrastructure construction won't actually benefit the country...issue of maintenance". Give me a break. This is like someone buys in a car at a fair price and then whine:"but the dealer should give me free gas for life."

    "It's a fact...first roads being built aren't useful for the general population or for local industry, but will rather simply connect the country estates of the current political elites to major cities". First of all, it is not always a fact. There is always ripple effect, collateral benefits, whatever you call it, to the general public. Second, at least now the "first roads" are built by the Chinese and Africans can start building "roads that are useful for the general population", no need to reinvent the wheel saves them money.

    If I were the Africans, I will vote any day for the Chinese. They bring jobs, they respect indigenous culture, they build roads and schools. Westerners? They brought guns, forced Christianity down Africans' throats and exploited Africans twice as harsh.

  • Report this Comment On April 27, 2010, at 2:06 AM, joandrose wrote:

    @GreatMugabe1 and lowfatmajia

    I too am "a son of Africa" - going right back to the Belgian Congo experience - through Rhodesia - and now the communist dominated ANC in S Africa.

    The Chinese do not give two hoots for African or any other culture. They are interested only in what is good for China . Pure self-interest , and why not !

    They will do whatever is neccessary to secure the raw materials which are imperative for their own national long-term survival .

    The Westerners who colonised Africa also exploited the continent out of greed - But if they had not done so there would be no highways,no cities,no hospitals,no airports....nothing exept the the grass huts and bush paths that existed before colonisation. Not even the wheel ! That is reality.

    The point is that to make money in Africa today investors must be tapped directly into the circles of the elite political honchos who make decisions about who gets what and where. The dash system/bribery and corruption thrive in Africa because the political systems allow and encourage it .

    Democracy does not work in Africa because such a large percentage of the people are still not sufficiently well educated to discriminate good from bad leaders.

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 1161244, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 8/20/2014 3:13:23 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement