There is no new analysis and putting as many 'official' numbers in an op-ed does not make it a reliable piece of research. This article is misleading and inaccurate.

Examples include:

"In 2012, BHP Billiton struck a $3.5bn deal with Pres. Bongo Ondima, son of the former president, to take over the Belinga mine." This didn't happen.

"For Australia, the acceleration of mining investments by China and India in Africa could see iron ore prices fall to $80 per tonne, possibly even $60 per tonne, in the next seven years." If this is from Hurst's (2012) paper on iron ore market contestability you're misquoting the findings by attributing the price fall to China and India - this is not a small step.

I'm all for having a platform for quasi-academic op-eds but if there is no editorial diligence there is a significant risk of perpetuating assumptions and half-truths as facts.

I won't be reading this blog again.

I'm with RJStevens on this.

Simply regurgitating a whole load of statistics from various sources and random excerpts from Google searches doth not an intelligent article make. Especially where there is no worthwhile conclusion to the process, bar the dog-bites-man illustration of the fact that "nations continue to trade". And getting facts wrong in such a short piece is unforgivable.

"In 2012, BHP Billiton struck a $3.5bn deal with Pres. Bongo Ondima, son of the former president, to take over the Belinga mine."

Did not happen. Unlikely to happen:

http://www.apollominerals.com/images/apollomi---ahbib.pdf

And the advertised "implications for Australia"?

"For Australia, the acceleration of mining investments by China and India in Africa could see iron ore prices fall to $80 per tonne, possibly even $60 per tonne, in the next seven years"

The economic result of this speculation being... what? Where's the other shoe?

Then there is this:

"The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China has called for increased FDI in Australia."

Ummm... yes. So...?

It does of course accurately reflect the media-fed incoherence of the man-in-the-pub about all-things-foreign, as he bemoans the fact that his beer hasn't tasted the same since Fosters were victims of "increased FDI in Australia". But that was from the UK, so doesn't qualify as scary enough.

One day, someone will write an article on the shifting sands of the world's economy without feeling the need to hint at impending domestic doom.

China is unlikely to get such a smooth ride in Africa as this article may suggest. Firstly, the problems associated with iron ore ventures in places like the Democratic Republic of Congo are there for anyone who is a regular follower of SBS News to see. Secondly, China tends to behave rather like the former colonial masters in the 19th century. There are already examples of reactions against poor treatment of local workers and unacceptable working conditions. It seems the Chinese have failed to learn from the lessons of history and are doomed to repeat its mistakes.

*For Australia, the acceleration of mining investments by China and India in Africa*

Hang on, last time I checked, a whole lot of Australian miners were very busy in Africa. Miners will go wherever there are opportunities and the reward is worth the risk. In Africa, for me to invest a dollar, the rewards would have to be far greater than elsewhere, given the political risk of the next dictator changing the rules or turfing out the company on its ear.

But yes, Africa's minerals will be developed and yes, that will have a downward effect on Australian mineral prices. So what? Given the wages paid locally at present, our boys are living in fairyland, much to the detriment of other exporters such as agriculture. When Alice leaves fairyland, we'll have to deal with the reality. So be it.