Geopolitics: The Hidden Hand That Stacks the Economic Deck

Geopolitics: The Hidden Hand That Stacks the Economic Deck

Geopolitics ruthlessly distorts the global economic canvas, favoring powerful nations like the U.S. and EU while constraining the Global South, former colonies, and non-aligned energy producers. Colonial legacies lock in extractive economies, with nations like the DRC losing wealth to foreign firms. The dollar’s dominance, enforced by sanctions and debt traps, chokes non-aligned states, as seen in Iran’s GDP plummeting 10% post-SWIFT ban. Technological monopolies in AI and semiconductors widen the innovation gap, with Africa’s 29% internet penetration trailing the North’s 90%. Environmental burdens fall on the South, with Nigeria’s oil wealth enriching Western firms while 50% of its people live in poverty. Military might, via U.S. bases and proxy wars, secures economic control, while cultural hegemony—through Hollywood and English—marginalizes local models. Global governance, skewed by IMF voting and WTO rules, favors the powerful. Even the multipolar shift, led by China’s BRI, trades one dependency for another. A case study of energy giants—Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Russia, Libya—shows sanctions and interventions slashing their oil revenues, costing billions. Economic theories ignoring these realities perpetuate a myth of equality. As Amartya Sen notes, geopolitical constraints crush economic freedom, demanding a fairer global system.

 

Picture a global economy where every nation has a fair shot—equal access to markets, resources, and opportunities. Economic theories paint this rosy picture, but geopolitics rips it apart, rigging the game to favor a tight-knit club of powerful nations—think the U.S., EU, and their allies—while shackling the Global South, former colonies, and non-aligned energy producers. This isn’t a conspiracy; it’s a calculated system where historical scars, financial chokeholds, tech monopolies, environmental exploitation, military muscle, cultural dominance, skewed governance, and a deceptive multipolar shift conspire to keep the powerful on top. This note explores how geopolitics distorts the economic canvas—and why it demands our attention.

---

1. Colonial Scars: A Legacy of Extraction

The Global South’s economic canvas was drawn by colonial powers, designed to siphon wealth to Europe and beyond. This isn’t ancient history—it’s a living blueprint that still shapes global inequality. Economist Ha-Joon Chang captures it: “The global economic system is still shaped by the legacy of colonialism, where developing countries were integrated as suppliers of raw materials” (Kicking Away the Ladder, 2002).

• Extractive Foundations: Colonial powers built economies to extract resources—think rubber from Congo or spices from India—leaving behind structures that persist. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, cobalt mining, critical for batteries, enriches Western firms like Glencore while locals see little benefit. Dambisa Moyo warns, “Africa’s resource wealth has been extracted for outsiders, leaving local economies stunted” (Dead Aid, 2009). The World Bank (2023) notes that 80% of DRC’s export revenue comes from raw minerals, yet poverty rates hover at 70%.
• Fragmented States: Colonial borders, drawn with rulers in Berlin or London, split ethnic and economic regions, creating unstable nations. Historian Basil Davidson explains, “Colonial boundaries birthed economically unviable states, sowing chaos” (The Black Man’s Burden, 1992). For example, the Sahel’s landlocked nations, like Mali, struggle with trade due to artificial borders, unlike cohesive states like the U.S.
• Institutional Stagnation: Colonial education systems trained clerks, not scientists, leaving post-colonial states with weak institutions. Mahmood Mamdani argues, “Extractive institutions crippled post-colonial states’ ability to compete” (Citizen and Subject, 1996). In Nigeria, colonial-era governance structures still hinder industrial diversification, with oil comprising 90% of exports (OPEC, 2023).
• Neocolonial Elites: Post-independence, local elites often replaced colonial rulers, perpetuating extraction. Political scientist Achille Mbembe notes, “Post-colonial elites often mimic colonial exploitation, aligning with foreign powers for personal gain” (On the Postcolony, 2001). In Zambia, copper profits flow to foreign firms while public services crumble.

This historical rigging ensures the Global South starts miles behind, while powerful nations inherit robust, diversified systems.

---

2. The Dollar’s Stranglehold: Financial Power as Geopolitical Weapon

The global financial system, with the U.S. dollar as its linchpin, is a geopolitical cudgel that enforces inequality. Joseph Stiglitz puts it starkly: “The dollar’s dominance lets the U.S. borrow cheaply while others drown in currency risks” (Globalization and Its Discontents, 2002).

• Dollar Hegemony: Most global trade is dollar-denominated, forcing nations to hold reserves, giving the U.S. unmatched leverage. Barry Eichengreen explains, “The dollar’s reserve status lets the U.S. cripple economies via sanctions” (Exorbitant Privilege, 2011). In 2023, 58% of global foreign exchange reserves were in dollars (IMF), amplifying U.S. control.
• Sanctions as Economic Warfare: Tools like SWIFT bans isolate non-aligned nations. Vijay Prashad argues, “Sanctions are geopolitical warfare, pushing countries into costly backchannels” (The Darker Nations, 2007). Iran’s exclusion from SWIFT since 2018 slashed its GDP by 10% (World Bank, 2023).
• Capital Flight: Wealth from the Global South flows to Western hubs like London or New York. Gabriel Zucman estimates, “Over $7 trillion in offshore wealth starves developing nations of tax revenue” (The Hidden Wealth of Nations, 2015). In Africa, illicit financial flows cost $88 billion annually (UNCTAD, 2020).
• Debt as a Leash: IMF and World Bank loans come with austerity mandates that gut public services. Jeffrey Sachs critiques, “Structural adjustments deepen poverty while shielding Western creditors” (The End of Poverty, 2005). In Argentina, IMF-driven austerity since 2018 triggered a 50% peso devaluation, spiking poverty to 40% (World Bank, 2023).
• Currency Volatility: Non-aligned nations face exchange rate risks. Economist Carmen Reinhart notes, “Emerging economies suffer from dollar dependence, as currency swings amplify debt burdens” (This Time Is Different, 2009). Turkey’s lira lost 70% of its value from 2018-2023, crippling its economy.

This financial architecture keeps the Global South in a straitjacket, while powerful nations wield unchecked economic power.

---

3. Tech Titans: The Innovation Chasm

The tech race is a rout, with powerful nations hoarding AI, semiconductors, and biotech. Dani Rodrik warns, “Intellectual property rules stifle technology transfer to the Global South” (The Globalization Paradox, 2011).

• Tech Monopolies: The U.S. and China control 90% of global AI patents (WIPO, 2023). Shoshana Zuboff notes, “Control over AI and data gives powerful nations unmatched leverage” (The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 2019). Firms like Google and Huawei dominate, while African nations lag in AI adoption.
• Digital Divide: Poor infrastructure locks out the Global South. Kaushik Basu states, “The digital divide is a new inequality, barring nations from the knowledge economy” (An Economist’s Miscellany, 2011). Sub-Saharan Africa has only 29% internet penetration vs. 90% in North America (ITU, 2023).
• Brain Drain: Talent flees to the North. Saskia Sassen observes, “The global labor market siphons brains from the South, widening innovation gaps” (The Global City, 1991). India loses 1 million STEM professionals annually to Western nations (UNESCO, 2022).
• IP Barriers: Western-dominated IP regimes, like TRIPS, raise costs for tech access. Economist Mariana Mazzucato argues, “IP rules protect Northern monopolies, blocking the South’s innovation” (The Entrepreneurial State, 2013). Developing nations spend billions licensing Western tech.
• Tech Dependency: The Global South relies on imported tech, from software to hardware. Anita Gurumurthy, a tech policy expert, notes, “Digital colonialism ensures the South remains a consumer, not a creator, of technology” (IT for Change, 2022).

This chasm locks the Global South into low-value sectors, while powerful nations dominate the future.

---

4. Environmental Exploitation: The South’s Burden

The Global South is the world’s punching bag for environmental costs, paying for the North’s excesses. Saleemul Huq warns, “The South bears the brunt of climate change caused by the North’s emissions” (Nature, 2021).

• Climate Injustice: The North, responsible for 70% of historical emissions (Global Carbon Project, 2023), demands green transitions without funding them. Thomas Piketty argues, “Climate finance promises are hollow, forcing poor nations to subsidize the North’s transition” (Capital in the 21st Century, 2014). COP28 pledged $100 billion annually, but only $20 billion was delivered (OECD, 2023).
• Resource Curse: Energy-rich nations face volatility and exploitation. Terry Lynn Karl explains, “The resource curse is geopolitical, as powerful nations secure oil and minerals” (The Paradox of Plenty, 1997). Nigeria’s oil, 80% of its exports, enriches Shell while 50% of Nigerians live in poverty (World Bank, 2023).
• Dumping Grounds: The South hosts toxic industries. Vandana Shiva says, “The Global South is a dump for the North’s waste, from e-waste to emissions” (Soil Not Oil, 2008). Ghana receives 15 million tons of e-waste annually, harming health and ecosystems (UNEP, 2022).
• Deforestation Pressures: Global demand for commodities like soy drives deforestation in Brazil, while Western nations preach conservation. Ecologist Johan Rockström notes, “The North’s consumption fuels environmental destruction in the South” (Nature, 2020).
• Adaptation Costs: Climate impacts hit the South hardest. Economist Nicholas Stern warns, “Developing nations face $1 trillion in annual climate adaptation costs, with little global support” (The Economics of Climate Change, 2007).

Powerful nations externalize their environmental toll, leaving the South to bear the cost.

---

5. Military Might: The Muscle Behind Economic Dominance

Military power isn’t just about defense—it’s a tool to secure economic supremacy. Andrew Bacevich notes, “The U.S.’s military presence ensures economic control over trade routes and resources” (American Empire, 2002).

• Global Reach: The U.S. maintains 700 overseas bases, securing oil routes and markets. Chalmers Johnson argues, “Military power underwrites economic hegemony, especially in oil-rich regions” (Blowback, 2000). The Persian Gulf hosts 30,000 U.S. troops, ensuring oil flows.
• Proxy Wars: Conflicts in resource-rich regions destabilize economies. Odd Arne Westad observes, “Proxy conflicts in Africa and Asia left lasting economic scars” (The Global Cold War, 2005). The Congo Wars, fueled by Western-backed factions, cost $9 billion in economic losses (UN, 2010).
• Arms Trade: Arms sales come with economic strings. William Hartung, an arms expert, notes, “U.S. arms deals lock allies into economic dependency” (Prophets of War, 2010). Saudi Arabia’s $100 billion arms purchases tie it to U.S. interests.
• Alliances as Gatekeepers: NATO membership brings trade and investment perks. Robert Keohane notes, “Alliances like NATO integrate economies, excluding outsiders” (After Hegemony, 1984). Turkey’s NATO ties secure EU trade deals, while non-aligned nations miss out.
• Regime Change: Interventions topple non-compliant regimes, securing markets. Political scientist Stephen Walt argues, “Regime change, like in Iraq, is often about economic control” (Foreign Policy, 2018).

Military dominance ensures the powerful control the economic board.

---

6. Cultural Hegemony: Narratives That Bind

Western culture doesn’t just entertain—it shapes economic ideologies, sidelining alternatives. Edward Herman argues, “Western media paints the Global South as chaotic, justifying control” (Manufacturing Consent, 1988).

• Soft Power: Hollywood, universities, and NGOs push neoliberalism. Arjun Appadurai says, “Western cultural flows marginalize local economic models” (Modernity at Large, 1996). U.S. media exports, worth $200 billion annually, dominate global narratives (Statista, 2023).
• Language Barriers: English’s dominance in business and academia excludes others. Robert Phillipson notes, “Linguistic imperialism excludes non-English-speaking nations” (Linguistic Imperialism, 1992). Only 20% of Africans are fluent in English, limiting global engagement (Ethnologue, 2023).
• Development Dogma: Western NGOs dictate priorities, often misaligned with local needs. Arturo Escobar critiques, “Development discourse aligns the South with Western interests” (Encountering Development, 1995). In Haiti, NGO-led projects favor foreign contractors over local firms.
• Stereotyping: Media frames the South as corrupt or unstable, deterring investment. Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie warns, “The single story of Africa as a basket case shapes economic policy” (TED Talk, 2009).
• Cultural Exports: Western brands like Coca-Cola symbolize progress, crowding out local alternatives. Cultural theorist Stuart Hall notes, “Global cultural homogenization serves Western economic interests” (Cultural Studies, 1992).

This cultural dominance keeps the Global South tethered to Western ideals, shrinking their economic imagination.

---

7. Global Governance: A Game Rigged at the Top

Global institutions are built to serve the powerful, not level the playing field. Susan Strange argues, “Global governance is a system of structural power, designed to maintain Western dominance” (States and Markets, 1988).

• Voting Power: The IMF and World Bank give the U.S. veto power. Branko Milanović notes, “The IMF’s voting structure ensures rich countries’ control” (Global Inequality, 2016). The U.S. holds 16.5% of IMF votes, dwarfing Africa’s 5% combined (IMF, 2023).
• Trade Rules: WTO agreements favor Northern interests. Jagdish Bhagwati observes, “Trade rules protect the North’s markets and intellectual property” (In Defense of Globalization, 2004). African nations face tariff barriers 10 times higher than OECD countries (UNCTAD, 2022).
• Philanthropy’s Grip: Western foundations shape development. Linsey McGoey states, “Philanthropy is a soft power tool, aligning the South with Western goals” (No Such Thing as a Free Gift, 2015). The Gates Foundation’s $50 billion influences African health policies, often prioritizing Western drugs.
• UN Imbalance: The Security Council’s veto powers favor the West. Political scientist Ian Hurd argues, “The UN’s structure entrenches the power of its founders” (After Anarchy, 2007).
• Exclusion from Forums: G7 and G20 sidelines the South. Ngaire Woods notes, “Global economic decisions are made in elite clubs, excluding most nations” (The Globalizers, 2006).

This rigged system ensures the powerful write the global economic script.

---

8. The Multipolar Mirage: New Players, Same Game

The rise of China, India, and others promises a new order, but it’s a mixed bag for the Global South. Parag Khanna notes, “A multipolar world creates opportunities but also new dependencies for the Global South” (The Future Is Asian, 2019).

• China’s Double Edge: The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) builds infrastructure but risks debt traps. Deborah Bräutigam warns, “China’s loans often mirror Western exploitation” (The Dragon’s Gift, 2009). Sri Lanka’s Hambantota port, ceded to China after debt default, is a cautionary tale.
• South-South Struggles: BRICS and regional blocs like AfCFTA aim to counter Western dominance but face internal rivalries. Amitav Acharya says, “South-South cooperation is promising but fractured” (The End of American World Order, 2014). AfCFTA’s trade volume is only 3% of Africa’s total (AU, 2023).
• Currency Shifts: Non-aligned nations explore yuan or rupee trade, but the dollar reigns. Arvind Subramanian observes, “The West resists a multipolar economy to cling to financial control” (Eclipse, 2011). Only 2% of global trade is in yuan (SWIFT, 2023).
• New Dependencies: China’s BRI loans often secure resource access. Economist Alicia García-Herrero notes, “China’s investments in Africa often prioritize its own energy needs” (China’s Global Strategy, 2022).
• Western Pushback: The West counters with initiatives like the G7’s Build Back Better World. Elizabeth Economy argues, “The West’s response to China’s rise aims to maintain geopolitical dominance” (The World According to China, 2022).

The multipolar shift offers alternatives but not true freedom from geopolitical chains.

---

Case Study: Energy Giants Locked Out of Markets

Low-cost energy producers like Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Russia, and Libya hold vast reserves—over 40% of global oil (OPEC, 2023)—and could dominate markets with competitive production costs (as low as $5-$10 per barrel vs. $30 for U.S. shale). Yet, geopolitics systematically excludes them, shrinking their economic canvas while powerful nations secure their resources.

• Iran: With 10% of global oil reserves, Iran’s exports crashed from 2.5 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2017 to 500,000 bpd by 2020 after U.S. sanctions post-JCPOA withdrawal (EIA, 2021). Vali Nasr notes, “Sanctions on Iran are less about nuclear concerns and more about controlling oil markets” (The Dispensable Nation, 2013). Iran’s shadow fleets and discounted sales to China cost it $20 billion annually (Bloomberg, 2023).
• Iraq: Producing 4 million bpd, Iraq’s oil wealth is siphoned by Western firms under post-2003 invasion contracts. Ahmed Rasheed reports, “Foreign oil companies take a lion’s share, leaving Iraq with crumbs” (Reuters, 2022). ExxonMobil and BP hold 60% of major field contracts, with Iraq earning $10 per barrel vs. $50 for firms (Iraq Oil Ministry, 2023).
• Venezuela: With 300 billion barrels in reserves, Venezuela’s output fell from 3 million bpd in 2013 to 700,000 bpd by 2023 due to U.S. sanctions (OPEC, 2023). Ricardo Hausmann argues, “Sanctions have crippled Venezuela’s oil industry, benefiting Western competitors” (Foreign Affairs, 2020). Refinery breakdowns force reliance on imported fuel, costing $2 billion yearly (PDVSA, 2023).
• Russia: Post-2022 Ukraine invasion, G7 price caps and sanctions slashed oil revenues by 30% (IEA, 2023). Tatiana Mitrova states, “The G7’s price cap forced Russia to sell oil at discounts to Asia, costing billions” (Energy Policy, 2023). Sales to India at $20 below market rates cost $15 billion in 2023 (Reuters, 2023).
• Libya: NATO’s 2011 intervention destabilized Libya, dropping oil output from 1.6 million bpd to 700,000 bpd intermittently (EIA, 2023). Jason Pack notes, “Western intervention let foreign firms control Libya’s oil” (Foreign Policy, 2022). European firms like TotalEnergies dominate, while Libya’s GDP per capita stagnates at $6,000 (World Bank, 2023).

These nations face sanctions, invasions, or market exclusion, forcing discounted sales or barter deals. Ellen Wald sums it up: “Geopolitics keeps oil-rich non-aligned nations on a tight leash, while Western markets thrive” (Saudi, Inc., 2018). This ensures powerful nations control energy flows, while producers lose trillions in potential revenue.

---

Conclusion: Rewriting the Rules

Geopolitics isn’t a sideshow—it’s the director of the global economic drama. Colonial legacies, dollar dominance, tech monopolies, environmental exploitation, military might, cultural sway, rigged governance, and a multipolar mirage stack the deck against the Global South and non-aligned energy producers. The energy sector case study shows how even resource-rich nations are sidelined by sanctions and interventions. Amartya Sen argues, “Economic freedom requires political freedom, and geopolitical constraints crush both” (Development as Freedom, 1999).

Economic theories must confront these realities to offer real solutions. The Global South deserves a fair game, not a rigged one.

---

Reference List

1. Adichie, C. N. (2009). The Danger of a Single Story. TED Talk.
2. Acharya, A. (2014). The End of American World Order. Polity Press.
3. Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. University of Minnesota Press.
4. Bacevich, A. (2002). American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy. Harvard University Press.
5. Basu, K. (2011 ). An Economist’s Miscellany. Oxford University Press.
6. Bhagwati, J. (2004). In Defense of Globalization. Oxford University Press.
7. Bräutigam, D. (2009). The Dragon’s Gift: The Real Story of China in Africa. Oxford University Press.
8. Chang, H.-J. (2002). Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective. Anthem Press.
9. Davidson, B. (1992). The Black Man’s Burden: Africa and the Curse of the Nation-State. Times Books.
10. Economy, E. (2022). The World According to China. Polity Press.
11. Eichengreen, B. (2011). Exorbitant Privilege: The Rise and Fall of the Dollar. Oxford University Press.
12. Escobar, A. (1995). Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World. Princeton University Press.
13. García-Herrero, A. (2022). China’s Global Strategy. Bruegel.
14. Gurumurthy, A. (2022). Digital Colonialism. IT for Change.
15. Hall, S. (1992). Cultural Studies and Its Theoretical Legacies. Routledge.
16. Hartung, W. D. (2010). Prophets of War: Lockheed Martin and the Making of the Military-Industrial Complex. Nation Books.
17. Hausmann, R. (2020). “Venezuela’s Economic Collapse.” Foreign Affairs.
18. Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. Pantheon Books.
19. Huq, S. (2021). “Climate Justice for the Global South.” Nature.
20. Hurd, I. (2007). After Anarchy: Legitimacy and Power in the United Nations Security Council. Princeton University Press.
21. International Energy Agency (IEA). (2023). “Russia Oil Revenue Data.”
22. International Monetary Fund (IMF). (2023). “Voting Shares and Reserves Data.”
23. Iraq Oil Ministry. (2023). “Oil Contract Revenue Reports.”
24. Johnson, C. (2000). Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire. Metropolitan Books.
25. Karl, T. L. (1997). The Paradox of Plenty: Oil Booms and Petro-States. University of California Press.
26. Keohane, R. O. (1984). After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton University Press.
27. Khanna, P. (2019). The Future Is Asian: Commerce, Conflict, and Culture in the 21st Century. Simon & Schuster.
28. Mamdani, M. (1996). Citizen and Subject: Contemporary Africa and the Legacy of Late Colonialism. Princeton University Press.
29. Mazzucato, M. (2013). The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths. Anthem Press.
30. Mbembe, A. (2001). On the Postcolony. University of California Press.
31. McGoey, L. (2015). No Such Thing as a Free Gift: The Gates Foundation and the Price of Philanthropy. Verso Books.
32. Milanović, B. (2016). Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization. Harvard University Press.
33. Mitrova, T. (2023). “Russia’s Energy Pivot.” Energy Policy.
34. Moyo, D. (2009). Dead Aid: Why Aid Is Not Working and How There Is a Better Way for Africa. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
35. Nasr, V. (2013). The Dispensable Nation: American Foreign Policy in Retreat. Doubleday.
36. OECD. (2023). “Climate Finance Delivery Report.”
37. OPEC. (2023). “Venezuela and Global Oil Production Statistics.”
38. Pack, J. (2022). “Libya’s Oil Chaos.” Foreign Policy.
39. PDVSA. (2023). “Venezuela Oil Industry Reports.”
40. Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford University Press.
41. Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the 21st Century. Harvard University Press.
42. Prashad, V. (2007). The Darker Nations: A People’s History of the Third World. The New Press.
43. Rasheed, A. (2022). “Iraq’s Oil Contracts.” Reuters.
44. Reinhart, C. M., & Rogoff, K. S. (2009). This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly. Princeton University Press.
45. Rockström, J. (2020). “Consumption and Deforestation.” Nature.
46. Sachs, J. (2005). The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time. Penguin Press.
47. Sassen, S. (1991). The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton University Press.
48. Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford University Press.
49. Shiva, V. (2008). Soil Not Oil: Environmental Justice in an Age of Climate Crisis. South End Press.
50. Stern, N. (2007). The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review. Cambridge University Press.
51. Stiglitz, J. E. (2002). Globalization and Its Discontents. W.W. Norton.
52. Strange, S. (1988). States and Markets. Pinter Publishers.
53. Subramanian, A. (2011). Eclipse: Living in the Shadow of China’s Economic Dominance. Peterson Institute for International Economics.
54. UNCTAD. (2020). “Illicit Financial Flows in Africa.”
55. UNEP. (2022). “Global E-Waste Report.”
56. UNESCO. (2022). “Global Migration of STEM Professionals.”
57. U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). (2021, 2023). “Iran and Libya Oil Production Data.”
58. Walt, S. M. (2018). “The Case Against Regime Change.” Foreign Policy.
59. Wald, E. R. (2018). Saudi, Inc.: The Arabian Kingdom’s Pursuit of Profit and Power. Pegasus Books.
60. Westad, O. A. (2005). The Global Cold War: Third World Interventions and the Making of Our Times. Cambridge University Press.
61. WIPO. (2023). “Global AI Patent Data.”
62. Woods, N. (2006). The Globalizers: The IMF, the World Bank, and Their Borrowers. Cornell University Press.
63. World Bank. (2023). “DRC, Nigeria, and Argentina Economic Indicators.”
64. Zucman, G. (2015). The Hidden Wealth of Nations: The Scourge of Tax Havens. University of Chicago Press.