I thought about passing this answer completely by, since it made so little sense I had to read it three times to get a clear idea of what he was talking about. But as a historian, I feel I have to try and correct these huge errors lest other readers unfamiliar with the subject think he might be even slightly close to the truth. Well he isn’t, not in the slightest. The Japanese fascist/military government never had any interest in building any alliances with Africans. Where could you possibly get that idea? Japan was allied with the Nazis, remember? And the Nazis referred to the Japanese as ‘honorary Aryans’ which the Japanese fascist intellectuals found enormously complimentary. Some of these same intellectuals even proposed official government support of the immigration and intermarriage with Europeans and white Americans. The general consensus of most historians of the period is that the Pacific Theater of World War Two became nothing less than a full scale race war between two very racist opponents (Japan and the US) who both widely practiced the mutilation of dead enemy soldiers, the rape of enemy female civilians, the indiscriminate bombing of enemy civilian populations, and the killing of enemy prisoners. Japan made some noises early on about’liberating’ other Asians, but they were quite horribly racist in their treatment of every other Asian ethnic group, as I’m sure anyone from Korea or Taiwan or Manchuria could tell you, as my Filipina wife has told she learned in her schooling back home. So why, if the Japanese even treated fairly light skinned Manchurian Chinese so horribly, would you think they would seek to win the support of Africans? Where did you get such a bizarre idea? One final thing, where did you get the idea that we have provided a lot of aid to Africa? Because outside of military aid to Egypt, we just haven’t given anything more than token amounts.