Towards a New Paradigm: Some thoughts on the Chinese African Relationship
Last week the 5th Ministerial Conference of the Forum of China-Africa Cooperation was concluded in Beijing. The summit was attended by all the major players on the African continent such as South Africa, Nigeria, Ghana and Senegal. The major headline of the summit is that China plans to lend to various countries on the African continent a total of US$20 billion. The money will be used to invest in major infrastructure projects and new economic initiatives. The summit has put into focus the issue of the nature of the Chinese-African relationship. As a result I have decided to publish an essay that I wrote earlier this year for a foreign policy magazine:
The rising influence of China on the international stage has raised a lot of questions from policy analysts and the media in relation to its role in challenging the dominance of the traditional western powers and in particular the United States. This is most pronounced in relation to China’s involvement on the African continent. China’s development aims have meant that they have become heavily involved in resource rich areas of the continent with huge investments across the continent and in particular the Southern African region. With China’s economic involvement in the continent has come a significant degree of political influence, the African Unions (AU) new headquarters in Addis Ababa is a gift from the Chinese and a symbol of the growing political and economic cooperation between China and Africa.
The rise of China’s influence has led to US Secretary State Hillary Clinton stating “we don’t want to see a new colonialism in Africa” as a warning to African countries in her official five day tour of the continent last year. The majority of commentary on China has focused on the changing geo-politics and security of the African continent but China is also changing the politics of development on the African continent. A quasi-cold war is taking place on the continent in which the western neo-liberal development agenda is running counter to China’s state led capitalism, a situation which has increased with the collapse of the American and European financial system.
The South African government is leading the charge in relation to implementing a development agenda based on the Chinese development model. The South African Minister of Public Enterprises Malusi Gigaba in a piece he wrote for the South African newspaper Business Day states:
The global financial crisis has legitimised state involvement in the economy and has shifted the focus to how this should happen. Part of this debate is how the state should leverage enterprise ownership in the developmental process. SOEs (State Owned Enterprises) have played a critical role in developing an industrial base in highly developed and emerging economies. Experience suggests that private and public companies have performed both well and badly in achieving key national developmental goals. There have been patriotic, efficient private companies that have made long-term investments to achieve national objectives. There have also been corrupt, inefficient and rent-seeking SOEs that have been captured to serve narrow interests and have undermined economic development. (07/02/2012)
The global financial crisis and the emergence of China and Brazil as major economic players in the international system have challenged what was once a political red herring, the role of the state in the economy. The accepted political paradigm since the Washington Consensus in the 1980s was that the state should play no role in a market economy and has dictated the policies and politics of development and aid on the African continent. African states placed primary emphasis on selling state owned enterprises to the private sector and sought to attract international financial capital in response to the policy power of the IMF and the World Bank. The subprime mortgage crisis and the consistent economic growth of China and Brazil have created the political space for politicians on the continent to begin reasserting the role of the state in the development of the economy.
There is an emerging intellectual consensus among the policy elite on the African continent that are actively challenging the economic and political foundations of western influence on the continent. Dambisa Moyo has been the most celebrated of the emerging thinking taking place on the continent in her book Dead Aid: Why Aid is Not Working and How there is a Better Way for Africa argues that what the continent needs is a reliable trading partner and that China can be both a commercial partner and serve as an example of a country that has pulled itself out of poverty. Singapore used to be the poster child of the Washington consensus and a means for the western donor nations to scold African governments for their lack of economic growth and development. The resulting rise of China on the continent is leading to a weakening of the kinds of soft power often utilised by the US and other western donor nations to gain international solidarity and influence domestic policy.
China is actively involved as a commercial partner and investor in Zambia, Sudan, South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Tanzania, Ethiopia, Congo, Guinea and Algeria. In addition the China Development Bank estimates that it has lent $7 billion to over 30 African countries since the development of the China-Africa Development Fund. The presence of the fund as an active investor on the continent in bilateral state led infrastructure projects is leading to the re-emergence of the state as a key driver of economic development in African nation states.
The inability of western donor nations to match the investment and funding drive of the Chinese will see a long term decline in the ability of the west to act as the sole policeman on the African continent. The waning of western influence in the long term will open up the opportunities for the rise and development of the African Union (AU) to act as a stabilising force on the continent. The rise of China will provide the political space for African countries to determine their economic and social policy mixes, long held back by seeking to follow the strict orthodoxy of neo-liberal economic policies. It is a phenomenon that policy makers will have analyse more closely in the coming years.
|
Share The Love
|
Subscribe to Updates
|






What have we done…
It will be deceptive to think that china interest in and, relationship with, African is based on altruism. The recent incident in Zambia (where a Chinese Manager was killed) and the attempts by Malawi to restrict Chinese business activity) are just some of the instances where the reality of the China – African Relationship is played out.
While the ruling classes might be benefitting from the loans and investment, the question remains will it contribute to development in Africa? Make no mistake; China is interested in Africans resources and market.
I do agree that the emergence of China does provide a ‘window of opportunity’ for Africa to re-evaluate its development strategy and indeed the economic stagnation in the west has seriously undermined the neo – liberal agenda. However, using the state as engine of growth does have its pitfalls, not least corruption and the misappropriation of resources by politicians and government officials.
Hi Femi,
I agree with what you say but in relation to trade and business the political and business elite will always benefit firstly. China’s investment is not based on altruism nor should it be. China is an investor with interests and what’s important is that African nations have their own development and business agenda. The state is not the engine of growth but it is an important facilitator of growth. For many African countries the main investor in relation to building roads, bridges, hospitals and schools is the state, that development is what drives economic growth. In particular the infrastructure development!!! A big feature of Chinese investment is infrastructure growth, that’s an important element of it all.
I’m highly suspicious and no fan of the newfound ‘cosiness’ in Sino-African relations. And I get extremely concerned on what happens (is happening and has happened) when Chinese ‘values’ and modus operandi (where the end seems to justify the means) meet the business and political elite of Africa (and particularly the corrupt elements of the same). Let’s not forget China’s dalliance in Darfur. The Chinese are not Africa’s friends, and while this (friendship) may be of no concern in business and trade, I’d still be interested in an objective analysis of who benefits – or will ultimately benefit — the most from this emerging alliance, and my bet is on China.
If Africa’s relationship with China is indeed trade-based, and based on fair practice, that’s great. If on the other hand it’s business as usual with Africa at the receiving end of Chinese ‘aid’, a definite thumbs-down to this continued and undesirable dependency on external aid.
Changing the orientation of Africa’s begging bowls from West to East will not solve Africa’s problems. It’s all begging, which should no longer be the way Africa does business. While I’m not advocating for shutting out the rest of the world — Africa is a member of the world community and must stay engaged — we will never be the masters of our destiny as long as we continue with this deplorable mendicant culture, and the unsavoury strings attached to the aid that arises from this beggary.
I agree with Femi’s comment that what’s needed is for Africa to re-examine its development strategy, but this should not be limited to just the ‘Chinese connection’. Perhaps much more critical is for Africa to evaluate internal options and solutions: few successful world economies have grown from external aid, and most grew by first looking inwards and developing wholly home-grown solutions tailored to their particular circumstances. Malaysia and USA come to mind.
I think the problem isnt the chinese agenda, the issue is what is the collective agenda of african nations towards this investment towards china. We seem to be doing alot of debate about it but there is no realistic political consensus on the part of African nations. We must not only accept money but also have an agenda in relation to what we will do with it.
Nodding with you on the need for a collective agenda but I still consider that first and foremost, we need African solutions to African problems. Africa’s problem is mismanagement not lack of resources or enterprise. We should not saddle ourselves, and the generations to come, with debt and indebtedness to others, monetary or otherwise. I strongly believe in most of the philosophies and practices of Thomas Sankara, a revolutionary leader who was way ahead of his time, and who therefore had to be killed to perpetuate the status quo for those that benefited from it. With his pro-people stand and policies, Sankara WAS turning things around INTERNALLY in a country with meager capital resources, but the dark forces were set against him. Please see this blogpost and the embedded links and videos, that tell his story so eloquently. bit.ly/N9KxnX
thanks for the link.I agree with you about mismanagement.