November 4, 2006

China-Africa Summit

China-Africa

The Beijing SummitAfrica may be a continent of immense diversity, but when dealing with China, it appears more as a country made up of different units. China's population exceeds that of the entire African continent by about 400 million. When the Chinese President, Hu Jintao, visited a select number of African countries seven months ago, few could have predicted that in November 2007, practically all African leaders would be invited to Beijing for an unprecedented China-Africa Summit.

But, the writing had been on the wall. In January 2006, the Chinese government released its African Policy, aimed at explaining what China hopes to achieve not just in Africa but with Africa. Carefully crafted statements and a subtle language tone resulted in a document that seemed to be coming from a country which viewed itself not as superior, but as a partner.

About a week and a half ago, the BBC reported that the Chinese government was cleaning up Beijing in preparation for a summit of African leaders. Wrongly spelt English street signs and instructions were being corrected and the city was also being given a face lift. Nothing unusual, this blogger thought. That was until he got to see some of the changes online—giant billboards across the city, depicting what was meant to be the African landscape, its people and wildlife. Even a non-Chinese blogger like this, who easily gets turned off by the poor quality of written English often found in Beijing, and who found the billboards "ridiculous" could not but help take a picture of one.

The Beijing Summit on the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) opened today, the 4th of November 2006. It will run till the 5th of November. Probably the largest gathering of African leaders ever, outside United Nations General Assembly meetings, the summit is aimed at strengthening China-Africa relations . According to the state-controlled China Central Television International (CCTV), forty-one African Heads of State and forty-eight Heads of Government were present in Beijing for the summit, with hundreds of trade negotiators and business people. These alone hint at the significance of the summit.

China's interest in Africa is, without a doubt, greatly linked to the latter's huge pool of natural resources, much of which remain untapped. And with rapid development and modernization occurring across China, there is an increasing need for raw materials to continue fueling such development. African leaders in a position of strength (those who govern nations rich in resources of interest to China) must negotiate sensibly. The need to gradually curtail the export of raw materials and focus on the processing or conversion of such materials before export has become all too obvious. Non knowledge-based societies would simply be unable to compete favorably in today's fast-changing world.

According to this report in the People's Daily Online, trade between China and Africa reached almost $40 billion in 2005, four times more than it was in 2000. China has also granted tariff waivers to certain export items from the least developed African countries, as well as offered to train thousands of African professionals. Furthermore, China View reports that the Chinese Premier (Prime Minister), Wen Jiabao, has called on both parties to work together towards increasing bilateral trade volume to $100 billion in four years time.

Chinese involvement on the African continent is not without criticism. Most notable among these is its desire to deal and trade with Sudan, despite the ongoing conflict and killing of innocent civilians in Darfur province. The Chinese government should use its influence on Sudan to press for a speedy resolution of the conflict. The quiet diplomacy, which it claims to be employing, doesn't seem to be working.

For now, China appears to be doing something which neither the United States nor Europe did—engaging Africa. Whether this is solely driven by China's need for raw materials or also to increase its global sphere of influence would be debated for a long time to come. The President of Botswana, Festus Mogae, has described the China-Africa partnership as a partnership of equals (Botswana is one of the most stable democracies on the African continent). When it comes to dealing with Europe and the United States on the other hand, he sees a relationship between masters and subjects.

Like the rest of the world, this blog has watched China's increasing presence on and interest in the African continent for the past couple of years. From outright skepticism the position of this blog became one which cautiously accommodates China's increasing role on Africa's development. However, the fact remains that African nations are largely raw material exporters and until that changes, true partnership would be anything but achieved.

When China rolls out the red carpet for African leaders and decorates Beijing with billboards that read "Beautiful Africa", it unavoidably sends out a message to governments in Europe and the United States. While such marketing may have unconsciously boosted the morale and confidence of the African leaders and business negotiators in Beijing, it leaves the rest of the world guessing what China's exact ambitions might be.

The United States preaches freedom and democracy, and is currently engaged in a war that is aimed at bringing these to the Middle East. Yet, a significant chunk of humanity—in China—who see tangible improvements in their daily lives (from an economic point of view) live in a society that would be classified as undemocratic and repressive by the American government. By investing in real infrastructural development in Africa, undemocratic China—which of itself is still on the road of development—appears to silently doing what democratic Europe and the United States have avoided.

Africa remains the least developed of all continents. And, as to whose influence would likely be greatest in the near future, your guess is as good as mine. One thing is certain however. As Chinese influence on the continent increases, the influence of the United States (which appears to be primarily driven by the need to secure energy resources) and Europe declines. Eventually though, Africa would have to learn to stand on its own feet and the sooner it is able to do so, the better.

Related: From China Town To Oil Deals; China's African Policy

What some other bloggers think about the China-Africa Summit:

(1) "Trade not Aid": Whither the China-Africa Summit? from Across the Divide: Analysis & Anecdote from Africa
(2) China-Africa Business Council Meeting from Africabeat
(3) Rising China Reaching, Influencing Africa from China Confidential
(4) China-Africa Trade from Just Wanna Know
(5) Thanks, but no thanks from African Shirts

Labels: , , ,


>>Go to HomePage
Posted by Chippla Vandu, 10:05 PM | links to this post

18 Comments:

Good job Chippla on summarizing your thoughts about the China-Africa Summit in Beijing. I too was impressed with the reception the Beijing government has extended to the African heads of state and key ministers and to important African businesspeople. The announcements by the PRC regime that it will double aid, double trade to $100 bn dollars by 2010, write off an additional $1bn in debt, build hospitals and schools, increase training for African professionals, and so forth and so on sounds just great. Lord knows that most African countries can use all the help they can get.

The problem is these are pledges that have yet to be put into action just as the promises and pledges of the world's leading economies (the G7) made last year at the G8 Summit in Gleneagles. An additional problem is that China continues to prop-up not only repressive regimes in Africa, but murderous regimes in Africa such as Bashir's regime in Khartoum and Mugabe's regime in Harare (did I spell that right?). Then there are the less-than-desirable unfair business practices of continuing to use bribes and other perks to win lucrative contracts for building infrastructure and gaining access to the valuable natural resources that a handful of African nations have to trade with the rest of the world. Let's not forget China's involvement in the illegal trade in small arms and munitions on the continent or the fact that it supplies unstable regimes with high-end military hardware such as the attack helicopters used by Sudan in Darfur or the Chinese MIG's supplied to Zimbabwe. I could go on and on but why bother, the list of negatives is sooooo long.

I remain skeptical of the PRC's true intentions for the people of Africa and I am certain that the loathed Western nations will counter China's generous offers with some new initiatives and investments of their own. Let's not forget that trade with the U.S.A. and the E.U. account for more than 50% of the export revenues earned by African countries in 2005 and that figure excludes key African trading partners such as Australia, Canada, Brazil, Japan, Korea, and some Middle Eastern nations. China's trade and investments is still "chump change" in comparison, so let's not get carried away. Lastly, a slow-down in China's booming economy will have a direct impact on China's trade with Africa, especially in the demand for commodities such as minerals and oil and gas.

At the end of the day it is a matter for the people of Africa and their elected leaders (and non-elected dictators and despots) to decide, not the countries of North and South America or Europe or Asia. How best to use your precious and limited, finite natural resources and your unlimited human resources to build a better future for your children, and yourselves.

I of course will be joining in the debate ASAP and I appreciate that you took time to write about this important subject yet again. I would recommend that you and your readers take a look at the fine work of Jennifer Brea of the Africabeat blog. Africabeat focuses on the relationship between China and Africa and Jennifer (a graduate of Princeton University) really knows her stuff in this area. I'll let you know when my China-Africa Summit post is up at my place this week.
Posted by Blogger Black River Eagle at November 5, 2006 3:44 PM  
Thanks so much for introducing Jennifer Brea's blog. I'll respond to the issues you raised later.
Posted by Blogger Chippla Vandu at November 5, 2006 5:23 PM  
chippla can you please post the links to the transcripts from the plane crash...i'm discussing the ethics of the crash for a class and i need to confirm if indeed th pilot was warned of deteriorating conditions. furthermore id like to know if the pilot or the air tower has the final say... it seems like the air tower has the final say, cos many times on a plane, the pilot has said he cant go...i dunno
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous at November 5, 2006 11:08 PM  
The discussion on China-Africa trade has generated some much energy not because of the volume of trade, but simply because the majority of African nations are notorious for poor governance and visionless leadership. How great it would have been if China, or any nation with the capacity, can dangle the carrot and wield the stick at the same time.

As much as the need remains for greater trade, African nations need to be told, in clear terms, of the consequences of not meeting some basic requirements...such as good governance, free press, increased accountability, etc.
Posted by Anonymous imnakoya at November 6, 2006 3:20 AM  
Sadly, most people in western countries are still staying in the old cold war mentality. When China ventures out to engage with Africa, China-bashers label it as Neo-Colonialism. When China builds up its manufacturing industry, they say that China is exploiting poor peasants, putting them in inhumane environment. When China builds up its infrastructure, they point to the pollution from China. When China sends spaceship to the space, they accuse China of stealing technology. The list can go on forever… Some of the accusations may seem to be true. However, if the opinion is based on one-sided bias, every fact will get distorted.

The truth is that, China is not a “perfect” country. China is just a normal country in the development stage. Not surprisingly, China has more problems than a normal developed country or even a developing county, given to its enormous size and the attention it attracts. Moreover, Chinese people nowadays don’t have ideals as high as other westerners have in democracy, freedom, rights of speech, human rights, good governance, etc. Currently, 1.3 billion people are working hard to lift the country out of poverty and lead the nation to an average prosperous country. Cultural and Red revolutions have incurred too much cost to the country. The entire generation, like my parent’s, has been lost in class struggles. Deng Xiaoping finally gave the nation the precious chance for development, which China has been waiting for the past two hundreds years. With so much lost time, Chinese people are willing to sacrifice individual benefits for collective goods. There are many problems in China. Democracy and rights of speech are fringe benefits nice to have. However, nothing is more important than up-lifting the country from poverty and under-development. To archive the prosperity, China has to laser-focus on the development. Everything else can be solved when time comes. For that, it gives China-bashers plenty of ammunition in international media. Sadly, most westerners are looking at China through the narrow periscope created by China-bashers.

Now, back to the Beijing Summit, I really don’t know why people are skeptical of the intention of our government in building infrastructure for African countries or giving out loans to them. What’s wrong for letting African countries choose what to get, whom to deal with, and where to lead their nation to? At the end, Africans own their lives, their dreams, and their nations. China’s presence gives them the alternatives to choose from. It is that simple! Chinese does not bring guns, opium, or germs when we go to other people’s place.

After all, current international standards mean western standards. China has its own way of doing things, ‘mostly’ in a benign way. If, anywhere, modernization might turn out in the end not to mean ‘westernization’, it could be in China. The traditional role of government in China has always been to act as the guardian of Chinese values. The communist government we have today is no different from the nationalist government (who fled to Taiwan) or dozen of dynasties in a span of over 2,000 years, in which social elites are empowered to perform the public duties. Beijing Summit demonstrates the diplomacy with Chinese characteristics. We give out our respect and sincerity to our African friends by treating them as equals, without interference into their politics or strings attached to the loans. This only exemplifies traditional Chinese values. Yes, the Summit is organized by the communist government. The fact alone doesn’t entitle you to be skeptical of it.
Posted by Anonymous Yang Hui at November 6, 2006 4:50 AM  
"As much as the need remains for greater trade, African nations need to be told, in clear terms, of the consequences of not meeting some basic requirements...such as good governance, free press, increased accountability, etc."

Please don't take a higher moral ground to order African nations what to do when your ancestors put their ancestors into chains and sold them like commodity. The hypocricy of western countries went from slave trade, to Iraq war, to as recent as the scandal of disgraced evangelist Ted Haggard. Chinese, Africans, and Westerns, are all human beings living on this planet. When you realized that you are not morally superior to Africans, you can understand more about their needs and respect their choices. For a poor African country, the top priority is not to ensure good governence or to overthrow bad government. They care more about how to feed their hungry population and get out of the vicious cycle of poverty. China went through the same development path for the past 30 years and this puts China in a unique position to show Africans how to get rid of poverty without the risk of collapsing the foundation of nation and economy. However, at the end, Africans make their own choice on which development path to follow, Chinese or Western. The bottomline is that, Africans are their own masters and make their own choices, good or bad. We are not here to lecture them and order them around. So, please be more humble, sincere, and think for Africans from their perspective.
Posted by Anonymous Yang Hui at November 6, 2006 7:32 AM  
It is evident that China's move into Africa is all pervasive and will include all aspects of commerce and industry. I cannot see how this is possible without China also having influence in issues of national governance and human rights. I have said this more than once that a country with such appalling human rights record is not exactly going to worry about such things in other countries which puts it at an advantage over Western countries which at least superficially are concerned over HR but the reality is they could give a damn either.

An excellent piece Chippla but from a grassroots activist perspective none of this really impacts on the lives of the masses of dispossesed people whether in China or elsewhere - Greed and corruption march on in the name of Capitalism whilst the rest get left behind and the gaps between those that have and have not just get bigger and bigger.

PRC's true intention? To make money, to have access to and control resources and to influence governments to respond in China's interest - they are hardly there for altruistic reasons are they?
Posted by Blogger owukori at November 6, 2006 10:53 AM  
It is very nice to see that a (presumed) Chinese national, Yang Hui, has joined us here in these important discussions about China & Africa.

Perhaps someone should enlighten Yang that everyone who has commented on Chippla's post up to now is African or of direct African ancestry. I for one am the descendant of African slaves shipped off to the Americas a few hundred years after the great Chinese Admiral Zheng He reached the east African coast in the early 1400’s. In other words Yang Hui you are speaking to genuine Black folks here, westernized and otherwise. BTW: What happened to our relatives that traveled back to China with the Admiral in the 15th Century? Don’t tell me that someone in the Ming Dynasty lost the passenger records of those voyages.

I don't believe that you will find many “China-bashers” here but what you will find are people who express their views freely and fairly. This is not a U.S. or Western practice but a right of all people who live in free societies and believe me such people fight fiercely to maintain those precious rights and freedoms. Democracy and free speech are not “fringe benefits” that are nice to have as you say, they are important human rights that millions of people, including millions of Africans, have fought and died for over the centuries to achieve and to defend.

In regards to your comment that …”China does not bring guns and opium or germs when we go to other people’s places…” or your comment that “Please don't take a higher moral ground to order African nations what to do when your ancestors put their ancestors into chains and sold them like commodity…” or your belief that the Chinese government and people only have benevolent and good intentions in their hearts toward Africa and Africans... well, I'll give you a chance to think about that again and correct it before I respond. Either you have very poor access to reliable, verifiable information where you live or we in the West are very misinformed. Or is it that you are intentionally trying to mislead Africans and other people with such statements to win favor for your agenda?

I do sincerely hope that you at least have the heartfelt interest, willpower, and courage to stick with us here in this important dialogue... for your own benefit and the collective benefit of the Chinese people who engage with Africa and Africans. Who knows, perhaps we all may learn something from one another. One thing is for certain China’s present engagement with Africa won’t be as easy and opaque as you may have been promised.
Posted by Blogger Black River Eagle at November 6, 2006 2:53 PM  
I am not being rude here... but I have to say, being an African social elite or someone of direct African ancestry does NOT entitle you the right or give you a moral high ground to speak for 800 millions of African people living on the continent. This is especially true when you are imposing the western values of freedom or democracy onto people living in poverty.

We call those Chinese people who lost Chinese values or Chinese way of thinking as “banana” because from outside they have yellow skin but deep under they are totally westernized. I don’t want to label you guys as a bunch of “Oreo” cookies… so please put down your westernized ideals for a while, sit down, and image yourself as being one of the poorest people in your or your ancestor’s fatherland. Now tell me, what would a poor person need the most? Is it food or freedom? Is it a stable environment for survival, or is it a rigorous democracy championed with individual rights? When basic necessities are out of question, democracy and individual rights are among other luxury goods that are hard to reach for the majority poor. Millions of Africans died because of tribal rivalry in a political vacuum (or mess) created by ex-colonial powers. Far more Africans died because of hunger and diseases caused by under-development, man-made catastrophes, and natural disasters. You must be totally brain-washed by western propaganda to think that millions of Africans died of defending “westernized” human rights.

I am not necessarily saying that human rights are bad or evil. I am just pointing out that Africans do not need “westernized” human rights when they are struggling with their “basic” human rights in survival. This is a matter of priority in development, not a matter of entitlement to universal rights. I do not want to blame on you if you are that naïve to think that human rights are what African countries need the most. I was among those Chinese people in demonstration during China’s tremulous year of 1989. We sang the “Internationale” and up-held western inspiration in democracy and human rights. Right now, I realized that we, the students at that time, were brain-washed by westernized ideals and we were all very naïve. In looking back, I think what China needed the most in 1989 was to continue the development path of uplifting a large number of people out of poverty, but not to overthrow the communist government which was executing the development plan, nor to grant “westernized” human rights to the few social elites. Some protestors in 1989 were sent by the communist government to the re-education camps in the most remote areas in China. You know what? Those once-anti-government intellectuals later became the most faithful supporters of government’s policies after they realized what the poverty means to the local people in those remote areas.

I was born in a village in central China, then my family moved to a city when I was about to go to the elementary school. My father side’s relatives are still living in our village like all of our ancestors had been for the past few hundreds years. (Our genealogy which dated back to 1,400 B.C. documented the settlement of our family branch in the area since late Ming dynasty.) I still remember that the happiest time during my early childhood was to have an egg as celebration for my birthday. We were not among the poorest families at that time but I know that some families were so poor that their family members had to share the same pant if they wanted to leave the house. Well, what I can say is that China 20 years ago is not much better than most of the poor African countries today. Because of our shared experience in the development path we want to give African countries what they would need the most. There is a saying in China, “If you want to uplift a village out of poverty, you need to build a road first.” It was the mobilizing power of upgraded infrastructure that liberated the relatively untapped rural labor force into sectors with higher productivity, resulting in up-lifting of hundreds of millions of rural peasants out of poverty in a large scale. No any other country except China has eliminated poverty in such a short time and such a large scale in the entire human history. By focusing on building infrastructure for African countries, China knows that this will bring the long term benefits to improve the lives of the majority of 800 millions of African people.

It is therefore heart-breaking for a Chinese to see a small number of Africans taking a skeptical view, as demonstrated in some African blogs, on China’s benign intention to Africa. Western countries have had their chance in the past one hundred years or so to do something good to Africa. What happens to Africa now? Yes, you can say that Zheng He and his fleet took some Africans away from their homeland (an accusation I didn’t verify). Chinese people for the most of time treat African people like brothers. We didn’t colonize Africa when we had the chance to do so (and some westerners think that’s stupid). We didn’t get involved in slave trade. There may be some bad Chinese business people in Africa, but this does not diminish the fact that Chinese is treating African people as equals. The most pitiful thing is that some people are still under the illusion of glamorous western ideals, ignoring the most basic needs of African people, immersing themselves in the western propaganda of an evil China, but at the same time advertising their rights to speak for most of other African people. Please give China the benefit of doubts and judge China’s intention by China’s actions and the results, not by what you have read on western media or your pure obsession with western ideals.
Posted by Anonymous Yang at November 6, 2006 9:32 PM  
TO YANG:
It will be better for you to stick to what you understand most - Chinese affairs!

Let me ask you, have ever been to any African nation? If you have, have you ever been to the inner cities and spend time with the folks there? If you have, then you are qualified to have the views you have shared. If not, then invest you time wisely by spending some quality time reading about issues on the continent and understanding what the problems are!

Afterall what prompted your diarrhea of comments are written by people who have first-hand information and experience of the situation on ground, or have taken the time to study what the issue is. Have you?

The intention of your government to 'help' and trade with Africa is welcome; however, no amount of Sino dollars can fix the mess in Africa and pull the people out of poverty if the leadership remain greedy, unfocused and continually fail to establish and promote an enabling society for commerce and justice.

Now what do you say to the fact that China - as a prominent business partner of Sudan - hasn't initiated a peaceful resolution of Darfur crisis. Rather, your country has sold several millions of dollars worth of arms to Sudan. And do you know what Sudan has been doing with this Chinese-made-and- supplied-weaponry? I bet you don't, and if you do, you obviously don't care! Please!!!
Posted by Anonymous imnakoya at November 7, 2006 3:09 AM  
To IMNAKOYA:

I totally agree with you that I should stick with Chinese affairs and China should mind its own business. What you are saying about my knowledge of Africa is also right. I have not been Africa and I am not in a position to choose what is good for African people or speak for them. In fact, I have no intention to get into politics of Africa. I also don't know too much about Darfur crisis to comment on western media's accusation of China government in supplying weapons to Sudan government.

However, I do care about the well beings of African people in general and support our government's benign role in Africa. After all, China and African countries share the same history as the victim of exploitation by colonial powers and imperialism. I do believe that the people in each African country have the intelligence, the ability and the will to govern their nation and solve the crisis in Sudan. I also trust that our government is not as evil as many foreign media portrayed in Darfur crisis. Finally, I believe that China's experience in fighting poverty in the past 30 years can provide positive examples to African countries with the same aspirations.

My final advice to the crusaders of western ideals like you is: "You need fewer ideals but more pragmatism". Just like Deng Xiaoping put it: "We should do more, and talk less." Now, you should go back to Africa, stay with your compatriots, and start to put your ideals into action. Deng Xiaoping also said: "No matter if it is a white cat or a black cat; as long as it can catch mice, it is a good cat." In case that your ideals such as democracy and human rights don’t work very well in your country, you should try other method based on result orientation. For uncertainties in the future, Deng Xiaoping commented: You can “touch stones to cross the river”. Finally, Deng Xiaoping also reminded people of the pre-conditions for development: “…the overwhelming priority is stability. Without a stable environment, nothing can be achieved, and what has been achieved will be lost... Democracy is our goal, but the country must remain stable." Never mind that you don’t agree with Deng’s last comment on democracy, you need to make sure of a stable environment for development.

Well, I have to travel to Europe tomorrow and will disappear from here for some time. My words have been very harsh to you and other people in this forum. Please do not get offended. I hope I got enough attention from you and you can pick up whatever useful from my comments. Being a Chinese, I am still an outsider in this forum. Just as you suggested, I should mind my Chinese affairs. It will be for Africans like you to turn the affection for Africa into action and do something good for your African compatriots. You have the inherited duties to change your fatherland into a prosperous continent.
Posted by Anonymous Yang at November 7, 2006 9:37 AM  
Thank you Yang for your inputs here, especially that story about how you grew up in central China and participated in the 1989 uprisings. You are the 1st Chinese blog reader that I have found online who was prepared to enter into an intense but honest dialogue about China-Africa relations... at least in our little sector of the blogosphere.

I personally feel that your insights and opinions are valuable albeit I cannot agree with much that you have written here about how development comes before basic human rights and freedoms, to say the least.

Imnakoya, you should apologize for jumping on Yang's case like that and insinuating that he should mind his own business. I'm certain there was a misunderstanding of what you meant to say. Of course Africa is Yang's business, especially when he is such a staunch supporter of Deng Xiaoping and the serving PRC President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jibao. It is his duty as a capable and engaged citizen of the PRC to carry out their policies and ideas to the fullest extent possible, worldwide.

What will be interesting is when people like Yang with such a strong dose of indoctrination of traditional Chinese values and methods and perceptions of how the world works collide with so-called African elites and westernized black bananas and oreos (the latter refers to my folks in the Americas, I presume). In other words when the Chinese juggernaut collides with the realities that they didn't teach at those re-education camps and elite Chinese universities that's when the flesh and feathers will fly, big time.

Enjoy your trip to Europe Yang and when you get off the plane and walk across the tarmac into Old Europe, don't forget about the Ghost of the Tankman. Come back for a visit with us again real soon, you hear?

Evil Western Public News Channel
PBS Frontline/World: The Tank Man
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tankman/view/

Not everyone that was involved with the July 1989 protests and uprising in Tiananmen Square was crushed by tanks or arrested and shipped off to Chinese gulags for re-education. Many young Chinese did NOT sell out their deep desire for more freedom and rights and a better future for all Chinese people. Problem is, where are they? Are they coming to Africa?
Posted by Blogger Black River Eagle at November 7, 2006 1:49 PM  
Only time will tell if the PRC's interest in boosting trade with Africa is in our best interest. Summarily, we as Africans and our leaders have to see China's move as an opportunity to engage other developed or developing countries (India for one). Let them woo us and our resources and pray our leaders don't sell us out. According to Bishop Desmond Tutu: " When the missionaries came to Africa, they had the Bible and we had the land. The said, 'close your eyes and let us pray.' When we opened them, we had the Bible and they had the land."

Moral: Seller beware!
Posted by Anonymous Rosie at November 7, 2006 11:16 PM  
Yang Hui raises some very interesting points. Most times when China is discussed in the 'Western' media, issues of human rights violations and capital punishment are brought to the fore. China has its faults and I, for one, am not happy with the approach the Chinese government has taken to solving the Darfur crisis. But face it—does anyone truly believe that the American and European governments requested that their companies pull out of Sudan in solidarity with the people of Darfur, or because of pressure from human rights groups?

My skepticism of Chinese involvement on the African continent, as stated in previous articles on this blog, has largely been based on the fact that while African nations get to export raw materials to China, China exports finished goods to Africa. It had very little to do with the human rights situation within China itself, though I once alluded to dangerous consequences of the continuous silencing of all forms of opposition.

Communist-controlled China is lifting millions of people out of poverty. It has little or no press freedom and society is largely controlled. Yet, some Chinese believe that these are sacrifices that must be made for the collective good of all as Yang pointed out. This view had been echoed by a Chinese Professor friend whom I got to know a while back. But Yang needs to understand that African countries need good governance (democratic or otherwise) which would truly serve the needs of the people. Good governments are necessary in African nations, because, without them, the pace of development is slowed down.

China may be communist but it has been blessed with visionary leaders like Deng Xiaoping. The Communist party has and continues to foresee developmental plans in China. Corrupt Chinese state officials are tried and prosecuted in the hundreds. While these do not mean there isn't a corruption problem in China, they do show that there is a government in place which is willing to govern in such a way that the people get to benefit from it.

The focus of African nations should be on how to acquire and further develop technologies. That's the way forward. To a poor farmer in rural Kenya or rural Guinea, nothing matters more than he and his family having good meals each day and his kids being able to go to school. Democracy, communism or free market policies make no sense to him. I believe this is what Yang calls pragmatism. If the Chinese government could help in making this a reality for the farmer and thousands of other Kenyans, should their offer be rejected? (Of course, China gets the natural resources it needs in return).

Corruption is to a large degree linked to poverty. And bad governance continues to pervade places on the African continent with low literacy rates (Zimbabwe is an exception though). If more Africans could be lifted out of poverty and receive an education as a result of increased Sino-African trade, then I'm all for it. But then, as Owukori points out, what guarantee is there that increased trade would translate to an improvement in the living conditions of people at the grassroots? That's a question for African leaders (in whatever capacity: presidents, provincial governors, community workers, ministers, teachers, and all those in some form of authority) to answer.

Those of us privileged to blog have had certain basic necessities of life met (at least for the time being): we know where our next meals would be coming from. We've got roofs above our heads. We have electricity in our homes or in the offices or internet cafes from which we blog. To millions of people around the world, these are luxuries. To someone who isn't certain of his or her next meal, browsing the internet is something he or she could only dream of, not to speak of blogging.

I am for good governance, but African nations must not wait till their governments are 'prefect' before serious developmental plans are put in place. Parallel development is what I'd like to call it. Top of my priorities for most African nations would be education, healthcare and industrialization. When these are in place for most citizens, everything else would fall in line.
Posted by Blogger Chippla Vandu at November 8, 2006 8:43 PM  
I found this online...and I absolutely agree with it:

Whatever China has to offer us, it can be no worse than the slavery, brutal colonialism or apartheid that is very much the legacy of Western intervention in Africa. China, our brothers from the East, Akwaaba!

We have tried the Western option for, what, right about 50 years since African countries started ridding their states of the shackles of colonialism - look where it has landed us. Things can only get better from the mess our continent has become. China offers a hand - not as imperialists, slave takers or colonialists, but as separate, respectful entities. China, welcome to Africa!
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous at November 10, 2006 5:50 PM  
Black River Eagle:

The way you defended me here showed that you are a reasonable person with a sense of justice. Imnakoya is ‘too’ direct but he has his own point of views. He is just showing us who he is. That’s all.

What makes geopolitics so difficult to understand is that the earth community does not simply reside on a three dimensional globe with you at its center. It is your perception that makes you think that way. How you judge an event and conclude a judgment depend on your relative perception of the event. However, such perception can be deceiving. For example, the way you portrayed the Tankman as an image for young generation of Chinese shows your western perception on China. The thinking that our knowledge about this world is only from re-education camps or elite Chinese universities demonstrates your misconception about Chinese (and other people in this world). I don’t blame on you. What you know is what defines you and how you see this world.

What seems obvious to me is then the subtle differences between us on how we see this world. The differences are a result of clash between two civilizations, when the western thought is challenged by the oriental way of thinking. You care about freedom. We care about harmony. You will die for human rights. We will die for our unity. You are keen on democracy. We are keen on stability. Western value system while has its merits does not represent “universal” values. After all, Chinese has been living in this way for thousands of years. Our continuity of thinking explains for the longevity of Chinese civilization. Why will you think that we are betraying our ideals about democracy and freedom? In China, no one believes in communism now. Most people are also indifferent to democracy in China. Both communism and democracy are imported ideas from outside anyway. China is officially building a socialistic society with Chinese characteristics. It literally means that we don’t know what exactly we should call ourselves. Again, we don’t care if China is a black cat or a white cat. As long as China is progressing everyday, who will care? I am going to say this again and again, modernization doesn’t mean westernization. China will blend useful ideas from western countries into Chinese values. At the end, China will take a form of government which the world has never seen before. Pragmatism is the core of Chinese values. If you know that Chinese gave up using spoons in favor of chopsticks two thousands years ago, you will understand our line of thinking here.

The acknowledgement and respect for the differences between different civilizations are the requisites for a harmonic world. China adopts five principles of coexistence in its foreign diplomacy because we acknowledge and show the respect for the differences between each country. Therefore, when you expected that there is a big collision between China and the reality, you were implying that the “reality” is how you perceive this world to be and the collision happens when the western countries try to impose your perceived western values uniformly onto this world. You further assumed that Chinese will confront it simply because Chinese see things differently. Well, that’s simply how you see things with your western “periscope”. Chinese is more practical and we mind our own business. Sun Tze said that there are 36 strategies of winning a war and the most recommendable strategy is not to start the war in its first place. Soft-power is better than hard-power. Do you share the same wisdom here?

Chinese government is not perfect. Most of Chinese people will rank the government at around 70 to 80 out of 100. Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution are the low marks for this government. However, the government of People’s Republic earned its high marks in economic development, scientific advancement, sports promotion, women’s rights, poverty fighting, and national integrity. Today, people’s satisfaction with the government is rated much higher than that in many democratic countries. Why? It is because, just like our ancestors, most Chinese still believe in mandate of heaven and have higher tolerance for the government. Government empowered and entrusted by the people find it easier to carry out many social works unthinkable in western or other democratic countries. Just ask any Indians, how hard it is to build a road in India. Of course, the opposite is true as well. A wrong decision by the government could potentially bring disaster to the nation. According to the mandate of heaven theory, it would be justified for people to overthrow such government then. For that, our government was actually in a danger position in 1989. If it didn’t continue to execute the economy plan at that time, there would have been more dissents sprouting in every corner of the country, which would eventually have led the collapse of the government. Given to China’s achievement in the past 15 years, our government is now in pretty good shape because most people are throwing their support to the government to execute national development plan. For that, the “ignorance” part of you will say that every Chinese is brain-washed and Chinese just know how to follow the official party line. But I hope the “wisdom” part of you will enlighten you this time.

Now, go back to the main topic on the development of Africa. If you are thinking of democracy and human rights as pre-requisites for the development of your fatherland, you are still living in your dreams of westernized perception. Democracy and human rights usually do not come at the beginning of development. It took western countries few hundred years of continued social and economic development to reach that goal. South Korea and Chinese Taiwan went through several decades of dictatorship before installing democracy. However, in both places, economic development started taking off under the watch of a dictator. India, the largest democratic country, is a laggard in economic development until its endorsement of economic development centric policy in 15 years ago. Therefore, the right medicine for economic development is “policy” + “execution”, not necessarily the government form and human rights ideals. Democracy and human rights will come later when the development matures, but not the other way around. Of course, western countries are preaching those values but at the same time ignoring the actual needs of a country. I am not sure if they are too dumb or too smart. They will be dumb if they are detached from the reality in a country. They will be smart if they have ill intention for a poor African country so as to upkeep their supremacy of being a colonial master. In either case, this puts your standing in a debatable position.
Posted by Anonymous Yang at November 17, 2006 9:21 AM  
"The President of Botswana, Festus Mogae, has described the China-Africa partnership as a partnership of equals (Botswana is one of the most stable democracies on the African continent). When it comes to dealing with Europe and the United States on the other hand, he sees a relationship between masters and subjects."
=====

Hey, life is filled with lots of risks. As an "Afrocoid" from the Caribbean who was raised in Canada and have been on a 1 year hiatus (still) in Kenya, I am absolutely thrilled to see Africa gain a sincere OPPORTUNITY to flourish. I truly believe that, in the long run, Africa will BENEFIT tremedously with this new partnership with China. Yang, you gave me a lot to think about.

Oh the other hand, I do see the concerns raised by some of the other posters here. Personally, I think DEMOCRACY is bullsh*t. Just look at Kenya for instance! Heck, look at Jamaica, Haiti, lots of Caribbean islands and South American countries. Any how, everyday in the Kenyan news, you see corrupt politicians jostling for power and squandering precious TIME & RESOURCES. I'm still amazed she's doing so well economically with all the corruption that's making front page news. Yet, any person with half a brain can see that, if the government's leaders had the vision of a Li Kuan Hue (Singapore), Dr. Mahathir (Malaysia), Hugo Chavez (Venezuela), or the current crop of leaders in the Chinese government, that Kenya and other similar countries would be a powerful economic force. After all, we have the GOLD. Remember the movie Alladin? I think the genie said "He who has the gold makes the rules."

Anyhow, great discussion and I plan to be back.

Go Africa go!
Posted by Blogger Maxwell at November 29, 2006 7:49 PM  
"The differences are a result of clash between two civilizations, when the western thought is challenged by the oriental way of thinking. You care about freedom. We care about harmony. You will die for human rights. We will die for our unity. You are keen on democracy. We are keen on stability. Western value system while has its merits does not represent “universal” values. After all, Chinese has been living in this way for thousands of years. Our continuity of thinking explains for the longevity of Chinese civilization. Why will you think that we are betraying our ideals about democracy and freedom? In China, no one believes in communism now. Most people are also indifferent to democracy in China. Both communism and democracy are imported ideas from outside anyway. China is officially building a socialistic society with Chinese characteristics."
===========

Great points Yang! Well, I'm not too big a fan of the democracy that's pushed by the US media where you have to be rich in order to get a chance at becoming president. Then you have to always be thinking about RE-ELECTION. So, as a leader, you can't over-committ on certain policies. Then you also can't think too LONG term because u gotta satisfy the voters TODAY who are either brainwashed or naive. It's just very lousy. Or perhaps it's just implemented wrong.

All I'm saying is that democracy has been a let down to a lot people around the world. Of course, I have to give serious props to how they do it in Scandanavia, Switzerland and "even" Canada -- although it'd be a lot better if we were next door to Sweden/Norway/Finland/Denmark as opposed to you know who!. :-)
Posted by Blogger Maxwell at November 29, 2006 8:15 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link