Tokyo may alienate Africa with selfish and hard- to- implement aid policy

During the Sixth Summit of the Tokyo International Conference on African Development ( TICAD) in Nairobi, Kenya, late last month, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe pledged $ 30 billion in public and private support for Africa’s infrastructure development, healthcare and industrialization. Japan’s commitment has cast the TICAD under a spotlight.

The TICAD was launched in the 1990s by Japan and convened every five years. The first conference was held in October 1993 in Tokyo, chaired by then parliamentary vice minister for foreign affairs Shozo Azuma. The fourth TICAD in 2008 was chaired by then Japanese prime minister Yasuo Fukuda. The higher level of chairperson shows the rising weight of Africa in Japan’s diplomacy.

After he was re- elected into office in late 2012, Abe started a “globe- trotting” diplomacy with Africa being a focal point. He chaired the fifth TICAD summit in 2013 and turned the conference into one to be held every three years from 2016 onward. He also changed the venue of the TICAD to Africa. The summit last month was the first ever TICAD held in Africa.

Abe’s investment commitment at the TICAD caught wide attention because of the huge amount and the delicate timing. In December 2015, Chinese President Xi Jinping announced funding worth $ 60 billion to support Africa’s development when addressing the Forum on China- Africa Cooperation in Johannesburg, South Africa. Now Abe has added a $ 30 billion pledge to his 2013 commitment of $ 32 billion at the fifth TICAD, offering a similar amount of investment to Africa. This is interpreted by observers as a competition with China on the continent.

An article titled “Why China is beating Japan in the battle for global mind share” published by the Japan Times earlier this month demonstrates this tendency. Overseas investment is not unique to China and Japan.

But interestingly, investment by the two countries is often considered to con- note competition.

In fact, the competition lies not in the act of investment, but in changes in the political landscape brought about by the investment. For instance, the Official Development Assistance ( ODA) of the Japanese government mostly goes to Southeast Asian countries that geographically form a network encircling China. Hence China pays unusual attention to Japan’s overseas investment.

Japan has gradually demonstrated its intent to promote its political stance of confronting China. At the latest TICAD summit, Japan tried to bypass the subject of African development and steered attention to UN Security Council reform and maritime security issues that highly concern Japan. This certainly caught China’s attention. Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying expressed regret about Japan’s attempts to impose its will on African countries to gain selfish benefits and claimed that African countries all opposed politicizing TICAD.

In fact, Japan faces a slew of problems in implementing its TICAD plans. Of its previous $ 32 billion pledge, $ 9 billion hasn’t been put in place. Japan’s usual assistance in the form of ODA has difficulties being implemented in Africa. Given Africa’s poor infrastructure, investors need to provide both capital and lots of technical staff to assist with the programs. In this aspect China has made notable progress, but Japan is having trouble because its human resources are costly. Therefore, Japan has a long way ahead to translate its commitment at the TICAD into real outcomes.

If in this process Japan continues to tout its political ideas irrelevant to African development, it will arouse aversion among African countries and Japan will fall far behind China in making the investment achieve what is expected.