Getting Beijing in step with Africa’s beat
| Continent needs clear China policy if it is to derive benefit from each yuan spent here, say experts
ON THE same day that Trade and Industry Minister Rob Davies was expressing frustration at the US’s tough stance on the African Growth and Opportunities Act, China was expressing “strong dissatisfaction” over US military planes flying across the South China Sea where it is building an artificial island.
Also on that day in Cape Town, delegates at the ChinaAfrica Colloquium heard about the enormous potential in China-Africa trade. Read together, these events pointed to a world in a state of flux, with old alliances up for review and new ones being sought.
Despite the bullish prognosis from the Chinese representatives at the colloquium, and the rosy hue they would like to dress it in (“We should promote good accounts of Africa-China co-operation,” said China’s ambassador), the African delegates seemed unconvinced that benefits would flow equally. Africa has been here before. Said Adejumobi, the director of the regional office for southern Africa at the UN Economic Commission for Africa, acknowledged China’s support for African resistance wars and said the non-conditionality of its aid had made China “a good partner”. But he warned we should not assume all was well in Sino-African relations.
For one thing, the African industrial sector is collapsing partly due to cheap industrial imports from China. Equally, Chinese labour has been used to build and service infrastructure projects in Africa, resulting in little transfer of skills.
“China has an Africa policy, Africa needs to have a clear China policy. In spite of our diversity, African countries have many similarities. If we negotiate with China on an individual country basis, Africa will be weakened,” he said.
Shi Yinhong, an international relations professor at Renmin University of China, said African nations had opened their arms to China precisely because it was not colonising Africa and did not attach conditions to aid.
But several delegates took issue with this, saying that this aid had been accompanied by oppressive business conditions.
“You give us good loans but it is in exchange for minerals,” one African delegate said.
Loans for infrastructure projects are usually made with the proviso that Chinese companies and workers do the work.
The African delegate asked: “We get a $100-million [about R1.2-billion] infrastructure loan, a Chinese firm builds the project for $70-million, so it gets the business and makes a $30-million profit. Why are they not partnering with local companies and ensuring some profit stays in Africa?”
Professor Muna Ndulo from Cornell University in the US urged Africans to come up with clear ideas of what they wanted from China.
“It’s not a question of whether or not China invests in Africa, it is what do we want to get out of it, and that depends on what we do ourselves,” Ndulo said. “Clearly, China is pursuing its own interests and it should. This is not about brotherhood and fraternity, it’s about interests. We need clear policies on what we want from China.”
At stake for Africa is a slice of what has been described as the 21st century’s Marshall Plan, the ambitious and successful plan to help rebuild Europe’s economies after World War 2.
The 21st-century version is dramatically different. The “One Belt and One Road” strategy is being driven by China and is focused on developing Asia and, to a lesser degree, Africa. But at its heart is the same ambitious plan to support international economic development, win friends, gain influence and secure access to markets.
A successful strategy on its part could secure China’s growth and allow it to assume the US mantle midway through the 21st century, say analysts.
At present, although China’s GDP is second to that of the US, China’s GDP per capita is only 10% of the US level — and smaller than South Africa’s.