China’s increasing involvement in Africa should be viewed against this backdrop. Despite the euphonious verbiage about “cooperation”, “equal terms,” and “altruism,” the real intentions of China are threefold. The first is to gain access to Africa’s resources by signing with a bow sweetheart deals with African despots. The second is to canvass for African votes at the United Nations in its quest for global hegemony. In this sense, the Chinese are no different from the French. The third is to seek African land to dump its surplus population. Chinese communes are springing up in Namibia, Zambia, Nigeria and other African countries. The Chinese have succeeded in getting African states to accept large numbers of Chinese experts and workers as part of their investment packages: 28 "Baoding villages" have been established, each housing up to 2,000 Chinese workers, in various parts of Africa. But the Chinese are not the problem.
The real problem was the retinue of clueless African clods, who attended Chopsticks Conference at Beijing in October. “Clueless” because that was no Berlin Conference for sure. No European powers were present; only one Asian power, China. And no Maxim gun was needed. But lying prostrate at China’s feet were 40 African heads of state, offering themselves for voluntary economic enslavement. Disgusting.
Elementary principles of demand and supply suggest that that was a buyer’s market. When 40 desperate suppliers are competing for one buyer’s attention, the buyer calls the shots. With chopsticks dexterity, China can pick platinum from Zimbabwe; oil from Angola, Nigeria and Sudan; cocoa from Ghana; diamonds from Sierra Leone; etc. – all on itsown terms because of its strong bargaining position. Few radical intellectuals and African heads of state see nothing wrong with this
huge imbalance because China is perceived to be a “friend of Africa” since it is “anti-West.”
via R. E. Ekosso



6 comments:
similar commentary here:
http://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2006/11/orient-express.html
and here:
http://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2006/11/orient-express-ii.html
The long introduction to the brief excerpt about China in Africa that you have published here was a hammer, especially in regards to France and Belgium's colonial past on the African continent. What I also found interesting was that there was little or no condemnation of U.S. government and U.S. businesses support of certain dictators and despots on the African continent over the past six decades. Zaire's President Mobutu is a prime example of misguided U.S. foreign policy in central Africa, and there are loads of other examples right across the continent. Give U.S. some of the blame, we can take it.
I am also interested in the original source of this statement by Dr. Ayittey since it was not published in the press and other media channels that regularly cover his views on Africa. Could it be that Dr. George Ayittey is an avid supporter of some blog authors and decided to release this strong statement into the blogosphere vs. using traditional media channels? If that is so, great!
I'm with the Doc on this one re: China's voracious hunger for Africa's natural resources and land, but anyone who has read my various posts and comments about China in Africa already knows that.
Nice follow-up about China in Angola over at Garvey's Ghost. Keep up the pressure Sondjata, somebody out there will get the message eventually. Is it already too late?
"In this sense, the Chinese are no different from the French."
Dear God! 1.2 billion Frenchmen. The horror!!!
You may want to have a look at what Business in Africa Online has on this. Also, the African Business Leaders Forum may interest you too
Peter, can you provide us with a link to the article you are referencing at the Business in Africa website? Was there an article written about Dr. Ayittey's statements or about the recent China-Africa Summit? Thanks.
the professor is uncesarily negative.
i think you can be critical without being negative - i think there is a, actually i find it disturbing when africans adopt the negative dehumanising language thats all to common when the western press reports on africa. There is an issue with chinas role in africa but you dont have to dehumanise the chinese nor the africans in your language in order to put thepoint across
Post a Comment