China

Podcast: Why Africa needs to pay a lot more attention to politics in China

Posted on Updated on

I talked with Eric Olander and Cobus Van Staden of the China Africa Project Podcast and discussed why Africans need to pay more attention to what happens at events like the “Two Sessions” gatherings given China’s large and growing importance in African trade and development. This drew on an earlier column I wrote on Africa and China.

Advertisements

Shifts in China Africa Should Watch

Posted on

This article first appeared in my weekly column with the Business Daily on March 18, 2018

Over the past few weeks the Two Sessions of the annual meetings of the national legislature and the top political advisory body in China, have been happening. A great deal of attention has been focused on this Two Sessions perhaps because this is the first annual sessions opened under the guidance of Xi Jinping’s Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era. There are key points of interest for Africa.

The first is President Xi Jinping’s focus on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics; he delivered a speech on this in October 2017 to the National Congress of the Community Part of China. One of the key takeaways for Africa is not only how he sees the role of democracy within the context of Chinese socialism, he also made the point that it is time for China to have a say in the realm of ideology. It is not a secret that Europe and North America have been very overt and aggressive in selling democracy as a governance and political ideology to Africa for decades. It seems that Xi Jinping is hinting that it is time for China to have a stronger presence in this ideological space and share the principles of Socialism with Chinese characteristics with the world.

Image result for xi jinping

(source: https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/china-party-congress-xi-legacy-by-keyu-jin-2017-11?barrier=accessreg)

This is important because this Two Sessions occurs during a time of growing insularity, xenophobia and inwardness in Europe and North America. Indeed, reports indicate that China projects diplomatic spending to hit USD 9.5 billion this year, double 2013’s outlay. The Trump administration, indicates momentum in the other direction and has proposed spending of USD 37.8 billion, down from USD 55.6 billion last year. Given these dynamics, it will be interesting to see if or how Xi Jinping will make bolder steps so that China becomes a true global leader, which includes power in the realm of global ideology, and the extent to which Africa will be a point of focus.

The second key point of interest of the Two Sessions for Africa is the intent to stem corruption in the Chinese government. A key focus of Two Sessions was to ratify a law to set up a new powerful anti-corruption agency. Africa’s struggle with corruption is a well-known fact, and for the most part, African governments have seemed either unwilling or unable to control corruption in their ranks. Africa will therefore have great interest in seeing how the anti-corruption agency will be structured, the powers it will be given and how those found to be corrupt will be penalised.

Related image

(source: http://www.cubainformazione.it/?p=21091)

Thirdly, this Two Sessions has seen the growing importance of environmental concerns as a government priority.  This seems to stem not only from an understanding in the Chinese government that environmental degradation must be addressed as a strategic concern for the country and economy, but also as a response to growing demands from the Chinese public for responsible environmental behaviour and action as part of the country’s development model going forward. This is a shift Africa welcomes and there will be interest in seeing the extent to which environmental concerns will be integrated into Chinese activity on the continent going forward.

Anzetse Were is a development economist; anzetsew@gmail.com

 

TV Interview: What Can Africa Expect from China’s Two Sessions?

Posted on

In this CGTN interview I highlight the implications of the Two Sessions, China’s most important political gathering, for Africa.

Trump’s Plan for Africa is #MAGA on Steroids

Posted on Updated on

This article first appeared in my weekly column with the Business Daily on December 26, 2017

About two weeks ago Trump released his national security strategy where, for the first time it seems, Africa was directly addressed. Trump made two intentions clear in the strategy in terms of his economic focus for Africa: the first is that he recognises Africa’s potential as a market for American goods and as a means of building wealth for Americans. Second, he wants a clearer shift from aid to economic partnership. What is not clear is how Africa will benefit from the plan beyond his support for economic integration and an improved business environment (both of which are already priorities for most African governments). His plan puts the USA’s interests first, as per Make America Great Again (MAGA), but it fails to articulate how expanded economic cooperation with the USA will benefit African nations and citizens. In short, Trump’s economic plan for Africa is MAGA on steroids. His obsessive focus with ‘America First’ will clearly extend beyond the borders of the USA, and Africa is a mere player in the larger plan to re-establish the global economic dominance of the USA. Whether Africa will benefit seems to be of little consequence.

President Donald Trump speaks on national security, Dec. 18, 2017, in Washington.

(source: https://www.voanews.com/a/trump-to-unveil-new-national-security-plans/4168148.html)

Another element that is clear in his plan is that he wants to kick China out of Africa and take back dominance on the continent; his distaste with China is clear. Through the plan, Trump seeks to make the USA an alternative to ‘China’s often extractive economic footprint on the continent’. What is not clear is how kicking out Chinese interests and replacing them with those of the USA will be of use to Africa. Will investments from the USA be more generous and attractive than China’s? Will goods from the USA be more competitive than those from China? Will investments from the USA create more jobs for Africans than is the case with China’s? Will credit lines from the USA be more affordable than what China offers? There are no answers to these basics question in the strategy.  Instead what we get is the argument that the USA is inherently better for Africa than China- just because.

As can be expected, the plan is already being criticised. China and Russia take issue with being labelled as competitors that challenge American interests. The language of ‘us versus them’, particularly with regards to China comes out clearly. A pessimist looking through Trump’s strategy would argue that he’s setting up for a proxy war with China over Africa.

Image result for Africa china usa

(source: thenakedconvos.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/china_africa_us1.png)

However, the most puzzling feature of the strategy, in terms of the economic focus on Africa, is the language. Aren’t we taught in Strategy 101 that one ought not announce plans for dominance as ‘plans for dominance’? One ought to use amicable language that highlights the benefits of mutual cooperation and economic partnership—which is what China does. Strategic language underplays true intentions of dominance and instead uses language that will put everyone at ease and welcome the player onto the field. However, rather than discretion, Trumps language boldly announces his plans to make the USA boss of Africa again and thus, transparently, makes his strategic objectives obvious to all.

Anzetse Were is a development economist; anzetsew@gmail.com

Autocracy and Democracy in Africa: China’s Influence

Posted on

This article first appeared in my weekly column in the Business Daily on December 10, 2017

I’ve been thinking about China’s growing influence in Africa, and whether it is linked to growing autocracy on the continent, especially the East Africa region. However, it is not China alone that seems to be informing a move towards authoritarianism in the region. When Africa is given examples of countries that managed to catch up economically, the Asian bloc is often presented as the case study. Look at Singapore, Vietnam, China, Malaysia, Japan and South Korea, we’re told, they all managed to pull millions of out poverty and substantially improve the quality of life of their citizens in a relatively short period of time. What is not mentioned is that, for the most part, these countries were developed or are still developing under an autocratic state-led capitalism model where government drives and leads the articulation of capitalism and, to a greater or lesser extent, monitors and guides its evolution.

Related image

(source: www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Beijing+Municipal+Congress+Communist+Party+AYzoNUVRU8Al.jpg)

Africa is also not told that even Europe and North America made significant economic gains using models that were not democratic. The USA relied on the slave trade and slave labour to build wealth that was then used to drive industrialisation. Much of Europe relied not only on financial involvement in the slave trade to amass wealth, but also colonialism which played an important role in providing colonial powers with land and labour that generated immense profits that were then repatriated to European metropoles.  So some are asking: Why is Africa being told that the continent must develop under a democracy when so many others haven’t? And is this the most efficient path towards economic development?

In East Africa, we can see a move towards autocracy; indeed it can be argued that Kenya is the only viable democracy left. Ethiopia and Rwanda have made no secret of the fact that they are essentially autocratic states. Uganda has been under the hand of Museveni for well over 30 years and in Burundi President Nkurunziza seems bent on retaining control and extending his autocratic rule beyond constitutional provisions. In Tanzania, signs of autocracy are emerging given that the chief whip of the opposition party was shot, and President Magafuli shut down several newspapers.

China has been making aggressive inroads in Africa with mega project deals. FILE PHOTO | NMG

(source: http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/image/view/-/4222430/medRes/1832547/-/maxw/960/-/g7bbas/-/china.jpg)

Beyond philosophical questions as to why there seems to be growing autocracy in the region, international dynamics are also playing a role, specifically growing insularity in Europe and North America. The Trump Administration hasn’t even bothered to table a strategy for Africa and Europe seems preoccupied with Brexit, anti-immigration sentiment, and calls to use European money on Europe rather than on ‘others’. As a result, the voice from the global north that lectures Africa on the merits of democracy is receding and the power vacuum is intensifying the influence of autocratic China in Africa. Indeed, the autocracy that is emerging in Africa seems to be modelled more against the technocratic autocracies of Asia rather than the old African autocratic model exemplified by leaders such as Idi Amin, Mobutu, Mengistu and more recently, Mugabe.

It seems it is time for Africa to ask itself some tough questions: Should growing autocracy be encouraged? And if so, what will it cost Africans in terms of freedom of expression, human rights and political freedom? Or is democracy, despite all its problems, still the best way forward for the continent?

Anzetse Were is a development economist; anzetsew@gmail.com

Podcast: China and the rise of Africa’s new autocrats

Posted on

On December 3, 2017 I featured on the China Africa Project Podcast with Eric Olander and Cobus van Staden where we discussed growing authoritarianism, in East Africa in particular, and the role of China in challenging the notion that democracy is the best governance model for Africa.

 

 

Growing autocracy in the East Africa Region: Implications for China

Posted on

This article first appeared in ChinaFile on November 28, 2017

Though not in the headlines, China is operating in an East African region that is becoming increasingly autocratic and authoritarian. The East Africa region in this article refers to the countries of Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi and Ethiopia. It can be argued that in the region, Kenya is the only viable democracy left.

President Kagame of Rwanda has made headlines in the region for what appears to be the open targeting of Diane Rwigara who tried to run against him in elections earlier this year. Ethiopia has been ruled by the same party since 1991, with marked intolerance of opposition, evidenced in the imprisonment of political dissidents. Uganda has been under the hand of Museveni for well over 30 years and in Burundi the International Federation for Human Rights claims the crisis there has left at least 1,200 dead and 10,000 imprisoned for political reasons. In Tanzania, the chief whip of the opposition party was shot, opposition figures have disappeared, and in September, President Magafuli closed a third newspaper since June as part of a media crackdown.

Image result for Eastern Africa

(source: https://elimufeynman.s3.amazonaws.com/media/resources/kenya-img1.jpg)

The trend towards autocracy and authoritarianism in the region cannot be ignored and will have several implications for China. The first is that while it could be argued that it is easier for China to work with governments that do not have to deal with the complications of a robust democracy, there is growing unrest in domicile populations in the region. And although authoritarian East African governments may assure China and the Chinese private sector, that unrest is being ‘managed’, the reality is that it can grow to unmanageable levels, compromising Chinese investments. The Chinese private sector is already feeling the pinch where both last year and this year, protesters in Ethiopia destroyed Chinese factories and assets in anti-government protests.

The second concern China should have is that it is the very authoritarianism in the region that may make countries more difficult to deal with because decisions can be made unilaterally with no consultation or explanation given. It is possible that such decisions could negatively affect Chinese interests in the region and given the strong arm of government in most of the region, trying to seek redress through legal means would likely be futile. Further, China has branded itself through its non-interference policy. Will this position change if the action of authoritarian governments threaten Chinese investments in the region?

Image result for autocracy

(source: img.bhs4.com/34/f/34f19c14318e7c049b8e60d2c327d6d9c16627c6_large.jpg)

Finally, Zimbabwe provides an important lesson for China. China put all of its eggs in the basket of Mugabe’s autocratic rule. With Mugabe no longer in rule, there is surely concern as to how China will protect its investments and economic position in the country. And this is the fundamental problem with China continuing to interact with openly authoritarian governments; China can never be sure that the next ruler will treat them as well as his predecessor did. Will China be prioritised in Zimbabwe as other economically powerful countries and companies jostle to enter the country?

It will be interesting and see how both the Chinese government and private sector continue to operate in a region of growing autocracy and authoritarianism both of which pose considerable risks to China’s investments in the region.

Anzetse Were is a development economist; anzetsew@gmail.com