Money and Mandarin lessons fuel China's African invasion
From Liberia to Ethiopia, Beijing is constructing a 21st century empire thousands of miles from home
AFP
A Senegalese man waves a Chinese flag in Dakar as he waits for Chinese President Hu Jintao's arrival
This afternoon more than a dozen Liberians are expected at the Samuel Doe sports stadium in the capital, Monrovia. In a makeshift classroom with some plastic chairs and a whiteboard their teacher, Li Peng, is waiting to finish the group's second week of instruction in Mandarin Chinese. Early attendances at the free daily lessons provided by the Chinese embassy have been poor, but officials are blaming heavy rain rather than light interest. The class is still struggling with the basics and few Chinese listeners apart from their teacher would recognise the strange "hellos" and "goodbyes" being called out.
"Learning Chinese may prove difficult," Mr Li admitted. "But if they work hard they will make it."
The West African country set up to settle freed American slaves in 1843 is English-speaking and the going is hard.
John Cooper, a 57-year-old who has been attending the two-hour classes and works at a nearby youth centre, is determined to master Mandarin.
"Traditionally, we Liberians are closer to the Americans than we are to the Chinese," he says. "But the irony is that the Chinese are more open to us than the Americans are."
Liberia's government has no Mandarin speakers, and China's ambassador, Zhou Yuxiao, admits that he's uncomfortable that multibillion-dollar accords between the two countries are signed with one side unable to read the documents.
"We feel a little bit guilty at not being able to help Liberians to speak our language," he told the Associated Press.
On the same day last week that the Mandarin lessons were getting under way at the stadium in Monrovia, a much larger crowd was gathering about 300 miles to the northwest at another sports stadium, this time in Conakry, the capital of Guinea. The people had gathered to protest against the military junta and a young army officer, Moussa Dadis Camara, who with wearying predictability has been considering going back on earlier promises to hold free elections.
While Liberian students were grappling with Mandarin vowels more than 150 Guineans were being murdered. Scores of women were then raped. The massacre prompted international outrage, and the African Union meets next week to discuss possible sanctions. But it was revealed this week that China was preparing to throw the regime a lifeline in the form of nearly £4.3bn in oil and minerals deals.
It has left many wondering which is the real face of China in Africa: is it the quest for understanding being led by Mr Li in Monrovia? Or the naked pursuit of raw materials whose sale props up abusive governments like the one in Conakry?
China's engagement in Africa was supposed to have changed, experts say. Beijing's doctrine of "non-interference" in the domestic affairs of other countries was put to one side last year as it helped to nudge Sudan, one of its major oil suppliers, into allowing a beefed-up UN peacekeeping operation in Darfur. Then on a visit earlier this year China's president, Hu Jintao, signalled Beijing's intent to double aid to Africa.
According to Ian Taylor, a senior lecturer in international affairs at the University of St Andrews, the apparent contradiction is the product of a "clueless" approach to Beijing – "a tendency to treat China as if it's 'China Inc'."
Speaking from Beijing, he said: "There is no one Chinese policy towards Africa – it is a mixture of often-competing actors and influences that may or may not gel with official policy."
Chinese trade with Africa has grown from less than £6.3bn at the beginning of the decade to pass £60bn at the end of last year – only the European Union and the US do more business.
There are now some 800 Chinese companies operating in Africa and the investors in talks in Conakry are not from Beijing but from the Hong Kong-based China Investment Fund. Yet only two months ago officials in Beijing said that China would not be investing in Guinea.
"It's not clear if the CIF has the support of Beijing," said Dr Chris Alden, author of China in Africa. "Just like ordinary Western actors in Africa, China has independent actors who take decisions without reference to central government."
And some analysts suggest China's no-strings-attached approach in pariah states like Sudan and Zimbabwe is not the whole story.
Some 25 years after Band-Aid seared Ethiopia into the Western consciousness and conscience, China's engagement with Addis Ababa may say more about the Sino-African relationship. Whatever the achievements or shortcomings of famine-inspired aid in the Horn of Africa nation, they are being dwarfed by the Chinese-backed transformation of the country.
Ethiopia boasts none of the reservoirs of raw materials China is normally associated with, but Beijing has been doling out the credit to build roads and hydroelectric dams and is now financing a £940m expansion of the state-owned mobile telephone network.
In a recent paper for The South African Institute of International Affairs, Dr Monika Thakur found China's role in Ethiopia contradicted the spectre of the hungry dragon invoked by some in the West.
"China's activities in Ethiopia, and in Africa in general, are part of its continuing emergence as a global power, and as such are no different from what major powers traditionally have done," she wrote.
"Overarching judgements as to whether China's engagement is a blessing or a curse for Ethiopia are still unclear. What is certain is that the country can derive much from China's economic engagement."
The government in Addis Ababa has enjoyed the increased influence over Western donors that Chinese help has afforded.
"I think it would be wrong for people in the West to assume that they can buy good governance in Africa; good governance can only come from inside," Ethiopia's prime minister, Meles Zenawi, told the Financial Times recently. "What the Chinese have done is explode that illusion."
Mr Zenawi's government does not attract headlines in the way that Sudan's Omar al-Bashir does, but his administration has overseen the violent suppression of opposition in the wake of disputed elections. And he has since jailed popular opponents, such as opposition leader Birtukan Mideksa.
Dr Thakur warns that Addis Ababa could use Chinese assistance to avoid change – which could lead to "authoritarian stagnation".
However, China's own emergence as a great power, and the legitimacy of the one-party rule in Beijing, has been based on economic growth. Those looking for a champion of human or political rights are likely to be disappointed.
"The jury is still out on the significance of China's actions on Darfur," argues Dr Alden. "It's up to Africans to decide if China is having a positive or negative impact on rights in Africa. On the whole China is having a fairly neutral impact – it's really more about economic development."
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited



Comments
In Many respects, pre the recent last decade surge by China and BRIC, Africa faced an egregious demand side to their Raw Material Equation. The Continent was on short term contracts, it was unable to raise credit and subject to enormous high Beta Volatility. The arrival of China made the Demand side more balanced and competitive, The Chinese unlocked longer Term Funding and were prepared to put their Backs into doing something about the dilapidated Infrastructure. Amazingly, they tend to do it themselves because one thing they are apparently not short of is the work ethic. Looked at that way , it is as plain as day that they have been a tremendous force.
Just look at the Trade numbers and look at the wider BRIC Data as well.Its a hyper growth curve and thats the real evidence of how deep and powerful this relationship is now.
The African Continent has turned its face half way towards the East. And The Exxon CNOOC Ghana spat is a US China Power Play right in front of our very eyes. I do feel the Chinese would do far better to beat a gracious retreat re the Captain in Guinea and wring the Plaudits from such a move, because the Captain is really beyond the Pale but the degree of Chinese [And Indian and ME] engagement is now self evidently material.
President Obama and His Secretary of State crossed our Continent not so long ago but the Affairs of Man are not always decided by Firepower but by Dollars and HU has the Dollars now.
Aly-Khan Satchu
www.rich.co.ke
Twitter alykhansatchu
Instead the USA puts its big boots on an trampling all over the place. Instead of diplomacy and trade to open doors to get what it desires, the USA prefers to install puppet leaders and illegally invade nations.
Anyway, the Chinese are a very clever people. The Western govs used to give large grants, all this did was to find its way into private Swiss accounts. Some of the richest men in the world are long term ex-leaders of African countries. In their wisdom, the Chinese didnt give grants to build infrastructure. Instead they provided Chinese architects, developers and labour to work alongside the Africans - this has to instant impact of being a corruption free way to provide help where it was needed.
Obviously, more Chinese infrastructure rebuilding has gone to countries who have resources to offer to China. But overall these African countries have benefitted greatly.
But its better than the Western alternative of regime change, installation of puppet leader and then rape their country until is dried up and exhausted...
Ever heard of Iraq, Somalia, Suadi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen, Egypt and Afghanistan, etc, etc???
Ever heard of Germany, they took on most of the world and nearly won. What chance would the USA alone have had against Germany if they fought each other - USA would have been taken quickly, such was the engineering and military superiority of der Germans.
Anyway we digress, we are really talking about the approach to obtaining resources and influence of developing regions of the world.
- China with its superior diplomacy.
- Or USA with its big boots.
I like the Chinese and I used to like the Americans. So which is the best? Only one way to findout...
The world after US success in WWII has a Europe (now both West and East) that is freer than anywhere else in the world. China is repressive(yes Corporal it really is duh) and it is undemocratic (no vote,no say duh. If your insight is a better world with China dictating the agenda, you are even more naive that your posts would suggest.
Why dont you stick to the subject matter. Going off at a tangent doesnt really help in the debate regarding this article.
Let me remind you, the article is about the way China is interfacing with African countries. On the other hand, the West has been dealing with Africa for many millenia all the way from mass slavery, to colonisation, to installation of puppet leaders, to serial theft of resources without any form of compensation to residents of these nations.
These acts by China are not selfless, they are ultimately done for a selfish reason (for resources), but nevertheless, they show a degree of fairness unseen by any superpower, in recent history, when dealing with poor and helpless nations.
cavendish: Discuss or shutup...
And the above posts from myself and others are teaching you a little about international history - someone has to help you understand the world isn't painted in primary colours!
China - scary. Because? Totalitarian regime,no voting structure,no people power, any dissent quelled, largest corporal punishment numbers in the world. China - economic giant therefore power in the world. China - scary.
Anyway, nation bashing is futile. Point is, development in Africa has failed and will continue to fail with the neo liberal policies that crippled many Third World countries and their population by slashing expenditure on vital things and instead focused decvelopment through specific programs that did nothing. If the chinese wish to build roads, dams, etc, and still own them. I couldn't care less. The fact that these projects will be completed and the local population benefit from them, that is what matters from development point of view. This lets the country in question carry on with its own projects and actually, hopefully, develop faster than previously.
As china and its economy grows, and I have no idea why teh west has never tried this before, they need a bigger market as they already seem to saturate the western markets with their products. So if there are more middle class peopel in developed countries, a larger consumer base would exist. And how is this achieved? Well..exactly what is described in the article.
And on a final note, whether china is a democracy is not I think is quite pointless. Who says that only democracy can work? Our free governments lie to us anyway to get us to agree with them. or scare us into believing in the boogeyman.. I'd rather have someone just tell me whats what and get on with the job at hand.
But I am sure, with a few exceptions, many of the posters here have probably not been to an African country, let alone lived in 1 or more so I am sure with that experience, we can all rest assured that you know what is best for the African continent.
China might appear to be scary. But they have handled their integration into the world in a much more pragmatic manner by releasing their grip on their residents in a step-wise manner. Compare this to the way Russia, in the 1980's, let everything go resulting in partial chaos and corruption.
Obama could learn a lesson or ten from the way the Chinese have, in a diplomatic and smart way, engaged with the world for resources and regional influence.
You should ask your Chinese friends what they think of China and its non-democratic leadership. They will be pleased to tell you that (the current direction China is taking) is perfectly fine by them. In fact, they will take great pride in what (and the way) China is doing.
China might be scary for some nations, who will enevitably slide downwards on the world-power scales, but for the majority of the nations around the world, things are looking up.
Those who were arguing with corporeal_v001, I wonder if you have ever been to China. Judged by your writing, probably not. If you had been to China, you would know the current Chinese system works for the majority of Chinese - I didn't say this but numerous Western surveys. Not only most Chinese's lives have improved enormously, but more importantly, most Chinese are confident that their lives will get even better for the foreseeable furture - something that probably can't be said for most of the Western democratic world.
i forgot, we're liberating and making the world safe for democracy. I guess if your a dead arab you're considered liberated. Orwell would be proud
For example, the Chinese invasion of Tibet doesn't excuse the US/UK and a few others invading Iraq.
There are differences between the US and China (well, that sort of goes without saying really), and both of them have done some rather unpleasant things.
I do have some mild concerns about China's increasing influence to say the least; being a bit of a beardy liberal who believes in freedom and personal liberty/responsibility I doubt I'd get on too well living in China, or a country occupied/strongly culturally influenced by them.
Still, everyone was really lovely, and I'd like to see more of the place. The one thing that struck me was the scale of the architecture: the buildings are huge, wide open spaces everywhere too. After wandering around the somewhat-cramped Hong Kong it was one heck of a contrast...
Thank you, dogsolitude_v2, for your reply. I'm glad you enjoyed your brief visit in China.
Chinese political system is quite different from the Western world but it suits Chinese culture & China's current situation.
If you had the opportunities to talk to many ordinary Chinese then you'll find they don't crave for Western democracy, partly because Western democracy has its own fundamental problems, partly because they don't fit well with Chinese tradition and also because most Chinese are not educated & well off enough to understand let alone practise the kind of direct election process - you only have to look at Afghanistan to know what I mean.
Chinese government is doing the right things for most people in China, isn't that what's more important than the process itself? When you think outside box of the usual Western democratic system, you will find the strength of the Chinese system and why Chinese are not only "get on too well living in China" but are very glad & proud to be living in China!
Hope you will have the opportunity to visit China again and get to know it better.
All the best!
If you thought that three noun genders in German was bad, or found learning the declensions in Latin tricky, then you may need to adjust some of your expectations regarding learning Mandarin.
The word 'ma' can mean one of 'mum', 'linen', 'horse' or 'swear' depending on how you inflect the vowel. I also understand that the words for 'chicken' and 'prostitute' are easily mixed up by foreigners too.
Imagine being in a restaurant with your mother, and the potential confusion that could arise after a few glasses of wine:
"My horse would like some prostitute chow mein..."
Otherwise they have to join a tour group for a maximum stay of two weeks or so. Until the young people of China are allowed to travel, backpack, take a temporary job and intermix with the population of European countries they are not going to look in our direction when they go back home and become business people and politicians. They are going to build ties first with the other countries that welcomed them. It will be our loss.
I feel Londonrebel is the one out of the loop. Also I have never had a problem with a visa or work. But I do feel a bit uncomfortable with my passport being logged so often. But then again it isn’t so long since you lost your passport for a few hours if you booked in to an Italian hotel. The world is changing but our little island doesn’t have a clue.
But I fail to understand why people are making such an issue out of the lack of foreign travel by many Chinese. I have met countless people around the west who have never had a passport or travelled much beyond their neighbouring countries. I was looking for some statistics on percentage of americans who own passport. Nothing is official but it seems that rise in passport ownership has increased over the past 10 years, but there are probably reasons for that like actual airport security on domestic flights and stuff.
Have a lovely day.
China is still going thorough its industrial revolution. How many Europeans travelled during their industrial revolution?
Plus China is bigger than the whole of Europe so travelling outside China would be the equivalent of Europeans travelling outside Europe. How many Europeans regularly travel outside Europe?
Most Chinese are contented to travel inside China, which is vast enough to provide ethnical, social & geographically diversity.