South Africa

The Europe-Africa summit has come and gone. Robert Mugabe was the most visible figure at the summit, and he made his share of noise, prattling on about most of the same things about that which he prattles whenever he has cameras on him and with his acquiescent media lapdogs at home lauding him as a hero. At least one European leader, Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel, condemned Mugabe for his bullying, thuggish, destructive leadership but most of the rest of the attendees could not be bothered, just as they could not be bothered to do anything significant with regard to Darfur, trade, China’s role in Africa, crises in places such as Somalia, or much of anything else. For all of the optimistic talk heading into the conference,  division and disappointment were the coin of the realm in Lisbon, where little concrete progress was made.

Africans North-to-South, East-to-West are hyper-wary of foreign encroachments. This should come as no surprise after the dual destabilizing phenomena of western imperialism and the Cold War threw Africa into paroxysms of chaos from which it has not ever fully recovered. So despite (or perhaps because of) the myriad examples of China’s increased chumminess with Africa (which I have written about fairly extensively at this blog), including heightened interest from Chinese entrepeneurs, some Africans are increasingly concerned that this exploding Chinese interest just represents old wine in new skins, neo-colonialism from the east rather than the West.

Here is a quick survey of Africa-related news stories that have appeared in the last few days:

Sierra Leone’s voters went to the polls this past weekend and  it appears to have gone off with few allegations of improprieties. Hopefully this marks the first small steps in the country’s redemption.

Sam Dealey, Time magazine’s Africa correspondent, argues in the New York Times that it is unwise, problematic and unnecessary to exaggerate death tolls from crises such as Darfur as some activists are wont to do.

Also in the Times we learn that China’s interest in Africa extends to Chad’s oil resources. It can be assumed that anywhere in Africa where there is oil, China’s presence will soon follow.

Afrifocus has again turned its attention to China’s role in Africa. Worth checking out are a Gareth Evans and  Donald Steinberg article arguing that China’s mindset toward Darfur has changed to the point that “instead of being part of the problem, it could play a significant role in the solution.” If Evans and Steinberg are correct in their assessment, this would provide a pretty good example of why we should never have static conceptions of nation states and their policies.

Also worth checking out is this issue of  Pambazuka News, which is dedicated to the issue of China’s role in Africa, and two Foreign Policy in Focus articles: “China Provokes Debate in Africa” and “China in Africa: It’s (Still) the Governance, Stupid.”

The sometimes problematic nature of China’s relationship with Africa is nowhere more stark than in Beijing’s engagement with Sudan (see also here, here, here, here, and here). Over at The New Republic Eric Reeves, one of the foremost authorities on the crisis in Darfur, has a piece telling us to be wary of China’s support for UN Resolution 1769, in which the United Nations Security Council authorized a joint UN-African Union (AU) force to intervene in Darfur.

Although China did vote to support the resolution this year (last year they abstained so as not to breach Khartoum’s sovereignty, or so they would have had you believe) Reeves would not be so fast to heap praise on Beijing for coming around: “Winning China’s support came at a significant price. Khartoum’s staunchest ally voted for the resolution only after it had helped to secure the elimination of key provisions.” Reeves also shows that there is blame enough to go around among Western powers and not just China.

It will be seen if this resolution proves to be another half-measure that falls short in reality. One hopes that a demonstrable use of force — the threat of which really has been the only stick to which Khartoum has responded consistently — will set the stage for a long-term solution in Darfur. But until we are given reason to believe otherwise, skepticism will rule the day. Nonetheless, the authorization of troops and the willingness to use force signals a vital step forward if the troop presence comes to pass.

China’s increasing presence in Africa has become clear in the past couple of years. (For my own writing on this – with links – see here, here, here, here and here.) The Asian continent’s other giant, India has been watching, and has designs on increasing its presence in Africa. China’s role at best represents a dual-edged sword, and in the most realistic assessments Beijing represents a potentially dangerous and destabilizing force for most of Africa. Perhaps India will provide another option for African countries faced with the enticement of Chinese investment or none at all. 

Dr. Mannavar Sivakumar, chief of the United Nations’ World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) agricultural meteorology division, argues that Africans need to be more aware and “proactive” on the issue of climate change:

 ”He said it was ‘critical’ for Africa, which forecasters predict will be the region worst affected by changing weather patterns, to get its act together. ‘Africa is projected to have a large area covered with arid or semi-arid regions; as the population increases, there will be an increase in demand [for food] while on the other hand there will be less precipitation on account of climate change [to support agriculture]: this will be a ‘double killer’.'”

But this “double killer” also represents something of a dual-edged sword.  While climate change will have deleterious effects for Africans, many rightfully ask if they will have to stall industrial development until they can afford to go green even while the west has been able to go through industrial growth while utilizing technologies that have always been far more growth-friendly than earth-friendly. The poorest nations on Earth will have to confront this problem most acutely, though so too will giants such as China and India.

My colleague Bill Hewitt is doing yeoman’s work over at the FPA Climate Change Blog. He addresses these issues in far greater depth and with far more acuity than I ever could.

Update: Along the lines of Africans taking the initiative on issues related to the environment, climate change and the like, Cape Town seems poised to become Africa’s first “Green City.” 

China’s role in Africa will continue to grow in the coming decades. There are many reasons for this, not the least of which is China’s voracious appetite and need for oil. But the Chinese have shown little interest in issues related to human rights, which they always shrug off as being a matter of internal politics and thus no within their ambit, since the Chinese profess to value national sovereignty above all. (For a collection of posts on China and Africa over at dcat see here.)

It is almost impossible to tell whether China’s influence on Africa will be to the continent’s benefit or its detriment. Despite the fact that China clearly wants greater enagement with Africa than any other global power there is a certain level of asymmetry involved that is worrisome, and the Chinese disregard for human rights concerns indicates that Africa’s Big Men will be able to lean on Chinese support without having to undergo even a pretense of reform. Chinese support will thus prop us despots while milking the continent of resources and increasing dependence on a powerful and rich foreign state. These hardly are the ideal conditions for development.