Despite concerns raised by few Western countries, such as Britain and the U.S., over the political, economic and military roles that China has been playing in Africa, China is successful in making inroads to Africa with reciprocal warm gestures from many African countries. The very visible progress in political, economic and diplomatic cooperation between Africa and China is a sheer showcase of this reality.
Why Africa is important to China?
China’s vast economy, which is the second largest economy in the world, requires huge raw materials and energy resources. As the Middle East has become a too chaotic supplier-destination for energy, China found African countries as the ideal supplier-destinations for much needed natural resources, such as oil, minerals, timber and cotton. Moreover, African markets are seriously attractive to any export-oriented industrial economy like China because of Africa’s large population (around 1.1 billion), who are potential consumers. For China, African fast-growing markets are ideal for immediate export of cheap manufactured goods that China is best in making, and also ideal for the future export of high-end products and services, towards which China is slowly moving.
Africa could be instrumental for China in its counter to the U.S.’s “pivot to Asia,” which is a diplomatic, economic and strategic offensive aimed at undermining Chinese influence and preparing for war. “One Belt, One Road” strategy, something that needs no introduction, is China’s response to U.S.’s pivot to Asia. China is seeking to include Africa within its “One Belt, One Road” strategy aimed at more closely integrating Europe and Asia via land and maritime infrastructure.
Why Africa prefers China over others?
China has adopted a flexible approach with regard to the African resource market under the “Beijing Consensus”: (i) non-interference, (ii) infrastructural development, (iii) friendship and respect (for African leaders, people and sovereignty) and (iv) Chinese model of development (operating in Africa under the influence of China’s own development history, which prioritizes “economic development” over other progress). Therefore, Beijing Consensus, according to many African intellectuals, portrays China’s intension of maintaining a strict respect for African sovereignty and China’s non-interference approach to internal issues of African countries. In line with this policy, China helps Africa with loans and infrastructure building projects without any political strings attached about democracy or transparency. Such Chinese non-interference approach gives African countries enough flexibility to work for immediate economic development.
Efforts have been made toward stronger economic integration in Africa. In 2002, the African Union was formally commenced in order to accelerate socio-economic integration and promote peace, security and stability in Africa. China has been continuously voicing in favour of such African integration in almost all China-Africa summits, symbolizing China’s intension to see Africa together as one.
China invests in the construction of African infrastructures, such as roads, railways, dams, ports and airports. Such projects create massive employments for hundreds of thousands of Africans. These (creating jobs and building a developed Africa) are very visible benefits that appeal the African people of all ages and of all walks of life towards mandating for further Chinese involvement in Africa.
The U.S., France and Britain are China’s main rivals in Africa. France and Britain were once the largest trading partners of Africa. However, from 2008 onwards, China remained Africa’s largest trading partner, while the U.S. remained the second largest. China has been giving aid to more African countries than the U.S.
China wants to move away from its low-end products manufacturing trend to high-end products. China intends to build up the low-end industrialization capacities in other countries, helping Chinese companies in their attempts to “go global” as they set up factories in other countries. And, industrialization is just the obsession that many African countries are craving for. Therefore, it seems China’s plan to build up the low-end industrialization capacities in other countries and African countries’ desire for industrialization coincides with each other, making China and Africa the ideal-most partners for each other in this regard. Chinese Foreign Minister regarded China as a most desirable and reliable long-term partner for Africa to achieve industrialization.
China has been increasing cooperation and exchanges with Africa on the cultural front, particularly in the media and education arena. Over the last decade, China extended its media presence across all major press and electronic media in Africa. The famous CCTV News Channel and China Daily have dedicated Africa editions. Africa hosts a number of Chinese cultural centres and 46 Confucius Institutes, which focuses on the promotion of the Chinese language and culture. Health care development and medical assistance have been one of the main successful areas of cooperation.
Military cooperation between China and Africa goes back to the Cold War period when China backed a number of African liberation movements, while post-cold war era witnessed a military relation based on economic interests rather than ideology. China has been sending troops to Africa to participate in peacekeeping and pledged to increase its support for the peacekeepers in Africa. Apart from peacemaking, China provides military training and equipment to a number of African countries. An increasing number of African countries have shifted their source of supply of defence hardware from traditional providers to China.
The need to protect China’s increased investments in Africa have driven China to adopt new diplomatic and military initiatives in order to try to resolve unrest in countries like South Sudan and Mali. China’s security assistance to the African Union and national militaries of many African countries is in part designed to boost their capacity to counter threats (such as attack on the Radisson Blu hotel in Mali) to their economic interests from conventional and non-conventional armed forces. China’s first ever overseas military facility is planned to be hosted in Djibouti, located in the Horn of Africa.
The ministerial meeting in China in October 2000 was the first collective dialogue held between China and African countries, establishing the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) in order to strengthen alliances, sign contracts and make important announcements. Since then Chinese and African partners meet every three years for the summit of FOCAC, or otherwise known as China-Africa Summit.
During the 2015’s summit, which was held in South Africa, Chinese President Xi Jinping pledged $60 billion over a three-year deal in loans and assistance to the African countries. On the media front, Xi said that China would provide training for 1,000 African media practitioners each year, and would set up satellite TV programs in 10,000 African villages. Xi also pledged to provide funding for 200 African scholars and 500 African students to visit China each year. China would also provide 2,000 education places and 30,000 government scholarship places for Africa. China would establish regional vocational education centres and colleges, train 200,000 technicians and provide the Africans with 40,000 training opportunities in China. Xi pledged some 200 poverty reduction projects, 30 teams of agricultural experts and a limited amount of debt relief to some of the poorest African countries.
As part of China-Africa peace and security program, Xi pledged that China will provide $60 million in free assistance to the African Union to build and maintain its army, both its regular army and crisis response, as well as support UN peacekeeping in Africa. China’s new Africa policy paper pledged more military cooperation, including technological cooperation, joint exercises, personnel training and intelligence sharing. China’s goal is to build up African capabilities so that the African countries – as well as organizations like the African Union – can ensure their own stability. However, Xi made it clear that through increasing economic and military cooperation, China does not intend to colonize Africa. President Xi clearly stated that China strongly believes that Africa belongs to the African people and African problems should be handled by the African people. Xi also clarified that China’s latest military efforts are to combat militancy, and not to engage itself in the local African conflicts.
Criticisms against China
There are widespread accusations that China is a neo-colonial power in Africa. And that China-Africa cooperation have given rise to human rights abuses. Other criticisms are economic in nature. There are accusations that African workers face ill-treatment and poor pay by Chinese companies and that the influx of Chinese workers take away local jobs. The criticisms go further in alleging that African markets are harmed by low-cost Chinese-made products, which put great competitive pressure on local industries and businesses. Some argue that China’s involvement in Africa currently benefits primarily the African elites, and not the general Africans.
However, according to several African intellectual corners, these aforementioned accusations are part of a larger propaganda originating from the Western corners in order to undermine China’s influence over Africa. According to such African sources, African culture has already been plagued by centuries of Western domination and the imperial economic and social structures.
Unlike Western economic giants, China made development – not pursuing democracy and transparency – the sole model for its partnership with Africa. With such a flexible approach, China seems to anticipate that African governments would find China a better choice over the West with regard to long term partnership.
China continues to expand its influence in Africa on diplomatic, cultural and commercial fronts, while working to secure and stabilize Africa for China’s own long term gains.
It is clearly in the interest of Africa to avoid full alignment with either of China and the West, but to play one side against the other — which might work to decrease raw material prices and to earn other leverages. In this way, it would be well guaranteed that negotiating power remains in the hands of local African policy makers, ensuring end of all sort of exploitation against Africa.
Twists and Turns in US -China Trade War
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s stopover at Beijing on 08 October may not have been a pleasant experience, more so in the backdrop of accusation of US Vice President Pence about China attempting to interfere in U.S. elections. The agenda of North Korean denuclearisation, where US and China were broadly agreeing earlier, seems to have taken a back seat, and improvement of relations doesn’t seem to be realistic in near future. The ongoing trade war continues as both sides dig their heels despite being the biggest trading partners of each other, because it is also linked with global dominance, strategic and military posturing, diplomatic and information offensive.
China Braving Threat to its Vulnerabilities
China is putting a brave front despite being badly hit at some of its most vulnerable spots in the tit-for-tat trade war with both sides spiralling the slapping of tariffs on a wide range of each others’ trade items. Taiwan, which is another sensitivity of Beijing is witnessing visit of US officials after Taiwan Travel Act was signed by President Trump, with a promise to arm it further with latest weaponry. US continued military posturing in South China Sea, along with the appearance of UK warship ignoring Chinese repeated warning is another concern. A recent injection of over $110 billion by China into its banks and hardly any financial benefits coming out of BRI partners incapable to repay anything is tightening its financial freedom for global dominance. Some of its BRI partners want to get out of the ‘Debt Trap’ by refusing/reducing Chinese investments is adversely affecting Chinese dream project (BRI), after five years of its announcement like Philippines.
Not a Smooth Sail for US
US on the other hand cannot be celebrating either, with China digging it heals and refusing to give up either in trade war or South China Sea. On North Korean front, the policy of good optics continues with Kim managing to get a lot of goodies from South Korea (presumably at their cost), during the last summit of North and South Korea. Kim in fact has been an outright winner, managing to get another Summit with President Trump, which helps him in convincing his countrymen of his sound leadership, as well as boosting his status internationally. US sanctions on paper continue, but after the chest thumping at Singapore Summit, his friends like China automatically relaxed the sanctions on North Korea, without any worthwhile denuclearisation/reduction in his nuclear/missile arsenal. US realises that knocking out China financially is the key to its global dominance; hence is unlikely to soften up to China. US also faces another challenge of keeping its allies like Japan and South Korea satisfied while negotiating with North Korea and asking ASEAN to make choices of partners, besides continuing with CAATSA hurting some of its strategic partners who could be helpful in balancing China.
It will take some time to see that whoever has greater resilience to withstand the economic stand-off and appetite to take setbacks will have an upper edge, which seems to be US at this point of time. As per IMF assessment, China’s GDP size will be 1.6 per cent lower in 2019 than it otherwise would be, if the US slaps tariffs on all Chinese imports.
How is India affected?
The Indian economy has survived some global slowdowns earlier and should be able to sail through the present one. The bigger problem is the sanction under CAATSA in dealing with Russia for urgently needed military hardware like S-400 and Iran for cheaper crude oil being paid in rupee terms, for which India has adequate refineries. The US option of buying shale oil does not suit India as it does not have adequate refineries and will have to purchase finished product in dollar terms. The port of Chabahar is also crucial for India for connectivity to Afghanistan and CAR. The silver lining is that US being our strategic partner will like to have well equipped Indian Forces to balance China and Indian connectivity to Afghanistan, in case Pakistan does not serve their strategic interest. On both counts I am hopeful that US will find a way out not to hurt its strategic partner.
The talks held in September 2018 between Kim Jong-Un and Moon Jae-In
In less than one year three meetings have been held between the North Korean Leader and the South Korean President, Moon Jae-In.
In the initial meeting the two leaders had decided to put an end to the state of war between their two countries. They had also reaffirmed the goal of denuclearization of the entire peninsula, with the consequent destruction of the nuclear potential of South Korea and of the United States, in particular. They also decided to create an inter-Korean Liason Office between the two sides of the Demilitarized Zone and to bring together the families dispersed between the two Koreas. Finally, the idea was to create new communication infrastructure – railway lines, in particular – a project by which Russia has always set great store.
Indeed, Russia is betting many of its cards on a reunification between the two Koreas, capable of enabling it to keep its excellent relations with South Korea – which are essential for the economy – and to also support North Korea, which is Russia’s unavoidable strategic goal.
Now the two Koreas are dealing on their own, without the US brokerage and intermediation with respect to South Korea, although President Donald J. Trump has recently stated that President Moon Jae-In is his official “delegate” for the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.
The United States is scarcely interested in the internationalization of the North Korean economy. It only wants denuclearization, while Kim Jong-Un wants denuclearization to develop his country’s economy and maintain its geopolitical and national autonomy.
A serious problem – both in talks and in the final or working documents – is also to define an effective mechanism to check denuclearization.
Indeed, between September 17 and 19, 2018, the signing of the Joint Declaration of Pyongyang has not fully clarified the mechanism of checks on the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. Kim Jong-Un’s idea is to organise these checks with a series of “experts” appointed by the friendly powers, while the South Korean idea is to accept the maximum possible denuclearization to start the long process of reunification.
The two respective Defence Ministers, however -namely Song Young Moo for South Korea and Rho Kwang Chul for North Korea – have just signed a separate document from the rest of agreements.
In that text confidence-building measures between the parties are put first, with North Korea’s acceptance of dismantling a launch pad and a site for checking jet engines, with the presence of yet unspecified, but friendly international experts. From IAEA? We have some doubts, in this case.
Subsequently North Korea could also dismantle the Nongbyon site, if the United States does the same in South Korea.
It should also be recalled that most North Korean missiles are built to be launched by mobile vehicles, not from fixed bases.
In short, North Korea wants the United States to remove the nuclear umbrella protecting South Korea and Japan while, in the recent talks with North Korea, the United States thinks of a bilateral treaty regarding only the Korean peninsula and, at most, some classes of North Korean missiles.
In the US mind, the planned reduction of North Korean long-range missiles could be even equivalent to a nuclear and conventional decrease of its troops stationed in Guam.
On the basis of a new future agreement, both Koreas (and God only knows how and to what extent the North Korean conventional military potential would be useful for a South Korea unified with North Korea) would also define maritime and land buffer zones, as well as a no-fly zone over the old border, with a view to avoiding clashes or accidental air battles.
This is already partially clear, but much work shall be done to define all the details.
There would also be plans to cover or reduce artillery batteries along the coast.
Obviously, should these talks run aground, the only concrete political result would be the progressive divergence between South Korea and the United States, precisely on the problem of the peninsula’s denuclearization.
Furthermore, over and above the aforementioned sites, North Korea will dismantle the site of Dongchang-ri, in addition to the site of Yongbyon, while Kim Jong-Un is also very interested in the building of fast railway links between South and North Korea.
The two Koreas will get the industrial site of Kaesong back in shape and the old tourist project concerning Mount Kumgang back in track, besides planning new joint economic and tourist areas.
The inter-Korean agreement regards also collaboration for medical and environmental issues, as well as for the protection from epidemics.
In other words, both Koreas think of an economy of compensation between them, which could also develop at a later stage and become a need for the development of both countries.
An economic-political symbiosis that could get the United States out of play and later reinstate Russia, which is increasingly interested in the South Korean economy, as well as finally favour China, which has no intention of leaving the Korean peninsula to the hegemony of North Korea alone.
At the end of the Treaty, there is also the project of a joint participation in the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games and a joint candidature for the 2032 Olympics.
A few days ago, North Korea also expressed its intention to join the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank – a sign that the internationalization of the North Korean economy is now a certainty.
Hence it is a de facto peace treaty between the two Koreas.
If North Korea continues along this line, it is very likely that South Korea will gain a tactical advantage over the sea while, if the relations between South Korea and the United States remain as they currently are, there should be no significant changes in bilateral relations between the USA and South Korea.
However, what is the current state of relations between the United States and North Korea?
In fact, while the inter-Korean relations are all in the framework of effective confidence-building measures, the clear purpose of the fourth round of talks between the two Korean leaders is to preserve a strong US engagement in the whole negotiation process.
Kim Jong-Un wants to engage the United States for his global economic projection and he certainly does not want to remain tied to a regional economy, albeit open and “reformed” according to China’s rules.
For North Korea, the procedure is simple: at first, bilateral talks with the US support for South Korea; later peace between the two Koreas and finally what is only interesting for the USA, namely denuclearization.
It is not even unlikely that the United States does not accept this timing, but it is also unlikely that it realizes the strategic and economic aspects of this timing.
North Korea wants a fundamental agreement with South Korea because: a) it is an unavoidable asset for the modernization of its economy; b) it is the fundamental strategic factor to have the support of both Russia and China, who want to avoid North Korea’s hegemony over the peninsula, but also want to keep it as a rampart for US forces in South Korea; c) it is only through South Korea that North Korea will eventually be in a position to be connected to the Chinese maritime economic and strategic system and reach up to the Mediterranean.
In fact, if the relations between the United States and North Korea improve further, the site of Yongbyon could be dismantled definitively.
Hence currently Kim Jong-Un wants to thoroughly test the US goodwill, rather than South Korea’s goodwill, in developing a long or very long-term peace policy.
In Kim Jong-Un’s mind, there is in fact a key factor: the US behaviour in the phase in which Muammar Gaddafi accepted its proposal to dismantle his nuclear project.
Kim Jong-Un thinks that not even the story of Saddam Hussein is a guarantee for the US long-term reliability and for the stability of its leaders’ word of honour.
This is the real important factor in the strategy of the North Korean Leader.
Moreover, the US immediate reactions to the last meeting between the two Korean leaders have been fast and positive, both by President Trump and by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
And North Korea’s autonomous foreign policy has been seen also recently, with the 70th Anniversary military parade.
North Korea’s military parade and its important national celebration, was attended by Li Zhansu, ranking third in the internal power hierarchy of the Communist Party of China (CPC); by Valentina Matviyenko, President of the Russian Federal Council, the third elected office in the Russian Federation; by a very significant figure, Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz, President of Mauritania, and finally by Hilal al Hilal, deputy-General Secretary of the Syrian Baath Party.
With peace, North Korea will significantly develop its already multiple economic and political relations with Africa, which will be essential for its new economic development.
At the military parade staged on September 9, there were also authorities from Iran, South Africa and Singapore – which is the never forgotten model of the Chinese “Four Modernizations” -as well as other 60 delegations from “friendly” countries.
At economic level, in August, shortly before the big military parade of the 70th Anniversary, there was the International Fair of Razon, which hosted as many as 114 companies of which 52 North Korean ones.
The North Korean product lines mainly included pharmaceuticals, foodstuffs, textiles, electronics and cosmetics.
However, there were many Chinese large companies selling their products in North Korea despite the UN sanctions.
As from September 17, there was also the Autumn Fair which brought together 320 commercial companies from Russia, New Zealand, Australia and China.
This is in fact the new paradigm of North Korea’s foreign policy.
The dollar has also grown in the exchanges with the North Korean currency, both on the official and on the “parallel” markets.
If all goes well at geopolitical level, the North Korean project will be to further improve its light industry, in addition to the diversification and quantity of products, with a view to trying its own autonomous way on the market world, as was the way of the nuclear system.
It should be recalled that this was also Kim Il-Sung’s project.
China’s Imprint underneath the Pyongyang Joint Declaration
On September 18, the leaders of two Koreas met each other in Pyongyang, the capital of the DPRK. The world media focused on the meeting during which the two sides issued the “Pyongyang Joint Declaration”. If we see the Panmunjom Declaration serving as the cornerstone of the dialogue between two Korea, it is necessary to say that this joint declaration took a substantial step to the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula that is vital to the regional peace and beyond.
Literally speaking, the Pyongyang joint declaration highlighted the key issues as follows. First, both sides are determined to achieve the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. Second, they will work together to improve their relations with a view to the existing state of war, as the defense chiefs from the DPRK and ROK earlier signed a comprehensive agreement aiming to reduce tensions on the peninsula. Third, they will promote the peace talk process of the Korean peninsula. Given that Kim pledged to work toward the “complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula”, it would be seen as a political declaration that would mark a starting point for peace negotiations. If all goes well, a peace treaty would be sealed and then comes normalization of DPRK-US relations after it achieves complete denuclearization.
As a close neighbor to the Korean Peninsula, China always supports the DPRK and ROK as well in improving their relations through dialogue and consultation and promoting reconciliation and cooperation. This is the consistent and persistent position of Beijing, which has been playing a responsible role in politically resolving the Korean Peninsula issue and achieving the long-standing peace of the region.
In effect, prior to the leaders of two Korea met each other this week in Pyongyang, they have closely contacted their respective allies or strategic partners. Among them is China, dealing with both sides – Pyongyang and Seoul – in a unique way. It is true that China is the largest trading partner of the ROK while it is equally the only legal ally of the DPRK as well as its largest ideological partner now. If we review the bilateral relations between China and North Korea since last March, Kim Jr. has paid three significant, though unofficial, visits to President Xi of China. For example, during his March 25-28 visit, both sides vowed to continue their traditional solidarity in terms of their shared ideologies and common strategic interests. Xi especially proposed to strengthen the close ties between the two ruling parties. As he said to Kim, “party-to-party and state-to-state relations are the common treasure to both sides. And safeguarding, consolidating and developing China – DPRK relations are unswerving guidelines for China’s foreign policy and security strategy.
During his second meeting with Xi in Dalian summer resort, Kim vowed to terminate all the nuclear tests and to follow denuclearization if the United States took corresponding measures with good wishes. Then following his meeting with Trump in Singapore on June 12, Kim came to Beijing again on 19 to meet his Chinese counterpart. Xi confirmed China’s “3-no change” policy towards the DPRK, that is, political solidarity between the two parties remains unchanged, the friendship between the two peoples remains unchanged, and China’s support of a socialist Korea remains unchanged. Essentially, they serve as the foundation of the strategic consensus between Beijing and Pyongyang. In return, Kim reiterated his permanent shutdown of all nuclear tests and facilities if the US would respond sincerely and responsibly.
Given all the analysis above, it is understandable to conclude that China’s long-standing adherence to the goal of denuclearization of the Peninsula through dialogue and consultation is fully reflected in the Pyongyang Declaration. Meanwhile, China’s stance remains evident since it claims that the Korean issue must be resolved eventually by the Korean people rather than any external power. Therefore, peace not force is the only acceptable way. Also, as China and Russia have repeated that no coercive change of the regime by outside power is tolerated, North Korea can be confident and comfortable to proceed the permanent shutdown of the missile engine test site with international experts observing; and then a complete denuclearization is not too far in the future.
Here is necessary to argue that China has never claimed to play an exclusive role in the Korean Peninsula. Instead of that, China has always encouraged the DPRK to talk to the United States and other relevant parties. Since Kim has agreed to make a trip to Seoul for further talks and to meet the US high-ranking officials in Pyongyang soon, the summit between Kim and Moon marks a leap forward toward peace.
Yet, as the lessons in history show, it is better to approach realistically the Korean issue simply because it has involved too complicated concerns and memories and the overlapped interests. Therefore, we should be ready to accept trial and challenges lying ahead. China has insisted on diplomacy which means that all parties concerned should be brought to the negotiating table under the mandate of the UN Security Council.
Now, Beijing has navigated the course of denuclearization proactively to protect two sides’ common core security stakes when Kim reportedly promised to give up his nuclear program if the United States and South Korea respond to his proposal with good will. Due to this reason, China will do what it can to help ensure “no change of regime by force and denuclearization at the same time in the Korean Peninsula”. This is China’s influence or Beijing’s imprint on the Korean denuclearization issue and the regional peace.
Merkel’s projection regarding nationalist movements in Europe
In recent years, we have repeatedly spoken about the blows that hit the United Europe hard, and resulted in constant...
Nearly Half the World Lives on Less than $5.50 a Day
Economic advances around the world mean that while fewer people live in extreme poverty, almost half the world’s population — 3.4 billion...
Hydrogen: The missing link in the energy transition
Hydrogen as an energy carrier and feedstock has clearly gained momentum in the past year. I see at least three...
Creating Smart Cities for Innovative Tourism Experiences
The UNWTO Conference on City Breaks: Creating Innovative Tourism Experiences (15-16 October 2018) concluded today in Valladolid, Spain, with a...
Why and How Russia is poised to strengthen its Afghan Role
After the Soviet Union’s withdrawal from Afghanistan and the USSR’s subsequent disintegration, Russia seemed neither interested in nor capable of...
Poverty should be our history, not present
17th October presents an opportunity to not only acknowledge the struggle of our fellow humans suffering from poverty but also...
The Islamic State’s reviving scheme
Despite the fact that ISIS lost 98 percent of its controlled territory, it is aiming for a reforming and coming...
Intelligence2 days ago
Why China will win the Artificial Intelligence Race
South Asia3 days ago
The “Neo-Cold War” in the Indian Ocean Region
Energy3 days ago
Italy’s and EU’s natural gas imports from the United States
Americas2 days ago
Trump: The Symbol of America’s Isolation in the World
Intelligence1 day ago
The issue of intelligence between the United States and China
Intelligence2 days ago
US Conducting Biological Experiments Near Russia’s Borders
Newsdesk3 days ago
Eurasian Research on Modern China-Eurasia Conference
Central Asia3 days ago
Kazakh court case tests Chinese power