By Rorik StrindbergThe views and opinions expressed in this essay do not necessarily reflect those of the creator of this blog and are the sole responsibility of the author. Essays expressing opinions similar to and counter to those of the creator of this blog are strictly for diversity and to start thoughtful and meaningful discussion.
In the October 28 2006 issue of the Economist, there is an article titled, “China in Africa; Never to late to scramble.” The second halve is a direct reference to the scramble for Africa, which occurred after the Berlin Conference in 1884-1885. Although this is a direct reference to the “New Imperialism” or often known as “Empire for Empire’s sake,” Chinese ambitions in Africa seem to be in concert more with the imperial ambitions of the first wave of imperialism. The best example of the first wave of imperialism is Great Britain’s involvement in India, dating form the 17th century to the 20th century. Is this the path that the Chinese will fallow in Africa?
British involvement in Indian was initially simply economic. The English (1) desired to initially purchase Indian goods, silks, clothing, ect. The Mughal Empire, the Muslim rulers of India left in place after the fall of the Mongolian Empire, had allowed the British and others to trade in modern India. It is important to note that England initially simply did not have the power to “take over” the Mughal Empire. Treaties with the Dutch, after the Anglo-Dutch merger when William of Orange became the king of England, the English and the Dutch agreed to give the English control of the Indian Trade and the Dutch control of Indonesia. The next step towards English control of India was to get the French out of India, which was accomplished after the Seven Years War, or as we call it in America the French and Indian (Native American Indian) War. After an English victory, the French were expelled from India. The most important idea of English Imperialism in India is that it evolved slowly. Initially it would have been absurd to even think that the tiny nation like England could ever control the Mughal Empire. As the Mughal Empire began to crumble the British begin to assume more and more of the role of the government, to maintain the trade. After the Napoleonic wars from 1792-1815, when the British were excluded from trade with the European Continent, industrialization picked up speed. After this period the British needed markets to export their industrial products to, and places to get raw materials from. This fact greatly increased the rational and rate of imperialism.
A similar process occurred in Egypt with the British and in Mexico with the French. Both Egypt and Mexico had a history of reneging on debts. To solve this Egypt became a protectorate of Britain, where British forced the Egyptians to pay off their debts. In Mexico, the French imposed Maximilian as Emperor of Mexico for the same purposes.
Back to China and Africa. Although China has been involved in Africa since it begin to export Maoism to Africa in the 1950’s, recently China is more involved in Africa and will be increasingly in the future. Africa-China trade in 1995 was just 3 billion dollars, and now has multiplied by just under a factor of eleven to 32 billion dollars. China now accounts for 10% of African trade, although this figure is expected to double by 2010. China is primarily interested in Africa as markets to export surplus goods, and importing raw materials. China needs minerals, farm products, timber and oil. (2) Many African Nations are elated by the idea of trading with China, for Western traders, the IMF and Paris Club, are constantly pestering African Nations over, corruption, torture, democracy, and the lack of accountability. The Chinese simply are not concerned with such nuances that only get in the way of making money. For example, when Canadian and American Firms left Sudan because of domestic backlash of dealing with the greatest human rights of the 21st century, Chinese state-owned firms quickly replaced them. Now Sudan virtually has UN veto power through China to any action in the Darfur. China is also building armament factories in Sudan.
A little side note, it dose not matter how many lighters are held up at a rock concert, China and Sudan will not stop the killing. (3) The only way to stop the killing would be to have a whole lot of US Marines show up at President Omar al-Bashir’s front door. Who knows what kind of mess that would create?
Although China invests money in Africa, it really does little good. Most of the jobs that are created are for Chinese workers. This includes many of the railroads that the Chinese are building in Africa in turn for oil. Also, many of the cheaper Chinese products are displacing African businesses; there is a detailed description of in the article of a shop owner in Angola that can not do business any more because of Chinese competition. Also in Thomas Freidman’s The World is Flat, there is a detailed description of how cheaper Chinese plastic lanterns are replacing the ones previously made by Egyptians. One really has to wonder if this is a symbiotic relationship or a parasitic relationship.
In the defense of the Chinese, one also has to look at the money lent and aid by America and Europe to Africa. American Aid to Africa has to employ American not African Firms and most of the European Aid to Africa ends up back in the hands of the Europeans. This is in the forms of Swiss Bank Accounts and European luxury items. Although, most of the Western money at least has good intentions, like the World Bank’s plan for Chad. This is where World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz proposed to lend Chad money at a low interest rate, so that they could build an oil pipeline. The money was lent on the basis that a large percent of the oil money would be reinvested in the people of Chad. The President of Chad spent all of the money on the military.
There are other models for African nations to fallow. Botswana and South Africa posses a GDP per capita that are about the same as Russia and are higher then Mexico, Brazil, India and China. Botswana since 1966 has the one of the highest growth rates. Many attribute this to parliamentary government and fiscal discipline. One dose not have to sleep with the devil for profit.
In conclusion I will admit that I am a Sinophobe, and this should be taken into account when you read my articles. I find their state offensive, as one Chinese activist said; China represents the worst of Capitalism and Communism. Also, China executes more criminals per year then the rest of the world combined, and sell their body parts on the black market. This is what their government really dose. (4) This is neglecting numerous other human rights violation committed by the Chinese State, for the sake of time. One really has to wonder do the Africans really know what they are getting into with China. One can see how easily trade involves into outright colonialism. I wonder what will happen when African nations renege on their debts to China or the security situation in Africa prevents China from getting its oil. Can you say Imperialism?
Footnotes
1. I switch between England and Britain because the union of England and Scotland forms Great Britain and to refer to Britain before 1707 is incorrect.
2. Economist, 53
3. This is a program that I am highly critical of that always appears on Myspace.com
4. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4921116.stm
No comments:
Post a Comment