China in Africa: Partners in the Year of the Snake

By Jen Alic | Tue, 01 January 2013 00:00

African exports to China have increased six-fold since 2000 alone, the bulk of it in oil, and this year, China surpassed the US and Europe as Africa’s largest trading partner.

Starting from $11 billion in bilateral trade in 2000, Beijing racked up $160 billion dollars in trade with Africa by 2011.

Chinese businesses have also invested some $15 billion in Africa in 2012 alone—that’s up from $500 million in 2002.

China is hot for Africa’s natural resources, which include 40% of the world’s total chromite deposits, 60% of the world’s cobalt and 20% of its gold. But most importantly—oil and gas. For starters, we’re looking at a possible 72 billion barrels of crude in the East Africa Rift, more than 250 trillion cubic feet of natural gas offshore Kenya, Tanzania and Mozambique, and 5 billion barrels of proven reserves in the Sudans. And this is only scratching the continent’s surface.

China is also hungry for minerals in the West, North and Central nations, oil from West Africa and agricultural products from Chad, Mali, Benin and Burkina Faso, which do much to supply China’s massive textile industry. But West Africa is also a key importer of Chinese products, with Nigeria the lead consumer (42%).

East Africa and Southern Africa are ripe with massive Chinese investment in infrastructure, mining and trade. Most Chinese firms operating in these regions are state-owned and they enjoy major government support. This support allows them a leg up in the competition: They bid low on contracts, and usually get them.

It is in East Africa that the Chinese presence is most keenly felt—and seen. Here, China enjoys joint ventures with African state-owned companies. China’s Sinopec oil has joined forces with state-owned Sonangal in Angola ($3.5 billion). In Gabon, China’s CMEC/SINOSTEEL consortium has invested about $3 billion in the exploitation of iron ore deposits.

In terms of foreign policy and economics, African policymakers pay the most attention to China. To put it simply, Africa’s wealth is tied to China’s economy.

The New Year — China’s Year of the Snake — will see Beijing expand its footprint in Africa, while the US tags along, behind the game.


Why? China has consistently offered Africa a broader relationship, and while the US and Europe remain very significant economic drivers in Africa, China offers something bigger — a clear path to the creation of regional economic blocs. China’s willingness to invest in major infrastructure projects across the continent has been one of the primary attractions. And we’re not talking just about pipelines — China has been busy building thousands of kilometers of new roads and railways across Africa.

Nigeria has recently benefitted from this Chinese ambition. In late December, China completed the rebuilding of the railway connecting the south commercial hub of Lagos to Kano, the largest city in the north. It was a $166 million project that involved rebuilding 1,160 kilometers of railway.

In the end, Africa’s China choice comes down to Beijing’s business model, which in terms of long-term development is preferable to that of the West. Beijing offers a package deal that Africa has embraced for its pragmatism.

And there is a philosophical element to Africa’s love affair with China: In Beijing’s efforts to push through real infrastructure development on a regional level, it tends to view Africa through a completely different lens than the West. For China, Africa is a partner, not a parasite that happens to be rich with natural resources.

True to form, though, Washington lags behind in Africa, unable to figure out how to structure a broader relationship. As such, 2013 will be another year of Chinese progress in Africa—and Africa is very much looking forward to the development this promises.

http://oilprice.com/Geopolitics/Africa/China-in-Africa-Partners-in-the-Year-of-the-Snake.html

I watch China's CCTV channel and i see how they talk about China's involvement in Africa and African countries have testified to how China has helped them grow. I think China has done more for Africa than the US and Europe have ever done. However, i don't think Africa should just open it's legs to be taken over by China. We have to be smart.

Afam4eva: I watch China's CCTV channel and i see how they talk about China's involvement in Africa and African countries have testified to how China has helped them grow. I think China has done more for Africa than the US and Europe have ever done. However, i don't think Africa should just open it's legs to be taken over by China. We have to be smart.

Well spoken bro. But it's an unbeatable arrangement - resources for infrastructure. Africa's resources are virtually inexhaustible. Guaranteed to last over the next 1,000 years. Once we develop the necessary infrastructural base to make the technological leap, we would be in a good place.

What I like about China is that they're not interested in sending 'aid' and other such tricks developed by the west to siphon our wealth. Neither are they interested in our politics or how we choose to govern ourselves. Nor are they interested in funding rebel groups to overthrow 'unfriendly' governments in Africa and impose kleptocratic puppets. They operate by strict codes of business partnership and nothing else. You can't ask for more than that to be honest.

I don't like or trust China, at all at all.

ekt_bear: I don't like or trust China, at all at all.

It's not about liking or trusting them but about them following the stipulated rules of engagement in their host country. If they can do that then i have no worries. Our leaders should just play smart, that's all.

Well said afam.

I am happy that asia is also inventing in africa. But in the words of Kwame Nkrumah [b]"We face neither east or west; we face forward." [/b]

We shall see, I suppose.

free13: I am happy that asia is also investing in africa. But in the words of Kwame Nkrumah "We face neither east nor west; we face forward."

Great words indeed by the great man. But don't forget that Nkrumah - the consumate Pan Africanist - predicated his ideas on the eventual unification of the continent into one single political entity with a central govt. To bring his vision of a fully independent Africa to fruition, we need to think seriously about continental unification. It's a lot easier getting the continent to pull in one direction when it has just one central govt as opposed to 54.

Rossikk:

Great words indeed by the great man. But don't forget that Nkrumah - the consumate Pan Africanist - predicated his ideas on the eventual unification of the continent into one single political entity with a central govt. To bring his vision of a fully independent Africa to fruition, we need to think seriously about continental unification. It's a lot easier getting the continent to pull in one direction when it has just one central govt as opposed to 54.

Yes i think he and some other african leaders at independence meant well for Africa (although he had his own problems). But i do not totally support the idea of "ONE AFRICA". I am yet to be convinced of its economic viability, it will also be extremely difficult. Just take Nigeria as an example; from 1960 to date, we can't even say that we are a country.

free13:

Yes i think he and some other african leaders at independence meant well for Africa (although he had his own problems). But i do not totally support the idea of "ONE AFRICA". I am yet to be convinced of its economic viability, it will also be extremely difficult. Just take Nigeria as an example; from 1960 to date, we can't even say that we are a country.

Yes it will be difficult, but it's achievable. The current 54 nations will simply become states of the African federation, if they choose, or they may wish to reconfigure themselves.

As for economic viability, the very question is absurd. OF COURSE it will be economically viable to have a single African nation. All the oil, gold, diamonds, coffee, cocoa, iron ore, tin, coal etc, on the continent will have a single fixed price monitored by the central govt. Just like China. No more price wars among competing African nations driving commodity prices down. The African govt will be very powerful and influential by virtue of its command of a significant chunk of the world's most valuable resources. The African govt could impose economic sanctions on any nation and cripple their economy, including the US, Britain, France et al.

Politically, the idea of French or other foreign troops landing anywhere in Africa on any 'mission' will be totally out of the question. They can only do that today because the continent is filled with relatively poor and isolated nation-states that on their own, are easy pickings for foreign powers. So when there's say a rebel invasion of Mali, the Mali govt ''invites'' the French to enter Africa to launch airstrikes. But in a unified Africa, the central govt could call on the COMBINED armed forces of Africa to flush out such miscreants in a matter of hours, not even days, and without recourse to 'foreign assistance'.

Rossikk:

As for economic viability, the very question is absurd. OF COURSE it will be economically viable to have a single African nation. [b]All the oil, gold, diamonds, cofee, cocoa etc,[/b] on the continent will have a single fixed price monitored by the central govt.

Yes gold, oil, cocoa.......etc, but remember talk is cheap. What has happened to all these resources in individual african states; NOTHING. Oil in nigeria, iron and copper in congo, diamonds in freetown etc. Independent African states are weak. You do not bring a bunch of weak states together and then expect them to become strong. That is like bringing 52 one week old babies together and expecting them to walk, because they are large in number. It is impossible, a one week old baby will never be able to walk, never. Whether they are 5,10,15 or 52. Its really not about numbers.
Each African state should be able to sustain itself first and i mean - infastructure, health, education, economy etc. Look at what the EU is going through, because it allowed weak states into the union. Africa should not fall into such a trap. Having a large number of states lumped together will not save africa.

free13:


Yes gold, oil, cocoa.......etc, but remember talk is cheap. What has happened to all these resources in individual african states; NOTHING. Oil in nigeria, iron and copper in congo, diamonds in freetown etc. Independent African states are weak. You do not bring a bunch of weak states together and then expect them to become strong. That is like bringing 52 one week old babies together and expecting them to walk, because they are large in number. It is impossible, a one week old baby will never be able to walk, never. Whether they are 5,10,15 or 52. Its really not about numbers.
Each African state should be able to sustain itself first and i mean - infastructure, health, education, economy etc. Look at what the EU is going through, because it allowed weak states into the union. Africa should not fall into such a trap. Having a large number of states lumped together will not save africa.

Sorry but you are ALONE in such ideas. Fact is that every signatory member nation to the AU agrees in principle to the ultimate political and economic unification of the continent. It's part of the AU charter. The only point of contention among member states is the timing and speed towards such unification, so it's bound to happen at some point.

http://www.africa-union.org/root/au/AboutAU/Constitutive_Act_en.htm

As for your 'baby' analogy, that is just absurd. Africans are not ''babies''. It is their placement in weak, dependent client-states that makes them play the role of ''babies'' in the comity of nations.

It is a FACT of history that poor, underdeveloped, weak, isolated states with poorly developed state institutions are sovereign in name only, and are far easier to manipulate and sabotage by internal and external actors, than unified empires.

And it's both misleading and useless telling us that ''nothing'' was accomplished by the balkanized African states. Misleading because it is certifiably false - African states have achieved a LOT since independence - education, health, infrastructure have all improved massively since colonial days, and a 300 million strong middle class has developed - and useless because it is precisely because of the relative weakness of these nation-states that we require political and economic integration and unification.

China by the way was once a mishmash of weak, competing, autonomous states with various ethnic groups at loggerheads and loads of corruption. Until the Chinese elite decided to create a single Chinese nation and a single national language (Mandarin) out of the disparate chaos, and the rest, as they say, is history. If China can unify why can't Africa? China holds over TWICE the African population, so we really have no excuse.

free13:


Yes gold, oil, cocoa.......etc, but remember talk is cheap. What has happened to all these resources in individual african states; NOTHING. Oil in nigeria, iron and copper in congo, diamonds in freetown etc. Independent African states are weak. You do not bring a bunch of weak states together and then expect them to become strong. That is like bringing 52 one week old babies together and expecting them to walk, because they are large in number. It is impossible, a one week old baby will never be able to walk, never. Whether they are 5,10,15 or 52. Its really not about numbers.
Each African state should be able to sustain itself first and i mean - infastructure, health, education, economy etc. Look at what the EU is going through, because it allowed weak states into the union. Africa should not fall into such a trap. Having a large number of states lumped together will not save africa.

Correct yarn

Rossikk:

Well spoken bro. But it's an unbeatable arrangement - resources for infrastructure. Africa's resources are virtually inexhaustible. Guaranteed to last over the next 1,000 years. Once we develop the necessary infrastructural base to make the technological leap, we would be in a good place.

Reminds me of Gowon claiming our problem was not money. It was how to spend it. No resource is inexhaustible. We act like it though and unless we stop depending on others to develop us, we will remain at the bottom of the barrel permanently. We arent getting a fair deal from China right now, so whats all the celebration about

Don't mind the jingoist!!!
Our resources are virtually inexhaustible, but our management and acumen invisible.
China and fair deal is like pepper and the eye.
China received Western investment, stole & still stealing the technology behind it and then accumulated enough dollars to almost collapse the world economy.
I laugh at China though - they have to be able to sell what they produce. Globalization built their economy and they can't withdraw from it now.
This is the only reason they are so eager to cooperate with the rest of the world - but they have unusual mumus in African leaders.
Leaders who, even if the Chinese put the technology behind what they do inside their brains, would still not help their people to learn to produce.
As a group, African leaders are imbeciles but there are a couple of good ones though we are yet to see there end.
OBJ was a good African leader in the 1970s!!!

Rossik, better go thank your stars that the West remains a counterbalance to China's growing power.
With mumus like African leaders China may finally become the world superpower, and then Rossik and the gang will really understand the true meaning of "Chinese rule".

birdman:
Reminds me of Gowon claiming our problem was not money. It was how to spend it. No resource is inexhaustible. We act like it though and unless we stop depending on others to develop us, we will remain at the bottom of the barrel permanently. We arent getting a fair deal from China right now, so whats all the celebration about

koruji:
Rossik, better go thank your stars that the West remains a counterbalance to China's growing power.
With mumus like African leaders China may finally become the world superpower, and then Rossik and the gang will really understand the true meaning of "Chinese rule".

Abeg tell them o. Go ask the Filipinos, Malaysians, Thai etc the thing wey their eyes dey see. Bullying in broad daylight with no apologies.

ekt_bear: I don't like or trust China, at all at all.

Neither do I. While they have made considerable impact on our continent and abstain from our politics (as far as we can see) something tells me they are just trying to edge the west out by playing good business partner. Their exploits in tibet and absolute disregard for human rights make me wary of them.

A client of mine had dealings with a chinese company that was supposed to ship some products to him after he had paid for them. I wrote to the company when they refused to comply with their own end of the deal. Their legal system is crafted to favour one side only - Chinese.

I'd rather deal with a british company that respects trade agreements and at least have a modicum of respect for rule of law.

To all of you leaning towards China, you 've got to be very careful dealing with the Chinese.

China is beta because we africa mostly like inferior

You know dat everything about china no dey last.

Yes na.

Afam4eva: I watch China's CCTV channel and i see how they talk about China's involvement in Africa and African countries have testified to how China has helped them grow. I think China has done more for Africa than the US and Europe have ever done. However, i don't think Africa should just open it's legs to be taken over by China. We have to be smart.

What has China done for Africa? They will come into your country and invest with your own money. Only God will help all those African countries who signed silly contracts with China between 2002 till date.

I beg wait make them become world power too, and you will see terorism at it's peak from the chinko people. Power fit change anything for this life.

There is no laziness within china as a very populated nation they have been able to counter ther problems in producing and exporting products to meet demands and it has put them in the map...
Now Africa especially the most populous black nation - Nigeria ..remains stagnant due to corruption and greed from leaders from the onset...that's what we are reaping now poverty everywhere the poor can't match up to be a middle class... And we have a very large numbver of youth who can't produce anything only to waste money going to universities. And in the end nothing to use the knowledge acquired there for (at least I can boast only 20percent uses their knowledge gotten from universities here) we are just consuming --take a visit to apapa port and tincan port you will weep !!!

Let us bear it in mind that nobody can love you as much as you love yourself. If you have to choose between your interest and someone else's interest you definitely will choose yours. "Foreigners" always start on good footings until they have infiltrated your system and seen how weak it is. Why pay for what you can have almost free? The west didn't start with colonization. They started with trading with us. Over time they saw that they could have our resources for free. Why pay? Same will happen with Africa-China in the long run. We need to develop an education system that makes us competitive in the global economy. Anything short of that (even a harmless partnership) is waste of time and will send us back decades.

If not for China, Africa would have been begging for ordinary tea and tooth paste from the US and EUROPE.

I dnt think d Chinese ve been knw to be betrayals. They are strict wif Their bizness policies unlike d west that wld give u wif one hand nd collect wif the other hand. And tthey are good at bringing competition down to dia kneels, let's just imagine a Chinese telecom company competing wif MTN nd dia likes, the wld run out of d market.

Rossikk: What I like about China is that they're not interested in sending 'aid' and other such tricks developed by the west to siphon our wealth. Neither are they interested in our politics or how we choose to govern ourselves. Nor are they interested in funding rebel groups to overthrow 'unfriendly' governments in Africa and impose kleptocratic puppets. They operate by strict codes of business partnership and nothing else. You can't ask for more than that to be honest.

spot on.