by Pepe Escobar (cross-posted with the Asia Times by special agreement with the author)
When China calls, all Africa answers. And Beijing’s non-politicization of investments and non-interference in internal affairs is paying off big time
The dogs of war – cold, hot, trade, tariffs – bark while the Chinese caravan plies the New Silk Roads. Call it a leitmotif of the young 21st century.
At the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) in Beijing, President Xi Jinping has just announced a hefty US$60 billion package to complement another US$60 billion pledged at the 2015 summit.
That breaks down to $15 billion in grants and interest-free loans; $20 billion in credit lines; a $10 billion fund for development financing; $5 billion to finance imports from Africa; and waving the debt of the poorest African nations diplomatically linked to China.
When China calls, all Africa answers. First, we had ministers from 53 African nations plus the African Union (AU) Commission approving the Beijing Declaration and the FOCAC Action Plan (2019-21).
Then, after the $60 billion announcement, we had Beijing signing memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with nine African nations – including South Africa and Egypt – related to the New Silk Roads/Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Additionally, other 20 African nations are discussing further cooperation agreements.
Debt trap or integration?
That does not exactly paint the picture of the BRI as a vicious debt trap enabling China to take over Africa’s top strategic assets. On the contrary, the BRI is seen as integrating with Africa’s own Agenda 2063, a “strategic framework for the socio-economic transformation of the continent over the next 50 years” tackling unemployment, inequality and poverty.
Apart from letting the numbers speak for themselves, Xi deftly counter-punched the current, massive BRI demonization campaign: “Only the people of China and Africa have the right to comment on whether China-Africa cooperation is doing well … No one should deny the significant achievement of China-Africa cooperation based on their assumptions and speculation.”
And once again Xi felt the need to stress the factor that does seduce, Africa-wide – Chinese non-politicization of investments, and Chinese non-interference in the internal affairs of African nations.
This comes right after Xi’s speech celebrating the five years of BRI, on Aug. 27, when he stressed Beijing’s organizing foreign policy concept for the foreseeable future has nothing to do with a “China club.”
What that reveals, in fact, is a Deng Xiaoping-style “crossing the river while feeling the stones” fine-tuning, bent on correcting mistakes in what is still the BRI’s planning stages, and including the approval of a mechanism of dispute resolution for myriad projects.
African leaders seem to be on board. For South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, the FOCAC “refutes the view that a new colonialism is taking hold in Africa, as our detractors would have us believe.” AU chairman Paul Kagame, also the president of Rwanda, emphasized a stronger Africa was an opportunity for investment, “rather than a problem or a threat.”
A ‘non-enduring contingency location’?
According to the China Chamber of International Commerce, over 3,300 Chinese companies have invested Africa-wide in telecommunications, transportation, power generation, industrial parks, water supply, rental business for construction machinery, retail, schools, hotels and hospitals.
China is, in fact, upgrading its investments in Africa beyond infrastructure, manufacturing, agriculture and energy and mineral imports. China is Africa’s top trading partner since 2009; trade expanded 14% in 2017, reaching $170 billion.
In November, Shanghai will host the first China International Import Expo – jointly managed by the Ministry of Commerce and the Shanghai municipal government, a convenient stage for African nations to promote their proverbial “market potential.”
Xi depicted as a new and ruthless Mao? China mired in abysmal corruption? China’s massive internal debt about to explode like a volcano from hell? None of this seems to stick Africa-wide. What does impress is that in three decades, a one-party system managed to multiply China’s GDP per capita by a factor of 17. From a Global South point of view, the lesson is “they must be doing something right.”
The ultra-sensitive military front
In parallel, there’s no evidence Africa will cease to be a key BRI node for investment; a market with an expanding middle class receptive to Chinese imports; and most of all, strategic reasons.
And then there’s the ultra-sensitive military front.
China’s first overseas military base was inaugurated on Aug. 1, 2017 – on the exact 90th anniversary of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). The official Beijing spin is that Djibouti is a base for peacekeeping and humanitarian missions, and to fight pirates based on the Yemeni and Somali coastlines.
But it goes way beyond that. Djibouti is a geostrategic dream; on the northwest Indian Ocean and at the southern path to the Red Sea, en route to the Suez Canal and with access to the Gulf of Aden, the Arabian Gulf and most of all the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait. This prime economic connectivity translates into transit control of 20% of all global exports and 10% of total annual oil exports.
Not accidentally, Djibouti’s top capital source is China. Chinese companies fund nearly 40% of Djibouti’s top investment projects. That includes the $490 million Addis Ababa-Djibouti railway, whose strategic importance far exceeds elephants, zebras and antelopes “roaming freely alongside a railway.”
Djibouti’s aim, as expressed by President Ismail Omar Guelleh – who visited Xi in Beijing last November – is to position itself as the number one connectivity/transshipment node for all of Africa.
Now compare it with the Pentagon’s AFRICOM agenda – as in an array of Special Ops deploying nearly 100 secret missions across 20 African nations at any given time.
As Nick Turse extensively documented in his must-read book Tomorrow’s Battlefield, there are at least 50 US military bases Africa-wide – ranging from what AFRICOM designates as “forward operating sites” to fuzzy “cooperative security locations” or “non-enduring contingency locations.” Not to mention 36 AFRICOM bases in 24 African nations that have not previously made it to official reports.
What this spells out, once again, is further evidence of the ever-replicating Empire of Bases. And that brings us to Africa’s stark “contingency location” choice. In the ultra-high-stakes development game, who’re you gonna call? FOCAC and the New Silk Roads, or Ghostbusters AFRICOM?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1a-QpyF7rNc
When you post a link, it is most polite to write a brief description of what it refers to.
Otherwise, it’s just uselessly posted link.
Thanks
Sure. Let us just say, that the chinese will find themselves in exactly the same predicament as the previous batch of colonialists did.
Watch that flick carefully, you shall see what I mean.
Of course there are ways they could avoid the coming quagmire, but not in this paradigm of ours.
I am confident, they are pragmatic enough to find the solution.
The Anglo-Zionists have a trump card (pun intended) to tilt African leaders toward neo-colonial Africom – their jihadi terrorist assets. Having turned Libya into a breeding ground for terrorists and expanded their footprint further south, they can now offer “help” to nations wanting to protect their citizens from these head-chopping rapists. It’s the protection racket writ large, and it could work. By having “lily pad” bases all over Africa and bribing military and police officials throughout the continent, the Chinese may find their infrastructure projects destroyed by “terrorists” or worse.
It’s good that African leaders are responsive to the Chinese efforts, but they also need to weed out those in their nations who see collaboration with the Anglo-Zionists as a business opportunity.
Suez is blocked for use, to allow physical, over the land, continuation of Silk Roadz
An alternative route to Northern Africa, through Syria’s Mediterranian access to Libyan ports, has been blocked,
Now the Saud-AngloZio coalition is erasing Yemen, this destroying the other alternativet access to the Horn of Africa.
Excellent piece, Pepe — hats off.
“Only the people of China and Africa have the right to comment on whether China-Africa cooperation is doing well … No one should deny the significant achievement of China-Africa cooperation based on their / the West’s / assumptions and speculation.”
Xi of course knows what the Zionazis think about suchlike proclamations, hence adding massive insult to injury since China is way too powerful for any “colour revolution” stunts (failed miserably in 1989) or “humanitrian interventions”.
Africa, for its part, knows “European values” inside out as of the late 15th century. The alternatives AFRICOM versus BRI are neatly illustrated by contrasting contemporary Angola to Libya, or the erstwhile Libya under Ghadaffi to the Congo. It’s an absolute no-brainer what’s winning hearts and minds in Africa. In other words: Expect the usual screamfest starring the MSM presstitutes, the humanitarian imperialists, and the ‘anti-authoritarian’ Cultural Marxists — all of them overwhelmingly ‘concerned’ about faggots, anti-Semitism, corruption, environmental disaster, slave labour (sic) and all the rest.
AFRICOM intends to cost America 50 more years of wars, basings, and chaos foisted upon the continent in pursuit of MIC aggrandizements and Trillions that will total 50-100 Trillion, half century from now.
And since most Western societies care not at all about Africa, the psychopaths of AFRICOM/Pentagon will have more of a free hand than in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya or Lebanon.
The black population and cultures are of little concern and slight historical attachment to the US/EU.
Anything goes. The UN, amazingly, also is unconcerned.
A great war machine is just heating up in North Africa and Sub-Sahara. But Hell is coming to Africa, with red, white and blue flags flying.
“Ariabian Gulf”? Did you mean Persian Gulf?
Bab-el-Mandeb Strait
He did mean the Persian Gulf. Trump used the term “Arabian Gulf” to insult Iran. I’m a little curious why Pepe used it as well. There’s an in-depth article on this issue at: Quora, Oct. 15, 2017 ” Why did Trump call the Persian Gulf “Arabian Gulf?”
https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Trump-call-the-Persian-Gulf-Arabian-Gulf
Hey Pepe: could have mentioned what is just across the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait! This forms a kind of pincer, China base on one side, Yemen, Shia, (Iran) on the other side. IE, those global supply chains just might be part of the strategy, protection and control.
I think because of the political culture of strongmen and the legacy of colonialism, AFRICOM has more chance of “succeeding” in subjugating the African continent.
Allowing Africans to develop as they see fit, to create their own “values/valuables”, that they can trade through an interwoven Silk Road, requires visionary, INDEPENDENT, leaders of men.
Though silk treads are the strongest, the spinning/weaving process is delicate and as long as the fabric has not yet been created in it’s entirety, AFRICOM can cut/disrupt the links easily.
I’m Nigerian and I can tell you with confidence that AFRICOM is a non-issue. George Bush Jr begged, cajoled, threatened, lobbied for African nations to accept the US imperial military command and was universally rejected. Nigeria and South Africa–the local hegemons of West Africa and Southern Africa, respectively— lobbied the smaller countries around them not to accept AFRICOM. As a result of these efforts, AFRICOM Headquarters is still based in Germany (as opposed to the original plan to base it in an African nation).
While US troops can be found in some African countries (i.e. DR Congo, Liberia, Niger Republic and Uganda), these are present in small numbers. Repeated attempts to persuade Nigeria, Chad and Cameroon to allow US troops enter their countries to “help fight terrorism” were rebuffed vociferously. Punishment came later–Bush Jr and Obama refused to sell weapons to Nigeria and blocked its allies from selling too. Chad which is not known for islamic terrorism was included in the Trump’s muslim travel ban (although it was later removed).
Despite the grandiose plan of having several military bases spanning the large continent, the americans only managed to establish a US Navy Base next to rival Chinese and French military bases in Djibouti (East Africa) and a small Drone Base in Niger Republic (Of course, there is the US/UK Diego Garcia Base built on land stolen from Mauritius in 1968).
AFRICOM and BOKO HARAM – same thing. Its covert – but the illegal trafficking of animals and dead animal parts is a huge factor of BOKO HARAM – as well as arms and drugs – AFRICOM is homebase for this – How do you think BOKO HARAM gets all those cars and weapons ? AND DRUGS –
What do you think would happen if the US Military set up a base in your neighbourhood ? Drugs in the neighbourhood would skyrocket – half the US military is hooked on drugs – and they import them through their bases without any customs – its completely corrupt –
its not Africa’s choice – the people of Africa are in a worse position with their governments than the people of the West are with theirs. Its horrible.
The South African government – which is part of BRICS – is horrible – its all SO CORRUPT in Africa that the only wealth in the countries – is in the hands of the ‘elite’ – its like Ukraine.
we can only hope that China’s offer of aid – $60 billion – goes to the right places – I hope China’s people get educated on the poaching of wildlife in Africa – before its too late – rhinos and pangolins and elephants – and lion bones – etc – yuck.
What do you mean “China’s people get educated on the poaching of wildlife in Africa”? Chinese has been an agriculture based country for thousands of years. Poaching wildlife is definitely not part of their culture.
If you are talking about elephant trunks, China has already issued laws prohibiting the import of elephant trunks. MSM tends to exaggerate the elephant trunks sold/smuggled into China while ignore the import to Japan, Taiwan, HK and other southeast Asian countries.
ivory and rhino horns – and lion bones – look into it yourself – FB has loads of pages on African elephants and rhinos – almost extinct – China is biggest consumer – basically the only consumer of pangolin scales – just look up Pangolin – never heard of it ? the most trafficked animal in the world – they’re so cute too
If anyone doubts China’s strategic long term commitment to African-Chinese partnership, go and watch the 2017 Chinese action flick ‘Wolf Warrier 2’ directed by Jing Wu, the the first non-Hollywood film to ever break in to the top 100 highest grossing releases.
chinafrica Review
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTL7x99Ds8A
IMDB
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7131870/
I doubt if African countries can make decisions on their own. In my country for example, the AZ controls everything. From the banks, to the Oil & Gas firms and all, they have absolute control over everything here in Nigeria. What they cannot control, they can destroy. When President Muhammadu Buhari got into office, the President of International MotherFuckers, otherwise known as IMF (you ma call it International Monetary Funds is you wish, but that is not what they are) had to travel to Nigeria to persuade the then new President to devalue the Nigerian currency. When the President turned down their offer, the WHOLE media were making noise about how he was going to ruin Nigeria’s economy. In fact, former Finance ministers and ex-governors of the Central Bank of Nigeria (with numerous ‘prestigious international awards’) claimed the economy would collapse completely. Obama shamelessly declared on TV that he would ‘encourage’ Nigeria to devalue her currency because it is in the ‘best interest of Nigerians’. Now here is the problem; it was ordinary citizens who had no knowledge on economics that took it upon themselves to force the Presidency into devaluing the Naira because Obama and ex-Harvard graduates said so. These intellectually weak citizens who hate the President because a politician said they should are willing tools for local politicians and AZ agencies like CIA. The President who is usually indifferent about public opinion since most of them are unsound refused to give up until a militant group called Niger Delta Avengers (CIA group?) popped up in the oil producing Niger Delta region and started blowing up oil installations offshore with technologies which Nigerian Navy could not combat. The Presidency had to bow to pressure but still, he was punished for being disobedient through economic manipulations from Central Bank of Nigeria and Wall Street. Boko Haram is coming back in full force and the way the Nigerian Military seems to be fighting them is through what looks like a war of attrition. The entire military has been infiltrated. The political class too. The people are not even willing to resist. Try to educate a Nigerian (not the 6-12 on this website) on the true political and economic situations in their country and see their reactions. We are all fed up with foreign domination of Africa, but the truth is we are not ready to fight them. To be ready, we have to be willing. Otherwise, our leaders will jut collect more money from China and head over to the West to get more money, else, they get more dead persons.
This is so sad to hear. People are destroying their own country without proper thinking. Culture and ideology independence is crucial for all developing countries, China included.
I doubt your leaders will be able to easily “collect more money from China and head over to the West,” since the $60 billion pledged by Xi is mostly bond with projects, be it infrastructure or economic projects. I surely hope African people will benefit from these investments, not the AZ bastards.
I usually enjoy Pepe Escobar´s articles, but some of his statements I question in light of developments in South Africa specifically:
– “Beijing’s non-politicization of investments”
Organisations say govt wants to lay its hands on coal reserves under farms to aid the Chinese:
Joint media statement by AfriForum, Akkerland Boerdery, TAU SA, Solidarity and Agri Limpopo, 3 September 2018:
http://politicsweb.co.za/documents/what-the-expropriation-of-akkerland-boerdery-is-re
https://www.thesouthafrican.com/afriforum-land-expropriation-china-resources/
Pepe writes:
– “non-interference in internal affairs is paying off big time”
Because Beijing is not prepared to criticise South Africa on its policy of land confiscation without compensation from Boers, some of that land may be made available for Chinese development so yes it is “paying off”, but is it moral?
In fact non-interference would mean just that, but China it would seem China supports the land reform policy:
https://www.thesouthafrican.com/xi-jinping-support-land-reform/
Pepe seems to be in a humerous mood – he asks:
“Who’re you gonna call? FOCAC and the New Silk Roads, or Ghostbusters AFRICOM?”
Considering that China has no point of view about the farm murder epidemic in South Africa – and that it supports South Africa´s controversial land policy and considering that Donald Trump does have a point of view – if you were a white farmer in South Africa, from a survival point of view, who would you choose?
https://rationalstandard.com/suffer-the-children-donald-trump-and-sas-hate-crime-farm-murders/
But China has plenty of coal of its own, why would it want to import coal from far away? Are you sure these newspaper is not doing some kind of propaganda here to plant distrust between locals and Chinese?
Due to its painful and humiliated experience with the Western over the last 150s, China know how it feels to be imposed/intervened by outsider powers. When China says Non-interference, it REALLY means Non-interference. Thus the land reform in S. Africa is an S. African affair, China has nothing to say and should say nothing.
I’d feel happier about it IF there was more information available.
Don’t forget China sponsored war in Angola and terrorism in SA.
I don’t disagree that Chinese investment beats AFRICOM activities, but at the same time it’s like being asked to choose between drowning or suffocating to death.
It’s not Africa’s choice AFRICOM decides. How many military bases has it got in Africa? Compared with China?
I am Kenyan, and what I know is that too many of my countrymen and Africans in general are clueless about the true nature of US intentions in Africa i.e retaining the decades old and hideously exploitative natural resource extractive practices of its multinationals, while thwarting and destroying Chinese influence and competition for the same resources where China pays top dollar for what it needs, from seafoods to minerals, enriching Africans and creating a more astutely aware African middle class that no longer accepts the previous western status quo.
This is AFRICOM’s true purpose, to retain by force US hegemony and access to those African resources such as Coltan from the DRC where US semi-conductor and microprocessor manufacturer Intel gets most of its supplies, or Cobalt, the principle ingredient that will drive the coming AI electric car revolution with DRC the source of huge percentage of global reserves. The Chinese are now effectively the biggest suppliers of DRC Cobalt, putting them in a position to influence and control prices to the advantage of Chinese manufacturers against those from the West.
Amid this volatile mix, the Chinese too are preparing or have already started putting up their own military bases to protect their Africa interests, with Djibouti’s naval base the first, and likely to be followed by other bases in West Africa, Angola and DR Congo. Obviously, China is signalling its intentions to fight to protect its commercial interests, even against a military superpower like the US.
It is Africans who are caught in the middle, and even worse, most have no idea that this is going on, and when the US and China come to blows, it is Africans who will suffer the most. Africa’s only hope for averting disaster is with China, Russia and Iran accelerating the de-dollarization of global trade to weaken the US currency as a reserve medium, forcing the US to cease printing dollars that finance its empire of bases around Africa and the world.
Neither, The African ubuntu trade route
“What does impress is that in three decades, a one-party system managed to multiply China’s GDP per capita by a factor of 17. From a Global South point of view, the lesson is “they must be doing something right.”
They don’t have a central bank owned by the Rothschilds so their economic growth is kickstarted by investment spending on infrastructure instead of serial asset inflation bubbles that only enrich parasitic plutocrats.
4 More Crue
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybcxIpb-R_0
Africa’s choice is not either or between Africom and the New Silk Road. Africa will chart a security arrangement that will enable the continent to value add and trade with rest of the world on mutually beneficial terms, in the spirit of ubuntu. This means no more land grabbing, no more exporting of raw resources only, and no more unchecked trade deficits. This is in the near future, there will be many unbelievers, but it will happen. There was a rich civilization in north east Africa ( Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia). The Greeks borrowed a lot from this African civilization, which is the basis of western civilization. The either or false dichotomy implicitly writes of Africa, there is saying “it is not yet over until the fat lady sings”.