ZHAO Yongsheng: Sino-African symbiosis not overdependence

Illustration: Peter C. Espina/GT

According to Radio France Internationale, a recent research report released by Standard & Poor's demonstrates that African economies are increasingly dependent on China, as China has become the largest investor and importer of raw materials from Africa.    

Undoubtedly, China's influence in Africa has been reinforced gradually with joint efforts of the two sides. However, if we also consider their relative dependence on each other, the reality is exactly the opposite: China's need for raw materials and energy makes it more dependent on Africa than the other way around. Furthermore, it is meaningless today to discuss the question of relative dependence between Africa and China, because what we value in this relationship is the wellbeing and benefits generated for both sides. In addition, dependence is a variable that is really difficult to precisely quantify, especially in the case of Africa and China, due to the limited availability of data.

How can this specific new relationship be described then? In my opinion, it is a real "symbiosis effect" instead of an overdependence phenomenon. I use the word symbiosis to describe Africa and China because symbiosis refers to a close relationship between two entities of different kinds, which benefits both sides and the concept perfectly applies to the Sino-African relationship, which is much more than "who depends on who" or "who is overdependent on who."

Actually, "symbiosis vs. conditionalities" signifies the role of today's China vs. yesterday's West in Africa. Before China, Western societies "controlled" the African continent for several centuries from colonization to independence, and from independence to post-colonization. If I use one word to summarize Western policies vis-à-vis Africa during previous decades, it will be "conditionality," which specifies numerous complex conditions for Africans to obtain financial aid or other forms of assistance from the European and North American countries. 

"Conditionality" is in fact an ideology enforced on recipient countries from donor countries, knowing that this Western ideology was born in the specific Western social, legal and economic environment, and that any experiment to simply "plant" a Western ideology in African soil can only lead to failure. This is what has happened between the advanced industrial countries and African underdeveloped countries during so many recent decades.

Before China's arrival, African countries had no other choice but to accept the harsh terms of Western conditionality. Nevertheless, the acceptance of these terms by Africans was just a disguised obedience, and the majority of conditionality terms were never respected. The relationship between Western and African countries under the terms of conditionality has been just like the game of Tom and Jerry. 

Fortunately, after the adoption of the reform and opening-up policy, China has quickly become a new economic player in the international arena, especially in terms of outbound direct investment (ODI). Moreover, since the eruption of the global financial crisis in 2008, the ODI capacity of the Western world has significantly decreased, while the Chinese government is worried about  excess capital and production capacity. Hence, the global financial crisis or the European sovereign debt crisis proved to be a turning point in the West-Africa and China-Africa relationship. After that, China has been dominant in the African continent.

Different from the Western countries, the Chinese have their own recipes for Africa. First, the Chinese policy is based on what I term as "de-conditionality," which means the separation of economics from politics, of economic aid and assistance from political conditionalities. Second, different from the Western countries that colonized Africa, China has no such entanglement or historical "baggage" with Africa.

Third, and most importantly, China has responded to the new needs of African countries with the so-called "turn-key projects" or package services in broad sense.

There is the example of a petrochemical bidding competition where China won against the US and France. One explanation is that this project is so large that neither the US company nor the French company had sufficient capital available and the Chinese company won on this basis.

What China has established is a new type of relationship between Africa and the outside world which differs completely from the traditional Africa-West relationship. This new Sino-African relationship is the "symbiosis effect" which offers an opportunity for China to invest with its capital surplus and deliver goods. It also offers an opportunity for Africa to receive Chinese investment without having to deal with dazzling Western conditionalities and to possess the production capacity transferred by China including necessary technologies concerned. And it offers an opportunity for Africa to discover the huge Chinese market for its raw materials and energy, and this solves the big problem of China's lack of raw materials and energy sources.

None of these arguments mean that what China does in Africa is perfect. But in my opinion, compared with the Western countries, the Chinese shall make progress in their integration with the local communities, i.e. more participation in local activities. This will prevent future segregation, which is otherwise bound to happen if the budding problem of integration is not well tackled. 

The world changes, and so does Africa. China fits in with African needs and succeeds. The West shall also learn to change its strategy toward Africa, especially in terms of "conditionalities." More than inter-dependence, the Africa-China's relationship is a real "symbiosis effect" - good for Africa, good for China, and it may also be good for the West.