Africans questioning Chinese

ARTICLE: Namibians Say Inquiry on China Will Expand By By SHARON LaFRANIERE and JOHN GROBLER, New York Times, July 31, 2009

An easy prediction of mine, as predictions go: the reality that China's penetration into Africa, because of its mercantilist bent and tendency toward corruption, would generate significant local frictions.

Expect more of this. It is all part of the re-negotiating process that will never end.

(Thanks: Ken Nalaboff)

Comments

[stuart abrams]

I know you have rejected the term "colonialist" to describe Chinese activities in Africa. Perhaps it is a matter of semantics - I use the term "colonialist" in an economic sense similar to the way you are using the term "mercanitilist." Whatever. It seems to me that when a Core power interacts with the Gap without adhering to the rule sets of the Core, something akin to colonialism is going to happen. If China deals with Africa through bribery, it is almost inevitably going to find itself embroiled in conflicts throughout Africa by being tied to unpopular corrupt regimes, which will put China in a position of having to prop up those regimes militarily. The result comes pretty close to colonialism under any definition. I would suggest that you were unduly harsh on Obama's Africa speech a few weeks ago. However, perhaps instead of lecturing the Africans on the benefits of good government, we should direct more persuasion at the Chinese (and the Indians) to get them to join into some sort of international agreement to adhere to something like the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

[Tom Barnett]

It's imprecise to use colonialism strictly for economic relations, because you're implying a political overlay that just isn't there.

Then there's the normative content of the word.