By Laiyin Yuan
Author: Shang Xi
Translator: Laiyin Yuan
Published on: 04/03/2015
Source: Southern Metropolis Daily (SMD)
Original text (in Chinese): http://epaper.oeeee.com/epaper/A/html/2015-04/03/node_2748.htm
This article is a trenchant diagnosis of the underlying problems in Sino-Africa economic relations. During the recent Third Africa-China Young Leaders Forum, the Deputy Secretary General of the China Foundation for Peace and Development suggested that the Chinese government and companies should rethink how they do business in Africa. More local efforts should also be encouraged in order to enhance people-to-people exchanges between both sides. It is a useful introspection for the Chinese to find a way to “clear its name” in African countries.
---- Laiyin Yuan (translator)
China has been providing aid for thousands of projects in Africa. In addition to famous ones such as Ethiopia’s African Union Conference Center, Tanzania’s Nyerere Conference Center, and Mozambique’s National Stadium, there are also a large amount of highways, railways, airports, hospitals, schools, etc.
However, with more and more Chinese people moving to Africa, conflicts between them and locals are intensifying. On the eve of the Third Africa-China Young Leaders Forum, a Chinese restaurant in Kenya provoked widespread condemnation because it barred local Kenyans from entering after 5:00 pm (read more here - Laiyin).
During this forum, the China Foundation for Peace and Development (CFPD) held a dialogue focusing on “People-to-People Exchange and Sino-African Relations.” Ji Ping, CFPD’s Deputy Secretary General, created a new word “Afrina” combining “Africa” and “China” in his speech, hoping the two sides can truly understand each other on a non-governmental level.
“Now the most important thing in Sino-African relations is people-to-people exchange, and everyone has responsibility in it,” said Ji Ping during an exclusive interview with our reporter after the forum. China’s aid in Africa should “break the whole into parts” and penetrate into the African grassroots.
Showing posts with label Soft Power. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Soft Power. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 7, 2015
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
A lesson in Soft Power
Posted on December 17, 2013 by Nkem
On Africa’s earliest interaction and trade with China, Philip Snow in The Star Raft: China’s Encounter with Africa had the following to say:
The soft approach is also no longer unique to the Chinese as the US, the UK, and Germany are taking a page out of their playbook and reinforcing their diplomatic relations with African states. In today’s world of multi-polarity and increasing options, despite the retention of the US’s hegemonic influence, the use of soft power is at times more effective than the use of hard power. Easy access to information has increased the value of critical discourse. I would argue that there is a need to push this discourse and to continue to examine foreign policy successes and failures for African states engaging with external actors and the reverse to flesh out best practices and reduce redundancy and ineffectiveness.
Easier said than done.
On Africa’s earliest interaction and trade with China, Philip Snow in The Star Raft: China’s Encounter with Africa had the following to say:
A Star Raft was an expedition which carried to the exotic lands the star-like radiance of an imperial ambassador, and the object of its voyage was to win for the emperor the allegiance of distant peoples. The exchange of goods was laden in Chinese eyes with a symbolic significance far outweighing the value of the goods themselves. By trading with the fleet, the African coastal states were paying the Ming emperor the homage they owed him as the sovereign of the world (p. 27).The quotes above are some of my favorite from Snow’s now dated but still relevant tome on early Chinese interaction with Africa. In many ways his observations can be reframed to represent aspect of current permutations of Sino-African relations in today’s increasingly multi-polar world. For instance, Chinese insistence on African acceptance of the One China Policy as the foundation for diplomatic relations is a symbolic acquiescence to the People’s Republic of China’s communist party’s government’s value for sovereignty. Similarly, Chinese courtship and respect, for economically weak and culturally different African states have won them favor and political support in the international political arena. Although early Chinese relations with African freedom fighting efforts sought to support and promote a socialist/communist agenda, recently the Chinese have not urged African states to adhere to any particular political convictions. But it is naive to believe that the Chinese are not following an economic or political agenda in Africa. Just as the Star Rafts brought glory and prestige to the Emperor, Chinese engagement in Africa is in pursuit of domestic Chinese objectives; much like everyone else is in Africa to pursue their own objectives.
How different all the same these Chinese visitors were from the Europeans who arrived in Africa seventy years later. Travelling in thousands, armed to the teeth, the Chinese were not aggressive. Unlike the Portuguese they stormed no cities and conquered no land. Even if the sixteenth-century novelist was right to describe an initial conflict, he also makes it clear that the Chinese were tactful, anxious to avoid disturbing the small coastal states any more than was necessary to achieve their basic ends. Unlike the Portuguese they refrained from plunder. Instead they coaxed the coastal rulers into trading by presenting them with gifts of coloured silk. They did not burn, as the Portuguese would, with the urge to impose their religious convictions, to lay siege to African souls. All they sought from Africans was a gesture of symbolic acquiescence in the Chinese view of the world. Mogadishu and Brava, for their part, were happy enough with the relationship to send their envoys to Peking three further times while the Chinese Columbus was on the seas. The Chinese accepted, because the Chinese treated a weak and strange people with courtesy and restraint (p.29).
The soft approach is also no longer unique to the Chinese as the US, the UK, and Germany are taking a page out of their playbook and reinforcing their diplomatic relations with African states. In today’s world of multi-polarity and increasing options, despite the retention of the US’s hegemonic influence, the use of soft power is at times more effective than the use of hard power. Easy access to information has increased the value of critical discourse. I would argue that there is a need to push this discourse and to continue to examine foreign policy successes and failures for African states engaging with external actors and the reverse to flesh out best practices and reduce redundancy and ineffectiveness.
Easier said than done.
Monday, June 17, 2013
SADC: Tomorrow: U.S. Competitiveness in Africa w/ Members of Congress
|
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)