NationStates Jolt Archive


China again! This time in Africa. They're everywhere!

Eutrusca
20-11-2005, 15:45
COMMENTARY: Actually, should the US and China get into a "war for the minds and hearts" of the African people, I can't see anything but good come out of it for struggling Africa. What say you?


China Wages Classroom Struggle
to Win Friends in Africa (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/20/international/asia/20beijing.html?th&emc=th)


By HOWARD W. FRENCH
Published: November 20, 2005
BEIJING - As the teacher, a career Chinese diplomat, spoke, his class of African diplomats scribbled furiously.

At the United Nations, China opposed the United States invasion of Iraq and has defended the right of Iran and other developing countries to use civilian nuclear power, said the teacher, Yuan Shibin. China, he noted pointedly, swept aside American objections to making an African the secretary general.

There was nothing subtle about his message, which will be repeatedly hammered home to the African diplomats during their three month, all-expenses paid stay at the Foreign Affairs University here. "China will always protect its own interests as well as those of other developing countries," Mr. Yuan said. By contrast, "U.S. national interests are not often in conformity with those of other nations, including China."

The classes are one element in a campaign by Beijing to win friends around the world and pry developing nations out of the United States' sphere of influence. Africa, with its immense oil and mineral wealth and numerous United Nations votes, lies at the heart of that effort.

Since 2000, Chinese trade with Africa has more than tripled, reaching nearly $30 billion in 2004. Beijing has signed at least 40 oil agreements with various African countries. Medical teams from China are training counterparts in numerous African countries and providing free equipment and drugs to help fight AIDS, malaria and other scourges.

"China is making a determined effort to make sure that its interests are represented," said Drew Thompson, a China scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "They are making sure they have a seat at the table, and that their relationships are comprehensive and not just economic. It isn't competitive in the way the cold war was. It's more a case of seeing to it that their message is on one of the many cable channels out there."

China's efforts to cultivate African ties date to the earliest days of the independence era on the continent, when Beijing armed and trained liberation movements and sent its workers by the thousands to build roads, railways and stadiums. Today, Chinese bankers and oil executives are as common a sight as Westerners in African capitals.

Meanwhile, several Chinese ministries, including Science and Technology, Agriculture, Commerce and Education, are working with African governments to train officials and develop human resources.

While the aid seems aimed at winning African hearts, the classes in diplomacy, constantly refined over the past decade, seem aimed more at swaying African minds. In addition, to impart a sympathetic view of China, they put forth a distinctly Chinese view of the world on questions about everything from economic development and history to democracy.

"Soft power is said to be coercive, persuading people to do what you'd like them to do, as opposed to hard power, which means forcing them to do what you want to do," said Qin Yaqing, vice president of the Foreign Affairs University, a state-run school that trains China's own diplomats and works with foreign trainees. "In traditional Chinese philosophy we have something similar to this, and it is called moral attraction."

China's appeal to Africa and much of the third world centers on the idea that nations will be drawn to an emerging superpower that does not lecture them about democracy and human rights or interfere in what Beijing considers "internal affairs."

The other pole of attraction is, of course, China's remarkable quarter century of economic growth, which has lifted it from the ranks of the poorest to make it one of the largest and most powerful economies.

For developing countries, many of which have grown disenchanted with the so-called Washington consensus, a mixture of lowered trade barriers, privatization, democracy and free markets, there is intense interest in trying to learn from China. There is talk of a rival "Beijing Consensus," which emphasizes innovation and growth through a social-market economy, while placing less emphasis on free markets and democracy.

Officially, China denies that it is promoting a competing program. "Yes, a lot of African countries have been coming to China," said Liu Jianchao, deputy spokesman of the Foreign Ministry. "But although people may call it a Beijing Consensus, we are not trying to pose as a model for other countries."
Liskeinland
20-11-2005, 15:53
You may as well stay allies with China while you can. I reckon war will break out eventually.
Eutrusca
20-11-2005, 15:59
You may as well stay allies with China while you can. I reckon war will break out eventually.
I honestly have my doubts about that.

1. Most of the interests of the Chinese don't seem to clash with the interests of the US. Taiwan seems to be the one exception, and even that can be finessed.

2. China has every reason to avoid armed conflict as the US does.

3. The US has hopefully learned it's lesson about getting involved in ground wars in Asia.

5. The supply lines in either direction are way too long.

6. Both China and the US are more interested in economics than in any putative clash with each other.

I can more easily imagine a continuing uneasy mutual adaptation to each other's needs and desires than any sort of armed clash.

Perhaps we could even negotiate a bi-lateral peace accord which could redound to the benefit of developing nations. [ being the eternal optimist here. ]
Super-power
20-11-2005, 16:01
So can I say it's an 'Invazn?'
Potaria
20-11-2005, 16:02
So can I say it's an 'Invazn?'

*slap*
Eutrusca
20-11-2005, 16:05
So can I say it's an 'Invazn?'
:confused:
Super-power
20-11-2005, 16:07
:confused:
Invasion + Azn (modified version of 'Asian') = Invazn - a massive invasion by people of Asian/Azn descent
Super-power
20-11-2005, 16:08
*slap*
*counterslap*
Eutrusca
20-11-2005, 16:09
Invasion + Azn (modified version of 'Asian') = Invazn - a massive invasion by people of Asian/Azn descent
Ah! LOL! Good one. :D
Eutrusca
20-11-2005, 16:12
A wise and far-seeing leader should propose a Sino-American alliance and call it something like "The Alliance for World Development." Sadly, there don't seem to be many of those coming down the pike. The current crop of politicians seem to be more concerned with where they stand on Gay marriage, God in the pledge of Allegiance, and whether or not we need to pull out of Iraq today or sometime in the next century. SIGH! :(
Eutrusca
20-11-2005, 16:17
Knowing the potential for clashes, what with forces from both China and America scattered all over the globe, we could even set up standing mechanisms for addressing any potential flash-points. Hmm. I'm kinda scaring myself here! Heh!
Celtlund
20-11-2005, 19:07
6. Both China and the US are more interested in economics than in any putative clash with each other.

Wasn't Japan interested in economics when it started its conquest of Asia before WW II? They invaded other countries because they needed the natural resources to support their economy. Don't you think the same thing could happen with China if diplomacy fails to get them what they need?
Colodia
20-11-2005, 19:12
So can I say it's an 'Invazn?'
:D
Sdaeriji
20-11-2005, 19:20
You may as well stay allies with China while you can. I reckon war will break out eventually.

They said that for 50 years about the USSR.
Celtlund
21-11-2005, 00:05
bump
Manganopia
21-11-2005, 00:07
For developing countries, many of which have grown disenchanted with the so-called Washington consensus, a mixture of lowered trade barriers, privatization, democracy and free markets, there is intense interest in trying to learn from China. There is talk of a rival "Beijing Consensus," which emphasizes innovation and growth through a social-market economy, while placing less emphasis on free markets and democracy.

This is in fact perhaps a good thing.
Neu Leonstein
21-11-2005, 00:18
This is in fact perhaps a good thing.
As long as they stick to the modern, Deng Xiao-Ping model, Chinese system. This isn't the first time China got involved in Africa, and back then it was about exporting Mao's version of the revolution, and many economies were royally f*cked.

An Example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Nyerere
German Nightmare
21-11-2005, 00:18
Wasn't Japan interested in economics when it started its conquest of Asia before WW II? They invaded other countries because they needed the natural resources to support their economy. Don't you think the same thing could happen with China if diplomacy fails to get them what they need?
It can be said that others have done likewise.
Grand Mortland
21-11-2005, 00:21
They said that for 50 years about the USSR.
Yes, but I doubt China will fall in the next 50 years. Tensions in the Cold War were very high. And those extra years beyond could be the final push. ;)
Karaska
21-11-2005, 00:22
As long as they stick to the modern, Deng Xiao-Ping model, Chinese system. This isn't the first time China got involved in Africa, and back then it was about exporting Mao's version of the revolution, and many economies were royally f*cked.

An Example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Nyerere

Lets be fair one of the reasons Africa is so screwed is because everyone was screwing with it. The europeans, the americans, the arabs, the asians. Hell if you can find me a continent (with the exception of Australia) that never screwed with it I'll die of shock
Grand Mortland
21-11-2005, 00:25
Lets be fair one of the reasons Africa is so screwed is because everyone was screwing with it. The europeans, the americans, the arabs, the asians. Hell if you can find me a continent (with the exception of Australia) that never screwed with it I'll die of shock
You didn't say Antarctica in exception nor in the whole paragraph. :P
Celtlund
21-11-2005, 00:25
It can be said that others have done likewise.

Sure other nations have invaded to get the natural resources of another country. My question is will China invade someone else if they can not get the resources they need through diplomacy?
Neu Leonstein
21-11-2005, 00:26
Lets be fair one of the reasons Africa is so screwed is because everyone was screwing with it. The europeans, the americans, the arabs, the asians. Hell if you can find me a continent (with the exception of Australia) that never screwed with it I'll die of shock
The problem was that many of the African nations weren't actually doing too bad in the fifties and early sixties. They usually had charismatic leaders who had brought independence, with broad public support, and everyone was full of hope.
And many then had a choice of either Capitalism or Socialism, and since the time after the war was Socialism's heyday, many chose it.
And the weird thing was: It actually worked in many cases. Nyere (to whom I linked) was the leader in Tanzania, and he developed a mix of the kind of dream the Atlee Government had developed in Britain and traditional African way of life. And it worked, because the people were putting in - he was considered the best guy on the planet for a while, popular everywhere.
Problem was that there were a few flaws with his program, and instead of looking at democratic means to solve them, he turned to Mao's China, and the place turned into a nuthouse.

No real danger of the same kind of thing resulting this time, but I just thought I'd add it to the discussion.
Grand Mortland
21-11-2005, 00:27
Sure other nations have invaded to get the natural resources of another country. My question is will China invade someone else if they can not get the resources they need through diplomacy?
Or they can get it through capitalism. Lots of Chinese companies are buying up foreign natural resource companies and those companies are very loyal to motherland China. So therefore, they don't require diplomacy or invasion.
Karaska
21-11-2005, 00:28
You didn't say Antarctica in exception nor in the whole paragraph. :P

*gasp* surely you've heard of the great Antartic war in which Antarctica sent nuclear seals to Africa in an attempt to take control of the sugar industry
Neu Leonstein
21-11-2005, 00:28
Sure other nations have invaded to get the natural resources of another country. My question is will China invade someone else if they can not get the resources they need through diplomacy?
Everyone can be bought, and China's got the funds.
I think I'll make a thread today about Chinese Communism and its history and what it might mean for today's China. Saw a documentary about it yesterday.
Grand Mortland
21-11-2005, 00:31
*gasp* surely you've heard of the great Antartic war in which Antarctica sent nuclear seals to Africa in an attempt to take control of the sugar industry
Are you serious? Have you not seen those penguins? They're all over the southern African peninsula. They've been at it for 100's of years!
German Nightmare
21-11-2005, 01:11
Sure other nations have invaded to get the natural resources of another country. My question is will China invade someone else if they can not get the resources they need through diplomacy?
Not in Africa, I reckon. China lacks the transport capability to start such an endeavor. Otherwise, it would be a "Long March" indeed...

But, one seems to forget that China prospered mainly from trade over the course of the last 5000 years. They actually really liked making a lot of money before the whole thing turned sour.

So, hopefully they won't.
Eutrusca
21-11-2005, 01:15
Sure other nations have invaded to get the natural resources of another country. My question is will China invade someone else if they can not get the resources they need through diplomacy?
I think that if they do, it will be some country relatively close to China geographicaly. They have the same logistics problems we would face with a war half a world away. And this wouldn't be any "police action" either. Any war between the US and China would be a knock-down, drag-out smackdown. Even as a soldier, I wouldn't wanna be involved in that one!
Celtlund
21-11-2005, 02:18
Or they can get it through capitalism. Lots of Chinese companies are buying up foreign natural resource companies and those companies are very loyal to motherland China. So therefore, they don't require diplomacy or invasion.

Strange. A Communist governent using Capitalism. Who would have thought it was possible to combine the two?
Celtlund
21-11-2005, 02:21
Not in Africa, I reckon. China lacks the transport capability to start such an endeavor. Otherwise, it would be a "Long March" indeed...

But, one seems to forget that China prospered mainly from trade over the course of the last 5000 years. They actually really liked making a lot of money before the whole thing turned sour.

So, hopefully they won't.

Prior to WW II the US lacked the transport capacity to carry out a war in the Pacific and Europe. A lot can change in a few years.
Celtlund
21-11-2005, 02:29
I think that if they do, it will be some country relatively close to China geographicaly. They have the same logistics problems we would face with a war half a world away. And this wouldn't be any "police action" either. Any war between the US and China would be a knock-down, drag-out smackdown. Even as a soldier, I wouldn't wanna be involved in that one!

It wouldn't take them long to build up the necessary forces to invade Africa or South America. Look at what Japan and Germany did before WW II. Look, what the US did during WW II. A country bent on war or on a wartime footing can do a lot in a hurry.

I agree it would be a knockdown, drag out. Hell, it would be WW IV. Yes, I said WW IV as we are now engaged in WW III. :(
Eutrusca
21-11-2005, 02:33
It wouldn't take them long to build up the necessary forces to invade Africa or South America. Look at what Japan and Germany did before WW II. Look, what the US did during WW II. A country bent on war or on a wartime footing can do a lot in a hurry.

I agree it would be a knockdown, drag out. Hell, it would be WW IV. Yes, I said WW IV as we are now engaged in WW III. :(
Supply interdiction is far, far easier now that it was in WWII. In effect, there are no "forward" or "rear" areas anymore. Anyone trying to move masses of men and equipment by sea or air would face opposing force projection that would boggle the mind.\

Envision a smaller, lighter version of the Global Hawk, with GPS guidance that could locate a resupply ship or aircraft anywhere within the Pacific AO and you'll be close to the mark.
Celtlund
21-11-2005, 02:59
Supply interdiction is far, far easier now that it was in WWII. In effect, there are no "forward" or "rear" areas anymore. Anyone trying to move masses of men and equipment by sea or air would face opposing force projection that would boggle the mind.\

Envision a smaller, lighter version of the Global Hawk, with GPS guidance that could locate a resupply ship or aircraft anywhere within the Pacific AO and you'll be close to the mark.

Guess you are right. I completely forgot about the advances in intel. Hell, an army can't serve beans anymore as the IR would pick up the heat from the farts. :D
Celtlund
21-11-2005, 03:01
Supply interdiction is far, far easier now that it was in WWII. In effect, there are no "forward" or "rear" areas anymore. Anyone trying to move masses of men and equipment by sea or air would face opposing force projection that would boggle the mind.\

Envision a smaller, lighter version of the Global Hawk, with GPS guidance that could locate a resupply ship or aircraft anywhere within the Pacific AO and you'll be close to the mark.

Guess you are right. I completely forgot about the advances in intel. Hell, an army can't serve beans anymore as the IR would pick up the heat from the farts. :D
Eutrusca
21-11-2005, 03:24
Guess you are right. I completely forgot about the advances in intel. Hell, an army can't serve beans anymore as the IR would pick up the heat from the farts. :D
Yeah, 'specially dem old farts like ours, eh? :D