Every three years, Beijing hosts a major Africa summit. China is concerned with satisfying its hunger for raw materials – it is not very interested in the continent’s problems. Africa is perceived as a mere object, not least because it does not speak with a unified voice.
The media-effective handshakes in Beijing seemed to have no end this week: delegations from almost all 54 African states had traveled to the ninth China-Africa Summit at the invitation of the head of state and party leader Xi Jinping. There was no shortage of non-binding pleasantries during the three-day event. There was also something absurd about it. At the same time, two rival generals and their armies were at war with each other in Sudan – a tragedy that was largely ignored in Beijing.
More than 15,000 people have already fallen victim to the war, which has been going on for a year and a half; according to the UN, it has now triggered the world’s largest refugee crisis. International organizations are warning of famine, partly because the warring parties are deliberately making aid impossible.
Of course, it is not primarily up to China to stop this war. But as Africa’s most important financier and largest trading partner by far, it should use its influence to pressure the Sudanese war leaders – and the African heads of state gathered in Beijing – to end the war immediately.
Instead, Xi recently received one of the Sudanese war criminals, General Abdelfatah al-Burhan. Chinese companies signed several investment agreements with Sudan on Thursday regarding nuclear power plant, port and airport projects.
Businesses that primarily use China
Beijing could not demonstrate more clearly that its courting of Africa is not about promoting peace, but about business. Further evidence of this is that, unlike Western donors, China provides its support free of political conditions such as human rights, the rule of law and other forms of good governance.
There is nothing wrong with business in and of itself. After all, the sharp increase in Chinese interest in Africa since 2000 has contributed to the construction of roads, ports and railway lines costing billions of dollars. At least some of these infrastructure projects make everyday life easier for millions of Africans and contribute to the development of some regions.
But these are also deals that benefit China more than the Africans, as they facilitate the transport of raw materials that the Middle Kingdom so urgently needs, such as oil, rare earths, copper, cobalt and gold.
In addition, Chinese investments are usually granted in the form of loans. Beijing has now promised the continent a further 42 billion Swiss francs over the next three years until the next China-Africa summit. For several countries, including Zambia, Malawi, Ghana and Ethiopia, these loans have turned out to be a debt trap. They are threatened with insolvency.
Tempting markets
When economists talk about potentially high growth rates for the African economy, this has a lot to do with population growth. Today, there are 1.4 billion people living on the continent – about as many as in the whole of China or India – and according to UN forecasts, there will be 2.5 billion by 2050.
China is not the only country eyeing this enormous sales market. The EU and countries such as Indonesia, Great Britain, South Korea and Russia are also hosting Africa summits. At the beginning of the year, the USA sent none other than Vice President Kamala Harris on a charm offensive through Ghana, Tanzania and Zambia.
African heads of state can be pleased about this level of interest. But they should also ask themselves whether it would not make sense for them to represent common positions more often. If they spoke together more often, for example as an African Union focused on the continent’s most pressing problems, this would strengthen their political influence. This would ultimately also benefit the population in the African states.
This idea may be utopian, but the reality in which African states compete with each other, wage cruel wars and remain at the mercy of foreign powers is a poor alternative.