China-Africa cooperation is a win-win partnership: Debt Trap talk is Western propaganda

By Allawi Ssemanda and Ndawula Shemei.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep on repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it,” Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels once noted. If you have been following current international affairs, you would have noticed that most of Western international commentators are arguably obsessed with China-Africa relations, especially when commenting on the thousands of China-funded or supported development projects in Africa. Despite clear and countless opportunities, born out from China-Africa relations, and backed by international scholars, experts and organizations, politicians and some commentators from the West continue to frame Sino-Africa relations, with many branding China’s development assistance as a “debt trap” and others calling it “debt diplomacy.”

Interestingly, despite many developed countries, such as the U.S, UK and almost all members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), having arrangements where they support development projects in African countries through loans, only development assistance from China to African countries is branded as a “debt trap.” Perhaps it is high time someone questioned those promoting the debt trap and debt diplomacy idea and called it what it is – Western propaganda tact whenever reporting about China-funded projects in Uganda and Africa in general.

It is not surprising that many international relations scholars and analysts branded as “bad journalism”, reflecting “poor understanding” of international contractual law, a report which suggested Uganda was set lose its international airport to China. While this was a spot-on characterization of such reporting, one can still argue that it fell short of addressing the purpose of such reporting fact such reporting, which, in my view, is to undermine great achievements African countries, Uganda inclusive, have realized as a result of mutually beneficial relations with China.

 

As Indira Gandhi taught us, questioning is the basis of all knowing; and those who don’t question are condemned to bondage. Possibly, African countries should ask: what are the motives of “debt trap” propaganda? Is it because its proponents love African countries so much that they are concerned that African countries will fall into these so-called traps? Why is it that infrastructure funding from Western countries, coming with conditions, is called development assistance while China’s condition-free assistance is branded a “debt trap”?

In my view, those promoting the so-called Chinese debt trap are hypocrites who have been grossly unfair not just to Africa but to the entire global south, for decades now. Despite knowing the importance of improved infrastructure in social and economic development, the West, unlike China, has for long been giving developing countries very limited support for the improvement of infrastructure, transport, and electricity, which are key for sustainable development. Moreover, even infrastructure support from the Paris Club and individual Western countries has been declining steadily for some time now. While on the surface the decline in funding to African countries is just a manifestation of budget constraints facing Western countries, a deeper analysis reveals that this decline is also due to the so-called liberal market ideology practiced by the West.

In addition, a critical analysis of the modus operandi of colonialists and imperialists reveals that they have never wished to see Africa liberated. That is why, for the West, it is a disaster when China offers mutually beneficial assistance to African countries, because such assistance will eventually make African countries more self-reliant, which is directly against the hegemonic aspirations of some western countries. This largely explains why Western commentators have coined frightening phrases, such as “debt trap” and “debt diplomacy” to scare African countries into abandoning their relations with Beijing.

Actually, western countries are worried that, as a result of win-win Sino-African cooperation, China is wining the hearts of African countries, essentially because Beijing respects African countries, and is happy when they all prosper. On the other hand, Washington’s relationships with African countries are premised on Washington’s desire to dictate how her African partners should run their affairs. In other words, in its foreign policy, the U.S seeks to outrightly exert its hegemony over African countries.

In his Opinion entitled Why America Must Lead Again, President Biden is very categorical. The guiding principle of his foreign policy is to place the USA at the head of the table, and selfishly govern the world.  Indeed, as argued by Walter A. McDougall, a professor of History and International Relations at the University of Pennsylvania, in his article, “Can the United States Do Grand Strategy?”, USA foreign policy has always been guided by imperialistic and selfish interests; “The real motive for USA foreign policy during all eras of history was not security or liberty, but the capitalist appetite for new markets, resources, and customers, at home and increasingly abroad. So, the American Dream was real, but therein lay tragedy because in order to meet the growing expectations of a growing population, the United States was ineluctably drawn to imperialism that belied its liberationist rhetoric.

It is, therefore, clear that the USA has never sought to establish a partnership with another country if that partnership undermines the total hold of the USA on that country.  To the west, seeing China building the capacity of African countries to end their dependency is a night mare. It is what John Mearsheimer calls the tragedy of great power politics. Therefore, as the USA and her allies brand China-Africa partnership a debt trap or debt diplomacy, African countries should know that, in context of sustainable development, the USA is not, and will never be, the best partner.

Actually, unlike Sino-Africa relations, the partnership between the Global North and the Global South has always represented the true meaning of a debt trap! The West’s development assistance and aid to the Global South, especially in Africa, has always been characterized by confidentialities, which are often incompatible with African countries. Whereas some scholars argue that partnership should involve a degree of equality among players, the West’s cooperation and is premised on Western hegemony; and the sstructural adjustment programs (SAPs) were a perfect illustration of this.

For decades, the Global North extended development assistance through the World Bank and IMF and their conditional assistance sometimes included telling African countries which sector to prioritize, the number of workers to retrench, and basically how governments should run, at times pouring funds into historical black holes, like political administration, which are riddled with corruption and bureaucracy. Broadly, one can argue that such forced priorities are tantamount to a debt trap as many of African countries stopped investing in domestic priorities in favour of what the World Bank and IMF agents dictated regardless of what African countries needed to take off economically.

With such facts known but ignored, and the continuous framing of China-Arica relations, one cannot help but conclude that branding China’s development assistance to African countries debt trap or debt diplomacy is propaganda based on selfish political interests of the west.

Allawi Ssemanda is Executive Director Development Watch Centre Think Tank, and Ndawula Shemei is a research fellow at the Centre.

 

Sino-Africa Skepticism and “Debt Trap” Talk Lack Facts: Critics Are Wrong.

By Allawi Ssemanda

China’s funded Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) – a project that will bring easy connections to countries of East-Asia, Africa, Europe, Middle East, China and the America’s has been viewed by critics of Sino-Africa relations with geopolitical lenses with frames insinuating that China imitated the project with hidden agenda. However, analysis and figures from credible international organizations such as World Bank and African Development bank underscores that BRI project – the first of it’s in the world’s history will provide African countries with greater opportunities which will enable these countries develop industrial capacity and infrastructure which are all key in the continent’s body (African Union) 2063 Vision.

Currently, about 29 international organizations and over 65 countries which represents 62% of the global population have either signed to join BRI or have shown interest in the project. This means that upon completion, the project will make the world’s largest market easy to access and traverse on road which is key in transportation and mobility of goods and services. Indeed, World Bank forecast suggest that as a result of BRI project, infrastructure, trade and investments links with China and several countries in BRI project will see improvement in trade and investments.

In Africa, over 20 countries including the continent’s largest and growing economies such as Nigeria, Ethiopia and Kenya have all joined the project. In East African Region, locals are already enjoying fruits of BRI project. For example, Djibouti-Addis Ababa Railway line which is part of silk road reduced the 759 kilometres journey from three days on road to just 12 hours a great breakthrough in mobility of goods and services.

Current figures indicate that Chinese investments in countries are estimated at over $200 billion, while China’s trade with countries that fall in the corridors of BRI have registered growth figures at $6 trillion for years 2014-2019 while the trade between China and BRI countries was worth $6,975 billion.

China’s declaration during 2018 Beijing Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) where China announced that African countries are key partners in the project proves BRI’s Strategic Rationale which emphasizes that Belt and Road Initiative is meant to build a “community of Common Destiney for Mankind” and easy mobility as well as connectivity of the world.

China’s commitment to invest and support African countries investments in industrial capacity which resonates well with AU’s 2063 vision makes the project an opportunity for the continent to realise her vision. Indeed, 2019-2021 FACOC Beijing Action Plan aims at using industrial capacity cooperation mechanism to ensure both China and African countries realise their objectives. Consequently, BRI project will in the long run undoubtedly result into aiding African countries to develop in in aspects of technological advancements.

Though critics of Sino-Africa Relations claim that China’s development assistance is a debt trap and unfounded claims that China is is hiding ambitions of neo-colonialism Africa, or to seize the African Countries’ properties in instances African countries fail to pay back, these claims seem far-fetched and African countries should really deny ‘Sino-Africa Skepticism’ listening ears for this will slow down the much-needed development cooperation between China and African countries. There are more opportunities BRI project is bringing and African countries should focus more on seizing these opportunities.

According to African Development Bank (ADB), African countries are faced with shortfalls in infrastructural funding budgets. ADB adds that to meet their infrastructure needs that will allow African Countries sustain their growing population and replace their ageing infrastructure, African countries need between $130-170 billion annually. Therefore, African countries need allies who can help them raise such funding and Chinese efforts should be supported rather than attaching it with all negativities.

  Aerial-photo-shows-the-Mazeras-Bridge-of-the-Mombasa-Nairobi-standard-gauge-railway-in-Kenya-May-12-2017.-Xinhua

It is worth noting that talks of “debt trap” are unfounded and based on speculations rather than facts. A recent study by Rhodium Group; BRI project has the best agreements with all those assessed having provisions that China can renegotiate, forgive or write off debts on countries under BRI project opposed to ‘Sino-Africa Skepticism’ who claim China will seize such projects.

Indeed, there are facts centrally to claims of the so-called debt trap. In 2015, China wrote off $40 million loans to Zimbabwe, in 2018, China announced it hard forgiven Botswana a loan totalling to $7 million in 2019, Addis Ababa announced China had written their debt which was incurred in BRI project.

Allawi Ssemanda is a senior Research Fellow at DWC. The views expressed in the this article are his own and not necessarily those of DWC.

DWC

Development Watch Centre

Kampala - Uganda

ADDRESS

Plot 212, RTG Plaza,3rd Floor, Office Number C7 - Hoima Road, Rubaga

CONTACT

+256 703 380252

info@dwcug.org

FOLLOW US
© DWC - All rights reserved - Cookies Policy - Privacy Policy