China and the EU divide the African pie

Until now, China and Europe hardly ever cooperate in Africa. The People’s Republic of China applies a non-interference policy. They have established relations with the despised regime of Sudan for example, and exploit oil there. Next to human rights, also commercial interests often lead to resentment between Europe and China. The Chinese get oil exploitation permissions and public tenders before the very eyes of European and American companies because they appeal to their imported Chinese workers, who do the job quicker, more efficient and for a lower price. On the other side there is the always hesitating European Union. One example: The developing countries are still waiting for the promised one billion euro to tackle their food crisis. That money may even never be there, because each EU member state decides independently whether they want to donate to that fund.
the cards reshuffled

The Chinese way

Although China’s part in the trade relations with Africa is three times smaller than the EU’s, China’s presence has changed the balance on the black continent. For example, thanks to a Chinese loan, Angola would be able to free itself from loans at the International Monetary Fund and from the conditions linked to that.
It’s not that China doesn’t have any terms, but it worries much less about sustainability issues or the risk of Africa once again getting involved in a pile of debts.
‘Whether the Chinese will support the European call for good governance and democracy in Africa is doubtful’, Romain Philippe of the ngo ActionAid says. ‘That is why I consider the text in which the EU asks China for a dialogue about Africa to be just a masquerade for talking with the Chinese about how to divide the African pie.’
Less sceptical is Member of European Parliament Dirk Sterckx, also president of the Chinese delegation of the European Parliament. ‘The Chinese are often pictured as the plunderers of Africa’s mineral wealth, but who are we to blame them? Moreover, China does have a long-term vision. When they start exploiting copper somewhere, they build a whole economy around it. That means that they plan to exploit longer than 5 or 10 years and that transparency, less corrupt regimes and safety are also of importance to them.’
pragmatic

Sustainability

The text of the Commission is indeed aiming at more ‘safety and peace, a condition for development’. The environment and food safety are also important issues, together with the very necessary construction of the African infrastructure, something the Chinese are extremely good at. Still the text is deliberately vague, call it ‘pragmatic’ – like an insider who helped at the redaction of the text does. ‘We are not abandoning our values, but we didn’t want to turn it into a litany either. Discussing behind closed doors or noting down all our reproaches in a European document are two very different things.’ Just like the American trialogue with China and Africa, the text does not contain much controversial issues.
‘We are building on some existing initiatives, like a consultation with China on sustainable FSC-wood. A few member states wanted us to put more stress on certain principles like human rights, but that would only obstruct the dialogue.’ Even when the text tackles the issues of safety and peace, it hardly does anything but stimulating the EU and China to organise peace operations together with the UN and the African Union. Of all the permanent UN – Security Council members, China is already one of the most generous suppliers of peacekeepers for Africa, meaning this paragraph will probably not cause any trouble.

the absence of Africa

According to the same insider, the statute of this so-called communication however could be very harmful. ‘This announcement is a high-policy document in which the European Commission reveals its intentions. For the Chinese it is of great symbolic value. If they publicly agree with this text without permission of the African countries, they fear that this might rankle. Because then it seems like the African fate is negotiated above their own heads.’

The big absentee in the invitation Towards Trilateral Dialogue and Cooperation is indeed Africa. Although the Commission calls for more support for pure African initiatives like the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM – African states rate each other on criteria of good governance), it is unclear who will participate as third partner of this trialogue in the future. The African Union? Broken-winged and not powerful enough. All 54 African countries? Unfeasible. Moreover, Europe has more than once divided the African countries itself, for example with the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA’s) for different African regions.

Africa as test case

China-experts are pessimistic for another reason. Professor Xuewu Gu of the Institute of East Asian Politics in Bochum, Germany, sees a clash of fundamentally different visions. ‘For Europe, Africa is a matter of development cooperation. For China, Africa is only of economic interest. Chinese companies consider this as a test case for their chances of succeeding in the world market. According to China, Europe’s golden times in Africa are over. That is why China will never comply with the European standards.’

Perhaps Beijing will endorse some demands of the EU – ‘to shush criticism and out of concern for its image in the world’ – but that would only be lip service. ‘Don’t forget that China is not a democracy and consequently does not want to defend human rights elsewhere in the world.’
incredible
According to Helmut Reisen of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) the call for trialogue is perhaps an opportunity to praise ourselves. Are our western standards and labels as decent as we believe them to be?

‘Do we really have to ask the Chinese to support the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative for the mining sector? It is an inefficient and untrustworthy instrument. And what about our official development cooperation? Even my wages are a part of that. I have some serious doubts about the false accountancy of the development cooperation. If we really want to talk with the Chinese, we should start from scratch and develop new standards together.’