In The Media
Josh Kurlantzick
{
"authors": [
"Josh Kurlantzick"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"China"
],
"topics": [
"Economy"
]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
Other
Beijing’s Safari: China’s Move into Africa and Its Implications for Aid, Development, and Governance
Published on Nov 1, 2006
Source: Carnegie Endowment
China’s economic and cultural relationship with Africa provokes serious questions in the West about international aid, human rights and energy security. On the eve of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) in Beijing this November 3-5, how should Western nations view China’s burgeoning relationship with Africa, and what does it suggest about China’s new approach to global diplomacy?
In a new Carnegie Policy Outlook, Beijing’s Safari: China’s Move into Africa and Its Implications for Aid, Development, and Governance, Carnegie Visiting Scholar Joshua Kurlantzick argues that Beijing has quickly become a major donor and investor across Africa, and has savvily used multilateral forums like FOCAC to cultivate African elites. As a result, China now rivals the United States, France, and international financial institutions for influence on the continent. Chinese loans and grants to African nations, which now reach nearly $3 billion, have become much more enticing than condition-laden aid from international institutions. Beijing also has wooed African nations with aid for infrastructure, a ban on export tariffs for the poorest nations, and its status as a market for African goods and services.
Chinese engagement in Africa could be a catalyst for positive change on the continent. But the China-Africa relationship also could be damaging to African politics, environments, and debt loads. Kurlantzick argues that China should develop a broader strategy of influence in Africa – using soft power to build popularity among African publics, rather than reinforcing authoritarian regimes. China should also create a permanent aid bureaucracy capable of working with other donors.
Kurlantzick further argues that the United States, Europe, and international financial institutions should not only call for China to be a stakeholder in Africa but give China a stake. This includes considering expanding China’s role in the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, and helping China develop a permanent aid bureaucracy. Making China a stakeholder in Africa now will encourage positive Chinese leadership in mediating conflicts, promoting development, and tackling non-traditional security threats in the future.
This is a web-only publication.
Click on the link above for the full text of this Carnegie publication.
About the AuthorJoshua Kurlantzick is a visiting scholar in the China Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Kurlantzick is assessing China’s relationship with the developing world; his book on China’s soft power will be released in early 2007.
About the Author
Josh Kurlantzick
Former Visiting Scholar, China Program
A special correspondent for The New Republic, a columnist for Time, and a senior correspondent for The American Prospect, Kurlantzick assesses China’s relationship with the developing world, including Southeast Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
- Fighting Terrorism With Terrorists
- India is Divided Over Its Ties to the US: Push and PullIn The Media
Josh Kurlantzick
Recent Work
More Work from Carnegie China
- The Plaza Accord and Its Relevance for ChinaCommentary
The Plaza Accord was not an externally imposed punishment of Japan but part of a broader restructuring that Japanese economists and policymakers themselves recognized was necessary. Its effects were undermined, however, when Tokyo responded to the resulting slowdown with policies that exacerbated investment, credit expansion, and the very imbalances the adjustment was intended to resolve.
Michael Pettis
- Untangling the Nuclear Knot: A Constructive Agenda for Managing China’s Nuclear Relations with the United States and Its AlliesPaper
The nuclear relationship between China and the United States is increasingly shaped by widening perception gaps rather than deliberate strategic design.
Tong Zhao
- Who Paid for China’s Last Debt Cleanup, and Who Will Pay for the Next?Commentary
China’s banking crisis in the 2000s was resolved by transferring the costs to households through financial repression—a decision that recapitalized the banks while exacerbating the structural imbalances that continue to shape the Chinese economy today.
Michael Pettis
- Caught in the Middle: Chinese Biotech Firms’ Divergent Responses to U.S. SanctionsCommentary
Chinese biotech companies have been on the receiving end of U.S. economic coercion. Yet their responses have differed significantly because firm and state interests are not uniformly aligned. For Washington, treating all Chinese tech firms the same, irrespective of their actual interests, risks pushing them farther into Beijing’s corner.
Xue Gong
- Are Data Centers the Solution to China’s Renewables Excess Capacity?Commentary
China’s latest energy plan explicitly calls for integrating data centers into the electricity system, particularly connecting them to green energy. It appears Beijing wants to use compute as a source of domestic demand to absorb renewables excess capacity.
Damien Ma
