Africa has got to be the most beautiful place on the planet along with Costa Rica of course. The people and animals are so special. We need to help these people get their independence back and the west needs to stop robbing these special people of their resources. They need help with means to grow food and start industry.

Well said John Walker. As for Mr Restore i dont blame you for your arrogance, i blame our porous and rubbish leaders.But i see a better and fairer world, If you happened to look around you Mr Restore, you would find that western economies are taking a due correction. I welcome full heartedly the contribution of China and co to our economies and hope this partnership continues to grow.

Wilbert,
I see you are still stuck in a hugely idealistic mode. Let’s get a few points straightened out first.

First, there is no such thing as ‘fair’ trade. If there are some weaker and some stronger states, trade is never fair. However, there is something called ‘mutually beneficial’ (relatively speaking), and something that’s of (virtually) one-sided benefit. The Western deals made mirror the latter rather than the former; the Chinese deal mirrors the former rather than the latter. That’s why I’ve placed so much emphasis on infrastructure rebuilding.

Secondly, you say that after a person has eaten s/he will wonder why he is in his state and demand political freedom. You make far too many assumptions to reach this conclusion. A human has to first not worry about where his/her next source of food will come from for their next meal in order to have the time to think about something else. Otherwise, they will risk not surviving. Once survival can be ensured for the foreseeable future, they can then be open to learning. It is only after they learn and are educated that they can learn the value of ‘freedom’ and ‘political rights’. (Just think why the better educated tend to participate more in political events?) So, your ideal may remain an ideal, but without completing the first step of feeding them, you will never be able to educate them, and thus will not waste time contemplating about ‘political freedoms’ when they can’t even ensure their own survival.

Thirdly, weapons. If China doesn’t supply the weapons, another major country will. It is impossible to stop weapons arriving on the African continent. So, why not encourage the countries’ leaders to do it legitimately in exchange for money instead? Do you think the Western countries are really any better in this respect, despite all their talk about ‘human rights’ and ‘freedom fighters’? They end up supplying both sides with weapons (or during the Cold War, each of the sides supplied one side in the wars within Africa). Who benefitted? Both the US and the Soviet Union. Who suffered? The poor Africans. And what if one side, the US or the Soviet Union, stopped supplying weapons? The other would supply weapons to both sides, through different personnel / companies. Let’s not be naive about the weapons trade.

Fourthly, do you truly believe that just because one leader claims that they are for democracy that they will not also oppress the people and milk their country dry of resources and money for their own (or own party’s) gain? What makes one dictator better than the other for the average citizen? You must get to the root of the cause of all these dictators getting into power in the first place - corruption.

Fifthly, China in some ways is a good example to learn for Africa. It was raised from the dumps less than 60 years ago, when parts of their country separated. They underwent terrible internal turmoil and self-destruction during the Cultural Revolution. Abuse of power and corruption was, and still is, rife. But in the last 30 years or so they have transformed from a limp, weak country to one that is now touted as the next superpower, and having the capability to rival the US sooner or later. What’s most important is that they did this completely without liberal democracy’s political rights. Africa has many ways to proceed.

But the past has shown that the West is only interested in keeping Africa weak, poor and divided in the name of democracy, whilst threatening embargos and economic retaliation in return for the virtual destruction of their economies. China at least practices the principle of non-interference and only deals with the political leaders. The deals they make will disproportionately enrich the political elite, but with extra schools, etc. being built, these average citizen in many African countries doing deals with China have a chance of rebuilding themselves.

Sixthly, who said these deals between various countries in Africa and China aren’t subject to ‘open bidding’? Did Western countries simply withdraw their offers overnight leaving China as the only bidder? Doing deals with China is in fact better realpolitik by these African countries. By creating competition for Africa’s resources (esp. between the USA and China) the African countries get a better deal. Most importantly, should one side suddenly decide to abuse their power and pressure the African country into accepting less fair deals in the future when they have become more reliant (e.g. ‘free markets’ in Africa, see my first post), the other side can step in. This is basically what’s happened - China would never have got a foothold in Africa if the West offered great deals to African countries. This is why I say if the West wants to reassert its foothold in Africa, it needs to be more pragmatic. It’s just business - or trade - to these major powers.

Seventhly, I am not going to defend Mugabe, but if you really think Tsvangirai is going to be much different after that many years in power (assuming he isn’t displaced or killed by some other power-hungry, ‘democracy-loving’ leader), you must be ridiculously naive. The only difference between them is that one was an anti-colonialist and the other is pro-Western. Also, please don’t think that overthrowing one dictator will solve all problems. If you put a half-competent leader in replacement, you will have even less efficiency, greater corruption, and with no security. If you think this kind of anarchy that causes civil war is the way forward to make the people strong (so that they can secure their political freedom) you must be dreaming.

Last but not least, one has to understand that the concept of democracy, and human rights, is the END RESULT of good governance, and NOT the solution to all problems. Have you not seen many recent ‘immature’ democracies failing because they were not ready for it? It has caused more suffering to the people and made even more people fall below the poverty line. First you need to attend to the basics. Feed the people. Clothe them. Then educate them. Once you have a stronger infrastructure and society, they can then demand political rights and ensure a better leader succeeds. If you don’t let the people be stronger first, you only guarantee even worse repression and wiping out of these ‘freedom lovers’.

John Walker / Nduka Tolefe

There is no such thing as a free lunch, China is not in Africa after the goodness of its heart. Whatever roads and infrastructure China is building in Africa it is being paid for it. If China tendered for these projects openly and won them fairly, then no one will have cause to complain. But knowing Africa’s leaders as we all do and how corrupt they are; they is no such thing as an open and transparent deal. And the Chinese for their part, what are they getting for their unflinching public support of these dictators. You have to be very naïve to say, nothing!

What is of even greater concern to me as an Africa is the dear, dear price the ordinary people of Africa have paid for China’s continued support of dictators like Al Bashir and Robert Mugabe. It is the Chinese made weapons which are being used in Sudan to mow millions of innocent and defenceless people. China is well paid for the weapons (it is not only roads, etc China is supplying, John) and clearly does not care against who they are being used. A few months ago a whole ship load was delivered to Mugabe and he had just declared war on the electorate because the dared vote for his political opponent!

So to paraphrase you John, if the West want a foot hold in Africa, they too should be more like the Chinese – milk the continent for whatever they can get and forget about the tragic suffering that ordinary Africans! Well that would not be the first time the West has done that, in fact many in the West are doing just that. As an Africa I do not want to suffer and condemn the West, East and their local African proxies for making me suffer. What I am concerned about is giving the ordinary African – not the British, Chinese or Africa’s dictator- a foothold on Africa!

Nduka Tolefe you said “lot of people lay too much emphasis on human rights, but they forget that a human being has to be well fed first before his brain can exercise any kind of human right.” Actually the right to food is just one of the many economic rights among others like the right to work, the right to be paid a fair wage, etc. The other rights are the political rights; the right to life, free and fair election, freedom of expression, etc.

African leaders are notorious for down playing the political rights in favour of political each time they are asked to account for their repeated denial or out right violation of the people’s political rights included the most important of all- the right to life! They have argued that they are concentrating on delivering the roads, hospitals, school, food, etc. etc. which are of greater importance to their people than the political rights.

To a starving man a bowl of food is certainly more important than freedom of expression; who would dispute that! The truth is never that simple however. After he has had his bowl of food the man must now ask why he ever found himself in that state; he has to if he does not want to be stuck in that rut! And to do ask the pertinent questions, get the honest answers and do for him to DO something about it – he must have the political rights.

Leaders the world over will promise you anything and when they know they will never be held accountable as is the case in Africa, they promise heaven on earth. Mugabe promised us mass prosperity the reality is millions in that country are facing starvation. Only last week Mugabe had a whole fleet of the latest model of Mercedes Benzes delivered to a select few, the ruling elite and by contrast School Teachers’, considered unimportant to Mugabe’s political game, monthly wage is just enough to buy one kg of meat! Of course if the people of Zimbabwe had their full political rights they would have forced Mugabe to address their economic needs seriously or elect someone!

Nduka, would you say the right to life is less important than the right to food? I would say the right to life. Not that I accept the either or choice before us, because we can have both. I only put emphasis on the political rights because they are certainly more important but also because without the political rights you can not fight for the economic rights, if these too should be denied. The truth is the economic rights are the first denied and to silence you the political rights are taken away too!

For those who compare China to Western imperialism, nothing is ever said of the different styles of deals that are made. Unconditional loans vs. conditional, building infrastructure vs. destroying it, sending people to help out vs. seizing a country’s people and forcing them to work elsewhere, paying full value / market price + a bit more for goods vs. forcing unfair trade relations (primary goods exported, secondary/tertiary goods imported at a massive overvaluation). Anybody else notice the difference between Chinese influence and Western influence?

China’s help especially with infrastructure, e.g. building roads, rails, setting up factories, repairing buildings, and unconditional loans which do benefit the population in some way (after all even corrupt leaders aren’t seizing 100% of these loans, right?) cannot in any way be compared to Western colonialism. The strongest countries can exercise this freely instead of having ‘freedom’ imposed on them at the expense of having enough to eat on a daily basis. China’s help gives everyone on the continent of Africa something the West never gave them - the right to self-determination.

If the West wants to reassert their foothold on Africa, they need to wake up to reality. Preaching about human rights won’t help. Renegotiating deals to give Africans a much better deal to improve their political and economic relations is essential. It is ironic for one to judge the donor countries’ system then claim they are fighting for Africa’s self-interest. The donor country’s internal political system has little bearing on economic relations providing both the donor and the country receiving the donation believe in the value of money and aren’t hugely ideologically slanted. The time for cheap talk about human rights is over. No person can be truly free if they are starving or thirsty, because they are always dependent on someone / something else. Food, or money for food has a more pragmatic benefit. People are only truly amenable to education if they aren’t starving. This is what is meant by actions speak louder than words.

Feisal Mohamed Derie
You ask a fair question; why the ICC is pursuing Al Bashir but not Husni Mubarak or Robert Mugabe? I take it you believe that the other two leaders too have a case to answer for. Indeed I would even go so far as to say there many other dictators in Africa who too should be charged for very serious crimes against humanity. So why Al Bashir alone; it is my ardent that 1) charging Al Bashir would send a clear warning to other dictators and would be dictators that the wheel of justice may turn very slowly but it does turn. And that they will be asked to account for their wrong doings some day. 2) With Al Bashir in the docks the ICC can go after the next dictator.
Aliou
It is true the West is certainly guilty of hypocrisy and double standards in its dealings with Africa. China certainly played no part in the slave trade or colonisation of Africa but that should not stop us see China for what she really is- an evil and ruthless big brother. China has openly supported Africa’s dictators and propped them up regardless of the suffering the later were causing. True the Chinese government has a poor record on good governance and human rights even within China itself. But, that is of no comfort to the people in Sudan or Zimbabwe suffering under dictatorship the Chinese have been propping up for decades now!
Africa’s anger against the West exploitation and repression is completely justified and clever leaders like Robert Mugabe have used that historic fact to hide their own present wrong doings. He has repeatedly presented his argument in such a way that to say he was wrong one had first to admit that the West did nothing wrong. Admit the West made mistakes, and he wanted the subject closed; as if what he has done since is insignificant or irrelevant.
Africa has suffered enough and we need to move on and give our people hope of a better life. That will never ever happen until we learn to see what is before us in its totality and not the polarised image the West, East or some dictator want us to see! Leaders like Al Bashir and Robert Mugabe have committed very serious human rights violations against our own African people. It is amazing that so many fellow Africans should be struggling to condemn these dictators for no other reason other than the West condemned it and they can not be seen to be on the same side with the West!