The growth of neocolonial tendencies, the current geopolitical developments, and the competition among external countries for African resources – these are some of the topics discussed recently by researcher and business analyst Lipton Matthews in an interview with Kester Kenn Klomghem. Matthews is associated with media outlets and institutions such as Merion West, The Federalist, American Thinker, Intellectual Takeout, Mises Institute, and Imaginative Conservative.
Matthews focuses particularly on the significant contribution of China to various sectors of African economies, especially infrastructure development over the past three decades, and also on the potential consequences of cooperation between Russia and China in Africa.
He also speaks about the positive prospects and importance of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and encourages African political and business leaders to work together to strengthen trade networks within the continent, address new challenges, and seize opportunities to build a better Africa, whose population is estimated at 1.4 billion people. Below are excerpts from the interview:
What are your general thoughts on China's and Russia's involvement in Africa? How would you compare these two foreign actors in Africa?
Matthews: African experts, such as Peter Kagwanja and Rahamtalla Mohamed Osman, have rejected claims that China is colonizing Africa. In general, African leaders view China as a driving force for the modernization of the region. For example, between 2001 and 2002, Chinese foreign direct investment in sub-Saharan Africa grew by 53 percent year-on-year, significantly exceeding US investment, which only increased by 14 percent. In addition, African countries were not among the states that criticized China at the UN for its treatment of the predominantly Muslim Uyghur population.
Nevertheless, there are reports in the West that portray China's influence in Africa negatively, but in reality, Africans appreciate China's role in the region. Since the Cold War, developing countries have considered China to be an ally. Therefore, the rise of China is viewed favorably by African political leaders because they believe it represents the aspirations of the developing world.
At the same time, China has greater legitimacy in Africa because it did not have a colonial empire in this region. Similarly, Russia had an empire in Europe, but not in Africa, so Russians can present themselves as liberators. Moreover, they were never part of the political West and cooperated with Africans against Western hegemony during the Cold War. Therefore, Africans are likely to accept Russia as an ally and will not perceive its involvement in the region as a manifestation of imperialism.
Although Russian investments in Africa do not reach the level of Chinese investments, it seems that Russian actors have identified this region as a source of raw materials and are taking advantage of the opportunities that the continent offers. According to Matthews, Western commentators fail to recognize that Russia and China are using their differences from the West to gain political influence in Africa. He believes that the West is losing the battle for dominance in Africa for ideological reasons. For example, Western countries promote classical liberalism, while Russia and China support a state-oriented approach to development. Because the doctrines of these powers are consistent with the left-leaning philosophy of Africa, their actions, according to him, generate less resistance.
Do you also see rivalry emerging in geopolitics, a systematic confrontation with the United States and Europe, especially France, in Africa? And what if China and Russia were to join forces?
```Matthews: In geopolitics, there is always rivalry, but I believe the tactics of Russia and China have been misunderstood. Both countries play a role as disruptors in Western politics. Their goal is to foment chaos in Western democracies and accelerate tensions, and they are succeeding on a large scale in the age of social media. Unlike the West, Russia and China are led by brilliant strategists. These Russian and Chinese strategists have convinced Western strategists that they want to directly challenge Western hegemony.
In reality, however, they are only seeking to create their own spheres of influence separate from Western interference. Russia wants to limit the presence of the United States in Eastern Europe, and China envisions creating a sinocentric order in Asia. If the United States and the broader Western community want to prevent the rise of China and Russia, they must use soft power and cultivate goodwill among developing countries. Developing countries appreciate the approach of Russia and China based on non-interference. According to Matthews, if Western countries pursued a less moralizing foreign policy, they could shift the balance of power in their favor.
Compared to America, China and Russia are technologically backward and are "paper tigers," but they understand the importance of ideas. Western countries believe they are fighting a geopolitical war, while in reality, they are competing for ideological dominance. For example, Russia is popular in Mali, unlike France, because it can portray itself as a victim of Western imperialism through propaganda, even though Russia itself was an imperial power and today exerts its influence in Eastern Europe.
Another factor is that in this case, the colonial power was France, not Russia, so Russia can always present itself as a more legitimate partner. At the same time, Russia and China realize that war is not necessary to weaken the West, because Western countries no longer trust themselves, according to Matthews. Across the West, white people are attacking Western history, and demoralized people are not motivated to fight wars. Therefore, China and Russia have already won this battle.
Furthermore, China and Russia do not want to join forces to defeat the West, because that is not necessary, according to Matthews. It is clear that the West is its own worst enemy. At the same time, Russia and China are competing for influence, so it is more likely that one of these partners will align with the West to limit the options of its rival. According to him, if Western leaders want to prevent the rise of their rivals, they must employ foreign policy experts who truly understand ideas and history.
Do you think it is appropriate to use the term "neocolonialism" in relation to several foreign actors operating in Africa? Which countries do you think are neocolonizers?
Matthews: First, it must be recognized that colonialism is not a new phenomenon and is not exclusively a European affair. History also records examples of Europeans colonizing predominantly white areas in Europe. For example, Sweden once had its own empire in Europe. However, colonization is an expensive undertaking, and according to the late Paul Bairoch, there is a negative relationship between economic growth and empire.
Many countries have actually experienced remarkable economic growth without owning empires. On the other hand, according to Matthews, we should abandon the idea that colonialism is inherently exploitative. Most people would prefer sovereignty over colonial rule, but his point is that colonial status doesn't necessarily hinder economic growth, and some African colonies experienced faster growth during the colonial era. We should prioritize good governance over national sovereignty. In his view, it's better to be under the rule of benevolent colonizers than subject to a dictator.
Furthermore, Matthews argues that concerns related to neocolonialism are misplaced. China is trying to maximize the potential of African resources, not build an empire. The problem is that administrative and regulatory structures in Africa are weak, making it easy for China to circumvent regulations. The idea that China is colonizing Africa is a consequence of long-term dysfunctional governance in African countries. Through its infrastructure projects, China is driving modernization in Africa, much like Europeans and Americans did in the developing world years ago.
However, the difference is that the Chinese are not imposing their own standards on Africans. This could also be a disadvantage, as linking investments to requirements for higher standards could help improve public administration structures in Africa and increase the region's ability to attract investment. African leaders appreciate that Chinese investments are not tied to demands for reforms. Overall, Matthews believes that China's influence in Africa has been positive.
According to researchers at Johns Hopkins University and Boston University, China lent a total of $95.5 billion to Africa between 2000 and 2015. Approximately 40 percent of these loans financed the production and transmission of electricity, and another 30 percent was allocated to modernizing outdated African infrastructure.
Despite claims that Chinese investments are primarily directed towards extractive industries, a study by Dollar et al. in 2015 found that these sectors account for approximately one-third of total Chinese investment in Africa. The study also notes that the share of Chinese foreign investment is higher in countries with weak governance. Therefore, Africa is a significant target because the quality of governance is generally less effective in this region. This makes the continent more vulnerable to potential exploitation by China, as many countries have been unable to improve the quality of their governance.
Removing trade barriers in the region will create new business opportunities and promote technological innovation. The free trade agreement will be even more beneficial if African politicians ensure that intellectual property is not overly regulated. Innovation can occur even without legal frameworks to protect intellectual property, and society is likely to gain more benefit if ideas are freely accessible to the public.
```htmlIf Russia wants to help Africa, it should support its transition to a knowledge-based economy through agreements on technology transfer. Russians should also invest more in cooperation in research and development with their African partners. According to Matthewse, this agreement will fundamentally transform the African economy, and a wealthier Africa will be good news for Russian investors as well. If Africa is properly managed, the continent should succeed.
Kester Kenn Klomegah, TDS
thediplomaticsociety/gnews.cz
```