Use the drop-down boxes above to navigate through the Website  
Return to Reasoning List

Here is a link to this page:

Sino-African Partnership: A ray of hope

1 - 1011 - 17
Time Zone: EST (New York, Toronto)
Messenger: JAH Child Sent: 1/9/2019 6:08:30 AM

Yes Nesta that must be true, because the voices of those I am speaking of have not made a difference in the plan moving ahead, despite some of them going to great lengths to stop its progress. So there must be people on the other side whose voices are heard more, especially in the political leadership.

Messenger: Nesta1 Sent: 1/9/2019 7:03:08 AM

Yeah, what they call "progress", even when it provides employment and economic development opportunities, always seems to come with winners and losers. Before expatriating from the USA, i spent my adult life in the Pacific Northwest and i hated it every time they cut down another forest. I didn't care if it meant progress or jobs, it was just destruction to me so i protested. Nevertheless, they kept on cutting them down, bulldozing and building....seems like there are always trade offs.

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 1/9/2019 2:54:07 PM

InI voices don't get heard Jah Child because there is always someone in a high position who will sell out for short termism and profit.

As a Garveyite I could never agree with Nesta.


How have China helped other countries? Again this hasn't been addressed.

If help comes at a cost (with interest) is this help? Loan sharks and credit companies work in similar ways . And that is what this conversation comes down to - LOANS. Western countries with the IMF have extorted African countries for decades with high interest, and this is following the debts many countries were already left with post colonialism. China's loans tend to be with less interest but are backed by natural resources such as the oil backed loans of Angola. So 1 backra wants cash debt the other backra wants less cash debt but Africa's natural resources?

Rastafari shoud see past arguing over which loan company is best. SELF SUSTAINANCE please

Messenger: Nesta1 Sent: 1/10/2019 12:26:06 AM

Actually, Chinese involvement in trying to promote constructive Sino-Africans relations is much more than loans. While infrastructure financing is one of the most publicized aspects of the relationship between China and the nations of Africa, the biggest story is really business investment to enhance existing business enterprises and to build new ones. These are shared business risk endeavors in which Chinese investment is not collateralized (i.e., it depends on the success of the African businesses). China is also actively engaged in sponsoring education and vocational training, technology transfers, medical missions, and cultural exchanges. The flip side of the loans perspective is that China has also provided debt relief and debt cancellations to African nations.

The point is simply that the are a number of good things coming out of Chinese initiatives to engage Africa and create opportunities for Africans. I concede the element of Babylon in all of this and that a lot of it is capitalism at its root (hence serving the mammon, not Jah); but it's overly negative to tar all of the efforts made by many different Chinese people and initiatives as all being nefarious. Sincere & ethical people with sincerely positive motives come in all different shapes, sizes, genders and colors from all different ethnic backgrounds and nations.

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 1/10/2019 4:14:02 AM

Africa has every right to learn from past endevors with the outside world and look upon any helping hand with mistrust. If your point here is that there are SOME Chinese people and business who wish to only offer aid without any interest or collateral then I agree. Equally there have always been ones like this throughout the western involvement with Africa too. These ones should be applauded

But the bigger message is one of Africa helping Africa and not needing or really even wanting foreign aid or foreign involvement in domestic affairs. Self SUSTAINANCE over charity.

We Africans are simply sick to death and tired of the story of the foreign super hero coming down to save poor Africa; just as we are sick of the trickster stories of swapping land for foreign help whether in the form of religion guns or highways. More and more Africans are being awoken to the ideas of independence. Domestic trade and relations between African countries which lets not forget was what HIM was all about for me should always be placed higher than foreign support even if in the form of aid.

By the way - Your initial post is quite different to your last post. You first post honestly did try to paint the whole brush of Chinese - African relations being all positive and all beneficial for Africa. And was more focused on competing and comparing this to EuroAmerican-African relations. At least in your last post you do concede to the fact that this isn't always the case

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 1/10/2019 4:34:48 AM

China / European / American intentions are rarely to compete for African natural resources on the open market but to OWN them and their associated infrastructure to control supply. This is where my problem lies.

The main... not the sole.... But the main reason for Chinese interest in Africa is due to China being reliant on foreign resources. The next conversation needs to be specific into each Chinese - African endevor as to how these resources a4e being obtained

An example of what I was referring to in the first paragraph:

"In 2008 China signed a long-term infrastructure
development agreement with Democratic Republic of Congo worth over $9 billion (Whewell, 2008). At the same time,
the DRC national mining company, Gecamines, agreed to ease the major mining company, Katanga Mining Ltd., out of
the two key copper deposits, Mashamba West and Dikuluwe in the copper-cobalt belt, paying Katanga the equivalent
of $825 million and granting the concessions to a Chinese company. Interestingly, the deposits were not scheduled to
produce copper until at least 2020, and China could not bring them into production for at least five years (Katanga,

Messenger: Nesta1 Sent: 1/10/2019 5:52:20 AM

The intended point of my initial post (whether i succeeded or not in communicating it) was to highlight the differences between the Western mindset and attendant actions in its approach to diplomacy and doing business with Africa versus those of the Chinese. This difference is rooted in a Chinese/Eastern culture which is thousands of years old and which the West has a difficult time relating to or understanding.

It is precisely the shared Sino-African risk business ventures which demonstrate that Chinese business men and women aren't coming "to save poor Africa". They're investing capital which both they and their African partners stand to lose if they cannot work cooperatively to cultivate viable businesses. In contrast to European colonialism, such business collaboration in conjunction with ongoing technology transfers permanently impart knowledge & experience that Africans will use to create their own economic development independent of foreign partners and/or investment.

Like any generalization, my point was never intended to suggest that every undertaking by Chinese interests in Africa is homogeneously or universally positive; just that, in general, the Chinese mindset in its approach to doing business with Africa is much healthier than the West's approach has been historically. If we want to give credit to the West for teaching the Chinese and Africans by example that its approach to African economic interactions has been wrong-headed and counterproductive, I have no problem with that.

1 - 1011 - 17

Return to Reasoning List

Haile Selassie I