China-US Interest in Africa the Implications for Peace and Development

7/29/2019 China-US Interest in Africa the Implications for Peace and Development

1/17

Vol. 5(4), pp. 114-130, July, 2013DOI:10.5897/JEIF12.051ISSN 2006-9812 2013 Academic Journalshttp://www.academicjournals.org/JEIF

Journal of Economics and International Finance

Full Length Research Paper

China-US interest in Africa: The implications for peaceand development

Odey, Acha Francis1, Eneji Mathias Agri 2,3 and Shi Li Rong4

1China Foreign Affairs University Beijing, 100037 P.R, China.

2China-Africa Science and Technology Foundation, Beijing, China.

3Department of Economics, University of Jos, Nigeria.

4Shanghai Pudong Hanwei LTD, China.

Accepted 3 May, 2013

Apart from the China-US relations, one of the most important bilateral relations that have attracted theattention of analysts in the field of international relations today is the triangular Africa-China-UStrilateral engagements. Scholars, practitioners, business community and citizens from the three sidescould in one way or the other express their own anxieties, with some imaginary conclusion about theimplications of this relationship. All these go to remind us about the interesting, disturbing andcomplex nature of Africas geopolitical economy. This paper critically and briefly examines China USinterest in Africa: their activities, and the implications for African peace and development. The articlegives a brief overview of Africas situation and the anxiety created by the engagement of China and theUnited States in the contemporary geopolitics and political economy of Africa. Questionnaires wereused to elicit responses from diplomats, citizens and regional organizations such as the African Union

(AU) and ECOWAS. Simple percentages and pie charts are used for data analysis, presentation anddiscussion of results. The article finally makes some recommendations and concludes that the peace ofAfrica will also be the peace of China and the United States as well as that of the internationalcommunity.

Key words: Development, geopolitical economy, natural resources, integration, peace and security, trade.

INTRODUCTION

China-US engagement in Africa represents one of themost influential diplomacy in determining the future ofAfrican states. Their engagement has manifold dimen-

sions; economic, political, security, infrastructural, envi-ronmental, health, education, social, cultural and others.Conflict of interest between these two super powerscould possibly result in economic conflict, gravitating toeconomic warfare and possibly even to military conflict inAfrica. Africa, the sub-Saharan Africa in particular,possesses substantial strategic, untapped reservoirs ofthe world most essential development- integrated naturalresources; ranging from oil, timber, gems, bauxite, cobalt,

uranium, gold, diamond, crude oil, gas, chromiumplatinum, copper, phosphate rock, manganese, titaniumand many more. All these deposits of natural resources

that are spread across many African states make thecontinent a major supplier of these commodities. In theareas of oil and gas, the continent has continued toattract unprecedented interests of developed anddeveloping countries such as the United States andChina respectively. However, it is almost six decadessince most African states got their political independencebut their development pace is far below their naturalmaterial and human endowments. This has earned the

*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected].


2/17

continent such appellation as the least developed, theunderdeveloped, the backward, the poorest continent, etc.There is obvious contradiction in Africas endowmentsand the attendant crisis, abject poverty, diseases,corruption, despair, hunger, and starvation which are thecharacteristics of Africa in the mainstream media

(Deborah, 2009). Africas unthinkable squalor conditionshave continued to attract the attention of the internationalcommunity, from those that mean well and those that donot. In spite of its natural endowment, Africas name wassynonymous with poverty, hopelessness and despair,political instability, war, tribal and religious violence, warover natural resources and the so-called national cake,poor governance with corruption infested system, waste,social and economic insecurity with some states headingfor failed states and some like Somalia alreadyconsidered as so (David, 2011; Jonathan and Sara,2010). Resource-rich areas have become controversial inBakassi, Darfur, and South Sudan etc. At a particulartime, the continent became insignificant in the scheme ofinternational affairs, lacked genuine appeal and attractionfor investors, except for furthering the old imperialisticactivities of the industrialized world. The search formarkets and sources of secured raw materials forindustrial advantage of various countries competing foreconomic and market expansion and sustained growth.Therefore, as Eskor (2000) has rightly noted, the need formarket and raw material was the only source of attractionand relevance in Africa. Recently, however, the worldbegan to witness another phase of intensive and exten-sive economic development activities in some emergingcountries like China, Brazil, India, Russia, and SouthAfrica, now known as BRICS, making an unprecedented

giant stride in what was dominated by cartels of NorthAmerica, Western Europe and Japan. This is verypromising for Africa, seeing that their fellow Africancountry (South Africa) is among these 5 of BRICS; thisbrings a ray of hope to the continent.

Like all phases of industrialization from the 18th to the20th century, these new emerging economies cham-pioned by China have brought about an overwhelmingphenomenal transformation in the outlook of the globaleconomy, both in practice and process, and haveimpacted tremendously on the geopolitical economy ofAfrica (Alfredo, 2002). It has introduced another phase ofcompetition for African markets and natural resources

between the traditional, industrialized West and theemerging BRICs members. Worthy of note is theattention it has caught among media practitioners, civilsocieties and scholars in the field of political economy,international relations and foreign policy observers andanalysts in the ongoing fierce competition betweenWashington and Beijing with its attendant mixed feelings,interpretation and conclusions. Both US and China areworld leading energy consumers and they import crudeoil from Africa. According to the US Energy InformationAdministration, China accounted for 40% of total growth

Odey et al. 115

in global oil demand (Wood, 2009). Also, in 2009, Chinabecame the second largest importer of oil at 4.3 millionbarrels per day, behind US with 9.6 million barrels.

Analysts still struggle to comprehend the full-scale andthe trajectory of Chinas engagement in Africa, as theyaccuse China of not being transparent (Machiko and

Marie, 2012). Others say Chinas engagement in Africa ischaracterization of Chinas global hunt for energy (Zweigand Jianhai, 2006). However, since the inception of theForum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) in the year2000, its interest in Africa is widening and gettingstronger by the years. The United States engagemenwith Africa is channeled through the New Partnership foAfricas Development (NEPAD), and the US agenciessuch as African Command (AFRICOM), African Growthand Opportunity Act (AGOA), the Millennium ChallengeCooperation (MCC), the Presidents Emergency Plan foAIDS Relief (PEPFAR), the Africa Education Initiative(AEI) and The African Peace Initiative (API). Eachcountry uses its establishment(s) for policy re-engineeringand strategic diplomatic networks in order to assert theifull presence and to maximize the best opportunities thatabound in resource rich Africa (CAITEC, 2010; CD, 2010)At the same time, their renewed interest has also calledfor serious worries and concerns especially in the areasof peace, stability and development of Africa. Most othese US African foreign policy instruments are a demon-stration of American thoughtfulness; it is also seen asAmerican rethinking about Africa and consequently thenew significance it attached to the continent.

Amongst the concerns that stir the minds ofinternational development analysts is the fate of Africa. Inthe changing landscape of Africas relationships, can

Chinas engagement make a difference to Africasdevelopment? Has the situation added true relevance tothe continent? Is there any prospects that the activities ofChina and U.S. in Africa will facilitate the emancipation ofthe continent economically and also hasten its integrationinto the global economy, or does this mean anothescramble for the continents natural resources or thepromotion of neo-colonialism and mercantilism thafurther the exploitation of Africa for the benefit of thecapitalist imperialists? Eskor (2000) described this asoperating under the umbrella of the so-called nationagovernments and institutions/agencies in-charge of thenatural resources of various African states?

Also, are the

concerns for peace and stability in the region? Williams(2004)

noted that, the new global system does not involve

the earlier geographical expansion, such as newterritorial conquest; the new enlargement of capitalism isnot as visible as one may think. It exchanges relationswith deepening rather than the enlarging of the systemsdomain. It invades and co-modifies all of those publicand private spheres that previously remained outside itsreach.

Given the question marks on these engagements, it ispertinent to find answers to the true interest of the United


3/17

116 J. Econ. Int. Finance

States and China in Africa, and ascertain if their enga-gements will realize Africas development objective. Thisis necessary as such findings will help to support orrefute the illusion made by some analysts that Africawould be more bruised than ever before, especially underthe present strong influence of China. The remaining part

of this paper is divided into 5 sections. In section 2, wepresent the theoretical framework; section 3 discussesthe China-US interests in Africa. In section 4, we presentthe implications for Africas peace and development.Section 5 is the methodology of our research. Conclusionand recommendations are the last, section 6. In our fieldstudy, optimists still believe that China-US interest inAfrica will contribute to the regeneration of Africaneconomies.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The Puerto Rican sociologist Ramon Grosfoguel (2008)offers a comparison of world systems and postcolonialanalytical approaches. He argues that both share acritique of developmentalism, eurocentric forms of know-ledge, gender inequalities, racial hierarchies, and cultural/ideological processes that foster the subordination of theperiphery in the capitalist world-system (Grosfoguel,2008). However, according to Grosfoguel, postcolonialcritiques focus on agents of colonial cultures, while world-system critiques focus on structures of capital accumu-lation. While postcolonial theory tends to be limited in itsanalysis of political-economic relations, world-systemstheory (WST) tends to be limited in its analysis ofculture:both literatures fluctuate between the danger of

economic reductionism and the danger of culturalism.The WST emphasizes on development and unequalopportunities across nations in a capitalist world economy.It has roots in classical sociology, and Marxian politicaleconomy (Alfredo, 2002). In this perspective, many of thephenomena that have been called globalizationcorrespond to recently expanded international trade,financial flows, and foreign investment by transnationalcorporations and banks (Anouashiravan, 2007; Gilroy,2005). Trade globalization is both a cycle and a trend; thereal integration of the interests of capitalists all over theworld has very likely reached a level greater than at thepeak of the 20th-century wave of globalization. This is

facilitating stiff competition among center states for worldhegemony and it is also turning into warfare. There is anapparent need to building of stronger, more cooperativeand self-reliant social and economic relations in theperiphery and semi-periphery.

CHINA AND US INTEREST IN AFRICA

Africas proven reserve has grown by 56% in the lastdecade, (Wood, 2009). Energy analysts generally believe

that Chinas oil investment in Africa may see someincrease of about 70%, reaching about $50 billion by2015. US ExxonMobil and Chevron have since completed a 3.7 billion pipeline carrying 160,000 b/d of oifrom Central Chad through Cameroon to the AtlanticOcean for onward shipping to the US. The US interest in

Africas oil as it is affirmed by its controversial struggle toestablish AFRICOM base in Sao Tome and Principe othe Gulf of Guinea is to assist it control the Oilfield fromNigeria, Equatorial Guinea, Angola, Gabon and Came-roon. This is a region that the US is very much concernedabout, the Beijing inroad in African oil (Engdahi, 2007)The common questions we have often been confrontedwith and which we are certainly sure will continue to beis the question of China-US interest in Africa. The answeris simply economic interest; natural resources, in whichoil, gas, diamond, cobalt, wood, uranium etc are amongthe major articles in trade. This can be shown in Figure 1In this chart, crude oil takes the lions share of 70%; ironcotton and diamond, 11% while others, 19%.

One does not need a seer to reveal this. The contem-porary world powers geostrategic or geopolitics in Africaparticularly, between China and the United States, thetraditional Western actors, Japan, Russia, Brazil andIndia is centrally focused on African natural resourcesSurya (2009)

affirmed this when he noted that the

concept of energy security occupies prominent place inthe foreign policy of China and India. It is stressed thataccess to cheap energy has become essential to thefunctioning of modern economies, as such the competition over energy sources is a key issue in foreign policyof industrialized countries. Therefore, it will be a fallacyor pretentious for one to believe that energy or natura

resources and African fledging markets of over one billionpotential consumers are not the major nuts in the US-China-Africa engagement. Table 1 shows some comer-cial deals of Chinas three largest oil companies in Africa.

Generally, Chinas oil deals in Africa are characterizedby loans and credit lines in connection with infrastructureprojects. Between 1996 and 2006, CNPC has contractedabout 20 projects in nine African countries. In 2005CNPC won an engineering contract to build a $385million Sonatrachs refinery in Algeria. The internationaimport of Chinas net oil import is expected to jump from3.5 million barrels per day in 2006 to 13.1 million barrelsper day by 2030 (Stephanie, 2008). About 85% of Africas

exports to China come from oil-rich countries whichinclude Angola, Equatorial Guinea, Nigeria, Republic ofCongo and Sudan. Data available indicate that China hasbuilt 27 million ton of oil production capacity, 3,500 km oitransportation pipelines in Sudan, China has assisted inbuilding Sudans oil industry and trained about 6.000management staff and skilled labor. While it also revealsthat only 13% of African oil is exported to China and morethan 30% goes to Europe and the United States. Chinasinvestment in African oil industry represents only onesixteenth of all FDI in the oil industry (Frank and


4/17

Odey et al. 117

Figure 1. Composition of US-china trade with Africa.

Table 1. Some commercial deals of Chinas three largest oil companies in Africa.

CNPC

Since 1996, China National Petroleum Corporation CNPC) has controlled a 40% stakein the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company in Sudan; in 2003, CNPC purchasedoil refineries in Algeria for 350 million USD and signed an exploration deal for oil in twoblocks; in 2004, CNPC invested 1 million USD in an oil and gas exploration project inMauritania; in 2006, CNPC and Sinopec teamed up to exploit newly discovered drillingrights to an oilfield in Sudan in a deal worth about 600 million USD.

Sinopec

In 2002, China Petrochemical Corporation (Sinopec) signed a contract for 525 millionUSD to develop oil field in Algeria; in 2004, Sinopec signed a technical evaluation dealfor three onshore oilfields in Gabon to supply China with crude oil; in 2005, Sinopecpurchased a 27% stake in an oil field off the coast in Nigeria; in 2006, Sinopec enteredinto a joint venture partnership with a local oil company to build an oil refinery in Angola;in 2006, Sinopec has been constructing a 1,500km pipeline to Port Sudan.

CNOOC

In 2005, China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) paid 2.3 billion dollar for astake in the Akpo Offshore Oil and Gas Field in Nigeria; In 2006, CNOOC signed aproduction-sharing contract in Equatorial Guinea; and bought a 45% stake in a Nigeriaoil and gas field for 2.3 billion USD; also in 2006, CNOOC was allowed to explore in sixblocks covering 44500 sq miles in Kenya;

CNOOC In 2008, concluded arrangement to lift Nigeria oil through South African Petroleum Co.,which gives China access to about 175, 000 barrels a day. The $2.27 billion deals gaveCNOOC 45 percent stake in the Nigeria off shore oilfield.

UNIPEC In 2012, A commercial agreement between the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation(GNPC) and UNIPEC Asia Company Limited has committed the country to supply13,000 barrels of crude oil daily, which is the share of Ghana's oil in the jubilee field, tothe Chinese for fifteen-and-a-half years to pay for a $3 billion loan.

Sources: Naidu and Davies, China Fuels its Future with Africas Riches; Scott-Meuser, Fuelling Development: Chinaand Africa; Meidan Michal, Chinas Africa Policy: Business Now, Politics Later.

Nordensvard, 2011). In 2006, China also committed well

over $8 billion to Nigeria, Angola and Mozambique and$2.3 billion to all Sub-Sahara Africa from World Bank. It isinformed that Ghana has concluded negotiation for $1.2billion Chinese electrification loan in 2011. Since 1999,CNPC has invested $15 billion in Sudan. It virtually own50% of the countrys oil refinery. China takes about 65 to80% of Sudans oil production of 500,000 barrels per day.As at 2009, energy analysts estimated Beijing investmentin Sudan oil and related industries at $7 billion (Jerker,2009). CNPC owns major part of Southern and NorthernSudan and produced about 300,000 b/d since 2006.

During the same period, Sinopec was noted to have

completed the construction of pipeline, tanker terminal inPort-Sudan. While China has invested about $15 billion inoil infrastructure, 60% of Sudans oil is exported to ChinaIn 2005, CNOOC paid $2.7 billion for a rich oil block inNigeria (Taylor, 2012). In a similar quest for oil, Sinopecwhich owns 50% of Angola BP-Greater Plutonio project isbelieved to have invested more than $5 billion in Angolasinfrastructure and oil related projects. In 2002, Sinopecsecured a contract of $525 million to develop Zarzaitineoilfield in Algeria. In 2003, CNPC purchased Algerianrefineries for 350 million with a deal to explore two oi


5/17


Table 2. Percentage of Chinas imported crude oilby region (1995-2006).

Regions 1995 2000 2003 2006

Middle East 46 53.6 51.3 45

Africa 11 24.0 24.4 32

Asia-Pacific 41 15.0 15.3 8Others 2 6.7 9.4 15

Sources: Lai, 2007, Chinas Oil Diplomacy: Is It aGlobal Security Threat?, P522, cited from Yearbookof Chinas Economic Foreign Relations and Trade,2002, 2003; Zhao, 2007, China-US Oil Rivalry inAfrica.

Table 3. China's top 5 trading partners in Africa(US$; 2010-2011).

Country Trade value

Angola $24.8bn

South Africa $22.2bn

Sudan $8.6bn

Nigeria $7.8bn

Egypt $7.0bn

Source: China Customs data; Frontier Advisoryanalysis.

blocks. PetroChina and Algeria Hydrogen Carbide alsoagreed to jointly develop oilfields and construct a refinery.In 2006, CNOOC signed a deal with Kenya to explore sixoil blocks of about 44, 500 sq miles (Ian, 2012). Between

2005 and 2006, Angola received $3 billion loan inexchange for oil. In 2006, PetroChina and NigeriaNational Petroleum Corporation struck a deal of $800million to supply 30,000 barrels of crude oil per day.Table 2 shows Chinas imported crude oil by region.

China-Africa business ties have witnessed interestinggrowth in size, structure and diversity. According toChinese Commerce Minister Chen Deming, Tradebetween China and Africa hit a high record of $166bn(106bn) in 2011. Africa is an important source of rawmaterials to feed China's economic boom. By June 2012,China had invested US$45 billion in Africa, including overUS$15 billion of direct investment. Over 2,000 Chinese

companies of different types are operating in 50 Africancountries. The building of China-Africa trade andeconomic cooperation zones is making smooth headway,driving Africa's industrial growth. The fact and figure isshown in Chinas top 5 trading partners in Africa (Table 3,Figure 2).

During her address at the Colombia University in 1998,the Assistant Secretary of State, Susan E. Rice made itvery clear that the US relies heavily on the AfricanContinent for petroleum and strategic minerals. In volumeterms, more than 15% of US crude oil imports come fromthe continent (Table 4). The Continent is projected to be

Table 4. Composition of China's imports and exportsfrom and to Africa (US$; 2010).

Import sector Import value

Minerals $50.6b

Metals $6.2bn

Stone and glass $2.4bnWood, wood products $1.3bn

Textiles $0.7bn

Export sector Export value

Machinery and electrical $17.2bn

Textiles $10.7bn

Transport $8.2bn

Metals $6.4bn

Plastics and rubber $3.0bn

Source: China Customs data; Frontier Advisory Analysis(2011).

the major source of US oil import in the future and theWikileaks has revealed American unrestrained deter-mination to do everything possible to secure and defendher interest in Africas natural resources, especially in theNigeria oil. The information also revealed that it wilemploy all its powers to contend China in this regardAmericas economic and commercial interests in Africaare enormous. While as at 2008, its exports to SubSahara Africa was about $18.5 billion, making it thesecond largest industrial supplier to the region; its importswas put at $86.1 billion. Under the same period, imporunder Africa Growth and Opportunity Act was said to be

67,357.8 billion. As at 2007, the overall exports from Sub-Sahara were put at $244.6 billion. The updates of thereports-imports 2009-2012 are shown in Table 5.

Generally, the revived economic and commerciaactivity between the United States and Sub-Sahara Africais making an impressive progress. According to theUnited States Trade Profile (2009), the two-way tradebetween the two sides as at 2008 was already $104.6billion. However, it is pertinent to state that, besides theanti-terrorist campaign mission, one of the majomissions of President Bush visit to Africa in 2003 wasinfluenced by the Africa market which has remained oneof the yet- to- be fully tapped in the world. In 2009

President Barack Obama visited Ghana which isconnected to the latters strong democratic records. Andperhaps, the most essential was based on Africas hugeoil reserves which it believes will assist in fuelingAmerican economy as well as serve as counterweight tothe influence of OPEC. The US trade balance with SubSaharan Africa from 2005-2008 is shown in Table 6.

U.S. total trade with Sub-Saharan Africa (exports andimports) increased by 28.0% in 2008, as both exportsand imports grew. U.S. exports increased by 29.2% to$18.5 billion, driven by growth in several sectors includingmachinery, vehicles and spare parts, wheat, non-crude


6/17

Odey et al. 119

Figure 2. China-Africa Growing Trade Relations. Source: China Customs data; Frontier AdvisoryAnalysis, 2011.

oil, aircraft, and electrical machinery (including tele-communications equipment). U.S. imports in 2008increased by 27.8% to $86.1 billion. As has been thecase throughout 2008, this growth continues to be due toa significant increase of 31.9% in crude oil imports(accounting for 79.5% of total imports from Sub-SaharanAfrica). Of the top five African destinations for U.S.products, exports to South Africa rose by 17.6%; toNigeria, 47.7%; to Angola, 62.6%; to Benin, 192.4% (dueto a large increase in the export of non-crude oil andvehicles and parts); and to Ghana, 46.1%. U.S. importsfrom the oil producing countries grew in every case withimports from Nigeria growing by 16.2%; from Angola,51.2%; from the Republic of Congo, 65.2%; from

Equatorial Guinea, 89.5%; from Chad, 55.4%; and fromGabon, 4.4%. U.S. imports from South Africa grew by9.9%. Declines in the import of platinum and diamondsfrom South Africa were more than balanced by stronggrowth in the import of ferroalloys and extremely highgrowth of over 350% in the import of passenger vehicles(caused by a surge in imports from South Africa as newcar lines produced in South Africa came on the market atthe end of 2007). In 2008, U.S. imports under the AfricanGrowth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) were $66.3 billion,29.8% more than in 2007. This figure includes duty-free

imports from AGOA-eligible countries under both the U.SGeneralized System of Preferences (GSP) and theexpanded AGOA GSP, plus textile and apparel items im-ported duty-free and quota-free under AGOA provisionsPetroleum products continued to account for the largesportion of AGOA imports with a 92.3% share of overalAGOA imports. With these fuel products excluded, AGOAimports were $5.1 billion, increasing by 51.2%. Much othis non-energy product increase was due to a 224.8%increase in imports of AGOA transportation equipmentvirtually all from South Africa as mentioned above. AGOAminerals and metals also increased by 58.8% and AGOAchemical and related products by 38.7%. AGOA textilesand apparel imports declined by 10.4% and AGOA

agricultural products by 7.9%. U.S. imports under AGOAare becoming increasingly diversified. Some of the moresignificant products include: jewelry and jewelry partsfruit and nut products; fruit juices; leather productsplastic products; and cocoa paste. The top five AGOAbeneficiary countries included Nigeria, Angola, SouthAfrica, Chad, and the Republic of Congo. Other leadingAGOA beneficiaries include Gabon, Cameroon, LesothoMadagascar, Kenya, Swaziland, and Mauritius (Morry2010). The US trade with Sub-Saharan Africa has beenon progression as shown in Figure 3. Imports dominate


7/17


Table 5. Sub-Saharan Africa: U.S. exports of domestic merchandise, imports for consumption andmerchandise trade balance by major commodity sectors (annual and year-to-date from Jan March).

Million dollars

U.S. exports of domestic merchandise 2009 2010 2011 2011 YTD 2012 YTD

Agricultural products 1,956 2,304 3,043 672 605

Forest products 206 267 317 77 80Chemicals and related products 1,459 1,596 1,916 446 529

Energy-related products 1,166 1,493 1,959 414 362

Textiles and apparel 199 236 261 57 66

Footwear 34 29 35 8 7

Minerals and metals 789 1,136 1,407 740 245

Machinery 1,834 1,990 2,108 424 655

Transportation equipment 4,969 5,330 7,043 1,426 1,616

Electronic products 1,285 1,205 1,217 283 348

Miscellaneous manufactures 188 245 276 47 65

Special provisions 551 604 716 179 181

Total 14,638 16,437 20,298 4,774 4,762

U.S. imports for consumption 2009 2010 2011 2011 YTD 2012 YTDAgricultural products 1,459 1,846 2,102 592 645

Forest products 79 87 109 27 28

Chemicals and related products 988 2,081 2,349 595 417

Energy-related products 37,674 51,266 58,816 13,324 8,993

Textiles and apparel 943 814 929 195 213

Footwear 1 1 2 1 1

Minerals and metals 3,813 5,702 6,519 1,634 1,389

Machinery 226 319 362 92 99

Transportation equipment 1,549 1,713 2,318 439 504

Electronic products 81 87 108 23 21

Miscellaneous manufactures 135 229 197 46 38

Special provisions 210 207 208 45 69Total 47,159 64,351 74,019 17,015 12,416

U.S. merchandise trade balance 2009 2010 2011 2011 YTD 2012 YTD

Agricultural products 497 459 941 80 -41

Forest products 127 181 208 50 53

Chemicals and related products 472 -485 -432 -149 113

Energy-related products -36,508 -49,773 -56,857 -12,911 -8,631

Textiles and apparel -744 -577 -667 -138 -147

Footwear 33 27 33 8 6

Minerals and metals -3,024 -4,565 -5,113 -895 -1,144

Machinery 1,608 1,671 1,746 332 557

Transportation equipment 3,420 3,618 4,725 988 1,113

Electronic products 1,204 1,117 1,109 259 327Miscellaneous manufactures 53 16 79 1 28

Special provisions 341 397 508 134 113

Total -32,521 -47,915 -53,721 -12,241 -7,654

Note: YTD= Year to Date. Import values are based on customs value; export values are based on f.a.s. value,U.S. port of export. Source: Compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

the trade, while exports progresses slowly.Like the United States, it has become obvious that

China can no longer hide its intention; its core motive in

Africa is to be part of the beneficiary of Africas hugenatural resources especially energy resources to fueChinas industrialization, in which it became a major


8/17

Odey et al. 121

Table 6. U.S. Trade with Sub-Saharan Africa ($ Billions).

Year 2005 2006 2007 2008

U.S. exports 10,210.7 11,859.7 14,296.1 18,471.9

U.S. imports 50,364.6 59,092.8 67,357.8 86,052.7

U.S. net imports 40153.9 47,233.1 53061.7 67580.8

Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Census.

Figure 3. USA trade with Sub-Saharan Africa ($Billion). Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerce,Bureau of Census.

importer since 1993. Presently, China is the secondmajor consumer of Africas oil after the United States asshown in Figure 4.

The graph depicts the United States and China as theleading trading partners in Africa are far ahead of othercountries like Germany, France, the United Kingdom andJapan. In Table 7, we present the major African exportsto China and the exporting African countries.

China today has stakes in almost all the 54 Africancountries that have diplomatic ties with Beijing. Although,it is relatively new, compared with the US, in the field ofAfricas natural resources, but its growing impact in

recent time is tremendous. Its investment in the oil sectorand other solid minerals in countries like Sudan, Angola,Equatorial Guinea, Nigeria, Ghana, Gabon, DCR Congo,Namibia, and Lesotho etc are remarkable. The tradefigure between the two sides stood over USD 106 billionas at 2008.

Generally, there is no doubt that the interest of the twoeconomic giants go beyond natural resources in whichenergy is in the forefront. Both countries have shownkeen interest in such areas as military cooperation, UNPeacekeeping, health sectors, agriculture etc. While USthrough Africa Growth and Opportunity Act has helped to

promote mutual benefits on both sides, especially in theprovision of clean water, security, democratization pro-cess of Africa and such efforts as facilitating theintegration of Africa economy into the global economyChina through FOCAC has not done less either. PremierWen Jiabao during his 2006 address in South Africastated that, as at 2006, the country has already providedover 900 infrastructure projects and dispatched 16,000medical personnel to African countries (CD, 2006).

IMPLICATIONS FOR AFRICAS PEACE AND

DEVELOPMENT

Clifford (2009), in his critical analysis of the presenscenario, noted that if slavery as a source of labor in thepast was acquired through conquests, then it should beexpected that gas, oil, diamond, cobalt and other mineraresources that are integral to development would beacquired in a similar way. In line with the same thinkingKlare (2001), in one of his interviews, predicted that thenext zone of crisis after the Middle East will be in theresource rich African continent. Klares prediction was nodoubt informed by Americas increasing need for oil and


9/17


Figure 4. Africas Principal Trading Partners, 2011 ($Billion). Source: Derived from IMFDirection of Trade Statistics Yearbook, 2011.

Table 7. Major African exports to China and the exporting countries.

Major African exports to China Major exporting countries

Crude oil Angola, Sudan, Congo Brazzaville, Equatorial Guinea

LOGS Gabon, Congo Brazzaville, Equatorial Guinea, Cameroon,Liberia

Iron ore and concentrates South Africa, Mauritania, Liberia, Mozambique

Diamonds South Africa main exporter

Cotton Benin, Burkina faso, mali, Cote dIvoire, CameroonOres and concentrates of non-ferrous base metals South Africa, Congo Brazzaville, D.R. Congo, Rwanda, Nigeria

Tobacco Zimbabwe

Iron/steel coils South Africa

Platinum South Africa

Manganese ores and concentrates Gabon, Ghana, South Africa, Cote dIvoire

Copper and copper alloys Zambia, South Africa, Namibia, Congo Brazzaville

Aluminum and alumna South Africa

Wood of non-coniferous species Cameroon, Gabon, Congo Brazzaville, South Africa, Ghana 33

Source: World Bank, Africas Silk Road.

gas reserve, and other mineral resources necessary for

its sustainable development. Besides, Klare must havealso been influenced by Chinas unprecedented inroad toAfrica and its voracious needs for energy and othernatural resources to sustain its present developmentmomentum. As the two largest consumers of naturalresources and presently leading players in Africa, thepeace and the development of Africa and global stabilitywill to a large extent be influenced by the activities ofthese two economic giants. China and the US have invarious forums and through their policy statementsrepeatedly wished Africa a peaceful and stable continent

necessary for sustainable development. However, in

reality, anxiety has continued to mount between Chinaand US, and the traditional players in Africa with each ofthem trying to assert or reassert its presence in thecontinent. Recent events in places like Congo DCRZimbabwe, Sudan and the activities of some of theirmultinationals in most part of Africa do not only call forsome serious concern but the unguided interests of theUS, France in Code dIvoire political impasse, the Libyancrisis in 2011 and the decision for the US/NATO ledalliance with rebels in Lybia puts a big question mark onpeace and democratic process in Africa. Like the case of


10/17

Odey et al. 123

Table 8. Major African imports from China and the importing country.

Major African imports from China Major importing countries

Clothing and textiles Benin, Togo, Gambia, South Africa, Kenya, Nigeria, Ethiopia, cotedIvoire, Sudan, Madagascar, Ghana

Footwear South Africa, Nigeria, Ghana, Benin, Togo

Motorcycles Nigeria, Togo, Mali, Cameroon, Guinea

Batteries and accumulators Benin, Nigeria, Togo, Kenya

Rice Cote dIvoire, Liberia, Tanzania, Nigeria, Ghana

Travel goods, handbags, suitcases, purses South Africa, Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania

Electrical, electronics and telecom equipment Nigeria, Zambia, Ethiopia, Angola, South Africa, Uganda

Construction equipment/materials Sudan, Nigeria, South Africa, Ghana, Benin, Kenya

Source: UN COMTRADE.

Iraq, it is the interest for Libyan oil and the need todestroy the uncompromised Gaddafi to achieve NATOshidden agenda. Was it not easier to capture Gaddafi

alive and make him face justice than to use aircraft bom-bardment and incur huge debt on Libyan oil? Are thescores of human beings being killed in Syria, Yemen andBahrain more or less important to those ones purportedto have been killed by Gaddafi? The quest for oil andother natural resources and domination will continue topromote multiple standards by the imperial and formercolonial powers that are now regrouping under theauspices of their dominated United Nation and all kinds ofloosed and hijacked resolutions. As part of the efforts toease the growing anxiety, Jendayi (2006), the USAssistant Secretary of State for African Affairs once notedthat, I dont think Chinas seeking for oil in Africa is a

threat to the United States interests.

Although, Chinaand US may not engage in a physical confrontation thatcould lead to serious instability in Africa or globalinstability, but their competing influence, trade interests,political structure, policy and operational strategies suchas promoting democracy and good governance, trans-parency and accountability, human rights, conditional aidand loans by the US and its Western led institutions,compared with the Chinese unconditional or low interestloans and aid, non-interference policy, non-admittance ofhuman rights abuses and the beliefs that Africa canchoose its own course as against the usual dictatedWestern styles, are at variance. This variance of the two

super powers may continue to have serious implicationson the peace and stability of Africa.

METHODOLOGY

In order to elicit sufficient information for our comparativeanalysis, and to achieve a balance and degree ofreliability on a broad and politically intractable subjectwith all of its intricacy like this one, the study decided toconduct extensive interview and administer questionnairerandomly in the study areas in South Africa, Ethiopia,

Nigeria, Tanzania, China, regional organizations such asAfrican Union Commission, ECOWAS CommissionInstitute of Security Studies (Addis Ababa) and African

embassies, the United States embassy, European UnionOffice accredited to the Peoples Republic of China. Inthe data analysis, the sample size is 248, except for theAfrican perception of US-China engagement that is 500However, the number of questionnaires sent out wasmore than these sample sizes. The sizes here represennot all the questionnaires administered but those thatwere returned, or with valid answers. For ease of analysisthe simple percentage is used as shown in the varioustables and pie-charts.

Table 8 is the result of the survey conducted in thestudy areas covering South Africa, Tanzania, EthiopiaNigeria and China (embassies and international organi-

zation). It tries to find out the reasons for Chinasengagement in Africa (Figure 5). The sample size is 248and the calculation is based on simple percentage. 45%out of 248 respondents surveyed argued that the primaryreason for Beijing engagement in Africa is for theextraction of natural resources. This can be seen wherenatural resources is used to back Chinese concessionaloans in Africa. The other interests which act as theconveyer of its interest for natural resources are tradeand economic. While 19 and 17% respectively arguedthat trade and economic are Chinas interest in Africa, 4%believed that China still has some degree of politicainterest in Africa vis--vis the search for diplomatic allies

multilateral and issues of common interests in interna-tional voting. China-Africa engagement may emerge asone of the critical building blocks in shaping the globaeconomic and geopolitical landscape in the years tocome. They recalled that it was Africas vote that gaveChina a seat in the United Nations Security Counciwhich was held by Taiwan until 1971. It was argued thasince the dawn of independence of Africa and coupledwith improvement at the cross-strait relations, politics hasbecome a fickle factor in China-Africa relations. Thestudy noted that even though Beijing is interested in thepeace and stability of Africa, it has little or no interest in


11/17


Figure 5. Reasons for Chinas engagement in Africa.

Table 9. Reasons for Chinas engagement in Africa.

Reasons Naturalresources

Trade Economic Politics Democracy Peace andStability

Exploitation

Mutualbenefits

Total

Response 112 46 42 8 0 6 12 22 248

Percent 45 19 17 3 0 2 5 9 100

Table 10. Reasons for the US engagement in Africa.

Reasons Naturalresource

Trade Economic Politics Democracy Peace andstability

Exploitation

Mutualbenefit

Total

Respondent 58 20 17 8 9 3 7 2 124

Percent 47 16 14 6 7 2 6 2 100

Source: Field survey 2010/2011.

the democratic message largely because its under-standing of democracy is different from that of the West.However, the survey revealed that Chinas engagementin Africa has features of mutual benefits or the Win-Winapproach. Chinese respondents argued that it is thesincere intention of Chinese to show a difference from theWestern engagement by helping to facilitate Africasdomestic development contrary to the usual multiple andcomplex route to resource exploitation.

Table 9 is a survey of the reasons for the United Statesengagement in Africa. The result of the study also shows

that the core reason for US engagement in Africa isnatural resources in which oil is at the top of the list ofinterests in the continent. While interest in naturalresources is 47%, followed by trade (16%) and economic(14%) respectively; politics and democracy was down theladder of its interests in Africa (Figure 6). Respondentsargued that apart from the fact that politics, democracy,peace and stability are, and should be seen as few ofthose cost- effective mechanisms for achieving theUnited States core interest in Africa, it is noted that theUnited States and its European allies have continued topay lips services and multiple standards to the so-called

good governance and democracy. Tables 1 and 2 thussuggest that the central reason for China and USengagement in Africa is about economics of naturaresources. However, both countries are using differenmethodology to pursue their interest in the continent.

Research question 1: Does the Chinese engagement inAfrica have any significant benefits for Africa? AnswerYes.

Table 10 tries to answer if the Chinese engagement in

Africa has any significant benefits for Africa. The surveywhich covered the above study areas was to test theveracity of the above proposition. 64% of the 248respondents surveyed are positive about the Chineseengagement in Africa. Based on the above result, thestudy noted that the Chinese engagement is beneficial toAfrica especially in the area of infrastructure developmen(Figure 7). The reasons for their decision have sincebeen reflected in the body of this work.

Research question 2: Does the United States engagement in Africa have any significant benefits for Africa:


12/17

Odey et al. 125

Figure 6. Reasons for US engagement in Africa.

Figure 7. Benefits of Chinas engagement in Africa.

Figure 8. Benefits of US engagement in Africa.Source: Field survey, 2010/2011.

In the analysis in Table 11, out of the 248 respondentscovering both one-on-one interview and valid question-naire, 48% were positive about the United Statesengagement in Africa (Figure 8). However, the problem is

that apart from the weak negotiating capacity of Africanofficials, the United States has placed too muchemphasis and multiple standards on what it calls goodgovernance, democracy and human rights at the expenseof Africas infrastructural development and technologytransfer. The study also shows that the mutual benefits inthe Africa-US engagement have been very much unequawhen compared to decades of interaction between thetwo sides. It also reveals that the United States hascontinued to meddle in the internal affairs of Africancountries, supporting authoritarians who do not only rulewith fixed hand but protect the United States/Westerninterests such as continuous exploitation of Africasnatural resources through unequal arrangement.

Research question 3: Do Chinese activities in Africasuggest any act of colonialist, mercantilist, predator, oencourage authoritarian?

From the result of the survey in Table 12, 56% out of the248 respondents did not believe that Chinese activities inAfrica are characterized with acts of colonialist, mercan-tilist, and predator or that China is the author oauthoritarianism in Africa (Figure 9). It also suggests that


13/17


Table 11. Benefits of Chinese engagement in Africa.

Country South Africa Ethiopia Tanzania Nigeria Total

Respondent 38 60 80 70 248

Percent 16 24 32 28 100

Source: Field survey 2010/2011.

Table 12. Benefits of US engagement in Africa.

Country South Africa Ethiopia Tanzania Nigeria Total

Respondent 40 28 36 60 248Percent 16 11 15 24 66

Table 13. Chinese activities in Africa suggesting any act of colonialist,mercantilist, predator or authoritarian.

Responses No It depends Not aware Probably yes Total

Respondent 140 46 34 28 248Percent 56 19 13 12 100

Figure 9. Chinese activities in Africa suggesting any act of colonialist,mercantilist, predator or authoritarian. Source: Field survey 2010/2011

Chinas principle of non-interference in the internal affairsof Africa as often referenced in the case of Sudan andZimbabwe was not sufficient enough as respondents alsocited the cases of the falling and existing sit-tight dictatorsin Africa who have continued to exist as stooges andprotgs of the United States and former Europeancolonial capitals. Respondents argued that Chineseengagement in Africa has rather been blessing than

curse. It was also argued that if there is any act ofcolonialism, mercantilist or predator, both China and theUnited States are not completely free as both of themtake so much from Africa and leave just very little behind.

Research question 4: Is there any divergent of interestbetween China and US in Africa and if yes, could theiractivities lead to conflicts?

Table 13 shows that 51% out of the 248 respondentssurveyed argued that China-US interests in Africa are

more convergence than divergence. This result is inconsonance with the argument that they are all in Africafor common goal, and that is natural resources in whichenergy and other development- integrated minerals are inthe forefront (Figure 10 and Table 14). The areas odivergent is associated with their different understandinginterpretation, the process and exercise of such issuesas politics, democracy, human rights, and peace and

stability, all of which has not only become foreign policyof the United States but economic instrument in thehands of the Western- American led side. To China, all ofthese deco-rations are largely a matter of culturaconnotation. Respondents argued that the question orival and possible conflict will arise when one party feelsthat its interests are being undermined by the other partyand the inability of the two parties to agree to cooperateon what some Western analysts described as peacefuexploitation of Africa. This is the area where Americasees China as a threat in Africa. It is then pertinent to


14/17

Odey et al. 127

Figure 10. Existence of divergent interest between China and US in Africa.Source: Field survey, 2010/2011

Table 14. Existence of divergent interest between China and US in Africa.

Response Common interest Divergence Conflict Total

Respondent 126 84 38 248Percent 51 34 15 100

Table 15. General perception of Africans about Chinese engagement in Africa.

Options Satisfied Not very satisfied Not satisfied Total

Responses 260 150 90 500

Percent 52 30 18 100

suggest, in line with the result of this survey, that thecentral interests of China and US in Africa is common,and that is, that of securing of natural resources tosustain their industria-lization drive at home. The battlethat is raging is not over Africas territory per se, butrather among Chinese firms and Western firms over theirshare of Africas markets. In this battle, Africa has notgained the ability to determine her own economic policiesamidst a growing political disaffection and a rise in rebelscum extremist politicians. The Chinese firms are seen bythe Western firms as a threat to their scope, profit andpowerful autonomy in Africa. They are therefore in acompetition to still retain their traditional and dominantrole in Africas economic and political system. It is hopedthat this competition in a short run will have major effects

on efficiency and productivity, but the long run effect onconflict or peace is still possible.

Research question 5: What is the general perception ofAfricans about Chinese engagement in Africa?

In Table 15, the simple percentage analysis indicates that52% of the 500 valid responses suggest that Africans arepositive about Chinese engagement in Africa. Respon-dents believe that apart from the fact that China listensand understands Africas needs, Chinese engagement in

Africa has also put Africa back on track and that theengagement holds a lot of opportunity for Africandevelopment quest if properly managed (Figure 11)While 18% of the respondents are not satisfied withChinas engagement in Africa, 30% are also not verysatisfied. They attributed this to some sensitive issues ofenvironmental and safety standard such as Zambiacopper mines, the issue of counterfeit products dumpedin Africa by China, Chinese workers taking over jobs inAfrica, alleged business misconducts, lack of dueprocess and transparency in contracts, aid and loans etcThis group of respondents also accuses China of secretlyand indirectly meddling with politics in some AfricanStates like Zimbabwe, Angola and Sudan. They complainabout the inability of Beijing to separate between

business, commerce and politics as well as their inabilityto stick to the traditional friendship by Chairman MaoZedong and also to make the lay Africans understandwhere the role of Chinese engagement in Africa startsand ends.

Research question 6: What is the general perception oAfricans about Western/US led engagement in Africa?

Table 16 shows that 32% out of 500 respondents aresatisfied with the United States engagement in Africa


15/17


16/17

relative peace in some countries very vulnerable toexternal influences. As observed by respondents on thequestion on Africas feelings about Chinese presence,some of the African leaders are believed to have recordsof human rights abuses, authoritarian and corrupt prac-tices are presently taking solace in the Chinese non-

interference policy, making it difficult to establish astandard of what is good governance in Africa. Re-grettably, AU/NEPAD benchmark for democratic andeconomic good governance appears to have lost itsoriginal flavor. While it may not be possible to agree withthe pessimists that African Renaissance has been ahallucination, it may be appropriate to suggest thatAU/NEPAD and other relevant protocols such as theprotocol of the Constitutive Act and its Peace andSecurity Council (PSC) need to be reignited by the samezeal in which it was born. It is pertinent to state that mostof the crises that have occurred in Africa and the lingeringDarfur-Sudan crisis, Congo DRC, Libya and CodedIvoire etc could be attributed to both internal andexternal factors. While the internal factors range fromethnic and religious divide, negligence, underdevelop-ment, identity issue, quarrel over the distribution ofproceed from natural resources, leadership tussle etc.Often time, these internal problems are triggered byexternal factors. Like Susan E. Rice rightly observed,most of the crises in Africa are proxy in nature (the use ofinternal tools), where neighbors are pitted againstneighbors. It is quite unfortunate to note that, the mostcommon knowledge about the continent is its richness innatural resources, poverty and crisis. However, while itmay suggest that Africa will not be different from that ofEurope, Asia, and Latin America. Perhaps the difference

is that both China and the US, and other players in Africaare yet to decide when it is due for Africa to enjoy peace,stability and development. Until those who benefit fromAfrican crisis realize that there will be more benefits in apeaceful, stable Africa that is developed than a crisisinfested Africa, the continents hope for peace anddevelopment will remain an illusion. On the other hand,Africa should on its own decide to purge itself of thosecheap characters that are self-endemic in nature and inpractice. The present security network aimed at pre-venting the spread of terrorism has little or nothing tooffer in terms of real stability in Africa. True peace,stability and genuine development in Africa may not

come until Washington and Beijings interests in Africaare sufficiently under control. And this also applies toother European partners especially, France, UK andBelgium. Therefore, any business interest that is capableof undermining the unity of Africa should be revisited byall peace loving nations and people. All acts that promotetacit exploitation of Africas natural resources, corporate-sponsored corruption or crisis are inimical to stable peaceand development in Africa. Therefore, it is pertinent tostate that Washington and Beijing as well as the so-calledtraditional players and their various multinational

Odey et al. 129

companies must change their old way of thinking. Whilebusinesses in Africa must adopt international standardthe 21st century interstates relationship and diplomacymust transcend the old schools of deception, lies andplacatory remarks that are often informed by uncontrolledgreed and selfishness.

Recommendation

In order to achieve the desired peace, stability and deve-lopment in Africa, China, US and European traditionaplayers and other stakeholders in the continent must betransparent, avoid undue heat, expand investment in theareas of infrastructure, health, education, power generating sectors, agriculture, and plough back part of theidividend in the various national economy where theyconduct their businesses. China and the United Statesmust avoid a fitful approach in their engagement in Africaas it does not project the true attitude of a true partner-ship and the true wishes that Africa should develop. Theymust be sensitive to negative public opinions on suchissues as business malpractices, adhered to internationaCorporate Social Responsibility standard and take note othe alleged hands in some African countries resourcecrisis.

In the modern interstates practices, states are morallyurged to be mindful of the way they pursue their nationaambition and to do so with necessary precaution, in ordeto avoid attaining their national goals at the detriment ofthe other parties. Non-interference can be violated inseveral ways; it could be through the unjust support forthe incumbent government at the detriment of the entire

country, or particular region and ethnic groups. This ismore dangerous in a multi-ethnic country with tendencyfor power chauvinism. We would like to remind China andUS and perhaps, other major industrialized nations not topursue energy security and other mineral resources athe expense of peace and stability of their smallepartners or turning blind eyes to injustice, suffering andsometimes death of ordinary citizens. We all know wherewe have done wrong; the most important thing is to bemore conscious of sensitive issues that may inflamecrisis and to do everything possible to avoid it. And that isto guide the way we go about pursuing our variousnational interests and appetite for development integrated

natural resources. NEPAD and other Africas think-tankshould aim at the following rules of engagement; technology transfer, human capital and physical capital develop-ment, FDI, industrial restructuring, growth in Africas tradewith the rest of the world, economy diversificationexpansion of service industry including financial, legalmanagerial, and information services.

Finally, Africa on its own must realize that peace andstability is the only ingredient that can provide the mosneeded environment for foreign direct investment (FDI)and economic growth. There can be no progress in the


17/17


midst of pervasive conflicts. Africa must be conscious ofits potential and strive to acquire the necessary profes-sional and technical capacity to enable it deal efficientlywith contemporary interstate relations, bilaterally andmultilaterally. The various stakeholders in Africa mustdemonstrate their genuine commitment to helping Africa

build its own capacity necessary for sustainable develop-ment in all spectrums of the economies. However,Africans must understand that their own destiny is in theirhands. While America or China may not afford to do moreor less (Bob and Gallup, 2009), Africans and especiallytheir leaders must demonstrate the courage to go theextra miles to take the continent to its next level. That is,peaceful and stable industrialized Africa with marketeconomy. As we strive to develop physically, our mindsmust be allowed to develop too. Revenue from thenatural resources must be invested on people;infrastructure and other long terms profit generatingprojects. Leaders, officials and local businessmen andwomen must be prudent, discipline and above all put uptrue nationalistic spirit, a sincere commit-ment to theirvarious national greatness and pride. Like Susan E. Ricehas rightly admonished, the United States and Chinamust continue to work in concert with Africans to helpsecure the continents future if they are to be smart aboutsecuring their own. If Africa succeeds, China, the US andother countries stand to benefit. If Africa fails, we will allpay the price.

REFERENCES

Alfredo SF (2002). Political Economy for Contemporary Capitalism.Routledge, Taylor &Francis Group, London and New York.

Anouashiravan E (2007). Globalization and Geopolitics in the MiddleEast: Old Games, New Rules, Publisher, Routledge New York andCanada.

Bob Tortora, Gallup (2009). Opinion Briefing: Achieving gains in Africa,Council of Foreign Relations.

CAITEC (2010). China-Africa Trade and Economic Relationship AnnualReport; China Academy of International Trade and EconomicCooperation Beijing.

CD (2010).Different Development Path: Imbalanced World is as a resultof Western Mode of growth, which puts developing countries in unfairposition (China Daily September 29.

Clifford ES (2009). Energy and International Wars: from Babylon toBaghdad and beyond and beyond.

David HS (2011). Areas of Convergence and Divergence betweenChina and US in Africa, China and US in Africa: Advancing theDiplomatic Agenda (Journal of Foreign Relations November 14.

Deborah Brautigam (2009). The Dragon Gift: the real story of China inAfrica. Oxford University Press.

Decolonizing political economy and postcolonial studies. Revista Criticade Ciencias Sociais, 80. Available at http://www.eurozine.comarticles/2008-07-04-grosfoguel-en.html. Last accessed April 112011.

Engdahi FW (2007). China and USA in New Cold War over Africas OiRiches, May 20, 2007.

Eskor Toyo (2000). Background to Globalization, Academic Staff Unionof Universities (ASUU), Zanda Communication Agbowo, University oIbadan.

Frank Urban, Nordensvard John (2011). China and the African OiSector: Channels of Engagement, Motives, Actors and ImpactsInstitute of Development Working Paper Volume 2011, No.374Brighton BNI 9RE, UK, 2011).

Gilroy BM (2005). Multinational Enterprises, Foreign Direct Investmenand Growth in Africa: South Africa perspectives, Publishers (PhysicaVertag Heidelberg, Germany).

Grosfoguel R (2008). Trans-modernity, border thinking, and globacoloniality:

Ian T (2012). In: Richard Soares(Ed), Oil and Politics in the Gulf oGuinea, China returns to Africa. St Andrew University, Pretoria 2012

Jendayi F (2006). Chinas Interest in Africa, not a Threat.Jerker H (2009). Chinas Emerging Role in Africa, A Strategic Overview

May 2009.Jonathan H, Sara VH (2010). The Limits of Socialization: The search fo

EU-China Cooperation. Towards Society Challenges in Africa(Publishers, Brussels Institute of Contemporary China Studies.

Machiko N, Marie S (2012). The Changing Landscape in AidRelationships in Africa: Can Chinas Engagement makes a differenceto African Development?

Michael TK (2001). Resource Wars: the new landscape of GlobaConflict Metropolitan Books, Henry Holts & Company New York.

Morry M (2010). Selling Big to China Negotiating Principles for theWorlds Largest Market, (Publisher, John Wiley and Sons (Asia) PteLtd.

Stephanie H (2008). Council on Energy Relations, June 9, 2008.Surya NY (2009). India, China and Africa: New partnership in energy

security (Jnanada Prakashan P&D Publishers New Delhi.Susan ER (1998). US Interest in Africa: Todays perspective. Released

by the Bureau of Africa Affairs, October 28, 1998.

William IR (2004). A theory of Global Capitalism: Production, Class, andState in a Transnational World (The Johns Hopkins University PressBaltimore and London.

Wood M (2009). In: Mike Hodel (Ed), The Scramble for Energy: ChinasOil Investment in Africa, (The Journal of International Policy SolutionsCalifornia).

Zweig D, Jianhai CB (2006). Chinas Global Hunt for Energy. ForeignAffairs, September/October.

Documents

China-US Interest in Africa the Implications for Peace and Development