Showing posts with label US-Africa Summit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label US-Africa Summit. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 10, 2014
Forum on China-Africa Cooperation vs US-Africa Summit
China-US Focus published on 10 September 2014 a piece I wrote titled "Forum on China-Africa Cooperation vs US-Africa Summit." My main point was that these are different kinds of events and they do not portend increasing China-US competition in Africa except for the winning of commercial deals.
Friday, September 5, 2014
Chinese Analysis of US-Africa Summit
China US Focus published on 29 August 2014 an analysis titled "Does the US-Africa Leaders Summit Reflect a Shift in America's Strategic Thinking?" by Dong Chunling and Wang Lei, both assistant researchers at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, a government think tank.
The authors concluded there has been a shift in America's strategic thinking towards Africa for two reasons. First, Africa's economy is growing so fast. Second, emerging powers have entered Africa in such force that it is resulting in a decline of American influence.
The authors concluded there has been a shift in America's strategic thinking towards Africa for two reasons. First, Africa's economy is growing so fast. Second, emerging powers have entered Africa in such force that it is resulting in a decline of American influence.
Thursday, August 21, 2014
US versus China in Africa
The National Interest published on 17 August 2014 a commentary titled "Five Reasons Why the United States Can't Beat China in Africa" by Zachary Keck, managing editor of The Diplomat.
Unfortunately, the title of the article misses the point. The United States is not trying to "beat" China in Africa. There are areas of competition such as competing for contracts just as there is US competition with companies from the UK, France, and Germany. In the final paragraph of the article, the author writes: "In sum, the U.S.-Africa Leaders summit notwithstanding, the United States cannot compete with China in Africa." Even if you accept the premise of the article, it is silly to suggest that the United States cannot even "compete" with China. Fortunately, the author goes on to say that the United States does not have to compete with China as the two countries' interests are not zero sum. This should be the real point of the article.
Going back to my problem with the title in the event you are inclined to agree that the United States must "beat" China in Africa, the data to support this case are cherry-picked. The argument depends heavily on China's growing and America's declining trade with Africa and the fact that China has more high level visits to Africa. These points are valid. But there is no mention of the fact that US aid to Africa in recent years has been running at about $8 billion annually versus an estimated $2.5 billion from China. Cumulative US investment is still larger than cumulative Chinese investment in Africa. And whether you agree with the policies or not, the United States has a deeper security relationship with most African countries. China has far more peacekeepers assigned to UN missions in Africa, but Washington pays about 28 percent of UN peacekeeping operations while Beijing pays only 6 percent.
Unfortunately, the title of the article misses the point. The United States is not trying to "beat" China in Africa. There are areas of competition such as competing for contracts just as there is US competition with companies from the UK, France, and Germany. In the final paragraph of the article, the author writes: "In sum, the U.S.-Africa Leaders summit notwithstanding, the United States cannot compete with China in Africa." Even if you accept the premise of the article, it is silly to suggest that the United States cannot even "compete" with China. Fortunately, the author goes on to say that the United States does not have to compete with China as the two countries' interests are not zero sum. This should be the real point of the article.
Going back to my problem with the title in the event you are inclined to agree that the United States must "beat" China in Africa, the data to support this case are cherry-picked. The argument depends heavily on China's growing and America's declining trade with Africa and the fact that China has more high level visits to Africa. These points are valid. But there is no mention of the fact that US aid to Africa in recent years has been running at about $8 billion annually versus an estimated $2.5 billion from China. Cumulative US investment is still larger than cumulative Chinese investment in Africa. And whether you agree with the policies or not, the United States has a deeper security relationship with most African countries. China has far more peacekeepers assigned to UN missions in Africa, but Washington pays about 28 percent of UN peacekeeping operations while Beijing pays only 6 percent.
Saturday, August 9, 2014
US-Africa Summit: VOA Discussion with Cohen and Shinn
The Voice of America "Encounter" program with Carol Castiel on 8 August 2014 discussed the outcome of the US-Africa Summit with Hank Cohen, former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, and myself. This wide ranging 30 minute radio discussion dealt with investment, aid, trade, security, Ebola, human rights, Power Africa, natural resources, the Export-Import Bank, China, and the role of the private sector.
Friday, August 8, 2014
Reaction to US-Africa Summit
The Institute for Security Studies in South Africa published on 7 August 2014 a commentary titled "Washington Consensus: First US-Africa Summit Succeeds and More Will Likely Follow" by Peter Fabricius, foreign editor, Independent Newspapers. This is a mostly favorable account of the US-Africa Summit in Washington.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
