- China’s conflict resolution role remains unclear.
Despite its growing commercial presence, China has mainly remained on the sidelines concerning conflict resolution diplomacy in Africa. Beijing did appoint a special envoy for the Horn of Africa earlier this year, and held a peace conference in Ethiopia, but China has not been as active in diplomacy surrounding that country’s devastating civil war as might be expected given its heavy commercial and political investment in Ethiopia. While the African Union has taken the diplomatic lead, with the United States playing both a public and behind-the-scenes role in Ethiopia, Washington should be prepared if China moves away from its traditional “non-interference” policy to assume a larger diplomatic role in African conflicts.
- Most African countries desire good relations with both the United States and China, wanting to avoid fallout from major power rivalry.
African leaders recall with concern the Cold War, when the United States and Soviet Union fought proxy wars in Africa, making them wary of great power rivalry. Some Africans view China as a positive development model. This favorable impression is actively cultivated by Chinese diplomacy throughout Africa. Sometimes U.S. interests will require pressuring Africans to choose, such as when the United States pressed African states to vote to condemn Russia’s brazen invasion of Ukraine at the United Nations (China abstained). But in general, U.S. diplomacy in Africa will be more effective when it’s not framed as an “us-or-them” proposition, especially versus China. Early in the Biden administration, Secretary of State Antony Blinken told allies that the United States would not expect them to choose between Washington and Beijing. This approach, however, will come under increasing pressure if relations between the two major powers worsen.
- Africans want to do more business with the United States.
Africa is the poorest, and fastest growing, continent. Greater trade and investment are critical, or rising unemployment will stoke more social and political tensions, leading to violent unrest. Unfortunately, Africa remains marginalized from the global economy, representing just three percent of world trade. African leaders, in both government and business, recognize the importance of the U.S. market, the sectoral leadership of many U.S. companies, and the high standards of U.S. businesses, especially compared with the poor transparency and environmental records of many Chinese companies.
Encouragingly, the African diplomatic corps in Washington wrote the Biden administration asking that commerce be a summit priority. American businesses have been slow to engage in Africa for many reasons, including a perception of high risk, poor infrastructure and lack of government support. With more U.S. government tools now available, including the recently launched Development Finance Corporation, some businesses are viewing the summit as a place to begin their involvement in Africa.
- The United States should play to its strengths while competing with China.
U.S. companies are not competitive against Chinese and other firms in certain industries, such as road and bridge construction. Chinese firms have lower cost structures and benefit from decades of African experience. But some U.S. companies are competitive, including in the health, financial technology and renewable energy sectors. The United States has a great asset in its large and vibrant African diaspora, many of whom maintain commercial connections with Africa. The summit is wisely engaging and profiling the diaspora.
The United States also remains a source of inspiration for the large majority of Africans, who aspire to democratic governance. Washington should continue to support African democrats, civil society and media that are pressing for open and inclusive governance, often in the face of repression. China, on the other hand, opposes these values.
Continued next page
(267 VIEWS)
