Responding to an Economist article on a perceived battle between Israel and Iran for friends on the African continent, S.H. Razavipour stresses that suspicion around Iran's motives merely highlights Western hypocrisy.
In the past decade, Africa has become a cauldron of competing interests between new and old actors. Whereas in the 19th century it was just a handful of countries that benefited and profited from Africa’s riches – namely from its extractive resources, cheap labour and not to mention slavery – now it seems that the tide has shifted with ‘new kids on the block’.
With increased competition by the emerging powers from the global South, it would appear that Western actors can no longer claim a monopoly over Africa’s resources. However, this does not mean that the emerging powers have totally eclipsed Western influence in Africa. Africa’s global trade patterns are still intricately tied to former colonial empires while for most African countries the North still remains the leading trade partner. This is because most African economies built up their post-independence economies by locking themselves into Northern markets and relying on investment from these economies.
While this new competition – from countries like Brazil and Venezuela from South America, India and China from Asia, Australia, Turkey and even Israel and Iran from the Middle East – unleashes new impulses around Africa’s geo-strategic importance in the global system and a definite challenge to the exclusive benefits that the Western countries had enjoyed from Africa until recently, it does appear that the same thing will happen with the new comers too.
Some of these new actors will find better ways to cooperate with the older ones to behave like a cartel to increase their benefits. They will tow the line with the big brothers so that they are also given a seat at the table to claim their slice of the cake.
Others like China because of their political conflicts and competitions with America and other capitalist countries will prefer to find their own business interests in Africa and follow a ‘go it alone’ strategy, although this is not to suggest that Beijing as well is not part of the global capitalist cartel.
The issue at hand is whether the new comers to the global capitalist cartel will be treated with equal rights and access, or whether they will be used as a means to an end because of their financial muscle to bail out the old Northern capitalist cartel that has suffered as a result of the financial crisis. Better yet, are these new actors willing to transform the structures of international capital accumulation by joining the capitalist roundtable, or is it more of the same?
One thing is certain though, and that is breaking into the global capitalist cartel is very much an exclusive club.
Perhaps that is why we still face the juxtaposition of some mainstream Western media and think tanks cautioning against new comers like China as a ‘threat’ to Africa while we are also told that China is an ‘opportunity’ for Africa.
Yet such warnings are more accusatory when it comes to actors like Iran’s competing engagements in Africa.
‘THE ECONOMIST'S’ CONCERNS
On 4 February 2010 The Economist published an article entitled [email protected] or comment online at Pambazuka News.
NOTES
[1] See The Economist debate: Africa and China: http://www.economist.com/debate/days/view/468
- Log in to post comments
- 1045 reads