Boosting FOCAC’s intellectual capacity

At the end of March the follow-up committee of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) in partnership with the Institute of West Asian and African Studies (IWAAS) of the Chinese Academy of Social Science (CASS), launched the China-Africa joint research and exchange program . Hosted in Beijing the launch was considered to be a high-powered event with the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs being one of the significant stakeholders of the launch.

The joint research and exchange programme follows closely on the heels of the FOCAC 2009 meeting where Premier Wen Jiabao announced amongst the 8 measures the creation of a common academic platform to strengthen cooperation and exchanges between scholars and think tanks from both sides as part of the endeavour towards ‘increasing mutual understanding between the peoples'. More

Moreover it represented the fulfillment of the vision mooted five decades earlier by Premier Zhou Enlai during his visit to Accra, Ghana in 1964 where he also outlined the overarching principles that would govern China’s effective development assistance and cooperation partnership with Africa.

From the African side there was a diverse set of voices with representation from academic institutions like CODESRIA as well as national think tanks ranging from Kenya, Cameroon, the Republic of Congo, South Africa, Morocco, Tanzania, Mauritius, Libya, Benin, Nigeria and Senegal. And Fahamu was also invited to participate as part of the social movement dynamic.

But perhaps what captured the essence of the launch was the theme: Peace and Development in Africa and China-Africa Cooperation, which revolved around the following areas:
• Africa’s Prospects for achieving the MDGs and the role of the International Development Community
• Africa’s Peace and Security Issues
• African Integration and Regional Cooperation
• Sino-African cooperation after the financial crisis

Therefore the underlying foundation of the launch was essentially about maintaining stability in Africa’s political and socio-economic landscape and in the continent’s external relations. And, of course, understanding how this can be achieved through establishing joint research exchanges and building collaborative knowledge systems.

While the gathering represented a unique opportunity for Africa participants to outline the type of research agenda that should be set in order to develop a mutually beneficially partnership, the actual focus of the discussions seem to focus on a particular ideology and discourse that has become the conventional wisdom on Africa.

In this regard the presentation made by the general secretary of CODESRIA, Ebrima Sall, captured this myopic view in the literature on Africa’s development. He highlighted that for there to be a genuine research exchange, the first step is to redefine the scholarship that we use when examining Africa’s development challenges.

Of course what he was talking about is the western hegemonic epistemology that tends to define African problems in a narrow lens of western philosophy of what is wrong with Africa and then prescribes what should be done to save the continent.

These comments, made by Dr. Sall, definitely raises several critical issues about the future of this research and exchange program.

First, the platform provides an ideal space to build indigenous African knowledge systems that can determine how African challenges should be approached from an African perspective.
Not only does this promote a direct response in shaping the literature on Africa but it also becomes a significant platform in promoting a more viable knowledge base of South-South cooperation.
Second, by using the exchange to nurture a dominant scholarship that is African centered means that trilateral dialogues that incorporate Western views is neutered, thereby preventing Western institutions from becoming the authoritative voices on Africa’s relationship with China, how it should be controlled and what lessons China should learn from Western experiences.

This is critical since until now the debate on Africa-China engagement has been largely influenced by commentators and other such pseudo academics aka business consultants who have acted as advisers to Western governments as well as to Beijing in pretending that they know what is best for Africa.

While there can lessons to be learnt from Africa’s past experiences with former development partners, it is not absolutely necessary that we need to see the engagement in the same vein of the liberal enlightenment. The issue is really about how does African maximize the best possible benefits out of its relationship with China based on its own terms and through an African epistemology.

Here we should be looking at Africa’s own response to the economic crisis of the 1970s and the Structural Adjustment Programs, which produced the Lagos Plan of Action and Alternative Framework to Structural Adjustment Programs. We should also recognise the works of great scholars like Amir Samin, Amilcar Cabral, Thomas Sankara, Julius Nyerere and others, which have made invaluable contributions to African scholarship and still shape the thinking of many young African scholars who are promoting an Africa discourse and literature.

Moreover, we must remember that the current compartmentalization of the state of affairs in Africa as something new ignores that Africa has experienced crises before and there is a plethora of literature of how Africa can overcome these challenges as highlighted by the writings of the great African thinkers identified above. It is imperative that this scholarship is not neglected in the joint research and exchange program.

Third, if the intention of this joint research and exchange platform is to develop mutual understanding between African and Chinese peoples then we must also reflect on the common social justice struggles that is being experienced in African and Chinese societies. Such class conflicts reflect that the growth model and the trickle down effect has not created a better life for all. If anything it has created widening gaps of inequality. Therefore, these are identical struggles about inclusion, rights, human centred development and dignity that should not be seen as mutually exclusive. But it also means that we must be honest about the role of the political and economic states elites in this engagement. In other words who benefits?

Fourth, the platform should also be about whether new paradigm shifts can be created around Africa’s integration into the world economy and more importantly with respect to realigning the structures of production within African economies.

What we should be asking in this respect is whether a new model of engagement can be drawn out of this platform where China is willing to reform the financial and political institutions of the international architecture that is currently built around the orthodoxy of the liberal model of growth and the liberal enlightenment philosophy of the trickle down effect.

This remains a critical inquiry since we cannot overlook how the rise of the corporate capital from the South is gaining from this model and advancing their profit margins through a modern day version of imperialism while their governments are playing to the historical platitudes of development partnerships.
Definitely, questions of trade protectionism, tariff barriers and other related issues should be at the fore of what type of market access and reform of the WTO is the right mix for Africa.

Finally, while the platform must be lauded because it does create the opportunity for Africa scholarship to be mainstreamed, we must also be aware that there are competing interests amongst scholars in the continent and those from the Diaspora.

Therefore there must be an overall attempt to ensure that this platform does not become a contested terrain of personality clashes and whose voice gets heard.

As much as this is an exchange between African and Chinese scholars, the critical impulse for this to be an effective partnership and collaboration has to be the inclusion and the voice of social movements, activists and communities that are at the cold face of the Africa-China engagement and who have important stories to share about how this engagement is affecting their daily lives whether for good or ill, even though it may fall outside the ambit of formal academic research.

This is because old tensions between state authorities and citizens in African societies have become more acute in recent years. While we cannot deny that these emerging powers (including China) have reignited the debate about transformation of the African state, the type of development we should be seeking and how Africa should engage with these actors (i.e. what is Africa’s agenda and policy), it is also recreating new forms of capitalist class formations. This is because of the way class structures are aligned to state capital and accumulation of wealth in African societies and the fact that African governments are seen as active agents in this engagement.

Therefore as we embark upon this new chapter in the Africa-China engagement, I am reminded of the remarks made by my colleague, Dr Firoze Manji, regarding the debate on the footprint of the emerging powers in Africa:
“We need to consider who is benefiting from the engagement with China and how? It is not enough to talk about 'African countries' as if they were comprised of a homogeneous population with the same material interests. Are the interests of our ruling classes being strengthened by their relationships with China (or other players)? If their interests are being enhanced, what are the consequences for the rest of us? Or are we going to delude everyone that the 'national interests' are all that matter? What is the impact of China et al's engagement on class formation, on capital accumulation, inequalities, etc.? What opportunities does it present to social movements and other citizen organisations for advancing their own interests and the interests of the oppressed through playing one imperial power against another? What will be the consequences of rapid capital accumulation of a class of African traders who have avidly positioned themselves to ply trade to and from China? How much of the antipathy and xenophobia towards China is a reflection of the competition between the petty bourgeoisie?’

These are definitely pertinent issues that need to be addressed.

More importantly the platform represents an opportunity for African academics, scholars and other voices to develop and shape an African policy coherency, which must be based on African ownership.

Moreover, it must be an evolving relationship that advances an African agenda on nurturing and shaping our young journalists and media institutions towards developing the African media perspective.

We have an opportunity, how it is shaped from the African side will determine whether China does, indeed, offer an alternative form of engagement.

BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

* Sanusha Naidu is the Research Director of the Emerging Powers in Africa program based with Fahamu in South Africa. She attended the launch of the China-Africa joint research and exchange program

* Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at Pambazuka News.