China worked effortlessly to water-down a United Nations resolution -- effortlessly?

your copy editor should smoke slightly less weed-- HOWEVER, glad to see this being written about. topic is important and analysis is solid

The author obviously does have a very personal interpretation of the word "colonization" and a superficial understanding of the history and means of western colonization of Africa ! Nowadays, it seems that using meaningless and provocative vocabulary or catching phrases becomes a desperate and only way to attract visibility when one is short of substance. I suggest that the author does some homework of studying the history of western colonization of Africa before launching a trivial yawning of this nature. It is an insult to any history-educated people !

Gee, "HLY", wouldn't be Han, would you? Sorry, but your PRC is showing.

Please make whatever counterarguments you see fit, but "trivial yawning"? Not even close. I, for one, disagree with the author's latent Marxist analysis, but the overall point -- that China is staking out a position in the new Great Game, and the chessboards are Africa and South America -- is virtually undeniable.

Kudos to WaPo for giving voice to this issue.

Take it from a chinese man -- Don't trust the chinese when doing business with them!

Where were all these analysts when the West have for decades been raping Africa, including using World Bank, IMF and their proxies (African leaders) as vehicles for doing so. The IMF/World Bank pushed their weight around in the late 1980s (and still does), under prodding from the West, and forced Nigeria to devalue its currency and to open its borders to dumping from the West under the guise of trade liberalisation. The foregoing measures brutally decimated the country's manufacturing industrial base leading to millions of people being thrown out of work. Where were all these analysts? They are all envious now that another country is now exploiting the fertile ground for resource expropriation nurtured and sustained by the West in Africa. STOP PROVIDING SAFE HAVEN FOR MONEY STOLEN FROM AFRICA. A RECEIVER OF STOLEN GOODS IS A THIEF.

It may well be that the Chinese view Africa as their "cheap labor market" of the future?

As someone with ties to the international business sector, I am always wondering why there is so little visible American effort made to develop African sources of production?

China has merely replaced the West using Economic Imperialism as a trade practice. In deed, the West has become the victim of China's Economic Imperialism. It is the age old story of developed nations, with high trade barriers, dumping their cheap goods on underdeveloped countries, without trade barriers. Because local industries can not compete, underdeveloped countries remain under the economic control of developed, protectionist nations.They all need trade barriers so there goods can compete with the low prices of Economic Imperialists countries. Trade Barriers equal development. Pure Alexander Hamilton in his Report on Manugfactures!

This is typical West's bias. In stead of blaming West for forgetting Africa, you are blaming China for remembering Africa. West's colonization was by force. China is just trading with Africa. When people trade with each other, they influence each other. Since the trade with China has Westernized China, Would you say West is colonizing China ? I don't think so. I don't think China is colonizing Africa either. The author's analysis is based on the combination of bias and jealousy. Just shows how dishonest the author is. Its a shame for America.

Colonization? A stupid methaphor. Its simply China doing business with Africa.
Africa was colonized by the West (whites) for centuries and used as puppets during the cold war. The African continent was abandoned by the West at the end of the cold war and it was getting poorer and poorer. China came in to do business, develop industries with a market ready to buy all raw material or semi finished products. We cannot blame china for buying raw material. The reason is that Africa does not have the industrial capacity to produce finished products. If the West cares about Africa, the Author must tell us why the continent remained poor for many centuries even with the continous presence of WHITES.

Good God, can someone send the author a remedial English book? I'm going to colonize his cerebrum if he doesn't learn to write a coherent sentence.

Wow, aid money without any restrictions! It really is to good to be true! No more onerous Western demands such as "stop organizing death squads to kill thousands of innocent people in your country" or "pass and enforce worker safety laws for once" or my favorite "stop selling passports to non-citizens".

It's the dawn of a new era for Africa!

The West's "investments" in Africa have "declined"? My God, we send (read: waste) billions on nitwittery such as AIDS relief every year, and many more times what any other nation send. The awkward truth here is that despots in Africa routinely use corruption to keep aid from doing a bit of good and getting to their people. Its sad, but that's the situation. Blaming the West for not caring is preposterous. Example: Bush DOUBLED aid to many Afican nations. Where does it end up - with the corrupt leaders.

"Of course" is the short answer.

There are all kinds of "answers" and "views."

There are a couple things people, anywhere they are on some kind of "ideological" specture, need to keep in mind is:

China has close to 1.5 billion people. The land has been in constant use --- very few fertile acres have been left in fallow for long --- for two continuous thousand years.

China's "approach" to business is different from European whites: the Chinese have this backward leaning stance on issues: they come in true peace! They do NOT want other people to abolish their indigenous butcher shops of the various kinds, because China does NOT want others to tell it how to upkeep its various butcher shops and dark dungeons for the "criminals" who challege the "correct leadersship".

Unfortunately, the Africans and many South Americans are positioning themselves to do "business," "strict business" with China where the argument is "both sides win". They will wake up in a generation or two that China has been EXTRACTING tons and tons of RAW and therefore precious resources from them,,,, just like the Europeans and their descendents elsewhere have done since the Roman's times........

Mandate of Heaven vs Manifest Destiny. Enter the Dragon, China wins in the art of fighting without fighting. The soul smiles. Thank you for Bruce and Brandon.
Maybe we can work together to reunite Korea?

It is a shame to blame African leaders as corrupts. Most of them are honest leaders who cares about their population. Africans don't need help or grants but business opprtunities. The true fact is that the West has erected so many trade barriers and subsidies that Africans cannot sell their products.
China gives Africa business opportunities. That's what we want. Not Aid or whatever humiliating grants.....

Folks one used to be concerned by the Chicoms' rapid and remarkable competition with the U.S. in Africa until I read that Bush's Asst. Sec. for African Affairs opined that the "U.S. does not perceive any threat by China to U.S. interests in Africa." So there if another one of Bush's "experts" says not to worry then why worry say I.

If Chicom trade with Africa equals colonization what the heck should we call Chicom trade with and domination of markets in the United States? Try sheer national suicide or more Bush stupidity.

USA envy has set in!! The USA is broke, Europe has a pension shortfall dynamite in her treasury; thus neither is interested in helping Africa. After destroying the infrastructure of Lebanon and Iraq, primarily with USA weaponry {both were friends in the past, "DEMOGRAPHIC LEBANON' and "IRAN FIGHTING HUSSAIN"}. It appears that the leadership of Africa prefers the company of China, a country which has not waged war all over the globe [as did the USA,in Chile, in Nicaragua,in Grenada, in Panama, in Somalia, etc] in the last 50 years. China also has money without "ONE-SIDED FREE TRADE" propaganda of the USA. Whereas China had experienced African Trade 400-600 years ago, without economic war, and Slave trade, without financial subjugations by proxies [IMF, World BAnk, USA mega-banks, USA Hedge Funds] is it suprising that as the USA Hegemony is collapsing that African leaders look towards the rising economic collossus, China, for their future?

The strategic interest of China [and Russia, and India - the new powers to be] is to apply the death by thousand cuts to the USA economic power. Tying up resources, especially those missing from the wealth of mainland USA, is but one aspect of this economic warfare. That China can afford to do this openly [without CIA, etc help] is due to the corrupt nature of the USA economy ruled by the philosophy of SPEND SPEND SPEND, and do it more as you go into debt, while China SAVES for a rainy day [or to ensure that it can get the material to keep its economy humming].

Crying about human rights and rule of law from the UK/USA side is somewhat facicious after IRAQ, prisoner rendering etc. Human rights issues have never entered the USA government/industry's interest except if there was money to be made from such interst. The deaths and population displacement in Iraq has nothing to compare to since the end of the Vietnam War, all courtesy of USA/Uk colonial desires. So why should Africa tie itself to such human rights abusers as UK/US.

when the above points are adressed in a rational manner, then perhaps there can be a discussion on Chin's place in Africa, from the USA point of view. Til then less noise the better .

Steve Lindsey, I suggest you read up on some of the actual demands that are made of many countries that accept US aid. You might not be so quick to judge if you actually knew some of the specific policies.

HLY, do you even know who William Gumede is? He's a prominent South African historian, author and political analyst and someone who probably has a much better understanding of colonization than you--maybe you should do your own research.

Those of you who argue that China is just conducting "business" or "trade" are being disengenuous. The Chinese and African governments, as well as the ruling and business elite who stand to profit, know that the nature of these agreements will lead to the dependence of African nations on China.
Any agreement that sets out to have a capital poor country export its natural resources without tying in reinvestment through job creation results in economic dependence and the exploitation of the citizenry. These types of agreements set the stage for a colonial relationship between China and the African nations.
This isn't a liberal, conservative or American viewpoint, it is a historical viewpoint.

African leaders are wise people. They do business with China because they do not have any choice. The West is spending so much money in WARS that do not have the financial muscle to help African countries. My dear White Wild West, STOP blaming China. I think its jealousy.....

Some people do not understand what the word colonization means. Historically, COLONIZATION means a WHITE people Governing a foreign country. Example: An Englishman or French man acting as Governor in an African country. (It's by force).
I don't think that a Chinese will be acting as Governor or President in an African country (By force, I mean).

Question; Which country or region of the world has the most corrupt leadership, China or Africa?

Kolo, please tell me you don't really think that the term colonizer is restricted to use on "WHITE" people?

Really...your not serious are you? In order to have a meaningful discussion we have to be able to think in more broad terms than the way it has been used "historically" (though I question the validity of even that statement).

Hosever, China is wrong to support the janjaweed in Darfur. Perhaps, China need to reconsider it's actions in Darfur. China decided to do the same thing the Europeans has done to take advantage of a situation. Keep factional fighting and steal the country's natural resources.

The author would be wiser to change the title of the article into: Is China Exploiting Africa? instead of colonizing.
My Answer is NO. China is offering Africa business opportunities that did not exist before. Most Africans are grateful.
I don't understand the mentality of the West who always give lessons to the third world (I guess it is typical of colonization mentality).

Africans should first have sex with Chinese then let the Chinese colonize Africa. Then we will have Black Chinese and Chinese Africans. Then we all can do business, you know, Global Trade.

If the US support the Saudis and some middle-east dictatorial regimes then Why should China not support the Sudanese?

The entire continent of Africa is the envy of all industrialized Western nations, China and other Asian nations. It has the 4 most strategic metals in the world (chromium, cobalt, manganese, and platinum). Has the best and largest supply of diamonds in the world. It now has the largest amount of crude oil in the world. It has huge abundance of medicinal plants and animals that other nations have been exploiting for a long time. It produces the largest amount of cocoa beans and best coffee beans in the world. It has the youngest most populated workforce in the world. It has the longest river in the world and is 30 billion square kilometers in size with huge agricultural and other production potential. It is also ground zero for the biological weapons of HIV/AIDS and Ebola.

Overall, China is good for Africa. The African Union and NEPAD must firm up the centralized structure to reduce the cheaper Chinese goods. China & Africa is the path. African Diaspora must invest in Africa NOW! America is financially broke.

Since a few years ago I have this feeling that People Republic's obvious interest in Africa is of more sinister kind than just raw materials. The Chinese are getting ready to settle the continent in case AIDS leads to depopulation of parts of Southern Africa.

Clean & Tidy
Go A, Frica

I wonder which part of the world invented the word "colonization", then I wonder why is china colonizing africa while the others stayed back (or do they?)..

I think the auther have the right to his opinion.China in africa is more business and political strategies than a colonizing sentiment

vova. If American and Canadians have replaced the indians (indigenious population) why should Chinese not replace Aficans?
They will become yellow Africans?

The Chinese are pure RACIST. Trust me and are only in Africa to suck the continent dry..SIMPLE. African technocrats and intellectuals desperately NEED to wake UP and save this wonderful place and it's people. We re tired of patronization!!!

China's investment in Africa's infrastructure seems like a good thing. But China's willingness to ignore all governance standards...maybe not so beneficial. The weakness of political institutions explains a lot of wasted foreign aid in Africa. Just when there seems to be acceptance by most African leaders of the need for institutions to enhance transparency in foreign aid, China starts writing blank checks.

The question is not whether China is worse than the West in its foreign aid motives and policies, but what are the likely effects of China's new foreign aid in Africa. In terms of political institutions, the effects appear less than beneficial.

hmmm. Too late. There is nothing to save in Africa. The West has already suck it dry.

Peter. Politics and democracy alone does not feed hungry people and gives work.

I live in the very democratic Island of Mauritius. Recently, the European Union decided to reduce the price of sugar by 36%. (The island would loose US$ 100 million per year). The sugar cane industry is near bankruptcy and more than 10,000 would be jobless soon.

On the other side, high oil prices has seriously affected the economy.

The Europeans is not proposing any financial help. How can we reject an offer of US$300 million dollar investment by Chinese companies to create an industrial zone in Mauritius?

Delighted with this short treatise. Hope to have more. It is also true that China's overtures to middle eastern countries is proceeding apace. But of course the US foreign policy, courtesy of GWB and the neocons, is busy trying to help Israel take over the middle east. And it's all going so well.
But glad Africa and Africans have some help, from wherever.

We should leave the african people to judge whether China is "colonizing" Africa. People in the west like you and me sitting in front of the computer have no right to do so.

Mauri:

Peter is not talking about the problems you're referring to.

To make a claim that "politics and democracy alone do not feed people" is a crude and unconstructive comment.

Peter wasn't saying that democracy feeds people. He's talking about non-responsive, corrupt governments that take foreign aid and misuse it. This is a serious problem that cannot be overlooked.

You too are looking at separate problems, but you cannot say that his problem does not cause poverty but yours does. Both issues are important causal factors.

This is free trade, no nation is being forced into a transaction at gunpoint. In any case every nation has a right to refuse the sale of natural resources and also has the right to refuse the purchase of foreign goods if they are in the process of overtaking marketshare because domestic consumers prefer foreign products over domestic ones.

China's relationship with the states of Africa are mutual. The PLA doesnt shock and awe anyone in the region to opening up their domestic markets.

It has been stated that financial help cannot be given without transparency because African political institutions are corrupt. Is it true? Can it be proven?

The truth is that when the WEST give money they have already taken a big part of it through consultancy services and lots of preliminary reports. This takes years before any project could start.

Why blame African instititions being corrupt and unabled to succeed?

It's a wonderful thing to see so many people responding to this article. I couldn't be happier to see this number of concerned individuals and this is what makes the new type of dominance different of that of the past (by USA and Europe), still Africa and Latin America are on their own and very dependable on foreign policy by the superpower. One thing is inevitable: the downfall of the United States and the emerging of the this new super power China. Get used to the idea.And it will all be the same sh*t. China or USA, I'd like to see china, just for a change.

In response to Mauri's comment: there are many factors contributing to poor development outcomes. Pointing to one important factor does not negate the importance of other factors. So, yes, institutions are critical. And, yes, there is considerable empirical evidence that weak institutions contribute to slow development in many African states. Does this mean EU and US agricultural subsidies don't matter? No, these surely impede development. Does this mean high consultancy fees don't matter? Also, no. But this doesn't change the critical importance of political institutions (I'm not talking about "let's everybody democratize!") for ensuring the oil revenues go for productive ends.

America keeps fighting wars china will making friends

Peter. You're right to see everything globally. Good analysis.

Authors assertions are grounded in truth for you can only expect to be on the losing end (from African perspective) when dealing with a super power like China that puts respect for basic human rights of its citizens secondary to imperative of building economic might. But the real question is what is the alternative? The West just don't have any respect for Africa aside for its resources and tourist attraction. Most African Nations don't have the internal strength for protectionist policy even if their governments were squeaky clean.

The fact that washington post find this idiot black person write this article, is to hide its not so good intentions. The author is a puppet who is trying to get attention from west. Since when a free trade pact is colonization? Nobody is pointing to a gun at anyone. If you buy a banana from a farmer, are you colonizing the farmer or the farmer colonizing you? what a idiot.

Since China discovered America in the year 1421, according to Gavin Menzies highly credible history, left settlements here with Chinese inscribed markers dated in their system of dating and were apparently the first to circumnavigate the world, what is soooo surprising about Africa. I believe, before I could read Chinese, I saw such a pillar near Asmara, Ethiopia in 1964 and Asmara is at about 8,000 feet, if I recall.

The author seems to have a vocabulary problem. This is most apparent in the headline. "Colonizing" a territory consists of invading it and imposing a government of the conqueror's choosing in order to secure access to the local industrial and agricultural commodities. Obtaining commodities by paying money to the locals responsible for producing them is normally referred to as "trade" or "trading." So the headline should read "China Trading With Africa?"

Seriously, though, this article is sensationalized horse manure. And its badly written. For example, the sentence "China envisaged annual trade with Africa to reach $100bn by 2010," has so many problems its almost pure gibberish.

While I don't agree with everything the article asserts and I sympathize with Muari on the issue of Western trade tariffs and agricultural subsidies, do we really have to call Gumede an "idiot" and turn our noses up at his English? Good grief.

oh jeez, this article is really coming out of the right mouth..

Africa is a pit and will always remain so. It is a pit of tribalism, "big man" ism, corruption, and stupidity on a scale to defy belief. One example: Thabo Mbeki, South Africa's PM, believes AIDS is caused by "spores" ... a common South African practice is to rape virgin girls in a belief it will "cure" AIDS.

Tribal superstion and ignorant witchdoctory do not a civilization make. THAT not Western Colonialism (which was appalling) is the heart of Africa's problems (and always has been).

King Leopold ran the Congo as his own personal slave state; the number of Congolese during his rule halved under his slave regime that would have appalled the Romans. Yet the Taipeng Revolt killed more in a era of muzzle loading weapons.

WHY?? Did China and Singapore and South Korea and Taiwan and Malaysia and Thailand all achieve very remarkable economic progress while Africa languished in brutal witchdoctory ... WHY?

Because the Chinese and Asian strongmen may have been theiving bastards, but they were at least intelligent theiving bastards who understood they could steal more if their people became richer. And they weren't superstitious witchdoctors like Mbeki.

African cultures devalue education, science, technology, in favor of bravado and superstition. Ladies and Gentlemen I give you General Buck Naked and the Buck Naked Brigade.

China merely recognizes that Africa is a source of cheap labor, cheap raw materials for value-added Chinese manufacture, and easily exploited by their superstitious and ignorant/blustery leaders. A continent where people actually believe that shaking hands with a White or Christian will cause their penises to drop off is easily exploited.

Even South Korea in the late fifties, recovering from a massive war and suffering under a theiving tyrant, invested in science and technology and has leveraged that investment into a very good standard of living today. Africa has produced nothing in the way of scientific research or new technology.

China will bleed Africa of it's meager resources, sell it a lot of cheap junk, and leave it's people (if possible) even poorer and more ignorant than before.

[Africa is so bad Zimbabweans have four times the death rates of Iraqis, and would love to move to Iraq where they have a far better chance of surviving. That's the pathetic hopelessness of Africa. FOUR TIMES WORSE THAN IRAQ.]

After spending more than 2 decades in Africa, I can assure you that no matter what you have to say about the US or China and their various ambitions in Africa, the problem with Africa is all self made. The first person to disagree with this simple premise is either ignorant or a liar.

African leaders are corrupt, dictatorial bullys. Their subjects are uneducated and unwilling to stand up to them. This creates the perfect environment for exploitation. The perfect example of this is Mugabe. How many African leaders want him to step down? Who has spoken up?

Grow up Africa. The rest of the planet has moved on.

IT IS SCARY HOW FOR OIL NATIONS LOOK THE OTHER WAY WHEN BRUTAL KILLINGS HAPPEN ALL AROUND THEM. MAN, IT'S UNFORTUNATE. AND REALLY GUTLESS.

Jim Rockford. I somewhat agree with you.
I am of Chinese origin whose family emigrated from China to Mauritius a century years ago. Mauritius has a population of 1.2 millions consisting of 80% from Asian origin (Indians/Chinese) + a few % from Europe. The rest around 15% from African origin.
The bare truth is that a century ago our families left their countries because they were poor. We were treated as slaves by the English masters (colonialism).

The Asians and Europeans (Whites) worked very hard, educated their children and now they can be considered rich or middle-class, enjoying a type of life equalling European middle-class (A home of at least 200 m2 + all imaginable amenities + latest craze - LCD TV + new Sedan Car every 7 years + family holidays in Asia or Europe every 4-5 years). Additionally at least one of their children is in Europe or US for Higher studies.

The population of African origin is still very poor. They did not educate their children and still depends on the Government for a low class house. They live a day-to-day life, enjoying festive Week-Ends and spend all their money. Culturally these people of African origin do not have a business mentality. Its not their fault. But thanks to Asians/Europeans who econmically developed the country to one of the richest in Africa, the people of African origin in Mauritius enjoys a better life than those in Africa.

It is not the fault of Chinese to come in Africa and do what African cannot do by themslselves. At least they will get some share of the benefits and live a better life. Its a WIN-WIN situation.

I know that if there were only Africans in Mauritius our standard of life would be as low as Madagascar (our neighbor) which is one of the poorest in the world.

Yep, Jim Rob and Mauri. Same here in America it seems too unfortunately. Everyone needs to look in the mirror once in a while...

Africans are the most stupid, lazy-ass people on the face of the earth. The problem with Africa is Africans. If Asians or any other non-African people come to Africa, it can only be an improvement. Of course they will be accused of exploiting the natives. The indiginous people of Africa are incapable of comprehending any benefit that other people achieve through the process of being intelligent and productive organisms. This is a trait that they share with western liberal idiots like the writers here at the Washington Post.

Whether you interpret colonization as the act or process of establishing a colony, or as merely to increase influence over Africa by political and economical power would not please typical westerners(Mr Havin alike) or "history-educated people". They think (rightly) that colonization stuff has been and will always be westerners' business and they will never accept the fact that China will dominate the world in the 21st century.
Mr HLY and his history-educated people should take a look at the website:http://www.1421.tv/ in which an admirable British has been working on a remarkable project that would, if succeeded, rewrite the history of New World Discovery, including Columbia's America.
I would also like to suggest that Mr Havin to travel to small towns in Burundi(my US college pal's home country) where you will bump into some "Black Chinese" or Chinese Africans. They are the descendants of Chinese workers who were sent there(and other poor African countries) to help build rail roads during the 70's and some married to locals and settled down in the country.
I'm not a Chinese national or pro China. But whether you like it or not, China, with megaeconomy growing at a rate of over 10% annually, and with close to one trillion foreign reserves, will soon become one of the two world's superpowers.
Welcome to the real world, westerner/white supremacists: face and live with the ever-changing world or move to Mountain Home, Arkansas.

African leaders may be corrupt and brutal in Western eyes, but they are the products of history and circumstances.

If in 1865 there was a superpower like modern day US, Lincoln would surely be condemned as a brutal dictator or even war criminal for forcefully suppressing the Confederacy rebellion, causing one million casualties (3% of the population).

Every nation (including the US) must run its own course of history and development, however inhumane it may sometimes be. China, having been through over 100 years of foreign invasion and internal conflict, understand this deeply. That's why it never imposes its own standards on others.

America was successful in bringing a Florida-style democracy to Iraq. I wonder what song Bush would play on his guitar if Hurricane Katrina hit Africa.

muskrat; Example: Bush DOUBLED aid to many Afican nations. Where does it end up - with the corrupt leaders.

I'm sorry, muskrat, but you really must stop reading the press clippings and start relying on your own eyes and investigative work.

When one takesa hard look at the numbers, Bush's 'doubling' includes 9% of new money. A far cry from 'doubling'. That amounts to around $800m in new spending. Most of the 'doubling' Bush promised is money to be provided anyway through the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) and the AIDS promise. It's also interesting to note that very little of the money for the AIDS initiative has been disbursed yet and it's been 3 years since it was announced.

Basically, not only was the promise wildly inaccurate and solely meant for scoring political points among the ignorant at home, without actual delivery, it's an empty claim.

You'd do well to remember there's a VAST difference between the claims of politicians and reality.

Chineseview:

There was a global superpower on the scale of the United States in 1865. It was called the British Empire.

The British Empire was greater than the US because there was at least one Union Jack somewhere in the world that was under sunlight exposure.

Yonkers, NY, 30 Dec. 2006. No. That is the simple answer to the author's question QUOTE IS CHINA COLONIZING AFRICA?UNQUOTE. The truth is that in its relentless drive to modernize and catch up with the West economically, China needs all that Africa has in terms of oil and minerals but the big difference between what the former European colonizers did in the past and what China is now doing is that those European colonizers simply grabbed what Africa got WITHOUT PAYING FOR THEM while on the other hand China is PAYING FOR ALL THAT IT IS GETTING FROM AFRICA ON MUTUALLY AGREEABLE TERMS. What is more, China is offering African countries sizable loans IN THE BILLIONS PER COUNTRY without the strings which Western aid and financial institutions routinely impose on such loans. It is of course inevitable that China will become a major player in Africa. It remains to be seen whether its financial and economic clout automatically translates into political leverage. Mariano Patalinjug. MarPatalinjug@aol.com