China Redux

It’s not often that the paper of record writes with such biting sarcasm. But the Times is not holding back its disdain for the way China has pursued relationships with certain African countries. Here is an excerpt from today’s NYT editorial page, entitled “Patron of African Misgovernment”:

Misspent your country’s wealth? Waged war against an ethnic minority? Or just tired of those pesky good governance requirements attached to foreign aid by most Western governments and multilateral institutions?

If you run an African country and have some natural resources to put in long-term hock, you’ve got a friend in Beijing ready to write big checks with no embarrassing questions. That’s nice for governments, but not so nice for their misgoverned people.

While I too have been critical of some of China’s investments in Africa (here and here), it’s worth noting that there is good that may yet come from the bad. Trade and investment helps to reduce poverty in Africa, period. And China is playing a major role in increased trade and investment on the continent.

Beyond the obvious problems of funding illegitimate, murderous regimes (!!!), the concern is that China’s investments in Africa seem to be only helping the autocrats and mining investors get richer (a point the Times editorial makes). In other words, GDP rises in African countries (which is generally good for reducing poverty), but the neediest in those countries don’t reap any of the benefits. Which gives foreign aid a bad name.

Here’s the lesson for China: If you must provide succor to reviled autocrats (in Africa or elsewhere), at least use your wealth to help the poorest people. That means funding for HIV/AIDS and malaria prevention programs instead of technical assistance to develop oil facilities. Or education projects instead of opening export markets. If you can do that, the truly decent might cancel out the truly awful in the eyes of the world. And the Times might even spare you its sarcasm.