[The Clockwork Rat]

Zimbabwe could be in line for a windfall of up to $10bn (£6.19bn) from China, a potentially huge boost to its ailing economy, its ministers have claimed.

But such an investment would be likely to heighten concerns about president Robert Mugabe's increasingly warm relationship with China, which has been accused of turning a blind eye to human rights violations across Africa.

Zimbabwe's coalition government is putting up a united front on the issue, however, insisting that Chinese investment in mining and agriculture could help turn the economy around.

Tapiwa Mashakada, a government minister and member of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), told Reuters on Monday: "We have met with officials from China Development Bank and they have said they are willing to invest up to $10bn in Zimbabwe."

The sum would dwarf Zimbabwe's gross domestic product, expected to be about $6bn (£3.72bn) this year.

Mashakada, the minister of economic planning and investment promotion, told a conference in Harare that he expected Zimbabwe to produce about 1.5m tonnes of maize in 2011, up from 1.3m last year. He saw gold production hitting 13 tonnes in 2011, up from 8.3 tonnes in 2010.

Zimbabwe also has the world's second biggest platinum reserves and hugely controversial deposits of alluvial diamonds.

China is "looking into mining development, that is exploration and exploitation, agriculture, infrastructure development and information communication technology", Mashakada said. "The Chinese are now moving towards strict due diligence, accountability and transparency. At the end of the day this really depends on us, how we position ourselves as a destination for investment. China is coming in a very big way." The announcement could be aimed at trying to prod western investors to sink more money into Zimbabwe out of fear they will lose ground to China.

Trevor Ncube, an entrepreneur who attended the conference, said he was sceptical about the headline figure. "That number looks a bit too big for me," he said. "It sounds a rather extravagant claim."

Ncube, publisher of the Zimbabwean newspaper NewsDay, said he understood the lines of credit were aimed at the private sector. "We shouldn't overplay the political dimension. The Chinese are streetwise. We expect them to conduct themselves in a businesslike manner. We know it's not humanitarian; they will earn a bit of interest."

China said recently its two-way trade with Africa had increased by nearly 45% in a year to hit a record $114.8bn (£75bn). Its investment in Zimbabwe has been growing steadily over the last decade but still lags behind that in neighbouring Mozambique, Zambia and Angola.

The unity government formed between Mugabe and prime minister Morgan Tsvangirai in 2009 brought stability to an economy crippled by hyperinflation. But it has failed to attract foreign investment, especially from western companies who want more political reforms and are anxious about a law that says 51% of firms worth over $500,000 should be owned by black Zimbabweans.

Last year the Chinese embassy in Harare threw an 86th birthday party for Mugabe. Such gestures have fuelled speculation that China is content to prop up Mugabe and could even bankroll his next election campaign. It has refused to join America, Britain and the EU in imposing sanctions against the president and his allies. But the MDC hesitates to criticise a potential cashcow. Tsvangirai told Fox News last week: "Whatever you can say about the Chinese, they are not missionaries. They have business interests, they have their own national interests, especially when it comes to resources."

Chinese investors have snapped up commercial and residential properties in Zimbabwe's capital, Harare, over the past few years. The influx of cheap Chinese goods, known locally as "zhing-zhong", has caused widespread annoyance.

William Bango, a veteran former journalist, said: "China is just taking advantage of a basket case. If you're a donor's burden, you have all kinds of thieves and crooks and people bringing you all kinds of trinkets.

"Once we restore this society to normalcy, with all standards maintained, China will fall away."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/fe ... on-economy

Didn't we see this a while back, by a certain island nation just off the coast of NW Europe?

[Eauz]

If China sees it is worth investing, why not? China is doing the right thing, when it comes to doing business. It's up to the people in Zimbabwe, to either fight against the government or not. Good for China, on improving their access to resources.

[Fasces]

If Portugal sees it is worth investing, why not? Portugal is doing the right thing, when it comes to doing business. It's up to the people of Africa, to either fight against the government or not. Good for Portugal, on improving their access to resources.

Imperialism is imperialism, whether its mercantilist, capitalist or socialist.

[J Oswald]

The money will probably get siphoned into various officials' pockets, but that's a risk the Chinese will have to take. If they want to invest, good for them.

[Eauz]

If Portugal sees it is worth investing, why not? Portugal is doing the right thing, when it comes to doing business. It's up to the people of Africa, to either fight against the government or not. Good for Portugal, on improving their access to resources.

Imperialism is imperialism, whether its mercantilist, capitalist or socialist.

I don't think Portugal invested much into Africa, though. But, yes, in terms of reality, do you really have a problem with China investing this money into Africa? Even if it was a publicity stunt, did Portugal send hospital ships to Africa? At least China is investing in infrastructure and building roads. As for the West, nuclear waste dumping in the Ivory Coast and using Somalia as a garbage can by European firms.

[J Oswald]

Even the nuclear waste example can count as an example of investment, as long as the dumping power is paying the Ivory Coast money for doing so. The Ivory Coast can do anything they want with money, and payment for services rendered can be a good source of revenue in poorer nations.

[Eauz]

Even the nuclear waste example can count as an example of investment, as long as the dumping power is paying the Ivory Coast money for doing so. The Ivory Coast can do anything they want with money, and payment for services rendered can be a good source of revenue in poorer nations.

True, but which actually benefits society, infrastructure and roads or government payment to other governments?

[J Oswald]

They can theoretically help equally, although direct investment's more likely to help in a poorer nation. Money has the nasty habit of winding up in government officials' pockets.

[Eauz]

They can theoretically

Correct, but again, infrastructure & roads vs. theoretical development.

[J Oswald]

I think it's good that China's investing money. I'm not exactly sure if they think they'll gain a long-term advantage from it, but in the short and medium-runs, it will pan out decently for them.

[The Clockwork Rat]

Here, where did I suggest that I was vigorously opposed to this? I merely drew a parallel with past events.

[JohnRawls]

Well why not , when europe abandoned zimbabwe someone needed to help them.

[Fasces]

So the IMF loans are a tool of Western neo-colonialism, but China gets off the hook? Some consistency should be maintained, I think.

I don't oppose this act in principle, but it is naive to believe this comes with no strings attached. I am dubious of China's intentions.

[JohnRawls]

Imf loans are usually forced on countries and this one isn't.

[Fasces]

They are not forced. A government does not have to engage in deficit spending.

[Eauz]

So the IMF loans are a tool of Western neo-colonialism, but China gets off the hook?

There is nothing moral about it. It has nothing to do with neo-colonialism or imperialism. This is just good business on the part of China and shows our own weakness, when it comes to development and investment opportunities. Even South Korea is getting involved in emerging markets, as they are investing more in Myanmar.

but it is naive to believe this comes with no strings attached. I am dubious of China's intentions.

Who suggested they didn't come with strings?

[Amanita]

I don't think Portugal invested much into Africa, though.

What should it matter where they invested? Portuguese imperialism fueled the economies of the new world and gave birth to modern capitalism thanks to its slave trade. From a marxist perspective, European imperialism should be seen to have done WONDERS for humanity, including Africa in the long run. Even in the short run, Portuguese imperialism, in particular, drove the coastal African states (e.g. Kongo) to expand inwards in search of slaves and other resources to be traded. In case of Zimbabwe, the Munhumutapa gave way to the more advanced gun-wielding Rozvi. This is precisely the problem with modern so-called "marxists". They suddently turn moral-sentimentalist when it comes to the imperialism historically conducted by European people.

[Texpat]

Beautiful.
Where is the outcry of sadly-oppressed Euros and Britons about the misuse of power?

I cherish the massive gulp when these chronic whiners start swallowing their pathetic words.

Long live Mugabe! Go China GO!

[Mod note: I'll leave this for now, defying my feeling that this post is anything but serious, let alone appropriately worded for an on-topic discussion. Be a bit more serious in the future and we won't have to do this again.]

[ChildOfTheDamned]

Whatever keeps mad bob rich and in power is fine with me. The zim people mustn't get off so easy for voting in a racist.
Their lesson continues.

[Eauz]

This is precisely the problem with modern so-called "marxists". They suddently turn moral-sentimentalist when it comes to the imperialism historically conducted by European people.

There are three issues to resolve here:

1) There is no official line, with regard to whether imperialism is good or evil, in the Marxist camp. Marx was in full support of the British, to modernize India.

2)My discussion in this thread has nothing to do with morality. The concept of slavery, did see major changes in the life-style of people and we saw the move towards modern capitalism, however, in terms of a comparison between what Europe did (or didn't do) in Africa and that of present day China, it seems that having roads, infrastructure and investment will probably do much more to modernise Africa, than throwing cash at the problem or relying on chairty groups to feed people.

3)My argument was from a business perspective. China is investing and gaining access to a lot of resources, throughout the world and at the same time, encouraging growth and investment in countries that the West ignores or won't do business with. It's not China's problem, that the West has given up on potential clients and development projects.