The Weekend Economist "Quaerere Verum"

The Weekend Economist "Quaerere Verum" is a part of the greater Weekend Economist, which is an interactive space aimed at being both a source of information and a place for discussion on developing stories related to Economics, Business, Technology, Finance and Geo-politics. Please feel free to post your comments and/or send us your own articles for publication by contacting us at weekendeconomist@gmail.com. Also, if there is a relevant topic you would like us to write about, please ask and we will be glad to meet your request. Finally, our two other blogs, WE Technology, Strategy & Business and The World Beyond The Weekend Economist, might be of interest as well. We hope you enjoy our site(s), Benjamin Valk & Jeroen van Bommel.
Showing posts with label Sudan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sudan. Show all posts

Monday, May 21, 2007

#64 The Non-Genocidal Face of Sudan

Sudan, Africa's largest country, is best known for the crisis (others would call it genocide) in Darfur. But there is another story to Sudan as well. A much more positive one. Sudan happens to be one of Africa's fastest growing economies and, ironically, one of the more stable as of late. What's more, Sudan is currently also one of the world's fastest growing economies.

Sudan's President Omar Al-Bashir announced recently that the country's economic growth rate reached 8% in 2006, adding that the growth rate is expected to increase to between 9-13% in the next year. In fact, according to IMF figures, real GDP growth has reported an average of 6.7% over the past seven years: 8.4% in 2000, 6.2% in 2001, 6.4% in 2002, 4.9% in 2003, 5.2% in 2004, 7.9% in 2005 and 8% in 2006. Other sources put the GDP figure even higher at an average annual growth rate of slightly more than 7% over the past seven years. GDP in 2005 stood at US$ 6,747,748, compared to a mere US$4,950 in 1980. This is remarkable given the grave situation in Darfur and the economic blockade imposed by a large number of nations, as well as the long North-South Civil War that ended with the official signing by both sides of the Nairobi Comprehensive Peace Agreement on 9 January 2005, granting Southern Sudan autonomy for six years, to be followed by a referendum about independence.

Not surprisingly, two major factors in the growth equation are China and oil. Oil revenues have become a major part of GDP, contributing to 49% of the total GDP in 2004, compared to 5.9% in 1999. China imported 81% of Sudan's entire oil exports to the world, while oil accounted for 98.8% of Sudan's exports to China. Of Sudan's total exports to the world in 2003, 40.9% went to China. China is indeed by far Sudan's most valuable trading partner, as, according to the OECD, Sudan's main partners 2004 were China (64.3%), Japan (13.8%) and Saudi Arabia (3.7%). In terms of Sudan's importance for China's economy, Sudanese oil accounted for no more than 5.5% of China's total imports of oil in 2004. Sudanese activist Ali Askouri has gone so far as to proclaim Sudan "The first country to become a Chinese colony."

Another interesting fact that is very much worth noting is that Arab investments in Sudan surged by more than 15 times from US$657 million in 2004 to US$2,341 in 2005. Despite all this, however, we should hope that the crisis in Darfur is not permitted to fade any more into obscurity than it already is. If the figures provided by the United Nations are correct, more than 200,000 people have been killed and two million displaced in the fighting. This should not be worth an economic boom. Khartoum says only 9,000 people have died, but this is not taken seriously by many. In any case, China, for one, does not seem inclined to budge even one inch from their principle of non-interference in the affairs of other countries (a policy that was established more than 50 years ago by then foreign minister Zhou Enlai). Without China, little can be done in Darfur. Without China, little economic growth would be witnessed in Sudan. China reigns supreme.

Friday, December 29, 2006

#10 A True Man of Peace

A recently declassified document by the US State Department reveals that Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Yassir Arafat was not always so peace loving (whether he ever was is something I leave up to each of your own individual judgments). On March 1, 1973, Arafat ordered the Black September Organization members who seized the Saudi Arabian embassy in Khartoum, Sudan, to kill the United States ambassador, his deputy, and a Belgian diplomat. At the time there was a diplomatic reception at the Saudi embassy honoring the departing US Deputy Chief of Mission.

It is interesting to note that another Peace Laureate who is today trying increasingly hard to play a part in the Middle East peace process, Jimmy Carter, considered Arafat a "dear friend." One might expect that, given this new information, Carter's legitimacy should now be undermined in the eyes of US government officials. Sadly, this probably won't happen, given the fact that this is not entirely a new story. In fact, Kenneth R. Timmerman reported on this event back in June 25, 2001, but never found many ears that were willing to listen. You can find his report on the following website: http://www.john-loftus.com/welsh1.asp.

Given the fact that it has always been preferred by top officials to see Arafat as a man wanting nothing more than peace, this would be news is really worth little more than a shrug. This is especially so now hat he is no longer among us. I mean, why tamper with a noble (or should I say nobel) martyr? Although Abu Mazen (President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas) has been accused of funding the Munich massacres, his slate record is virgin-like compared to Arafat's. Not to mention compared to that of any Hamas official. As such, I continue to place my hopes on Abbas, albeit skeptically due to the precariousness of his position.
The actual document from the Department of State can be found here: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/67584.pdf

Wednesday, December 27, 2006

#3 Africa - China's Training Ground

If the term "failed state" is used to define those states where government is unable to perform its basic duties, then Africa could be considered a "failed continent." Indeed, in the 2006 'Failed States Index' published by the US think-tank, The Fund for Peace, and by US magazine, Foreign Policy, 4 out of the top 5 failed states are located in Africa: 1. Sudan, 2. Democratic Republic of Congo, 3. Ivory Coast, 4. Iraq, 5. Zimbabwe.

Africa, however, is blessed with an impressive endowment of mineral wealth, which has not gone by unnoticed by the risk-loving Chinese. China is eager to snatch its share of Africa's near-global monopolies of platinum (89%) and diamonds (60%) and her significant proportion of the world's cobalt (53%), Zirconium (37%), and gold (28%) reserves (Jonah, 2005). Africa further boasts very sizeable reserves of coal, uranium, copper, nickel, natural gas, and most importantly, oil. While Africa currently accounts for 7% of the global total estimated proved oil reserves (EIA, 1999), the region has the potential to supply 25% of the U.S.'s oil imports by 2015 and already accounts for 30% of China’s imports of oil, according to Forbes. In fact, Angola has recently become China’s largest oil supplier, surpassing Saudi Arabia.

While Africa’s natural wealth is not a new phenomenon, China’s significant investments in the continent is. To highlight the stunning growth of trade between China and Africa, in 1999 the value of trade between the two was $2 billion, which grew to $29.6 billion in 2004 and is expected to reach $50 billion by the end of 2006 (IMF). In some countries, China has set up a near-monopoly in trade, importing 81% of Sudan’s global oil exports and 72.5% of Congo’s global exports in metals, while simultaneously accounting for 14.2% of Sudan’s total global imports and 9.1% of Ghana and Tanzania’s total imports (Kaplinsky, 2006).

The phenomenon of China’s trade in Africa presents the continent with a renewed opportunity to climb out of its current misery and forever shed the stigma of failure. What it also presents, however, is a perfect stage on which China can learn the ways of a global superpower. China is able to build her clout relatively quietly, while the old guard focuses their attention elsewhere. Not only is the Middle Kingdom securing crucial resources to sustain her incredible growth, she is also ‘playing the field’ politically. A similar pattern is emerging in Latin America; where China is slowly becoming a pain for the US, as Latin American countries that are fed up with the Americans for whatever reason now see China as the perfect alternative. Chavez’s open flirting with China is a good example of this. Given Chinese support to such rogue regimes as the Sudanese government and Mugabe in Zimbabwe, increased global Chinese influence is sure to rile the US further.

It is therefore imperative that the US takes note of China’s dealings in Africa, as it is sure to be merely the testing ground for further expansion. The US and the EU should engage with China in Africa, rather than compete directly, as it is impossible to beat the conditions given to African nations by the Chinese (China follows a policy of non-interference in other countries’ internal affairs and thus pays no mind to issues like corruption). China has already provided crucial infrastructure and real estate in exchange for trade deals and has provided loans and given debt relief to countries such as Angola, which was refused loans by the West unless it met certain governance requirements. Such conditions cannot be provided by the USA, EU or Japan, as it would mean a major loss of credibility, giving China a clear advantage. Only by engaging China in Africa can the US continue to exert influence and retain her credibility in the continent. The ultimate question is how to go about doing this. The US has little leverage in regard to China, seeing as the Chinese are supplying most of the credit to the US. The EU remains the largest investor in Africa, while the US is second and China third, suggesting that Europe should play a key role in engaging China.

One way to do this is by asking China to join the African Partnership Forum (a grouping of key African governments, Western development donors and African and international organizations), as suggested by Leni Wild and David Mepham of the IPPR. China should also be involved in other Western forums concerning Africa, while Europe and the US should ask to join existing Chinese forums discussing various issues with their African partners. The EU/China Co-operation Program should also put the issue on her agenda. It should be made clear to China that her image will be seriously tarnished unless corporate governance is incorporated into her dealings in the African continent. The African Union’s commitment to good governance should help in this respect.

In sum, China’s rising influence in Africa is a topic that consists of many branches (many more than have been touched upon above) and should prove to be of great significance in a global context. Other postings on the Weekend Economist will be sure to cover the issue from different angles.
References

EIA (1999) A snapshot of Oil and Gas in Africa Official Energy Statistics from the US Government, Energy Information Administration

Forbes (2006) http://www.forbes.com/business/energy/2006/10/06/energy-african-oil-biz-energy_cx_jc_1009beijing_energy06.html

IMF Direction of Trade Statistics

Jonah (2005) Presentation by Sam Jonah, former President of AngloGold Ashanti, University of South Africa, unpublished.

Kaplinsky R (2006) Winners and losers: China’s trade threats and opportunities for Africa, The New Sinosphere.