It seems like the Sino-Japanese rivalry is once again heated up as China and Japan find their new battleground in Africa – jostling for influence through developments and summits amounting to billions of dollars.
In 2016, Japanese Prime minister Shinzo Abe pledged 30 billion dollars as support for the African development over the next three years, at the Sixth Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD VI) which was held in Nairobi, Kenya on the 27th and 28th of August – the first time in 23 years that the TICAD was hosted in Africa since its inception in 1993. In addition, a 10-billion-dollar worth of infrastructure projects was executed in cooperation with the African Development Bank.
Since 2013, Japan has promised 62 billion dollars to Africa – which was easily eclipsed by China’s approximately 94-billion-dollar worth of funding to nearly 2 650 development projects in fifty-one African countries. As a matter of fact, Africa receives more than half of China’s annual international development budget.
However, PM Abe is seemingly unconcerned with the discrepancy stressing (in his address at the TICAD VI) that quality, and not quantity, is what matters – saying:
“Allow me here to add to the word ‘Africa’ the three modifiers of ‘quality’, ‘resilient’ and ‘stable’. That is precisely the form of Africa that Japan will aim for, working together with you. A ‘quality Africa’ will be built…”
While Japan’s increased contribution and aid to African development is a positive sign of enhanced international relations, the broad coverage of Japan’s linkages intensifies its competition with China in Africa.
Rather than assessing the conclave (TICAD VI) in a linear fashion, as Japanese and African leaders converge to chart a common agenda, the Chinese have a negative view about the matter and see the move as Japan’s way to supplant China in Africa.
“We all know that TICAD, as its name suggests, is a multilateral platform for communication and cooperation with its focus on African development. Its purpose is to support African development. Regrettably, during the 6th TICAD held last week in Kenya, Japan attempted to impose its wills on African countries to gain selfish interests and drive a wedge between China and African countries.”, says Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying during a regular press conference held on August 29, 2016 – a day after the TICAD VI.
These exasperated accusations are primarily rooted to the observation that Japan has attempted to inject political issues – such as the U.N. Security Council reform and maritime issues – into the forum’s agenda which was supposed to be just about African development, and therefore politicizing it.
Besides economic issues, two of China’s many concerns as Japan continues to heighten its political and military presence in Africa are – Japan’s hopes of enlisting African countries to the U.N. Security Council, which according to Abe, “U.N. Security Council is the common goal of Japan and Africa.”; and maintaining and expanding its Djibouti military base (since 2011) to combat piracy on the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea. In the Chinese view, these are clear manifestations that “the Abe administration essentially wants to get rid of the shackles of the post-war system and seek to become a political and military power.”
China is particularly worried about the “freedom of navigation” that Japan is introducing to Africa. Especially that Beijing’s claims in the South China Sea have been rejected, a discussion on freedom of navigation between Japan and Africa will affect China’s support base.
At the end of the day, while it is given that Japan and China have a long history of rivalry (i.e. World War II, Nanking massacre, and territorial disputes especially over the Diaoyu Islands) and as tensions between their relations multiply, it is ideal for these two countries to fight their battles in their own backyard without involving other states – in this case, Africa. On the other hand, it is objective for Africa not to take sides but take advantage of other countries’ interests to the detriment of its economic well being.
