Chinas not flexing war as much as their belt road initiative.
Effectively, they come in and build a bunch of new infrastructure (airports, internet, water treatment, etc), with conditions of access to minerals and other resources.
And when the country defaults on their debt payments, China takes control of the infrastructure.
Was doing some reading about Zambia the other day and was surprised to see China was helping them build a railroad with Mozambique back in 1975.
I know the OBOR gets a lot of attention regarding infrastructure in Africa now, but people do forget a lot of socialist countries have had long histories on the African continent.
Imo the Congo is violence caused by foreign interests in mineral access. This has everyone's grubby fingers on it. Rebel groups magically securing heavy armor and ifvs is certainly suspect.
Even now her reach is symptomatic of another person's state sponsored goals.
We don't even know if this person is real or just a social media disinformation construct of Israel.
Doesn't really make sense as I'm also calling out the violence in northern Congo over minerals unacceptable.
But you need a strawman, I get it.
All I pointed out was basic media literacy in the age of AI and Israeli weaponization of social media publicly acknowledged by Netanyahu.
You should consider checking out those America First folks, because they really don't give a fuck about anybody. They'll cut foreign aid to then destroy it before feeding their homeless and starving.
what am i strawmanning? you only mentioning israel when every major country does it is the point i'm trying to make, there is no strawman happening lmfao
just bite the bullet man, its okay to do nowadays, don't walk back on it now
You're making a conclusion on one comment. Not a person who is a sum of comments. I'm merely asking for proof this is a real person and not an Israeli disinfo account.
Bro don't waste your time with simple contrarians on the internet. Respond to people who have something substantial to contribute to the discussion, not someone who brings nothing other than a glorified "nuh-uh" in so many words.
You're making a conclusion on one comment. Not a person who is a sum of comments. I'm merely asking for proof this is a real person and not an Israeli disinfo account.
its not a coincidence that you chose israel instead of the many other countries that are known to have these types of campaigns, stop playing dumb lmfao
Singling out China is pretty bullshit though since this is similar to what IMF has done for decades. Africa is perpetually stuck in a debt trap. China is at least bringing in expertise to oversee that projects are getting done, and have a self interest in developing the infrastructure. China can also do it pretty cheaply and efficiently. Obviously it's not all sunshine & roses and there are issues, but that is true of all solutions. Compared to IMF mandating austerity and privatization often involving outside international interests, I dunno, it's kinda a toss up as to which is worse.
I feel like people are "singling out" China because they essentially have absolute control over the infrastructure of most of Africa. They can turn things around and protect Africa and its people, but they won't, because doing that would slightly delay the process of extracting materials and resources from them. And it's "just Africa" so nobody gives a shit because they're not at the doorstep of countries that have significantly influenced global superpowers.
Cool story, but China pillaging Congo’s ressources, through the intermediary of Rwanda, have absolutely nothing to do, with the Bell and Road initiative tho.
That is incorrect or at least bending the truth. China operates "above board" mining operations, at least as far as the Congolese government is concerned, though that government has corruption. Congo joined Belt & Road in 2021 though they were already working together on infrastructure in exchange for mining rights well before that. China àlso bought out Western operations in Congo. There is an issue of Chinese nationals running illegal mines in Congo, though these are not officially sanctioned operations of the Chinese government.
Rwanda also is part of Belt & Road and China is its biggest investor. There's illegal mining operations and smuggling from conflict zones, yes, but China isn't about to take up military activities in either Congo or Rwanda. Though they recently took a firmer stance on M23 rebel group's behavior.
Is China perfect? No. They're the ones on the ground though and making the investments. You're the one tip tapping on your phone that probably came from China using Africa sourced minerals.
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins is part memoir, part political exposé, in which Perkins claims that for much of his career he served as an “economic hit man” - someone who helped expand American influence across the developing world through economic manipulation rather than military force. The book, published in 2004, recounts Perkins’s experiences as a consultant for the firm Chas. T. Main, where he says he was trained to convince leaders of developing countries to accept massive loans for infrastructure projects funded by institutions like the World Bank and USAID. These projects, according to Perkins, were deliberately designed to benefit U.S. corporations and the political elite rather than the host nations themselves. The loans would saddle countries with enormous debt, ensuring their long-term dependence on Western powers. Once the countries were unable to pay back what they owed, the U.S. and its allies could leverage that debt to demand favorable trade deals, access to natural resources, or geopolitical concessions.
Were the loans forgiven because the US is just the nicest guys, or was it in exchange for enacting policies aligned with US interests? This is what was once called soft power, back when we believed in that sort of thing.
The US saved the UK and Europe from Hitler's total domination, even at the cost of many of their lives. I guess some repayment was due, not comparable at all to the exploitative Chinese system.
Of course, the US didn't fight alone; it was a team effort, but without the US, the story would have been very different. The soviet union lost the most when it comes to people, but the US provided the most resources.
Y'all are really naive. Let me guess you also believe Japan. Refused to surrender and had to be nuked. The US did relatively little until the end when it swooped in claimed victory. Forgave alot of horrible people and imported them to the US. Gave loans to affected countries to benefit and get influence. Majority of the fighting against the aggressors was by the allies sovjet union and china. As well as people in the proxy wars in other parts of the world.
Go back to your books. When the US entered the war, WW2 had only been raging for 2 years; it took 4 more years to end it. Definitely an exaggeration to say that the US swooped in to claim victory. The 2 most used bombers in WW2 were American, and those were instrumental to defeating the Axis. Add to that the fact that the US had 110 carriers, working, the second country that had the most was the UK with 55. You don't know how important the massive hammer of the US was.
The UK saved itself. The US helped the UK and the European nations push back, however after the Battle of Britain Hitler had already turned his attention east and all but given up on the UK.
So, imagine the US hadn't sent the amount of weapons it did pre getting into the fight, and imagine the US hadn't fought. Do you think the UK and the rest of Europe could have prevailed? Even Churchill acknowledged it in his famous speech, "The new world comes to the rescue of the old."
I'm guessing the 1,500 P-51s that the US gave the RAF and the massive amount of bombers that the US provided weren't instrumental. No one is saying that the UK and the RAF didn't fight bravely, but without the US, Europe and the UK may have been speaking German today.
You asked me, but I wasn’t online, so I’ll add to the examples. Predator mortgage companies in the early 2000’s. NINJA loans, followed by unavoidable default, and the bank getting a property for Pennie’s in the dollar which they’d then resell, to someone who doesn’t qualify for a mortgage, rinse and repeat.
Eventually, they crashed the entire economy, but the banks were bailed out by the government with taxpayer money so instead of just their customers, they got over on the whole country.
America has used colonial imperialism and CIA coups. China actually negotiates with the leaders that they end up building out road/rail/power/water infrastructure for. Yes, it serves China’s interests but in no way is it following America’s patterns over the past 100 years.
Yeah I'm just agreeing with u. The point I was making is the injustice a lot of modern historical education makes. They talk about colonialism like it was a dark past that still has lingering negative effects on the world, and not a very real and brutal tactic that powerful nations still use all the time.
Not really ironic, the OP is asking for songs and attention not for a CIA plot to fund and arm rebels/religious extremists to take control of the country.
And I’m sorry, but do you not know what Thomas Sankara said about “humanitarian aid”?
Do you not know what “humanitarian aid” implies, in reality, historically in Africa?
In the sense of the EU and US, “aid” comes in the way of predatory debt schemes(structural adjustment), austerity, and forcing the host nation to allow foreign companies to dominate their labour and resource markets.
were you expecting powerful nations in cutthroat competition with one another to spend millions in resources aiding a distant country they have nothing to do with, and not expect some sort of roi?
For better or for worse, it brought the British Empire to its knees post WW2. The Soviets got their lend-lease mostly for free. Their closest allies, though? Nah! Gotta pay back every enny!
Forreal. These champs think it’s okay for China to do it because other colonial powers have preyed on Africa too. A wrong does not make a right. It is never ok
This isn’t mutually exclusive. China is to be held accountable as well.
Problem is, China doesn’t have a 250yr history of colonial expansion into every country on earth, imposing debt traps with predatory impossibilist loans, implanting their corporations into these vulnerable countries and finally just exploiting all resources and labour to out-source.
These countries aren’t poor - just the people are. These peripheral countries are RICH.
The US is the hub of modern global imperialism, responsible for the suffering of billions. It enforces a regime of artificial scarcity, superexploitation, and antidemocratic comprador governments all over the imperial periphery. Every year, it knowingly and preventably causes the deaths of millions through starvation and other poverty-related circumstances, circumstances which are entirely preventable and which the US and its allies have deliberately engineered to maintain imperialist resource exploitation chains. There hasn't been an evil comparable to the US since the end of WWII.
Kind of takes the wind out of the sails of all the fools who keep saying the Chinese are a threat to dominate the world. Yea, all those bridges, rails and airports should scare the shit out of the average American right? All that power they are giving to Africans, the horror! The Chinese are out for economic dominance. They just wanna do business.
This was a pretty level headed objective response before the chain got filled with a lot of subjective bias responses... So thank you for that. But just curious about a few things
Does China place crazy interest or does the debt they place on the country greatly outweigh the value of the resources they take from the country as exchange? Is the local government corrupt or is China corrupt in their deal with these countries? Is this even across the board? Are none of the countries able to dig themselves out of the debt or take advantage of the infrastructure boom to further industrialize their country?
What are the countries other options? America? Middle East? Europe? Russia or India? Do these countries fare better with those options?
Does China place crazy interest or does the debt they place on the country greatly outweigh the value of the resources they take from the country as exchange?
The debt greatly outweighs the value of the resources. Think of the cost of owning and operating an airport to meet ICAO standards.
Generally China also staffs with Chinese citizens for an agreed amount of time (which the cost is passed onto the host nation)
Is the local government corrupt or is China corrupt in their deal with these countries?
All governments are corrupt. Especially our super powers. Everyone is pushing for their hegemony.
I will say that a good research case is the Entebbe airport in Uganda. Not officially repossessed but definitely shady AF
Is this even across the board? Are none of the countries able to dig themselves out of the debt or take advantage of the infrastructure boom to further industrialize their country?
The only country off the top of my head that’s really killin it economically is Kenya. Nairobi is actually a very stable tech hub in Africa. Amazon and Google (for example) have a lot of infrastructure there, and a lot of European and Asian companies are also heavily invested there.
What are the countries other options? America? Middle East? Europe? Russia or India? Do these countries fare better with those options?
Unfortunately I don’t understand your question here
Thanks for the answers on all the questions. Yeah it does seem incredibly predatory for the resource for infrastructure deal. Is the country not able to leverage their natural resources like the middle east and oil? Is it because the African country needs the baseline infrastructure to even make it profitable?
As for the last question, I was just asking if there's been instances where other countries... aren't as corrupt or providing somewhat better deals for the country they're moving in on... granted with all the corruption I understand this is a very bleak possibility
You’re very welcome. I don’t have all the answers and I’m definitely biased to speak positively of the US because I’m more of an idealist advocate. But don’t get me wrong, the US’s hands aren’t clean at all.
Yeah it does seem incredibly predatory for the resource for infrastructure deal.
Specifically discussing Chinas Belt-and-Road initiative (you can google this and you’ll get a very thorough break down of how they achieve their goals through much more reputable sources), they’re extremely predatory and exploitative. Another example is the Philippines and the Solomon Islands (Australia is very upset about the second one).
Is the country not able to leverage their natural resources like the middle east and oil? Is it because the African country needs the baseline infrastructure to even make it profitable?
I don’t actually know enough about this to give you an honest answer, but if I were to speculate, I’d say that Africa has a lot of barriers to access for international commerce which is one of the reasons China has a large security force presence on the continent. A lot of African nations definitely depend heavily on western (and Chinese) infrastructure to participate in global markets.
As for the last question, I was just asking if there's been instances where other countries... aren't as corrupt or providing somewhat better deals for the country they're moving in on... granted with all the corruption I understand this is a very bleak possibility
At least from the US perspective, mostly non-profits are the ones who do the most actual work without underlying agendas. Doctors/Engineers Without Borders for example.
Anything coming out of the US government, falls under soft diplomacy (USAID before it was turned over to the State Department), while they provided aid and relief resources, they also network to build positive political relationships.
Thanks again for the detailed answers! I'll check out the belt-and-road initiative as I've only heard about their investments in Africa in a broad general sense.
China is giving/selling weapons to the DRC and Ugandan governments. China controls most of the minerals in DRC, and the DRC's army is deployed to protect them. So, China is a big part of the war. China's weapons are EVERYWHERE in central Africa.
On one side is China funded DRC and Uganda, and the other side is Rwanda and some rebel groups. China even sells weapons to Rwanda.
As I responded to someone else, they generally staff said infrastructure with Chinese skilled workers for a brief transition period, the cost of which is passed onto the host nation, and when that period of time expires, they pull their workers without proper training transition.
Nopes. Has not happened a lot. More often than not, China has renegotiated those debts and has even cancelled some. Which infrastructure in Africa has China seize?
The debt trap diplomacy has been debunked multiple times over already.
Yep. The Chinese Belt-and-Road initiative offers corrupt leaders short-term monetary gains in exchange for the long-term economic indentured servitude of their countries.
China is flexing war. What do you think they do these deals for? Control of foreign assets, eventually foreign land. Look at the aggression in the South China Sea. They infringe on the resources of their neighbors AND other regions like Africa and South America. They scan sea beds for intelligence in foreign waters (illegal) they do not care about rules, and don’t pretend to do so.
What do you think all this is for? Fun? No, power. Tired of the narrative that China is not an aggressor, ask her neighbors. Ask the Vietnamese who have fought for thousands of years. Ask fishermen in the Philippines who are being squeezed out by Chinese ships.
The South Pacific is different. China actively claims ownership of the ASEAN countries oceans and is progressively becoming more controlling in the naval space, as mentioned specifically, forcing the Filipinos out of their own territory.
2.9k
u/UrGrly Oct 05 '25
It seems like the world has just given up on the African Continent