Afrasian Transformations

Achenbach, Ruth; Beek, Jan; Karugia, John Njenga; Mageza-Barthel, Rirhandu; Schulze–Engler, Frank

doi:10.1163/9789004425262

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Not only does The Economist have a wide circulation, but also it has substantial influence on its readers, many of whom are powerful decision-makers (Zevin, 2019). Also, the views presented and published by The Economist are also held by many academics and many media practitioners (for a detailed review of the African-Chinese relations literature, see Achenbach et al, 2020;Monson, 2020;Nguepjouo, 2020;Park et al, 2016). Therefore, where claims are unfounded, it is essential to provide critique.…”

Section: Prognosismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, although a few academic writings (e.g. Achenbach et al, 2020;Bello, 2008;Chen and Duggan, 2016;Sheridan, 2016) seek to address misrepresentations generally, no academic articles have specifically addressed the mischaracterisations by The Economist. Such a critique must recognise that, unlike many accounts on the relationship between Africa and China, The Economist has produced helpful data for social science research.…”

Section: Problematicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

China–Africa Relations in The Economist, 2019–2021

Obeng‐Odoom

2022

Journal of Asian and African Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ‘Scramble for Africa’ has historically been a concept used to describe the plunder of Africa by colonial powers, their subsequent economic capture of African resources, their political control and their racial domination of Africans. But, in recent times, many writers have pointed to Chinese ‘Scramble for Africa’. Of these depictions, The Economist’s has been both categorical and relentless. But is the set of relationships between China and African countries imperial? Does it amount to a Chinese ‘Scramble for Africa’? If so, what can be done; if not, why not? Neither content nor institutional analyses of 27 stories, sampled from 132 issues of The Economist from 2019 to 2021, show conclusive evidence that the relationship between China and Africa is imperial. Evidence of African indebtedness to China, Chinese opaque resource transactions in Africa, and the controlling effect of China’s Belt and Road Initiative typically emphasised by The Economist is serious. But it does not amount to economic plunder, political control, military destabilisation or racial domination. The Economist’s characterisation of China–Africa relations reflects wider processes of Westernisation. Its features include the use of mainstream economic analysis, (mis)representation of the Global South to maintain Western hegemony and inhibiting Southern struggle to break the Western chokehold on global development. As an elite newspaper, The Economist’s ‘frame analysis’ not only presents news, but also produces views that caricature Global South agendas, especially those that threaten Western liberalism and imperialism.

show abstract

Section: Prognosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Problematicsmentioning

confidence: 99%