Same Same but Different? India–Africa Relations and Chinese Involvement in the Continent

Abstract

India's involvement in Africa today is often viewed in economic terms only, mainly focusing on resources. The narrative of an emerging power just looking for oil is nowadays used for India's involvement in Africa as much as for Beijing's foray into the continent. Although both countries' reinforced involvement in the continent is the most important development of Africa's international relations since the end of the Cold War, this approach poses the danger of overlooking or at least playing down important nuances and possible differences between the Indian and the Chinese way of dealing with Africa today. As a matter of fact, officials in New Delhi try to dissociate their policy vis-à-vis Africa from Beijing's 'game plan'. But to what extent do India's and China's involvement in Africa actually differ? This article lays out an analytical framework for comparing Indian and Chinese involvement in Africa and subsequently helps examine historical, political and economic relations between the two emerging powers and Africa. It seeks to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of New Delhi's involvement in Africa beyond conventional, sometimes simplistic, assumptions by contrasting India-Africa with China-Africa relations and carving out differences and similarities.

Africa beyond ‘South‐South cooperation’: A frame with limited resonance

“…Outside UN circles, and at first sight, the ‘South‐South cooperation’ frame seems closely connected to Africa as a continent and region. African countries have arguably been among the most cited recipients of projects and initiatives set up with China, India or other ‘Southern’ partners (see Gieg, 2016; UNDP, 2019;). South Africa has received significant attention not only as part of the BRICS and IBSA alliances but also as a ‘South‐South cooperation’ provider for other African countries (Besharati & Rawhani, 2016).…”

“…Instead, both India and particularly China have used the Forum Summit and FOCAC to establish ‘X+Africa’ formats that, at their core, do not rely on references to ‘North’ or ‘South’. The ‘country‐to‐continent’ frames they promote are part of connectivity patterns that promote broad cross‐regional frameworks which, notably for China, are primarily directed at strengthening bilateral ties and cultivating soft power partnerships (Gieg, 2016; Kohlenberg & Godehardt, 2021). While African representatives have used FOCAC and other ‘X+Africa’ formats for their own—usually also bilateral—purposes (Soulé, 2020; see Carmody et al, 2019; Large, 2021), the political and economic dominance of partners like India and particularly China means that cross‐regional engagement mostly unfolds in hierarchical terms.…”

“…are primarily directed at strengthening bilateral and cultivating soft power partnerships (Gieg, 2016;Kohlenberg & Godehardt, 2021). While African representatives have used FOCAC and other 'X+Africa' formats for their own-usually also bilateral-purposes (Soulé, 2020;see Carmody et al, 2019;Large, 2021), the political and economic dominance of partners like India and particularly China means that cross-regional engagement mostly unfolds in hierarchical terms.…”

Why NTM is a Challenge in Trade Relations? Evidence from India–Africa Agricultural Trade

“…Alden and Verma (2016) emphasised that India’s exporters faced many obstacles in making investments in African markets due to the lack of capital resources, business environment and investment agreements. Gieg (2016) discussed that India has attained momentum in trade and investment with Africa and become a ‘decisive emerging power’ in Africa’s international relations and posed challenges for China, which has been ahead in trade with Africa due to earlier liberalisation policies compared to India. Kumar (2017) studied the India–Africa trade over the period 2007–16 and suggested that the Continental Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) and the ‘Asia Africa Growth Corridor’ (AAGC) initiative may bring mutual benefit and synergy for both the partners.…”

Equal Relations and Appropriate Expertise in India’s South-South Co-operation? Discourse and Practice of the Pan-African e-Network

“…Third, the PAEN fits within the tradition of transfer of expertise but takes it further by focusing on transfer of expertise via information technology instead of more traditional trainings, courses and expert visits (Gieg 2016). The 'traditional' capacity building approach is represented by the Indian Technical Co-operation (ITEC), launched in 1964.…”