Is China's economic thrust into Africa potentially beneficial?

It certainly could be. It would bring capital into the African continent and develop the economies. Perhaps such development will dispel many of the stereotypes about the continent.

As long as Africa can maintain control over their own natural resources. Traditionally, this has not been the case in the long run. Or is that one of the stereotypes as well (seriously)?

Some pros and cons of China's increased involvement in Africa:

Pro --

1)The Chinese are prepared to provide investment, manpower and technical expertise immediately, bringing rapid benefit to the African economies
2) The benefits are already apparent in Angola - by the end of 2007 the country will have a north-south highway for the first time in its history, two of the three main railway lines will be functioning for the first time since the early 1970s, and the electricity network will be national. Donors and aid agencies would have taken a decade to achieve this, if at all.
3) Chinese interest rates are concessional, enabling countries with no access to international capital markets to fund their development cheaply.
4) The Chinese approach of reciprocal and respectful relations with Africa has done much to boost the confidence and prestige of African governments which are taking a more robust approach towards foreign companies and agencies.


Downside aspects --

1) The easy availability of Chinese loans and credit-lines risks undermining attempts to improve governance and transparency.
2) A major issue is the lack of local employment that the Chinese-funded investment projects are creating. Generally, Chinese companies bring self-contained construction teams with them, often including most of their manual labour, and as a result large-scale infrastructure projects employ few locals. There is also little transfer of skills, and African government are now pushing for this to be a condition of future credit-lines.
3) Some of the conditions of the credit-lines are highly favourable to the Chinese. For example, in Angola 70% of contracts must be awarded to Chinese companies or use Chinese personnel, versus 30% Angolan. This is something the Angolan government is trying to reverse in its current negotiations for an even larger credit-line.
4) The ready availability of Chinese funding has encouraged African governments to pursue large-scale prestige projects and to abandon their less mediagenic poverty-reduction strategies which have a more direct impact on the population. In the longer-term, the rush to build has meant there has been little thought for future maintenance of infrastructure - in particular roads, bridges, new hospitals - which could deteriorate very quickly after the Chinese leave.

It will be beneficial to both China & African countries. The growing economical power "China" has lot to offer for African nations.
But the fair practices, transparency, human rights related issues need to be watched.

What could ever give the US and European oil companies the right to criticize China’s involvement with “controversial regimes” when the US and Europe were the ones to create these regimes in the first place.

Look at the state of the oil rich African nations today that the US and European companies are involved in:

Nigeria - Close to political collapse with a 20% + reduction in production because of instability and kidnappings

Sudan - Government is currently involved in one of the largest human rights atrocities (I guess were still not allowed to say ‘genocide’) in the history of the continent

Equatorial Guinea - US State dept. considers the government to be repressive including multiple human rights violations

If the Americans and Europeans really cared about the political situation and controversial regimes in Africa they would not be giving a cent in investments to the above countries. If Shell really cared about Nigeria they would have left the country the second Saro-Wiwa was unjustly imprisoned (for the first time).

I find the biggest disappointment in all of this that the European and US oil companies only now bring up the issue of “controversial regimes” when China is thinking about investing, but have failed to do anything over the last 50 years to help the situation. The hypocrisy of it all is amazing.

I fully agree - China's surge into Africa will perpetuate unimagineable levels of corruption, regimes will remain unaccountable,unrepresentative and autocratic, and violent conflict will persist throughout the continent. For the West to criticise China's strategy on Africa is hypocritical in the extreme. For Shell to remain in Nigeria totally destroys the credibility of its business principles, its sustainable development and environmental initiatives - the company says it will conduct business in a moral, ethical and environmentally friendly way -but what it promises and what it does are two different things.

Has anybody seen or heard about George Monbiot's ideas about creating vast solar panels over the Sahara and using direct current to allow the electricity created to be sent to Europe and other places.

Does anyone think this is feasible?

This morality debate regarding the presence of Shell or China within the African continent is ridculous. Shell and Sinpoec etc... are corporate entities, and frankly their only real responsibility should remain focussed on shareholder value and nothing else. Compliance and ethics needs to be focussed towards profitability.

African issues about corruption are African problems, that Africans need to deal with; not Shell and/or its competitors. If the state is corrupt, it is up to those who suffer to change it. The minute we bring in morality/ethics (beyond that defined by law), we are in a grey area. Where is the line drawn. Should all corporate interests stay out of Sudan, out of Nigeria, out of Iraq, out of the United Kingdom for their colonial behaviour, the United States for segregation and slavery.

The world is corrupt, but it is not a corporate responsibility to clean it up. Corporations need to comply with regulations in place, and if the Chinese maintain this, then frankly, there is no point of criticism.

With China and India finally developing into countries where the standard of living is rising by a good spread between industrial effort and agricultural level the last continent on earth that is lagging behind is Africa.
So any effort, which may bring in more prosperity, should be welcomed.
This may educate the population and bring more prosperity so they can start to think about the next step in life instead of the daily care for water and nutrition.
The next step could be more education, social security and political stability.
It is hard to get rid of corruption if so many have to depend on it to for their income.
(apart from the ones that like to become filthy rich)