This study assesses the popular claim that Chinese engagement in Africa is imperialism through a case study of relations between China and Angola. Using Marxist imperialism theory as point of departure, it develops a comprehensive theoretical framework for testing the hypothesis that China is imperialist in its relations with Angola. This necessitates two areas of examination: the export of capital as the principal method of expansion, exploitation and extraction, and neocolonialism as the principal mode of control and domination. Whereas the former must in effect cause underdevelopment, the latter must in effect facilitate and maintain the current order. The empirical assessment finds no substantial support for the hypothesis that China is imperialist in Angola. Although multiple problematic aspects are identified in terms of debt levels, resource dependence, employment patterns and capacity building, no strong causal link is found between Chinese capital export and underdevelopment in Angola, or strong indication of neo-colonialist means of control and domination for the facilitation and maintenance of such relations. Rather, the assessment finds more empirical support for China-Angola relations being of mutual benefit development-wise, as their principal arrangement of oil-backed loans for infrastructure projects guarantees China a relatively stable market for oil import in exchange for sorely needed national reconstruction following decades of civil war. Although China and Angola are unequal powerwise, the conclusion is that they do engage on fairly equal terms in a way that cannot be deemed imperialist. This puts the general applicability of imperialism theory on China-Africa relations into question, inferring that they may indeed be more beneficial than regularly assumed. It also signals that a more careful, critical and evidence-based approach must be demanded from those that are quick to assert Chinese engagement in Africa as imperialist based on unfounded, biased or dogmatic notions rather than theoretical-empirical consideration. More case studies based on a framework such as the one developed here are encouraged to substantiate these results, with the hope of finally reaching a constructive end to this debate.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:su-222130 |
| Date | January 2021 |
| Creators | Gustavsson, Benjamin |
| Publisher | Stockholms universitet, Institutionen för ekonomisk historia och internationella relationer |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.034 seconds