Keypoints:
- Africa should scrutinise both Chinese and Western narratives
- Pragmatic business thinking should guide foreign partnerships
- Diversification and transparency are Africa’s strongest safeguards
FOR years, Africans have been presented with two competing stories about China.
One narrative, often promoted by Western commentators, warns that Beijing uses finance, technology and information to expand its geopolitical influence. The other, increasingly visible across African media and political discourse, portrays China as an indispensable development partner that builds roads, ports, railways and factories while asking fewer political questions than many Western governments.
Which story is true?
The answer is that elements of both can be true at the same time.
According to a recent analysis published by Foreign Affairs, Chinese state media organisations, including Xinhua and CGTN, have entered into extensive content-sharing arrangements with broadcasters and newspapers across Africa. For cash-strapped newsrooms, free or heavily subsidised material can help fill reporting gaps. At the same time, reliance on externally produced content inevitably raises questions about editorial independence and whether audiences are receiving sufficiently diverse perspectives.
That concern is legitimate. News organisations should be cautious about becoming dependent on material supplied by any foreign government or state-backed institution, whether from China, the United States, Russia or Europe. Editorial independence is essential to maintaining public trust.
However, replacing one unquestioned narrative with another would be equally unwise.
Much commentary on China’s role in Africa is shaped through Western strategic lenses. While some concerns about debt, cybersecurity and influence operations deserve careful consideration, analysis can also overlook an important reality: countries and corporations pursue their own interests, regardless of geography or political system.
Business interests versus geopolitics
Events this week illustrate the point.
According to reports, Nvidia has told Chinese customers that its new Vera processors for AI data centres could become available as early as August, reflecting efforts by the American technology company to rebuild business in one of the world’s largest markets after previous export restrictions affected sales.
Meanwhile, the European Union has proposed restricting public funding for Chinese-made solar inverters over concerns that internet-connected equipment could create vulnerabilities in critical energy infrastructure.
At roughly the same time, the US Pentagon reinstated Alibaba, Baidu and BYD to a list of companies it alleges have links to China’s military, a designation that could pave the way for additional restrictions in future.
Taken together, these developments reveal an important contradiction. Western governments continue to warn about potential security risks associated with some Chinese technologies, yet Western companies remain determined to compete for Chinese consumers and commercial opportunities.
Business interests and geopolitical competition frequently coexist.
Africa should recognise the same complexity.
The debate should never be reduced to whether China is entirely good or entirely bad. Nor should African policymakers accept either Beijing’s messaging or Washington’s warnings without independent assessment.
Instead, governments and businesses across the continent should adopt an entrepreneurial mindset.
Successful entrepreneurs do not become emotionally attached to suppliers or investors. They negotiate hard, compare alternatives, diversify risk and focus relentlessly on their own interests.
An Africa-first strategy
That principle should guide Africa’s engagement with China and every other external partner.
Where Chinese investment delivers productive infrastructure, creates jobs and transfers skills or technology, it should be welcomed. Where Western, Gulf or other international investors provide better value or more favourable terms, they should receive equal consideration. Every proposal should be evaluated on transparency, sustainability and its contribution to local economic development.
The same disciplined approach should apply to information and media partnerships.
Content-sharing partnerships are not unique to China; international media organisations around the world collaborate across borders. The critical issue is ensuring that African editors retain independence, verify information rigorously and provide audiences with balanced reporting rather than allowing any external narrative to dominate.
Africa is also far from powerless.
With abundant critical minerals, a rapidly growing population and expanding consumer markets, the continent occupies an increasingly important place in the global economy. China understands this. So do Europe and the United States.
Rather than choosing sides in an era of intensifying geopolitical rivalry, African governments should use that competition to negotiate better financing, stronger industrial partnerships, technology transfer and investment that creates lasting domestic value.
The greatest danger is not engagement with China alone, nor cooperation with Western economies.
It is becoming overly dependent on any single partner while failing to build the institutions, bargaining power and transparency needed to safeguard national interests.
Healthy scepticism should be matched by commercial realism.
Africa’s competitive advantage is not choosing between Washington and Beijing. It is ensuring that both compete to deliver better outcomes for Africans.
Judge every project on its merits. Demand accountability from every investor. Build resilient institutions. And remember that in international commerce there are no permanent friends or permanent enemies—only permanent interests.
By approaching every partnership with confidence, evidence and discipline, Africa can ensure that engagement with China, the West and the wider world advances African priorities through mutually beneficial, transparent and sustainable cooperation.
