5Reader Recommendations


Special Report: China In Africa (Part 5) Equatorial Guinea: A Strongman Turns East

By: Richard Behar
With its resource-hungry push into the sub-Sahara, Beijing puts the planet to the test.

EnlargeChina in Africa | photo illustration by Plamen Petkov



Related Content


When my plane smacks down in Equatorial Guinea -- where if the captain misses the runway, you could end up in Cameroon -- I become the first American journalist to visit this pint-sized republic (population: 550,000) in nearly three years. That was when Equatoguinean officials forced two American reporters to leave after they'd spent just a few days in Malabo, the capital, asking questions. One of them, Peter Maass, was booted for "spying" simply for walking down a street chatting with a European ambassador.

That kind of reception might seem harsh, given that Americans have long been the only foreigners privileged to enter this country without a visa and given the long-standing and cozy relationship between the two countries. But it's not journalists who are welcome here in Equatorial Guinea -- it's oil workers.

E.G. is less a country than a corrupt, extended-family business that cooked up its own national anthem. And the American oil industry has been singing along for years, cuddling up as much as necessary (and with barely any competition) to Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, the 66-year-old despot who has ruled this backwater since 1979. Smaller than El Paso, Texas, E.G. has nevertheless managed to get itself at or near the top of just about every shameful list in the world -- from the most-censored countries (according to the Committee to Protect Journalists) to the most corrupt (Transparency International) to the worst places to do business (the World Bank). Geoffrey Wood, a business professor at the U.K.'s University of Sheffield and coauthor of The Ethical Business, concluded in his own 2004 study of E.G. that the country is a "criminal state" that matches or exceeds the "rapacity and brutality" of the Duvaliers' Haiti, Somoza's Nicaragua, and Batista's Cuba. Despite an economy with the highest average annual growth rate in the world (21%) since 2001, more than half of the population lacks access to potable water and electricity. The UN says E.G. shows the greatest disparity on earth between per capita income ($50,000, surpassed only by Luxembourg) and human welfare (most of E.G.'s citizens live on less than $1 a day).

"Economic numbers are not the best way to know a country," one of President Obiang's sons would later tell me. "We don't really have an economy here." There are no ATMs, virtually no banks, and no credit cards or foreign currency are accepted. There is also not a single bookstore or newspaper stand -- since no independent media are permitted. Only 8,000 people have Internet access (monitored, of course). State-run radio broadcasts odes to Obiang -- calling him the "country's God" who "has all power over men and things" -- in between songs warning citizens they will be crushed if they speak out against the regime.

Obiang prefers to be called "El Libertador" (the Liberator). But locals privately call him and his cronies "Los Gordos" (the Fat Ones). The E.G. government takes in $4 billion a year in oil revenues and royalties, and yet just about every building of any size seems to be owned by the president's family or government ministers, who tend to be one and the same. One of Obiang's sons runs the forestry ministry and owns the country's only private radio station, as well as a rap-music company in Beverly Hills; he recently bought a $35 million house in Malibu. Another son is the power behind energy and mining. Obiang's closest security adviser is his brother Armengol. His brother Antonio is minister of defense. Obiang himself has two mansions in Maryland.

From Issue 126 | June 2008

Comment

Recent Comments | Total

May 22, 2008 at 2:33am

j luther

A great case for the need of a transforming mode Western Capitalism

June 5, 2008 at 10:31pm

Yele Odofin

I would like to commend the journalistic efforts of this writer, whom I first saw on Lou Dobbs show. Most of Richard Behar's arguments were spot-on; however, these positions were understandably based on North American perception of Africa, as a homogeneous continent of beggars and "Have Nots". Having worked on development policy issues in Nigeria, as well as reviewed a significant number of other African nations’ foreign policies. I would like to stress some points Richard omitted in his piece.
Firstly, African countries have strategic needs and these needs vary quite significantly. There is a growing fear among most African political and academic elites that a strong economic ties with the West would come with a lot of unrealistic strings such as the imposition of liberal social issues all in the name of 'Human Rights', there is also a need to diversify economic, diplomatic and military interests. It’s a no brainier that make these countries less vulnerable to external influence and western sanctions most of these countries have learned from the Zimbabwe experience. Most African countries have actively pursued the so called "South- South" development partnership. Nigeria and other African states, in the last decade have seen a huge bi lateral trade boost with countries like Brazil, Russia, India, and countries in the Middle East.
The reason for the Chinese acceptance by African leaders has little to do with corruption as there are many havens in the Caribbean, some European Territories, South America and Middle East to launder such funds.
Finally, contrary to North American media and Hollywood’s exaggerated depiction of desperate living conditions in places like Western Sudan, Somalia, Liberia, Sierra Leone and some parts of Congo. I wish to state that as a result of institutional reforms in financial sector, communication and industries, Nigeria, Ghana, Botswana, Ethiopia and many more African countries have witnessed unprecedented increase of their respective middle class populations.
The Chinese are not exploiting Africans; they are simply filling a vacuum.

June 6, 2008 at 1:44pm

Afam Edozie

The United States and the West are no more special to Africa than any other country or group of countries that can provide markets for their goods, capital for their industry and expertise for their development. During the cold war the US understood this. For sure before the emergence of Asia the United States and the West had much more of these things than others and was therefore perceived as more important.

The great mistakes of US foreign policy (if I can call them mistakes) are that the US does not to have a strategy nor to have any 'real' values that they adhere to.

So they foreigners neither look up to them as a moral beacon, nor have they built in strategic advantages that will give them an edge in the future.

As a result the US lost the Shah's Iran and is loosing a host of other countries. And will likely loose much of Africa to China.

The Chinese also have no values worthy of emulation, but they do have an effective strategy.

Their strategy is to

i) use loss leaders (and leverage their low cost base) to get a foot hold into a country (foreigners bearing gifts policy),

ii) Ignore national politics (I see no evil policy),

iii) corrupt the locals (despite Nigeria's reputation as a den of corruption I know many people who don't take bribes, regardless the Chinese still try to bribe them and when they don't accept they try even harder, like they were told to do this in head office, and

iv) invade the country

I live in Nigeria and the Chinese are moving in here at an alarming rate, there are more Chinese living here than any other minority group and they are coming in at every level. Large, Medium and Small sized Chinese companies. As well as sole Chinese traders. They have factories in almost every corner of the country.

They go to the middle of no where, ask the locals for land to build a $10 million processing plant (or something) (why should anyone say no, no one else - not even our own govn - has come to do anything to provide us with jobs) and in any locality outside of the major cities even $1 million investment is a big deal. They then import hundreds of Chinese workers for every job except the most menial and go ahead to treat all their workers (Chinese and Nigerians) like slaves.

They do not transferring skills, they do not train, they do no even die (I kid you not, Chinese do not die in Nigeria), when one dies his death is kept secret, his body is shipped back to China in bulk using refrigerated containers and another Chinese comes to take his job.

The only part of their colonialisation strategy that is failing is that they are not allowed to marry local girls. But I think they have a shortage of girls of their own, so we see an increase in the number of 'secret' wives. How this one will pan out is anyone's guess. But I guess they will get shipped out and we will be left with lots of half Chinese babies.

Few policy makers in Africa understand the Chinese strategy and even fewer of them have the capability of doing anything about it. In 20 years, the Chinese will be a big minority in Africa, with significant participation in industry and economic life.

The west has not had a coherent strategy since neo-colonialism failed in the 70s. The US attempt to establish an African command is laughable and is seen across the whole of Africa as a desperate attempt to introduce a military strategy.

No doubt a charm offensive with promises of dollops of aid will eventually get them the base, and no doubt they will be able to establish a military presence through their planned deep water port in Sao Tome. But as you can see it does not stand up to the Chinese strategy which involves feet on the ground and involvement in the community.

June 9, 2008 at 10:19pm

Aliou Sylla

The US bet on Iraq has yet to bear real fruits whereare China's has paid off many folds. Go figure!

Comment

Special Editions?