Tag: Africa

Learning from China: Adapting Development Strategies for African Contexts

Posted on By Nnanda Kizito Sseruwagi

Although it may not be possible to have a comprehensive cookbook of China’s rapid development recipes, a few policy frameworks implemented in the country can provide guidance. The Chinese development model has not been uniform. It has been at every stage punctuated by state-led industrialisation alongside export-oriented growth, and strategic global engagement, among other factors/ policies. Africa sets its sights on China for direction, as a late developer, because China has mastered the art of leapfrogging growth or catching up. However, given the disparate and diverse political and economic characteristics between the two entities, we need to carefully tailor and adapt what works and leave what doesn’t, from the Chinese blueprint of late and rapid development.

There is a unique political economy framework that made China’s development success possible. Whereas Deng Xiaoping is highly credited for instituting transformative reforms, there was a strong, centralised state which he leveraged to implement pragmatic policies, i.e., special economic zones (SEZs), massive infrastructure investment, and education and technical training to spur human capital development. Deng was also granted a monopoly of power rendered by the Communist Party, which allowed him to have continuity of his policies under the stability of a cohesive political structure. It was also workable to implement policies on a largely ethnically homogenous population, with a social history of collective discipline embedded in Confucian cultural ideas. Such moral compulsion from social norms and habits can hardly be transplanted, but it facilitated the rapid policy implementation we see in China. Additionally, industrial transformation was timely in a nation which was poised to reform its large agrarian economy.

African nations emerged out of colonialism with significant infrastructure gaps. The post-colonial contexts they find themselves in require that they assert economic sovereignty and push for state-led development, which fits well with the Chinese model. It has, indeed, been China at the frontline of supporting Africa’s move to bridge infrastructure gaps, supporting such projects as Kenya’s Standard Gauge Railway and Ethiopia’s Addis Ababa-Djibouti Railway, under the BRI, among countless other projects in several African countries. Moreover, China never lends itself to political interference in Africa as a precondition for its investments, as is common with Western aid and development finance, which comes pegged with prescriptions and conditionalities of all manner, eroding away the autonomy and agency of African states.

The diversity among and within the 54 African nations, however, implies that the continent’s political economy is widely different from China’s. We have so many ethnicities, are corrupted by colonial legacies, plagued by electoral volatility undermining policy continuity, fragmented by opposing governance structures, which ultimately complicates state-led development initiatives.

Weak institutionality and corruption are a serious hindrance to Africa’s development efforts. Weak institutions make China’s state-led, long-term development strategies hard to replicate, because governments face significant opposition and illegitimacy, making the long-term stability that shelters growth absent. Corruption disorients public-spiritedness, turning ruling regimes into cash-and-carry kleptocracies. This is the challenge for countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo, making the implementation of large-scale projects unsuccessful. There is a need to earn legitimacy for African governments by ensuring merit-based and accountable governance that serves all citizens without accentuating ethnic differences. Traditional leaders should also not be merely co-opted but fundamentally involved in local and national development programs, so that they view state development policies as an inter-collective program in which they and their co-ethnics have a stake, and must therefore take responsibility and involvement.

While China’s development leveraged export-led growth to satisfy the global demand for manufactured goods, Africa finds itself in a different context. It is a resource-dependent continent; its economies survive on the extraction and sale of primary commodities like minerals, oil, or agricultural products. The key to transforming this status quo to increase returns rests in domesticating ownership and ensuring the locals have a higher stake in the businesses and industries. This will nip profit repatriation and rent-seeking in the bud. Local ownership here does not mean that indigenous people must be the only ones with economic rights, but rather that even companies owned by foreigners must register locally and transfer the most profitable work of their business to Africa.

Whereas China’s development was easy to mobilise in a socially cohesive population, Africa’s ethnic diversity should not be mourned as a challenge; rather, African governments should embrace traditional and communal participatory approaches to social mobilisation towards development goals. Africa’s ethnic groups were historically assimilationist, and this cultural heritage must be encouraged as opposed to perpetuating colonial divisions that politicised divisive ethnicity.

The writer is a senior research fellow at the Development Watch Centre.

 

 

 

Time Africa to Adopt China-Scale Development Commitment

Posted on By Nnanda Kizito Sseruwagi

Africa is tied to conventional, rudimentary, unambitious, lethargic modes of governance and political-economic behaviour. We pursue cliches of democracy and development and all related norms and conformities that have been taught to us by the developed, Western world with full blindness to our crucial realities.

We lack a grand strategy for development. We are adapted to incrementalism in everything – hoping to make progress through small, gradual steps rather than largescale, ambitious reforms. This road we are on is unlikely to deliver development. And the window within which Africa must catch-up up will eventually close.

There is no guarantee that we cannot be conquered again if we don’t stand up quickly and hold a place as a peer with all developed nations. This child-like place that Africa occupies in the world is not just humiliating but may eventually be exploited through new forms of imperialism in the future in ways we cannot comprehend today.

Think about the defining factors for the survival of nations in the world today; Artificial Intelligence (AI), synthetic biology, quantum computing, robotics, and clean energy. Where is Africa’s involvement or contribution in the global competition to advance in these fields? We only seem to be offering raw materials. In fact, we are the raw materials.

In a world with advanced AI systems, where we face risks of artificial general intelligence (AGI) becoming misaligned with human values, what would Africa do to defend itself against attack in a war where AGI is optimized by an enemy country to cause catastrophic harm based on racial identity? As a continent vulnerable to pandemics, what contribution is Africa making to the development of synthetic biology to enable rapid vaccine development?

Our net contribution to the development of any of these technologies that will shape the future is close to nothing. But the consequences of this may not be as simple as missing out. Lagging behind in the next decades might slide us into new forms of recolonization unless we embrace a development model with the ambition, scale, and discipline exemplified by China’s rapid transformation.

The era and error of foreign aid inculcated in us a dependency on foreign/Western powers by which we ceded sovereignty and agency. Such dependency also drove us to withdraw our commitment to industrialization, infrastructure development, and self-reliance. Western masters disincentivized African governments from developing domestic capacity for economic sustainability because African leaders could beg or borrow to fill gaps in their national budgets. The result is where we are; capable of almost nothing in a world of tremendous opportunities.

Given the urgency of these matters, China’s example for rapid socio-economic transformation from a predominantly large agrarian society full of peasants, to an industrial power with vast skill and intellectual resource, should be studied with a goal to be appropriated and domesticated by African leaders.

Unlike Western nations where capitalism evolved organically and defined how society is governed and resources are distributed, China’s transformation emerged out of massive state-led investment in infrastructure, education, and industry, coupled with a relentless focus on self-reliance. It is the only country where the free-market enterprise developed highly without distorting the politics of the country. Because of this, capital has not succeeded in eroding the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party (CPC). Capital has not undermined the leadership of the Chinese people.

China also exposes the lie that has been told to developing countries especially in Africa – that it takes democratisation in the Western form, to develop. We have suspended all efforts and thought towards development by being tied in an endless web of political bickering over cliches like democracy, human rights, freedom, etc.

China has guaranteed the rights and freedoms of her people outside the normative governance models of the West. It has liberated over 800 million people from poverty without ticking any boxes that the West dictates to Africa as prerequisites for development.

Without Western democracy, China constructed 37,000 kilometers of high-speed rail between 2000 and 2020. Without Western democracy, China has urbanized over 500 million people, and lifted 800 million out of poverty. Without Western democracy, the CPC prioritized long-term planning over short-term populist gains and accountably executed the aims it set out to achieve for its citizens, with a discipline in execution unimaginable in the West.

Africa must suspend many political distractions and pursue a tunnel vision of development and socio-economic transformation. We are 1.4 billion people with a median age of 19. This is a demographic resource with potential to scale development – it is a tremendous work force. But the window to achieve this will not last forever. Our young people will grow old. The peace we enjoy is not guaranteed to last forever. We must coordinate our commitment to this goal when we still can.

The Writer is a senior research fellow at the Development Watch Center.

Governance: Lessons from Chinese Political Discipline

Posted on By Nnanda Kizito Sseruwagi

Khatondi Soita Wepukhulu, a Ugandan journalist of rare find, recently challenged my long-held views on corruption. Over time, I had come to deeply question the prevailing narratives surrounding corruption among Africa’s ruling elites. I had come to think, and still do, that there are fundamental epistemological miscomprehensions and biases about corruption in Africa, which are less about corruption and more about the racial-stereotypical description of Africans in general and their leaders in particular. The dominant discourses on many issues in Africa and about Africans are usually overgeneralized and oversimplified. This is largely still the case in discussions on corruption.

My agnosticism was firstly on the scale and impact of elite corruption on the national development of African countries. I grew up writing poetry against corruption. It was the easiest subject for creative writing in literature classes because we were raised to think it was Africa’s biggest problem. However, a counter-narrative emerged when my mind was opened to the actual fiscal capacity available for potential embezzlement and misappropriation of public funds in a country like Uganda.

Let us first consider the structural constraints of public finances in many African countries. Given our poverty, many African governments have limited money to spend. Our budgets are much smaller compared to the size of our economies. Our basic needs also outspend our incomes. For instance, Uganda’s tax-to-GDP ratio is about 13%. What this means is that the total amount of taxes collected by the Ugandan government each year is equal to only 13% of the country’s total economic output (GDP). This clearly shows that a very small fraction of Uganda’s economy is taxable/taxed, and consequently, the government has little money to spend on public services like healthcare, education, and infrastructure. Also, for context, Uganda’s tax-to-GDP ratio is much lower than that of many wealthier countries, where the average is 34%.

The second leg of the argument above is that Uganda/African countries’ already constrained budgets are unavoidably committed to non-discretionary spending obligations. Remember, we are talking about the budget before it is passed and, thus, before one shilling of it has been misappropriated. The non-discretionary spending obligations referred to above include committed/recurrent expenses that must be paid by law or out of necessity, meaning the government of Uganda has no choice but to spend this money appropriately. Some of these expenditures include: debt payments, i.e., paying back loans and interest; salaries for government workers such as teachers, members of parliament, RDCs, doctors, soldiers, and police officers; pensions and social security to retired government workers; basic public services like healthcare, education, and security that the government must provide. If we break down Uganda’s national budget, it is clear that a significant portion of it is allocated to these committed expenditures. For instance, in the recent budget, debt Repayment consumed 3.1 trillion for external debt and UGX 9.1 trillion for domestic debt. Wages and Salaries of government employees consumed UGX 7.926 trillion. There are also so many other expenses that cannot be captured due to limited space in this newspaper, such as scholarships for government-sponsored students in universities, etc. All these mandatory expenditures combined amount to approximately UGX 29.126 trillion, representing about 40% of our total national budget. Compared to any wealthy, developed country, this is a substantial allocation to non-discretionary spending, which limits the government’s fiscal space or financial flexibility to spend on new development programs, or for that matter, to steal the money.

The intriguing paradox presented by the fiscal reality of many of our African governments, as described above, begs the question: If African governments have so little extra money to misuse, can corruption really be the main reason for underdevelopment? Even if our leaders were to steal all the money that wasn’t already budgeted for recurrent expenditures (quite an implausible scenario), there still wouldn’t be enough to make a big difference in our countries’ development.

That is the mathematical impossibility and first indictment I found against the banal, stereotypical, overused platitude that corruption is the biggest cause of underdevelopment in Africa. Realistically speaking, for a typical African country like Uganda, with just about 2-3% of its GDP available to spend on development projects due to budget limitations, the resulting infrastructure gaps – whether it is insufficient electricity, poor public transport system, poor education/medical facilities – are inevitable regardless of the ethical height of our leaders. We could as well appoint Jesus, Mohammed, and Budha to govern Uganda, and they would do little to nothing to provide public goods and services with such a lean budget.

Of course, there are even many other arguments to deconstruct the corruption narrative. For instance, many of the developed nations actually experienced significant corruption during their periods of industrial transformation.

The wisdom from the foregoing observations made me realise that the development challenges facing African nations may be more fundamentally rooted in structural economic constraints such as low tax bases, limited industrial capacity, unfavourable terms of trade, and debt burdens – than in governance ethics. “It is the political economy, not the morality of African leaders, Stupid,” I might say.

Then enters Khatondi.

My conversation with Khatondi Soita Wepukhulu on corruption and its effect, if any, on Uganda’s development took a different tangent when she said the economics of corruption were beside the point!

“When some minister in China is hanged for stealing $100 million, it isn’t because the dent to the economy is big. Moralisation of corruption by the political elite of the day is super crucial to building the nationalist consensus required to do other things,” she said. This was an argument difficult to challenge.

She argued that “China and the Asian Tigers we admire have a strict culture on theft of public funds… What our normalized theft does is kill nationalist agency and responsibility of self towards country.”

“That is the sort of harm that a larger public wallet can’t rectify.” She continued.

I couldn’t agree more.

Khatondi’s argument introduced me to a profound dimension of why corruption in Africa matters, which I had since overlooked. I read in her point something which has been significantly degraded almost to extinction in Museveni’s NRM government – the existence of a strong public spirit in public service!

Current estimates show that China has a nominal GDP of approximately $18.28 trillion – which comes to about $37.07 trillion in Purchasing Power Parity terms (PPP). So, if a Chinese minister is executed for embezzlement of $100 million, it can’t be primarily because the theft presents a serious threat to the performance of the Chinese economy. Such strict political discipline rather represents something far more fundamental to the health of the nation: the establishment of moral authority and collective purpose in national politics.

I think that China stands highly uncompromising against elite corruption not because such theft would bankrupt its inexhaustible treasuries but because it would corrupt the soul of the Chinese state… it would fracture the moral legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The severe punishment of corrupt Chinese officials, therefore, serves as a powerful ritual reminding other CCP ruling elites of the primacy of national interest over individual enrichment.

In the morning of the NRM government in the late 80s and early 90s, the state’s leadership viewed itself as a servant to a national mission. The stark contrast today is that NRM ruling elites stand rather as privileged beneficiaries of power. The moral authority that enables the Chinese government to demand sacrifices from its citizens in service of long-term development goals is absent in Uganda because of the corrupt degeneration of the NRM political class. That might be the biggest threat to the development of our country.

The normalization of elite theft in many African states has corroded the very foundation of national purpose. It is hard to see, for example, in Uganda, whether the government still has a purpose to power. It seems President Museveni’s will to power has degenerated into holding power for power’s sake, given the lawlessness with which corrupt public officials who occupy key NRM positions walk scot-free. When Ugandans regularly witness politicians engaging in brazen self-enrichment, it fractures our nation beyond the economic impact of corruption. It breeds a cynical individualism that now sees everyone buying the biggest Toyota to manoeuvre giant pot-holes in our roads instead of caring for the public infrastructure systems for the collective good.

This is why my initial persuasion on simply increasing African countries’ fiscal capacity, while important, cannot solve our fundamental problem. Widening our national budget space might enable more development spending even with some leakage to corruption, but it cannot restore the moral authority required for transformative national projects. Our leaders cannot demand sacrifice from us while they openly engage in self-enrichment.

China’s strict political disciplinary model echoes a profound lesson: uncompromising moral standards for leadership are central to building public trust with citizens, which rallies them around the nation’s development vision. Unless the NRM government rebuilds its moral authority over the state through a genuine commitment to public service, not even the vast oil resources we are hoping for will fuel our country’s transformation. When history books are written, perhaps NRM’s greatest corruption will not be the theft of money but the theft of Ugandans’ faith in the state to do good.

The writer is a senior research fellow at the Development Watch Center.

 

How to Modernize Uganda? Lessons from China’s Agrarian Change

Posted on By Nnanda Kizito Sseruwagi

Mathias Walukaga in Ekyatusomosa Lweera, Herman Basudde in Mweraba Ngenze, and Kazibwe Kapo in Sigwa Jajja Wo all sing about a common Ugandan phenomenon – the migration of people, often as individuals, on a lonely search for economic opportunity, from rural to urban centers. Whereas the central message in each of their songs is different, they all sing about work and in the process aspects of rural-urban migration filter through the message, showing how one’s fortunes usually change for the better when one leaves their villages to work in towns.

In the broader processes of national development and transformation, massive rural-urban migration, as opposed to individual migration, facilitates structural transformation in the economy, society, and politics. No country developed without experiencing increased migration of people from rural areas to urban centers with the attendant shift from subsistence agriculture to industry and service delivery as the major sources of employment and livelihood. The message in Walukaga, Basudde and Kazibwe’s songs is that rural-urban migration is economically transformative.

China is a notable example of a country which developed by systematically organising its rural–peasant population within national projects of state modernization which saw its rapid socio-economic transformation.

China harnessed its vast rural labour force for national development to enable it to transition from an agrarian economy to a global industrial powerhouse in what is known as the Great Leap Forward. Whereas the social and human consequences of the Great Leap Forward were an astronomical failure, in the end, the Leap set China on a course for long-term industrial growth. I am not suggesting the adoption of a Great Leap Forward for Uganda, but I carry the understanding that forms of violence have been central to the development process in all nations. Karl Marx, by far the greatest political economist, was cognisant of the brutality of the process of development as involving forced dispossession and coerced transformation of peasants into providers of free labourers in the process of “primitive accumulation.” Marx did not think that the peasant should be saved from this fate since the peasantry was “a relic of a past mode of production now on its way out: unproductive and, mostly, politically backward.”

More recently in the early years of this century, China set out to stimulate economic growth with rapid urbanization as its key strategy. How did China turn rural land into urban centers at an accelerated pace?

Firstly, unlike in Uganda where leaders are preoccupied with politics and power, one of the most preoccupying issues among leaders in the People’s Republic of China is solving “China’s Agrarian Question.” China’s leaders share a long-standing ideological goal of driving industrialization and urbanization.

Like China, Uganda urgently needs to modernize the countryside, reduce poverty and transfer rural peasants into the urban economy. This process will enable us to shift large droves of our population from tilling the earth in villages to being integrated into higher-value employment in industry and service sectors.

Countries which have most of their people employed in sectors of service delivery and industry are wealthier as opposed to those reliant on agriculture for employment. The current disaster in Uganda and many African countries is that agriculture still employs over 70 percent of our labour force which definitely contributes the least to our national wealth/GDP. In contrast, the world’s biggest economy – the United States has over 77% of its GDP derived from the service sector, 20% from industry and just 1-2% from Agriculture. In China, the GDP is distributed between the service sector, industry and agriculture at approximately 54.6%, 38.3% and 7% respectively.

To return to the question of how China increased urbanization in recent decades, let’s first observe the fiscal reforms of the early 1990s. The Chinese government reorganized national budget allocations by reducing the financial support it extended to local governments. This forced lower-level governments to find means to be financially self-sufficient. This consequently fundamentally altered how local governments managed revenue generation and land use in the countryside.

Additionally, local governments turned to land as a primary source of revenue. In China, rural land is collectively owned by village communities whereas land in urban areas is owned by the state. Under the new fiscal system, local authorities began systematically converting rural land into urban land which allowed them to lease the newly classified land to developers for a profit. This became an essential strategy for generating revenue since land sales to private investors and construction companies provided large sums of money that could be used for local development projects.

These policies increased pressure on rural land and the consequent economic challenges in the countryside propelled more people to migrate to cities in search of better opportunities. Indeed, this was a migration trend that had already been underway with China’s broader economic reforms, which opened it to foreign investment and turned the country into the “factory of the world.” As industrialization expanded, the cities became economic hubs that offered higher job opportunities and wages compared with the countryside. The mixture of rural economic distress and the pull of urban job opportunities accelerated rural-urban migration.

The rapid urbanization fuelled by land conversion and migration contributed to China’s economic boom, as its cities became the centers of industrial production, commerce, and innovation that we know today.

Whereas these processes faced widespread resistance from villagers, as would be expected, they were and are inevitable and necessary processes of modernisation. This is how China uprooted its peasants from agrarian modes of livelihood.

The more I commit to understanding development discourse, I find that the only way for underdeveloped countries to achieve socio-economic transformation is through undergoing ruthless processes of converting their mass populations of peasants involved in farming into workers in industries and service sectors. I have not yet known any process where this happened in peace and harmony. Except for a handful of countries that sat on mega oil reserves which simply pumped oil out of the ground to grow their economies, all the world’s nations, regardless of how much mineral resources they had, had to undertake significant land reforms in the process of “depeasantization.” That’s the missing conversation in Uganda’s political talk.

The writer is a senior research fellow at Development Watch Center.

 

 

 

 

A Better Deal: Why Africa is Turning to China for Development

Posted on By Sino Uganda Research Centre

By Nnanda Kizito Sseruwagi

Across historical times, empires that sought world domination eventually met with decline and decay. The American Empire in particular and Western countries in general are currently undergoing a gradual erosion of influence, power, and stability. Left to their own devices, blind and deaf to the calls for reform in how they interact with the rest of the world from the global south, the West/America is teetering in the footsteps of empires of yore – the Roman, the Ottoman, and the British empires. Having enjoyed global prominence for much of the 20th and 21st centuries, America is entering a period of decline.

The warning signs of decline are as clear. Unprecedented political polarization, widening economic inequality, crumbling infrastructure, rising national debt, and a polarized media landscape at home.

On the world stage, we are contesting America’s global dominance. China, which identifies with our “global southern interests,” has emerged as a formidable competitor, outpacing the United States. Whether in advanced manufacturing, artificial intelligence, or infrastructure development, China is dwarfing America. China’s Belt and Road Initiative exemplifies its ability to expand its influence globally, particularly in Africa, Asia, parts of Europe, and Latin America. Yes, even Europeans who are supposed to be cousins of the Americans in global politics are now preferring to buy goods like electric cars from China, because it is excellent and cheap.

America’s global leadership is waning on many fronts. It is likely to lose the war in Ukraine (Yes, it is its war against Russia). It lost the war in Afghanistan. It lost the war in Libya. America has burnt its taxpayers’ money on countless senseless wars and lost. But the most fatal war it is losing is the war for hearts and minds. More African/global southern countries/people are turning East for development support and comradeship in international relations.

We in the developing world did not create the international geopolitical vacuum which China is beginning to occupy. By departing from globally unifying interests and selfishly pursuing a self-righteous and self-destructive global order where it has the only and last say, America surrendered its comradeship with the nations of the world to the more self-effacing China, which promises and practices peaceful co-existence and shared development.

The relationship between Africa and China has evolved significantly over the past two decades, presenting a range of development opportunities for African nations. Africa is the world’s last most underdeveloped, poorest continent. We urgently need to transform from being agrarian economies to becoming modern, industrial nations. China has heeded our call and emerged as a dominant player in infrastructure investment across Africa. It is now narrowing a critical annual infrastructure investment gap of about USD 50 billion. Chinese firms have flocked to Africa, financing and constructing roads, railways, dams, airports, and establishing industrial parks. These are investments critical to economic growth.

In stark contrast, American investments in African infrastructure and manufacturing are significantly going lower with every passing year. The United States Department of State recently struck off Rwanda from the list of AGOA, implying Rwanda can no longer export goods to the United States tax-free. The cause of this drastic decision was that Rwanda decided to develop its domestic textile industry thus proscribing importation of second-hand clothes from America.  If indeed the United States was interested in the structural transformation of such a small, poor country like Rwanda, why would it be ruthlessly against developing its small textile factories?

Instead, America’s brazen self-righteousness is focused on decreeing governance and institutional frameworks around the world. It doesn’t matter what problem you’re dealing with; America knows it can be solved if you govern yourself according to its prescriptions and its model. No context, no questions. This is the hubris that China has emerged to challenge, not by force but by providing an alternative for the world’s developing countries.

China’s approach to investment in Africa is also characterized by a focus on long-term partnerships that drive industrialization and capacity building. Development is a long-term process. It requires sustained support no matter the circumstances. This makes China a reliable partner for developing countries because it does not intervene in the political governance of these nations. And it does not put conditions on its investments dependent on how these countries are governed. This is something America failed to recognise. But switching how it supports African governments based on occasional disagreements with laws passed by African parliaments or how elections are managed or how presidents behave, etc, America fails to be a long-term reliable partner on the development journey of African nations. China’s willingness to commit to long-term projects without imposing immediate political conditions stands in stark contrast to American strategies that often favour short-term results or regime changes when “American expectations” are not met.

It is not difficult to see why African states are going to cast their lot with China for a long time to come. China has positioned itself as a key player in Africa’s development journey. On the other hand, America has refused to hear us out. And is diving head-first into its global decline and decay.

The writer is a senior research fellow at the Development Watch Centre. 

Improved Technology Is Vital in Answering Uganda and Africa’s Energy  Dilemma

Posted on By Sino Uganda Research Centre

By Arthur Atuha

The World Bank estimates that one billion people – of which a big fraction is in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia – have no access to electricity! Relatedly, the African Development Bank (ADB)  explains that Sub-Saharan Africa cannot realise its development targets with current shortage of electricity stressing that the region needs USD 130-170 billion annually if it is to address its power challenges. Some experts argue that this presents a major barrier to social economic transformation touching major development indicators like health, education, poverty reduction, food production, gender equality, livelihoods among others.

Indeed, President Yoweri Museveni has often explained that “lack of infrastructure such as electricity” can impede development aspirations by among others causing high cost of doing business stating that lack of energy is one of major bottlenecks the continent is grappling with. Uganda’s Vision 2040’s whose aim is “A transformed Ugandan Society from a Peasant to a Modern and Prosperous Country within 30 years” undercores the importance of energy in any country’s social-economic development. The potential demand is seemingly growing with stretches from agriculture, manufacturing and domestic consumption. Digital infrastructure and innovation in the Power sector are meant to foster entrepreneurship but how do we achieve this at the earliest times anyway?

With several sources of power such as Nuclear, thermal, biomass, solar and hydro, supply is ceasing to be a challenge for Uganda’s dream but rather demand triggered in-terms of load growth, electricity access and quality of service mapped against the cost of electricity. The Grid development plan (2018-2040) indicates growth in sales by UETCL of 9% partly due to exportation of electricity to neighboring countries like Kenya. Nonetheless, the demand side in Uganda has continued to portray potential in the next future thus the need to match it to supply.

Global energy targets have also continued to be enforced especially through donations, grants and Foreign Domestic Investments (FDIs) calling for compliance to conditions such as affordable and clean energy which is number 7 priority of United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG 7) and number SDG number 13 – climate action with notable environmental regulations especially those relating to green energy and reduction of carbon emissions for example the use of electric vehicles that are eco-friendly. This has fronted Technology as a feasible solution to solve power issues globally like never before for which Uganda should not be indifferent.

China is already playing a key role especially in supporting energy infrastructure development especially in Africa and the entire global south. China’s Belt and Road initiative (BRI) is one of main vehicles Beijing has been using to fund and support energy infrastructure development including Uganda’s Karuma and Isimba hydropower stations. Also, through Chinese State-Owned firms, Beijing’s role in ensuring global transformation of the power sector is very visible and commendable. China Southern Power Grid (CSG) , a state-owned enterprise that operates in China’s five provinces including Guangdong, Guangxi, Yunnan, Guizhou, and Hainan has demonstrated digital AI plus power systems (Green) in Hainan province with low carbon development at 28% energy usage in China. With these targets of sustainability, renewables are becoming irreplaceable thus the need to attract an interdisciplinary approach of integration.

With demand, system stability is seen to be the biggest challenge however with appropriate planning parameters and investment in climate friendly portfolios and products, these can guarantee reliable and resilient power systems, for example replacing generators and inverters with converters.

Uganda’s electricity problems are largely associated with accessibility, reliability and energy losses some of which are underpinned to vandalism. Investment in digital infrastructure such as drones that have an AI inbuilt mechanism can be used for smart monitoring of both transmission and distribution network lines especially in the highly risk areas like the North-eastern part of Uganda (Karamoja region) that is prone to insecurity thus threatening the safety of staff operators.

The path of investment in Technology has seen CSG become a performance benchmark in China with its power reliability hitting nearly 100%, accessibility stands at 100% with sufficient energy storage to beat outages, cost of power has dropped by 60% in the past decade due to the pricing mechanism that is market established among the 38 OECD countries. This has stimulated economic growth and social benefits including improved competitiveness with China’s scale increasing from 11 trillion yuan in 2012 to over 50 trillion yuan in 2022.  It is imperative to associate such achievements to be driven by market demand, technological innovation and government support.

On 9th December 2024, CSG launched the implementation of a new power system to achieve cleanliness and low carbon emissions of power supply by 2035. This is to have a composition of Wind PV, hydro, nuclear and hydrogen as renewables are becoming a more reliable substitute for fossil fuels. Safety and sufficiency being pre-requisites, development is meant to advance in-tandem to enhance reliability with

They built a back-up power supply coordinating the large power grids to the distributed smart grids guaranteeing a stable electricity system operation. Cost effectiveness and efficiency being key, the electricity tariff will further decline due to the improved electricity market mechanism increasing terminal energy consumption to 42% by 2035. This demonstrates synergy between supply and demand with foundations from flexibility and intelligence thus optimizing source grid integration. If the different energy sector players in Uganda (ERA, UEGCL, UETCL, UEDCL) through the ministry of Energy explored such opportunities of technology advancements, Uganda could become among the first developing countries to witness the benefits of the new power supply system gradually by 2035. With UMEME out, maybe Uganda and Africa in general should  borrow a leaf from China’s CSG. The company has already helped a number of countries such as Vietnam, Chile, Peru, Laos and Luxenberg among others to significantly improve their power supply by significantly reducing power losses in process of distribution among others through use of advanced technology.

The writer is a Research Fellow at the Development watch Centre.

China’s Wang Yi Africa Visit: 2025 Will Be A Fruitful Year For Sino-Africa Relations

Posted on By Sino Uganda Research Centre

By Allawi Ssemanda

Dear Editor, last week, China’s top Diplomat Wang Yi completed his week-long Africa trip having visited four different African countries of Chad, the Republic of Congo, Namibia and Nigeria.

The visit which marked 140th visit from Chinese top leadership to the continent since the year 2007. It was also 35th year in a row Chinese Foreign Minister making Africa the first destination for his foreign where traditionally the visit covers 4-5 African countries every January of the year. By all measures, the tradition confirms that China puts great importance to its cooperation with Africa. It is also a testament that China’s diplomatic ties with Africa is guided by principles of amity, sincerity, mutual benefit, inclusiveness and real results as President Xi Jinping often states.

Wang Yi’s visit came just months after China upgraded bilateral relations between African countries with China to the level of strategic relations, with president Xi Jinping during 2024 Forum on China Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) announcing that the overall characterization of Africa-China relations be elevated to all-weather China-Africa community with a shared future for the new era.

If critically analyzed, Wang Yi, who doubles as a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, his visit is key in deepening practical cooperation between China and Africa in different sectors and promoting an in-depth development of China-Africa cooperation with real results and win-win for both sides. Indeed, President Xi Jinping observed in his 2013 FOCAC summit key note address in Durban, South Africa that; “the development of China-Africa ties can only be in the present continuous tense and never in the present perfect tense.”  A decade plus since Xi’s remarks, China continues to stand shoulder to shoulder and work with African countries for mutual benefits – a sign that Beijing is committed to her idea of building a community of shared future and prosperity for mankind in the new era.

For decades now, the trade between two sides have been growing and are projected to further grow in 2025. For example, in addition to being Africa’s largest trading partner for the last 15 years in a row, at the end of 2023, China’s trade volume with African countries reached USD 282.1 billion. At the end of 2024, this grew to USD 296 billion representing about 5% increasement, according to data by the General Administration of Customs of China.

With China’s Belt and Road Initiative which is making significant contribution in improving the continent’s infrastructure connectivity, zero tariff policy on African goods entering Chinese markets as announced by China, the figures of trade between two sides will likely grow further. Considering multiplier effects of such which include among others contributing to improved standards of living, one can safely argue that China-Africa cooperation in all ways is contributing to building a community of shared prosperity and shared future in the new era. This goes without saying that China’s initiatives such as Global Development Initiative, Global Security Initiative and Global Civilization Initiatives are also key in building the ideal world.

In this context, Wang Yi’s visit clearly shows China’s willingness to work with African counterparts in ensuring that the 10 partnership actions President Xi announced during the 2024 FOCAC summit meant to be implemented over a period of next three years are fast tracked. The 10 Partnership Actions include among others; mutual learning among civilization which will see sharing of governance experience, establishment of 25 China-Africa studies centers; the Partnership Action for trade and prosperity; the Partnership Action for industrial chain cooperation which will see the launch of an African SMEs empowerment program and  China supporting the continent to build 20 digital demonstration projects in Africa; the Partnership Action of connectivity with aim of supporting 30 infrastructure connectivity projects in Africa; and Partnership Action on health. Under health action, China will send 2,000 medical experts in Africa, launch 20 programs of health facilities and malaria treatment and encourage Chinese companies to invest in Africa’s pharmaceutical production.

Others include Partnership Action for development cooperation which will see implementation of 1,000 small and beautiful livelihood projects; Partnership Action for agriculture and livelihoods which will see increase in Chinese funding of agriculture on the continent; Partnership Action for green development; Partnership Action for people-to-people exchanges; and Partnership Action for common security.

If critically analyzed, all the 10 Partnership Actions will help the continent to address its challenges and most of its bottlenecks to development. For example, under the Partnership Action for Agriculture and livelihoods, China promised to provide Africa with 1 billion Chinese Yuan in emergency food assistance, support in building about 6,670 hectares of standardized agricultural demonstration, send agricultural experts to train their African counterparts and establish a China-Africa agricultural science and technology innovation alliance. This is in addition to implementing 500 programs meant to support and promote community welfare. More importantly, under the Partnership Action for agriculture, China’s aim is to promote two-way investments for new business by both Chinese and African companies with aim of retaining and adding value in goods produced on the continent and create at least one million jobs for the continent.

Aware that China believes in consultations other than enforcing her own ideas on her allies, one can argue that Wang Yi’s visit at a time when the two sides are readying themselves to embark on implementation of the projects under the said Partnership Actions, the visit was crucial for consultations and understanding of priorities for African countries where the partnership projects will be implemented. It is also a testament of China’s readiness and willingness to kick-start the implementation of the 10 partnership actions.

Taking the Partnership Action for common security as an example, during his Africa trip, Minister Yi was categorical that China will “firmly support Africans in addressing African issues in the African way,” stressing that “African people are the real masters of this continent.” Yi further expressed China’s stance against interfering in the Continent’s internal affairs in any form and instead showed Beijing’s willingness and readiness to support the continent so that African countries themselves can devise ways of addressing their concerns. It’s in this visit that wang announced USD 136 million to support the continent in addressing security issues, help in training of 6000 troops and 1,000 police officers across Africa. He also pledged China’s support to the continent in its interests including at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). “At the UNSC, China will always be in favor of Africa,” stressed wang Yi.

In conclusion, considering that China takes engagement and consultations with allies key in their development support; and, aware that China’s global initiatives such as Global Development Initiative, Global Civilization Initiative and Global Security Initiative and the Belt and Road Initiative have some convergence with African Union’s Agenda 2063, one can safely argue that 2025 will be a fruitful year for China-Africa cooperation. With Wang Yi’s just concluded visit, this assertion is arguably bankable especially that both sides are determined to strengthen their achievements and that Beijing has been clear that her relationship with Africa is guided by principles of amity, sincerity, mutual benefits and real results with aim of building a community of shared future for mankind in the new era.

The writer is a resident senior research fellow at the Development watch Centre.

Africa’s Position on China’s Global Initiative on AI Governance

Posted on By Sino Uganda Research Centre

By Musiime George

There is no more denying the fact that Artificial Intelligence is reshaping the world in more ways than we could have possibly imagined. For example, AI could detect cancer much earlier and with increased accuracy. Moreover, it is projected that by deploying AI, businesses will save up to $8Billion annually by 2026. Nonetheless, in the midst of these impressive achievements are concerns that Africa must take note of. As a continent that is not playing a significant role in shaping the conversation on AI, albeit the conversation being ongoing, Africa must work with partners to ensure that inclusivity and representation are prioritized as early as in the Development of AI models. Unless this happens, we might wake up one day to realize we did not do enough and by then, it will be too late-as put in 2023 by OpenAI CEO, Sam Altman “If the technology goes wrong, it can go quite wrong.”

While this conversation takes shape, there are two prominent perspectives that standout in relation to Africa; 1) how the continent might or must reposition itself to benefit from the AI revolution on one hand, and 2) the need to build effective AI governance on the other. The World Bank drills deeper, talking about fostering equitable access to AI, and aligning the discussion around AI with sustainable Development Goals. Whereas both perspectives are essential, this essay contends that Africa must also work to ensure that inclusion and representation particularly in the development stages of AI are prioritized.

As we speak, the United States and China standout as de facto leaders in the global AI revolution. However, some commentators speculate that the competition between the two could follow the same trend as the cold war era arms race between the United states and the Soviet Union. To recap, this race resulted into unprecedented proliferation of nuclear weapons with the two great powers creating ever more destructive capabilities. On the contrary, many countries did not develop nuclear capabilities at the same pace or at all which made the nuclear threat even more profound. In the same way, the current trend in AI risks creating a similar scenario, especially in the absence of effective AI governance frameworks. For example, Trump era Secretary of Defense, Mark Esper once pointed out that, “…which ever nation harnesses AI will have a decisive advantage on the battlefield for many years.”  This goes to show how nations might deploy AI in the absence of such frameworks, ways that might jaundice efforts to build a peaceful, fairer and equitable world.

Experts who have been bold to express their concerns about AI have highlighted the emphasis placed on “AI for good” Vis-a-Vis Ethics of AI in the global conversation on Artificial Intelligence. In fact, it is easy to come to the consensus that, AI might not have a problem, but rather how we use it and where we use it. Moreover, one area often cited as a source of potential risk is, that of training data. The key concern here has been, most of these models have been implemented prior to the establishment of any frameworks for AI governance. Thus the question becomes what is the quality of training data used? And how well is Africa represented in these datasets?  With almost all of the training datasets coming from the global north, there is a significant risk of reinforcing existing stereotypes, and power dynamics which have for a long time held Africa at a disadvantage. Moreover, in an age where nearly 60% of online content is produced by AI, subsequent improvement of AI capabilities could only exacerbate this dynamic since it is based on already biased input.

The risk of accelerated bias: Different Tech enthusiasts and experts have on numerous occasions highlighted the possibility of AI creating abundance on the bright side. Nonetheless, there have been warnings from others, regarding the risk of accelerated bias, particularly in cases where the initial training data was prejudiced or not representative. Thus, the Cinderella issue in the AI conversation is that of representation, and quality of training data. Indeed, algorithmic biases directly affect both fairness and trust, jeopardizing any benefits presented by AI. Given the historical injustices and cultural sensitivities on one hand, and the bulk of training data coming from the global north on the other, AI models could aid in perpetuating historical injustices, stereotypes, thus undermining uptake and subsequent access to the benefits of AI technology on the continent. This is one particular reason why Africa needs to rise to the occasion and play its due role in this conversation.

As China and Africa made renewed commitments to jointly building an all-weather China Africa Community with a shared future for the new era, both partners agreed to work together in order to seize the historic opportunity of the new round of technological revolution. This commitment made at the 2024 FoCAC summit in Beijing aligns well with the need to address the inclusion and representation in the development of AI. The effort will seek to foster an inclusive, fair, just and nondiscriminatory environment for the development of science and technology. More so, in the first steps, Africa overwhelmingly welcomed China’s Global Initiatives on; AI governance and Data security. The initiatives are a step in the right direction in as far as promoting the rights of Africa in the global governance of AI are concerned. Therefore, working with China, Africa can enhance not just its role but also representation in novel AI models; from Large Language Models to Generative AI Models and everything in between.

In conclusion, as the universal application of Artificial Intelligence is cascading around the world, Africa can position itself to reap the enormous benefits presented by this revolution. Faced with an absence of AI governance frameworks in most countries, and the risk of accelerated biases, Africa must harness positive partnerships in order to counteract the perpetuation of old stereotypes, injustices, underrepresentation while enhancing fairness and inclusion as inroads to the positive benefits of Artificial Intelligence. In addition, the partnership with  China could be a strong advocacy voice for responsible and ethical AI in order to minimize associated security threats and the concentration of power thus buttressing global order and peace in the age of AI.

The author is a research fellow at the Development Watch Centre.

 

China’s Wang Yi’s Africa Visit Shows Her Value

Posted on By Sino Uganda Research Centre

By Joshua Kingdom

“Africa should be a big stage for international cooperation, not an arena for major-force rivalry”. These were the words of then Chinese Foreign Minister (FM) Qin Gang speaking to the press in Ethiopia while on his Africa visit in January 2023. Thereafter, he would fly to Angola, Gabon, Benin, and finally Egypt. This sort of thing happens at every beginning of year in a long standing tradition of demonstrating an enduring commitment to African affairs by The Chinese Communist party (CCP). For 2025, the current FM, Wang Yi concluded the year’s version of the tour in Nigeria on Thursday last week.

There is a lot that the minister’s journey achieved on its own, including the fact that his meeting with President Denis Sassou Nguesso of the Republic of the Congo re-echoed China’s readiness to start on the implementation of her promises at last year’s Forum on China-Africa Cooperation as well as how the liaison with Chad fills a gap that the recent crisis between the country and her former colonizer had caused. For our purposes here however, we will instead focus on how it is that the custom of Chinese foreign ministers travelling to this part of the world annually is strong evidence for how much their government cherishes it.

In doing so, I hope to provide a counter-perspective to that which one often hears from the West when its media paints China’s motives in relating with Africa as opportunistic through and through. As you read on, please keep at the back of your mind the fact that these cries have somehow become louder at a time when the potential of the AU states begins to vividly show– it is estimated for instance, that we will spend as much as $16 trillion in consumption and business yearly by 2050.

The shift in partnership preference by African leaders from West to East is explainable in part by the fact that Beijing has treated them with dignity. While President Hu Jintao hosted the first China-Africa Summit in 2006 thus, it took almost a decade before the United States thought that organizing an equivalent event was worth the bother. No example brings out this point better however, than the FMs’ engagements. I mean, the practice has been going for thirty-five years now. Surely, everyone would agree that the state of geopolitics has changed so much from 1990 that China cannot have been lying low all this while waiting for when the moment is right. Add to this the fact that FMs are often high ranking state officials such that their involvement in any duty is a mark of the significance that their party attaches to it and you see where this is going. Indeed, Wang Yi presently serves on the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party.

Moreover, China has made gains from the China-Africa FM trips as much as Africa has. Seeing the deliberate effort that the CCP leadership has invested through this initiative, other global powers are beginning to send more of their top politicians on the continent with competing offers. In 2023 alone hence, United States Vice President Kamala Harris and Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited five African nations between themselves. And in December last year, President Biden made his way to Angola. Significantly, the latter country has a lot to thank China for since western powers had mostly abandoned it during the immediate aftermath of the disastrous war that wrecked it at the turn of the century.

Knowing that there is no place in which actions speak louder than words than in foreign relations then, the time that Chinese FMs spend on the continent every beginning of year tells us all that we need to know about their homeland’s view of Africa. Countries in the Northern hemisphere will have to up the game before earning the right to convince Africans otherwise.

The writer is a lawyer and research fellow at the Development Watch Centre.

WHERE THE WEST AND CHINA HAVE LED US: COUNTING GAINS AND LOSSES

Posted on By Sino Uganda Research Centre

By SALIM ABILA ASUMAN

The year 2024 has come to an end, and we find ourselves in that familiar beginning of a new year moment where we look back at the past year’s events much like flipping through an annual financial report.

But, instead of profit margins and balance sheets, we are trying to reflect on the actions, decisions, and strategies that shaped the global landscape last year.

If there is that one thing that dominated the headlines the last year, it’s the dynamic duo of the West and China.

Just like an annual report provides clarity on where an establishment stands, it is time for Uganda and Africa at large to assess where the West and China have led us and what the next chapter holds.

As Uganda and definitely much of Africa, continues to play host to foreign powers, it’s time to take stock. Who’s winning? Who’s losing? And more importantly whether there has been a move towards tangible economic progress?

This article takes a final glance at 2024 as we begin 2025, it delves into the profound impact of their co-operations and partnerships in Africa, while examining the moves that defined 2024. Buckle up as we dive into last year’s most riveting global showdown.

In the recent years the relationship between China and Africa has yielded substantial returns across key sectors transforming infrastructure, boosting trade advancing industrialization, and driving economic growth.

As we review the results, its clear that the investments and collaborations are setting Uganda and the broader continent on a path to long term prosperity. Below is the assessment of the gains in tangible terms, measuring the impact of this partnership on Uganda’s development.

Kampala-Entebbe Expressway: The completion of the USD 1.3 billion Expressway, has transformed Uganda’s transport landscape. This 51-kilometers road now connects Uganda’s capital with its international airport, reducing travel time by 30 minutes and enhancing trade and tourism.

Karuma Hydroelectric Power Plant: with an investment of USD 1.7 billion, this project is set to add 600 MW of electricity to Uganda’s grid, addressing the country’s energy deficit and supporting industrial growth.

These infrastructure projects have reduced logistical costs and improved regional connectivity, contributing to a 3.5 percent increase in GDP growth. Uganda’s ranking in the world bank’s logistics performance index has improved boosting investors’ confidence.

Uganda’s trade with China has also reached USD 2.7 billion, with exports valued at USD 800 Million. Major exports included; coffee, minerals, while imports from China included machinery and electronics, accounted for USD 1.9 billion.

About USD 120 Million has also been invested by China in Education and Skills Development. Over 2,000 Ugandans have received scholarships to study in China, with 400 students graduating in fields such as engineering, energy, and agriculture.

These educational investments have equipped Uganda’s youth with technical skills, reducing unemployment rates in several sectors and as a result there has been a reduction in national unemployment.

It would be a mischief if China’s investment in Uganda’s Oil and Gas sector is ignored. China National Offshore Oil Corporation’s (CNOOC) has so far invested about USD 1.4 billion in Uganda’s oil sector.

Uganda’s economic future, in many ways, is now paved by Chinese concrete, and while it sounds like a fairy tale of infrastructure, this is the undeniable fact.

On the other side there is a symphony of good intentions and familiar missed opportunities. Let’s talk about the west, the United States, the European Union and their assorted agencies have spent decades agitating about democracy, good governance, and human rights. They have managed to tick off a few boxes in Uganda, funding healthcare programs, agricultural initiatives, and governance reforms.

Take USAID’s efforts in Uganda, sure, there has been progress in health and food security, but what about jobs? What about the kind of industrialization that could make Uganda self-sufficient, and not just reliant on aid? The West’s model often focuses on alleviating the symptoms of poverty without addressing the root causes.

Western aid flows in like a river generous and well-meaning but its often not connected to the kind of long-term economic investment that could truly propel Uganda into the future.

In addition, while western companies have been having a foothold in Uganda and Africa, they have not been enthusiastic in investing in local enterprises to aid Uganda build its own industries.

Not only has the West ignored the real engine of economic growth, but they have also missed a vast opportunity by not embracing more directly the natural resources that Africa possesses. While China was building railways, the West was stalled in pushing environmental policies that clash with Africa’s needs to extract and exploit their resources for growth.

China, on the other hand, has no qualms: oil, coal, and gas are all part of their development strategy. To many nations on the continent with natural resources, the West’s refusal to engage with Africa’s resources sector in favor of a more ‘environmentally responsible approach’ is a luxury Africa simply cannot afford.

So, what do we have at the end of 2024? If you are Uganda, you have new roads, shiny power plants, and an expanding, if slightly precarious, economic footprint on the map.

However, the truth is that, the future of Africa will be determined by a tightrope balancing between the two forces. China offers infrastructure and trade, while the West offers ideals and humanitarian aid. But the real question is, Can Uganda-can Africa-find a way to leverage these investments for long-term, self-sustaining growth? Or will it continue to stand in the shadows of foreign powers, and always counting the gains and losses on a balance sheet that never seems to add up? Only time will tell. Though the answer is right in front of us.

The writer is a research fellow at the Sino-Uganda Research Centre