Wu Guangqiang

    jw368@163.com

    THE inking of a series of trade and investment deals worth US$53 billion by Chinese Premier Li Keqiang and Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff on May 19, along with the signature of other huge deals between China and Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan during President Xi Jinping’s visits to these countries, has drawn much international attention.

    The rest of the world looks at China’s increasing global presence from varying perspectives. Most countries welcome it with open arms, viewing the cooperation with China as a major impetus for their own development, while a few countries see China’s rise as a challenge to their dominance of the world and label China’s overseas economic activities as “new colonialism.”

    One of the typical charges against China’s overseas economic expansion alleges that in its drive to secure reliable supplies of raw materials, China is coddling dictators, despoiling poor countries, destroying local environments and undermining Western efforts to spread democracy and prosperity.

    Based on these charges, China has the original sin: fast economic growth. Because of the extrication from poverty of 1.3 billion people, China needs more natural resources, more markets, and more room for further development. Apparently, there is nothing wrong with this. Raising people out of poverty is also a Western value.

    Nothing is more absurd than calling China a new colonialist. By a general definition, colonialism is the establishment, exploitation, maintenance, acquisition, and expansion of colonies in one territory by a political power from another territory. None of the criteria fits with China.

    Aware of their own ridiculous accusation, China bashers have made up the new term “new colonialism,” which, of course, defies any definition or substantiation.

    When slamming China, the critics’ words never add up. When China was in dire poverty, Western politicians criticized the Chinese Government for depriving its people of the right to get rich and adopting a closed-door policy.

    When China finally embraced the policies of reform, opening up and a free market and created an economic miracle, Western moralizers began to change their tones.

    China does business with the rest of the world with the same principles and methods Western nations do. Chinese investments are welcomed worldwide and Chinese products sell well everywhere. China buys foreign natural resources and commodities in large quantities. All the deals are done following the principles of equality and mutual benefit. China believes in fair play and plays the game by international rules.

    The only difference is that China’s appetite for resources and China’s capability for production and construction are unprecedentedly larger. The sheer size of China’s population gives rationality to this phenomenon. Never before has the world witnessed the occurrence of a population of 1.3 billion shaking off poverty within such a short period of time. The world should be ready to see even greater impacts of China’s massive economy.

    But just because China is investing heavily overseas and buys more natural resources, does that necessarily equate to exploitation, destruction and supporting dictatorships?

    China’s investment in Africa is the chief “evidence” of the neocolonialism allegation. Critics say what China is doing in Africa now is just the same as what past colonialists did: go to Africa, take the natural resources and leave the local people poorer.

    The critics selectively miss one important fact: unlike Western colonialists, China not only buys natural resources, but invests heavily in African infrastructure and industry so as to lift the African continent out of poverty.

    However, the warnings about environmental destruction are something China must heed. China’s environment has paid a dear price for our rash economic development. China should work with local governments in countries where China is investing to protect the environment.

    Over the years, the world has seen rampant terrorism, bloody civil wars and social and economic disorder wherever the U.S. has sown “democracy.” China believes that democracy comes after basic subsistence is achieved, not vice versa.

    Time will prove who is doing the right thing.

    (The author is an English tutor and freelance writer.)