World Bank Approach Counterproductive – Undermines the State

*China CP Answers*

China CP Answers: Not Committed to Democracy Promotion

Johan Lagerkvist, Research Fellow-Swedish Institute of International Affairs, 2010, Challenging the Aid Paradigm: Western Currents and Asian Alternatives, ed. J. S. Sorensen, p. 174-5

A notable example is when Chinese scholars argue that there is a need to strike a balance between democratic politics and the politics of stability. If you have too much of either ingredient, they say, in the given cultural and socio-economic context, it may invite instability. Democratic disarray and political instability make a state of affairs that in the Chinese mind-set amounts to the same as negative GDP growth. He Wenping for example argues that:

“It looks as if ‘democracy’ not at all is the miracle drug for every conceivable disease, and if applied, it takes effect. Having ‘democracy’ does not automatically mean there is political development. One can definitely not easily equal ‘democracy’ with political development. Only a democracy that accounts for both order, i.e. social stability and rule of law, and effectiveness, i.e. economic development, can forcefully push for political development.” (He 2005)

While by no means writing off the merits of democracy or democratization, she wants us to assess critically the merits of promoting democracy in all places and at any time. She brings up South Africa, Namibia, Botswana, Mauritius, Mali, Mozambique, Senegal, and Ghana as countries that have acquired the right balance between democracy and stability, and thus shown how democratization should sometimes be expanded in order to get the appropriate level of efficiency to promote development. Especially important are the establishment of the rule of law, expansion of popular participation in politics, a growing rights consciousness and the supervision of ruling parties by public opinion. But nonetheless, He Wenping also sees the need to temper democratic ambitions in unfavorable contexts. She observes that democracy has in some countries sped up and revised age-old African tribalism or local nationalism and thus proclaims that when “democracy” cannot coordinate the relationship between effectiveness (economic development) and order (social stability and the rule of law) well, reversal and setbacks in the democratization process can’t be avoided. With a technocrat’s glasses she views the contemporary African situation: “Even if the logic of development means that nation-building and economic construction must be carried out in advance, yet third world countries too, at the same time, confront the strong wish and demands of people to participate in politics and economic distribution” (He, 2005).
CHINESE AID “RECIPIENTS” DO NOT VIEW CHINA AS A MODEL

Johan Lagerkvist, Research Fellow-Swedish Institute of International Affairs, 2010, Challenging the Aid Paradigm: Western Currents and Asian Alternatives, ed. J. S. Sorensen, p. 176

Johan Lagerkvist, Research Fellow-Swedish Institute of International Affairs, 2010, Challenging the Aid Paradigm: Western Currents and Asian Alternatives, ed. J. S. Sorensen, p. 177-8

This is a far cry from telling people that your model of success is a “one-size-fits-all” solution to be emulated everywhere. Another Chinese Africanist, Liu Hongwu, is of a similar opinion when he observes how some view China as the new savior that will reduce Africa’s poverty, which he believes to be as ridiculous as when people in the past regarded the West as Africa’s savior. The same argument is also heard from China’s government agencies. The Chinese government’s State Council Leading Group Office of Poverty Alleviation and Development, for example, has, like China’s Africa watchers also stressed the importance of formulating policies that are context specific, as opposed to a fixed model. As the factors causing poverty vary, different approaches are needed in different regions in China. Gradual reform is also seen as key, to introduce pilot projects on a small scale to test different development ideas on a local level. This, together with a multidimensional approach to poverty reduction, with a focus on capacity-building of farmers and a long-term focus where growth is coupled with poverty reduction, were said to be key lessons. Likewise, Li Zhibiao admonishes African nations that they must consider their own situation and not copy mechanically from others. While Li does not want to paint an overly rosy picture of the results brought by the post-Mao economic reforms, he still believes there are few pillars of wisdom in the Chinese reform experience that Africa can study. First, he argues that it is important to undertake gradual economic reform in order to avoid the outbreak of severe unrest. Second, he believes an opening up too the outside world is necessary as the Chinese reforms were carried out against the background of rapidly developing globalization. Without opening up China could not have made use of foreign direct investment. Therefore Peerenboom is right, on the other hand, when he argues that China’s development path does not provide a detailed blueprint to be followed slavishly by other developing nations. Rather than buying wholesale into advice from the World Bank and IMF, China has adapted basic economic principles according to its own circumstances and perceived needs. The question now is if China will continue to reduce poverty on a global scale by actively engaging in other Third World countries, through investing, becoming an important donor of foreign aid and giving loans at favorable terms. Numerous developing countries, both authoritarian and democratic, look to China and invite experts from there to lecture on law, economics and politics.