The Instigator
brian_eggleston
Pro (for)
Winning
27 Points
The Contender
I-am-a-panda
Con (against)
Losing
20 Points

Chinese colonisation of sub-Saharan Africa would be beneficial to all concerned

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/11/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,902 times Debate No: 5940
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (0)
Votes (7)

 

brian_eggleston

Pro

China has the military capability to simultaneously land massive numbers of ground forces on the Atlantic coast of Democratic Republic of Congo and the Red Sea coast of Sudan and move through both countries, occupying Kinshasa and Khartoum, meeting at the border and branching out into Rwanda, Central African Republic and Chad en route.

This would secure China huge reserves of desperately needed natural resources. Furthermore, Chinese investment in the public infrastructure of the region would bring stability and prosperity to some of the poorest, most corrupt, war-torn, famine-stricken countries in the world.

As China has no history of colonisation of Africa, this arrangement would not be seen as a return to the days of European imperialism and, furthermore, none of the aforementioned countries are part of the British Commonwealth so their leaders could not turn to the UK for military assistance.

Therefore, in view of the benefits that would accrue to all concerned, I submit that China should invade sub-Saharan Africa without any further delay.

Thank you.

Country Profiles:

Sudan
http://news.bbc.co.uk...

D.R. Congo
http://news.bbc.co.uk...

Rwanda
http://news.bbc.co.uk...

Central African Republic
http://news.bbc.co.uk...

Chad
http://news.bbc.co.uk...
I-am-a-panda

Con

I would like to thank eggleston for debating this unique topic with me.

Firstly, I will say my points:

1. China is not fit to secure foreign soil.

There's a reason Tibet is an outrage. It is because they suppressed the people's religion and thoughts. 90-100% of all African's in the nations you mentioned believe in religion,so why should they be forced into Atheism?. If someone said after 5 years 'Let's start our own government' China wouldn't let them. They would execute him in the middle of the night. My opponent mentioned no form of U.N. supervision, so there would be no supervision of this.

2. It would create a new cold war.

The reason the cold war began was because there was a division between communist and capitalist nations. If China were to colonize Sub-Saharan Africa, they would fight the capitalist countries. The U.S. would transport arms to Africa, and the whole mess would start again. If China colonized Africa, they would see themselves fit to colonize areas of other distress, such as rebels in South America or civil wars in Eastern Europe. This would even further hostilities.

Now to rebut my opponents points:

He says this will secure the resources China needs. So, are you saying China should get free or extremely cheap resources off Africa because they pushed out the rebels, who sometimes have the best interest of the people at heart. You also mention Chinese infrastructure. But what about China's problems? Surely it should sort out it's own people before it start collecting an empire. China has a Human Development index of .77, leaving it with low-middle wages for the average Chinese person. It also has the 105th lowest GDP. If you also look at China's industry, they pollute the world with tonnes of Co2 and other harmful gasses yearly. So, if China were to colonize Africa and set up shop, we would be that much closer to the ice caps melting.

In summation, Is submit China is in no position to colonize Africa or an other nations for the foreseeable future.
Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1
brian_eggleston

Pro

With many thanks to "I-am-a-panda" for his considered and informed response, I would like to reply to his comments as follows:

China's record on human rights and freedom of expression has been rightly criticised in the past. However, these days, Chinese citizens are free to practice religion and express their views, within certain parameters. However, these parameters are a lot less draconian than those found in sub-Saharan Africa.

An invasion without the sanction of the UN would be controversial, I agree, but it wouldn't be unprecedented – the US and the UK invaded Iraq without any resolution from the UN.

With regard to a second cold war, given the economic dire straits America and Europe are currently in and their pre-existing military commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan, together with the growing tensions between the West and Iran and Russia, it is highly questionable that developed nations would have the resources or inclination to ratchet up the pressure on China to withdraw from Africa – particularly if they could see tangible benefits accruing to the native populations.

I relation to my opponent's point about rebels, rather than the national governments, controlling the natural resources: I concur this is often the case. However, I disagree that these bandits have anyone's best interest other than their own at heart – it really is all about the money. Yes, China has its own problems with corruption, but when cases are uncovered, the culprits are executed. In Africa, the crooks just pay the government off.

Also, while I accept it is true that there is a divide in prosperity between the wealthy cities and the impoverished rural areas of China, which results in an overall low GDP per capita statistic, this problem is now being seriously addressed.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn......

In any case, China is the world's second largest economy, has the world's largest foreign currency and gold reserves and has lent the US and Europe most of the money required to bail out their faltering economies. This is yet another reason why the West wouldn't challenge China's intervention in Africa – China would react by pulling the plug on foreign lending and their economies would go into freefall.

http://siteresources.worldbank.org......

http://www.bloomberg.com......

My opponent's final point about the environment was a valid one, but needs to be put in context. Chinese people produce far lower CO2 emissions than Americans, who with only 5% of the world's population, nevertheless, produce 25% of the world's pollution.

All considered, I believe that the Chinese colonisation of Africa is a long overdue solution to the world's greatest humanitarian problem.

Many thanks.
I-am-a-panda

Con

I would like to thank Eggleston for this debate, even if we have had some stumbles along the way!

My opponent says that 'Chinese citizens are free to practice their religion and express their views'. But Catholicism is outlawed in mainland China and only 2 state - approved protestant churches are legal. This is not freedom to practise one's religion. You say they're allowed to express their views, yet they have restricted online amenities. For example, look at this comparison of a Google search in China, and one in the U.S. http://en.wikipedia.org.... As well, any words, such as democracy, are banned in chat rooms. This is proof that they cannot 'express their views' if they can't even use the word democracy.

'An invasion without the sanction of the UN would be controversial, I agree, but it wouldn't be unprecedented – the US and the UK invaded Iraq without any resolution from the UN.'. yes it is true, but they invaded 1 nation, not a whole region of a continent. As well, the U.S. and U.K. comply with most U.N. rules and regulations, whic hbrings me on to my 3rd point

My opponent claims that 'highly questionable that developed nations would have the resources or inclination to ratchet up the pressure on China'. What about Japan, Indonesia Australia & India? They all have little or no commitment to the current war on terror and have a combined force of 2.114.000 troops, enough to have a lot of pressure on China.

My opponent claims that rebels are 'bandits' and 'don't have anyone's best interest other than their own at heart'. But who is more sympathetic with the people? The rebels of the nation in hand, or a foreign communist force ready to inflict any ideology it desires, and rape the natural resources and keep them away from the people.

I accessed my opponents link, but found nothing relating to the issue of low GDP. This is what I was directed to http://www.chinadaily.com.cn....

Yes, China has lent U.S. and Europe money, but they have the recession in their hands as well. The central banks in China are slashing bank rates.

We are talking about Africa, not the U.S., colonizing Africa. it is true the U.S. has a terrible Co2 emission problem, but that should not reflect onto China in any way, and Vica-versa.

To conclude, we are over the age of imperialism. China, or any nation, is not fit to colonize any nations. They should give foreign aid, drive out the warmongers and set up lasting democracies. China shouldn't colonize Africa ever, but should send peace keepers. I urge you to vote Con, as China will simply worsen the situation. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
No comments have been posted on this debate.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Renzzy 8 years ago
Renzzy
brian_egglestonI-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by The_Booner 8 years ago
The_Booner
brian_egglestonI-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Zeratul 8 years ago
Zeratul
brian_egglestonI-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:61 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
brian_egglestonI-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by DiablosChaosBroker 8 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
brian_egglestonI-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by paramore102 8 years ago
paramore102
brian_egglestonI-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by KRFournier 8 years ago
KRFournier
brian_egglestonI-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05