As the US Cuts Aid, Will China Take Over Africa’s Development?

Though controversial both internally and externally, it is undeniable that USAID has played a significant role in third-world’s humanitarian issues. The suspension of USAID has brought immediate impacts to Africa. The cases below had been confirmed by the Associate Press (AP): in Congo, “Action Against Hunger” will stop treating tens of thousands of malnourished children from May, which the charity said will put the children in “mortal danger”; in Ethiopia, food assistance stopped for more than 1 million people, and Ethiopia has been forced to lay off 5,000 local healthcare workers who were working on its HIV response; in Senegal, the biggest malaria project has been closed, as well as aternal and child health and nutrition services; in South Sudan, a project providing access to quality health care and nutrition services to more than 115,000 people has been closed; in Burkina Faso, more than 400,000 people lost access to services such as water; in Somalia, 50 health centers servicing more than 19,000 people a month closed because health workers’ salaries have been frozen. These were only a small proportion of already confirmed impacts.

UN Secretary general called on other donors to increase their contributions. African countries had also made statements that they will make good use of their own efforts to tackle the impact. However, the aids from other organizations as well as African countries’ own efforts are unlikely to fully fill up the $60 billion gap left by USAID, particularly in humanitarian assistance and health, due to their limited capacities. The World Bank has announced that it will adjust its lending program to support economic projects in Africa but focus on infrastructure rather than direct aid. EU has also announced to consider increasing aids in Africa, but due to its own tight budgets, the scale is likely not enough. The World Health Organization (WHO) has warned that the cuts could lead to 16 million new malaria cases and 166,000 deaths in Africa each year.

In the US, the opposition to the suspension not only came from humanitarians, but also politicians concerning that the US is contracting its influence in Africa and yielding it to China. The Guardian described it as a ‘perfect opportunity’ for Beijing to grow its own soft power in Africa. In fact, China has been providing aids to Africa long before this suspension. Different from USAID that provides direct humanitarian materials, China focus more on investing Africa’s infrastructure to help them achieve long-term economic development. China has helped Africa to build over 100 ports, 10,000 kilometers of railways, 100,000 kilometers of highways, 200,000 kilometers of fiber-optic networks, and more than 200 hospitals and schools in Africa. These infrastructural investments not only improved the traffic and communication conditions, but also provided foundations for Africa’s resource exploitations and economic development. On the food sector, China’s aids are not limited to directly providing foods, but tends to provide technological support to increase their agriculture efficiency. For example, a rice planting project led by China in Cote d ‘Ivoire has increased yields from 2.5 tons per hectare to more than 4 tons.  On the health sector, China also helped Africa to build hospitals, and has sent medical teams to train the local clinicians. At the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) in September 2024, Chinese President Xi Jinping announced that China would provide over $50 billion in financial support to Africa over the next three years, with more than half of it offered in the form of credit.

Many regard China’s aids as more practical, since it aims to help Africa achieve long-term development by investing infrastructure, which is part of China’s own experience of development. Meanwhile, compared to USAID that additionally ask for “implementing democracy” or “free market”, China’s aids are considered to have relatively less interference to Africa’s domestic affairs.

However, these are not sufficient for China to replace USAID in Africa, for many reasons. The humanitarian crisis taking place in Africa are desperate, they might not even have today, let along the future, while China’s aids focused less on providing immediate humanitarian support. Meanwhile, since China’s aids are in the form of investment, some criticized that China is asking for return instead of providing free assistance. Some even criticized that China’s financial support could place African country into “debt trap”, a situation in which a borrower’s debt obligations exceed their ability to repay, forcing them to take on new debt to repay old ones. Though such concern hasn’t been proved yet, China is indeed the pivotal lender in Africa, exceeding $170 billion to 49 African countries and regional institutions between 2000 and 2022. Further providing loans could potentially aggravate Africa’s debt burden.

While China and other actors could attempt to fill the gap, the question remains: can aid truly be replaced, or will millions be left behind? The world cannot afford to turn a blind eye to Africa’s struggle.

By Xingchen Liu