The strike, which ended this month, came in the wake of a series of difficult periods in the Chinese-Zambian relationship. Two years ago, more than 40 miners were killed in a blast in a Chinese-owned explosives factory at Chambishi, blamed on lax regulations. A year later, the giant 30 year-old Mulungushi textile mill, originally funded by Beijing, was forced to close after a flood of cheaper Chinese goods effectively strangled its business.

Many are calling for ‘equilibrilisation’. The most prominent case of African ‘push-back’, as the phenomenon is known among Africa and China experts, is in South Africa. Although a vocal advocate of a Sino-African partnership, partly as a counterbalance to the US-dominated global architecture, South Africa’s President Thabo Mbeki has delivered the most poignant warning yet of the potential dangers of the new relationship. In late 2006, he told the South African Students Congress that African states ran the risk of getting stuck “in an unequal relationship” with Beijing, such as had developed between Africa and the former colonial powers.

This warning came as the South African government put the finishing touches to a deal on quotas for Chinese textiles, aimed at propping up the struggling local garment industry. Analysts do not believe the quotas have had much effect, but symbolically they represented South Africa drawing a line in the sand, sending a powerful signal of assertiveness.

China was recently hailed by The Economist as the ‘New Colonialist’, a title and a sentiment certain Chinese Officials clearly resent, given the rebuttal found in the People’s Daily, which, like all other Chinese media, is State controlled. According to the People’s Daily, “some Western media have attempted to discredit Sino-African relations by propagating their African version of the ‘China threat theory’.” There is a saying in Namibia that, as the sun rises in the east, so do all good things come from the east. On a recent trip to Namibia, I was surprised to find just how far China’s influence had extended.

Namibia is a vast country, the size of France and Germany put together; with a tiny population of 1.4 million. Although you are unlikely to see many clear signs of Chinese culture, the indirect impact of Chinese investment is evident. China has undeniably boosted the Namibian economy, with its demand for raw materials; it has also created an abundance of well paid jobs. For better or worse, many Namibians are leaving behind their traditional lives and values to work in the mines and factories that have sprung up to meet China’s demand for natural resources. In most of Africa, the structure of employment is such that, in industry, the demand is mostly for male workers. Consequently, men tend to migrate alone, leaving their wives and families behind, at least initially.

This has shaped the perception of the sex roles, which tend to associate women almost exclusively with the task of housekeeper and mother. There is a lack of data about the involvement of women in the migratory process, owing to the numerical preponderance of males in the migratory streams and the ‘invisibility’ of women who, as wives, merely accompany or join migrant males.

The propensity to migrate correlates closely with educational attainment. Migrants are generally younger and better educated than the rest of the population in their place of origin. Migration itself is linked to the pursuit of formal and informal education in the cities, where most post-primary institutions and apprenticeship opportunities are concentrated. Since most wage employment is found in cities, rural youths who invest heavily in education must, out of necessity, invest also in migration, if their education is to pay off.

China repays its debt with large injections of investment into Namibia’s infrastructure and her people. The Chinese Embassy in Windhoek offers numerous scholarships for further education. On a visit to the Namib-Rand reserve, I met a guide who was about to begin training as a pilot on a scholarship from the Chinese Embassy. He told me that they were offering a large number of scholarships like his to pursue higher education.

Over the last 30 years, China itself has witnessed one of the largest cases of rural-urban migration in history, and the situation is still escalating. There are 103 million urban migrants in Chinese cities but, by 2025, there will be 243 million; the total urban population of China will be nearly a billion. More than 40% of China’s urban population will be migrant within two decades, putting huge pressures on the ability of local governments to provide adequate services for their urban dwellers, according to a study by the Mckinsey Global Institute. It seems plausible that this process may, to a certain extent, be due to China’s labour shortage which is feeding greater import dependence. Likewise, Sub-Saharan Africa has the world’s highest rate of rural-urban migration. This is driven, in part, by greater employment opportunities instigated by the building of new factories – most of which are Chinese investments. People are moving to the cities and often there is nowhere for them to live; townships continue to expand and for a large proportion of the poor in urban Africa living condition are deteriorating, as the strain on resources increases. Furthermore, the improvements in infrastructure cannot keep up with the pace of population growth in urban areas.

But China also has its supporters. Abdoulaye Wade, Senegal’s president, recently defended China’s growing economic role in Africa in an article in the Financial Times, writing that “China’s approach is simply better adapted than the slow and sometimes patronising post-colonial approach of European investors, donor organisations and non-governmental organisations.” He observed that the Chinese model for stimulating rapid economic development has much to teach, not only Africa, but also Europe. Through direct aid, credit lines and reasonable contracts, China has helped African nations complete infrastructure projects in record time- bridges, roads, schools, hospitals, dams, legislative buildings, stadiums and airports. The President concluded that “In many nations, including Senegal, improvements in infrastructure have played important roles in stimulating economic growth.”

China has also been a much needed friend to Robert Mugabe. With the possibility of change in the air, Chinese companies have been actively exploring opportunities in Zimbabwe, which boasts rich deposits of gold, uranium, platinum and diamonds. Chinese Deputy Commerce Minister, Gao Hucheng, who was in Harare last month on a trade mission, said Beijing had invested $1.6 billion in Zimbabwe in 2007, although analysts say Chinese investment has yet to take off. The Chinese Government seemed to ignore the possible moral objections to supporting Mugabe. China’s role in Darfur has also been heavily criticised.

China may appear as confident and ambitious as ever. However, in the current economic climate even the Chinese government admitted its outlook for 2008 is grim. The financial crisis which has brought several banks in the West to the brink of bankruptcy- Bear-Stearns, Northern Rock, and several of the state owned banks in Germany- have led some commentators to view this as a seismic shift in the global economy. If they are right, who will be the winner and the losers in the new order?

In October 2007, the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China took a stake of approximately 20% in Standard Bank, a South African bank with total assets of US$119 billion, for just US$5.5 billion. China is investing throughout the developing world, but most notably in Sub-Saharan Africa, not only mining its resources, but also taking strategic stakes in its businesses. When the world economy emerges from the present downturn, China will be propelled further forward; that is, if its government doesn’t make too many mistakes. But will the African nations, with which China is forming such strong ties, move forward with China?

According to Open Democracy, an internet-based forum for democratic debate, Wen Jiabao, the Premier of China, has said he is the most worried man in the world. Consumer spending in China is low, representing only 36% of the country’s GDP, yet inflation is higher than ever. There is a labour shortage in the manufacturing sector, and market forces are causing wages to rise. Although a large middle class has been emerging, many workers still suffer from poor living conditions, and there is a serious power shortage. Then there is Tibet.

The Beijing Olympics have been orchestrated by the Chinese government to mark China’s emergence as a superpower. As China tries to deal with the major economic, environmental, social and cultural issues that confront it at home, the cultural impact of its investment in Sub-Saharan Africa may not be high on its list of priorities. But for Africa, the stakes are high: undoubtedly, Chinese investment has brought significant economic benefits, but the loss of traditional values and social disintegration are a high price to pay.

Over a quarter of a century ago, when Zimbabwe was created, independence declared, and Mugabe victorious, there was anticipation, both at home and abroad for a better future. Writing in 1983, Jeffrey Davidow said “in the future, Zimbabwe’s position as a regional power, and perhaps as a leader of Africa as a whole will increase.” Perhaps this was an overly optimistic outlook, but considering the natural resources with which the country is endowed, combined with the popular support behind Mugabe, the potential of this nation was great. In the 28 years which have passed, hopes of Zimbabwe becoming a stable democratic force in the southern Africa, economically prosperous, an example for other states to follow, has withered. By amending the constitution at will, Mugabe created a one-party state, opposition rooted out, dissenting voices threatened and removed. In the 1980s the government killed 8000 in uprisings in Matabeleland and the Midlands. In 1990 the presidential elections were nationally and internationally condemned as rigged. In 2002, elections were held amid allegations of vote rigging, intimidation and fraud. And now, his ruthless nature is once again emerging, in an attempt to prevent democracy being fulfilled.

According to Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, the government of Zimbabwe violates rights to shelter, food, freedom of movement, freedom of assembly and protection of the law. The people are starving, the economy is in free- fall, disease is spreading fast, and the government sits by. Four million people are facing severe food shortages, 1.8 million people are living with HIV, 80% are unemployed, and Zimbabwe now has the lowest life expectancy in the world – 37 for men, 34 for women. Inflation is currently at 165,000% although economists predict it may rise to as much as 500,000% by the end of the month. To illustrate the extent of the current monetary disaster in real terms, at the time of going to press, a can of Diet Coke cost Z$56million. This would have bought a grand mansion ten years ago. A spokesperson from Christian Aid has said “the country is close to meltdown.”

The desperate state of the country prior to the election catastrophe was surely harsh enough, but now a month on from polling day, the situation has intensified. Fear is spreading across the country, and demands for change are high. The MDC, Movement for Democratic Change, claims Morgan Tsvangirai, their leader, won 50.3% of the presidential vote, and independent polls suggest a 49% share. By the constitution the winning candidate must secure more than 50% of the vote to avoid the run off poll. While Tsvangirai pleads with neighbouring African nations to intervene, to halt the current crisis, Mugabe’s ‘war veterans’, the muscle of the regime, have been called out. “We fear this is the prelude to a government crackdown on political opposition and civil society in the wake of a hotly contested election,” states Georgette Gagnon, the African director of Human Rights Watch.

There are concerns that the MDC is little better, however. Reports of violence and intimidation of voters by Tsvingarai’s supporters have been emerging. According to Paul Nyathi, a civil rights lawyer and resident of Bulawayo, the “thuggish behaviour” of some members of the MDC has escaped attention “because the big prize is still to rid the country of Mugabe and his cronies.”

Many believe that an African solution to this current crisis, as a means to ensure stability after the result is declared, is still the most viable option. It is widely believed that South Africa plays a most crucial role in developments in Zimbabwe. Precedent has shown that when intervention, even in small ways, has been attempted, some measure of success has been achieved. Mbeki hosted talks in December 2007 between ZANU-PF and the MDC, which although ultimately declared a failure, seemed to have provided the impetus for the government machine to refrain from violence in these recent elections. Yet Mbeki’s constant failure to vocalise any condemnation of Mugabe publicly, only recently acknowledging that he was flawed in his previous assumption that there was “no crisis” in Zimbabwe, has led many to question whether the South African government is capable of regional leadership to end the current crisis.

South Africa’s Sunday Times recently reported that “South Africa’s strategy of quiet diplomacy has done little more than cosset Mugabe while he raped his country.” Gordon Brown, and the Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, have now called on African leaders to isolate Mr Mugabe, for there is very little the UN, the EU or even the African Union can do to support Zimbabwe if her neighbours refuse to act. So far the response has been far from encouraging – the feeble response of the SADC, South African Democratic Congress, last week in finding a plausible solution to the crisis has increased concerns that an African solution is going to be hard to achieve. Yet the people of South Africa have showed great courage, which their leaders should now imitate. By refusing to unload shipments of arms, dockers have orchestrated a domino effect. The South African Archbishop, Desmond Tutu has joined the call for an international arms embargo to be placed on Zimbabwe, and the British government has rejoined the call.

The extent to which the international community, and particularly the West, can intervene, is limited, however. Colonialism and white oppression still looms large in this nation. Britain, in the last decade alone, has not helped its cause. British criticism of the regime has figured in Mugabe’s view of “black Africa under siege by white colonialists,” and a consistent misunderstanding of the complexities of the internal psychology of this nation has done more harm than good. History seems to have tied our hands behind our backs. A spokesperson of Mr Brown stated that if the election is deemed to be stolen, there is very little Western governments can do about it. Britain cannot be seen to be meddling, and the West lacks credibility in the region to intervene. However, now that evidence of persistent violence and human rights abuses is pouring in, a strategy of more than quiet diplomacy and ‘pointing fingers’ is required.

By urging Zimbabwe’s influential neighbours to apply pressure, by offering substantial monetary support, and by placing our faith in the powers of the region, there is a chance for Zimbabwe to surmount its current difficulties. The international community must now assist those who have a chance of ending this crisis. A run-off is dangerous, a coup is worse, but we cannot wait any longer. As David Miliband said, Mugabe “is clinging to power and beating his own people to death.” Nearly a year ago, in July 2007, Zimbabwe’s leading cleric asked: “Is the world just going to let everything collapse on us?” We must answer “no.” A settlement must be found. And once this crisis is past, rebuilding a nation, once of so much promise, will be the task at hand. We must not shrink from it.

“The Bible says those who go against God’s will by sin will be punished through diseases.”

“The source of this disease is prostitution.”

“HIV is a punishment for sin.”

My colleague Mr. Masalu and I stood on the grounds of a local church, surrounded by five church elders. They talked in a mixture of Swahili and English, and Mr. Masalu translated for me deliberately. What had been a simple chat against the setting sun had turned quickly into a fascinating discussion about religion and HIV in Tanzania. They were eager to talk. And we were eager to listen, having traveled in Tanzania for six weeks now, trying to pin down these very same issues. The most recent journey had taken us along two hundred kilometers of bumpy dirt road into Babati, an agricultural town by Lake Minera, the famous natural park.

One of the church deacons was particularly talkative. He claimed that he would not advise those who are infected with HIV to seek medicine. His reasoning was that medicine strengthens the body of those who are HIV positive, misleading others into thinking that they are healthy and thus increasing the likelihood of HIV transmission through sex. I was stunned by this logic. So what should HIV positive people do instead?

“Pray. The Bible promises to provide cure for those who confess and seek help from God.”

HIV bounces off the walls of prayer rooms and churches like no other disease. Take malaria, for example. It kills many more people every year than HIV, but it is rarely discussed in religious settings; it is secular—we know that it is spread by mosquitoes that more or less strike at random, and it can be effectively treated. The religious fervor surrounding HIV stems from two factors: it is primarily spread through sexual intercourse and there is presently no medical cure. The lack of understanding about HIV/AIDS has led to many alternative theories concerning its origin; these theories range from the dubious: AIDS is not caused by HIV but through build up of toxicity in human - to the outrageous: it is conceived in labs and unleashed by the U.S. government to kill off Africans and homosexuals. Many pastors preach that the disease is a punishment from God for those who commit adultery.

As HIV spreads, the perceived connection between HIV and religion has erupted into dangerous incidents. In Malawi, a pastor recently made headlines for telling five HIV positive people in his church to stop taking medication because they had been cured through prayer. ‘Televangelism’ has also become increasingly popular in this conservative country where the HIV prevalence is about 14 percent. Churches regularly broadcast programmes on Television Malawi, with pastors preaching messages of healing miracles. Some openly say to viewers, “all those who are sick should touch their television set and, using the other hand, touch where they are feeling unwell.”

The situation is much more extreme in Entoto, Ethiopia, where legends have spread of a divine-healing river. Approximately 4,000 people have migrated to Entoto and paid $5-7 per month for the privilege of cramming into tiny rooms without toilet. Entoto has became a safe haven for the outcasts and the ill looking for spiritual help. Every morning the priests of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church in Entoto bring the patients up the hill to perform healing rites, a component of which involves drinking up to six litres of holy water. Healing could take anywhere from one day to several years, a priest claimed, and more than a thousand people have been cured in the past two years. “We don’t allow patients to take medication if they want to receive holy water.” Poor hygiene has made commonplace a host of other health problems like tuberculosis. But few complain about the conditions, believing that suffering increases their chances of healing.
Many factors contribute to the proliferation of the spiritual healing industry. Despite recent international efforts to provide free HIV/AIDS medication, access to treatment remains problematic due to transportation difficulties in getting to the clinics, the stigmatization of HIV and medication, and simple ignorance of these programs. In Ethiopia, there are over one million people infected with HIV, but only seven percent of these are currently on anti-retroviral medication. Spiritual healing meets the important needs of people living at a grass-roots level. At best it provides moral support, physical care and sympathetic guidance on how to cope with HIV. But it is also becoming a tremendous money-making industry. Pastors who claim to have healing powers stand to gain large followings in their congregation and consequently make more money at the offertory. Less delicate pastors would charge patients directly for performing healing rites.

Seldom does a pastor claim to possess divine healing power himself; this would be too outrageous for any patient with even a passing knowledge of the Bible. Instead the persuasion usually runs along thelines of “God can heal any disease, even HIV, but he listens only to some prayer requests and not others. Mr X has a special ability to communicate with God. If he prays for you and if you become a good Christian, then you will be healed.” ‘A good Christian’ is an important caveat, for it dissolves any responsibility from the healer in cases where the patients do not improve, or, worse still, die. The blame for failure would be shouldered by the patient for not having strong enough faith.

Recently-sprung churches now dot the landscape in several African countries. They are mostly of Pentecostal creed, though often operating as independent churches with congregations numbering in the tens, and, sometimes, in the thousands. Spiritual healing is often the central tenet of such churches. The pastors—most are self-taught and have not gone through any seminar or bible college. The churches—typically an open air meeting ground. The members—new converts to Christianity mix with Catholics and Lutherans, all drawn by the promises of healing.

Amosi Mlaki was the pastor of International Assembly of God Tanzania Church, a small church with 25-30 members that he started on his property. Cheerful and friendly, he talked with me while waiting for the start of a weekly meeting of Pentecostal pastors in Arusha, Tanzania. Pastor Mlaki claimed that God uses HIV as a punishment for sin, but acknowledged that HIV can be transmitted through non-sexual means—mother to child, blood transmission. He had a prayer that he used in cases of healing and said, “ the faith of the pastor when combined with the faith of the sick people” allowed healing to take place.

But who gets healed and who does not?

“Even in our churches there are people working properly in faith and others working slowly. So others are too small,” explained Pastor Mlaki. “If they have not enough faith, then I allow them to use medicine. I can’t let them to die because when they can’t use that medicine they can die because they don’t have faith.”

“And if they have enough faith?”

“Yes they can receive the power of Jesus.”

Answers from a 43-question survey collected from about 600 churchgoers in Tanzania reveal some stunning facts:

• More than half of all participants claimed that HIV is a punishment from God.
• Over 70% believed that prayers can cure HIV; this included every congregant at one rural Pentecostal church.
• More than half claimed that they know people who have been cured of HIV through prayer.
• Five percent said they would refuse medical treatment if found to be HIV positive.
• Most people also believed that God works through medicine and doctors.

Cases of prayer healing make for sensational news articles, but much more damaging to the plight of people living with HIV is the stigma that they have to face day to day, a stigma founded on ignorance: “I wouldn’t sit next to you because I could catch HIV through your breath,” and superstition: “you have HIV so you must be a bad person and possessed by a demon.” It is important to recognize that the important role that religious groups play in providing health care. In Tanzania, hospitals affiliated with Catholic and Lutheran churches account for almost half of all health service in the country. Much of HIV medication and counseling is disseminated through such hospitals, so religion is a force to be reckoned with in consideration of global health.