Diplomatic relations are comprised of three types: official contact, semi-official contact and people-to-people contact. In the discourse of China-Africa relations, there is a neglected field, for example, P2P contact.

For any bilateral relation in the international arena, indirect contact always goes before direct contact, informal contact before formal contact, non-official contact before official contact. Therefore, P2P contact is the basis of bilateral relations.

One important aspect of P2P contact is cultural offering and cultural learning. We understand that “culture” is a very colourful, yet ambiguous, term, with countless interpretations.

Among the various definitions, I prefer Richard A Shweder’s definition, which considers culture as “community-specific ideas about what is true, good, beautiful and efficient”.

Understand other cultures

In the world community of different peoples and cultures, people need to know each other, understand other cultures and learn from each other. Culture offering represents a concept of equality and a sense of sharing a more important element in P2P contact, which in fact lays the foundation of better bilateral relations and would make a greater contribution to a more harmonious world.

I would like to discuss the history and achievements of the China-Africa P2P contact, in order to deepen our understanding of the issue. It is divided into three parts. The first is a historical survey, covering the nineteenth century to the present.

The second illustrates the achievement of P2P, with a focus on the period after 2000, the year of the establishment of Focac, based on three types of contact, for example Focac -sponsored P2P contact, individual contact and P2P contact run by Chinese civil organisations (CCO).

After the set-up of Focac, three types of cultural contact and exchange have played their role and each has its own characteristics. P2P contact, sponsored by Focac, has several advantages; large-scale, guaranteed funding, and big influence. Using the government budget there is no problem with funding.

The government can mobilise various media to report the activities and the news are accessible to the public. Yet there are disadvantages as well. Most obviously, the contact is at an organisation level and it is difficult to get to the grassroots level.

If the government is a good one, the results are positive; if the government is bad, the effect might be negative – what’s more, the credibility is reduced because of propaganda from both sides.

As for the cultural contact through individual effort, it can be presented or performed by everybody, everyday, everywhere if there is a mixing of Chinese and Africans. This type of contact is a cultural offering and exchange, characterised by its cultural features, spreading slowly and smoothly without intentional design, premeditated intervention or governmental plan. People come and go, exchange their language, greetings and laughter, and start to mix in an ordinary way.

They do things out of own interest and willingness. There is not much immediate effect, thus no counter-effect. Penetrating into the daily lifestyle of ordinary people, the cultural influence is usually mutual and lasts long without notice.

Cultural exchange organised by CCOs is a popular type of China-Africa interaction. It can avoid the government image and is thus better perceived by ordinary people.

The way of doing things can be continuous and the involvement can be very active. However, for sustainability it needs both a highly mobilised civil society and a better source of funding, in order to make the actors more effective. Since there is a process of choice of partners and participants, it has to depend on either the government, or on individuals.

‘Soft power’

However different their characteristics are, P2P contacts between China and Africa are very promising, since they are involved in a wide range of activities, such as cultural offering and exchange, development co-operation, experience sharing, medical assistance, poverty reduction, educational co-operation and environmental protection.

Most Chinese scholars have argued that P2P contact should be emphasised in order to strengthen China’s “soft power”. This approach is problematic. It is essential to get a clear idea of the nature and purpose of P2P contact.

P2P contact is neither propaganda, nor what Huntington termed “soft power”, but cultural interaction, cultural offering and cultural mixing. It is a means of mutual learning and mutual understanding, not a kind of “power”. The process of P2P is two-fold, for example. to understand the other’s culture and thus to lay the basis for better relations, and make yourself understood by your partners, friends and brothers.

If propaganda replaces P2P contact, the result will be less effective or even negative, and the friendship may be damaged.

A popular view holds that the China-Africa honeymoon is over and a difficult time will come, with increasing problems regarding bilateral relations. I have the opposite view, for example more problems are better.

Why do I say so? No contact, no problem. When relations are wider and deeper, more problems will definitely occur. In an equal relationship and with mutual respect, China and Africa can discuss problems together and find solutions. After problems are solved, the relationship will be stronger.

* Professor Li Anshan is the director of the Centre for African Studies at the School of International Studies at Peking University in Beijing. He was among the academics that spoke yesterday at the China-Africa Relations Round Table Conference, co-hosted by the China Public Diplomacy Association and Independent Media, ahead of this week’s Forum on China-Africa Co-operation.