Beijing’s zero-tariff move with Africa highlights alternative to western trade frameworks

By Bhabani Shankar Nayak* 

As the United States adopts broad tariff measures to protect its economic position and influence in global markets, China has introduced a zero-tariff policy for fifty-three African countries in an effort to expand trade, share skills, and support economic cooperation. In contrast, the United States continues to frame its commercial engagement with Africa through the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).

AGOA “provides eligible sub-Saharan African countries with duty-free access to the U.S. market for over 1,800 products, in addition to the more than 5,000 products eligible for duty-free access under the Generalized System of Preferences program” for 32 African countries. These benefits are tied to conditions: beneficiary countries must demonstrate progress toward a market-based economy, rule of law, political pluralism, due process, openness to U.S. trade and investment, and policy commitments related to poverty reduction, anti-corruption, and human rights.

Critics argue that such conditions limit the ability of African countries to pursue independent economic and foreign policies, and that AGOA reinforces structural patterns under which African countries primarily supply raw materials while value addition and higher-end benefits accrue elsewhere. The act is seen as offering limited scope for building broad-based economic opportunities for African producers and consumers.

European countries, now operating collectively as the European Union, also maintain structured trade relationships with African nations through Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs). These agreements are negotiated on reciprocal terms that often require commitments many African economies find difficult to meet.

China’s zero-tariff initiative, part of the wider China–Africa relationship shaped by the Forum on China–Africa Cooperation (FOCAC), represents a different model. It aims to strengthen economic ties, promote industrial investment, and encourage local production in Africa. By doing so, it seeks to expand employment and livelihood opportunities while integrating African economies more effectively into regional and global value chains.

For supporters of this approach, China is offering a form of international free trade that differs from Western models historically shaped by stringent conditionalities. They argue that Western trade frameworks continue to prioritise the mobility of their own capital, products, and services, while African exports still face barriers in those markets. Protectionist measures in Europe and the United States often coexist uneasily with their advocacy of “free trade” for African economies.

China’s zero-tariff policy has begun to expand African exports to China and improve their position in global markets. It is reinforced by trade-facilitation measures designed to simplify cross-border commerce, enabling African producers and Chinese consumers to benefit from more direct economic exchanges. Events such as the China–Africa Economic and Trade Expo reflect the effort to deepen people-to-people and business-to-business ties.

In this context, allegations that China engages in “debt-trap diplomacy” remain highly contested. Documents such as The Elements of the China Challenge, published by the Policy Planning Staff of the U.S. State Department, portray China’s development activities as predatory and strategically coercive. Numerous scholars and analysts, however, have challenged these claims, arguing that they lack substantive evidence and are frequently driven by geopolitical rivalry rather than factual assessment.

China’s tariff-free initiative highlights an alternative approach to international trade—one that seeks to link producers and consumers more directly and support development-oriented cooperation. Supporters contend that this model allows producers to better understand markets and set prices that reflect true production costs, without the distortions created by layered intermediaries.

By contrast, critics of Western market systems argue that price-setting and consumer preferences are often shaped by corporate interests, making “free choice” less straightforward than it appears. Under the model promoted by China, consumer preferences and producer capabilities are intended to interact more transparently, with the market serving as a facilitator rather than the dominant force determining production and distribution.

China’s engagement in Africa continues to generate debate, but its zero-tariff policy offers a significant example of how alternative forms of global trade and cooperation can be structured in the present international environment.

---

*Scholar based in UK