China’s rise on the global stage has been breathtaking in speed, scale, and strategy. From lifting 800 million people out of poverty to becoming the world’s manufacturing hub, China presents itself as a development success story—and increasingly as a model for the Global South.

But critics argue that beneath the infrastructure projects and economic deals lies a new kind of empire—one built not with soldiers and flags, but with contracts, debt, and quiet control.

So, is China a model for progress or a modern imperial power?

Why It Could Be Seen as a Model

1. Economic Transformation:
China achieved in 40 years what took the West over a century—turning a poor agrarian society into a technological and industrial powerhouse. Countries facing poverty and inequality look to China’s path as proof that development doesn’t need to follow Western liberal capitalism.

2. Infrastructure First:
Through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), China has funded and built roads, railways, ports, and digital networks in over 60 countries. Many African and Asian governments see this as tangible, fast, and focused on long-term growth, not just humanitarian optics.

3. Non-Interference Policy:
Unlike the U.S. or former colonial powers, China doesn’t tie its aid or investments to demands for democracy, LGBTQ rights, or anti-corruption reforms. Some governments see this as respect for sovereignty rather than moral policing.

Why It Could Be a New Form of Imperialism

1. Debt and Dependency:
Several nations are now heavily indebted to China. While China claims this is fair trade, critics say it’s a “debt trap,” especially where loan terms are opaque. In Sri Lanka, the Hambantota Port was leased to China for 99 years after the country defaulted on repayments—evoking echoes of colonial leases.

2. Control Without Colonies:
China often brings its own laborers, sidesteps local economies, and pushes for political influence behind closed doors. In Zambia and the DRC, Chinese companies have been accused of poor labor conditions and environmental violations while controlling key mining sectors.

3. Narrative Manipulation:
Through media partnerships, Confucius Institutes, and digital platforms, China is expanding its soft power—not to empower local voices, but to shape how it is perceived. This control of the narrative is subtle, but powerful.

4. Resource Extraction 2.0:
While China builds infrastructure, it often does so in exchange for raw materials—from oil in Angola to cobalt in Congo—echoing colonial-era extraction deals, just with new rules and new rulers.

Conclusion: Both Can Be True

China’s rise is both a development model and a strategic power move. For countries desperate for infrastructure, China offers an attractive path. But if these partnerships lack transparency, fairness, or long-term local benefit, they risk becoming a new form of empire—without the military, but with the same hunger for control.

The real question for other nations is:

Can they engage with China on their own terms, or will they repeat the cycles of dependency that have long defined the Global South’s relationship with powerful outsiders?

By John Ugo U. Ikeji