Civicidea

Over the decades, Zambia and China have developed strong economic relations. China has financed various infrastructure projects, including airports and railway systems. Chinese companies play a dominant role in Zambia’s copper and cobalt mining and processing sectors.

However, a lawsuit filed by 176 Zambian farmers against local subsidiaries of Chinese companies Sino-Metals Leach Zambia and NFC Africa Mining has triggered a diplomatic crisis. The farmers’ protest was provoked by an incident in February, when the collapse of a tailings dam caused acidic waste to spill into nearby rivers near the town of Kitwe, located about 285 kilometers north of the capital, Lusaka. The spill damaged farmland, and farmers described the event as an environmental disaster that violated their constitutional right to live in a safe and healthy environment. The toxic waste contaminated the soil and destroyed crops.

Supporters of the petition emphasized that the population was not promptly warned about the danger and had to live in an ecologically polluted environment for seven months. The farmers are therefore demanding $ 80 billion in compensation and an additional monthly payment of $ 336 for eco-migrants.

The environmental crisis has also drawn international attention. Dr. Iva Pesa, Assistant Professor at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, stated that the farmers’ demand for 80 billion USD carries a symbolic meaning. According to her, the petitioners themselves likely knew that receiving such a large sum was unrealistic. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that their goal is to stop the operations of the Chinese companies’ subsidiaries.

For Zambians, it is more acceptable and easier to confront small Chinese firms and file lawsuits against them than to go after major local mining giants such as ZCCM or Mopani, which appear to provide broader economic benefits to local communities primarily through employment opportunities. According to Pesa, the farmers’ lawsuit was less motivated by environmental activism and more by a desire to share in the economic benefits:

Chinese companies earn enormous profits. Naturally, part of this economic benefit should be distributed to the local communities whose living areas have been devastated by toxic substances.” – Iva Pesa.

Meanwhile, the Zambian government has attempted to downplay the environmental impact of the incident. In August, Minister Cornelius Mweetwa stated that there was no need to declare a state of emergency. The government and Sino-Metals claimed that the pH level in the affected area had returned to normal and that compensation of 14 million kwacha had already been provided to residents. However, the government’s active lobbying in favor of Sino-Metals may ultimately lead to widespread electoral absenteeism. This incident could mark the beginning of the end for state-level relations between Zambia’s political and economic elites and China.

This is the first time a major mining company in Zambia has been accused of environmental destruction. The Zambian farmers’ protest has caused a significant diplomatic rift. Although the U.S. Embassy has also described the incident as an ecological disaster, China’s Foreign Minister denied any connection between the catastrophe and the Chinese subsidiaries or their management, claiming that they were actively cooperating with the Zambian authorities.