One problem: in Africa, it would be the Chinese who would be a minority (at least initially).
Also, your model breaks down when you take into account Asian minorities in the US.
Vietnamese refugees entered the US, literally with just the shirts on their backs, not speaking English, being unfamiliar with American culture, and IN JUST ONE GENERATION have a disproportionate number of valedictorians, doctors, scientists, etc. They attended the same public school system that non-Asian minorities attended, yet vastly outperformed them. They lived in poverty similar to non-Asian-minorities for the first few years, but were soon running their own small businesses.
This indicates that the low performance of non-Asian minorities is not primarily due to external factors of racism, but due to internal factors, whether cultural or genetic.
A century earlier, another wave of ethnic minorities arrived. They were subject to discrimination, yet persevered and within a generation or two had risen to high status. I'm speaking of the wave of Eastern European Jews.
Your comparing apples to oranges.
The Vietnamese or Jewish groups in the U.S were in the top economic and/or intellectual strata of their home countries. So even with subpar school systems and an oppressive environment they are able to succeed. Comparing the success of east Asians or Jews to the relative lack of it for African Americans is like comparing apples to oranges.