International Chinese Debt-Trap Diplomacy: Xi Jinping's Belt and Road Initiative Turns 10 Years Old

[TidWell]

The chinese have already come to Jamaica.

 

[Rod1]

Indeed it has. Sadly: strong men make good times, good times make weak men, weak men create rough times, rough times create strong men.. west is falling, while we are arguing gender politics, cuddling immigrants and beating each other with bike locks others are getting stronger and more dynamic.

Its not failing, the rest of the world is simply catching up.

 

[Werdun]

Its not failing, the rest of the world is simply catching up.

You dont think these are symptoms that the west is dying or corrupted?

I think they are pretty obvious.

 

[Rod1]

You dont think these are symptoms that the west is dying or corrupted?

I think they are pretty obvious.

These things are completely inconsequential to real life.

Ill worry more about the US and its political apocalypse.

 

[ShinkanPo]

Lol, what are they supposed to say? "You are only allowed to drown in Western debt, no Oriental debt for you!"

The Chinese are simply taking a page or two out of the Western playbook except without the explicit colonialism. If the West complained the hypocrisy would be obvious to the third world and they'd still end up taking the loans.

IMF already made statement I just watch a CNN report about it just now they are litteraly warning of the Chinese debt trap, some investors are also speaking out warning Western investors about putting money in China.


I dont think this and the China Tarrifs are coincidental I think the "west is starting to push back"

 

[tramendous]

Islamist are to dumb to be a global threat in the long run they will be anihilated by any competent military that is motivated in stoping them. Provided the Chinese dont actually support Islamists againts the west.


The Muslims for a long time have been like the usefull idiots by Proxy nations.

Well atleast China is not really a backwards civilization if they suplants the west as the next tech power I guess humanity will be fine.

"Islamists" has always been a fake threat to scare the general public and have a boogieman available to fuck up the middle east. The actual game has always been between the same world powers. Only idiots fell for and continue to fall for islamists being this global threat.

 

[Arkain2K]

Do you think Goldman Sachs asked the Venezuela government to improve anything?

I think Goldman Sachs is not in the business of Official Development Assistance at all. Not sure why you would think of them when I specifically said "ODA from the West".

Beijing seems content of having said assets most likely because they really cant collect on the debt.

They already know the debt is unserviceable before they even offered it. It's the reason why they even offered it in the first place. The deeper a "friend and ally" is stuck in the debt trap, the better.

Would rather surrender a port or two than pay tribute forever.

Yes, they would. As planned.

Do you honestly think that countries that need to sell everything for cheap in order to get hard cash to service debt are better off?

What the Chinese specifically ask for collateral in each tailor-made loan contract is often much more strategically important to them than to the debtee, and those collateral often have much less monetary face value than the debt. That's why the debtee would gladly sign their sovereignty over, it's a win-win, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_invasion_of_Panama

China works in a remarkedly different way than the U.S.

Throughout history, the U.S is well known to use force if it's disrespected, but it will eventually give assets back to the local governments (even if it's not legally compelled to) if that's the popular thing to do to maintain the friendship and mutual benefits, that includes the Panama Canal that the American built themselves and have all the legal rights to administer in the first place.

You will have a much more difficult time coming up with ONE example of China giving up something that they laid claim to from their "friends and neighbors" in the last 3000 years. Court verdicts be damned.

Just ask @ShinkanPo , he knows a thing or two about his neighbor's long game, and what a mistake it would be comparing Beijing's intentions to Washington's.

As amusing as it may be to watch any of the debtees/neo colonies try to cross their Chinese overlords, I'm quite confident that we wouldn't get to see it anytime soon - for the entire ruling class in those countries are already in Beijing's pocket, quite literally.

 

[Rod1]

Goldman Sachs is not in the business of Offial Development Assistance.

World's sovereign debt is between 40 to 60 trillion dollars, a pittance.

 

[ShinkanPo]

I think Goldman Sachs is not in the business of Official Development Assistance at all. Not sure why you would think of them when I specifically said "ODA from the West".



They already know the debt is unserviceable before they even offered it. It's the reason why they even offered it in the first place. The deeper a "friend and ally" is stuck in the debt trap, the better.



Yes, they would. As planned.



What the Chinese specifically ask for collateral in each tailor-made loan contract is often much more strategically important to them than to the debtee, and those collateral often have much less monetary face value than the debt. That's why the debtee would gladly sign their sovereignty over, it's a win-win, right?



China works in a remarkedly different way than the U.S.

Throughout history, the U.S is well known to use force if it's disrespected, but it will eventually give assets back to the local governments (even if it's not legally compelled to) if that's the popular thing to do to maintain the friendship and mutual benefits, that includes the Panama Canal that the American built themselves and have all the legal rights to administer in the first place.

You will have a much more difficult time coming up with ONE example of China giving up something that they laid claim to from their "friends and neighbors" in the last 3000 years. Court verdicts be damned.

Just ask @ShinkanPo , he knows a thing or two about his neighbor's long game, and what a mistake it would be comparing Beijing's intentions to Washington's.

As amusing as it may be to watch any of the debtees/neo colonies try to cross their Chinese overlords, I'm quite confident that we wouldn't get to see it anytime soon - for the entire ruling class in those countries are already in Beijing's pocket, quite literally.

There were rumors that the Chinese are trying to get the Subic and Clark former US Bases facilities as collateral for their power loans to the Philippines since they will be the one to develop the new railway and airport connecting the former bases to the rest of the provinces and metro manila.

Like others have said the Chinese are playing a long game the more Chinese assets in the country the more it becomes acceptable for them to put military units on the country.

 

[Grenz]

Yuan isnt an international currency, Chinese banks or courts cant force banks all around the world to seize your cash and to force others not to cash your loans until you pay debtors.

See vulture bonds.

I'm not making the connection. Isn't what you're describing above standard bankruptcy procedure? And how are vulture funds, i.e. buying stake in a nation's debt, related specifically to lending money in Yuan? I'm not getting how it's relevant in what currency the loan was made.

 

[MayhemMonkey]

Frankie was right to fear them

 

[InternetHero]

Not our world so much, as their world.

Their backyard as they see it.

 

[Rod1]

I'm not making the connection. Isn't what you're describing above standard bankruptcy procedure? And how are vulture funds, i.e. buying stake in a nation's debt, related specifically to lending money in Yuan? I'm not getting how it's relevant in what currency the loan was made.

1.- Nope, in standard bankrupcy procedure you actually get your debt written off most of the times.

2.- The vulture bonds were able to collect because a judge blocked Argentina's payments to other debt holders, there is no such thing as western banks dealing in Yuan. China cant blacklist you internationally over it.

 

[Rod1]

I think Goldman Sachs is not in the business of Official Development Assistance at all. Not sure why you would think of them when I specifically said "ODA from the West".

ODA from the west is a tiny fraction of the sovereign debt market, the vast majority of third world countries are indebted to private banks.

They already know the debt is unserviceable before they even offered it. It's the reason why they even offered it in the first place. The deeper a "friend and ally" is stuck in the debt trap, the better.

So the Chinese offers money to build a harbor, the harbor gets built and it proves unprofitable so the Chinese come and offer to buy the unprofitable harbor and still give a 30% stake to the parent country?

Seems to me that its still a profit for Sri Lanka, they got 30% of a harbor that wouldnt exist eitherway and their country becomes more industrialized. Also the base being leased i presume doesnt stops Sri Lanka from collecting taxes either.

Yes, they would. As planned.

The Chinese would be far better off if said debt was paid so they could lend more money for other projects instead of being forced to take hold of these ventures at a loss.

Its not like they cant use the port unless they own it.

What the Chinese specifically ask for collateral in each tailor-made loan contract is often much more strategically important to them than to the debtee, and those collateral often have much less monetary face value than the debt. That's why the debtee would gladly sign their sovereignty over, it's a win-win, right?

How much sovereignty do you think a country that has to pay up to 11% of its GDP on interest payments alone really has? Would rather give up a harbor that i didnt even had to build.

I still get a stake and i still get to collect taxes and industrialize.

China works in a remarkedly different way than the U.S.

Throughout history, the U.S is well known to use force if it's disrespected, but it will eventually give assets back to the local governments (even if it's not legally compelled to) if that's the popular thing to do to maintain the friendship and mutual benefits, that includes the Panama Canal that the American built themselves and have all the legal rights to administer in the first place.

So its good when the noble West does it but not evil when the scheming orientals do it? Do you even know why it is called gunboat diplomacy?

The US carved the country of Panama because Colombia didnt wanted to sign the original Panama Canal treaty, then had Panama puppet government sign it.

And the reason the Torrijos-Carter treaty happened was because the US was afraid the Panamians would turn towards the Soviet Union and repeat the Suez crisis in their backyard.

You will have a much more difficult time coming up with ONE example of China giving up something that they laid claim to from their "friends and neighbors" in the last 3000 years. Court verdicts be damned.

Outer Mongolia.

Just ask @ShinkanPo , he knows a thing or two about his neighbor's long game, and what a mistake it would be comparing Beijing's intentions to Washington's.

And @panamaican would tell you a thing or two about Jamaica and how benevolent western lenders are.

Im not apologizing for China, im merely pointing out that the west has been doing the same or worse for decades.

As amusing as it may be to watch any of the debtees/neo colonies try to cross their Chinese overlords, I'm quite confident that we wouldn't get to see it anytime soon - for the entire ruling class in those countries are already in Beijing's pocket, quite literally.

And im pretty sure that said fortunes are safely stored in western banks or real estate.

As someone mentioned in this thread, at least Sri Lanka gets a port.

Meanwhile the western racket of lending money that gets embelezzed and then deposited into western financial system to lend more money to corrupt individuals seems to be quite worse, because you still need to GIVE UP your natural resources in order to get hard cash, and since the money was embelezzed you get nothing to show up for it.

Ill take a port, even if its major shareholder is a chinese state company.

 

[Trotsky]

Rod1 in this thread

 

[InternetHero]

Rod1 in this thread

One would put themselves at great hazard equating the machinations of B/eiji/ng as the equivalent of Washington to score a few good looking points for rhetoric's sake.

This is not good ground for a morally relative exercise in our supposed hypocrisy about judging Oriental grabs at Occidental imperialism of the now as "too harsh."

It is worse, even if the case is not being made here.

All the pinkest Power Rangers in the world could not mask that Bei/jin/g's current way of doing "business" in Africa and East Asia is more aggressive, conniving, and cruel.

If anyone wants to make a thread about it. (I would, but that's not a good idea...)

 

[caxias]

^
^
tell that to king Leopold's victims

 

[Rod1]

One would put themselves at great hazard equating the machinations of B/eiji/ng as the equivalent of Washington to score a few good looking points for rhetoric's sake.

Of course we arent equating it, since Washington for the most part has, and up until recent history been the far worse offender when it comes to "machinations".

It will take a while before China even comes close to the machinations involved in the 2000s war on terror.

This is not good ground for a morally relative exercise in our supposed hypocrisy about judging Oriental grabs at Occidental imperialism of the now as "too harsh."

Harsh how? China isnt invading anyone.

I would say that debt forgiveness in exchange for a majority share in a public work project that was financed with Chinese money is far more tame than the virtual debt slavery that some countries are immersed in.

It is worse, even if the case is not being made here.

All the pinkest Power Rangers in the world could not mask that Bei/jin/g's current way of doing "business" in Africa and East Asia is more aggressive, conniving, and cruel.

I would say the Chinese have less issues in a lot of cases with corruption in certain countries.

 

[Islam Imamate]

All the pinkest Power Rangers in the world could not mask that Bei/jin/g's current way of doing "business" in Africa and East Asia is more aggressive, conniving, and cruel.

Its quite the opposite actually. Its the West that was more conniving, cruel, and aggressive given they used indebtedness as a pretense for colonization and/or control of countries like Tunisia and Egypt. When China does that then we can equate the two.

 

[InternetHero]

Of course we arent equating it, since Washington for the most part has, and up until recent history been the far worse offender when it comes to "machinations".

It will take a while before China even comes close to the machinations involved in the 2000s war on terror. (1)



Harsh how? China isnt invading anyone.

I would say that debt forgiveness in exchange for a majority share in a public work project that was financed with Chinese money is far more tame than the virtual debt slavery that some countries are immersed in. (2)



I would say the Chinese have less issues in a lot of cases with corruption in certain countries. (3)

1. That is kind of arguing the past for the present.

2. Is invasion the standard, or cultural oppression, destruction, near genocide (and calculated at that), regional terror, the oppression of 1.4 billion people, and the exportation of that police state politics to a billion odd more people?

3. Certain countries we can agree on.

How much, and how hard, we will end up disagreeing on for reasons of cultural, politics, and perception.

I know a lot about the United States and history, cultural, and changes and a fair amount about the other Americas in terms of those three things.

You know a lot about the greater Latin Americas as well as the United States but see the history, culture, and changes in a vastly different light.

I think if we have a discussion about that, we might find a few agreements or interesting points but would mostly be making our acolytes happy.





When it comes to China, the Americas, and today, I do not see much daylight, and doubt we are going to find the daylight based on our differences of opinion.

I am here, have been here and there for a long time, and I know, or rather understand China, to be terribly honest, about as well as anyone can, and in many respects what Be/ijing is "up to" from India to Australia to Africa up to suppressing dissidents -inside- the United States and probably in Latin America.


To try and sum everything into a ready made premise:

China's foreign policy today is much more nefarious for all of the world than the United State's foreign policy. In intention, in execution, and in those literally executed or oppressed.