China has dramatically curtailed its lending in recent years. Now, it’s emerging as the largest debt collector for many of the world’s poorest nations — a shift that threatens to undermine poverty reduction efforts and fuel instability, according to a new report.

Lending for China’s Belt and Road Initiative — which includes funding for a massive series of new railways, ports and roads in the developing world — began winding down before the COVID-19 pandemic, according to Peak repayment: China’s global lending, released this month by Australia’s Lowy Institute, a foreign policy think tank. The report points to diplomatic pressure within China to restructure unsustainable debt and to recover outstanding debts from abroad for the change.

  • Dogyote@slrpnk.netEnglish
    1·
    2 days ago

    Said the pot to the kettle… your claim was refuted by several people. Maybe reconsider your stance?

    • Skiluros@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      12·
      2 days ago

      What wasn’t refuted?

      The port has no commercial viability. If it does, show me its transactions relative to ports of comparable size in say south India.

      Have you ever lived or visited the region? Sri Lanka or south India. Or any part of the Indian subcontinent. Or any part of Asia for that matter.

      Prove me wrong! I will admit I am wrong and will appreciate the correction.

      • Dogyote@slrpnk.netEnglish
        1·
        2 days ago

        Well…you started with the idea that the financing of the port was a debt trap. I and others have already provided info stating otherwise. You appear to be moving the goalposts.

        • Skiluros@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          11·
          2 days ago

          What info have you provided?

          There is no moving goalposts. From the Wikipedia article:

          Construction of the port commenced in January 2008. In 2016, it reported an operating profit of $1.81 million but was considered economically unviable.[4] As debt repayment got difficult, the newly-elected government decided to privatise an 80% stake of the port to raise foreign exchange in order to repay maturing sovereign bonds unrelated to the port.[5][6] Of the two bidding companies, China Merchants Port was chosen,[5] which was to pay $1.12 billion to Sri Lanka and spend additional amounts to develop the port into full operation.[7][8][9]

          In July 2017, the agreement was signed, but CMPort was allowed a 70% stake. Simultaneously a 99-year lease on the port was granted to CMPort.

          Can you explain Kerry Brown’s arguement in context of this information?

          • Dogyote@slrpnk.netEnglish
            1·
            2 days ago

            Brown observes that China has had to commit more money to the project, expose itself to further risk, and has had to become entangled in complex local politics.

            That’s not how a debt trap is supposed to work.

            • Skiluros@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              12·
              1 day ago

              Says who?

              It’s pretty clear you have no clue what you are talking about or you’re playing dumb (in an effort to work as a free PR shill for China).

              I am done here!