54
this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2024
54 points (71.4% liked)
World News
35674 readers
1335 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
all 40 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
[removed by mod]
It's the complete opposite.
- An African leader on the hypocrisy of those saying China is imperialist.
- China africa panel: if you want actual infrastructure, you go to China, not the west.
- Five imperialist myths about China's role in Africa.
- Evo Morales - Why China and Russia aren't imperialist, but the US is.
- Yanis Varoufakis on China's foreign policy dealings with Greece and Africa.
- Vijay Prashad and Qiao Collective - Is China imperializing Africa?
- China has forgiven over $10B in debt, over half to Cuba, but also including > 20 African nations, Pakistan, and Cambodia.
- The chinese debt trap is a myth.
- China writes off $6M in debt to rwanda, provides another $60M in grants.
- China forgives over $78M in Cameroon debt.
- China writes off $36m Mozambican debt.
- China writes off substantial amount of Angola debt.
It's gonna be great TV
Typical liberal brain rot fantasy. You are literally making shit up from fantasy stories and then playing them in your head and enjoying it.
The reality is that there is no Chinese debt trap and Dessalines gave you a great list of articles to read. Read them.
You are more likely to see China acting like this in insipid Canadian and πππ ππππ TV shows, since you don't have any real examples. The China debt trap is a myth cooked up by the transatlantic financial class for your gleeful consumption.
Did a little digging. Found one interesting piece from Hudson institute including an opinion piece from former head of world bank. Main points: China, and Russia to a lesser extent, are prioritizing engagement with Africa both for for economic and political purposes (large UN voting bloc). China favors market rate loans over foreign aide, article suggests they cannot afford straight aid even if they wanted to. Loans from China are denominated in dollars, so strengthening USD and increasing interest rates playing a large role in debt. African nations paying more in debt repayment than receiving in aid and economic benefit. Traditional capital markets are no use to Africa because capital is flowing to developed countries and companies that already have cash. Doesnβt seem like China wants to repossess infrastructure they built, they actually want loan repayments. China doesnβt want to take write downs because they are concerned the money will be used to repay western creditors. US foreign policy is weak in Africa, infrastructure aid would go far because would improve terms from China. Itβs a far more complex situation than I had thought. I plan to do more reading on the topic so I can be better informed.
China takes write downs all the time. It has written down over $3Bn in debt and it's restructured 5x that for countries who couldn't afford to repay on the original terms.
When imf says aid it's not what you mean. It means loan with strings attached.
Strings meaning the repayment terms. The issue was more about which lender is going to write down bad loans, China or the west.
Oh no way, they will tell you to nationalize assets, impose fiscal austerity and all the other things that you can hear from a corporations board room in search of records profit in the next quarter even if it means nosediving economics in 4 months.
So yep, aid is worse than loans.
I've yet to see any of you coming at me cite anything that isn't a Washington think tank. Why don't we try something other than begging Sα΄α΄α΄Κα΄ΚΙ΄ Bα΄Κβ’ to use Associated Press/AFP sources, citing hardcore right wing neocon think tanks that appear first on Google search, and instead try asking Africans about what they think of China?
You don't even know how to find that information, do you? Post-Ukraine Google has you thumbfingering RAND Corp and The New York Times into my mentions. You are one stinky boy!
I wasnβt coming at you dork.
The guy is itching for an argument on every post.
The account is 2-3 days old and is posting or commenting at least once per hour in the last 24. They posted three disparate articles with commentary in less than five minutes, so I donβt believe it is a single, real, person.
You are going to need to come back with something other than NEOCON DRIVEL if you want me to take your quest to inject π€π³βπΊβπ¦βπ³βπ¨βπͺπ§β into my discourse seriously. "Did a little digging" always seems to include the first page of search engines that had their balls chopped off by the Alliance to Secure Democracy in 2022. I don't need live reports on your Google search journey!
Two day old sock puppet account surely doesnβt have an agenda. Focus your attention elsewhere factory troll.
My agenda is smashing that MFing ππ₯ππ―π’ π π²π±π±π¬π«. Get your neocon agenda, both-sidesing ass out of here.
You absolute potato, you've got the energy of an entitled youngest child.
Says the redditor begging me to take Washington think tanks seriously because learning something new scares him.
[removed by mod]
This article has literally no basis for this other than "Western critics blame the president for being too leftist and Chinese" and it's a pro-western Taiwanese source that simply parrots AP/AFP
Are you serious rn?
In December 2017, unable to repay a huge Chinese loan, Sri Lanka handed its Hambantota port in the south of the island to a Beijing company on a 99-year lease for US$1.12 billion.
This is just the reality, my friend. You can look past western propaganda but seem to really struggle with anti-western propaganda.
How is this different from crippling debt owned to world Bank?
Listen "friend", your reality is based purely on sources from the Western financial class. So much so that you're not even aware of the neocolonialist financial pressure they placed on Sri Lanka to begin with. It's just China China China, because you only look at what you're told to look at. Because you're a well-trained little pig dog, aren't you? Who's a good boy??
So where in what you posted did the IMF seize a Sri Lankan port to finance a debt
You mean when a Canadian company recommended that Sri Lanka should sell hambatotan as part of debt renegotiations, that was more significant than the IMF impoverishing the entire country? Did you think they took the port back to China? While China is responsible for 10% of the debt and 63% of the debt forgiveness in the country?
Do you do anything other than repeat Wall Street news? Vulture funds made huge risky investments to Sri Lanka they knew could not be repaid and used the international law system - the US run mafia - to threaten them into paying off debts that should have been forgiven.
Taking more control over assets in countries being stripped by the Western vulture capitalists is a good thing. That's why China has lots of under the table agreements to recoup losses on or take control of assets if the IMF does this shit or if there's a regime change now. Risk is a real thing, debts are not sacred, I understand that's out of your depth as your understanding of finance is limited to what your masters tell you.
The alternative is simply threatening people to pay up, the Wall Street way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative
They're gonna accept money from China in exchange for favorable trade deals.
Nice username
If it amounts to anything, Colombia will get infrastructure projects and we will get salty WAPO opeds
[removed by mod]
Yes, "tankies" do have a tendency to step in and develop third world nations after ages of languishing under colonialism.
[removed by mod]
"Go read" the Hudson Institute? RAND? What will the first page of Google bestow upon the next challenger?