When I learned about this initiative, I heard that China kind of had to expect losing that money or a big part of it. If that's true, bailouts and write-offs actually happening doesn't say anything about the success of the initiative. It's not about making even more money then, it's about putting all that cash to use in a way that benefits China. So the questions asked should be: 1) Did China improve its access to foreign markets? 2) Did China expand its political influence? But not "are its loans paid back?"
For real, I feel like he didn't even touch upon whether the program was successful or not in terms of transportation, infrastructure, trade and overall economic growth.
I'm surprised the video did not mention the collateral (or restructuring concessions) that borrowing countries are forced into: China may be quite happy to see a country default on a loan, when this means gaining a non-revocable 99-year lease on a foreign port, for instance.
Yea, it is almost negligent that this isn't mentioned. The Chinese are not stupid, they are aware that many of these governments are risky borrowers; they give out these loans because they can recoup their losses by taking a Cobalt mine or whatever at default. It is the same thing the IMF let Western investors do, and the IMF rightfully got in a lot of hot water for it. The BRI should really be viewed with more scrutinty than "it is just the Chinese making bad investments".
@LTNetjak Funny enough, for this reason international "courts" (forget the correct term) were created where basically companies can sue a country if they expect unfair treatment - the company and the country each name a "judge" and those 2 decide on a third one to then review the case, make a judgement and the company can then western countries accept those judgements - meaning the company can ask a western country to collect the debt. So if a country would nationalize the investment of a company, that company could then sue in these courts and get their money back. Problem being, these court proceedings are extremly expensive and judges often agree everyone has to pay a share -> resulting in companies making a loss despite winning the case.
@@Shuizid Sunnychild, and what if country don't abide this judgement? Do you imprison it? "International Law" for countries is more like laws of sandbox decided by playing children then to actual law set by countries or able organizations. There is no higher entity that can enforce any laws. Law is only law if it can be enforced. So international laws are actual laws if there is enforcement of it, in that case, are you or you friends ready to invade for debt collection.
Who says it hasn't done what it is suppose to do? First of all BRI projects required all or most construction companies to come from China so they mainly did not lose that much of the money. The money was mostly cycled back into China. Secondly they are getting allot of basing rights or outright ownership of many of these projects which gives them allot of leverage over these countries who owe them.
The China "debt trap" narrative has been debunked by the British Debt Justice and World Bank data. They found that African countries owe 3x more to Western banks, asset managers and oil traders than to China, and are charged double the interest. 12% of Africa's external debt was owed to China lenders, compared to 35% to Western private creditors. China has since cancelled the debt for 17 African nations.
All of this is wrong 😂😂😂 Most labor is local, some technician and engineers might be Chinese, but it wouldn't make sense to bring thousands of low skill workers from China. Also, no, this projects aren't owned by China. Not sure what "basing rights" are, but as the video shows, the idea of the Chinese debt trap and China arm twisting these countries into submission was always US fearmongering. China has gone out of it's way to bail out countries
@@carkawalakhatulistiwa High speed trains are a huge boondoggle, and even the ones in China are money losers. Regardless of the loan terms, this thing is of no real use, unless it can actually pay for itself, which is highly doubtful.
As an American who has seen decades of foreign aid, IMF loans, and general Third World corruption, I just want to completely fill YT's servers with laugh emojis over the thought that China thought these loans would be repaid.
@@recoil53 As a South African, living in said corrupt third world country, I want to laugh along. These loans only serve to prop up failing governments that doesnt serve the people.
@@nukiolbartes6279 I don't think anyone believes that China will fail miserably, or conquer the world to begin with. At maximum, people see it as a aggressive dictator that recently did well for itself but is coming off its high. You wanna see some real schizo stuff though? Check Weibo and what Chinese talk about; they REALLY do believe the US is about to collapse and yet is somehow gonna destroy them lol
@@froggin-zp4nr Western democracies aren't doing that, not even their media, but China and Russia do that constantly. ESPECIALLY Russian media that boasts about LGBT weakness or something.
The US kept fearmongering about Japan's economic dominance way after the post-war economic boom. Truth is, nobody really knows because the economy is pretty unpredictable a lot of the time.
Because US are not invited to join the BRI..US is failing as a world power , Their arrogance and greed has been noticed by the whole world. Especially the continent of Africa.
I imagine China views the losses as being covered by using their own contractors, the increase in trade, the positive relations with developing countries, and financial and political leverage. Some returns will continue and grow decades after the project is finished.
Sometimes they do this on purpose. I am not entirely certain which country it was, but I think it was somewhere in Asia or West Africa were they knew the country couldn't repay them, yet they kept feeding them money until the country said "sorry we cannot affort the built of this port anymore" and China anticipated this from the start and that is how they gained a port (for economic or military purpose) miles from the homeland. The dam built on an active volcano made me laugh a bit and this is a dumb example. But I think the main goal for China is the increase of softpower. Do not forget that China's economy is worth trillions and that those billions are a small amount of it. Countries that can pay you back with money have to use other ways to pay back China for example in allowing Chinese troops stationed in that country. Maybe it is not an economic success, but I still think China's influence grows through this project.
This is both stupid and ignorant. China has 1 overseas military base in Djibouti with 200 soldiers. It leased a port in Sri Lanka and uses it for commercial purposes only. Just as the EU forced Greece to sell and lease out it's airports, stadiums and ports when Greece defaulted.
@@LB-yg2br speeding up the industrialisation of developing nations by providing infrastructure is a forward thinking money play... Africa is the youngest population speeding up its development ignites the positive loop of fast paced economic growth which creates demand for Chinese equipment, machinery and infrastructure congruent with economic development... then you'll also have a burgeoning middle class that now wants goods and services which is a market China can sate. China thinks in centuries not presidential cycles.
@@LB-yg2br shoring up Central Asia is a hedge against Turkish, Iranian or Russian dominance in the region. Hence China has supported Turkish banks, been a trade lifeline for Iran and increased trade with Russia instead of taking advantage of its weak state due to sanctions... they've bribed them to forget their ambitions. In South America its largely the same story it has underwritten Argentine economy to the tune of billions, provided essential investment in mining operations across Latin America and provided Brazilian security services with surveillance tech... this is all to make this region a viable consumer market in the next 50 years not to get UN votes next week
There's a big factor I think you're failing to consider: Most of those infrastructure projects ended up being built with Chinese-supplied materials and manufactured goods and in many cases were also performed by Chinese contractors. In other words, a large portion of the money China lent out has already gone back to China. Plus all of their contracts had those 99 year lease clauses, so China will have control over major infrastructure in countries around the world. That's not helpful economically per se, but there's no shortage of concern that those projects (especially the ports in countries around India) might be repurposes for military use. A trillion dollars in "loans" might seem unreasonable, especially if they're unlikely to be paid back but a trillion dollars in military infrastructure? That's less than 2 years relative to the US' military budget, and only about 5 years worth of China's "official" military budget. Seems a little less unreasonable in that light. Not to say that China can't or won't make massive mistakes - everybody does. But there's been a very long history of western analysts predicting China's imminent economic collapse that turns out to be a long-game play that we don't expect as we tend to view everything with a very short-term lens, especially in economics where our entire culture has been effectively build around quarterly and annual reports. We often simply fail to consider plans that don't have an obvious pay-out (or at least a measurable milestone) in a 12 month period. And that's before we stop to consider that "obvious" itself is hard to measure when the CCP is so tight-lipped about their economic status. At best, we're building our predictions upon mere assumptions and indirect evidence.
A trillion dollars you NEVER spend is a trillion dollars that really does not exists. China must spend that money or it will disappear... so they really don't really care if anybody pays them back or not, they got work for their companies and some goodwill.. possibly developing future markets. it's good enough.
back as inflation on core economic factors, which has to be managed by the central bank, when these big projects end, malinvesments will come back as inflationary pressure and an economic recession. not very smart.
@@neonlight1214 Someone trying to cope with China making terrible investments lol. The CCP has no power projection. If even one of these countries decided: "You know what? We don't really feel like this 'soft imperialism' is for us", everyone knows China wouldn't be sending their army over to protect their initiative, nor could they. They haven't even been able to reclaim a tiny island off of their coast, I doubt they have the organization to do it all the way across the other end of the world.
Thing is, whenever China _does_ get its loans repaid, that's just a nice bonus, because they've *already* got the money back. These loans tend to be conditional on whatever projects they're being used to fund using Chinese labour and Chinese suppliers. They ship thousands of construction workers to wherever something's being built. All the money comes straight back to China.
Not really. If a government subsidizes its industry, it is spending money that it does not get back. The money they get back was supposed to be from the loans. Think about how farm subsidies work in the USA, is that a costless endeavor? In this case China is subsidizing its construction industry which has become oversized but is too vital to pare back. The Chinese construction industry is worth $3.7 trillion, China's total GDP is $18 million. Construction is 20% of their whole GDP but they are at a point where building projects for their primary market of growth, real estate, aren't viable in the same way they were in the recent past, so they need something to build because you can't just downsize 20% of your economy without massive repercussions.
@@AlephOmega-zy5qs No, the government itself doesn't get the money back (immediately), but China does. If you're paying Chinese workers to build something using Chinese materials with Chinese equipment, all the value, the wealth, stays in China and is not transferred to the other country. It remains in the Chinese economy. The added value of the completed infrastructure does transfer to the other country of course, so it's not quite as good as building infrastructure in your own country, but a large amount of the apparent cost is spent within the Chinese economy. Initially it goes to the workers, and the materials and equipment suppliers, but it gradually trickles its way back to the government through taxation. On this scale, money works less like an asset with value that can be exchanged and instead like the working fluid in a heat engine, enabling the transfer of work from one part of the system to another. When the US pays its farmers subsidies, as with spending on any other public service - healthcare, schools, military, that money mostly continues to circulate in the US economy and overall the government spends the same amount as it brings in. Back to the heat pump analogy, the government (along with central banks) works like the expansion valve, regulating the flow of the output generated by the compressor (workers) so it can transfer that work to the broader economy. As long as there are no leaks, all the money stays in the system. Leaks in this case would be money leaving the country (eg to import goods, energy, etc) but even then, the _global_ economy is a self-contained system.
@@jhonbus That engine analogy is the heart of my issue here. No engine is an ideal Carnot engine, perpetual motion machines cannot exist. If such a thing worked, infinite economic growth would be possible via perpetually increasing government spending. There are always inefficiencies and when it comes to both of these cases there's a massive amount of waste and inefficiency, which is why I'm generally not a fan of Keynesian economics. China's construction industry is a disproportionately large part of China's economy as I mentioned previously. The BRI was meant to provide an outlet for that construction industry so they don't run out of things to build and collapse China's economy while conveniently paying for itself and expanding Beijing's soft power. Those last two things have not panned out and the issue of their construction industry becomes larger every day. That's why Beijing is having high speed rail built to the middle of nowhere despite most of the routes being obvious money sinks that will cost a fortune to maintain, they need something for the construction industry to do. They are fully aware of this and are kicking the can of the financial infeasibility of their construction industry down the road. Their real estate market can no longer support it so the government must fill that role. How long can Beijing support a $3.7T industry that cannot subsist on its own? That is going to put a massive strain on their economy.
@@jhonbus Farming and coal power subsidies are actually a big problem for America and Europe alike. They are politically hard to get rid off or limit to reasonable levels, but its also a destructive policy thats limiting the governments capabilities to do things. Like just doing "something" might make your GDP look good, but youre not just spending money. Youre spending energy and ressources, and your government doesnt even get the money back, since those projects dont have long term benefits. Pointless infrastructure in your own country even costs a lot more energy and money to maintain. Even chinese foreign investments, supposed to create soft power, are more and more of a financial drain. Youre burning ressource to keep people busy today, but youre gonna pay for a long time as a consequence. And at some point theres just nothing to build anymore, or you dont got enough money. And then you are screwed. Thats the current course of China, its economy is not sustainable in any way. If anything, the RBI was supposed to be the solution, to support trade to europe and open up new markets, so you dont have to rely on those dangerous subsidies as much anymore. Because China is having real big trouble currently, with growth slowing down and the many huge projects becoming liabilities. Internationally, those suspected "debt traps" are also becoming a diplomatic problem, together with Chinas aggressive and insulting political messaging. The west is getting tired if Chinas acting, and is taking its hostility and one-sided economics more seriously. Most surrounding countries around china are similar; they are increasingly concerned. Everyone becomes less ready to work together with China, which is not great for a country relying on trade, doubly so if that trade is very one sided with Chinas protectionism. Thats also why the west generally isnt doing super huge projects without benefit. You can afford them in big growth phases, but after that you gotta be careful. Nor is America, despite their warmongering in the middle east, actually interested in conflict with major powers. All of that hurts you in the long run.
Isn't what these loser BRI loan recipient nations said about the west back in the day when they were praising China "liberal" loan policies and claiming debt trap diplomacy was fake news?
By “you” you are probably referring to China. I would like to point out that loans for misguided infrastructure seems a better approach than trying to “win hearts and minds” by bombing weddings.
@@spritemon98 yep in china they have a saying "chabuduo" which translated means "meh that will do". Everything the ccp is involved in is chabuduo- cutting corners with time and money
The BRI isn't really about being a trap, but more about creating the same type of infrastructure in the East as we have in the West when it comes to transport and commerce and economics in general and when complete China and that entire region of the world will be unstoppable. As for the "infinite" funding, that is being supplied by the QE process and I humbly request that you read my comment prior to this one for this greater overall perspective.
Well, i know for a fact that they have been successful at least on my home area in pontianak city, indonesia. The Belt and road initiative is successful but which side is actually became the winner of this deal? The answer depends on who you ask. Most people from the west would point to Sri Lanka or the locals who often not allowed to take part in their projects. To me, i think their infrastructures works perfectly. It does exactly what our govenment wanted it to do despite all its problems like foreign workers and all that maintenance stuff. Put those problems aside and you get one perfectly working infrastructure boosting the economy, bringing the goverments money, and giving some kind of pride to the local for each successful projects. How we see the BRI and how it really works for us is best summirized with Gyude Moore's quote "China might win more but at least Africa didn't lose". For us its "China might win more but at least Indonesia didn't lose."
When somebody is giving you easy loans, there is always a catch which you will not like. Its just common sense. But of course corrupt politicians of these countries don’t care.
I have followed and watch for years and over the last year your biases are showing more and more. Hope you haven’t forgotten the ideals that you stated this Chanel with. I look forward to seeing your honest in depth reopening in the future. Give the facts and let the world take it for what it is.
well the Belt & Road Initiative was always about something more than financial gain through interest. Trapping a country in debt is a pretty effective way of exerting influence over it.
Hmm you owe 85 dollars to a guy who has many conditions and 15 dollars to a guy who has no conditions. Which one is debt trapping you? China is between 10-20% of debt of those countries. The West is 80-90% of the debt.
Lot of great points are being made in the comments about how you're missing the bigger picture. Its important to note these projects are more than just foreign aid. These also provide means for China to extract crucial strategic resources especially in Africa for rare minerals. China also gains political influence over these countries to influence UN votes as well which is just as valuable in as any repayments they might receive.
The situation in Ukraine was started by America and NATO, way back around 1990 when Bush 1 was president. And you're being lied to about what's going on. Ukraine sank the Moskva? The American military has had 24/7 coverage of that entire area for years, including satellite coverage with something called "synthetic aperture radar". Synthetic aperture radar has the ability to clearly see through rain and clouds..... So, if Ukraine sank Moskva, where's the American military video showing it???? And that "stuck in the mud" crap they kept telling us, was also a lie. They needed them to look incompetent, so they became stuck in the mud. Fact is, Russia is a LOT more broke than you're told, and they always have been. You're told, and believe, that Russia isn't that far behind America in military power. That's a lie. They own a lot of equipment, but have no money for training, or maintenance. They had dry rotted tires, from lack of maintenance, and the tires quite literally exploded out the sidewalls...... They weren't stuck in the mud, they had flat tires, while in mud. NOT the same thing. You're being lied to and told the story they want you to have, and you're believing them. That's a Kool aid drinker right there.
@@Jade-sc7ne You are the idiot ranting without knowing the context. I was talking about the port in Sri Lanka developed by China. The port has been leased to China for 99 years as Sri Lanka is unable to repay the loan they took.
Actually, it's all about QE and I humbly request that you peruse my comment prior to this one and you will more than likely appreciate this different perspective.
70% stake on a 99 year lease with a $1.1B price tag, money which Sri Lanka used to pay off debt from other countries which amount to 90% of their total debt. ruclips.net/video/7gwgcIfzttA/видео.html
Why not a video on the failings of the IMF and their austerity measures. Here is a starter. The IMF forces countries to cut down their budgets for education, health care and social welfare programs. One example of this is Greece, which was forced to cut its education budget by 23% between 2009 and 2014 as part of its bailout agreement with the IMF. Another example is Jamaica, which was required to cut its education budget by 10% in order to receive an IMF loan. These cuts can have serious consequences for students and teachers alike. In Greece, for example, schools have been forced to close due to a lack of funding, while teachers have seen their salaries cut by up to 40%. In Jamaica, the education system has struggled to provide basic resources such as textbooks and school supplies Is Greece economy back on track? Sadly no. Is Jamaicas economy back on track? Also no. Is the IMF broken? You’re videos are really biased and it’s showing.
Not all the countries which were offered BRI are developing. There are lots of developed countries which were offered participation or participate in the project, for example in Europe.
And in Australia, a very left wing *state* government tried to join, circumventing the constitutional exclusive foreign relations power vested in our Federal government. Thankfully, the latter vetoed the deal.
The world's ten largest debtor countries are all developed countries. The United States has the most debt in the world, followed by the United Kingdom and Germany. The top 30 countries are basically developed countries or countries experiencing explosive growth, such as Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. They are learning from developed countries and borrowing money to build infrastructure. Infrastructure services such as roads, railways, and bridges are the basis for a country's development. The purpose of building these facilities is not for profit, but for the development of business and the circulation of goods. If borrowing is a trap, China and the United States must be the stupidest countries in the world. About twenty years ago, China joined the WTO and borrowed a lot of money from the United States and Europe. Many Chinese companies have been acquired by the United States, and companies such as Wal-Mart and Starbucks are located in every city in China. China's development today is visible to everyone. Inclusion, development and innovation are the themes of the world. Ignorance never makes progress.
failing. Ask Croatian what they felt about the bridge Chinese built for them. And ppl from Costs rica about the football stadium ? Jesus western propaganda is crazy.
Just to forward a daring question: IS the "belt and road initiative" really "failing" when various states can't repay the credits that come with the project? The project comes with a number of caveats as far as i learned: - Every single investment ist built by chinese companies, with chinese workers; it basically is a way to make foreign countries invest in Chinas domestic economy. - And every single investment is secured by clauses that, if kicking into effect, transfer the ownership over the project to China, giving it infrastructural estates ontop around the world (for the prize of basically subventioning it's own domestic economy - which it otherwise wouldn't be allowed to due to WTO-rules) - which, as an extra benefit, allow China to extend the reach of it's military, given that a whole lot of those investments go into harbours and airports. So, ultimately, it really is a win-win-situation for China; either, granted credits are repaid. China earns money, with a perspective to earn even more in the future. Or, the credits default; China bails the creditor out, and thus (semi-legally) subventions it's domestic economy, and receives strategic estates in return. Really the only losers in this construct are the states that actually agree on those deals on China's terms - either, they pay a lot for objectively not overly useful infrastructure, or they lose souvereignty over parts of their land.
I see many comments here observing that China BRI loans typically involve mandatory use of Chinese labor, expertise, construction companies and so on. That, however, does not mean China "has the money back already". That is true to some extent regarding the payments, but overlooks the fact that if a Chinese worker performs work in another country, that is work not performed in China. Likewise materials, logistics, plant, expertise and so on, applied on offshore projects. The payments may come back to Chinese entities, but the actual value was applied overseas and to that extent detracts from the Chinese economy. Money is a medium of exchange, but the economy is about real things: goods and services.
you were very nice about what the loans under BRI were really meant to do china always knew these countries had no way to pay back the loans and that most of the projects were pushed by them not the countries and were doomed to fail plus with chinese companies doing all the work with mostly chinese labor they added very little to the economies of those countries I believe the phrase is dept trap diplomacy
Without infrastructure, Roads, Rail, Ports, Schools, Hospitals Reservoirs and Waste Water Treat plants poor countries will remain in a “POVERTY TRAP OF STAGNATION”. Infrastructure is the essential platform for countries to grow and modernize.
You mentioned Sri Lanka and Zambia, did you take some time to look at the debt composition of these two countries? Regarding Zambia, 45% of their debt is owed to Western private lenders with higher interest rates. If we talk about Africa in general, Africa owed the world nearly 700 billion and 88% of that debt is owed to non-Chinese lenders. If the situation is bad for Chinese loans and you think the non-Chinese lenders will be better off when their share of the loans is bigger than what China's in these poor countries, what makes you so certain that these countries won't default on the larger non-Chinese loans?
it sound like evil european way of doing things. People of africa stand for china... people of european descend are jalous. The whole world is behind China, while you are gossing about China, Russia and Africa partnership
The BRI loans are not regular loans. Their are disadvantigeous packages. China offer to you to built an infrastructure project (which you not always need) at a very expensive price (which you usually can't affort) by Chinese companies and workers and offers you a loan to pay for that. That means you are paying to Chinese companies and workes and the money goes to Chinese economy, so the it does not have the usual benefits of infrastucture projects like pumping money into your economy and providing empolyment to your people. The money you spend does not multiplicate in your economybut Chinese and if the project is of shitty quality or you actually don't need it you just payed a lots of money to improve Chinese GDP.
First of all, A country identifies a need: a port, road, railway, powerplant, dam.... Then the country tries to find funds, first they go World bank, IMF, Paris club.. they all say NO!! Then they go to a Chinese bank and MAYBE they get a loan. If the West cares so much, why did not they give a better offer? Simply because the West does not want the developing world to have any infrastructure so they will remain poor and subordinate. That;s the reason you are most likely paid to post the above comment, to keep the developing world poor.
And Chinese companies charge way less on infrastructure projects then the west. And China also offers some scholarships to developing countries so there are some knowledge transfer. It is always a country’s own decision to participate in the BRI or not, China did not engage in any war to make all this happen, unlike the war the west has started in 18/19/20 century
Another problem for China is that the loans were meant to ensure the projects were completed. Many of the debts are failing before the project finishes, just like a lot of construction projects within China. The collateral for the debts aren't finished, so are not worth anywhere near as much as the outstanding amounts.
China builds the BRI, and America now "attempts" the Build Back Better". But it is so far ...understood that no bricks had been laid, and no concrete poured. America has more problems than it could deal with. Some are self inflicted, eg Trump, some are ambitions went haywire, eg. Ukraine. Some are systemic, eg. spending more than it could earn
A theory in international relations is that China does NOT expect these developing countries to repay the loans. If the borrowers can't pay them back (due to rampant kleptocracy) then China can force the former to "lease" their seaports and airfields to the PLA as a form of repayment. Either way, China will have soft-power or hard-power influence over their backyard all the way up to the doorsteps of the Middle East and Europe.
i think you can scrap the word "doorstep"... China already posesses agricultural areas in italy and on the balkans and the majority of a port in germany. So it isn't up to the doorstep, it's already in the house. (And everybody inpower seems to underestimate their ruthlesness, dedication and intelligence)
The plan was not to develop infrastructure but to put China as the top investor in these countries. As plan is unfolding these countries have accepted Chinese currency and Chinese government will consider these bailouts as investment for its rise. Like Sri Lanka, which has already leased one of its major ports for China to a period of approximately 100 years.
They're borrowing from the U.S. to do it. No, they owe us more than we owe them. They haven't had to pay it back because they have Developing Nation Status, but hopefully not for very much longer.
@@sabin97 That's but a conclusion to an argument, and not a truth in-and-of itself. I could just as easily argue to the contrary and make the point stick as necessary. _Especially_ when it comes to China.
@@E4439Qv5 actually once china started diversifying their trading partners they became stronger. diversity IS strength. in everything. look for example bananas. do yo uknow what happens when there's no diversity? any disease destroys all your plantation. i have at least 3-4 different varieties of bananas....and not a worry in the world about them.
I think this video is missing the point. As someone once said, "the West is playing chess, while China is playing Go". The objective in Go is to capture territory, and the BRI is a brilliant (some might say diabolical) plan to do just that. Each time they "restructure" a loan, they grab a 99 years lease to a port (like the Hambantota port in Sri Lanka), or whatever. If they went outright to Sri Lanka and told them they wanted a 99 years lease to Hambantota and 70% ownership, they would have been laughed out of the room, but that's exactly what they got for $500M (minus whatever Sri Lanka managed to repay, salaries of the Chinese workers, etc.)
Oh, someone thought that spreading around more loans would make them look good for their boss. See also the loads of electric cars sitting around getting obsolete without getting driven, and big ol apartment buildings being fully sold out before they even exist.
It’s important to note that China will also seize infrastructure. If a country defaults, China will take control of their airport or harbor or whatever they used the money to build. The politicians all pay themselves from the loan so they don’t care about negotiating a better deal.
In my opinion, China isn't the least bit interested in seizing anything from these poor nations, but instead what I see China doing is that they are spending their "infinite" QE funding to create the same type of infrastructure we have here in the U. S. which provides for a robust interstate trade and once this is done, with the massive population there is in that region of the world, all of those nations will basically leave my country, the U. S., in the dust when it comes to trade and commerce. Please take a moment of your time to read my comment prior to this comment and I think you will appreciate the QE perspective.
@JackSmith-mk1ru Yes, of course, you are correct, but the most salient aspect of your comment is to acknowledge that the way China is able to fund these "schools, colleges, roads, hospitals" and the like is by China employing the quantitative easing (QE) process which is to electronically generate monies, when these sovereign nations should have the right to employ the QE process themselves which makes China, and the U. S., for that matter, an unnecessary middleman. Please, you must grasp the QE reality.
Out of this world of 198 countries, there are over 140 countries across 5 countinents join the Chinese One Belt One Road. Every month, there are more countries applying to join including Japan , India, New Zeland and Korea except US. Pretty soon the US will be the few to be isolated from the rest of the world.
Incorrect about the Montenegro road, it is definitely finished and it circumvents the most dangerous road in the country, also its a setup for a highway connecting to serbia, from which they get most tourists and do most trade with, the road was very much necessary
He who thinks that China wanted the money back is a fool. They are pretty much getting what they want. I just hope gobal leaders realise this and plan the future of their nations smartly.
It a propaganda message by the west that local labour is not used. Chinese companies employs locals just like any western companies would. And just like any western companies, engineers and management are usually not locals.
it's not failing. commerce between china and all of america(except maybe usakistan and its canadian pets) has been increasing since they started the initiative. on the other hand all of america has been reducing its commerce with usakistan and canada.
They planned to sell electricity to Singapore through Cambodia. The reality is they are selling to Vietnam (because selling to China, Cambodia, or Thailand means losing money for Laos, not to mention Laos does not have full authority on their power plants because they borrowed money from China). For the moment, Laos is doubling down on drugs and narcotics, which explains why drugs trafficking is increasing in VN, their oldest ally.
I am Pakistani and I thank China for CPEC, now we have progressed much more than all the countries in the South Asia combined. We have 24 hrs electricity, food available 24*7, jobs and other basic things that our government wasn't ever able to provide. Long live china and Pakistan friendship. I hope China keeps showering us with their blessings.
China builds the BRI, and America now "attempts" the Build Back Better". But it is so far ...understood that no bricks had been laid, and no concrete poured. America has more problems than it could deal with. Some are self inflicted, eg Trump, some are ambitions went haywire, eg. Ukraine. Some are systemic, eg. spending more than it could earn.
it sound like evil european way of doing things. People of africa stand for china... people of european descend are jalous. The whole world is behind China, while you are gossing about China, Russia and Africa partnership
Are you sure that China did not plan for the instance the Belt and Road Initiative was failing. It is not like China is losing anything. Even when the country goes down China gets land or promises.
China is better than the west at helping out developing countries. They recognise and anticipate; all their moves and consequence. They have a single mindset; they will prevail where others mismanage. Growth in terms of economy and population will open new markets where china can do business and not depend only on western needs, which takes their power to influence their economic output. Very wise to expand markets, not troops. It is a better investment than invest on a military that doesn't have economic output just geopolitical atm.
It's simply sea transport via massive container ships is massively cheaper than by train which is also massively cheaper than by truck which is also massively cheaper than by plane. And massive is 2x to 10x.
They made so much mess in Montenegro now they targeting them to take one part of the country for somthing they never build, they left on half build, China got upset way some Balkan countries like Albanian Kosova refused for their loan to build motorways
Failing? BRI is an investment initiative around the world. Most of the BRI projects have completed and running smoothly according to plan. A few failed investments among hundreds shouldn't be called failing altogether and isn't represent the whole initiatives. It's normal for investment to have some underperform portfolios.
This video says a lot of Chinese loans to other countries, and then these loans may be lost. I would say that it is much better for China than buying US treasury bonds and then suddenly being confiscated by the US one day. China took a bunch of dollars, and then you can't buy anything of value in the western market, so why should I hold dollars? Through the Belt and Road Initiative, China has left railways, highways, stadiums, and ports to other countries. Don’t they need these things? Even with debt, there are various rollovers. Probably the only thing they lost was the influence of western countries here.
Huhhh so the problem might not be with the BRI but how different countries materialize the projects. Corruption mismanagement political instability to name a few.
Australia just got caught with the US/UK version of this. We get submarines but they will cost us AUD35million a day for 30 years but at least we get to build part of them.!
Man, the fact the UK is making HS2 for up to £98bn, and China is crossing 3 continents for 8 times that price 😂😂 "British ingenuity" at its finest, what a joke we are
So the BRI is failing because China had to re-structure some loans. The result? The IMF projects China to be a leader of global growth in 2023 at about 5% thanks, in no small part, to increased trade with the countries China loaned money to. China's GDP is about $17 trillion. 5% growth gives $850 billion. In one year. Versus $250 billion of re-structuring over 20 years of loans, much of the money re-cycled back to China anyway. $250 billion is perhaps 1/3 of the Pentagon's annual budget. Plus, China still has massive foreign reserves. Contrast this with recession in the UK and USA, Germany at 0.1% growth, all while piling on more debt. Plus, countries are ditching the dollar, weakening America, China's greatest rival. Countries are getting deeper and deeper into China's sphere of influence. Plus, Western lenders have to take a hit as well, weakening them. "Similarly, developing countries might be warier accepting Chinese loans," yet there's a long list of countries awaiting admission into BRICS and SCO. This is a failure to you? "Things don't look good for China." Sounds like a good trade-off to me, geo-politically speaking. I think you're just trying to make yourself (and/or your audience) feel better that maybe China isn't poised to dominate the coming decades after all.
This is actually history repeating itself. . During the cold war, the Soviets and the World Bank loaned money based on gaining allegiance and not financial sense. Of course that led to a global debt ridden mess which started to clean up after the Soviet collapse..... until China arrived. . I had originally welcomed Chinese loans as they were more financially viable (than the cold war era). Man was I wrong.
try thinking of it like a gaming system there always sold at a loss and they make the money back plus more from games and accessories. same with the belt road give it 25 years and then lets see what happens
I know one Pacific nation where the common people are angry, because large things have been built using Chinese designers and workers, moving the loan money out of the nation through not employing locals and not using local materials. Worse, due to strange government approvals, the items are not fitting the people's needs, and somehow they are shoddily built.
Taking a narrow look at the amount of distressed loans is beside the point. Even if China does not get repaid in fuly, she still has the use of the additional infrastructure built as well as political goodwill and influence abroad. The BRI is not purely about economic gains, let alone in the short-term.
"When Argentina is in trouble, which is basically all of the time" As an Argentinian.. yeap xD
Truer words have never been spoken
I love how it’s a Brit saying it 😂
that one got me good 😆
I noticed that roast. 😂😂 And they said it so naturally, also!
I really hope Argentina doesn't become Venezuela 2.0
When I learned about this initiative, I heard that China kind of had to expect losing that money or a big part of it. If that's true, bailouts and write-offs actually happening doesn't say anything about the success of the initiative. It's not about making even more money then, it's about putting all that cash to use in a way that benefits China. So the questions asked should be:
1) Did China improve its access to foreign markets?
2) Did China expand its political influence?
But not "are its loans paid back?"
For real, I feel like he didn't even touch upon whether the program was successful or not in terms of transportation, infrastructure, trade and overall economic growth.
Yeah I agree the belt and road initiative is a long term investment, that could start benefiting China 20-30 years to come.
@@collinskipkoskei8761 I think influence starts to grow immediately.
Yep, this video completed missed the plot.
Money can be creared from thin air. Minerals and physical resources cannot.
I'm surprised the video did not mention the collateral (or restructuring concessions) that borrowing countries are forced into: China may be quite happy to see a country default on a loan, when this means gaining a non-revocable 99-year lease on a foreign port, for instance.
Yea, it is almost negligent that this isn't mentioned. The Chinese are not stupid, they are aware that many of these governments are risky borrowers; they give out these loans because they can recoup their losses by taking a Cobalt mine or whatever at default.
It is the same thing the IMF let Western investors do, and the IMF rightfully got in a lot of hot water for it.
The BRI should really be viewed with more scrutinty than "it is just the Chinese making bad investments".
the thing is, China has never annexed a country due to them defaulting on a loan and even went As far As forgiving loans if they can't pay back
@LTNetjak Funny enough, for this reason international "courts" (forget the correct term) were created where basically companies can sue a country if they expect unfair treatment - the company and the country each name a "judge" and those 2 decide on a third one to then review the case, make a judgement and the company can then western countries accept those judgements - meaning the company can ask a western country to collect the debt.
So if a country would nationalize the investment of a company, that company could then sue in these courts and get their money back.
Problem being, these court proceedings are extremly expensive and judges often agree everyone has to pay a share -> resulting in companies making a loss despite winning the case.
@@Shuizid Sunnychild, and what if country don't abide this judgement? Do you imprison it? "International Law" for countries is more like laws of sandbox decided by playing children then to actual law set by countries or able organizations. There is no higher entity that can enforce any laws.
Law is only law if it can be enforced. So international laws are actual laws if there is enforcement of it, in that case, are you or you friends ready to invade for debt collection.
chinese loan contracts on average is still better/less devious than the loans made by the west
Who says it hasn't done what it is suppose to do? First of all BRI projects required all or most construction companies to come from China so they mainly did not lose that much of the money. The money was mostly cycled back into China. Secondly they are getting allot of basing rights or outright ownership of many of these projects which gives them allot of leverage over these countries who owe them.
The out right ownership narrative is a lie
The China "debt trap" narrative has been debunked by the British Debt Justice and World Bank data. They found that African countries owe 3x more to Western banks, asset managers and oil traders than to China, and are charged double the interest. 12% of Africa's external debt was owed to China lenders, compared to 35% to Western private creditors.
China has since cancelled the debt for 17 African nations.
All of this is wrong 😂😂😂
Most labor is local, some technician and engineers might be Chinese, but it wouldn't make sense to bring thousands of low skill workers from China. Also, no, this projects aren't owned by China.
Not sure what "basing rights" are, but as the video shows, the idea of the Chinese debt trap and China arm twisting these countries into submission was always US fearmongering. China has gone out of it's way to bail out countries
Hei Indonesian have new high speed train.🚄(We use a joint venture between Indonesia and China. Is Indonesia very smart and the West is very stupid)
@@carkawalakhatulistiwa High speed trains are a huge boondoggle, and even the ones in China are money losers. Regardless of the loan terms, this thing is of no real use, unless it can actually pay for itself, which is highly doubtful.
Turns out, adding strings of requirements to large loans is a good idea after all. Who would've thought.
The IMF does it all the time and they still exist
for the lender ?
These are debt traps laid out by China with a view to failing and then turning over assets such as shipping ports, airports etc..
@@nvizible 😂Exactly
As an American who has seen decades of foreign aid, IMF loans, and general Third World corruption, I just want to completely fill YT's servers with laugh emojis over the thought that China thought these loans would be repaid.
@@recoil53 As a South African, living in said corrupt third world country, I want to laugh along. These loans only serve to prop up failing governments that doesnt serve the people.
Chinaphrenia: the belief that China will both conquer the world and fail miserably, all at the same time.
this is good one. - they will fail so badly thats why we need to contain them - kind of logic
Well, back in the day, the Brits pretty much did exactly that.... if you know what I mean ;)
@@nukiolbartes6279 I don't think anyone believes that China will fail miserably, or conquer the world to begin with. At maximum, people see it as a aggressive dictator that recently did well for itself but is coming off its high.
You wanna see some real schizo stuff though? Check Weibo and what Chinese talk about; they REALLY do believe the US is about to collapse and yet is somehow gonna destroy them lol
@@froggin-zp4nr Western democracies aren't doing that, not even their media, but China and Russia do that constantly. ESPECIALLY Russian media that boasts about LGBT weakness or something.
Sinoprenia.
If China's Belt & Road projects are truly failing, why does the US continue to criticise China on it. The US should be celebrating and encouraging it.
The US kept fearmongering about Japan's economic dominance way after the post-war economic boom. Truth is, nobody really knows because the economy is pretty unpredictable a lot of the time.
Because its stupid and could collapse the global economy.
Well because the belt and road initiative might aswell be an epic success what if the there was a turning point at 2022
Because US are not invited to join the BRI..US is failing as a world power , Their arrogance and greed has been noticed by the whole world. Especially the continent of Africa.
Because the current administration won't bite the hand that feeds them. There's a reason we call him China Joe.
I imagine China views the losses as being covered by using their own contractors, the increase in trade, the positive relations with developing countries, and financial and political leverage. Some returns will continue and grow decades after the project is finished.
This significantly downplays how coercive and damaging IMF and World Bank lending has tended to be.
Cause this was focused on China, not America....
@@nenasiek You can't understand Belt and Road without understanding what it's competing with
@@andrewgreen5892 truuue
@@andrewgreen5892remember the west is good and any competition is bad!
its pure propaganda that's why
Sometimes they do this on purpose. I am not entirely certain which country it was, but I think it was somewhere in Asia or West Africa were they knew the country couldn't repay them, yet they kept feeding them money until the country said "sorry we cannot affort the built of this port anymore" and China anticipated this from the start and that is how they gained a port (for economic or military purpose) miles from the homeland.
The dam built on an active volcano made me laugh a bit and this is a dumb example. But I think the main goal for China is the increase of softpower. Do not forget that China's economy is worth trillions and that those billions are a small amount of it. Countries that can pay you back with money have to use other ways to pay back China for example in allowing Chinese troops stationed in that country. Maybe it is not an economic success, but I still think China's influence grows through this project.
If I remember correctly it was a deep water port somewhere around the middle east or eastern Africa
the hambantota port in sri lanka
@@spritemon98 also the gawdar port in balochistan pakistan
@@MayankExplains I think that's the one I'm remembering
This is both stupid and ignorant. China has 1 overseas military base in Djibouti with 200 soldiers. It leased a port in Sri Lanka and uses it for commercial purposes only. Just as the EU forced Greece to sell and lease out it's airports, stadiums and ports when Greece defaulted.
BRI isnt about money, its about soft conquest.
Wrong
Same thing, China needs to create countries to take their place in the manufacturing game so that they can placate the U.S as World Police Force.
@@skp8748 how?
Go on. Finish your thought.
@@LB-yg2br speeding up the industrialisation of developing nations by providing infrastructure is a forward thinking money play... Africa is the youngest population speeding up its development ignites the positive loop of fast paced economic growth which creates demand for Chinese equipment, machinery and infrastructure congruent with economic development... then you'll also have a burgeoning middle class that now wants goods and services which is a market China can sate.
China thinks in centuries not presidential cycles.
@@LB-yg2br shoring up Central Asia is a hedge against Turkish, Iranian or Russian dominance in the region. Hence China has supported Turkish banks, been a trade lifeline for Iran and increased trade with Russia instead of taking advantage of its weak state due to sanctions... they've bribed them to forget their ambitions.
In South America its largely the same story it has underwritten Argentine economy to the tune of billions, provided essential investment in mining operations across Latin America and provided Brazilian security services with surveillance tech... this is all to make this region a viable consumer market in the next 50 years not to get UN votes next week
One donating invest Billions and one creating chaos to sell arms and then send returnable Aid to fund the local economy?
There's a big factor I think you're failing to consider: Most of those infrastructure projects ended up being built with Chinese-supplied materials and manufactured goods and in many cases were also performed by Chinese contractors.
In other words, a large portion of the money China lent out has already gone back to China. Plus all of their contracts had those 99 year lease clauses, so China will have control over major infrastructure in countries around the world. That's not helpful economically per se, but there's no shortage of concern that those projects (especially the ports in countries around India) might be repurposes for military use.
A trillion dollars in "loans" might seem unreasonable, especially if they're unlikely to be paid back but a trillion dollars in military infrastructure? That's less than 2 years relative to the US' military budget, and only about 5 years worth of China's "official" military budget. Seems a little less unreasonable in that light.
Not to say that China can't or won't make massive mistakes - everybody does. But there's been a very long history of western analysts predicting China's imminent economic collapse that turns out to be a long-game play that we don't expect as we tend to view everything with a very short-term lens, especially in economics where our entire culture has been effectively build around quarterly and annual reports. We often simply fail to consider plans that don't have an obvious pay-out (or at least a measurable milestone) in a 12 month period. And that's before we stop to consider that "obvious" itself is hard to measure when the CCP is so tight-lipped about their economic status. At best, we're building our predictions upon mere assumptions and indirect evidence.
A trillion dollars you NEVER spend is a trillion dollars that really does not exists. China must spend that money or it will disappear... so they really don't really care if anybody pays them back or not, they got work for their companies and some goodwill.. possibly developing future markets. it's good enough.
What is this blabbering
@@neonlight1214 Maybe you should read it instead of making an idiotic comment for no reason?
back as inflation on core economic factors, which has to be managed by the central bank, when these big projects end, malinvesments will come back as inflationary pressure and an economic recession. not very smart.
@@neonlight1214 Someone trying to cope with China making terrible investments lol.
The CCP has no power projection. If even one of these countries decided: "You know what? We don't really feel like this 'soft imperialism' is for us", everyone knows China wouldn't be sending their army over to protect their initiative, nor could they. They haven't even been able to reclaim a tiny island off of their coast, I doubt they have the organization to do it all the way across the other end of the world.
Thing is, whenever China _does_ get its loans repaid, that's just a nice bonus, because they've *already* got the money back.
These loans tend to be conditional on whatever projects they're being used to fund using Chinese labour and Chinese suppliers. They ship thousands of construction workers to wherever something's being built. All the money comes straight back to China.
Not really. If a government subsidizes its industry, it is spending money that it does not get back. The money they get back was supposed to be from the loans. Think about how farm subsidies work in the USA, is that a costless endeavor? In this case China is subsidizing its construction industry which has become oversized but is too vital to pare back. The Chinese construction industry is worth $3.7 trillion, China's total GDP is $18 million. Construction is 20% of their whole GDP but they are at a point where building projects for their primary market of growth, real estate, aren't viable in the same way they were in the recent past, so they need something to build because you can't just downsize 20% of your economy without massive repercussions.
@@AlephOmega-zy5qs No, the government itself doesn't get the money back (immediately), but China does. If you're paying Chinese workers to build something using Chinese materials with Chinese equipment, all the value, the wealth, stays in China and is not transferred to the other country. It remains in the Chinese economy. The added value of the completed infrastructure does transfer to the other country of course, so it's not quite as good as building infrastructure in your own country, but a large amount of the apparent cost is spent within the Chinese economy. Initially it goes to the workers, and the materials and equipment suppliers, but it gradually trickles its way back to the government through taxation.
On this scale, money works less like an asset with value that can be exchanged and instead like the working fluid in a heat engine, enabling the transfer of work from one part of the system to another.
When the US pays its farmers subsidies, as with spending on any other public service - healthcare, schools, military, that money mostly continues to circulate in the US economy and overall the government spends the same amount as it brings in. Back to the heat pump analogy, the government (along with central banks) works like the expansion valve, regulating the flow of the output generated by the compressor (workers) so it can transfer that work to the broader economy. As long as there are no leaks, all the money stays in the system.
Leaks in this case would be money leaving the country (eg to import goods, energy, etc) but even then, the _global_ economy is a self-contained system.
@@jhonbus That engine analogy is the heart of my issue here. No engine is an ideal Carnot engine, perpetual motion machines cannot exist. If such a thing worked, infinite economic growth would be possible via perpetually increasing government spending. There are always inefficiencies and when it comes to both of these cases there's a massive amount of waste and inefficiency, which is why I'm generally not a fan of Keynesian economics. China's construction industry is a disproportionately large part of China's economy as I mentioned previously. The BRI was meant to provide an outlet for that construction industry so they don't run out of things to build and collapse China's economy while conveniently paying for itself and expanding Beijing's soft power. Those last two things have not panned out and the issue of their construction industry becomes larger every day.
That's why Beijing is having high speed rail built to the middle of nowhere despite most of the routes being obvious money sinks that will cost a fortune to maintain, they need something for the construction industry to do. They are fully aware of this and are kicking the can of the financial infeasibility of their construction industry down the road. Their real estate market can no longer support it so the government must fill that role. How long can Beijing support a $3.7T industry that cannot subsist on its own? That is going to put a massive strain on their economy.
@@jhonbus Farming and coal power subsidies are actually a big problem for America and Europe alike. They are politically hard to get rid off or limit to reasonable levels, but its also a destructive policy thats limiting the governments capabilities to do things.
Like just doing "something" might make your GDP look good, but youre not just spending money. Youre spending energy and ressources, and your government doesnt even get the money back, since those projects dont have long term benefits. Pointless infrastructure in your own country even costs a lot more energy and money to maintain. Even chinese foreign investments, supposed to create soft power, are more and more of a financial drain.
Youre burning ressource to keep people busy today, but youre gonna pay for a long time as a consequence. And at some point theres just nothing to build anymore, or you dont got enough money. And then you are screwed. Thats the current course of China, its economy is not sustainable in any way.
If anything, the RBI was supposed to be the solution, to support trade to europe and open up new markets, so you dont have to rely on those dangerous subsidies as much anymore. Because China is having real big trouble currently, with growth slowing down and the many huge projects becoming liabilities.
Internationally, those suspected "debt traps" are also becoming a diplomatic problem, together with Chinas aggressive and insulting political messaging. The west is getting tired if Chinas acting, and is taking its hostility and one-sided economics more seriously. Most surrounding countries around china are similar; they are increasingly concerned. Everyone becomes less ready to work together with China, which is not great for a country relying on trade, doubly so if that trade is very one sided with Chinas protectionism.
Thats also why the west generally isnt doing super huge projects without benefit. You can afford them in big growth phases, but after that you gotta be careful. Nor is America, despite their warmongering in the middle east, actually interested in conflict with major powers. All of that hurts you in the long run.
是的，中国的人工和资源不算钱，白送的。
The BRI is not profit driven - its about soft power and infrastructure.
China learn this from Rome.
You can't keep treating people like trash and expect others to like you, especially when they find out warning by others are right.
Isn't what these loser BRI loan recipient nations said about the west back in the day when they were praising China "liberal" loan policies and claiming debt trap diplomacy was fake news?
By “you” you are probably referring to China. I would like to point out that loans for misguided infrastructure seems a better approach than trying to “win hearts and minds” by bombing weddings.
Your talking about the west right? Because your comment encapsulates them
@@Jykobe491 no, he's talking about China and Russia. Cope.
I worked in a Chinese company in Tanzania. They're so racist and don't respect culture at all
should be renamed to "the debt and trap initiative) (high interest/ no job creation of local workers)
And Chinese builder's aren't that good at building durable structures
@Zaydan Alfariz I think China is much worse. Giant buildings, train structures and others collapse in under a year or 2
@@spritemon98 yep in china they have a saying "chabuduo" which translated means "meh that will do". Everything the ccp is involved in is chabuduo- cutting corners with time and money
Literally fake news, most countries asked China for the loans not the other way around.
The BRI isn't really about being a trap, but more about creating the same type of infrastructure in the East as we have in the West when it comes to transport and commerce and economics in general and when complete China and that entire region of the world will be unstoppable. As for the "infinite" funding, that is being supplied by the QE process and I humbly request that you read my comment prior to this one for this greater overall perspective.
Well, i know for a fact that they have been successful at least on my home area in pontianak city, indonesia. The Belt and road initiative is successful but which side is actually became the winner of this deal? The answer depends on who you ask. Most people from the west would point to Sri Lanka or the locals who often not allowed to take part in their projects. To me, i think their infrastructures works perfectly. It does exactly what our govenment wanted it to do despite all its problems like foreign workers and all that maintenance stuff. Put those problems aside and you get one perfectly working infrastructure boosting the economy, bringing the goverments money, and giving some kind of pride to the local for each successful projects.
How we see the BRI and how it really works for us is best summirized with Gyude Moore's quote "China might win more but at least Africa didn't lose". For us its "China might win more but at least Indonesia didn't lose."
远离美国人和他的政府、媒体，否则愚民政策会让你变的不幸
But, those infrastructure projects are poor quality and break down. If you are familiar with Chinese products, you shouldn't be surprised
Chinese Electric Cars Squeeze VW Manufacturing Plant in Germany Out of Business
This just western Copium.
Not as much as China and Russia trying desperately to replace the US dollar with their pathetic currencies 😂
This one's a known troll, let's give him a potato and be about our day.
When somebody is giving you easy loans, there is always a catch which you will not like. Its just common sense. But of course corrupt politicians of these countries don’t care.
I have followed and watch for years and over the last year your biases are showing more and more. Hope you haven’t forgotten the ideals that you stated this Chanel with. I look forward to seeing your honest in depth reopening in the future. Give the facts and let the world take it for what it is.
Exactly
well the Belt & Road Initiative was always about something more than financial gain through interest. Trapping a country in debt is a pretty effective way of exerting influence over it.
Hmm you owe 85 dollars to a guy who has many conditions and 15 dollars to a guy who has no conditions. Which one is debt trapping you?
China is between 10-20% of debt of those countries. The West is 80-90% of the debt.
Lot of great points are being made in the comments about how you're missing the bigger picture. Its important to note these projects are more than just foreign aid. These also provide means for China to extract crucial strategic resources especially in Africa for rare minerals. China also gains political influence over these countries to influence UN votes as well which is just as valuable in as any repayments they might receive.
Exactely, the situation in ukraine and how those countries react to it clearly shows the chinese influence.
The situation in Ukraine was started by America and NATO, way back around 1990 when Bush 1 was president.
And you're being lied to about what's going on.
Ukraine sank the Moskva?
The American military has had 24/7 coverage of that entire area for years, including satellite coverage with something called "synthetic aperture radar".
Synthetic aperture radar has the ability to clearly see through rain and clouds.....
So, if Ukraine sank Moskva, where's the American military video showing it????
And that "stuck in the mud" crap they kept telling us, was also a lie.
They needed them to look incompetent, so they became stuck in the mud.
Fact is, Russia is a LOT more broke than you're told, and they always have been.
You're told, and believe, that Russia isn't that far behind America in military power.
That's a lie. They own a lot of equipment, but have no money for training, or maintenance.
They had dry rotted tires, from lack of maintenance, and the tires quite literally exploded out the sidewalls......
They weren't stuck in the mud, they had flat tires, while in mud.
NOT the same thing.
You're being lied to and told the story they want you to have, and you're believing them.
That's a Kool aid drinker right there.
You didn't say anything about the 99 year lease thing that China is doing when a country isn't able to pay.
@@Jade-sc7ne You are the idiot ranting without knowing the context.
I was talking about the port in Sri Lanka developed by China. The port has been leased to China for 99 years as Sri Lanka is unable to repay the loan they took.
Actually, it's all about QE and I humbly request that you peruse my comment prior to this one and you will more than likely appreciate this different perspective.
70% stake on a 99 year lease with a $1.1B price tag, money which Sri Lanka used to pay off debt from other countries which amount to 90% of their total debt. ruclips.net/video/7gwgcIfzttA/видео.html
China PRC learn the 99 lease deal from the British in 1800's, work for them, then. Local labor, fuel, tax paid by China
Literally a 20% year-on-year growth and this guy is calling it a failure!? 🙄
"when Argentina is in trouble, which is basically all the time" lmao accurate
Why not a video on the failings of the IMF and their austerity measures. Here is a starter. The IMF forces countries to cut down their budgets for education, health care and social welfare programs.
One example of this is Greece, which was forced to cut its education budget by 23% between 2009 and 2014 as part of its bailout agreement with the IMF. Another example is Jamaica, which was required to cut its education budget by 10% in order to receive an IMF loan.
These cuts can have serious consequences for students and teachers alike. In Greece, for example, schools have been forced to close due to a lack of funding, while teachers have seen their salaries cut by up to 40%. In Jamaica, the education system has struggled to provide basic resources such as textbooks and school supplies
Is Greece economy back on track? Sadly no. Is Jamaicas economy back on track? Also no. Is the IMF broken?
You’re videos are really biased and it’s showing.
Hmmm that make taking over infrastructure sounds like a lesser evil. I would rather pay a toll on the road then having my education affected.
He is another western thug paid by western agencies to create hate about China
Not all the countries which were offered BRI are developing. There are lots of developed countries which were offered participation or participate in the project, for example in Europe.
And in Australia, a very left wing *state* government tried to join, circumventing the constitutional exclusive foreign relations power vested in our Federal government. Thankfully, the latter vetoed the deal.
@@alexanderSydneyOz
and thus that regional(a state is a country) government failed at benefiting from a deal.
@@sabin97 Ohio is not a country
@@tristanlau1213
i agree. it's an administrative region of usakistan.
not sure what that has to do with my previous post.
The world's ten largest debtor countries are all developed countries.
The United States has the most debt in the world, followed by the United Kingdom and Germany.
The top 30 countries are basically developed countries or countries experiencing explosive growth, such as Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand.
They are learning from developed countries and borrowing money to build infrastructure.
Infrastructure services such as roads, railways, and bridges are the basis for a country's development.
The purpose of building these facilities is not for profit, but for the development of business and the circulation of goods.
If borrowing is a trap, China and the United States must be the stupidest countries in the world.
About twenty years ago, China joined the WTO and borrowed a lot of money from the United States and Europe.
Many Chinese companies have been acquired by the United States, and companies such as Wal-Mart and Starbucks are located in every city in China.
China's development today is visible to everyone.
Inclusion, development and innovation are the themes of the world.
Ignorance never makes progress.
failing. Ask Croatian what they felt about the bridge Chinese built for them. And ppl from Costs rica about the football stadium ? Jesus western propaganda is crazy.
Just to forward a daring question: IS the "belt and road initiative" really "failing" when various states can't repay the credits that come with the project?
The project comes with a number of caveats as far as i learned:
- Every single investment ist built by chinese companies, with chinese workers; it basically is a way to make foreign countries invest in Chinas domestic economy.
- And every single investment is secured by clauses that, if kicking into effect, transfer the ownership over the project to China, giving it infrastructural estates ontop around the world (for the prize of basically subventioning it's own domestic economy - which it otherwise wouldn't be allowed to due to WTO-rules) - which, as an extra benefit, allow China to extend the reach of it's military, given that a whole lot of those investments go into harbours and airports.
So, ultimately, it really is a win-win-situation for China; either, granted credits are repaid. China earns money, with a perspective to earn even more in the future. Or, the credits default; China bails the creditor out, and thus (semi-legally) subventions it's domestic economy, and receives strategic estates in return. Really the only losers in this construct are the states that actually agree on those deals on China's terms - either, they pay a lot for objectively not overly useful infrastructure, or they lose souvereignty over parts of their land.
It’s a westoid propaganda channel don’t bother
I see many comments here observing that China BRI loans typically involve mandatory use of Chinese labor, expertise, construction companies and so on.
That, however, does not mean China "has the money back already". That is true to some extent regarding the payments, but overlooks the fact that if a Chinese worker performs work in another country, that is work not performed in China. Likewise materials, logistics, plant, expertise and so on, applied on offshore projects. The payments may come back to Chinese entities, but the actual value was applied overseas and to that extent detracts from the Chinese economy.
Money is a medium of exchange, but the economy is about real things: goods and services.
The rise of anti-China rhetoric in the media is worrying.
Why. The Chinese media hates on the West so Let Western Media hate on China
@@onlyagermanguy Western Media did it first
This is because they're actually succeeding, not failing like Western copers say every month.
Now 143 nations attending 10 years bri …. Don’t make yourself a joke. 😂
you were very nice about what the loans under BRI were really meant to do china always knew these countries had no way to pay back the loans and that most of the projects were pushed by them not the countries and were doomed to fail plus with chinese companies doing all the work with mostly chinese labor they added very little to the economies of those countries I believe the phrase is dept trap diplomacy
Without infrastructure, Roads, Rail, Ports, Schools, Hospitals Reservoirs and Waste Water Treat plants poor countries will remain in a “POVERTY TRAP OF STAGNATION”. Infrastructure is the essential platform for countries to grow and modernize.
South east Asia countries is signing for this BRI now. So don't be jealous when it is completed.
It really looks like expecting Countries to have decent human rights and democracy is in fact the most economically sustainable choice for lenders...
You mentioned Sri Lanka and Zambia, did you take some time to look at the debt composition of these two countries? Regarding Zambia, 45% of their debt is owed to Western private lenders with higher interest rates. If we talk about Africa in general, Africa owed the world nearly 700 billion and 88% of that debt is owed to non-Chinese lenders. If the situation is bad for Chinese loans and you think the non-Chinese lenders will be better off when their share of the loans is bigger than what China's in these poor countries, what makes you so certain that these countries won't default on the larger non-Chinese loans?
Long story short, they lended a bunch of money to countries that couldn't pay it back, and now they haven't paid it back 😮😮
it sound like evil european way of doing things. People of africa stand for china...
people of european descend are jalous. The whole world is behind China, while you are gossing about China, Russia and Africa partnership
You country’s economy is failing.
China's the largest trading partner in just about every continent not Europe and North America you might be missing something
Conquer nations without firing a shot. Many will say that is what the BRI was designed to do. Just ask Sri Lanka & Uganda.
"No string loans" from China? China took over a port in Bangladesh after they defaulted. Plenty of strings.
@@Taurus388 ah okay thanks!
The BRI loans are not regular loans. Their are disadvantigeous packages. China offer to you to built an infrastructure project (which you not always need) at a very expensive price (which you usually can't affort) by Chinese companies and workers and offers you a loan to pay for that. That means you are paying to Chinese companies and workes and the money goes to Chinese economy, so the it does not have the usual benefits of infrastucture projects like pumping money into your economy and providing empolyment to your people. The money you spend does not multiplicate in your economybut Chinese and if the project is of shitty quality or you actually don't need it you just payed a lots of money to improve Chinese GDP.
First of all, A country identifies a need: a port, road, railway, powerplant, dam.... Then the country tries to find funds, first they go World bank, IMF, Paris club.. they all say NO!! Then they go to a Chinese bank and MAYBE they get a loan.
If the West cares so much, why did not they give a better offer?
Simply because the West does not want the developing world to have any infrastructure so they will remain poor and subordinate. That;s the reason you are most likely paid to post the above comment, to keep the developing world poor.
And Chinese companies charge way less on infrastructure projects then the west. And China also offers some scholarships to developing countries so there are some knowledge transfer. It is always a country’s own decision to participate in the BRI or not, China did not engage in any war to make all this happen, unlike the war the west has started in 18/19/20 century
Another problem for China is that the loans were meant to ensure the projects were completed. Many of the debts are failing before the project finishes, just like a lot of construction projects within China. The collateral for the debts aren't finished, so are not worth anywhere near as much as the outstanding amounts.
If BRI is failing, why is G7 worried about it, and bringing G7 version of alternatives?
China builds the BRI, and America now "attempts" the Build Back Better". But it is so far ...understood that no bricks had been laid, and no concrete poured. America has more problems than it could deal with. Some are self inflicted, eg Trump, some are ambitions went haywire, eg. Ukraine. Some are systemic, eg. spending more than it could earn
A theory in international relations is that China does NOT expect these developing countries to repay the loans. If the borrowers can't pay them back (due to rampant kleptocracy) then China can force the former to "lease" their seaports and airfields to the PLA as a form of repayment. Either way, China will have soft-power or hard-power influence over their backyard all the way up to the doorsteps of the Middle East and Europe.
i think you can scrap the word "doorstep"... China already posesses agricultural areas in italy and on the balkans and the majority of a port in germany. So it isn't up to the doorstep, it's already in the house. (And everybody inpower seems to underestimate their ruthlesness, dedication and intelligence)
The plan was not to develop infrastructure but to put China as the top investor in these countries. As plan is unfolding these countries have accepted Chinese currency and Chinese government will consider these bailouts as investment for its rise. Like Sri Lanka, which has already leased one of its major ports for China to a period of approximately 100 years.
They are doing it so they can have infrastructure in those country.
They're borrowing from the U.S. to do it. No, they owe us more than we owe them. They haven't had to pay it back because they have Developing Nation Status, but hopefully not for very much longer.
If it is failing, why does U S worrying about ?
Great idea.Gonna connect a lot of countries and culture.❤
The bottiest of bot replies.
@@caesarmatty It's simultaneously basic and brilliant.
It's like using "diversity is strength" as though it's axiomatic.
@@E4439Qv5 diversity IS strength.
@@sabin97 That's but a conclusion to an argument, and not a truth in-and-of itself. I could just as easily argue to the contrary and make the point stick as necessary. _Especially_ when it comes to China.
@@E4439Qv5
actually once china started diversifying their trading partners they became stronger.
diversity IS strength.
in everything.
look for example bananas.
do yo uknow what happens when there's no diversity?
any disease destroys all your plantation.
i have at least 3-4 different varieties of bananas....and not a worry in the world about them.
China can allways put a military base if they dont pay
It's what they do anyway - it may not be used immediately, but it will be there (and used) in a time of conflict.
I think this video is missing the point. As someone once said, "the West is playing chess, while China is playing Go". The objective in Go is to capture territory, and the BRI is a brilliant (some might say diabolical) plan to do just that. Each time they "restructure" a loan, they grab a 99 years lease to a port (like the Hambantota port in Sri Lanka), or whatever. If they went outright to Sri Lanka and told them they wanted a 99 years lease to Hambantota and 70% ownership, they would have been laughed out of the room, but that's exactly what they got for $500M (minus whatever Sri Lanka managed to repay, salaries of the Chinese workers, etc.)
thanks, i was starting to get very curious on how the B&R initiative was going.
and yet, the BRI has an additional 3 Trillions US$ reserve for more protect worldwide, thanks to USA leadership
Note to your editors. Please make sure the music to your intros is at the same volume level as the rest of the audio
Oh, someone thought that spreading around more loans would make them look good for their boss. See also the loads of electric cars sitting around getting obsolete without getting driven, and big ol apartment buildings being fully sold out before they even exist.
It’s important to note that China will also seize infrastructure. If a country defaults, China will take control of their airport or harbor or whatever they used the money to build. The politicians all pay themselves from the loan so they don’t care about negotiating a better deal.
In my opinion, China isn't the least bit interested in seizing anything from these poor nations, but instead what I see China doing is that they are spending their "infinite" QE funding to create the same type of infrastructure we have here in the U. S. which provides for a robust interstate trade and once this is done, with the massive population there is in that region of the world, all of those nations will basically leave my country, the U. S., in the dust when it comes to trade and commerce. Please take a moment of your time to read my comment prior to this comment and I think you will appreciate the QE perspective.
@JackSmith-mk1ru Yeah, exactly.
@JackSmith-mk1ru Yes, of course, you are correct, but the most salient aspect of your comment is to acknowledge that the way China is able to fund these "schools, colleges, roads, hospitals" and the like is by China employing the quantitative easing (QE) process which is to electronically generate monies, when these sovereign nations should have the right to employ the QE process themselves which makes China, and the U. S., for that matter, an unnecessary middleman. Please, you must grasp the QE reality.
Out of this world of 198 countries, there are over 140 countries across 5 countinents join the Chinese One Belt One Road. Every month, there are more countries applying to join including Japan , India, New Zeland and Korea except US. Pretty soon the US will be the few to be isolated from the rest of the world.
Last time I checked China is still trading with USA as is most of the world. Your statement is laughable.
Incorrect about the Montenegro road, it is definitely finished and it circumvents the most dangerous road in the country, also its a setup for a highway connecting to serbia, from which they get most tourists and do most trade with, the road was very much necessary
Greetings from Italy 🙋♂️🇮🇹
free Tibet
Yup China has already help to free Tibet from the British Invasion las century 😂 1:00
He who thinks that China wanted the money back is a fool. They are pretty much getting what they want. I just hope gobal leaders realise this and plan the future of their nations smartly.
If these projects aren't using local labour and local materials (where possible) then it is pointless as where is the wider benefit?
It a propaganda message by the west that local labour is not used. Chinese companies employs locals just like any western companies would. And just like any western companies, engineers and management are usually not locals.
It's not failing lol
it's not failing.
commerce between china and all of america(except maybe usakistan and its canadian pets) has been increasing since they started the initiative. on the other hand all of america has been reducing its commerce with usakistan and canada.
Very interesting report. I've seen the Lao Chinese railway and the dams on the Nam Ou and Mekong. How will Laos repay the loans? Troubling.
They planned to sell electricity to Singapore through Cambodia. The reality is they are selling to Vietnam (because selling to China, Cambodia, or Thailand means losing money for Laos, not to mention Laos does not have full authority on their power plants because they borrowed money from China). For the moment, Laos is doubling down on drugs and narcotics, which explains why drugs trafficking is increasing in VN, their oldest ally.
It was never about getting back the money, it was about making allies along the way. And it was a massive success.
the count of monte cristo
I am Pakistani and I thank China for CPEC, now we have progressed much more than all the countries in the South Asia combined. We have 24 hrs electricity, food available 24*7, jobs and other basic things that our government wasn't ever able to provide. Long live china and Pakistan friendship. I hope China keeps showering us with their blessings.
China ఎవరికి ఏమి ఊరికే ఇవ్వదు. ఇప్పటికే చైనా కి మీరు చాలా అప్పులు బాకీ ఉన్నారు. చైనా పాకిస్తాన్ పోర్ట్స్, airports, mines అన్ని లాక్కొనబోతుంది.
China builds the BRI, and America now "attempts" the Build Back Better". But it is so far ...understood that no bricks had been laid, and no concrete poured. America has more problems than it could deal with. Some are self inflicted, eg Trump, some are ambitions went haywire, eg. Ukraine. Some are systemic, eg. spending more than it could earn.
😂 chal jhootha
Baluchistan?
11 Chinese killed
Here's a truth bomb for you: It's not.
This was really interesting. Have many developing countries benefited from improved infrastructure because of Chinese loans?
Thanks for spending the time to create and share this content perspective/awareness
it sound like evil european way of doing things. People of africa stand for china...
people of european descend are jalous. The whole world is behind China, while you are gossing about China, Russia and Africa partnership
You Western Propagandist!
bruh
We shall see who is failing after the BRICS Bucks are delivered in August?
First lesson in banking ..Don't lend to money to broke eternities .
Are you sure that China did not plan for the instance the Belt and Road Initiative was failing. It is not like China is losing anything. Even when the country goes down China gets land or promises.
1:03 It is not kolkata which part of BRI, it is bangladesh
Ten years from now the west is like: How did every country in the global south end up in Brics and belt road initiative 😂
China is better than the west at helping out developing countries. They recognise and anticipate; all their moves and consequence. They have a single mindset; they will prevail where others mismanage. Growth in terms of economy and population will open new markets where china can do business and not depend only on western needs, which takes their power to influence their economic output. Very wise to expand markets, not troops. It is a better investment than invest on a military that doesn't have economic output just geopolitical atm.
You don't understand the aim of BRI.
It's simply sea transport via massive container ships is massively cheaper than by train which is also massively cheaper than by truck which is also massively cheaper than by plane. And massive is 2x to 10x.
They made so much mess in Montenegro now they targeting them to take one part of the country for somthing they never build, they left on half build, China got upset way some Balkan countries like Albanian Kosova refused for their loan to build motorways
Failing? BRI is an investment initiative around the world. Most of the BRI projects have completed and running smoothly according to plan. A few failed investments among hundreds shouldn't be called failing altogether and isn't represent the whole initiatives. It's normal for investment to have some underperform portfolios.
This video says a lot of Chinese loans to other countries, and then these loans may be lost. I would say that it is much better for China than buying US treasury bonds and then suddenly being confiscated by the US one day. China took a bunch of dollars, and then you can't buy anything of value in the western market, so why should I hold dollars? Through the Belt and Road Initiative, China has left railways, highways, stadiums, and ports to other countries. Don’t they need these things? Even with debt, there are various rollovers. Probably the only thing they lost was the influence of western countries here.
Huhhh so the problem might not be with the BRI but how different countries materialize the projects. Corruption mismanagement political instability to name a few.
Australia just got caught with the US/UK version of this. We get submarines but they will cost us AUD35million a day for 30 years but at least we get to build part of them.!
Ecuador paid a high price for that dam, it took out the country's largest waterfall and ruptured an oil pipeline on the nearby river.
Man, the fact the UK is making HS2 for up to £98bn, and China is crossing 3 continents for 8 times that price 😂😂
"British ingenuity" at its finest, what a joke we are
Let me guess: war in Ukraine and a blown up Beirut. Ships stuck in Suez canal hurt China most.
Convenient
The defaults are a goal of the ccp as that means china has direct control of the infrastructure, basically more territory/bases
How many bases does China have?
@@skp8748 More than last year, fewer than next year . . .
So the BRI is failing because China had to re-structure some loans. The result? The IMF projects China to be a leader of global growth in 2023 at about 5% thanks, in no small part, to increased trade with the countries China loaned money to. China's GDP is about $17 trillion. 5% growth gives $850 billion. In one year. Versus $250 billion of re-structuring over 20 years of loans, much of the money re-cycled back to China anyway. $250 billion is perhaps 1/3 of the Pentagon's annual budget. Plus, China still has massive foreign reserves. Contrast this with recession in the UK and USA, Germany at 0.1% growth, all while piling on more debt. Plus, countries are ditching the dollar, weakening America, China's greatest rival. Countries are getting deeper and deeper into China's sphere of influence. Plus, Western lenders have to take a hit as well, weakening them. "Similarly, developing countries might be warier accepting Chinese loans," yet there's a long list of countries awaiting admission into BRICS and SCO. This is a failure to you? "Things don't look good for China." Sounds like a good trade-off to me, geo-politically speaking. I think you're just trying to make yourself (and/or your audience) feel better that maybe China isn't poised to dominate the coming decades after all.
France just ordered for $3 billion worth of VLCC ships
This is actually history repeating itself.
.
During the cold war, the Soviets and the World Bank loaned money based on gaining allegiance and not financial sense. Of course that led to a global debt ridden mess which started to clean up after the Soviet collapse..... until China arrived.
.
I had originally welcomed Chinese loans as they were more financially viable (than the cold war era). Man was I wrong.
And BICS? How’s their currency project going?
try thinking of it like a gaming system there always sold at a loss and they make the money back plus more from games and accessories. same with the belt road give it 25 years and then lets see what happens
Looks like it'll be a while until the Belt and Road Initiative will be completed (if ever).
I know one Pacific nation where the common people are angry, because large things have been built using Chinese designers and workers, moving the loan money out of the nation through not employing locals and not using local materials. Worse, due to strange government approvals, the items are not fitting the people's needs, and somehow they are shoddily built.
If RBI is a bad strategy, why does US bother about it? Why US is upset about its develpment? just let China lose money
Taking a narrow look at the amount of distressed loans is beside the point. Even if China does not get repaid in fuly, she still has the use of the additional infrastructure built as well as political goodwill and influence abroad. The BRI is not purely about economic gains, let alone in the short-term.