14 October 2024

Debt or Diplomacy? Inside China’s Controversial Loans to Sri Lanka, Laos, and Malaysia

Zdeněk Rod

In recent years, much of the discussion around China’s “debt-trap diplomacy” has come from U.S. media and political hawks. In May 2019, then-U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo accused China of using this approach, particularly through its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), an infrastructure project aimed at expanding China’s influence across Asia, Africa, and beyond. According to Pompeo, China uses opaque practices, corruption, and predatory loans to saddle countries with unsustainable debt, thereby undermining their sovereignty and seizing control of critical infrastructure, such as ports or power plants.

Beyond political rhetoric, foreign policy experts have also weighed in on the matter, suggesting that China deliberately targets countries that are unlikely to repay their loans. The argument is that when these countries default, they are forced to cede key assets like energy facilities, ports, or railways, thus extending Beijing’s influence over strategic infrastructure globally.

However, recent studies indicate that the reality of China’s debt diplomacy is more nuanced than commonly portrayed. While it’s true that China has lent vast sums to countries with questionable creditworthiness, many of these nations willingly accept such risky terms. In most cases, no country has completely forfeited its infrastructure to China, except in the partial example of Laos (more on that below). More commonly, nations have leased portions of their infrastructure to Chinese firms for extended periods, rather than surrendering outright ownership.

No comments: