Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Master_Income_8991 t1_jedksae wrote

Reply to comment by zusykses in China calls US debt trap accusation 'irresponsible' by BubsyFanboy

True it doesn't appear to be a cut and dry dept-trap. That being said I wouldn't skip the details. Doesn't sound like a dept trap but instead a trap where Sri Lanka is forced to build, host, and maintain (minority) stake in infrastructure the Chinese want to use. Dept it just a stepping stone to the actual intention. Some of the details you decided people should skip are the presence of Chinese submarines at the Chinese affiliated ports operating in Sri Lanka. Also one of the Chinese companies that went into CM ports was the company that constructed the port in the first place. Combine this with their construction of islands in disputed waters and the truth isn't too hard to see.

P.S. I don't think the Chinese are so stupid that they don't understand the concept of bribery, they are not infants.

−7

zusykses t1_jedp942 wrote

China didn't foist this port on Sri Lanka, and the debt Sri Lanka sought to pay off by working out the HIPG deal had nothing to do with the China Eximbank loans that Sri Lanka received - it was due to some ISBs (International Sovereign Bonds) that were due to mature; nothing to do with China. There's some valid criticisms to be made against China but honestly most of the failures here seem to be caused by financial mismanagement by successive Sri Lankan governments, unfortunately.

As far as the port being used for husbanding Chinese submarines I have no idea what you're talking about but if you've got a source I'd like to read it.

15

Master_Income_8991 t1_jegzfhw wrote

It's your source, it mentions submarine hosting.

I never claimed Sri Lanka did not take substantial risk. As for the loans having nothing to do with CM ports, well it's all a bunch of card tricks. Clearly the loans had an effect on the port ownership so they became defacto related.

1