[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

This is an example of that kind of statement that frequently gets thrown around in misrepresentation of reality. If you read development finance literature on this kind of stuff, you would know that "debt trap diplomacy" is debunked in the development finance literature. That phrase in relation to Chinese development financing and eximbank activity was coined in Indian news media in relation to Sri Lanka, where India has it's own interests at play, and it has caught on internationally and gets thrown around endlessly as a meme, but it's not reality.

While it is not necessarily as widespread as claimed, how do you argue this isn't a reality?

“Chinese debt burdens are substantially larger than research institutions, credit rating agencies, or intergovernmental organizations with surveillance responsibilities previously understood,” the study said.


The reason is an increasing number of deals struck not directly between governments through central banks but through often opaque arrangements with a range of financing institutions, hence “the debt burdens were kept off the public balance sheets.”

Laos, for example, had to sell part of its national electricity grid to China in 2020 in exchange to debt relief from Chinese creditors.


Laos’ overall level of debt exposure to China is equivalent to 64.8 percent of its GDP, including 35.4 percent of GDP worth of hidden debt that comes with the China-Laos railway mega project, according to the study. The $6 billion dollar railway is due to open in December.

https://www.rfa.org/english/news/lao...021161618.html