5 ms·

It's still an ally, more than the Chinese will ever be. Just wait and see, the loans you are getting ( not investments) are for Chinese workers. The loans are

It's still an ally, more than the Chinese will ever be. Just wait and see, the loans you are getting ( not investments) are for Chinese workers. The loans are at 4-6% if the work isn't executed by Chinese workers. That's not an ally

rolltiide 7y ago
And the IMF is different? Loan, extract resources, saddle with debt. I guess its only a whataboutism when you dont realize that you created a separate higher standard to begin with. edit: meant World Bank and USAID as they don't only lend to members.
- NicoJuicy 7y ago
  Yes, it is. It's only funds, not resources. Give me some trustworthy resources that say the IMF is both. The Western world has been giving back colonies from a dark past. That's a higher standard. Fyi, the entire world has dark pasts, some more successful than others.
  - rolltiide 7y ago
    I made an edit, I meant World Bank and USAID as they don't only lend to member countries. I don't have sources I would quote, but I have enough to be told to look over there and see the cause and effect. Developing countries are saddled with debt, and further crippled. Recipients of the debt are contractors. Austerity measures are needed to repay the debt, and the citizens are the ones burdened by it to help extract the country's natural resources to pay the debt. Even IF an indictment of the World Bank is just crackpot conspiracies, it is a really good instruction manual. China's approach is running the same playbook but may even be more completely benign. Their industries have been entering emerging markets that others have decided not to effectively touch, without invading. Are they also running the regime change playbook too like the US did all last century? Time will tell. They are doing a lot for African markets. They don't need to be an "ally", everyone should be skeptical. Lightyears ahead of what the west is doing though.
    - NicoJuicy 7y ago
      Debt has gone way worse since the Chinese came in for loans though ;) PS. No sources to quote, that's a bummer. Everyone thinks to see all causes and effects. I do not agree with this one. The West has been mostly fair in the digital age, while China doesn't. That's the cause and effect i see.
  - close04 7y ago
    Unfortunately the US now mostly has hostages rather than allies. There's always the threat of economic retaliation if the allies don't support US initiatives, no matter how outrageous ("let's start another war, Europe/Middle East/Africa can deal with the humanitarian consequences!"). And as the Snowden leaks have shown, the US is ready to try to cripple the infrastructure of their allies in case this is ever needed (the particular leak was about utilities and power). This is not excusing China's attitude, and it's by no means (much) better. You wouldn't call someone who keeps slapping you over the face a friend just because they could have punched you.
  - dangerface 7y ago
    > The Western world has been giving back colonies from a dark past. No they won their independence from wars, most of the colonies that where "given back" won their independence through fighting in world war 1 and 2, there are very few exceptions to this rule.
    - NicoJuicy 7y ago
      Well, Belgium gave back Congo and they did have resistance against colonialism ( rightfully so). But, Congo seems to fail to be independant and corruption seems to have gotten way worse.
Barrin92 7y ago
>It's still an ally, more than the Chinese will ever be. The US has no concept for Africa, because unlike China which uses infrastructure projects and investment as a way to offload its export surplus the US is an overwhelmingly domestic economy. There will never be an American 'Belt and Road' because it just doesn't make much sense for a country that has so little international economic exposure, whenever the US forms alliances it is towards purely political ends. In that sense one could indeed characterise the relationship with China as more stable. No Chinese leader is suddenly going to go isolationist over the next two decades just because they feel like it.
- chibg10 7y ago
  Even this framing is suspect -- China has very publicly been trying to shift from an export-driven economy to a domestic consumption economy recently. I question how stable the relationship is when that stability rests on the assumption China fails to meet its economic goals.
  - waterdownship 7y ago
    Trying to, means they are currently not.
  - Barrin92 7y ago
    China is still a country with significant room for industrial expansion with hundreds of millions of people moving from rural to urban areas adding to the manufacturing workforce, the country as a whole has not reached levels of prosperity that would produce a consumer driven economy, and one also needs to account for the heavy influence of export-led sectors on policy-making and the state-led economy which doesn't tend to lend itself well to consumer sectors. And also quite importantly as China climbs up the value chain it will increasingly seek to outsource to cheaper countries, as it has already started doing in Pakistan, one of the major hubs of the Belt and Road initiative. And given the quite authoritarian system, it will probably do so quite effectively without facing the political backlash that workers in the United States have caused.
- NicoJuicy 7y ago

rolltiide 7y ago

And the IMF is different? Loan, extract resources, saddle with debt. I guess its only a whataboutism when you dont realize that you created a separate higher standard to begin with. edit: meant World Bank and USAID as they don't only lend to members.

NicoJuicy 7y ago
Yes, it is. It's only funds, not resources. Give me some trustworthy resources that say the IMF is both. The Western world has been giving back colonies from a dark past. That's a higher standard. Fyi, the entire world has dark pasts, some more successful than others.
- rolltiide 7y ago
  I made an edit, I meant World Bank and USAID as they don't only lend to member countries. I don't have sources I would quote, but I have enough to be told to look over there and see the cause and effect. Developing countries are saddled with debt, and further crippled. Recipients of the debt are contractors. Austerity measures are needed to repay the debt, and the citizens are the ones burdened by it to help extract the country's natural resources to pay the debt. Even IF an indictment of the World Bank is just crackpot conspiracies, it is a really good instruction manual. China's approach is running the same playbook but may even be more completely benign. Their industries have been entering emerging markets that others have decided not to effectively touch, without invading. Are they also running the regime change playbook too like the US did all last century? Time will tell. They are doing a lot for African markets. They don't need to be an "ally", everyone should be skeptical. Lightyears ahead of what the west is doing though.
  - NicoJuicy 7y ago
    Debt has gone way worse since the Chinese came in for loans though ;) PS. No sources to quote, that's a bummer. Everyone thinks to see all causes and effects. I do not agree with this one. The West has been mostly fair in the digital age, while China doesn't. That's the cause and effect i see.
- close04 7y ago
  Unfortunately the US now mostly has hostages rather than allies. There's always the threat of economic retaliation if the allies don't support US initiatives, no matter how outrageous ("let's start another war, Europe/Middle East/Africa can deal with the humanitarian consequences!"). And as the Snowden leaks have shown, the US is ready to try to cripple the infrastructure of their allies in case this is ever needed (the particular leak was about utilities and power). This is not excusing China's attitude, and it's by no means (much) better. You wouldn't call someone who keeps slapping you over the face a friend just because they could have punched you.
- dangerface 7y ago
  > The Western world has been giving back colonies from a dark past. No they won their independence from wars, most of the colonies that where "given back" won their independence through fighting in world war 1 and 2, there are very few exceptions to this rule.
  - NicoJuicy 7y ago
    Well, Belgium gave back Congo and they did have resistance against colonialism ( rightfully so). But, Congo seems to fail to be independant and corruption seems to have gotten way worse.

Barrin92 7y ago

>It's still an ally, more than the Chinese will ever be. The US has no concept for Africa, because unlike China which uses infrastructure projects and investment as a way to offload its export surplus the US is an overwhelmingly domestic economy. There will never be an American 'Belt and Road' because it just doesn't make much sense for a country that has so little international economic exposure, whenever the US forms alliances it is towards purely political ends. In that sense one could indeed characterise the relationship with China as more stable. No Chinese leader is suddenly going to go isolationist over the next two decades just because they feel like it.

chibg10 7y ago
Even this framing is suspect -- China has very publicly been trying to shift from an export-driven economy to a domestic consumption economy recently. I question how stable the relationship is when that stability rests on the assumption China fails to meet its economic goals.
- waterdownship 7y ago
  Trying to, means they are currently not.
- Barrin92 7y ago
  China is still a country with significant room for industrial expansion with hundreds of millions of people moving from rural to urban areas adding to the manufacturing workforce, the country as a whole has not reached levels of prosperity that would produce a consumer driven economy, and one also needs to account for the heavy influence of export-led sectors on policy-making and the state-led economy which doesn't tend to lend itself well to consumer sectors. And also quite importantly as China climbs up the value chain it will increasingly seek to outsource to cheaper countries, as it has already started doing in Pakistan, one of the major hubs of the Belt and Road initiative. And given the quite authoritarian system, it will probably do so quite effectively without facing the political backlash that workers in the United States have caused.
NicoJuicy 7y ago