-
Communist-run Laos has come to the fore after it opened a high-speed rail line with China in 2021 that cost the landlocked country about $6 billion. While the development is seen by many as the start of a ramp up in infrastructure that directly connects China with Southeast Asia, it has raised concerns of a build-up in debt for Laos and other smaller countries.
-
China is by far Laos’ biggest creditor, accounting for about half of the $10.5 billion in external government debt. The tiny nation had $13.8 billion in total public and publicly-guaranteed debt at the end of last year, amounting to 108% of its gross domestic product.
-
Laos’ external debt payments in 2023 reached $950 million, almost double the amount compared to 2022, making the country defer $670 million in principal and interest payments. The World Bank has said in the past that such moves have provided temporary relief in recent years.
-
Laos’ development is seen by many as a further chapter of China’s ‘debt-trap diplomacy’ as Beijing offers developing countries financial loans under often opaque condition, leaving them grappling with repayments while it supports China’s efforts to expand its economic and political influence in foreign countries.
-
For example, Sri Lanka fell into default for the first time in its history back in 2022 after its foreign reserves dwindled. Last month the South Asian nation said it reached final restructuring agreements worth $10 billion, including with an Official Creditor Committee of bilateral lenders and China’s Exim Bank. Sri Lanka’s port, however, is now owned by China.
-
China dismissed the “debt-trap diplomacy” allegations.
I’m not frustrated, but this is simply another whataboutism which is unfortunately widespread here. One posts a report about a debt trap in Laos due to China’s belt and road, and the response is, “yes, but Nato, IMF, 'the West, …” followed by a wall of completely unrelated remarks.
Interesting is that this whataboutism gies only in one direction. When someone criticizes the IMF, World Bank, or any Western institution, I never read, “But autocratic China, …”
I don’t “brush this off like it did nothing”, it’s just off-topic. It’s blantant whataboutism, adding nothing to the topic. It’s a waste of time.
Its not a “whataboutism”. It is contrast. I do the same for articles that talk about western imperialism. Then I mention belt and road or Russian imperialism, to get people like you scream “WHATABOUTISM” because they are then in defence of “their guy”, having their enemy-mentality triggered as their trained response is vomited from their gullet. Academically speaking discussions can branch into relevant areas, in fact, you need that contrast to have a wider perspective on the problem, or else it’s just intellectual suicide and wankery.
It’s not off topic, it is literally relevant to the same subject. If I were to talk about Chinese car manufacturing vs western car manufacturing, then it would be off topic. But no, we’re talking state to state loans through “non governmental” organisations with predatory and exploitative conditions attached. That is inherently relevant to the topic, but from different parts of the world. If you’re trying to say this sub isn’t political, don’t.
What you’re essentially saying is I have to go make an adjacent repost on a western sub and then make it about IMF solely in the title? Each, in their corner, doing their circle jerk? Nuts to that weaksauce.