Macroscope | China’s belt and road initiative may have its flaws, but some critics are taking it too far
- Detractors of China’s ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ have adopted a shrill tone that smacks of vulnerability
- Rivalry should take the high road and not sink to constant attacks on debt trap diplomacy
The charge of “debt trap” diplomacy has been levelled so often against China in connection with its “Belt and Road Initiative” infrastructure lending policies that it has stuck like soiling mud. Yet, as often seems to be the case with China bashing, such charges may be misdirected in many cases.
As some would have it, Beijing has crafted a cunning strategy to lure countries along the belt and road route into borrowing more on projects than they can afford to repay. They are then forced to hand over ownership of the project to China, along with valuable assets such as land or ports.
Taken to its logical (or illogical) conclusion, this would suggest that China could end up owning and controlling potentially thousands of miles of strategic highway, scores of sea ports, power plants and communications networks across the Eurasian continent and halfway around the world.
The classic example cited by China critics is that of port at Hambantota in Sri Lanka which was handed over to China after the government there found itself unable to repay belt and road debt. Numerous other cases have been cited - in Asia, Africa, Latin America and elsewhere.
You don’t have to be a China apologist, however, to find other credible explanations for Chinese “over-lending” to belt and road client countries. And, despite the pitched competition between China and Japan for overseas infrastructure and other contracts some of China’s defenders are Japanese.
