Trade War with China

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ultra

Junior Member
Well, he does think it's China's fault and went as far as to criticize its leaders for being short-sighted but now, he doesn't know what should have been done. I asked him twice now, what specific terms he thought were predatory and how they should have been revised and he answered neither of the 2 times. "Guide and nurture" doesn't mean anything; the key word is "specific." From what I see, China has already guided and nurtured them by providing them with infrastructure plans and the funding to realize them. So now that he liked your post in which you said it's certainly not China's fault, maybe after thinking about it, he changed his mind on that point. He's welcome to do so.

Yes, I see your point of course, we all know what result would have been better but nobody seems to know what course of action would have been better to achieve that result. I want as much as anyone else to see those countries that China made loans to succeed, but when you are dealing with the bottom of the barrel in competence, you need to know that there will be losses and that kind of incompetence is not readily remedied simply by more financial support.

So once again, I'm with you in wanting to see these nations manage their Chinese loans better and walk out into the modern world with this opportunity that China has generously provided, but where I split with Ultra (before) is that I would never point fault on the Chinese government that this did not happen because like everyone else here, I simply don't know what could have been done better. Some people just don't have their act together. You can drive, pivot, maneuver, outrun 5 defenders to gently put the ball in your teammate's hands as he waits 2 feet under the net and sometimes, he'll still miss the shot. I'm not going to blame my hands on that one.



If I knew the specifics, I would be up there with Xi Jinping advising him how to guide and nurture these countries wouldn't I? I wouldn't be down here arguing with you lots endless on these pointless discussion would I? :D

And let me just say WINNER WINS LOSERS LOSE. It is a loser mentality to let things slide like this - and China is doomed to fail if they continue this way. China really need to take a page out of what US did for the Europe, Japan, South Korea..etc. There was an industrial effort to vertically integrate (off-shoring) US industries with their allied countries which I don't see in this OBOR whatever. China seems to be just content to lend money and expecting return and be done with it (oh and to sell their redundent steel capacity and products).
 

Ultra

Junior Member

You don't really need to dig too deep to see how China allies are now complaining they got the bad end of the deal.


Pakistan rethinks its role in China's Belt and Road plan: Financial Times


ISLAMABAD - Pakistan plans to review or renegotiate agreements reached under China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), joining a growing list of countries questioning the terms of their involvement in Beijing's showpiece infrastructure investment plan, the Financial Times reported on Monday (Sept 10).



Pakistani ministers and advisers told the London-based newspaper that the country's new government will review BRI investments and renegotiate a trade agreement signed more than a decade ago that it says unfairly benefits Chinese companies.


The projects concerned are part of the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
- by far the largest and most ambitious part of the BRI, which seeks to connect Asia and Europe along the ancient Silk Road.




They include a huge expansion of the Gwadar port on Pakistan's south coast, as well as road and rail links and US$30 billion worth of power plants.


"The previous government did a bad job negotiating with China on CPEC - they didn't do their homework correctly and didn't negotiate correctly so they gave away a lot," Mr Abdul Razak Dawood, the Pakistani member of Cabinet responsible for commerce, textiles, industry and investment, told FT.


"Chinese companies received tax breaks, many breaks and have an undue advantage in Pakistan; this is one of the things we're looking at because it's not fair that Pakistan companies should be disadvantaged," he said.




Pakistan's new Prime Minister Imran Khan has established a nine-member committee to evaluate CPEC projects, FT said. It is scheduled to meet for the first time this week and will "think through CPEC - all of the benefits and the liabilities", said Mr Dawood, who sits on the new committee.


"I think we should put everything on hold for a year so we can get our act together," he added. "Perhaps we can stretch CPEC out over another five years or so."


Several other officials and advisers to the Khan government concurred that extending the terms of CPEC loans and spreading projects out over a longer timeframe was the preferred option, rather than outright cancellation, FT reported.


China's foreign minister Wang Yi indicated during a visit to Islamabad last weekend that Beijing could be open to renegotiating its 2006 trade deal with Pakistan.


"CPEC has not inflicted a debt burden on Pakistan," he told reporters. "When these projects get completed and enter into operation, they will unleash huge economic benefits."


Islamabad's second thoughts follow other recent setbacks for BRI, which is seen by many as a bid by China's President Xi Jinping to extend Beijing's influence throughout the world.


Governments in Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Myanmar and elsewhere have already expressed reservations over the onerous terms of Chinese BRI lending and investment.


Pakistan is in the middle of a financial crisis and must decide in the coming weeks whether to turn to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for its 13th bailout in three decades.


Mr Asad Umar, Pakistan's new finance minister, told FT he was evaluating a plan that would allow Islamabad to avoid an IMF programme, which several people close to the government say would involve new loans from China and perhaps also from Saudi Arabia.


Mr Umar and Mr Dawood both said Pakistan would be careful not to offend Beijing even as it takes a closer look at CPEC agreements signed over the past five years. Mr Khan was elected on a platform of anti-corruption and transparency and has pledged to publish details of existing CPEC contracts.


"We don't intend to handle this process like Mahathir," Mr Umar said, referring to the nonagenarian Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad who has warned about the risk of Chinese "neo-colonialism". Malaysia has cancelled three China-backed pipeline projects and put a showpiece BRI project in Malaysia, the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, under review.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Ultra

Junior Member
Malaysia scraps China-backed East Coast Rail Link plan over price
  • Economy minister Azmin Ali admitted the government could not afford hefty interest rates demanded by high-profile ‘Belt and Road’ project
  • Official insisted Kuala Lumpur would ‘still welcome all forms of investment from China’, but consider them on a ‘case-by-case basis’
PUBLISHED : Saturday, 26 January, 2019, 12:08pm
UPDATED : Saturday, 26 January, 2019, 11:32pm

Malaysia’s government has decided to cancel a US$20 billion rail project being built and financed by China after failed attempts to lower the price, a minister said on Saturday, ending months of speculation about the future of the controversial project.

Economic Affairs Minister Azmin Ali said Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad’s government made the decision to scrap the East Coast Rail Link (ECRL) at a cabinet meeting this week.

The minister’s comments on Saturday – a recording of which was made available to This Week in Asia – are the clearest indication yet that the Malaysian government has reached a final decision on the 688km rail link after expressing an interest in cancelling the project last May.

It was to have been built by the China Communications Construction Company and 85 per cent financed by the Export-Import Bank of China.

Saturday’s comments contrasted with the previous pronouncements of Malaysian officials, including Mahathir, who had hedged their positions by suggesting the project could still continue even though they preferred for it to be axed.

There also appears to be differences within the cabinet on the matter, as Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng reacted to Azmin’s comments by suggesting the decision was not final.

Two separate sources with knowledge of the matter confirmed that Azmin had expressed the government’s final position: that the existing contract with CCCC would be terminated.

The decision is likely to mean Malaysia will incur a cancellation penalty, the sources said.

93a8d3a2-2119-11e9-9b66-f8d7b487d426_1320x770_170530.JPG



Azmin said in the end, the project was just too expensive for the government, which was left with huge debts after taking over from the scandal-tainted administration of former prime minister Najib Razak last year.


“The cabinet decided to scrap the project because the cost of development is too high, and we do not have the financial capability at the moment,” Azmin told reporters, according to a recording released by his office.


“If this project is not cancelled, the interest that will need to be paid by the government is almost half a billion ringgit (US$121 million),” he said. “We cannot bear this right now, therefore the project needs to be cancelled without affecting our good relations with China. We still welcome all forms of investment from China but we will look into the matter on a case-by-case basis.”

When the project was awarded to CCCC in 2016 by Mahathir’s now-deposed predecessor, observers hailed it as one of the cornerstones of President Xi Jinping’s “Belt and Road Initiative”.

28dd281e-211b-11e9-9b66-f8d7b487d426_1320x770_170530.JPG


The issue has been in the spotlight since several news reports – citing anonymous sources – said the closely watched project had been axed.

However, government officials including Mahathir and Lim, the finance minister, refused to confirm if it had.

Upon his shock election victory in May last year, the 93-year-old prime minister identified the ECRL as one of several big-ticket China-linked infrastructure projects he planned to cancel because he felt they were too expensive and unnecessary.

As negotiations stretched on, Mahathir in early January suggested the project could carry on, if on a much smaller scale.

e677e962-211c-11e9-9b66-f8d7b487d426_1320x770_170530.JPG


That plan failed, judging by Azmin’s confirmation of the cancellation on Saturday.

Najib, who offered the project without tender, has repeatedly said the Mahathir government would be making a mistake by cancelling the deal.

He has challenged Mahathir to make public the terms of the contract, which he says are favourable.

According to the former leader, the terms offered by the Chinese Export-Import Bank are highly competitive, with an interest rate of 3.25 per cent protected from exchange rate fluctuations and a seven-year deferment on payments.

Mahathir’s Pakatan Harapan bloc believes Najib, now facing dozens of criminal charges for his alleged role in the multibillion-dollar 1MDB scandal, endorsed Beijing-linked projects because of his enthusiasm to move the country closer to the Asian superpower.

Chinese companies bought assets from the 1MDB state fund in 2015 as the extent of its losses – allegedly through plunder – were made public.

Reviewing Chinese-linked projects was one of 10 things Mahathir’s government promised to do within the first 100 days of coming to power last year.

Following his meeting with Xi in Beijing last year, Mahathir said he had the assent of the Chinese government to review the projects, which he said Xi understood Malaysia needed to do.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Nutrient

Junior Member
Registered Member
Pakistan rethinks its role in China's Belt and Road plan: Financial Times

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The governments of both Pakistan and China on Monday refuted an article published in the Financial Times (FT) which had alleged that Pakistan is looking to renegotiate its position in Beijing's Belt-Road Initiative (BRI).

Looks like the Financial Times article is more propaganda from London.
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
If I knew the specifics, I would be up there with Xi Jinping advising him how to guide and nurture these countries wouldn't I? I wouldn't be down here arguing with you lots endless on these pointless discussion would I? :D

And let me just say WINNER WINS LOSERS LOSE. It is a loser mentality to let things slide like this - and China is doomed to fail if they continue this way. China really need to take a page out of what US did for the Europe, Japan, South Korea..etc. There was an industrial effort to vertically integrate (off-shoring) US industries with their allied countries which I don't see in this OBOR whatever. China seems to be just content to lend money and expecting return and be done with it (oh and to sell their redundent steel capacity and products).

Uh, no. If you knew the specifics, you would be literate and up to date on the news. These are not back-door negotiations; these are laid out in the news. The articles cite the amount, the percentage, the projects it's supposed to cover, how many years the loan is over and sometimes, the consequences for inability to meet checkpoints. That you didn't do any specific research but only spent your time criticizing the result shows me that you are not knowledgeable on the topic, biased against the Chinese government, and like to pretend that you are wise.

You don't have any idea who will fail and who will succeed; it is once again, your uneducated guess and poor attempt at looking wise. Even other members who were kinder than myself have pointed out several things to you but you could not understand them; you just keep regurgitating your same defeated points over and over again as if they were never addressed.

Allies turn and change, sometimes in the course of a single election. It is not smart to put your own blood and sweat to develop countries that may be with you or against you next year while those resources can be spent developing China itself. These loans were made as a compromise between that idea and the idea that potential allies should be up-lifted. So these countries have a good chance (which they agreed to take) and guidance, but if they fail, the consequences aren't China's alone to bear.

When the US pours money into countries, they don't always turn into allies; oftentimes, like with Pakistan, they take the aid and the US loses them nonetheless (or they continue to bait for more money). Europe, Japan, South Korea are examples of countries/regions that currently rely on the US militarily for defense. Without that live need, they would turn for their own interests regardless of how much the US invested in them. China should expect no different. Allies are temporary; self-investment is permanent. Allies side with strength; when China is too powerful for the US to contend within Asia, even Japan will jump ship and turn to China for self-preservation. Buying friends with money doesn't work; being strong works.

And on top of all this, the vast majority of the nations that have taken China's loans have done well with them. This is a largely successful effort to expand Chinese influence and trade. Emphasizing the 7 countries that have encountered problems is really like saying 7 students dropped out of MIT so MIT is a failure.
 

Nutrient

Junior Member
Registered Member
Malaysia scraps China-backed East Coast Rail Link plan over price

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Malaysia high-speed rail cancellation a blow to Japan's 'shinkansen' exports

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Looks like Malaysia's newly-elected government is cutting costs all over.

There has been talk that the high-speed rail line (to be built by the Japanese) has only been postponed, not cancelled. But I'll believe the line will be revived when I see it.

Do you have any more "debt trap" propaganda?
 

Gatekeeper

Brigadier
Registered Member
Uh, no. If you knew the specifics, you would be literate and up to date on the news. These are not back-door negotiations; these are laid out in the news. The articles cite the amount, the percentage, the projects it's supposed to cover, how many years the loan is over and sometimes, the consequences for inability to meet checkpoints. That you didn't do any specific research but only spent your time criticizing the result shows me that you are not knowledgeable on the topic, biased against the Chinese government, and like to pretend that you are wise.

You don't have any idea who will fail and who will succeed; it is once again, your uneducated guess and poor attempt at looking wise. Even other members who were kinder than myself have pointed out several things to you but you could not understand them; you just keep regurgitating your same defeated points over and over again as if they were never addressed.

Allies turn and change, sometimes in the course of a single election. It is not smart to put your own blood and sweat to develop countries that may be with you or against you next year while those resources can be spent developing China itself. These loans were made as a compromise between that idea and the idea that potential allies should be up-lifted. So these countries have a good chance (which they agreed to take) and guidance, but if they fail, the consequences aren't China's alone to bear.

When the US pours money into countries, they don't always turn into allies; oftentimes, like with Pakistan, they take the aid and the US loses them nonetheless (or they continue to bait for more money). Europe, Japan, South Korea are examples of countries/regions that currently rely on the US militarily for defense. Without that live need, they would turn for their own interests regardless of how much the US invested in them. China should expect no different. Allies are temporary; self-investment is permanent. Allies side with strength; when China is too powerful for the US to contend within Asia, even Japan will jump ship and turn to China for self-preservation. Buying friends with money doesn't work; being strong works.

And on top of all this, the vast majority of the nations that have taken China's loans have done well with them. This is a largely successful effort to expand Chinese influence and trade. Emphasizing the 7 countries that have encountered problems is really like saying 7 students dropped out of MIT so MIT is a failure.
Oh boy! I guess he didn't bothered to read my comments! I'm speachless. I give up.
 

Jono

Junior Member
Registered Member
In a certain way, I could understand the feelings and anxiety of the western powers. They don't quite understand how China works, and are not keen to understand the history and culture of China, so these breed suspicions and distrust. On the other hand, the Chinese people had really suffered terribly from foreign invasions and humility in the past century, and so are determined not to let history repeat itself. Hence you can see so many Chinese scientists devoting their lives, and efforts selflessly to advance the cause of their Motherland.
And to make matters worse, this new usurper, a fast rising "authoritarian" country that is China, does not share the same political system or ideology of the western worlds, and coupling with the relative decline of the latter, antagonistic sentiments are understandably prevalent among the western people.
Therefore I suggest that we Chinese people should be confident in ourselves and our system, and remain calm and composed, and not to get upset easily in the face of criticisms, whether fair or otherwise.
We also need to know that our country is a big elephant, and surrounding countries naturally harbour a fear towards us. Therefore it is important for OBOR to be transparent and really beneficial to the involved countries, to attract love, and to dispel fear and suspicions.
When the going gets tough, the tough gets going.
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
"Authoritarian" is relative. Authoritarian is demanding a nation not to develop technology because they don't trust you as a race. That's why they want to stop Made in China 2025. They get to develop technology without restriction but somehow they think it's their right to restrict the Chinese. Which is worse Chinese authoritarianism that's restricted to China or white supremacist authoritarianism that they want the world to accept. They don't see their authoritarianism. It's like judging Hitler only on how he treated his fellow Nazis and not by how he treats others. I'm sure he was very nice to and protected the rights of his fellow Nazis. Judge them by how they say people are innocent until proven guilty not by the reality that you're guilty to them until you prove yourself innocent. They fear China will abuse technology that doesn't even exist yet so they want to stop it from ever happening. You're guilty first. But that's even a cover to scare people because ultimately it's about white people who must be in authority. Even you're most ardent liberal would rather have the white Western world in authority because then how can they dictate to the world what's more important like when athlete Bruce Jenner transformed into a woman, all of the sudden there were calls in the US that China must deal with transgender rights immediately. Pay attention to blanket unspecified racism by Chinese to Africans while ignoring how unarmed black men get shot and killed by police in the US. Americans are fed up with identity politics yet racism is identity politics. What I just wrote is going to raise some eyebrows because they try to frame US fears over China as something legitimate when it's all just racism as usual. They don't like political correctness? Well just like identity politics, they've been doing it long before and they don't want people to see what's really motivating this fear of China that is just plain old racism as usual. Let's not call it what is really is. Yeah they can point to a race they say they love to counter but I guarantee it's someone who they conquered and forced their culture onto them. In other words they're not a threat to their control.
 

Jono

Junior Member
Registered Member
"Authoritarian" is relative. Authoritarian is demanding a nation not to develop technology because they don't trust you as a race. That's why they want to stop Made in China 2025. They get to develop technology without restriction but somehow they think it's their right to restrict the Chinese. Which is worse Chinese authoritarianism that's restricted to China or white supremacist authoritarianism that they want the world to accept. They don't see their authoritarianism. It's like judging Hitler only on how he treated his fellow Nazis and not by how he treats others. I'm sure he was very nice to and protected the rights of his fellow Nazis. Judge them by how they say people are innocent until proven guilty not by the reality that you're guilty to them until you prove yourself innocent. They fear China will abuse technology that doesn't even exist yet so they want to stop it from ever happening. You're guilty first. But that's even a cover to scare people because ultimately it's about white people who must be in authority. Even you're most ardent liberal would rather have the white Western world in authority because then how can they dictate to the world what's more important like when athlete Bruce Jenner transformed into a woman, all of the sudden there were calls in the US that China must deal with transgender rights immediately. Pay attention to blanket unspecified racism by Chinese to Africans while ignoring how unarmed black men get shot and killed by police in the US. Americans are fed up with identity politics yet racism is identity politics. What I just wrote is going to raise some eyebrows because they try to frame US fears over China as something legitimate when it's all just racism as usual. They don't like political correctness? Well just like identity politics, they've been doing it long before and they don't want people to see what's really motivating this fear of China that is just plain old racism as usual. Let's not call it what is really is. Yeah they can point to a race they say they love to counter but I guarantee it's someone who they conquered and forced their culture onto them. In other words they're not a threat to their control.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top