Free AI web copilot to create summaries, insights and extended knowledge, download it at here

Abstract

cisms have a fair standing in view of China's quest for global dominance, and the cost of this project on benefiting nations.<a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt-trap_diplomacy">Wikipedia </a>extensively defined Debt trap as: "diplomacy based on debt carried out in the bilateral relations between countries with an often alleged negative intent. The creditor country intentionally extends excessive credit to a debtor country with the alleged intention of extracting economic or political concessions from the debtor country when it becomes unable to honor its debt.The conditions of the loans are often not made public, and the borrowed money commonly pays contractors from the creditor country.”<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/world/asia/china-sri-lanka-port.html">In a similar deal</a>, between Sri Lanka and China, the Sri Lankan government lost its Hambantota port, in December 2017, to China for a lease period of 99 years after an inability to commit to the pay back of loans, running in billions of dollars, procured from China.The case of Sri Lanka is not a remote example, for since the inception of this BRI, countries such as Djibouti, Tajikistan, Maldives, Madagascar, Pakistan, Montenegro and so on, have become dept-ridden. And almost all the debts are based on infrastructural credits sourced from China.Kenya, is regarded as the newest victim of this China's gruesome economic policy. The African nation is at the brink of losing control of the Port of Mombasa, a matter that has to do with national sovereignty, if it fails to meet up with loans from China Exim Bank, according to a report from the auditor general of the African nation.The terms, or clause —or whatever you wish to call it, of the $2.3b loan for the Kenya Railways Corporation (KRC) made it explicit that the port’s assets are to be used as a collateral, and that they are not protected by Kenya’s sovereign immunity, due to a waiver contained in the contract.KRC had accepted the multi-billion-dollar loan in order to build the railway, with construction services provided by China Roads and Bridges Corporation (CRBC), a division of state-owned conglomerate China Communications Construction Company (CCCC); however, the nation seem to be finding it hard, in view of the world-scale economic downturn as a result of COVID-19, to repay the overtly generous loan.Here

Options

is the perfect picture: China gives a loan irresistibly generous, a too-good-to-be-true kind of thing, but adds to it a clause to use a national asset as collateral.Giving a loan with such conditions is a bad on the Chinese government. Reaching out to take them is another bad on the recipient nations; but the generosity always seem irresistible. It seem, from what we’ve seen so far, that the loans are given when the chances for pay back is slim; otherwise, how else can one explain why vulnerable nation’s are chief target.Vulnerability positions you to receive kindness from the kindhearted, but it equally leaves you open to manipulations. The hand that feeds you, ultimately, can rule you.China's economy has been on a perpetual growth trajectory for 50 years and counting, and so also has it's quest to, not just sit at the same table with the big players in the world-power category, but, also, to emerge as chairman of the board; a capital for the world, with power, authority and unimaginable influence.So it is a thing of worry that, while the United States, Russia, Britain and many other nations of the G-7 caliber struggle to wield and maintain influencial powers over nations, close and far, in a more prudent and cautious manner, China is taking a rather radical approach.The concept of a nation having authority over parts, or all of another nation's sovereignty, for me, is a practice unfit for modernity. We heard such things in the days of kings, when nations of the earth fought endless wars, and in the not-so-distant-past years of colonialism.Nevertheless, we see control play out in recent years, in the form of debt traps; in the supply of arms and weapons as a means of eliciting moral indebtedness, wielding control over international economic institutions as an avenue for exerting control over other more vulnerable nations; plus other forms of neocolonialism. And this method of control characterizes the international policies of most developed nations towards developing and undeveloped nations, especially those in the Asia-Pacific region, and Africa.So, while we wonder if Kenya will be able to replay the loan in due time, and whether China will go ahead and assume authority over the port; Nigerians are left with the same worry —will we be able to pay back? Will we really lose a national property if, paradventure, we are unable to?</article></body>

Nigeria Is Next To Lose Its Sovereignty To China.

The legislative arm of the Nigeria government recently discovered a clause in a $400 million loan agreement with the China Exim Bank, which has the potential of yielding some of Nigeria’s sovereignty to China.

The loan was obtained, back in 2018 for Galaxy Backbone, the federal government’s information and communication technology (ICT) agency.

Nigeria’s minister of transportation, Rt. Hon. Rotimi Amaechi, in a press briefing, made certain clarifications regarding the deal that has become rather controversial, two years after it was signed. According to him, the clause only enables China to own the project the loan money will be used for, in the case of a failure on the part of the Nigeria government to repay the loan when due.

This clarification is nerve-soothing. For when it is said that the most populous black nation on earth will yield part of its sovereignty to the Chinese, it is not as if China will haul its presidential seat into Africa and sit upon the power-house of Nigeria. It is not that outright colonialism will be making its way back to the shores of Africa again.

This sound reassuring, until a different perspective is taken, and the issue is viewed with the strategems of the People's Republic in perspective.

In 2013, the Chinese government signed the infamous Belt And Road Initiative (BRI), an infrastructural development strategy aimed at investing in over 71 other countries. In 2017 the Chinese president Xi Jingping lifted the face of the initiative and signed it into the communist constitution, making it obligatory a project for the country to carry out.

Helping 71 nations is in no doubt a philanthropic act, but however virtuous the initiative may seem, many have described it as a Trojan Horse, with analysts accusing China of using the help the project will provide to lay debt traps for benefiting countries.

Rightly so, these criticisms have a fair standing in view of China's quest for global dominance, and the cost of this project on benefiting nations.

Wikipedia extensively defined Debt trap as: "diplomacy based on debt carried out in the bilateral relations between countries with an often alleged negative intent. The creditor country intentionally extends excessive credit to a debtor country with the alleged intention of extracting economic or political concessions from the debtor country when it becomes unable to honor its debt.

The conditions of the loans are often not made public, and the borrowed money commonly pays contractors from the creditor country.”

In a similar deal, between Sri Lanka and China, the Sri Lankan government lost its Hambantota port, in December 2017, to China for a lease period of 99 years after an inability to commit to the pay back of loans, running in billions of dollars, procured from China.

The case of Sri Lanka is not a remote example, for since the inception of this BRI, countries such as Djibouti, Tajikistan, Maldives, Madagascar, Pakistan, Montenegro and so on, have become dept-ridden. And almost all the debts are based on infrastructural credits sourced from China.

Kenya, is regarded as the newest victim of this China's gruesome economic policy. The African nation is at the brink of losing control of the Port of Mombasa, a matter that has to do with national sovereignty, if it fails to meet up with loans from China Exim Bank, according to a report from the auditor general of the African nation.

The terms, or clause —or whatever you wish to call it, of the $2.3b loan for the Kenya Railways Corporation (KRC) made it explicit that the port’s assets are to be used as a collateral, and that they are not protected by Kenya’s sovereign immunity, due to a waiver contained in the contract.

KRC had accepted the multi-billion-dollar loan in order to build the railway, with construction services provided by China Roads and Bridges Corporation (CRBC), a division of state-owned conglomerate China Communications Construction Company (CCCC); however, the nation seem to be finding it hard, in view of the world-scale economic downturn as a result of COVID-19, to repay the overtly generous loan.

Here is the perfect picture: China gives a loan irresistibly generous, a too-good-to-be-true kind of thing, but adds to it a clause to use a national asset as collateral.

Giving a loan with such conditions is a bad on the Chinese government. Reaching out to take them is another bad on the recipient nations; but the generosity always seem irresistible. It seem, from what we’ve seen so far, that the loans are given when the chances for pay back is slim; otherwise, how else can one explain why vulnerable nation’s are chief target.

Vulnerability positions you to receive kindness from the kindhearted, but it equally leaves you open to manipulations. The hand that feeds you, ultimately, can rule you.

China's economy has been on a perpetual growth trajectory for 50 years and counting, and so also has it's quest to, not just sit at the same table with the big players in the world-power category, but, also, to emerge as chairman of the board; a capital for the world, with power, authority and unimaginable influence.

So it is a thing of worry that, while the United States, Russia, Britain and many other nations of the G-7 caliber struggle to wield and maintain influencial powers over nations, close and far, in a more prudent and cautious manner, China is taking a rather radical approach.

The concept of a nation having authority over parts, or all of another nation's sovereignty, for me, is a practice unfit for modernity. We heard such things in the days of kings, when nations of the earth fought endless wars, and in the not-so-distant-past years of colonialism.

Nevertheless, we see control play out in recent years, in the form of debt traps; in the supply of arms and weapons as a means of eliciting moral indebtedness, wielding control over international economic institutions as an avenue for exerting control over other more vulnerable nations; plus other forms of neocolonialism. And this method of control characterizes the international policies of most developed nations towards developing and undeveloped nations, especially those in the Asia-Pacific region, and Africa.

So, while we wonder if Kenya will be able to replay the loan in due time, and whether China will go ahead and assume authority over the port; Nigerians are left with the same worry —will we be able to pay back? Will we really lose a national property if, paradventure, we are unable to?