4

I heard on many occasions the political commentators from countries like US, India, Australia etc. accusing China of predatory investment practices called the Debt Trap Diplomacy.

One solution to this practice could be to discourage poor/underdeveloped/developing countries by giving them more options. Poor countries can either go to WB/IMF, invite private companies, or go to China.

The problem with WB/IMF is they put a lot of clauses/conditions which are on most occasions hard to implement for countries with weaker economies/infrastructures. Also, they require a lot of lobbying to the donor countries. Another problem is countries that are criticizing Chinese loans, mostly offer investments by private companies. Those companies prefer risk-free environments. As a result, countries which are, say, wartorn or have poorer infrastructures can't get those investments. These are the reasons why Chinese loans became so popular.

Why don't the USA (and like-minded countries) invest around the world as China does rather than only criticizing China, so that poor countries can have more options?

Improve this question
13
  • 2
    Perhaps because if they compete to offer "debt trap diplomacy", the returns of such debt will go negative, and the beneficiaries of such competition will be the third world who then receive subsidised capital. It may also be that the West already is debt-trapping or otherwise exploiting other countries, and China's arrival is now undercutting Western strategies for exploitation, which is why the West suddenly starts complaining about it. – Steve Jul 7 '20 at 1:13
  • 1
    The United States gives various countries a substantial amount of money (in absolute terms) in the form of foreign aid, but I don't think you tend to hear as much about "investment" (at least by the government). I should also point out that neither India nor the US are disinterested parties in any conversation around the foreign relations of China. – Kevin Jul 7 '20 at 6:52
  • 4
    Does this answer your question? Why is China the only country that build infrastructure for natural resources rights? – user23013 Jul 7 '20 at 10:02
  • 2
    The US does the same thing with the IMF. – Stephan Branczyk Jul 7 '20 at 10:51
  • 2
    Are you suggesting that BrianZ is an agent of the US government cunningly instituting their Stack Exchange political goals? – Obie 2.0 Jul 7 '20 at 23:12
6

What makes you think they don't?

Putting aside the problem of how to define "debt trap diplomacy", China is only ranked fourth (after Japan, the US and Germany) in foreign direct investment (FDI) outflows as of 2019 according to the World Bank. So the US does out-compete China in that regard, investing in other countries at nearly triple the level that China does. Considering that India has roughly 1/5 of China's GDP, its level of foreign investment is also fairly significant.

If China's foreign investment gets more attention in the media, this may simply reflect the perception that China is a rapidly rising power and seems for many to be destined to surpass the United States as the leading world economic power.

EDIT based on edits/comments: 1) China also sends most of its foreign direct investment to rich countries. 2) It's not clear to me what the Magurchara tragedy has to do with the question. All countries seek to reap maximum rewards and minimum cost and will do things that are not in the interest of receiving countries if they are allowed to do so.

Improve this answer
2
  • 1
    @user366312 I would encourage you to edit your question to provide published sources that support these assertions and provide more detail. – Brian Z Jul 7 '20 at 19:20
  • 1
    @user366312 So how would you characterize the "power" China is currently displaying in Hong Kong by imposing new "security" laws in direct violations of the Hong Kong transfer treaty? And I suppose you'd say it was "magic power" that the Chinese used to make coronavirus whistleblowers dissappear – Just Me Jul 7 '20 at 20:43

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .