How China Stole A Giant Port In Sri Lanka
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 มิ.ย. 2024
- Thank you Squarespace for sponsoring this video. Check out Squarespace: squarespace.com/megaprojects for 10% off on your first purchase of a website/domain.
Got a beard? Good. I've got something for you: beardblaze.com
Simon's Social Media:
Twitter: / simonwhistler
Instagram: / simonwhistler
This video is #sponsored by Squarespace.
Love content? Check out Simon's other TH-cam Channels:
Biographics: / @biographics
Geographics: / @geographicstravel
Warographics: / @warographics643
SideProjects: / @sideprojects
Into The Shadows: / intotheshadows
TopTenz: / toptenznet
Today I Found Out: / todayifoundout
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
Business Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
Casual Criminalist: / thecasualcriminalist
Decoding the Unknown: / @decodingtheunknown2373
![[Live สด] การออกรางวัลสลากกินแบ่งรัฐบาล งวดวันที่ 16 มิถุนายน 2567](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/P3WkqO9gKjo/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you Squarespace for sponsoring this video. Check out Squarespace: squarespace.com/megaprojects for 10% off on your first purchase of a website/domain.
How the USA stole and killed million's upon million's of human beings for greed ..Try one about that Baldy
Make a video how the west stole the whole land of PALESTINE
Dude, why you keep running NATO propeganda?
one important fact you missed out. what happened was anticipated a year before CCP signed the deal with Sri Lanka in Chinese Social media.
@@TheGrinningVikingBud if your going play defense for the CCP at least learn how to spell 🙄....50 cents awarded
Whatever the view on whether this was some nefarious scheme or just bad judgement on SLs part, the very simple glaring fact exists - a bank doesn't lend money without some level of proof it's going to get the money back. Lending 1/3rd of a countries GDP, on the back of 2 studies that said it was a bad idea, would be contrary to the best interests of any bank. That's the bottom line - BRI deliberately loaned money to someone who had no plan or means to reasonably pay it back. Mostly we call these people loan sharks.
Just like the World Bank and IMF? WESTERN Institutions but of course just easy to blame China isnt it?
Loan Sharks want their money + profit, not your stuff and thus won't lend you a million dollars since there's no way you'd ever pay that back.
China OTOH had a very specific end goal in building the port for its own purposes and then seizing as much sovereignty over it as they could with their unpayable 'loan'.
That was probably the plan.
The return on investment the Chinese bank wants is mainly de-risking from western controlled trade routes and ports, right? It would make it easier, faster, safer and cheaper since the location is excellent. It would also be in China's benefit if Sri Lanka is prosperous and has good industry, businesses etc. That would increase the overall value of the entire supply chain.
China also doesn't really care about getting money back as it, like any country that creates its own money, it can just print more. What has real value is physical stuff. Like a port. But that only has value when it's profitable, which it currently isn't. Instead of leaving Sri Lanka with an giant debt and an useless port they take responsibility. 99 years sounds like a very long time but in the time span of nations it's not a long time at all. If that ports becomes busy and very profitable in the next 100~200 years it will be a major boon for the Sri Lanka economy and its people.
It is also import to remember that China didn't *TAKE* the port they paid for it. Sri Lanka could have used that 1+ billion to pay of a good chunk of that debt but didn't. Likely because the port and the cost of servicing that debt is only 5% all the debt it has.
So now it has 5% more debt but also a modern port in a prime location along major trading routes. That is generally now how loan sharks leave their victims now do they?
Agree. But frankly, they basically said, in the contract, the port was the collateral.
Sorry, it would've happened to an individual that can't repay their loans as well.
And yes, China did give a bigger loan than what the banks might have given. But even loan sharks have their place.
The places that stopped them, hurt the local economy.
The interest is that high due to the risks they take.
That's how it works.
for anyone who don't know, sri lanka just passed a bill that gives the government the power to control all social media content, and is in the process of snatching people from homes and "rehabilitating" about 1000 people a day.
I didn't know. Sounds quite bad:
"The bill will also create an “Online Safety Commission,” a five-member committee appointed by the president, to “issue directives to persons who communicate prohibited statements under this Act to stop the communication of any such statements.”"
The world let them get away with a potential genocide in the last 15 years, their government already disappeared in a hand basket long ago.
That should be a topic for a video
Sounds like a China move.
@@01oo011 you can't buy a router brand other than Huawei with srilankan ISP's so yeah
1:15 - Chapter 1 - Belt & road
2:15 - Mid roll ads
3:20 - Back to the video
7:00 - Chapter 2 - The port
10:05 - Chapter 3 - The theft
14:15 - Chapter 4 - Alternative views
Thank you ik not everyone appreciates you but i do
The Habantota port and Airport were vanity projects. The feasibility studies were correct in that the area, which is basically a salt marsh is unsuitable for a port. During the ports initial days, sand kept building up in the inlet and the coastal sand flow was affected causing beaches all around the island to deplete.
We screwed ourselves and China took advantage of it.
The airport is a grain and onion storage.
Another failed project with Chinese support is the Lotus Tower.
Hambantota’s purposes was to circumvent India, who locked up development at Trincomalee via a Defense pact some 30 years ago to counter US influence. India wants Trinco because you can make a Singapore out of it, it had deep water, it is the root chakra of the subcontinent, and historically it jumpstarts the establishment of Kingdoms on Lanka- he who controls Kona, controls Lanka.
That said, expect India to make Lanka to them what Ukraine is to Russia and Taiwan is to China in the future. They’ve been playing the long game, and George Soros rug pulling the LKR by liquidating dollars creating the 2022 crisis the same way he created the 1997 Thai Baht Collapse and 1992 British Pound collapse plays into it. A weakened LKR will result in the question of INR adoption to be raised due to stability and strength. To give up LKR would mean giving up economic and financial sovereignty and in turn the Lanka. The final nail to the coffin of the illusionary independence thanks to the Common Wealth technicalities embedded within the constitution.
You screwed yourselves when you got in bed with IMF, World bank and Paris club.. and consequently lost your sovereignty. you will never get out of poverty until you get back your sovereignty.
"Win Win" means Beijing wins twice....
.
Which is infuriating because they staff them with Chinese employees.
No one forced them to take on so much debt
@@user-hm9is5ke9i Is the drug user or the drug cartel at fault. Is it the loan shark or the debtor. You can make a thousand analogies the reality is that they both suck but usually the supply is the worse one. (That would be the drug dealer/cartel which is China in this scenario).
They knew they were taking advantage of someone desperate.
@@user-hm9is5ke9i hello comunist
It's a Nguyen-Nguyen situation.
Hmm, the port didn't succeed economically due to expanding too quickly? Its almost as if the reports from two different companies had predicted such a result.
Yeah, but when 9 out of 10 professionals say the idea is stupid, don't you wanna listen to what that 1 other person said? Lol
evry single sri lankan port is earning massively, colombo is still the highest earning and only deep port in whole south asian region, hambantota port is growing day by day, already they are building more terminals bcz its not enough , so whats the problem?
@@skipper2594that’s why 44 ships visited this port in 1 year ?
That’s growing fast.
@@gund89123 did your mom gave you those data 😂😂😂.
hambantota RO -RO shipments up by 25% last year, it s curruntly expanding the capacity there, colombo port is even in 2024, the busiest and highest earing port in whole south asia and its growing more and more bcz of red sea c0nflict...
So better learn from facts and global news instead of your illiterated m0m.
Lets see a somewhat similar situation.China bought Greek and Portugese stakes in their main ports when they were both almost bankrupt.Then when the EU wanted to reduce Chinese companies influence in EU, both vetoed that.Thats how it works.Is there a specific reason the duration of the lease is 99 years btw?Because the US made the UK lease ports and airfields to em, also for 99 years in WW2 in exchange for 50 destroyers.
(just a light comment)
Perhaps the same reason shops say $99.99? It sounds better than a 100?
@@movingforward3030 I feel its a legal thing, maybe at 100 deal becomes permanent?
Pretty big upside for the UK. Continuing to exist
What was the alternative? EU during the financial crisis wanted to buy the infrastructure for peanuts
Like they did with Greek railways
Now days the Greeks railways are belonging to a Italian company and are in decline, thinks are worse than during the crisis - last year we had an accident with 50 dead mostly teenagers because the owners of the company decided to cut costs by removing most of security measures
On the other had Cosco leased Piraeus port for 99 years, they updated the infrastructure bringing income in the country by import tariffs and unemployment in the area dropped in all time low
The port city is revitalized and on average the people working for the port are getting higher wages than the national average
@@Pavlos_Charalambous Never said there was a better alternative,just saying if China comes to "save" your ass, they expect your cooperation in many other areas after.Same goes for the US ofcourse.
A successful port needs to have a reason to offload products there and or load product there. This port isnt in a location for either.
Being along a popular shipping route means nothing. Its not like ships stop for meals or diesel
Same thought crossed my mind, but many ships do reload a lot of cargo, loading cargo that's going in the right general direction, and offloading it when the ship route and direction of the destination of that cargo separates, and there's a port where it makes sense to do that. It's not as good a reason to stop there as ports where significant amounts of goods starts or ends it's journeys on water, but the fundamental idea isn't quite as flawed as it might seem based on relatively small import and export to and from Sri Lanka itself. Remember, they already had ports, even one that was bigger, I doubt they made the investments because the ports they already had were severely underutilized.
Makes for a great Chinese naval base, though...............
Transshipment Hub, where you can change the BL documentation, change CO .. 😂
There are many other Logistics items that you can provide to exporters , Shipping lines..
That just adds transit time, and transshipments can be done at any port. The problem with Hambantota is that Sri Lankans do not import or export enough to make the port worth operating and marketing for port calls.
There is a reason, capacity; think HS2 in the UK. Freight handling infrastructure was close to capacity. Now toss in some political speculation and if SL were to declare itself a freeport (remember when Hong Kong was one?) and the allure becomes more practical long-term.
A similar thing was done in both Darwin Port and Newcastle ports in Australia, the so called Conservatives in Australia leased the Darwin Port for 99 years at five million dollars a year..... noting that the year before the lease the port made a 17 million dollar net profit...... 50% of the Newcastle Port was sold as well. The Federal Government minister that was instructed to look at the Darwin Port deal ...... went to work for the Chinese Company immediately after he handed down his decision and left Parliament.
Lol revisionist history the Port made a loss for 27 years and was to be shutdown.
Still shouldn't have leased it to the Chinese but let it go into bankruptcy
Disgusting! So disappointing from an Aussie
Darwin Port:
Following the 2012 election of the Country Liberal party, the Territory sought to raise funds for unspecified purposes through the sale of public assets, including the Territory Insurance Office and Darwin Port.[2] In order to accomplish the latter, the Territory made a request for expressions of interest in late 2014 and early 2015, resulting in thirty-three companies signalling their interest.[3]
In October 2015, the Chinese-owned Landbridge Group won the bid for a lease of Port Darwin. The then Country Liberal-controlled Northern Territory Government under then Chief Minister Adam Giles granted the company a 99-year lease for A$506 million.[4][5] The contract price is more than 25 times the profit the port had earned over the preceding two years, and Landbridge also promised to invest A$200 million over a 25-year period. - Wikipedia.
So its not that China just came in it was a bid between 33 interested parties
Newcastle Port:
The port was the first commercial export port in Australia and is the world's busiest coal export port. Annual exports of coal from Newcastle exceeded A$15 billion in 2012-13. Newcastle berthed more than 2,200 ships a year in 2012-13.
In April 2014 Premier Mike Baird and Treasurer Andrew Constance announced that a "a consortium which comprises Hastings Funds Management and Chinese state-owned China Merchants" had successfully bid $1.75 billion for a 98-year lease of the Port of Newcastle. - Wikipedia
$15 million a year * 98 years is 1.47 billion. And with the world moving away from coal it might very well be a loss in terms of profit for the Chinese once the 98 years are done.
Also don't forget. They don't OWN the ports outright. They are leasing the ports. These ports will come up for bidding again and other nations can bid again. Not China's fault that the US/EU and others didn't want to invest more.
Don't get mad at China because they beat you at your own game 😂
25x the profit of the previous 2 years, means 50x the annual profits, for a 99 year lease? They better hope they can increase the profits. Because otherwise, just looking at the NPV, this would be a money losing deal.
Rambøll is a Danish company, not a British company.
Thanks for sharing.
Yeah, the clue is in the spelling. :)
"how'd you feel if your country drowned itself in debt in-"
"say no more, I'm American."
At least our money is kinda sorta going to good use.
Okay maybe only a little bit of it but at least we don't have Chinese companies taking our ports.... They are only moving into Bitcoin farms in Texas.
... I'm just going to shut up
@@JesseJamez55 no healthcare, mental illness left untreated, insecure borders, drugs flooding the streets, homeless veterans, ass infrastructure and public transport. But at least we got money for bombs.
Oh yes, quite right, that makes it all better then. Take more, why take everything if needed! Someone said it’s kinda sorta going to GOOD-THINGS! I was only going to waste it all on useless bad things.@@JesseJamez55
@@JesseJamez55 Yeah the debt is still reasonable since it's used around the world
Getting a modern port for a lease of only 99 years honestly sounds like a bargain. Meanwhile China carries the majority of the risk since it was their money they loaned out and now as the port isn't attracting the shipping it's expect most of those costs are for China as well.
This would have been another story if China had build this and then left them with the mess and pressured them into repaying. But they didn't.
The port is literally one of the fastest growing RO-RO transshipment hubs.
@@shogun_68 hahahhahah fcking propaganda you are! Hahahahahah bot
It's because "China-Bad" Just type in China on google or TH-cam and you will be FLOODED with anti-China garbage
@@KZrIsEating exactly the point. China is the largest economy when you look at GDP(PPP). Why would you not give to the Chinese and cash in. We benefit from skill transfer and greater employment.
I'm sri Lankan been dying for someone to cover this topic so thank you.
I am also dying to ask a Sri Lankan, why in hell u borrow money that u can't afford to pay back
Have you seen the port? What do you, as a local, think about it?
I have not seen the port in person but know a lot of people who have and by all accounts it's very impressive but everyone I talked to also said the same thing that it was useless and a drain on Sri Lanka
dont lie your name shows you are an indian
I am also asking u how sri lanka payed them before , the reason to be unpayable is bcz of pandemic which caused economic downfall to the world, while big countries barely managed the economy at that time , little countries couldnt manage it , do you know almost 25% of sri lankan exports go to usa,and usa limited many of those bcz usa was the most hit country by the pandemic, so SL evenues fallen , even tourism economy which is filling 5.6% of sri lankan GDP was totally vanished bcz people stop traveling , so they lost revenues to pay loans ,before 2021. they payed every single loan as It goes, Im asking why are you d 0 m b enough to ask a question like that@@Hkim185
China also owns the Darwin Port in Australia. They got it on a 99 year lease with the local government going around the National government.
It was a massive controversy at the time and has effected USA/AUS relations as USA use the port for loading their equipment.
Yes it was and remains controversial however it was negotiated well before the BRI and its activity elsewhere. And as such it is a commercial lease excluding military operations.
@@coujo65 China will bring military vessels there eventually. You’re incredibly naive if you believe what the CCP says.
when it did by sri lanka its debt trap
when it did by australia (darwin port for 99 lease to china) its business woow wostern theories
@@coujo65 The hambantota port is also a commercial lease. Military vessels are not allowed without the SL government's approval.
The USA's response has been to try and debt trap Australians with 300 billion dollars of submarines.
It's a port where no world traffic of cargo ship comes , still the Chinese will use it as a off-shore base for military purposes and not for free & commercial or private purposes
More likely as a place for the Chinese locust fleet of fishing boats. This way they have somewhere to dump the fish that is closer to the Indian Ocean fishing grounds.
They're obviously going to try to get cargo ships to come. Until the day they start constructing a massive military base, it makes more sense to make it successful commercial and make some money. Today's communist China is all about making capitalist profits.
It will incur losses for a long time but nobody knows how things will develop during 99 years. It's just a reckless bet, but it is still better than spending that money to buy the US debt.
the srilankans have agency to deny chinese military ship and the chinese won't impose a foreign base on a country neighbouring india who frankly have excellent relation with china so your whole point is gone
Countries don't have allies, they have interests. To believe that Sri Lanka was stupid is just demeaning. To think China is totally benign, is naiive. Two countries entered into an aggreement, knowing it's scale. Later, the same two countries entered into another deal when things didn't work out as expected. China likely came out better off, since they have more power and less to lose, but Sri Lanka had plenty of opportunity to make rhe most of it's initial construction.
Demeaning or not the people in power there who surely stole their take from the budget are most definitely stupid. Imagine being the leader of a whole ass country and selling out a giant portion of it to an expansionist neighbor so you can steal a portion of the budget to hide off shore somewhere. That sounds pretty stupid to me for sure
Consider the fact the president and PM of Sri Lanka who sign on the deal, ran from Sri Lanka and are now living in Singapore with millions of dollars in the pocket, BTW they flew to Singapore in Chinese military aircraft
China is our friend 🖤🇱🇰
Always informative a good watch, per the usual... However, the matraca during the b/w "old timey" pics is outrageous!
I love these videos, Simon Whistler I think you're awesome, I've never noticed it before, but for some reason the music seems to be particularly loud in this video
People act like the port is Chinese sovereign territory when all that happened was a chinese company took over management of the port. It is like claiming Barcelona is a British port because Hutchison (the company managing it) is British. This is dumb fearmongering.
There isn’t really a distinction between Chinese private venture and Chinese government operations. The private corpos do the governments bidding, and the government ensures that private ventures are in the strategic interests of the ccp.
stupid people all around......they believe just like chinese owned any thing out side of china particularly in Anglo countries that the Chinese owner don't have to follow local law. The fear that chinese owner will some how ship that farm land back to china...
@@noping4100 According to whom?
I find the Laos railway deal even shadier. China have somehow got Laos to pay for a railway they don't need that only really benefits China with imports into Laos and Thailand and next to nothing going the other way.
The British company isn’t doing the bidding of the government or the crown the way Chinese ones do the CCP’s
I once tried to explain this situation to another person,
Their solution was to simply build another port beside it.
100% Honest
pure genius
The sheer geniusness is hard for me to comprehend
Probably someone with an MBA...
I got a real "engineer" vibe from him. He just couldn't understand why they couldn't just build another, to replace it.@@timmy7201
100%@@djsonicc
Ramboll isn't British, the company was founded in Denmark in 1945.
There is a subsidiary in the UK, maybe he is refering to that one.
If all these ships are passing by, just why would they suddenly have a reason to stop…?
You must be single male. Bathroom breaks.
Free Window Cleaning
Exchange BL, Certificate of Origin , LoL.. ya don't know how Maritime Logistic works dude..
With knowing nothing about maritime shipping. I imagine more stops means they could carry less fuel and more cargo? But again I know nothing
15:51 just wanted to add constructive feedback, the music audio is bit loud in this segment, drowns out the voice over some.
Great topic, much appreciated for the content as always eh!
~a random canadian viewer
11:50 - No arm was twisted. The government knew fully well (or should have known) what the terms and conditions were when they agreed to loan the money.
Found the ccp party member.
As someone who is pretty familiar with this project as it was used as a case study in one of my econ classes, it's pretty shocking the lengths to which Simon and his editors went to distort and frankly, flat out lie, about this project. Either they don't know any better and used terrible sources rather than simply reading some peer-reviewed academic papers about it (for which there exist several), or they did have good sources and decided to distort it on purpose...
@@cassius_eu5970it would be helpful if you can what is exactly incorrect then just say Simon and company are lying.
@@SEAZNDragon... learn to do your own research. It can easily be found using Google.
@@cassius_eu5970 that's usually the style of these videos though. Exploring the most "popular" stance in the main segment and alternatives in smaller segments. In this video it is quite short 14:13
Also, I think you meant Simon and his writers. Editors just put images and transitions in. It's not a book.
1:12 Belt and road
3:20 end of sponsorship
6:58 the port
10:02 the theft
14:12 alternative views
Legend ❤
It would be nice if youtubers bothered to do chapters anymore....
Isnt this literally how france and britain wrestled control of the Suez Canal from Egypt? History may not repeat itself. But it doea rhyme.
The port was sold because it wasn't an economic success. How exactly is that like the Seiz canal
This is simply a case of no party doing their homework causing all parties to lose money
All you have to do to know if it was a ruse, is just look at the Chinese ships using the port and ask if any foreign ships use it now?
So the question I have... No ship was using it... Ok, but why? did they ever thought that one through?
What is the nationality of most of the ships going through that region (I honestly don't know, just wondering)?
And now that a Chinese company owns 70% of the port, what has changed? why would ships now suddenly use the port (if there even are any ships using it now)?
It's half way from China to the Atlantic
China could use it for its major fish plundering around the world
99 years is a long time. When Britain was building up Cape Town (South Africa) very few(if anyone) was stopping. Nothing much coming in or out. Eventually it became of the more important coaling & supply stops prior to the Suez Cannel.
That is the main fear. We don't know if the port will or will not become important as India import/export market grows.
@hugmynutus the problem with Sri Lanka is if you unload goods there, where can they go?
Only Sri Lanka
To make a busy port it should have been on indias mainland
Trucks could transport goods all over India
But they have their own ports anyway
I'm sure this will serve bricks nations. They all have something the other needs. Grain. Oil. Etc...
Can be easily converted to support Chinese Navy
If you ask for loan or mortgage from the bank. They give your loan or mortgage. Wot happen if you can't pay back . Than the bank debt trap???
But the banks make sure you can pay it back before giving you any money.
@@phamtoilon ever heard of subprime mortgage crisis? Similarly Who could knew the port wasn't popular and lost money after it was built?
That's what's been going on with student loans. It's predatory.
I am also asking u how sri lanka payed them before , the reason to be unpayable is bcz of pandemic which caused economic downfall to the world, while big countries barely managed the economy at that time , little countries couldnt manage it , do you know almost 25% of sri lankan exports go to usa,and usa limited many of those bcz usa was the most hit country by the pandemic, so SL evenues fallen , even tourism economy which is filling 5.6% of sri lankan GDP was totally vanished bcz people stop traveling , so they lost revenues to pay loans ,before 2021. they payed every single loan as It goes, Im asking why are you d 0 m b enough to ask a question like that
@@prastagus32 studies stated that the project was a bad idea. Still the SL govt and Chinese counterpart continued anyway
If I remember correctly this port was offered to India, but declined citing that this port will not make any profit and thats exactly that happened.
Would nr be surprised if they try that in SA. Capetown being strategic in shipping lanes
I counter your question at the end with a question of my own.
If a country like the US or the UK did this, what do you think the world would say? Because I could almost guarantee it wouldn't be positive.
Oh Hell no! We'd be called imperialist! Or any name you could think of. Because the Chinese aren't European...they get the benefit of the doubt. Sounds like a bit of racism going on. It does happen. Refresh my memory Asians...don't you all have a derogatory for us derived from the slang term for a person from France? Felang or something like that?
how do you guarantee that?
This wasn’t on warographics? What is this, a crossover episode? 😂
Do a vid on the first trucks ever build
China simply made deal with a win- win scenario for them. If the port succeeds, China gets good friends near India while making bank on their investment and gaining a solid reputation. If it fails, China gets to make Sri Lanka dependent on them while getting a port which they could use to turn a profit. It is not a debt trap. It was simply a great deal for China. Great deals are illegal or morally wrong if they are not coerced.
It was completely unneeded, it is certainly a debt trap. What kind of dipshit is like yeah 40 some odd ships yearly let's pump billions into that? There's a reason they get ports in these deals. They're trying to build out deepwater ports for their navy ships. All a military expansion technique under the guise of "loans"
Actually, it was not diplomatic delays between India and Sri Lanka that made them go for China's. India had tried to make them understand that the project will be a failure, but Sri Lankans politicians were hawkish on building a Singapore-like port. The fact that international cargo ships already stop in Singapore for refueling, restocking, etc., the geological position of Hambantota for a similar purpose was never going to be commercially viable. Sri Lankan government has made many such stupid strategic decisions within their domestic politics which broke their economy eventually.
That would depend in large part how much of the traffic going through Singapore is from Chinese companies or foreign companies going to China. Sri Lanka can services ships cheaper and/or faster than they will go there. Once the port becomes more used the country can further invest in differentiating itself from Singapore in the type of services, industry etc it has. But we will see how it works out such things are long term investments. It's not like Singapore become the hub it is today overnight.
and this is coming from an indian? ok
@@randyx3976 And how does that matter? Shouldn't facts matter in any analysis?
@@Souchirouu Singapore built that infrastructure for the port and associated benefits at a time when it was an opportunity in the region. They anticipated future global trade potential and built the infrastructure solving logistics problem of the region very early. Sri Lankan port would not have added a value to the shipping going through the region in current scenario. The assessment was done by many institutions. In fact, the port is built and sees no traffic from Chinese or any companies from other countries. This is what happens when projects are implemented without taking into account the detailed assessment of future potential, opportunities possible and expected ROI.
When two globally well known consultants tell you not to do something but then a third player comes in acting like "She'll be right mate!" then something certainly doesn't add up.
The companies said that the port was viable or did you miss that part
@@michaelotieno6524 I'll have to re-watch but I believe that viability was subject to certain provision. I believe one company even said expand in stages.
Greetings and Salutations from Temple, Texas, USA!
Build a mega port and the ships will come!! Ha! Where, oh where, was the scoping exercise / feasibility study / due diligence done etc. etc.? Sad story, but who knows how this will pan out in the fullness of time? One would think that the port was in a good geographic position for trans-Indian-Ocean shipping. If the Suez Canal were to close (!), how would that affect the Port's viability I wonder? Some naval power might be interested in leasing it, if it had a huge dry dock maybe - just a thought !! I wish Sri Lanka well - good people experiencing hard times these days.
You guys keep ignoring the fact that they have no naval rights to the port
China only accounts for 10% of Sri Lanka’s foreign debt. Try other countries.
That isn't the point, the thing is putting china as the Bad guys, sadly
Unfortunately if you decide to take on a predatory loan then it’s you’re own fault
As much as I am critical of China, I can't see their "give it to us" deal being 100% bad. The 99 years term is bad, the initial funding for the port is bad since the debt incurred was bad (I have a hard time believing viability studies could be bungled so bad), etc. But I can't fault them for offering to throw more money into it in exchange for ownership or something else in and of itself. That said again, 99 years is way too long. You do not need something for that long to make a profit. I also have little faith that it won't be used in some military capacity if it isn't already.
In December 2016, a mob of workers whole where believed to be backed by Rajapaksa loyalists protesting against the leasing of the port vandalized the port and took several ships hostage.
China is often brought up in such stories but the IMF has its own history in debt trap projects and those rarely end this well. Maybe we could get a video on a recent one of those?
The US and other IMF donors have forgiven the debt to Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) multiple times of the past few years. Often times for mere pennies on the dollar. Then these same countries go on a spending spree and get right back into debt and we're back at square one again. Take Nigeria for example. They only had to pay back 1/3 of their debt to the Paris Club of lenders. Within 2 years....2 YEARS they were back into even more debt. Curious I went to work (I worked as a nurse at large hospital) and asked a fellow nurse who was Nigerian. She rolled her eyes at me when I asked her about it. I asked her if, during the preceding 2 years if a rash of new schools had gone up. Her answer was NO. I asked her if a bunch of new roads had been laid down. Her answer was NO. New airports....NO. New electric lines to power more homes...NO. Where did this money go, I asked her. She told me "Mostly, it went into the President's bank accounts!". So, I think it's wonderful that China gets ripped apart for its efforts to loan corrupt governments money. Better to spread the pain around I always say!
The IMF is 190 countries, not just one with it's own agenda. So it's a bit different.
Got a link?
@@karlbrundage7472 cant share links here, but you can look up "The Multilateral Debt Trap in Jamaica" report by the Center for Economic and Policy Research.
"As part of the IMF agreement, Jamaica undertook severe austerity
measures, freezing wages and cutting spending. Even after the debt
exchange, Jamaica was left with the highest debt interest burden in the
world; interest payments alone amounted to 11 percent of GDP". You can also look at Sri Lankas 2017 Debt management report and their Foreign Debt Summary, which shows as of 2021, 81 percent of Sri Lanka’s foreign debt was owned by U.S. and European financial institutions, as well as Western allies Japan and India.
@@Hollylivengoodthe IMF is one country called the USA
A 99 year lease is pretty standard in Canada
For other sovereign countries to own?
@@WhyUbrownI’m sure Beijing is justifying it base on Hong Kong’s colonial lease.
@@WhyUbrownthe 99 year lease was proposed by the Canadians and recommended in fact.
11:26 I am sure the government coffers weren't the only ones getting wires.
the money which came from leasing hambantota port to chinese company were used to pay western debtors and the initial agreement didn't have any collateral infrastructure for loans
You forgot to add that china immediately tried to dock a military submarine at the port months after it was turned over.
This video is not telling the whole truth, Sri Lanka actually owes the West more in raw numbers
And yet the West hasn't asked for an entire port for 99 years as collateral for their further investment.
That's addressed
Having just finished the video and being a Sri Lankan myself I can say that Namal was part of the problem and I don't really like the way he was framed in the video. He was the son of Mahinda Rajapaksha and as I said before Maginda was a wannabe dictator and ran the country like it was his family business Namal was his son and put in power by his father he just made statements that sound good when he had actual effectual power, this is all without mentioning the most probably true rumor of him using government provided bodyguards to commit murder, allegedly.
I was in Colombo back in mid 2016, and the locals were absolutely pissed about all of the Chinese businessmen and buildings being built everywhere. The Chinese also would bring their own labors to Sri Lanka instead of hiring locals, which was massively unpopular by the locals
1st here!
Subscribed to many of Simons channels since 2018!
3rd of his presentations today 👏
Should do a video on the most insane city government officials who passed the most insane laws during their reign of power over their neighbor and lord of local municipalities! Karen’s on council.
Banks takes over your house after you fail to pay the mortgage. Is that a steal? Banks also lose money in this case, it is bad investment.
It’s happening in South America a mega port to be finished next year in Peru
This criticism of the PRC is strikingly similar to criticism of the World Bank, and other organizations set up at the behest of the US.
the difference being the CHINESE litteraly takes over the facility from the front.
It’s not right no matter who does it. The WEF needs to be shut down as they’re simply a criminal organization preying on weak countries.
Love tankie what aboutism, always comical
China: “it’s a win win…meaning we get two wins. You get two losses”
This is actually a loss loss. Neither side won anything
I think it depends on whatever else China gets up to.
Also, the background music was a bit loud during this video.
"Stuff can be two things."
In otherwords, China could definitely have intended to sneakily replicate imperialist Britain while the Sri Lankan government agreed to terrible loan deals and made bad decisions that screwed their citizens, so both sides have some blame. Tbh it's not surprising that China got involved, since PRC is known to undergo flashy, expensive projects that go nowhere.
I'm sorry, Sri Lanka willingly signed on for that debt and the following loan. It was out in the open, China didn't trick or threaten anyone to get it, and their offer to build infrastructure the Sri Lankan government wanted was as genuine as anyone else's. Only the country in question can decide if it was worth it, but it is their responsibility nonetheless - or rather, their politicians. If the infrastructure wasn't actually needed, the fault lies with their politicians, not the people they hired to construct it.
In fact, China's motives are entirely beside the point in this particular argument, because as long as they are acting within the bounds of that legal agreement, that's the freedom of choice they have been legally given by the Sri Lankan government. Only if they act illegally will they be acting in bad faith.
Something no one seems to be asking is what would have happened to Sri Lanka without the loan for the Port. What would the country's own debt have done to it, and who would they ultimately be paying off money to in the larger context?
China brided the local politician to accept the proposal. There were proofs of that in other projects, like the High Speed Rail project for Malaysia. The previous Prime Minister of Malaysia got charged for corruption, it was part of 1MDB scandal, where the PM would accept the inflated cost of the project China proposed because part of the sovereign wealth fund that was used to fund the projects would go back into the PM's bank account through the Chinese companies.
After it was discovered, the whole project is on hold and might be scrapped. Sure you could blame the local politicians for being corrupt, but it takes 2 hands to clap, China and the state owned chinese firms are not innocent either they know what they were doing.
@@operatorlink Where is the proof China bribed Sri Lankan officials for this project?
P.s I’m Sri Lankan and the port is now one of the fastest growing transshipment ports in Asia. Sri Lanka did not have the money or skills to do what the Chinese has managed to do. We lost nothing. If anything the port is providing more employment in the region.
Westerners will take any opportunity to make China look bad.
You are right, i don't know why Sri Lankan are not denoucing China if they are being cheated really.
Thanks for telling the truth.
@HAITI-1804 because they can't by contract. China did same crap in Montenegro Europe .
When a country cooperates with China. Some people say that it has been deceived by China.
@@koevirel8350 Proof? Let me guess, none at all! But still doesnt top you talking pish does it haha
@@HAITI-1804 not true. In fact we are trying to get more investment from China and India. They are our neighbours after all. Working with both sides will only be beneficial.
They did that in Darwin Australia as well
Wonder if that 1.12$B infusion from CM Port was paid in part in USD or EUROs which Sri Lanka has been short on recently. Lease a port out for 99 years and get help with their foreign reserves?
Probably in Yuan. China has been really strong arming it to become a global reserve currency.
they've done the same for kosovo's highway... and europe had to manage to buy the loan to counter china's plan (even if Kosovo isn't an EU member... )
As a Sri Lankan, I'm so glad you covered this topic.
Not only did they take the south port, India took most of the Colombo port.
India actually uses that port for Civilian purpose while China is colonising
Colombo port:
In 2021, Adani Ports & SEZ together with local partners John Keells Holdings and the Sri Lanka Port Authority signed a $700 million 35-year build-operate-transfer (BOT) agreement for West Container Terminal. In 2023 U.S. International Development Finance Corporation provided $553m in funding for the Adani-led project. West Container Terminal WCT is expected to become operational in 2025.
It's a partnership between a private Indian company, a Sri Lankan company and Sri Lanka Port authority with Financial support from the US. I don't see it as any country "taking" the Colombo port
@@theOGvikashanand no one care even the port use for civilian purpose , that port still occupied by india
@@theOGvikashanandTo think Indians are good at english...
Sri Lanka is more at a risk of colonisation by India then any other country.
@@theOGvikashanandChina also has only civilian rights to the port
The port is doing well now. One only has to search for a recent article on it.
Yeah Chinese spy ships visit the post on weekly basis, business is booming and Sri Lanka has defaulted 😂
Very interesting topic, explained in comprehensible terms - keep it up 😁
The music was kinda all over the place tho
On the one hand we're seeing similar things play out in Africa where China is taking control of ports and other infrastructure that they paid for but on the other hand China has a long history of over investing in infrastructure projects and are getting their own nation in economic trouble for the same reasons, so it could very well, just be china's poor decisions. I believe it's more of a win-win situation. The way they see it, either they get a port lease or they get friends with benefits
Keep twisting it and brainwashing people especially west.
Name one infrastructure project in Africa that china took over because the country couldn't pay?
Can you give me an example of infrastructure that China took over in Africa? I also agree that its simply poor decision making. They were expecting those infrastructure projects to become profitable quickly because of 10% growth but found out that that kind of growth is intact, rare outside East Asia. They've learnt their lessons now though. That's why you aren't likely to hear about such frivolous big money projects anymore
Somewhere along the timeline there was a lot of corruption the led to the outcome that could have otherwise been avoided.
On both sides
You have to wonder why they thought ships would suddenly flock to a port i would understand the move if ships were struggling for time in the existing ports but i guess thats not the case. My wife had a similar experience with a hair salon she often goes to her friends or they come here to have their hair, make up and nails done and she makes good money doing it so she took out a 6 month lease on a small shop with the expectation that after some time she would be fully booked unfortunately other than the few friends she only gained a handful of new customers and the shop made a net loss over the 6 months. The lesson being if the demand isn’t there don’t up the supply
This and a few other examples is exactly why Italy has pulled out of BRI.
The Chinese tactic is easy to understand: they will give you a loan with the same interest as the IMF or World Bank will with fewer restrictions and conditions and they will get good will which will lead to some great trade deals or, if you can't pay, they will negotiate a deal (for a port or something else to be leased for 99 years). It's a win-win. Although, it's a greater win if the country that takes the loan pays up.
One thing you should probably ask is what the alternative is to the Belt and Road Initiative. The Blue Dot Network? It's mostly private funding. Those guys will want far more money and far bigger guarantees. The interest the Blue Dot Network will have on its loan will be bigger. Same for the Build Back Better World of the G7. I don't know if the Blue Dot/B3W will be a success.
American here. I think it's high time for other countries to try the things they want. If they work out, fine. If not...then it's on them. At least they can't blame us or the West. And we can start having better relations again. What are your opinions about this attitude over in India and Sri Lanka? All my country can do is hold out it's hand and offer it's best. I wish all good luck no matter what. This is how you end up with allies instead of enemies. And with good trading partners.
@@GaryArmstrongmacgh
Look up India US relations. In 1971 India got involved in the genocide that the Pakistanis were enacting on what would become known as Bangladesh, helping the Bengalis. The US started threatening them with nukes. India got the USSR involved and USA backed down. After that Trump came in and decided to lie about the Indians and start a trade war with them. The Indians will be hostile to the USA for decades.
(From someone that lives in a country that's doing the same) Regardless of intend, China had full rights to the port.
We take the same risk when getting home loans from a bank.
The fault lies with the politicians, not China.
China merely did what any company company would do.
Sri Lanka still ended up with all the economic effects of a modern port.
Chinese port sounds better than no port at all.
We gave up control of foreign aid projects and saw them crumble.
For this particular deal, my biggest question is, "how much trade is going through that port now?"
Right?! How was this not covered at the end? We need to know that before we can really make a decision.
It is apparently doing well. Google this 2024 article:
Sri Lanka's Chinese-Run Ro/Ro Port is Taking Off
It's doing well now. Maybe that's why it was left out in the video. Search for the Jan 2024 article - Sri Lanka's Chinese-Run Ro/Ro Port is Taking Off
This wouldn't be nearly as sus or shady if so many other of the B&I projects didn't have the exact same fate.
I agree with this. If the belt and road initiative was successful in other developing countries and had a measurable net benefit. Then there should be no basis for concern. The fact that the debt still has to be paid and no one wants to use the port begs the question of how china will make the port profitable. Most ships ships traveling from the malaca strait to Europe are massive and require huge berths to just fit.
It’s almost as if the Belt & Road is a giant debt trap designed to steal from other countries. Imagine the outcry is the US or EU did this to a small nation.
Vietnam definitely does not want to be on China's side.
I’m curious as to why almost no one is using the port yet? I don’t think it was mentioned why it’s not really used yet?
It will be getting used now, by china
Have you found out yet?
We Sri lankans Don't know 😅
The one fact to come out of this murky deal is that the ruling family in Sri Lanka, the Rajapaksas, who also control the government, will have made a tidy personal profit out of it.
I think Sri Lanka got played, in part by itself and part by China. Because regardless of the outcome China comes out smelling the dollars and if war with India broke out, well that is a nice useful port they have there.
they didnt get played their polticians sold out.
I'm willing to bet those that cut the deal are hundreds of millions of dollars richer.
Well said.
Umm, maybe expand this video and do a part 2, detailing how China has done this to AUSTRALIA.
They have a 99 year "lease" on the Port of Darwin, a vital port that is used by out allies the US Military.
Darwin Port:
Following the 2012 election of the Country Liberal party, the Territory sought to raise funds for unspecified purposes through the sale of public assets, including the Territory Insurance Office and Darwin Port.[2] In order to accomplish the latter, the Territory made a request for expressions of interest in late 2014 and early 2015, resulting in thirty-three companies signalling their interest.[3]
In October 2015, the Chinese-owned Landbridge Group won the bid for a lease of Port Darwin. The then Country Liberal-controlled Northern Territory Government under then Chief Minister Adam Giles granted the company a 99-year lease for A$506 million.[4][5] The contract price is more than 25 times the profit the port had earned over the preceding two years, and Landbridge also promised to invest A$200 million over a 25-year period. - Wikipedia.
So its not that China just came in it was a bid between 33 interested parties
Newcastle Port:
The port was the first commercial export port in Australia and is the world's busiest coal export port. Annual exports of coal from Newcastle exceeded A$15 billion in 2012-13. Newcastle berthed more than 2,200 ships a year in 2012-13.
In April 2014 Premier Mike Baird and Treasurer Andrew Constance announced that a "a consortium which comprises Hastings Funds Management and Chinese state-owned China Merchants" had successfully bid $1.75 billion for a 98-year lease of the Port of Newcastle. - Wikipedia
$15 million a year * 98 years is 1.47 billion. And with the world moving away from coal it might very well be a loss in terms of profit for the Chinese once the 98 years are done.
Also don't forget. They don't OWN the ports outright. They are leasing the ports. These ports will come up for bidding again and other nations can bid again. Not China's fault that the US/EU and others didn't want to invest more. So guess the port wasn't that vital for the US military. They rather spend hundreds of billions on Israel instead.
@@Souchirouu no, they don't own them outright, but 99 years is a very long time and the cost to back out of the lease is also very high.
More to the point, NO nation should be allowed to lease major infrastructure of national importance.
What next, should we elect a Chinese citizens to be our prime minister?
Thankfully our laws prevent THAT from happening.
Personally, I don't think ANY foreigner should be allowed to own anything in Australia, or lease moderate to large companies / organisations.
If they think our country is so great to own things in, they should live here full time.
The only thing the Chinese company gets is under two billion dollars in a hundred years. What exactly are they going to do with the port that threates Australia?@@35manning
Good and balanced presentation.
The project and debt trap were conceived and promoted by Sri Lanka. China was there to provide the know-how and money.
It could've been any other country doing the same. The fact it aligns with the BRI is a strategic benefit for China.
Without infrastructure, Roads, Rail, Ports, Schools, Hospitals Reservoirs and Waste Water Treat plants poor countries will remain in a “POVERTY TRAP OF STAGNATION”. Infrastructure is the essential platform for countries to grow and modernize.
Overextending and mal-investment are just as damaging. You don't go from horses straight to high speed rail because nobody can afford to ride it, and the debts to pay off that project could have been better used for other vital requirements like education and communication.
lol, Australians are allowed to lend Darwin port to China for 99 years, but Sir Lankan lent the port for 99 years to repay its debts becomes a debt trap. nice one.
Darwin port is useless. It's not a main commercial port of Australia.
@@RR-us2kp 🤣🤣Useless? There wouldn't even be a port in Hambantota if China didn't build it.... Hambantota is useless if China didn't build the port.
The whole Belt and Road Initiative had three primary goals: the first was of course building infrastructure for the economic benefit of China; the second was clearly to influence the politics of the countries where they built that infrastructure; and the third was to saddle the foreign governments with massive debt that they realistically had no way of paying back, meaning they could repossess the infrastructure when that occurred. How any sane person could not see that is unbelievable. In the end it would have been far cheaper for China to foster better relations with ALL nations thus making the BRI unnecessary from the start.
The Indonesians will beg to differ. They Their newly Chinese built high speed rail line from their capital Jakarta to Bandung is a resounding success from the start go, silencing all the naysayers. Almost 90% capacity in daily ridership. Cutting a tedious road trip of 3.5 hours to just 45 minutes. They called their fast train Swoosh! Jakarta is one of the most congested and polluted mega city in the world. This rail line will really help to reduce the amount of traffic and improve the quality of air and life for all those long suffering commuters. The hope is now the government will consider extending the line from Bandung to the Surabaya the port city of 3 million.
The Indonesians will beg to differ. They Their newly Chinese built high speed rail line from their capital Jakarta to Bandung is a resounding success from the start go, silencing all the naysayers. Almost 90% capacity in daily ridership. Cutting a tedious road trip of 3.5 hours to just 45 minutes. They called their fast train Swoosh! Jakarta is one of the most congested and polluted mega city in the world. This rail line will really help to reduce the amount of traffic and improve the quality of air and life for all those long suffering commuters. The hope is now the government will consider extending the line from Bandung to the Surabaya the port city of 3 million.
The last point is something that even IMF economists have disagreed with. There really aren't any major cases of infrastructure takeover outside this one.
Who could ever have seen this coming...
They are doing the same in montenegro and really soon we gonna have Chinese navy own port 30 minutes away from Italy
Im argentinian. My country has suffered exacttly that in XIX and XX century, but in the first at the hands of UK and the USA in the second, so
What does thing have to do with anything? Or just whataboutisms to try and look contrarian and smart?
I know the UK story; what does the USA have to do with anything? Fantastic wine, by the way. By Argentine wine every chance I get over USA and other wines (well, maybe Chilean) Greetings from Canada.
@@jondoe4624 my point being: some westerns countries get really critical at China for doing what they do for centuries now
@@joaquinhererra6771Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because one person or country does a bad thing doesn't mean that another person or country is justified in doing the exact same thing. If we all agree "doing x" was wrong, then no one should be imitating that same bad behavior for any reason.
@@matthias720 couldnt agree More. But Yet, western media dosent critices US, UK or Europe, but China. Not saying that what China does its fine but westerns justo remember this when they aré not the ones benefitting frome louting, piracy or stealing
The truth is China is acting long term in it's own self interest. As USA first kinda guy. We do and have done the same everywhere we can.
Yeah well, except the Chinese don't bomb and loot everywhere they go freely. They build. So no, US foreign policy is nothing like the Chinese.
Europe and the US have had their chance at Africa for 2 centuries, it's the Chinese's turn, let's see how it turns out.
Finally some truth in this comment section
In isolation, I can see the point in trying to give China the benefit of the doubt. Sometimes its just somebody's incompetence to blame. However, when you realize that this isn't a one-off occurrence, but the actual strategy of the Chinese gov. And businesses, its a whole new story. This exact strategy of bad loans being turned into Chinese controlled entities is happening across at least 3 continents. And many of the host countries have found themselves unable to pay. Its predatory business on a massive scale.
From the start of this title it's Madagascar that they showed
A "nguyen-nguyen" situation for china.
Nguyen is a Vietnamese name
@@masterchinese28 haha yes it is
@@asylumental For the record, Vietnamese spring rolls are better!
@@masterchinese28 I agree!
Vietnamese are Pro China on the Internet. I have seen many comments on the social media where they were the first ones to defend China.
They learned from the best teachers: USA, England, France, Portugal and Spain.
China has a multi century history of colonization. They have been colonizing since before the US was a country. Tibet is a colony. Xinxiang is a colony. Taiwan used to be primarily polynesian people. The Chinese colonized the island and wiped out thes locals. China is one of the og colonizers
My wife is Beijing Chinese and an "elite"; if you think for one moment you're not dealing with people that !) never forget and 2) are there to win you're a fool. Red Guard blood runs deep. They TALK a good game, but at the end of the day, democracy is for stupid people. Power is for them.
@@jondoe4624 Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam is a colony. Japan, South Korea, Germany, the Philippines, Panama, ect a semi colonies.
@@jondoe4624 But it still does not take away the leadership and primacy of the West in relation to the number of coups d'état, armed interventions, assassinations of directly elected popular leaders, interference in internal politics using local elites and the installation of puppet governments. And more recently with the shameless use of Big Techs in these interventions. In this task they are unbeatable.
I remember Simon did a video on this back in 2019 on the VisualPolitikEN channel, on China's "Sugar Daddy Diplomacy". It pretty much panned out the way he said it would back then, in regards to Sri Lanka
At the time Srilanka got into trouble, it owed over 80% of all its external debt to IMF and western/Japanese instititions and about 10 % to China. The money Srilanka got for the port went to...get this... Pay other creditors, not China!!
That literally looks like.
Fuck what the hell's that country Madagascar
If two independent companies both analyzed the idea and found it lacked feasbility, i would have to assume either the Chinese analysis was faulty (since it didnt seem to see the lack of feasibility that indeed came to pass), or they saw a different type of opportunity. The fact that you can aegue that China is doing this to help Sri Lanka is exactly what makes it a trap. It sounds good and its exactly what Sri Lanka wanted to hear, both times.
Military!
Different from WMF?
Meh, China offered investment in a Sri Lanka infrastructure project
As any project, the investment , comes with terms and conditions.
Sri Lanka thought the terms were OK so they agreed a deal.
It turned out that the project was initially not very successful.
However Sri Lanka says it easily could be successful with just a bit more investment.
China agrees. then decides to make a further investment .
This time the terms include that China gets some executive control over the project.
Which gets reduced to some ownership of some physical land, rather than more debt.
I don't see how anyone thinks there is anything weird or malicious going on here.
Check the bank accounts of the people who approved a loan for a twice shown waste of $$. They hired people to assess the feasibility of the project who said nah that's dumb. But continued on anyway. Jeez I wonder why they may be. Couldn't be because the people who approved this got rich funneling money from the loans could it. Shining example of corruption is all I see