0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
1,270 $

China Growing In Bank Diplomacy

Support SouthFront

China Growing In Bank Diplomacy

Illustrative Image

Western narrative of “debt trap” about China’s diplomacy seems fallacious among investors and experts.

Written by Lucas Leiroz, researcher in Social Sciences at the Rural Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant.

China is becoming the most attractive lender in the world, despite Western efforts to slander Beijing’s strategy of “bank diplomacy”. Experts believe that the Western narratives about China sounds fallacious and does not seem to have credibility among state and private investors in developing nations, for whom China appears to be the best option for obtaining credit.

According to reports from the Group of Seven, more than half of the world’s low-income countries are currently in a bad credit situation, with accumulated debt and over-debt. In its statements, the Group urged creditor countries to “contribute constructively to the necessary debt treatments” – which seemed to be a direct message to China.

Beijing is the world’s largest bilateral creditor and has particularly intense and relevant business relations with developing nations, which of course includes low-income countries. The Asian country mainly lends money to infrastructure projects that are somehow related to its Belt and Road Initiative – a global platform of cooperation between developing states. Large Chinese banks, such as the Export-Import Bank of China and the China Development Bank, are primarily responsible for financing the construction of strategic facilities around the world, such as solar, coal and hydroelectric power plants, seaports, airports, highways, and railway lines. There are countries in debt to China throughout Africa, Asia and Latin America – in addition to Europe itself -, which reveals the inestimable relevance of Beijing to global business today.

In recent years, this Chinese strategy of financing infrastructure abroad has been classified by Western analysts as a “debt trap”. According to these experts, Beijing manipulates its partner countries to adopt some kind of “pro-China stance” in world geopolitics.  It is also claimed that China places in its contracts some specific clauses of abusive content, which guarantee to the Chinese government control over the national assets of the nations in debt. Interestingly, however, these same analysts do not classify in the same way the attitudes of western creditor organizations, such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, which are notoriously known for precisely demanding neoliberal measures from in-debt countries.

This type of evaluation in double standard, which condemns China and absolves Western creditors, is one of the reasons why the G7’s speech has lost value and relevance among investors around the world, who are increasingly attracted by China. Renowned researchers have described Chinese banking practice as truly pragmatic and not related to political and ideological schemes – typical of Western banks and the ‘Washington Consensus’.

For example, Thomas W. Pauken II, a consultant on Asia-Pacific affairs, geopolitical analyst, and author of “US vs China: From Trade War to Reciprocal Deal”, said: “China takes a different approach to its lending to other countries, especially the emerging markets, than, say, with the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (…) The major difference is the political issues involved. A lot of times the IMF and WB place a lot of requests for reforms and to make a lot of structural changes to a country’s economy. And a lot of times those structural reforms are not pragmatic or helpful to those countries. Therefore, China basically does loans more like a business person would. Is the country able to pay it back? If not, are these projects capable of generating revenues both for the country they’re doing business in as well as for the Chinese investors”.

In the same vein, political and financial analyst Angelo Giuliano also explains that it is the banks linked to the Washington Consensus that usually demand radical changes from countries in debt, directly violating state sovereignty, while China has another praxis, marked by unconditional respect to the political and financial sovereignty of the countries.

“[Waestern banks] make conditional loans at often higher rates and for the purpose of debt trap and push for political and economic reforms that often take place in the form of drastic privatizations and loss of sovereignty (…) While China has another approach of loaning with no strings attached, it is offering an alternative that respects countries’ sovereignty and that is gaining political support and allies that are uniting in a single front against old imperialistic ways”, he said.

In addition, it is necessary to mention that in several contracts Chinese banks establish decreasing interest with the possibility of extinguishing the debt in case of non-payment. China does this because it always seeks to lend money to private and state investors whose projects are somehow beneficial to Beijing and its BRI. Chinese praxis of “bank diplomacy” consists of looking for the final result of investments and not using credit as a tool for international political projection – even more considering the international neutrality typical of the Chinese State.

G7’s speech and the warnings issued in their last summit have a single objective: to try to make investors from developing countries move away from China and look for western banks, opting for the project “Build Back Better” – the global platform proposed by the G7 – instead of the Chinese BRI. But this kind of result can only be achieved through concrete and positive offers to developing countries, not through fallacious speeches.

You can follow Lucas on Twitter.


Support SouthFront


Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

American financial “help “=take over your countries resources rip them off build zero infrastructure – build bases- refuse to leave, Chinese help= build railways-roads-hospitals -bridges =water irrigation etc etc etc – dont set political terms -dont involve- IMF/WB etc In other words China treats those countries with respect – not colonialists -America-sanctions- bombs killing millions causes massive debts .


Chinas loans are 100% gold backed by a very stout infastructure programme with guarrantees to boot, Western loans are riddled in scams,renigging,terminating,blackmail of zero productivety,do the maths!

Thomas Turk

Dunn hoam-wurk fa skool tumorra, litlle gurl?

poko molo social worker

poko molo (midge)nazi borrows used condoms from Sawyer—very attractive to leroy when he commits sodomy on the nazi in idaho trailer park


China is not worst than the IMF, its the same.. It benefits threefold with its BRI, first it lends money so both chinese banks and corporate make business, then all infrastructure are required to project chinese commercial power (hence replace local businesses) and last indeed, systematic difficulties to repay loans leads to infrastructure appropriation or at the minimum to “favors” for further contracts with further loans to China (i observed this locally here in Serbia). I note somehow propagandists feel like its necessary to white wash China, it means, their dealing is becoming “openly questionable”.. Which is good. Elites are said to play both sides of the chess board, China is part of that, it is the poster child of the great reset nonsense (surveillance, lockdowns, CBDC)


If that is the case then why has Africa kicked out western colonialists and a majority voted for Russia ? Have you seen the devastation left by US Big Business who took their natural resources leaving ground water contaminated by cancerous chemicals- killed their fish -killed their crops etc. Watch African countries news which I have over many years on satellite.


I dont have satellite, is it available online? Do you recommend anything?

Muhammed Allah جثث فاسدة مصاصة الديك

Allah acts as a satellite.

Go to the mosque and you will get news that suits you.

Tommy Jensen

This is not the only thing China has been doing. There is more hidden under the table.


China competing with the IMF will be better than the IMF having the Monopoly. If a nation has half of its debt with each, then they can play them against one another for more favorable terms. Libya did not borrow money because of the sanctions and it helped them to prosper. I see the war against Russia by the G7, EU & NATO nations as the progression of the same piracy over others nations.


Please be better than the IMF which keeps other nations in debt enslavement.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x