Oh God I have so many things to say about this “article” ... where does one even start with this propaganda piece parading around as analysis. I am kind of surprised @diplmat_apac would green light such a clear hit piece. https://twitter.com/mstandaert/status/1262682680904183808

I thought I would do a thread about how misplaced this “article” is with regards to what CPEC is and how China’s lever BRI works but then again I would much rather write a proper article addressing this hit piece in its entirety

Those of you asking for bullet points, here are the basics that I honestly can’t address in detail on Twitter:
1. The whole article is premised on a report that was an IPP audit done from the time #Pakistan has had IPPS minus the years Military was in power.

I know that because I know half the folks on that investigative committee and exactly what their mandate was. This was part of the PM’s political rhetoric promise of finding what happened to #Pakistan’s wealth/loans

2. The premise was to establish what the IPPs were doing for the last two decades. Short summary is bad contracts were written because the Govt was desperate to generate power and gave IPPs a sweetheart deal again and again. The contracts were not competitive

3. Now let’s talk about this specific hit piece. As I said, the premise of this article and evidence is this report that I just mentioned. The argument being made is completely different from the evidence being presented. The argument made is #Pakistan is in a Chinese debt trap

4. The whole idea that #pakistan is in a Chinese debt trap is extremely wishy washy. Because the answer to that question is still up for discussion given the fact that out of the 46 Billion that were to be spent on CPEC only about half have been project financed so far

5. Additionally, what folks, especially in places like #Pakistan do not understand is how BRI is structured and what it does. I have written about this for three years now and the bottom line is, look at BRI like a intraregional organization and it will make more sense

Every project under BRI, meaning all of CPEC, is financed in this way - Chinese Banks give money to an approved BRI project’s lead company. That company invests that money in the said projects location. To guarantee smooth working condition and eventual output->

The local govt gives a soverign loan guarantee. The money is never actually given to the country itself as part of BRI, the country gives a soverign guarantee as kind of an insurance. That is not a trap. Again, I say this having researched and written on it for three years

6. The article mentions examples of Sri Lanka and Maldives but fails to explain that in both cases The local governments pulled the trigger on risky investments right before elections. Short on cash, the govt agreed to risky investments as it would look good domestically

When new governments came in, they tried to scrape the deals but couldn’t because of the BRI’s built in quirks which require all adjudication to happen under Chinese law in a court in Xi’an. So instead, those govt pulled out their soverign guarantee and handed projects to Chinese

7. Based on extremely janky evidence and pulling together random stories, the article propagates a trope popular in US conservative circles that China is somehow conning countries in to a debt trap and it must be stopped. That simply is a misconstrued understanding of BRI

I am not saying BRI does not inflict fiscal pain on countries, I am simply saying that BRI is a lot more than a debt trap or a loan snarking operation. BRI in fact is the legacy of President Xi. I promise you, his legacy is not to make China a loan shark

Also, I had hoped folks like HH would write actual analysis of things instead of hit pieces out of spite