Post Millennial: Uganda's only intl. airport is now under Chinese control due to a default on loan payments
A Chinese state-owned bank is now the owner of Entebbe International Airport, among other Ugandan assets, due to the Ugandan government's defaulting on a loan.
The loan for $207 million was originally taken out on Nov. 17 2015. It had a seven-year grace period which, as of the time of this writing, has now passed.
According to Sahara Reporters, "Entebbe International Airport is Uganda’s only international airport and handles over 1.9 million passengers per year.
Its seizure by China would greatly dent the legacy of the 77-year-old [head of state Yoweri] Museveni, who came to power on the back of an armed uprising in 1986, and expose him to election defeat."
Read more ....
Update: Uganda Surrenders Airport for China Cash (The Monitor)
WNU Editor: China is saying this is not a big story .... Clichéd ‘debt trap’ lies will not derail China-Africa cooperation (Global Times).
Update #2: Both Uganda and China are denying these reports .... China to seize Uganda’s Entebbe airport after loan default? Viral report officially denied (The Print).
But Uganda is admitting that it wants to renegotiate its loan .... Uganda asks China to amend airport-loan clauses: Reports (Bloomberg).
Update #3: Uganda is not the only country having debt problems with China. Nigeria is on the verge of losing some assets .... Nigeria risks losing assets to China over $3.48bn loan, experts warn FG (Punch).
Update #4: We shall see .... China loan binge starts to bite; the US, EU hope to gain from fallout (The East African).
NoEscape 2015 film with Owens Wilson & Pierce Brosnan
ReplyDeleteRogerebert.com's Peter Sobczynski criticized No Escape for its "borderline xenophobia",
'Seattle Times' Moira Macdonald criticized No Escape as offensive and concluded: "Just like the Dwyer family, I found myself looking for escape; you might, too." '
"No Escape's talented cast and taut B-movie thrills are unfortunately offset by its one-dimensional characters and uncomfortably retrograde worldview."
- Rotten Tomatoes
Those reviewers cannot help themselves. They were brought up woke and memorized their catechism in college.
Remember the Dubai ports deal?
A German company bought a local water company. People were upset. Some westerners (American) were upset that some other Westerners (Germans) bought the local water company. Now suppose the economy really goes to Hell and we have 30% unemployment. Is no Escape that far removed?
OR with a little of foreign travel or imagination replace the Dwyer family with a family with a Chinese surname. Set it in Africa or keep the setting in South East Asia.
Peter Sobczynski, Moira Macdonald, Rotten Tomatoes are arguing t that this is the modern day so of course that does not happen anymore. Those people are so naive and foolish.
There were were anti-Chinese riots in Indonesia in 1998. The local small time Chinese business men did not cause the government corruption, but they got the shaft.
"The riots were triggered by corruption, economic problems, including food shortages and mass unemployment. It eventually led to the resignation of President Suharto and the fall of the New Order government, which had been in power for 32 years. The main targets of the violence were ethnic Chinese Indonesians"
Seems to be an endemic problem
Indonesian mass killings of 1965–66
"Discrimination against people of Chinese descent in Indonesia has been carried out by governments in Indonesia since the time of the Dutch East India Company. Serious violence against Chinese people has occurred at irregular intervals since 1740, when the soldiers of the Dutch East India Company and other ethnic groups from Batavia killed up to 10,000 people of Chinese descent during the Chinezenmoord. "
Africa can be dicey. There is ant-Black discrimination in China. Some of the African traders leave China and remember the discrimination. It would not be hard to rile up a crowd in Africa.
If one country blows up, 3 to 6 countries will follow.
There quite a few Chinese expatriates living in Africa. I think they would have it easier than Chinese, who recently arrived working for a Chinese corporation. That is until a demagogue comes along. The Indians were driven out of Uganda. Are the Chinese next?
In the 1960s and 1970s there was a wave of nationalization by Third World countries of Western property in their country. It did nothing to cure their economic problems, but it doesn't change that they were still able to do it. There's nothing that will prevent these countries from nationalizing their ports, airports, and other infrastructure seized by China in debt defaults.
ReplyDeleteNow China will take a far harder stance on it then Western banks and companies did or Western governments did during the Cold War. But it's not like China can invade these countries in Africa. They can certainly embargo certain countries, but much of what China buys is raw materials which it needs and which is fungible on the world market. If they move their demand to another country, then the demand they displaced will go to the other country. And its unlikely the West and Japan/Korea would support China on this.
Now seizing Chinese owned property will have a cost to it, so countries won't do it lightly. But there will be a domestic political cost to these governments as China owns major parts of their infrastructure. China could conceivably fund rebel groups and coups as a counter, but those are high risk and come up with unknown costs.
Not saying this is what will happen. Zeitgeist of the times change. It's not the 1970s anymore. But I can't foresee there not being some kind of blowback. It's just what form it will take.
Chris
ReplyDeleteFor Chinese President Xi Jinping, Conquering Taiwan Is A Matter Of Honor And 'Saving Face'
Chris's comment
ReplyDeleteFirst paragraph. True in toto.
Second Paragraph, first sentence: Opinion, but 100% accurate IMO.
2nd, 3rd and 4th sentences: True. Explaining things that liberals beat their heads against.
Second Paragraph, last sentence: Opinion but 99% to 100% accurate.
Last paragraph: author is not saying what will happen, so it is kind of nebulous. There are known and unknown un knowns so the author and really anyone else will have a hard time making a prediction. Still all in all Chris seems to be someone's comments to read.
Do have a somewhat of a problem with "It's not the 1970s anymore." I use to believe it, but not anymore. It is arguing this is the modern times, so X does not happen. I never believed that feudalism would come around again. Yet, our betters seem intent on pauperizing the populace.