[beat]

coughcoughIMFcough

More broadly, taking on debt to build the infrastructure needed to level up industrial capabilities isn't exploitation. Building better energy grids, transportation, and communication infrastructure is expensive. It's fundamentally no different than software startups taking on fundraising rounds to enable growth. As long as the leadership isn't irresponsible about it, there's nothing wrong with it and it should easily pay for itself.

The important thing for debt-for-infrastructure planning is to keep corruption manageable, so you don't wind up borrowing to build boondoggles that are for the personal enrichment of the the well-connected rather than the good of the country.

At any rate, China is no more predatory in this regard than the IMF, the World Bank, or other western financial institutions. They have a surplus of capital and need to invest it somewhere. The goal is not imperialist, but rather capitalist.

[dalore]

China is more imperial. They have a really long 100 year view. They don't mind losing money to gain a long term advantage.

Yes it's exactly/similar behaviour to the IMF. Doesn't make a difference though to the people.

[eloff]

I think what you say is true, but that you very much underestimate China's imperialist ambitions.