China - Geostrategic & Geopolitical.

[Ananda]

‘Tidal wave’: How 75 nations face Chinese debt crisis in 2025

Developing countries to pay a record $22bn this year, mostly linked to loans from China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

www.aljazeera.com

Is it Debt or Investment strategies ? In the video the Tongan official seems certain any debt repayment with China can be negotiate. This is different with what others believe on impending Chinese Debt Trap.

Chinese debt usually align with the Investment from their private sector. Some in market already see the patern where same Chinese Financial Instutions finance infrastructure Debt and Investment on private sectors.

There are indications the infrastructure investment financing payment schedulle being renegotiate, while Chinese Private sectors continue dominating the trade. If in the end those infrastructure debts being reschedulle or even got some discount financing payment, but on other hand private sector financing shown good results, the same financial institutions will regain all their credit financing payment on overall.

China then regain diplomatic good will by shown "reasonable" investment financing scheme. In the end host country infrastructure being develop, but the chinese private sectors investment also flourishing and get biggest price. I do suspect the real aim is the later one.

 

[Ananda]

Why Washington’s call for Asia to buy more American arms falls flat

National interests here are shaped more by domestic imperatives and long-term pragmatism. Read more at straitstimes.com. Read more at straitstimes.com.

www.straitstimes.com

Put this as ST can be said shown quasi official opinion from Singapore. In short the article basically say that increase on defense toward 5% will not be heading by US allies in region, let alone other Asians.

1. Most Asians see the level of skirmish in LCS and Taiwan issue as worying but not justifiable enough for 5% GDP for Defense,
2. Infrastucture and improving basic economics environment more important,
3. China being seen more as Trade and Investment partners, rather then imminent threarts as US or Western Euro put.

Thus most Asian want to engage both sides and altough increasing defense happen in region, but not at the level of what US wants. Most in Region come to Shangrilla meeting, but also attend forum that being lead by China.

The tone that US give at this moment, especially by Trump trade tariff are in fact more concerning for most Asians then China threats rhetorics Hagseth try to envoke to the regions. The costs of US defense items then alternative within region also going to be factors that determine whether to buy US Defense Exports.

Something that reflect condution with Russia also, Asia going to make their own policy.

 

[hauritz]

Why Washington’s call for Asia to buy more American arms falls flat

National interests here are shaped more by domestic imperatives and long-term pragmatism. Read more at straitstimes.com. Read more at straitstimes.com.

www.straitstimes.com

Put this as ST can be said shown quasi official opinion from Singapore. In short the article basically say that increase on defense toward 5% will not be heading by US allies in region, let alone other Asians.

1. Most Asians see the level of skirmish in LCS and Taiwan issue as worying but not justifiable enough for 5% GDP for Defense,
2. Infrastucture and improving basic economics environment more important,
3. China being seen more as Trade and Investment partners, rather then imminent threarts as US or Western Euro put.

Thus most Asian want to engage both sides and altough increasing defense happen in region, but not at the level of what US wants. Most in Region come to Shangrilla meeting, but also attend forum that being lead by China.

The tone that US give at this moment, especially by Trump trade tariff are in fact more concerning for most Asians then China threats rhetorics Hagseth try to envoke to the regions. The costs of US defense items then alternative within region also going to be factors that determine whether to buy US Defense Exports.

Something that reflect condution with Russia also, Asia going to make their own policy.

America of course would benefit in arms sales but realistically all that money may buy you a few weeks worth of bombs and missiles. When you run out of weapons and spare parts you might turn to the United States and find they will have no spare capacity to replace any of your war stocks. Japan, South Korea and to a lesser extent Australia either can, or will, eventually produce at least some of their own weaponry.

Ultimately these smaller nations might not be able to contribute much to an air or sea war. They would be best served building up their land forces because I have my doubts as to whether China would really want to become involved in another Asian land war.

 

[Ananda]

these smaller nations might not be able to contribute much to an air or sea war.

My Chinese desk colleugues have a say on interpreting how Chinese Politics behave. They say China was and is Chung Kuo and Chung Kuo will always behave like Chung Kuo.

In sense Communist China is behaving in the core mind set like Imperial China. Imperial China even in the last two dynasty (Ming and Qing) limit themselves from land battle/conquest outside their imidiate border.

Cheng Ho/Zheng He Fleet was the pinnacle of Imperial China fleet. In their time, they are more interested to secure their trade lines, throughout East-SouthEast Asia, Indies Ocean, Middle East and East Africa. They are not interested to colonise outposts, even though they have superiorities in fleet strength at that time.

In sense this is shown in behaviour of present day PLAN. Skirmish in LCS more and more become game of possitioning with potential to become bargaining chip checkers board. The claim base on historical lines in SCS related to trade lines that being set up from Zheng He times.

So yes, the thinking seems with most of Asian nations is how to engage China in trade while bargaining with them toward securing trade lines. Bargaining more on sea and air shown why latest procurement from many Asian Nations also on that area.

Ukraine war also shown the importance on ammo supply independences. For that Indonesia also increase the investment on ammo productions. All part on the strategy to secure prolong defense capacities.

Thus I agree with you, China so far and even historically do not shown interest to involve on Land War outside their immidiate border. Chung Kuo from imperial times more interest to bargaining possition for secure trade lines. Taiwan is part of their immidiate border, thus they are more willing to wage land war there. However South East Asia and beyond raise doubts if China want to venture on land war. This is why behaviour of Asians against China differr then Euro against Russia.