Risk. Yes there are laws preventing or at least discouraging western companies from investment, but these are also inherently risky loans. China seems to have a larger appetite for risk. Higher risk, higher reward, but it can also backfire suddenly and spectacularly.

That's understandable but my point was criticizing China for taking on risk (and reducing it by using their own people) when our countries and businesses aren't willing is a bit b.s.

The livelihoods of people changed for the better.

> This isn't a developed nation, perhaps if the west is willing to do business your comment and sentiment has validity but sitting at Chinese workers and Chinese debt us better than sitting at a distance and pitying those poor people and occasionally tossing charity their way.

I disagree. It is sometimes better to do nothing if the alternative causes more problems than it solves. Laos' time would have come naturally given stable government and consistent investment. They are now on a fast-track to failure.

> Perhaps instead of criticizing China you should criticize the west for not besting China?

As I said before, if a better solution cannot be proposed, it is better to do nothing, rather than an action that will most certainly end in failure. Without a stable government in Laos, all investment will likely be misused. It is up for the Laos people to decide when they are ready.

China is also trying to become a world leader, it therefore opens itself up to criticism. There is a lot of responsibility if you want to wear large shoes.

> Why isn't europe doing this, afterall they are the final destination of the belt road and they get a ton of stuff from China and can benefit to trade with the rest of asia?

Europe isn't accepting charity from China, if anything it is the other way around. China receives favourable trading terms because they are a developing Country. The belt and road is not being built by China as a charity project, it is directly for their own economic gain.

> IMF and worldbank also hold a ton of debt on developing countries.

They do, but this is something that is currently a work-in-progress. Debt forgiveness is now more common and there is increasing regulation regarding issuing of loans to debt-trap companies.

> I mean, I like to think I am the last person to support the CCP but bullshit is bullshit!

I have no idea of your background, but you do appear (at least in this case) be supporting to actions of the CCP to debt-trap Laos.

What datapoint are you using to say laos will fail? Doing nothing is not better when hospitals, roads,etc... are being built. The people that are benefiting from those will disagree.

> It is up for the Laos people to decide when they are ready.

No it is not. Laos is a socialist/marxist state and their legitimate government has decided they are ready. Period. Outsiders have no right to tell Laotians to endure poverty and suffering and wait for capitalism, that is cruelty! They have the right to fight poverty by any means they desire.

> China is also trying to become a world leader, it therefore opens itself up to criticism. There is a lot of responsibility if you want to wear large shoes.

For sure, from uyghurs, south china sea to zero covid, I criticize the CCP and dislike them. But in this situation your criticism (if you are a westener in a democracy) is hypocritical is it not? The CCP is doing it wrong so they should do nothing and let them suffer like us? If you enjou capitalism then you should compete against china and do better or it just sounds like you are yet another westerner trying to shape other countries to a "superior" western way (some call it neo-colonialism).

> Europe isn't accepting charity from China...

That was not my suggestion and what you said about China's intentions is right. My point was Europe can sell to and buy from China, India and more with the belt road, they can profit by trading with like 50-65% of the world over one trade route. Of course, unless asia and africa is beneath europe to trade with ( which isn't the case because they already do trade).

> Debt forgiveness is now more common and there is increasing regulation regarding issuing of loans to debt-trap companies.

When the west was indebting other countries via imf/worldbank it wasn't a problem? And China isn't capable of debt forgiveness/re-structuring like the benevolent west?

> but you do appear (at least in this case) be supporting to actions of the CCP to debt-trap Laos.

Yes, that is correct. I support Laos' right of self-determination and respect their sovreignity and believe China is acting like any good capitalist in this case. The west should have been a better capitalist. But this isn't new. If you look at the colonization of the americas, europe chose to import slaves instead of employ their own people and eradicated governemnts and empires because their way was superior and they can't stand to respect the ways if the natives or allow them to self-determine and choose how to live and govern themselves, this pattern repeated in africa and after the division of former colonies and cold-war era invasions (circling back on how laos became the most bombed country because america invaded vietnam to contain China (pentagon papers)), subversions and proxy wars to contain the inferior communists and now that pattern continues with the rise of China.

My fear is China will beat the arrogant west at its own game -- capitalism! And as an American at least, I would much rather have America as the leading and influential super power. What I see and hear is how disconnected much of the west is from poor countries and how their suffering and poverty is nowhere near grasped by the plurality of the west.

> My fear is China will beat the arrogant west at its own game -- capitalism! And as an American at least, I would much rather have America as the leading and influential super power. What I see and hear is how disconnected much of the west is from poor countries and how their suffering and poverty is nowhere near grasped by the plurality of the west.

Then is your problem that America isn't doing the debt trapping? Am I understanding that correctly?

As a an European I very much dislike the thought of this being a necessary evil, as it will most likely result in more suffering in the long run. But maybe that's where I'm wrong?

Not at all, is it not possible to succeed without debt trapping? If you build a road, you can agree to collect tolls on it and require a percentage of that is paid back to the construcrion company forever. You can structure and restructure the debt as needed, use your workers like the Chinese. Is the only reason masses of westerners visit asia to invade? I do not approve of CCPs ways but until the west does better and competes it has no place criticizing China.

The obvious datapoint that Laos will fall is the failure of all the other Belt and Road initiatives.

Sri Lanka is the obvious one. But even Pakistan has lost access to vast swathes of its territory which are policed by the Chinese, and has little to show for it. The infrastructure being built’s only purpose is to make transport of Chinese goods easier.

Sri lanka is in talks with China to restructure debt and Pakistan is a nuclear power it won't just lose territory unless it was intentional, hard to say they have little to show for it when the road isn't complete.

Why should the western do the dirty jobs? It is the same as different jobs taken by immigrates and locals. Why not selling a bag made by other people, slap on a logo and sell it for 99% profit?

All China is doing is giving money to politicians and/or dictators for their short term benefit and in return those politicians and dictators are giving China massive long term benefits.

Western countries shouldn’t be beating China at this game because it’s a fucked up game that is very obviously designed to play the decision makers’ interests against the interests of the nation and its people.