So turns out all the hype about "debt trap" diplomacy is just US government nonsense, since they instead to prefer to keep Africans poor and depended on aid with strings attached, instead.
Research released in March, titled How China Lends, lifts the veil on Chinas debt contracts with foreign governments. Done by AidData, the Peterson Institute for International Economics and the Kiel Institute, it provides some valuable insights when put alongside the work at Johns Hopkins China-Africa Research Institute.
The study, based on 300 contracts worth more than US$36 billion, says the mix of confidentiality, seniority and policy influence could limit the sovereign debtors crisis management options and complicate debt renegotiation.
However, it also says the debate over Chinas lending strategy and intention is largely based on conjecture. Existing research and policy debate rests upon anecdotal accounts in media reports, cherry-picked cases and isolated excerpts from a small number of contracts.
Brautigam, of the China-Africa Research Institute, reaches similar conclusions. Chinas march outward, like its domestic development, is probing and experimental, a learning process marked by frequent adjustment, she says.
In another publication, she said her studies of Chinas FDI contracts found no asset seizures, evidence of use of courts to enforce payment or penalty interest rates. Countering claims that China refused to renegotiate contracts, she found 94 cases of cancellation, 16 of debt restructuring and one case of refinancing.
While Chinas obsession about confidentiality and lack of transparency fuels suspicion about intentions, she found that despite critics worries that China would seize its borrowers assets, we do not see China attempting to take advantage of countries in debt distress.