
Chinese may take over Mombasa port: Ouko - tartoran
https://www.nation.co.ke/news/Chinese-may-take-Mombasa-Port--Ouko/1056-4902162-xfphu7z/index.html
======
oliv__
Google cache version:

[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3CnkxG...](https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3CnkxGOB4bsJ:https://www.africanstand.com/news/africa/east-
africa/china-to-take-over-kenyas-main-port-over-unpaid-huge-chinese-
loan/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=fr)

~~~
chapium
Here is another article as well:
[https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nation.co.ke/news/Chinese-m...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nation.co.ke/news/Chinese-
may-take-Mombasa-Port--Ouko/1056-4902162-view-asAMP-4jem8jz/index.html)

~~~
dang
Since that article seems both more informative and more neutral (for example,
it says "China may" while the other article says "China to"), we switched to
it from [https://www.africanstand.com/news/africa/east-
africa/china-t...](https://www.africanstand.com/news/africa/east-africa/china-
to-take-over-kenyas-main-port-over-unpaid-huge-chinese-loan/). Also, this one
is still up and that one isn't. Thanks!

~~~
chapium
cheers

------
kolikotime
West African American here (Ghanaian - American). This article actually isn't
true, while the Kenyan Chinese pact that led to the construction of the
Nairobi - Mombasa Port does have clauses related to penalties around lack of
payment, there has been no actual announcement or any signs of China declaring
possession of the Mombasa Port. In fact, the big issue in Mombasa right now is
actually revolving around a Kenyan state company taking over one of the
terminals, a situation that doesn't delight the workers due to the late
payment periods of said state company.

Speaking furthermore, I do find it highly concerning just how much of an echo
chamber this place is in regards to this notion of "Chinese colonialism" and
Chinese "debt - traps". Most African countries still owe far more to the
IMF/World Bank than they due to China. Of the 54 African countries, only four
are in severe debt to the Chinese (Ethiopia, Kenya, Djibouti, Zambia), and of
those four countries China has gone the distance in terms of reviving moribund
national rail systems and helping to set up industrial zones, which is in part
why East Africa boasts the highest growth rates on the continent.

Africa is a vast continent with booming populations. They're also counties
with deeply huge infrastructure needs. Ghana alone while one of the richer
African countries is in desperate need of new roads, power plants (blackout
issues), hospitals (we recently passed a universal healthcare law), and
education(we recently launched universal free senior high school education).
The funding to launch these countries into elevated statehood isn't going to
come from the West. The city Of New York's pension fund isn't going to be
investing likely in the KSE (Kenyan Stock Exchange).

So are there issues with Chinese engagement? Yes. Will some countries make a
botch of it? Yes. But are other countries seizing the opportunity and using it
to drive a higher standard of life? Yes. But in my opinion it is a far better
arrangement than the European sponsored neocolonialism of the past. France in
particular still operates a monetary zone that operates in 14 African
countries in its former colonial obit, and we cannot forget the provocations
against the Gaddafi regime earlier this decade which resulted in accelerating
a migrant rush towards Western Europe. The Chinese stay out of African
politics. and in historical terms have largely not interfered in the political
processes of countries not in their "near abroad" to borrow a Russian
political term.

Anyway those are my thoughts from someone who is African and has actually been
to various countries in Africa.

~~~
afpx
Having worked with the World Bank in the past, I think that’s a very
uninformed and biased view. They have been very effective in reducing poverty
and improving infrastructure in Africa.

I recommend that you read facts about what they do before reading random
opinions online (from brand new accounts, especially).

Also, I know dang warns us about pointing out potential propaganda, but this
seems like this post is a good example of what I’m talking about.

~~~
creaghpatr
That’s an awfully dismissive comment to a well laid out argument, you’re not
really helping make a case for World Bank, which has been rife with corruption
for decades.

~~~
afpx
Sorry, I seem to have missed the ‘well-laid out argument’.

All I’m asking is that people read facts about the World Bank and make their
own opinions.

~~~
kolikotime
The World Bank had free reign largely in Africa from the 1960s until the early
2000s. They and the IMF had an untrammeled monopoly for the most part, which
was further supercharged by the 1980s Washington consensus. In that time
period African states on the whole became poorer and state infrastructure
crumbled. Now its not entirely on the World Bank/IMF of course, as in many
countries there was misgovernance, but we can wholly agree they did not create
Eden in Africa.

What has changed the equation for the continent started in the 2000s, the
commodities boom along with telecommunications improvement, along with the
entrant of new players such as China, India, Turkey, and until recently
Brazil(in the Lusophone states).

So if we choose to look at those historical datapoints, without even getting
into abuses at the IMF/World bank, we can effectively agree that the Bretton
Woods sisters have done very little to move the needle on African prosperity.

Can anyone blame Africans for ignoring the World Bank and IMF when the
countries that did ignore its orthodoxy, from China in the late 1970s to then
India in the early 1990s, prospered?

~~~
forapurpose
Can you back up this claim? My understanding is that, speaking very generally
about a large continent, most African countries did not implement the economic
fundamentals preached by the World Bank and IMF, but failed to due to
corruption and institutional problems, including a lack of the rule of law.
What African country adopted the rule of law, open markets, stable monetary
policies, a significant reduction in corruption, and failed to prosper?

> the countries that did ignore its orthodoxy, from China in the late 1970s to
> then India in the early 1990s, prospered

China and India did not at all ignore the 'orthodoxy', but enacted it and that
is credited with their economic expansion. China and India adopted capitalism,
opened their markets, and adopted economic fundamentals such as stable
monetary policy.

~~~
kolikotime
It is to my understanding that China was a relative latecomer to the World
Bank and has never been a particularly heavy lender from the bank or the IMF,
not to the extent that African states were subjected to. And furthermore while
China did follow certain strains of the orthodoxy, it retained heavy state
control and influence over many sectors and industries, something very few
African states were able to retain following the Washington Consensus.

African states on the other hand, about 40 states in the 1980s underwent what
we would call Structural Adjustment programs. State owned enterprises were
sold, huge slashing cuts were made to education and healthcare(This in part
decimated Nigeria's regional class university system), and various legal
reforms for the benefit of Western investors. The results of those experiments
were generally failed and led to a disastrous late 1980s and 1990s on the
continent.

In terms of a country that implemented many of those reforms and failed to get
that far. I would say both Ghana and Tanzania are pertinent examples. Ghana
has implemented about three to four rounds of IMF engagement since the 1980s
and is hailed regionally for its rule of law and stable political and
investment climate, it still only has a GDP per capita of $1,641. Then you
have Tanzania which since the 1980s has largely abandoned state socialism and
embraced a mixed market economy, its GDP per capita? a whopping $936.

------
mtw
The title is false; nowhere in the article says that Kenya is unable to pay
loan payments. It merely states that there's a contract clause that says China
might take over Mombasa port if payments are not due.

Kenya is not Sri Lanka, it's a wealthier country. They will find a way to pay
back the payment. What can be discussed is if it was the right decision to
build a high speed train. A much better decision would be to stick upgrading
the road network.

~~~
statictype
>Kenya is not Sri Lanka, it's a wealthier country.

Is it? Measured by GDP, they are lower than Sri Lanka.

What metric are you using?

~~~
thedudeabides5
World Bank puts Sri Lankan GDP ~$87bn USD to Kenya ~$75bn, per capita the gap
is wider, Sri Lanka ~$4,000 to Kenya's $1,500

------
c13u
Adding more breadth to AfricanStand

It's still controversial. KBC (state media) has an article[1] disproving the
claim. The Standard (one of 2 major local news) has an article[2] exploring
alleged papers from the Attorney General's Office that specify Kenya's port
income as collateral. The papers were exposed by John Githongo[3], a
politician who has tendencies of uncovering government misdeeds. He was in
exile a while back...

[1] [http://www.kbc.co.ke/chinese-govt-dismisses-report-of-
mombas...](http://www.kbc.co.ke/chinese-govt-dismisses-report-of-mombasa-port-
being-collateral/)

[2] [https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2001306837/does-
keny...](https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2001306837/does-kenya-risk-
losing-port-to-china)

[3]
[https://twitter.com/johngithongo/status/1075187915875971072](https://twitter.com/johngithongo/status/1075187915875971072)

------
chanux
The issue is a bit close to heart as a Sri Lankan. Here's an article which
discusses the situation of LK and who else is in risk of a debt trap
[https://qz.com/1317234/chinas-debt-trap-in-sri-lanka-is-
even...](https://qz.com/1317234/chinas-debt-trap-in-sri-lanka-is-even-worse-
than-we-thought/)

~~~
niyikiza
The Sri Lanka case is the only credible case of "infrastructure seized by
China because of insolvency"...but the media has used it to spread lots of
fake stories about "China taking over Africa".

~~~
tim333
Glancing at the Wikipedia article the port wasn't exactly seized due to
insolvency. There was a debt for equity swap on 70% of the port and then China
agreed to pay $1.4bn for a 99 year lease on the port and some surrounding
land.

------
melling
There were several stories a few months ago about how China’s Silk Road
projects were being given to countries they couldn’t pay them back. I guess
it’s true. Look for more of this.

~~~
supergirl
rich loan to poor to get richer. this is new to you? you think china is the
first or the last to do this? IMF is doing this wherever they can. the west is
annoyed china is doing this too so they push all these "amg china is evil"
articles to stir the pot and try to turn the locals against chinese.

~~~
icebraining
I'm not sure comparing China with the IMF will help your case; at least in my
Western European country, the IMF is itself considered evil by many.

~~~
barry-cotter
Much easier to blame the IMF than the fact that if you want to spend more than
you take in in taxes you’re going to have inflation and currency depreciation
unless you have capital controls. Also, the IMF doesn’t really lend large
amounts of money to countries that can access global capital markets
generally. Non-concessional lending is mostly for when no one will lend your
country money because you’re not expected to be able to repay. Concessional
lending is interest free so I struggle to see how they’re supposed to make
money on that.

------
KaoruAoiShiho
How does this happen, a website, literally created on 5 months ago, probably
just for this article, hits the HN front page. If you google africastand it
asks "do you mean africasand". OP how did you come across this article?

Edit: my bad made a typo. Ignore the google part. But the post still stands.

~~~
thegeomaster
It's "africanstand", not "africastand". When you google that, the website
shows up.

------
MrBuddyCasino
So this is Economic Hitmen 2.0. China watched and learned from what the US did
in South America.

~~~
raverbashing
I think when compared with Chinese imperialism, people will miss the US

~~~
buboard
I think people are overstating the chinese capacity to run a world-class
imperialist project. China still has a long way to go to making their own
country functional before they can do this kind of outreach

~~~
mschuster91
> China still has a long way to go to making their own country functional
> before they can do this kind of outreach

China has _massive_ amounts of US dollars (and lower, but still decent,
amounts of Euros) which are useless at home but can move literal mountains in
Africa.

Basically China can act like a VC fund in Africa: spend shitloads of money and
pray that 1 of 100 projects is gonna be a unicorn... the game is to not do it
like Europe dumping their used clothing and overproduced food over Africa, but
to provide infrastructure so that the billions of people in Africa actually
have the means to buy... yep, Chinese products.

The infrastructure is a loss leader, but ya gotta get the product into the
continent somehow. Europe and the US won't be able to profit from the infra,
we don't export anything of value except cars and software since all our
manufacturing and industry was shuttered and off-shored to... China.

------
xiii1408
Mods should, at the very least, change the title, since it is very misleading.

There is language in the deal that _would_ give China control over the port
_if_ Kenya was unable to pay back the loan. While concerning, this is very
different from that actually happening.

------
ptero
I know nothing about it, but comments to that article (in Google Cache) seems
to view the article as alarmist: for example, say that the grace period is
until 2023, so we are talking years, not weeks before something happens. No
idea if it is true or not, more info/references would be great. Can someone
give more insight?

~~~
niyikiza
I'm an African myself, but while Chinese model is different from the aid model
we are familiar with, it's helping solve so many problems that we had no
alternatives for. China is willing to come in with loans without political
strings attached. Yes, there are collaterals but Africa has its own
negotiators too, and we know the deal we get is much better than any other
country or institution would be willing to give.

~~~
NicoJuicy
No political strings attached? You mean, they just takeover and don't need
political strings?

They benefit far more, their own workers do 80% of the work and nothing is
helping the local economy. The loans also have to be paid back to China (
because they lend the money).

This is a very good way to create growth on the shoulder of others.

~~~
SmellyGeekBoy
Better infrastructure doesn't help the local economy?

~~~
dragandj
Not so much if the local economy is not developed enough to be able to utilize
it.

~~~
NicoJuicy
Short answer, but to the point.

These prestigious projects go broke without customers. The Chinese just gain
control of the "strategic" location.

------
paraditedc
Okay that's enough China bashing threads. On the positive side, China has in
the past waived some debts of African countries, which don't get to top of HN.

[https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-xi-pledges-60-billion-
to...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-xi-pledges-60-billion-toward-
africas-development-waives-some-debt-1535985008)

~~~
mb_72
Well... [https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-16/are-china-cheap-
loans...](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-16/are-china-cheap-loans-to-
poor-nations-a-debt-trap/10493286) ... not sure what 'bashing' you are talking
about. This 'debt-trap diplomacy' is a real concern here in Australia.

~~~
paraditedc
Your article talks about the same issue as the one being discussed here. And
my comment is to shed light onto this issue from the other side (debt issuer).
Anything wrong with that?

------
niyikiza
I see these stories popping up every now and then usually from debatable
sources and people continue to believe them because they fit "the suspected
plot" even when concerned parties deny them. I hate to sound like that
conspiracy guy but could it just be that some people are not happy with China
getting into partnerships with African countries?

Edit: typo

~~~
qrybam
An acquaintance travels around Africa relatively frequently and his
observations seem to be in line with the OP article sentiment. From China’s
perspective it makes a lot of sense to buy up Africa, it’s a resource rich
continent and was essentially given up by the west.

~~~
niyikiza
I grew up in Africa myself. And yes, China is getting more involved in more
projects than it used to but it's only because their terms are more favorable
than our darling western powers'. African countries are not some teenager girl
who is being duped into doing something they don't see themselves.

~~~
vixen99
Your inappropriate metaphor; no one else's.

~~~
kadendogthing
It's entirely appropriate. HN should fix its attitude on this issue.

------
awakeasleep
Could the USA or an european nation offer to pay the loan in exchange for
taking over the port? Itd be cool to swoop in on this deal.

~~~
m000
Greece should have thought of that:

    
    
      - Provide unfettered economic access to China for 20 years in exchange for having the country's debt paid by them.
      - Seed a few alarmist articles.
      - Wait until USA and EU go crazy over that and summarily agree on a debt write-off.

~~~
MFrGfBmq
Greece already leases the port of Piraeus to China. Didn't help much, our
country's richest families are shipping magnates.

~~~
cauldron
I mean Greece is selling EU permanent residency to Chinese for 250K euros
(property purchse), you can take with you all your parents and kids, best of
all, it doesn't require you to actually live there to get it.

------
speeq
Just like in Sri Lanka then:
[https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/world/asia/china-sri-
lank...](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/world/asia/china-sri-lanka-
port.html)

------
chapium
I have little sympathy other than for the people of Mombasa and Kenya who want
autonomy over this port and have no say in these deals. The damage done here
appears to be self inflicted.

------
maypeacepreva1l
As with any sales there could be that factor of China trying to sell more of
their product/services(just like US does to sell weapons in various nations)
but I find it strange that people are trying to politicize it being debt trap
and trying to garner sympathy towards the defaulter than towards the victim
who didn't get paid.

~~~
SuperNinKenDo
It's because it's very clear that China's intent with such loans is to create
a casus belli for such seizures or create complete economic reliance. Nobody
is going to sympathise with a predatory loanshark when they don't get paid and
use it as an excuse to grab what they really wanted all along.

~~~
paraditedc
_> It's because it's very clear that China's intent with such loans is to
create a casus belli for such seizures or create complete economic reliance._

Do you have actual evidence that this was the intention?

~~~
SuperNinKenDo
Let me know what evidence a 50 center would accept. Everyone else is
convinced, so it's only you I would be working to sway.

~~~
paraditedc
1\. I don't appreciate being called _50 center_.

2\. Any evidence will do, as long as it comes from a reputable source. You get
to decide what constitutes a "reputable source".

------
based2
[https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/world/asia/china-sri-
lank...](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/world/asia/china-sri-lanka-
port.html)

------
KeepTalking
To take over Mombasa port is the equivalent of a strategic takeout/takeover of
a number of East African countries. Mombasa port and its adjoining highway
connects Uganda, South Sudan, Rwanda, and Burundi. 100% of East Africa's
export cash crop produce (Coffee, Tea) flows through the port which translates
to significant revenues and GDP. I really hope that African para-state
agencies (African Dev Bank) steps in and provides monetary assistance to
Kenya.

Times like this make me wish that the EA community takes off and together
these tiny countries are able to better band together and pony up.

------
hkt
Imperialism by any other name.

------
late2part
For those interested in the more nefarious paths these situations could take,
you might read _Confessions of an Economic Hitman_. This books talks about how
nation states and corporations can work together to create situations for
global influence.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_H...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_Hit_Man)

------
mondo9000
Also a port in Israel surprisingly enough [https://www.jpost.com/Israel-
News/US-Navy-may-stop-docking-i...](https://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/US-Navy-
may-stop-docking-in-Haifa-after-Chinese-take-over-port-574414)

------
yes_man
Reminded me of this: [https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/addis-ababa-china-
cons...](https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/addis-ababa-china-construction-
style/index.html)

------
talltimtom
The first shots of the next world way where fired decades ago. Nobody saw them
light up the sky, for they where delivered by paper. No one read the news, for
the catualtiea would not fall until several decades later.

------
lordnacho
Before we throw about the term "Imperialism", let's remember what kinds of
things the European powers did that are rightly considered part of it:

\- Violently forcing "trade" to happen, often under an "East India Company".
You can have cannon balls or opium.

\- Forcing the local administration to learn the language and legal system of
the imperial power. Why do they speak English in Kenya?

\- Suppressing local rule. How many people had to die in independence wars?

\- Moving people around who didn't want to be moved. Plantation Rum anybody?

To compare current China with something like the British Empire is not very
reasonable.

~~~
nova22033
>To compare current China with something like the British Empire is not very
reasonable.

This is a strawman from PRC apologists. The article doesn't do that at all.

Also, the British doing bad things in the past is no excuse for governments
doing things like this today.

~~~
kadendogthing
>no excuse for governments doing things like this today.

Giving loans out for public infrastructure?

------
ac130kz
Just remember that China basically gifted a 100M$ bridge to the Maldives. Now
imagine the global scale of Chinese investments.

------
api
News is interesting but site is awful. It's slow and I got an ad with an
obvious malware popup. Blech.

------
NicoJuicy
Colonisation has begun, all in the excuse of "one road, one belt"

------
imustbeevil
If I think "why would China go to Africa instead of poor areas of China?" my
first thought is "what they're doing in Africa doesn't help Africa".

~~~
onlyrealcuzzo
Honestly, it's probably because this port has a higher projected ROI than some
poor area of China.

~~~
barry-cotter
You radically overestimate the competence of the Chinese government. The BRI
is a white elephant, a foreign policy initiative with Xi’s imprimatur. It’s
more important to be doing BRI things than that they make money.

------
cauldron
I'd say it's worth it for Kenya, these are huge money-losing projects anyway,

~~~
bawana
China has two major projects to dam up the white nile and the blue nile
upstream from Egypt and Sudan (who curreently use 90% of the Nile water)
Ethiopia, and Kenya will take control of the Nile and the two countries that
currently consume 90% of the Nile water will be starved into submission by
their Chinese landlords through taxes and fees over water. China needs a port
for their Navy so they can 'protect' their 'investment'. There are many
Chinese projects ongoing in Africa and there are whole towns that look like
they were imported from China.The concept of 'lebensraum' and the hunger for
growth among the powerful continues to disrespect geographical boundaries that
gave rise to the magnificent diversity on this planet. The only loss that I
mourn is the set of unique cultures and heritage of the many people inn
Africa. The great homogenizer (capitalism, growth,etc) will obliterate the
diversity on that continent. OTOH, maybe the hybrid vigor of Afro-Chinese
offspring will give rise to a new more robust strain of humanity.

~~~
cauldron
>China needs a port for their Navy

China already has a naval base in Djibouti near the American one.

And it's not like if China want to use the port to park their military
vessels, Kenya somehow would refuse them.

I mean China literally operates their vital railway and terminals.

As for their culture, I'm afraid it's already done.
[https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/05/world/africa/ethiopia-
gov...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/05/world/africa/ethiopia-government-
surveillance.html)

------
forapurpose
The amount of propaganda is damaging my experience here. Not unlike Facebook
and other platforms, HN seems to resist discussing how its platform is being
abused and how it damages user experience; users are forbidden from discussing
it publicly (in fact, I hope this comment is on the ok side of the guidelines,
as I'm not accusing anyone in particular). I'm confident that HN works on the
issue, so perhaps my difficulty is with a lack of transparency (again, similar
to Facebook) - we have no idea what is being done; we're in the dark. We can't
trust that the content we see is in good faith; it's a constant frustration
and struggle to read, and most of my time is spent on noise. Propaganda is the
worst content; it's noise to the signal and it's worse than noise because it
manipulates HN users; we also now know, if it wasn't clear before, that it's a
danger to free, democratic society - which is not something abstract, but
something that happens right here on HN.

The pattern I see, so often that it's predictable and a source of frustration:
1. It's easy to stay beneath the moderators' radar by sounding 'reasonable'
(in fact, on other topics, that's an explicitly taught strategy to white
supremacists [0], it's a well-established technique of propaganda going back
decades if not centuries, and I expect that professional astroturfers in any
domain have the same skills); 2. the astroturfers almost always appear; I
expected to see many pro-China comments appear here, including from purported
Kenyans / East Africans (I certainly wouldn't say all are propaganda, but the
pattern over many discussions seems clear enough that it's predictable); 3. on
issues about which few HN users have knowledge or expertise, such as this one,
there aren't even many people who can rebut the astroturfers; it's one-sided.

EDIT: Major revisions; apologies to anyone who read an earlier draft.

[0] _... he presented himself as polite, articulate and interested in cultural
politics, and though his views are abhorrent, he stated them all so
laconically you might forget that he actually believes in the concept of a
white ethnostate. And that’s the point: The genius of the new far right, if we
could call it “genius,” has been their steadfast determination to blend into
the larger fabric of society to such an extent that perhaps the only way you
might see them as a problem is if you actually want to see them at all._

[https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/magazine/FBI-
charlottesvi...](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/magazine/FBI-
charlottesville-white-nationalism-far-right.html)

~~~
kolikotime
This seems as if its pointed at me. I will say that I find it sad that modern
discourse has reached such a sad state that we suspect everyone who has a
nonconformist opinion of being a bot/robot/astroturfer.

All I will say is that I am no lover of China. Chinese civilization, like
Western civilization has exhibited anti-black tendencies and attitudes. The
Chinese are great lovers of African markets, but not African people.

I do encourage you though to try to understand the African perspective on this
issue, as well as other related issues that you may not generally understand
before you try to characterize it as propaganda. Modern Africa is in a state
of flux and deeply in need of infrastructure. There are many who say there are
heavy costs to Chinese built infrastructure in Africa, Those same analysts
will not reflect on the severe costs currently to Africa of its lack of
infrastructures. The absence of intra-regional rail, highways, of connected
electricity grids, of pipes and pipelines. If the West is truly concerned
about African welfare, they can always step to the fore with their own
expansive infrastructure agenda, but they largely won't, and we all know the
reason why.

~~~
forapurpose
It was not pointed at you or at anyone; it was a comment about my general
experience as an HN user. I didn't realize that your account existed before
you replied. My motives and knowledge, including about Africa (a word I
personally wouldn't use for a very large and diverse area), are not what you
assume; please don't attribute things to me.

FWIW, Western analysts have talked about the problems of Sub-Saharan African
infrastructure extensively and for a long time, and the West has attempted to
fund it. IIRC, generally it has been found that foreign-built and -funded
infrastructure projects fail, due to problems like corruption, rule of law
issues, lack of involvement by local communities, lack of understanding by
foreign funders, and lack of capacity for maintenance. As an analogy, you
can't just drop an infrastructure project on a country any more than you can
just drop an ERP system on a company; the company has to be ready, have
capabilities, and needs a lot of highly effective consulting if you want a
chance of success. The West's prior attempts at funding led to a massive 'debt
trap' for many poor countries, making debt relief a major priority (and one
that was resolved to a large extent). As I understand it, the predominant view
now is that developing local capabilities, including building institutions and
functioning government, is a necessary precursor to things like
infrastructure. Kenya's problem with the port, on its surface, would seem to
be a repeat of the old development pitfalls.

------
ryanqian
Does this fake news?

------
kevmo
Forcing/enticing people to incur debts they can't pay off is a time-honored
colonialist tactic for gaining control of land.

~~~
hkt
Yes. Belt and road is imperialism, no doubt. We (Europeans) did the same to
Africa before.

~~~
hannasanarion
And it was condemnable then too.

~~~
chirau
It was, but it wasn't actually condemned. In fact, the West scrambled for
Africa. They still are, just that they have another player who doesn't play by
their rules now.

