Connect with us
Wise usd campaign
ADVERTISEMENT

Trade

Resetting China–Sri Lanka relations for a Biden presidency

Published

on

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi shakes hands with Sri Lankan Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa in Colombo, Sri Lanka, 14 January 2020 (Photo: Reuters/Dinuka Liyanawatte).

Author: Ganeshan Wignaraja, Overseas Development Institute

During his visit to Sri Lanka on 28 October, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urged Sri Lanka to make a difficult but necessary choice with regards to its relationship with China. With US president-elect Joe Biden due to be inaugurated in January 2021, the time is ripe to reassess the state of China–Sri Lanka relations given Sri Lanka’s strategic location in the centre of the Indian Ocean.

China and Sri Lanka have enjoyed warm diplomatic ties since Sri Lanka first recognised China in 1950, supporting China’s accession to the United Nations and signing a rubber-rice barter deal in 1952. More recently, China’s global ascent has moved its diplomatic relations with Sri Lanka in a more commercial direction.

The Chinese debt trap remains a controversial issue. Since the early 2000s, China has become an important provider of commercial loans to Sri Lanka for infrastructure projects. There are claims that by accepting such loans Sri Lanka is now stuck in a ‘debt trap’. But Sri Lanka is not in a Chinese debt trap. Sri Lanka’s external public debt owed to China amounted to US$5 billion in 2018 or about 6 per cent of GDP.

Sri Lanka owes more of its external public debt to financial markets and multilateral and bilateral lenders than to China. The country’s generally high debt-to-GDP ratio over the past decade reflects the costs of a 30-year civil conflict, lacklustre post-conflict growth and notable currency depreciation.

The economic impact of Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) projects is another issue. The cumulative value of Chinese infrastructure investment in Sri Lanka amounted to US$13 billion between 2006 and August 2020. Some projects have brought greater benefits to Sri Lanka’s economy than others. The Colombo International Container Terminal has allowed the deep-water Colombo Port to become South Asia’s premier transhipment hub. The adjacent Colombo Port City, built on reclaimed land from the sea, could be a game changer for modern service sector growth and post-COVID-19 economic recovery.

But the benefits of some BRI projects in Sri Lanka remain questionable, including the Colombo Lotus Tower — a delayed telecommunications and leisure project. The rising imported inputs from China for construction projects in Sri Lanka have widened the significant trade deficit between the two countries. There are also less visible economic spill-overs from Chinese projects in terms of foreign investment from China into the Sri Lankan manufacturing sector, technology transfer and local job creation.

Senior Indian officials are concerned that a growing Chinese footprint risks violating Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and threatens India’s Southern flank and national security. Concerns have arisen that Hambantota Port — managed by a Chinese state-owned enterprise — could become a dual use commercial/military facility. The concerns grew following India’s skirmishes with China in the Himalayas. In an attempt to reassure India, the Sri Lankan Navy has emphasised that it manages port calls made by foreign ships and security at Hambantota Port. India–Sri Lanka defence cooperation has been bolstered by regular defence dialogues, navy exercises and training in India for the Sri Lankan armed forces.

Communist Party Politburo Member Yang Jiechi visited Sri Lanka just after Pompeo and provided a US$90 million grant for medical care, education and water supplies to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic. Meanwhile, the United States remains Sri Lanka’s largest export market and has donated US$6 million in COVID-19 assistance to Sri Lanka.

President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has since congratulated Joe Biden on his election, stating that he looks forward to working with him. Amid a likely continuation of US–China trade and technology rivalries, the Biden administration will likely expect Sri Lanka to match words with deeds.

As a small state without a large military, Sri Lanka should adhere to a strict non-aligned foreign policy in its relations with great powers, emulating the success of Singapore and New Zealand. Sri Lanka should also pursue transparent, market-oriented policies to reassure the United States and other investors. To further allay India’s security concerns, an India–Sri Lanka–Maldives maritime safety and security pact could be explored. These steps would permit Sri Lanka to better leverage its ties with China for post-COVID-19 economic recovery. This requires moving from a foreign borrowing relationship to one emphasising trade and…

Source link

Continue Reading

Trade

Self-Reliance and Openness: Core Principles of China’s Third Plenary Session

Published

on

The Third Plenum communique from the CCP indicates a prioritization of stability and compromise in response to China’s economic challenges. It highlights the concept of Chinese-style modernization and establishes political guidelines for balancing regulation and market forces.

The CCP’s Third Plenum communique signals a focus on stability and compromise in the face of China’s economic challenges. It emphasises Chinese-style modernisation and sets political directions for balancing regulation and market forces. While not as groundbreaking as previous plenums, it acknowledges the importance of market mechanisms and technological self-reliance, aiming to address issues like high youth unemployment and private sector uncertainty. The communique seeks to navigate the complexities of global competition and domestic innovation, potentially reshaping global supply chains and trade dynamics. Overall, it presents a pragmatic blueprint for China’s economic future.

Source : Self-reliance and openness central pillars of China’s Third Plenum | East Asia Forum

Continue Reading

Trade

Trade Prevails Over Political Persuasions in China-Germany Relations

Published

on

Russia one of EU's top-three exporters Eurostat

China and Germany maintain a strong bilateral relationship, rooted in economic cooperation despite ideological differences. Recent visits and agreements focus on expanding trade and addressing mutual concerns, navigating challenges while nurturing ties.


Evolving Bilateral Ties

China and Germany share a strong bilateral relationship, rooted in history since 1972. This connection has seen moments of cooperation intertwined with periods of tension. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s April 2024 visit underscores Germany’s commitment to fostering this partnership, reflecting a mutual interest in maintaining economic ties despite ideological differences.

Economic Pragmatism

As the second and third largest global economies, China and Germany’s economic interdependence is crucial. Germany emerged as China’s primary trading partner in 2023, with trade values reaching €254.4 billion (US$280 billion). In response to global scrutiny, Germany has taken a balanced approach, emphasizing economic stability over political discord. This was evident during Scholz’s prior visit in November 2022, where his diplomatic tone contrasted with broader EU sentiments.

Facing Challenges Together

Despite increasing public skepticism in Germany regarding China’s global influence and human rights issues, both nations continue to seek common ground. Their October 2023 Joint Statement highlights intentions to pursue cooperation in areas like carbon neutrality and open markets. To navigate these complex terrains, Germany can utilize its institutional frameworks to enhance dialogue, while also considering supply chain diversification to reduce dependency on China. The intertwining nature of their economies suggests that, despite challenges, both countries will continue to prioritize their substantial trade relations.

Source : Trade trumps political persuasions in China–Germany relations

Source link

Continue Reading

Trade

Fixing fragmentation in the settlement of international trade disputes

Published

on

Fragmentation in global trade due to the lack of development in multilateral trade rules at the WTO has led to an increase in FTAs. The Appellate Body impasse has further exacerbated fragmentation, requiring a multilateral approach for reform.

Fragmentation in Global Trade

Fragmentation in global trade is not new. With the slow development of multilateral trade rules at the World Trade Organization (WTO), governments have turned to free trade agreements (FTAs). As of 2023, almost 600 bilateral and regional trade agreements have been notified to the WTO, leading to growing fragmentation in trade rules, business activities, and international relations. But until recently, trade dispute settlements have predominantly remained within the WTO.

Challenges with WTO Dispute Settlement

The demise of the Appellate Body increased fragmentation in both the interpretation and enforcement of trade law. A small number of WTO Members created the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (MPIA) as a temporary solution, but in its current form, it cannot properly address fragmentation. Since its creation in 2020, the MPIA has only attracted 26 parties, and its rulings have not been consistent with previous decisions made by the Appellate Body, rendering WTO case law increasingly fragmented.

The Path Forward for Global Trade

Maintaining the integrity and predictability of the global trading system while reducing fragmentation requires restoring the WTO’s authority. At the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference in 2022, governments agreed to re-establish a functional dispute settlement system by 2024. Reaching a consensus will be difficult, and negotiations will take time. A critical mass-based, open plurilateral approach provides a viable alternative way to reform the appellate mechanism, as WTO Members are committed to reforming the dispute settlement system.

Source : Fixing fragmentation in the settlement of international trade disputes

Continue Reading