Italy Joins China's New Silk Road Project

> The European Union is also worried about unfair competition from Chinese companies, which are controlled by the Chinese government and benefit from the state’s financial backing. EU leaders in Brussels are preparing a strategy to counter the growing influence of China, which they describe as a “systemic rival.”

Most of the Western articles I've read express concern over Italy's involvement in the BRI. However, I am cautiously optimistic: maybe having one of the G7 countries participate in the BRI is a good way to cooperate with China and bring a more inclusive and globalistic approach to working with China? I think it's too early to tell how this will end, but I'm less pessimistic than most.

Look at Sri Lanka where nothing has been done except environmental disaster. Now Sri Lanka owes its soul, and land, to China. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/12/world/asia/sri-lanka-chin...

Montenegro has a bridge to nowhere built by Chinese workers instead of locals. Billions owed to China for a useless bridge. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-silkroad-europe-mon...

It seems to be China "invading" countries to gain territory only in a roundabout way. Like the Godfather China made an offer that couldn't be refused.

Thanks for this. Do you think it would be different if it's an EU member state? i.e., with EU oversight (assuming there is any), the BRI funds and investments could be applied and used differently.

one model for how it's going to work out is the US experience of stronger economic integration with China over the last 30 years. the EU should simply study in great detail the pros/cons of that history.

the analogy seems useful:

* China has the more united and disciplined central government, while the US had a more federalized, decentralized government, approximately like the EU.

* China has based its economic growth on exports, which is far less true of the US (and EU excluding Germany)

* China does not guarantee many (or any) economic rights to outsiders within its boundaries, whereas the US does. similarly the EU grants relatively strong rights, including government financial assistance and medical care, to outsiders within its boundaries

the simplest prediction is that it will turn out roughly the same way as it has for the US, and Germany, the EU zone's current main exporter, has the most to lose.

The bridge seems a terrible investment, regardless of who pays for it, but these terms are terrible:

"Under the terms of the contract, an arbitration court in China would have jurisdiction in the event of any legal dispute. CRBC won commitments that all imported construction materials, equipment and other goods be exempt from customs and value-added tax. Chinese workers were given 70 percent of the work."

Thr Chinese government issues a loan then disputes are handled by a body whose independence is highly questionable.

I’ll take useless bridge any day over so many destroyed bridges that US left in montenenegro in yugoslavia bombings and wars elsewere in the world.

Actually China, the biggest exporter, exports for less than 20% of its GDP. Nearly all of the major countries depend more on their exports except Japan and the USA.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_exports

Technically the bombing was done by NATO. The US forces which participated were just one of several militaries acting under overall NATO command. Ironically Montenegro is now a NATO member.

But the model of economic growth China pursued in the last couple of decades is export driven. This assessment is from 2011:

Much of China’s remarkable growth between 1978 and 2000 can be explained by the reform. But the more recent and faster growth in the last decade has been mainly driven by exports.

https://www.eastasiaforum.org/2011/02/27/chinas-export-led-g...