Trudeau Liberal government signing on with China's new investment bank to fund infrastructure

19 posts / 0 new
Last post
quizzical
Trudeau Liberal government signing on with China's new investment bank to fund infrastructure

is this how Justin is going to fund promised infrastructure to cities?

by not funding them at all and making them gets loans from this "new bank" he is investing 1 billion of Canadians dollars in?

or what?

 

quizzical

the Liberbals didn't campaign on this move to use Canadians money.

Unionist

The bank's mandate is funding infrastructure in the Asia-Pacific region.

Sean in Ottawa

I am not so sure involving Canada in it would be a bad thing. It will counterbalance the US control over international projects and I think that is a benefit. It may also open doors for Canada.

I don't think this would be lost money.

But would be good to hear other opinions.

swallow

It's a bank founded by China, which is no better or worse inherently than a bank founded by the USA.

On the up side, it's more controlled by Asian countries than existing multilateral banks, which are US-dominated. This should bea  good thing for Asian infrastrucure development. 

However, the AIDB is currently more insulated from social movement pressure than the World Bank and Asian Development Bank, which is potentially worrying. 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

When the US uses international agencies to make debt slaves of developing nations and impose austerity on their governments, we call it democracy. Hard to know what to call this Chinese bank.  I think that Canada's elite, who have made a seamless transition to maintaining control over our government, hopes that the new bank will fund the West Coast oil and gas infrastructure that is being rammed through. The Liberals will sign on and also allow a large percentage of the jobs to be filled by employees of Chinese companies that are awarded the contracts. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68zccrskOqQ

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Some Chinese responses ...

Xinhua: Canada should grasp opportunity to build new golden era of relations with China

... the gist of which seems to be that Trudeau Jr. could follow in the footsteps of Trudeau Sr and Chretien in building trade and relations with China. The other think of note in the piece is that, basically, if Canada wants to lecture China about Human Rights, then China is happy to lecture Canada about First Nations mistreatment.

China Welcomes Canada's Decision to Join the AIIB

Trudeau will fly to Hangzhou to participate in the G20.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

The establishment of this Chinese-led bank is a result of the brutal hegemonic dominance by the US over the [US-created] post WW2 institutions like the IMF and the World Bank. So it's a response to a problem for developing countries and, of course, countries like China and, to a lesser degree, Russia. 

Sean: "It will counterbalance the US control over international projects and I think that is a benefit. It may also open doors for Canada."

I agree with the latter but given the supplicant's role of Canada in recent history, I rather think that Canada, and other NATO-connected countries in the bank, could be playing a pro-US role in this relatively new institution. Ever the chihuahua of the Empire.

Don't forget the US-led "trade" agreement in the Asia-Pacific [TPP] has been designed to exclude China [and India, fyi] . Not Taiwan, however. This is no accident. Just as the US wants to encircle Russia, they also want to do the same with China. The "New American Century" doctrine has not been abandoned by the hegemon.

"According to Zhang Yizhen’s article (2015) undoubtedly, the TPP is a US move to contain China, exactly the way the US created Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TIPP) with Europe." - This from an observer very critical of China.

TPP Responses from China and Options for India

China has the "One Belt One Road" to counter the US plans. And, like the Russians, they have a substantian public or state sector. The US is known for wanting to destroy this in virtually every country of the world. Just think of the "humanitarian bombing" in Yugoslavia as an example. More recently, Syria has been the "beneficiary" of similar US actions which, somehow, seem better at targetting Syrian infrastructure than ISIS terrorists ...

Sean in Ottawa

ikosmos wrote:

Sean: "It will counterbalance the US control over international projects and I think that is a benefit. It may also open doors for Canada."

I agree with the latter but given the supplicant's role of Canada in recent history, I rather think that Canada, and other NATO-connected countries in the bank, could be playing a pro-US role in this relatively new institution. Ever the chihuahua of the Empire.

This is an interesting observation. It is often true that due to alliances an entity could end up arguing against its own interest.

So I feel that the bank is a good thing-- but I agree that Canada's role in it may not be in support of what it should do.

Another interesting example of this arguing against your interest is the spectacle of Ireland going to Europe to argue against it getting an absolutely massive tax payment from Apple -- money it needs desperately. In this case it feels it has to defend an agreement that it waive most taxes just so Apple would come and employ people. Europe does not allow individual states to bargain with companies to the lowest denominator and that is what they say Ireland did. I am sympathetic to the need for Ireland to find some way to attract business -- without a currency to incentivize -- but I can see how this undermines the ability of the collective to charge enough taxes to sustain those countries. This is another example of how divergent needs cannot be accomodated in a united Europe. Ireland has a different tax structure so it is possible that the Irish are correct and they have not created an illegal tax deal.

I agree generally that the US economic power must be contained and I hope this bank can at least do some of that. And of course that is better for the US. The US getting all it wants is also not even in its own interest. Us expanding interests and power is not sustainable and it will break that country if not through conflict through environmental and social destruction. It is not always in the interest of a greedy recipeant to give them all they ask.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

While he's rather too gushing in his enthusiasm for all things Chinese, P. Escobar is always worth reading.  His latest does not relate to Trudeau's trip directly, but still makes for ... interesting reading.

The Whole Game is About Containing Russia-China

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/columnists/20160829/1044733257/russia-china-game-brics.html

Here is Escobar's preview of the upcoming G20 in Hangzhou, China.

The Ultimate 21st Century Choice; OBOR or War

Quote:
China will keep pressing for emerging markets to have a bigger say in the Bretton Woods system. But most of all China will seek greater G20 backing for the New Silk Roads – or One Belt, One Road (OBOR), as they are officially known – as well as the new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/columnists/20160831/1044816377/g20-geopolitical-juncture.html

An interesting summary ...

Quote:
An array of financial mechanisms is already in place. The AIIB (which will fund way beyond the initial commitment of $100 billion); the Silk Road Fund ($40 billion already committed); the BRICS’s New Development Bank (NDB), initially committing $100 billion; plus assorted players such as the China Development Bank and the Hong Kong-based China Merchants Holdings International.

Chinese state companies and funds are relentlessly buying up ports and tech companies in Western Europe – from Greece to the UK.

Cargo trains are now plying the route from Zhejiang to Tehran in 14 days, through Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan; soon this will be all part of a trans-Eurasia high-speed rail network, including a high-speed Transiberian.

The $46 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) has the potential to unblock vast swathes of South Asia, with Gwadar, operated by China Overseas Port Holdings, slated to become a key naval hub of the New Silk Roads. Deep-sea ports will be built in Kyaukphyu in Myanmar, Sonadia island in Bangladesh, Hambantota in Sri Lanka. Add to them the China-Belarus Industrial Park and 33 deals in Kazakhstan covering everything from mining and engineering to oil and gas.

The declining US hegemon or the rising dragon?

OH, and one more thing ...

Quote:
At the same time, planning for a post-war Syria, Beijing is committed to boost trade and economic cooperation with Damascus, another future OBOR hub. It does not hurt this is also asymmetrical payback for Pentagon interference in the South China Sea and the deployment of THAAD in South Korea.

That's a real Chinese "f*** you" to our peace-loving friends in the US.

iyraste1313

It may also open doors for Canada.....

surely we must see the contradictions here!

Canada in hock to such a bank means political reorientation and in violation of US interests...what will happen when China and its allies of the Asian pacific put the screws to our infrastructural developments...and developments for the sake of developments without an underlying economic and geopolitical strategy will just further bankrupt the government...something which clearly now is in the cards...

Rev Pesky

From the original posted article:

Quote:
American officials have warned that the new bank would provide loans to developing countries without requiring any caveats about the environment, labour rights or anti-corruption reforms, as are typically included in loans from the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.

Ah yes, the Unitied States. Defender of Labour, Defender of the Environment, Defender of Simon Pure countries such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Phillipiines, South Korea.

 

iyraste1313

Thanks for this....the point is of course that Ámerican officials´ must be worried about any attempt by Canada to some sovereignty...

In this light I can´t help but notice, Chinese increasing (military?) support for the Democratically elected Syrian Government, while Canada of course is part of the coalition to break up Syria and remove its president...

if this policy proceeds, something will have to give!

Just waiting for Trudeau´s capitulation on this!

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

I think this is just the kind of minor independent move that Canada actually can get away with. Unlike leaving NATO, which would never be allowed. In this case, the U.S. may be mildly annoyed, and will issue "Tut, tut" statements like the above, but they will not do anything drastic in response.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Michael Moriarity wrote:

I think this is just the kind of minor independent move that Canada actually can get away with. Unlike leaving NATO, which would never be allowed. In this case, the U.S. may be mildly annoyed, and will issue "Tut, tut" statements like the above, but they will not do anything drastic in response.

I look forward to the day when some other country, say Turkey, for example, leaves NATO [BREXIT-style] in disgust and Canadians "suddenly" discover that Canada could do the same, why didn't we, and the stampede goes apace.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Turkey could certainly leave NATO, but for obvious historical and geographic reasons, the U.S. Empire would have to fall completely before it would loosen its grip on Canada.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Michael Moriarity wrote:

I think this is just the kind of minor independent move that Canada actually can get away with. Unlike leaving NATO, which would never be allowed. In this case, the U.S. may be mildly annoyed, and will issue "Tut, tut" statements like the above, but they will not do anything drastic in response.

If Canada can't follow the lead of many of its NATO allies who were involved in the startup of this new international bank then it really has become a dependency run from hedge fund offices in the US. 

Quote:

On 25 December 2015, the Articles of Agreement entered into force. On 16 January 2016, the board of governors of the bank convened its inaugural meeting in Beijing and declared the bank open for business. Jin Liqun was elected as the bank's president for a five-year term. 17 states (Australia, Austria, Brunei, China, Georgia, Germany, Jordan, Luxembourg, Mongolia, Myanmar, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Singapore, South Korea and the United Kingdom) together holding 50.1% of the initial subscriptions of Authorized Capital Stock, had deposited the instrument of ratification for the agreement, triggering entry into force, and making them all founding members [34] and bringing the Articles of Agreement, the bank's charter, into force. 12 other states followed later, taking the amount of Authorized Capital Stock held by the 29 members of the bank to 74%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Infrastructure_Investment_Bank

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Thanks for the background, K.

quizzical

thanks all for the info.