Large gas belt discovered in China

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

This is good news for the country and people of China. 

It might help cut down CCP's predatory geopolitical actions if the country of China had more of its own hydrocarbon resources. 

The One Belt One Road predatory initiative is likely to crumble in the global backlash and fallout of the China Flu disaster. 

 

Large gas belt discovered in China

CHENGDU, May 7 (Xinhua) -- An oilfield branch of PetroChina, China's largest oil and gas producer, announced their discovery of a huge natural gas belt with an estimated reserve of over 1 trillion cubic meters in southwest China's Sichuan Province.

The PetroChina Southwest Oil and Gasfield Company (SWOG) completed a successful test of prospecting for oil and gas in Tianbao Township of Daying County, which had a daily output of 1.22 million cubic meters of gas, according to the SWOG.

The belt, some 130 km away from the provincial capital of Chengdu, neighbors the gasfield in the Gaoshiti-Moxi area in the middle part of the Sichuan Basin, where the current natural gas production capacity reaches 15 billion cubic meters annually.

Based in Chengdu, SWOG supplies natural gas to more than 1,000 large and medium-sized industrial companies and more than 20 million households in southwest China. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

1 hour ago, Tom Kirkman said:

This is good news for the country and people of China. 

It might help cut down CCP's predatory geopolitical actions if the country of China had more of its own hydrocarbon resources. 

The One Belt One Road predatory initiative is likely to crumble in the global backlash and fallout of the China Flu disaster. 

 

Large gas belt discovered in China

CHENGDU, May 7 (Xinhua) -- An oilfield branch of PetroChina, China's largest oil and gas producer, announced their discovery of a huge natural gas belt with an estimated reserve of over 1 trillion cubic meters in southwest China's Sichuan Province.

The PetroChina Southwest Oil and Gasfield Company (SWOG) completed a successful test of prospecting for oil and gas in Tianbao Township of Daying County, which had a daily output of 1.22 million cubic meters of gas, according to the SWOG.

The belt, some 130 km away from the provincial capital of Chengdu, neighbors the gasfield in the Gaoshiti-Moxi area in the middle part of the Sichuan Basin, where the current natural gas production capacity reaches 15 billion cubic meters annually.

Based in Chengdu, SWOG supplies natural gas to more than 1,000 large and medium-sized industrial companies and more than 20 million households in southwest China. 

Sichuan Chengdu was my home when I lived and worked in China.  I can tell you without doubt that, due to the HOT spicy food there and a 20+ million person city population, that is the city sewer they have tapped into.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Does anyone else find the timing of this announcement somewhat suspect?

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

18 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Does anyone else find the timing of this announcement somewhat suspect?

Yes, that was my first reaction too.  But I decided to try to put a  positive perspective on it.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

18 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Yes, that was my first reaction too.  But I decided to try to put a  positive perspective on it.

I think this is referred to as ‘deflecting’....

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

4 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Does anyone else find the timing of this announcement somewhat suspect?

Assuming it's true, is this the "force majure" they've invoked to cancel LNG shipments previously contracted? 

[0R0 + 6,251]

So they found gas in a gas field? That is news?

We knew those exist in several locations in China. They also produce some 4 mob/d of their own domestic oil. Does this really change anything?

[Marcin2 + 726]

-

Edited May 19, 2020 by Marcin2
-

[pisstol + 48]

2 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

2 things:

1. Tom, your comment and also many others at this forum relating to BRI always have some hope, a sort of prayer that this initiative would go wrong, that it will not be succesful. Why are you so afraid of possible Chinese success ? I mean on human, personal level. I know what it means geopolitically, we all do. At the end of the day Tom this will not change your lifestyle in next 10 years. It is much more in the future. 
2. I do not understand from economic point of view why developed countries extract hydrocarbons ? I would make detailed geological surveys and leave it in the ground when cheap foreign hydrocarbon sources are available. I would extract them later when other sources are scarse. And would never export hydrocarbons it is such a waste for countries like Norway. Is it greed or democracy  so people demand this money ?

Marcin2,

You asked Tom, but I would like to ask a question. Do you live under a totalitarian government? You said, "I would make detailed geological surveys, etc.", but you are not a government. That is what a wise totalitarian government with central economic planning might do. And you said: "Is is greed or democracy ...", which suggests that you don't live in a democratic country or don't believe in democracy. Those writers who favor communism in South China Morning Post frequently criticize democracy as being chaotic.
 

[0R0 + 6,251]

2 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

2 things:

1. Tom, your comment and also many others at this forum relating to BRI always have some hope, a sort of prayer that this initiative would go wrong, that it will not be succesful. Why are you so afraid of possible Chinese success ? I mean on human, personal level. I know what it means geopolitically, we all do. At the end of the day Tom this will not change your lifestyle in next 10 years. It is much more in the future. 
2. I do not understand from economic point of view why developed countries extract hydrocarbons ? I would make detailed geological surveys and leave it in the ground when cheap foreign hydrocarbon sources are available. I would extract them later when other sources are scarse. And would never export hydrocarbons it is such a waste for countries like Norway. Is it greed or democracy  so people demand this money ?

Since you don't seem to understand free markets and private ownership structures, and thus lack the basics in economic analysis, let us put it in explicit terms. The free market would have had no OPEC in it and thus all the world's oil companies would be leasing fields in the entire cheap oil gulf region till it was gone. However, OPEC did form and its membership nationalized private interests much before that, then the price floor was set by OPEC, thus the cheapest oil was no longer the oil that costs least to extract. Also, the Saudi embargo days taught everyone that they better have their own or a nearby friendly source of oil. It is an inherent result of NOT having private greed and democracy, but dictatorships and monarchies controlling the cheapest oil. 

The only way your suggested oi policy works is if the old empires take back the Gulf and take back "their" oil fields from the "natives" and produce it on a free market basis.

 

The BRI was a stupid and naive imperial soft power strategy that never made sense, particularly the ROAD part China to Europe. Would never pay for itself and sink China into an even deeper hole than it is in. The BRI projects are in a chain of lands where all prior imperial properties were nationalizaed. China can't keep bribing the leaderships of these countries when they can just TAKE the ports, dams and other projects, particularly mines, and kick the Chinese out. Which they are just starting to do. The bad faith deals and the bribery just made sure of that being an eventuality sooner rather than later. 

China needs to have the big boat navy first before their property ownership means anything to these countries' leaderships. Their short range frigates are great for a first strike attack against S China Sea navies, but they are single use suicide vests, not a navy. Which is why experienced naval forces don't use many of them but to support large ship groups. Just as their submarines are useless to protect against piracy, where a merchant ship may go through encounters with hundreds of  speed boats and fishing junks with rocket launchers and machine guns and get boarded and hijacked. The submarines just run out of ammo fighting against a disorganized uncoordinated length of shipping through the S China Sea islands. China has its head so far up its paranoia of the US navy that it can't see that it's main job, as was that of its imperial predecessors who controlled those island bases before, was to fight piracy. 

Submarines can sink a merchant convoy and provide a small degree of protection against deep sea navies, but they are useless to protect merchant shipping where there is no hegemon of the sea that can deter pirates operating off the shores of politically incohesive countries.  

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

19 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

This is good news for the country and people of China. 

It might help cut down CCP's predatory geopolitical actions if the country of China had more of its own hydrocarbon resources. 

The One Belt One Road predatory initiative is likely to crumble in the global backlash and fallout of the China Flu disaster. 

 

Large gas belt discovered in China

CHENGDU, May 7 (Xinhua) -- An oilfield branch of PetroChina, China's largest oil and gas producer, announced their discovery of a huge natural gas belt with an estimated reserve of over 1 trillion cubic meters in southwest China's Sichuan Province.

The PetroChina Southwest Oil and Gasfield Company (SWOG) completed a successful test of prospecting for oil and gas in Tianbao Township of Daying County, which had a daily output of 1.22 million cubic meters of gas, according to the SWOG.

The belt, some 130 km away from the provincial capital of Chengdu, neighbors the gasfield in the Gaoshiti-Moxi area in the middle part of the Sichuan Basin, where the current natural gas production capacity reaches 15 billion cubic meters annually.

Based in Chengdu, SWOG supplies natural gas to more than 1,000 large and medium-sized industrial companies and more than 20 million households in southwest China. 

Good news for lungs in China and wherever else coal pollution ends up. I hope they can control their greed at CCP command and play fair. Very bad news for Russia. 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

7 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

2 things:

1. Tom, your comment and also many others at this forum relating to BRI always have some hope, a sort of prayer that this initiative would go wrong, that it will not be succesful. Why are you so afraid of possible Chinese success ? I mean on human, personal level. I know what it means geopolitically, we all do. At the end of the day Tom this will not change your lifestyle in next 10 years. It is much more in the future. 

2. I do not understand from economic point of view why developed countries extract hydrocarbons ? I would make detailed geological surveys and leave it in the ground when cheap foreign hydrocarbon sources are available. I would extract them later when other sources are scarse. And would never export hydrocarbons it is such a waste for countries like Norway. Is it greed or democracy  so people demand this money ?

Your Point 1.  When I was in Malaysia, China made several One Belt One Road infrastructure deals with the corrupt Malaysia government.  The contracts were very much one-sided, heavily in favor of China, and very bad economically for Malaysia.  Clearly, the CCP bribed the Prime Minister at the time (Najib) in order to secure the ruinous contracts.  In particular was a totally unnecessary high speed rail at exorbitant cost, and the loans would never be able to be paid.  When Najib was no longer in office, the Prime Minister cancelled the CCP contracts.

@Douglas Buckland may be able to comment further with current updates,

One Belt One Road is typically predatory lending and bribing by CCP to corrupt foreign government official, and when the loans cannot be repaid, CCP seizes the assets. under the terms & conditions of the OBOR predatory lending contract.  Typically this is to under-developed countries, but also to corrupt EU government officials.

EU is going to be in for a big surprise if the CCP's One Belt One Road predatory contracts term & conditions get made public.  

Chinese Communist Party is following their successful predatory lending practices in Africa, and using a similar model in the EU.

In a nutshell, CCP's One Belt One Road model seems to be:

   1) ** Bribe corrupt foreign government officials to accept a severely lopsided contract.  This could be loans for infrastructure, or investments in business, for example.

   2) When the lopsided contract / loan terms & conditions cannot be met (this is by design, not by accident) then the CCP "legally" seizes control of the foreign assets.

   3) The corrupt foreign officials who were bribed, then defend the CCP when the contract fails.

CCP is a predatory parasite, plain and simple.  Note I am talking specifically about the Chinese Communist Party government officials, and not about the Chinese people in general.

============================================

Your Point 2.  Countries are free to do as they see fit with their own natural resources.

============================================

 

 

** 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

@Tom Kirkman
Mahatir is gone now. Old crowd back in. Expect more of the same. If so, after the covid19 scare, Malaysia is no longer solvent. China will own it.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

The Chinese are incredible negotiators.  And Westerners, in almost every case, are incredibly gullible.  Acting almost as clones, the Chinese:

1. Meet with the target foreign interested concern (FIC) and feign surprise when the FIC "enlightens" them to the possibility of selling the proposed 51%/49% (Chinese/FIC) joint venture's (JV) widgets not only to the FIC's markets, but to the Chinese market as well.  This is trap #1.  When the FIC thinks they see "enlightenment" in their Chinese partner, they begin to believe they have a motivated (by greed) partner and that this is a restriction (local market) they can get around, with the eager help of their newly enlightened partner.  They believe, high on the prospect of selling their widgets to the Chinese market, they have made a breakthrough with this particular partner which will translate into access to markets they have been told they would not have access to.  The FIC will report back to headquarters that "even if we only get 1/4 of the Chinese market that is (breathlessly) OVER 250 MILLION CONSUMERS!  Now the trap has spread, and the FIC CEO starts making arrangements to expand investment and to make the next trip to meet the partners in person.

2. On the next trip/meeting, the CEO is eager to make an expanded deal; why else would he/she have come all this way?  The Chinese partners show them the proposed site(s) for the shiny new JV.  The CEO can easily see that the site(s) need an urgent injection of cash, but the Chinese side tells them, sadly, that the government Bureaucracy in charge of providing JV capital moves very slow.  That everything else is ready to move forward, everything, just not the Chinese side's money.  So sorry.  Trap #2 - The site(s) may not even be under the Chinese partner's control, let alone ownership, AND, more times than not they never had any significant capital to begin with.  Undeterred and seeing his opening, the CEO will pledge to get the JV a generous $1-5 million cash advance from the FIC's side immediately after returning to headquarters (some are even more efficient and make the transfer before they leave China).  The Chinese partner will show amazement at the FIC partner's capabilities and commits to getting the site(s) up and ready for production to begin right away, say 6 months' time?  In fact, could the FIC partner go ahead and send some or even all of the production machinery necessary?

3. The FIC CEO confers with his "delegation" to see if they could send machinery too.  They decide it is possible, but they would need to have "their man" on the ground for the installation.  The Chinese side, acting a bit humbled by such gestures of goodwill, consider this.  They know they can get the machinery through Customs, which is a big job anyway and nobody can be sure how long it will take (about 1 week  ), but they have not made accomodation for a foreign worker yet.  And since they don't know how long it will take for the machines to clear Customs (maybe 3 days  ), it's probably not a good idea to have the FIC's man sitting in a hotel for weeks, just waiting there.  The Chinese will suggest that the FIC go ahead and send the machines AND the floor plans and they will try their best to get the plant set up by themselves.  Trap #3 - The only things the Chinese partner wants are the floor plans and the machines, one of which will be "lost" for reverse engineering.  The CEO will again confer with his "delegation" and decide, why not, we have a signed contract (in a country with no neutral arbitration and contract laws that favor ONLY the Chinese partner), and they make the arrangements to send the Chinese everything they need.  They agree that a working team will return in 6 months, if all goes well, to get the machinery up and running, begin training the local staff (which doesn't exist) and get ready to open the production lines.

4. Six months later and the working team arrives.  They are met at the airport by an interpreter and transported in a NEW small fleet of high-end western cars and vans to their hotel to rest for a day or two.  Then they are taken to the JV site(s), where they immediately see that nothing has happened.  The machines are there (minus 1 that was apparently "lost") but still in their crates.  The buildings have not been cleaned and upgraded as promised and there are very few people around except for a shabby looking security guard.  AND the Chinese partner's senior management team is nowhere to be found.  Back to the hotel, calls are made to headquarters who order the working team to demand a meeting immediately with the Chinese partners.  Frantic interpreters promise to make this happen, and it does a few days later  Mind you, the meeting is with the newly appointed senior management team and nobody has met before, except maybe the interpreter is the same as the first meetings.  They also note that the interpreter has another "trainee" interpreter with him/her.  The team soon learns that the Chinese partners are in Beijing working on approvals for licensing and funding (still)!

The team plods forward with their meetings in an effort to find out what is going on and what is needed to get things back on track (250 MILLION CONSUMERS ARE WAITING!).  It slowly comes out that there was a big misunderstanding (or quite a few actually).  You see, the Chinese side says, we meant that we needed the machines to prove to the authorities that our FIC partners were serious.  They thought that would get the government to release the funds needed to get going.  "Didn't you understand that?"  More phone calls, more delays.  "No, that was not what we were told"  The interpreter is called out in the middle of the meeting and berated severely, as all of this misunderstanding must be his/her fault!  The interpreter is replaced on the spot by (isn't that handy) the less talented but available "trainee" interpreter.  Assurances are made that this embarrassing set of circumstances will not be allowed to happen again.

So, back to business.  Where were we?  Oh yes, so where is the $X million we sent you?  What?  The interpreter didn't tell you what that money was needed for either?  Lots of heated embarrassed discussion goes on in front of the team, and then, slowly, it subsides.  Silence.  The team leader asks the new interpreter: so what do we do now?  Shrug.  Just wait a moment please, Manager Xi  is waiting for some information and must talk to the partners.  Let's meet again tomorrow, okay?

Tomorrow.  Manager Xi informs the team where the money that was sent before had to be used (don't mind those shiny new vehicles outside):  X had to be used to pay off old debt (What?!), X had to be used to pay off old electric bills and upgrade the electrical supply for your machines, X had to be paid to Beijing for approvals, X had to be used to staff the JV (still no sign of these people), etc. etc. etc.  The team asks "So, is there any of that money left?  (No, sorry)  What about the funding from your side?  Has that been approved/released?"  Answer "No, that's why the owners are in Beijing, and it doesn't look good.  They think it might take another few months, or maybe, maybe, a little bit longer.  Trap #4 - They can't get up and running without another injection of cash.

This goes on for month after month until you have a working factory, you have given over your blueprints and designs (because what would happen if any of the machines were to breakdown in the middle of production? And that's what they demand in exchange for 250 MILLION CONSUMERS WAITING!  Finally, if they don't need your expertise anymore, they will trump up charges against your company and your team and throw the lot of you out, never to return.  There is no real recourse in the Chinese courts, and YOU agreed to those terms anyway.  You have no leg to stand on, and may well be on your way to bankruptcy, while the Chinese own your designs and your markets and your sales contacts and everything else.  Have a nice day.  Sorry it didn't work out.

I saw this play out dozens of times and the U.S. Consulate people I was in contact with shared devastating numbers of times that this same scenario was replayed.   We're talking thousands of companies every year.  And I guarantee you there are still companies going in today that will fall for the same things, all in the pursuit of those same 250 MILLION CONSUMERS(!) that have absolutely no interest in your widgets.

Edited May 9, 2020 by Dan Warnick

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

4 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

@Tom Kirkman
Mahatir is gone now. Old crowd back in. Expect more of the same. If so, after the covid19 scare, Malaysia is no longer solvent. China will own it.

How did I miss Mahathir's resignation and the collapse of his government.  Damn, that was quick.  A quick check shows that Najib is smiling again and expects a rosier future.  Bad news for Malaysia.  Bad news indeed.

[pisstol + 48]

On 5/7/2020 at 6:25 PM, Marcin2 said:

2 things:

1. Tom, your comment and also many others at this forum relating to BRI always have some hope, a sort of prayer that this initiative would go wrong, that it will not be succesful. Why are you so afraid of possible Chinese success ? I mean on human, personal level. I know what it means geopolitically, we all do. At the end of the day Tom this will not change your lifestyle in next 10 years. It is much more in the future. 
2. I do not understand from economic point of view why developed countries extract hydrocarbons ? I would make detailed geological surveys and leave it in the ground when cheap foreign hydrocarbon sources are available. I would extract them later when other sources are scarse. And would never export hydrocarbons it is such a waste for countries like Norway. Is it greed or democracy  so people demand this money ?

Hi, Marcin2: It appears from others' comments that you support Communist China. Tom mentioned already that if China has its own hydrocarbons, it won't have to depend so much on the "predatory geopolitical actions" that China is world-famous for.

And I have some more good news straight from South China Morning Post: Chinese courts are suddenly beginning to defend foreign businesses from the intellectual property theft that China is also world-famous for:

https://www.scmp.com/business/china-business/article/3083506/bruce-lee-loreal-china-pumping-optimism-court-cases-against

Maybe Mainland China will quit stealing and become an honest country some day. Chinese people are victims of Red-Chinese intellectual property theft. Bruce Lee Enterprises is suing.

 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

4 hours ago, pisstol said:

Bruce Lee Enterprises is suing.

LOL!  I thought you must've been joking, so I checked.  LOL!  You're not joking.  Awesome.

Anyway, this is good news of course, and movement in the right direction.  But, unless U.S. or England law becomes the normal basis for contracts, with neutral arbitration as part of those contracts, I'll reserve judgement as to the long term effectiveness of these supposed/hoped for systemic changes to Chinese business practices.

Bruce Lee Enterprises is suing.  LOL!  You've gotta love it!

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

On 5/7/2020 at 10:59 PM, pisstol said:

Marcin2,

You asked Tom, but I would like to ask a question. Do you live under a totalitarian government? You said, "I would make detailed geological surveys, etc.", but you are not a government. That is what a wise totalitarian government with central economic planning might do. And you said: "Is is greed or democracy ...", which suggests that you don't live in a democratic country or don't believe in democracy. Those writers who favor communism in South China Morning Post frequently criticize democracy as being chaotic.
 

@pisstol, please note that @Marcin2 lives in Poland, and he is most assuredly not a troll.  He definitely has a much different viewpoint than most Americans.  Marcin and I agree to disagree on many things.

[pisstol + 48]

4 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

@pisstol, please note that @Marcin2 lives in Poland, and he is most assuredly not a troll.  He definitely has a much different viewpoint than most Americans.  Marcin and I agree to disagree on many things.

OK. I got the message. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 5/8/2020 at 4:42 AM, Douglas Buckland said:

@Tom Kirkman
Mahatir is gone now. Old crowd back in. Expect more of the same. If so, after the covid19 scare, Malaysia is no longer solvent. China will own it.

Frightening. Can the people change leaders and reverse the trend? 

[Marcin2 + 726]

-

Edited May 19, 2020 by Marcin2
-

[Marcin2 + 726]

-

Edited May 19, 2020 by Marcin2
-

[pisstol + 48]

1 hour ago, Marcin2 said:

I do not support China, I just do not measure China in different way than US or other large countries. I think that one sided narrative: China is just bad, wrong and communist is counter effective.

Take BRI: Sort of Marshall plan only covering not 300 million but 3 billion people, a little larger. I do not say BRI is bad or right. I say 100 countries that signed just need Chinese infrastructure investment. You probably know that in decade 2010-2019 China built more, much more infrastructure than all other countries combined. Not opinion, fact, easy to check. Take Central or South East Asia, they suddenly have a chance to be Middle income and later developed countries, fast track.

Nobody , and US in particular has any constructive answer. OK US is making a lot of PR. Not black PR but PR, good PR. They do the same job here as with Huawei. When Trump Pence and Pompeo turn on their identical mantra : BRI bad, stay in stone age for your own good. Then people , but not Americans have some thoughts: 1. China must be the most important country and strongest country on Earth if US is so afraid, 2. US has No offer only talk , China is definitely more useful for us, 3. Communist built power plants give the same electricity as US built 4. China probably builds good infrastructure : did it in their country 5. They build fast 6. They build cheap.

So China is just making own sphere of influence, there is clash with US and would be.

Honestly apart from nuclear war there is No way for US to retain hegemon. The only chance would be to organize all OECD countries, but actually it is to late for this.

About IP protection, this is just necessity, they need to protect IP, cause China is the place with 2ndlargest IP output in the world, would be largest in 2022.

Thousands of R&D centers Chinese and foreign and 4 million people engaged in R&D need protection.

China is too strong to be afraid about natural resources mainly hydrocarbons and metal ores. Only US can technically prevent them from getting them but it means nuclear war , that is why I said technically.

Hi, Marcin2,

I read all of your long comment, and I will carefully read your comments in the future. I am American, but I don't think the USA can afford a Marshall Plan or anything like BRI - or even medical care at 20 percent of GDP, or even its military.

You didn't respond to the original question I asked you. I think that if you read your own words and the question I asked, you will understand why I thought you favored totalitarian governments.  

Sorry I jumped to the conclusion that you favored Red China. I will remember who you are now.

 

[Wombat + 1,028]

On 5/7/2020 at 9:44 PM, Douglas Buckland said:

Does anyone else find the timing of this announcement somewhat suspect?

Yeah. Couple of weeks ago, they also announced that they are producing commercial quantities of methane clathrate. If true, you can say goodbye to global LNG industry.

[Wombat + 1,028]

On 5/8/2020 at 5:52 PM, Tom Kirkman said:

Your Point 1.  When I was in Malaysia, China made several One Belt One Road infrastructure deals with the corrupt Malaysia government.  The contracts were very much one-sided, heavily in favor of China, and very bad economically for Malaysia.  Clearly, the CCP bribed the Prime Minister at the time (Najib) in order to secure the ruinous contracts.  In particular was a totally unnecessary high speed rail at exorbitant cost, and the loans would never be able to be paid.  When Najib was no longer in office, the Prime Minister cancelled the CCP contracts.

@Douglas Buckland may be able to comment further with current updates,

One Belt One Road is typically predatory lending and bribing by CCP to corrupt foreign government official, and when the loans cannot be repaid, CCP seizes the assets. under the terms & conditions of the OBOR predatory lending contract.  Typically this is to under-developed countries, but also to corrupt EU government officials.

EU is going to be in for a big surprise if the CCP's One Belt One Road predatory contracts term & conditions get made public.  

Chinese Communist Party is following their successful predatory lending practices in Africa, and using a similar model in the EU.

In a nutshell, CCP's One Belt One Road model seems to be:

   1) ** Bribe corrupt foreign government officials to accept a severely lopsided contract.  This could be loans for infrastructure, or investments in business, for example.

   2) When the lopsided contract / loan terms & conditions cannot be met (this is by design, not by accident) then the CCP "legally" seizes control of the foreign assets.

   3) The corrupt foreign officials who were bribed, then defend the CCP when the contract fails.

CCP is a predatory parasite, plain and simple.  Note I am talking specifically about the Chinese Communist Party government officials, and not about the Chinese people in general.

============================================

Your Point 2.  Countries are free to do as they see fit with their own natural resources.

============================================

 

 

** 

Not just plain ol corruption Tom, part of China strategy to control the world... https://twitter.com/Doranimated/status/1259199960064688133?s=20