IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v16y2025i2p348-356.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Discordant ‘Debt Trap’ and ‘Secrecy’ Narratives on the Belt and Road Initiative

Author

Listed:
  • Pompeo Della Posta

Abstract

This article discusses two main orders of criticisms of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the ‘debt trap’ narrative and the ‘secrecy’ narrative. The first refers to the alleged aim of Chinese lenders to trap recipient countries in their debt to seize the financed assets. According to the second, instead, Chinese lenders would keep contracts with debtor countries secret with the ultimate goal of obtaining a privileged position in the repayment of their credits. Although very controversial, as evidenced by the fact that they are contested by many academic authors, both narratives continue to circulate simultaneously and often unchallenged in the Western media. Moreover, they are discordant and incompatible with each other: if Chinese institutions claim a privileged position among all other creditors, it means that they have no interest in creating a debt trap and acquiring the resulting foreign assets, whereas if they really wanted to acquire these foreign assets, then they would have no interest in being repaid before other creditors. This plethora of contradictory accusations can be interpreted as further evidence of the negative bias with which the BRI is viewed, especially in Western circles, due to the heated geopolitical confrontation between the US and China.

Suggested Citation

  • Pompeo Della Posta, 2025. "The Discordant ‘Debt Trap’ and ‘Secrecy’ Narratives on the Belt and Road Initiative," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 16(2), pages 348-356, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:16:y:2025:i:2:p:348-356
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.70001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.70001
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.70001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:16:y:2025:i:2:p:348-356. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.