Comments

It is good to see the PM paying more attention to the Pacific and recognising broadcasting has an important role but both the content and the budget for this needs more thought. And any budget decisions should wait for the results of the two relevant government reviews currently underway: the Soft Power Review and the Review of Australian broadcasting Services in the Asia Pacific. The plan to go with commercial television is not meeting approval from the Pacific community in Australia or the region. A Sydney-based member of the Fiji community had this to say in response to the Friends of the ABC release posted on the Facebook page 'Supporters of Australian broadcasting in Asia and the Pacific': 'In Australia people are turning off commercial tv in droves probably because of the lacklustre content. Why would we want to subject our Pacific neighbours to reruns of the Bachelor, Farmer Wants a Wife and Love Island??? I thought we were trying to build stronger relationships with these people? ' Dorothy Wickham, one of Solomon Islands leading journalists and former managing director a local commercial television company describes what Australian commercial TV has to offer as cabbage: 'This is the most stupid idea I have ever heard!!! This is from someone who stood in front of her own people after the intervention force arrived in my country led by Australia and told them that Australia was a good neighbor and wanted the best for us! I hosted the talk back radio show that travelled around Solomon Islands repeating this message...! Come on Australian political leadership.. Was I wasting my time? The worst thing you can do is push in the face of our young people who are just emerging from a civil war during which people died - cabbage that commercial TV will offer! I am disgusted at this idea!' It is worth noting that in the past, when it had the money, ABC under its international mandate rebroadcast the best of all Australian television including the commercial, SBS and NITV to the region and it could do so again. But this is just one aspect of international broadcasting. The important thing is to be having a two-way conversation, with programs made in collaboration with the region and for regional audiences including in the culturally appropriate languages. International broadcasting is a lot more complicated than a few commercial TV shows ...and a few commercial TV shows are not what the aid budget should be spent on!

thanks Rieko

Thanks for the comment Satish. It would be excellent to have that data - though unfortunately I don't know anyone who has it either - and I don't think it is the kind of thing that gets reported on - as you probably know Lowy looked at bilateral aid to the Pacific - which has data at the project level. But calculating returns would be a whole other project entirely. But Jono Pryke, Alexandre Dayant or Philippa Brant from Lowy might have some more info.

While much of the focus on APEC has been centered around the costs associated with hosting the event (and rightfully so); very little has been discussed concerning the issues or agendas that the PNG Government should be championing as the chair. One of the hallmarks of the success of APEC will be the legacy and the immediate impact that PNG can have in advancing important reforms and agendas such as climate change and ensuring an equitable playing field when it comes to trade between Pacific island countries and the big players such as China, US, Canada, Japan and so forth. The tussle between China and US for influence over the Pacific presents PNG with an opportunity to shape the geopolitical landscape in the Asia-Pacific region in the next decade to come.

Hi Mark - good question - no it doesn't - though according to 2017 IMF Article IV - total government debt (which is what the figures are based on - data taken from the MTFS 2018-2022) - were projected to be 27 053 million Kina, unfunded super liabilities were 2 311 million Kina, and SOE borrowing was 390 million Kina - of which there is no data I've found on how much is owed to China - though if you added both liabilities in to the graph it is likely you would get a smaller % of debt out of the total owed to China as all the super liabilities are domestic - so wouldn't change the story much.

Hi Sheldon - thanks for the comment. However, commentary from the Lowy Institute suggests that we have likely seen the peak in Chinese lending to the Pacific (except for PNG) - https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/china-makes-inroads-on-pacific-aid-but-australia-remains-the-stalwart-study-finds-20180808-p4zw8b.html As Matt commented below - we don't make any analysis of project quality, or other geopolitical issues - though we do hope what we have done contributes to the broader discussion.

I couldn't agree me with your assessment and the need for tactful diplomacy from our PM to negotiate for a greater ROI from hosting the APEC.

It seems authors are making assumptions and far-reaching conclusions based on methodologies and data that are quite limited in scope. Authors say Pacific is 'not drowning in Chinese debt'. They should have added 'for now'. Also, are we only concerned about the 'now'? Good analysis should predict future trends. Data 'strongly suggests that the “debt-trap diplomacy” argument is without foundation'. So nothing to see? Nothing too worry about? No danger of current situation changing for the worse? So many unanswered questions.

Thank you for the clarification Matt. So much research, so little time! As we know, debt is not static. The situation can change- for better or worse - in a blink, so hard to pass definite judgements/firm conclusions. China in the Pacific is a complex, multi-faceted, evolving phenomena not easy to keep abreast of, or fully comprehend. Your research is helping understand the puzzle better. I look forward to more.

Hi Shailendra, Thanks as always for your comments. In this blog, we're solely focused on aggregate debt and the portion owed to China. We don't consider other questions, admittedly also important, such as: the quality of projects for which loans are made (an issue in the Malaysian case, and also in some projects in the Pacific), and the related issue of corruption and impacts on governance. I agree a comparative study would be interesting. Also interesting would be a debt analysis in which PIC debt is contextualised as part of the global trend, which has also (as a result of low interest rates) seen other developing countries increasing their debt. Thanks again. matt

This is an excellent and long-overdue piece. Thanks Matt and Rohan for putting the debt figures together. Data quality is a perennial problem in the Pacific, but this article allows others to build on the figures provided. I would also like to see rates of return on public investment by source, and issue that requires disaggregated data. Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.

Vanuatu Daily Post also posted a similar story - http://dailypost.vu/business/the-debt-trap-myth/article_54428acb-4e7e-5e51-8f3d-8b06586821a4.html But they also pointed to the citizenship and passport sale scheme for Asia, I assume China. I just found out that Vanuatu citizenship and passport is more attractive as they offer visa free to the EU - http://nomadcapitalist.com/2015/07/15/how-to-get-second-residency-citizenship-in-vanuatu/?fbclid=IwAR2zOJkHHKyuie4VoR6jJ-yZovg8ni4h3hXegKbbS5Aoa_LfE-OuMT51l_Q