China's double-standard on debt.

China's double-standard on debt.
Center for Security Policy.
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/home.aspx?sid=140&categoryid=140&subcategoryid=141

Communist China has done it again. Desperate for new sources of
energy, the Chinese are moving into an oil-rich nation eschewed by
others. In this case, however, the country in question is not a state-
sponsor of terror or other pariah state. Rather, it is Iraq, a country
the United States has gone to great lengths to make a member in good
standing of the Free World - free, among other things, of the
influence of those like PRC who had close ties to Saddam Hussein.
Yet now, according to the Financial Times, the Iraqi government last
Friday " revived a contract signed by the Saddam Hussein
administration allowing a state-owned Chinese oil company to develop
an Iraqi oil field." The deal to develop the al-Ahdab field in Iraq
was signed with China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) in 1997
and was valued at the time to be worth $1.2 billion. What is more, the
FT reported that Iraqi Oil Minister Hussein al-Shahristani announced
that "Baghdad welcomed Chinese oil company bids for any other contract
in the country through a 'fair and transparent bidding process' to be
laid out in the new oil law under discussion in Iraq's parliament."
Part of the impetus behind the free Iraqi government embracing CNPC -
the PRC's largest state-owned oil company and an instrument for its
partnerships with the world's most odious regimes - is a harsh
reality: China is one of all too few investors who appreciate the
strategic opportunities inherent in securing a foothold in Iraq today
and are able to accept, and mitigate, the risks associated with doing
business there.
Euchring Iraqi Sovereign Debt
Another consideration, however, has to do with the matter of Iraqi
sovereign debt to Communist China dating from Saddam Hussein's time
and estimated to be worth as much as $10 billion. The PRC has insisted
that the successor government in Baghdad is responsible for its
predecessor's liabilities.
The Financial Times noted Friday that a seeming breakthrough occurred
d uring a visit to China last month by Iraq's president, Jalal
Talabani. Beijing announced that "a 'large margin' of Iraqi debt would
be canceled, although no specific figures were released." As the
Communists are fond of observing, this is hardly a coincidence,
comrade. China used the leverage of a promise to forgive what is, as a
practical matter, uncollectable Iraqi debt to secure renewed access to
Iraqi oil.
There is a special irony to China's adamance on the subject that
successor governments are responsible for their predecessors'
sovereign debts. After all, American and other investors are estimated
to be holding Chinese sovereign bonds issued by pre-Communist regimes
worth roughly $260 billion - bonds the PRC has, to date, refused to
honor. While British holders of such Chinese bonds were given a
discriminatory settlement back in 1987, their American counterparts
have been left holding the bag.
Congress Tackles the Issue
Now, though, U.S. legislators are considering a bill that could induce
China to be more forthcoming. House Concurrent Resolution 160,
introduced last month by Rep. Lincoln Davis, Democrat of Tennessee,
would deny the PRC access to the U.S. capital markets until such time
as, among other things, Communist China "fully honors repayment of its
outstanding defaulted public debts owed to United States citizens."
Such a penalty for China's effective default would be a first. Until
now, there have been no material costs to China for reneging on these
debts. Its bond ratings were not affected. Neither has there been any
impediment to the PRC's ability to bring to American and other
international exchanges various "bad actors" - often state-owned
companies, like CNPC, PetroChina and Sinopec, engaged in activities
inimical to vital U.S. security, economic and/or humanitarian
interests.
In the absence of any serious, let alone sustained, effort by the
Executive Branch and the Congress to resolve this corrosive bilateral
problem, is it any wonder that there has been no satisfactory
resolution to other financial abuses by China? These include:
Beijing's manipulation of its currency; its underwriting of the
genocidal regime in Sudan; and China's worrisome financial (and other)
ties with Iran, Hugo Chavez's Venezuela and North Korea, etc.
The adoption by both houses of Congress of legislation like H. Con.
Res. 160 should be but the first of several steps taken to induce the
PRC to clean up its sovereign debt. For example, as legislative and
other measures are developed to counter China's currency manipulation,
provisions should be included requiring Beijing to make good on its
defaulted sovereign bonds.
The Securities and Exchange Commission and other credit-rating
agencies should be required to take into account China's defaulted
bonds in their ratings and disclosure requirements. And targeted
financial sanctions against the PRC should be promulgated in the event
China continues to ignore its long-standing financial commitments.
Last, but not least, American and other vendors should be encouraged
to settle accounts with China by using the legal tender of Chinese
sovereign bonds. In this fashion, Beijing can be held accountable for
its debts, with minimal impact on trade and other relations.
The Bottom Line
If China can use sovereign debt owed it - even debt incurred by
previous governments as despicable as that of Saddam Hussein - to
euchre freedom-aspiring Iraqis into making strategically momentous
concessions, the least the United States can do is ensure that the
Communist Chinese are held to no lesser standard. Sauce for the goose,
after all, must be sauce for the Beijing duck.

.