The reelection of Hugo Chávez last month for another six-year term as president of Venezuela elicited almost universal praise from Chinese media and foreign policy analysts. Their general consensus was that his reelection was not only good for the people of Venezuela themselves, but also for economic and political ties between the two countries. However, Chinese government and business leaders who have assumed smooth relations for the foreseeable future are at risk of being unnerved because ties are only as healthy as Chávez himself. Recent reports that Chávez is back in Cuba for further cancer treatment serve to highlight that the new Chinese leadership may have therefore inherited a foreign policy time bomb from their predecessors.
China’s blithe optimism about the impact of continued Chávez dominance of Venezuelan politics sits uncomfortably with a growing anxiety about the effectiveness of the country’s political risk analysis This anxiety is directly related to the dramatic political changes in places like Libya and Burma over the last 18 months or so. Many in Chinese diplomatic and academic circles lament that the Chinese government and firms were caught off guard, and on the losing end of regime change in Libya in 2011 and by Burma’s ongoing political transformation.
Economic concerns rest on fears that billions of dollars in Chinese investments and contracts in Libya and Burma have been lost, suspended or put at risk, while diplomatic concerns are based on a perception that regime change in Libya and Burma’s ongoing domestic transformation have resulted in geostrategic gains for the West at the expense of China.
China has therefore focused on improving its risk analysis to support its strategy of expanding already booming trade and investment in Africa, Latin American and Southeast Asia. This makes China’s deepening exposure to Venezuela, amid optimistic assessments about Chávez’ reelection paving the way for continued good relations, all the more potentially traumatic if China’s position in Venezuela were to deteriorate.
On the surface, China’s growing trade and investment relations with Venezuela fit the storyline of its ties elsewhere in South America: China needs key natural resources like iron ore (Brazil), copper (Chile), and oil (Venezuela) and the result is expanding complementary trade and investment in these commodities. Unlike Brazil and Chile, however, Venezuela is threatened by ailments including the so-called oil curse, high rates of violence and kidnapping, and tense relations with neighbors both near (Colombia) and far (the United States). Both praised and reviled as the most prominent figure of the contemporary Latin American left, Chávez is also the leader of the most polarizing and polarized country in the Americas.
Despite all of these obvious sources of risk, China has forged ahead with ever-deeper economic ties with Venezuela. In particular the China Development Bank (CDB), which has been dubbed “China’s Superbank” in a forthcoming book by Henry Sanderson and Michael Forsythe, has led China’s financing efforts in Venezuela with over U.S. $42 billion in loans-for-oil deals since 2007. The CDB’s Venezuela deals constitute the bank’s largest loan exposure anywhere outside of China and account for nearly 60 percent of the bank’s loans to Latin America and the Caribbean. In addition, and as part of the loans-for-oil deals, Chinese state-owned and private firms have signed billions of dollars more in construction, infrastructure and other contracts.
Chávez has dominated Venezuelan politics since he first came to office in 1999 and his courtship of China has served both his international ideological and economic agenda of diversifying the country away from a dependence on the United States. The Chinese government has been reticent to cooperate with Chávez on his ideological agenda, but its firms have more than compensated on the economic side with their vast build-up of financing and investment. The relationship has thus flourished as China has willingly stepped into the opening offered and guaranteed by Chávez’ personal leadership.
However, the longevity of that leadership has been called into question by Chávez’ cancer diagnosis in 2011 and by a reinvigorated Venezuelan political opposition movement. Chávez defeated the opposition in last month’s election and claims to have beaten cancer. But the state of his health is far from certain, and the opposition proved that after a long period of ineffectual leadership it is now a force to be reckoned with.
If the opposition comes to power, China will be left without its champion and guarantor of the thing China’s leaders crave most: stability. Henrique Capriles, the youthful leader of the opposition, has stated that if he were president, while not seeking to overturn the loans-for-oil deals with China, he would review their legality.
Since so little is publicly known about the deals' details the simple threat to openly publish them would give any post-Chávez leadership a great deal of leverage in the relationship with China. Moreover, in a highly polarized and oil-reliant country, China’s state-to-state, loans-for-oil deals are a potent and controversial symbol for those inside and outside of Venezuela who feel strongly one way or the other about Chávez.
While “losing” Venezuela may or may not turn out to be as traumatizing for China as its perceived losses in Libya or Burma have been, at some point China may learn that partnerships of convenience with polarizing, strong-man leaders like Chávez can also quickly and unexpectedly become highly inconvenient. In this context Venezuela may well provide a litmus test for the success or otherwise of China’s new investments in economic and political risk analysis.
Matt Ferchen is a resident scholar at the Carnegie-Tsinghua Center for Global Policy
young_sinologist
As long as public mistrust of China stays fairly disorganized (no boycotts, no major riots, no political opposition, no international anti-China alliances) I don't think China has much to fear from popular sentiment in its defined areas of interest.
The Chinese are pragmatic/mercenary enough to not really care who they buy and sell from, as long as they keep buying and selling. Their demand is strong enough, their pockets are deep enough, and their international position is weak enough that if they lose investments in some place like Libya, their best and really their only course of action is to just smooth out relationships as best you can and work with the new center of power. Maybe build some stadiums or increase the student visas or whatever else you need to do to build trust.
Based on what I've read, even Zambia and South Sudan, areas where China's done the greatest harm, are now pretty much back to business as usual. If I'm wrong, feel free to post info to the contrary. But I really haven't seen too much bite to the anti-Chinese grumblings in their quasicolonies. The only places where there is some real anti-Chinese sentiment that could turn into something are in areas immediately neighboring China; Vietnam, Myanmar, the Phillippines. These are places where you could conceivably see China starting a war to build a banana republic, but I still think it's pretty remote. As long as China is steadily providing cheap goods and easy money, and there isn't any major degree of organization in the opposition, I don't think you'll see too much more to the China-bashing than the occasional race riot or brief drop in the stock market every couple of years.
Dealing with the instability of regime change is the price of doing business with the marginal countries the west has left China to do business with. Western MNCs are "inflexibly selfish," and that inflexibility leads to indigenous insurrections, and then military interventions to protect western assets, as in Kuwait, Mali, Iraq, Vietnam, all of America's banana wars, and countless others. China is "flexibly selfish," and will buy and sell literally from anybody who has access to resources and markets. So you will hear grumblings, and you will hear about race riots, and you will hear about the occasional attack on Chinese oil platforms or dams in Angola or Burma. But you will not have an international terrorist movement declare war on the heathen Chinese, or hear about planes crashing into the towers of Shanghai.
Because while the Americans are withdrawing from Afghanistan and propping up failing and corrupt governments, the Chinese are the ones building the pipelines there and with a long-term interest in keeping the peace there, because they share a border. While no central Asian republic wants US bases on their soil, they're taking part in military exercises with the Chinese. While Americans withold funding from sketchy countries, the Chinese are underwriting vast, if crappy, infrastructure expansions. While the American drones are bombing Pakistan and turning what should be an ally against them, the Chinese have been basically supplying every aspect of their army for decades.
They're definitely not always right, but we need to learn from what they're doing right and wrong, and we need to learn from what they're learning from us.
George Abney
The appetite for high risk/high return risk in gambling follows wealth like bad air after a big meal of vegitables. When probable loss appears immenant do NOT lite a match when the stench begins to rise.
Robin
Oh come on, you guys are all "specialized" prophets of doom for China or what? Every damn thing China does you guys critize them (the BoXilai scandal), condemn it (the Daiyou islands), downplay it (the first aircraft landing on the carrier), predict doom (hardlanding for its economy). Please… retreat from these sort of fear mongering or hate creation towards China. They are not that bad, they are very good in fact. There progress is astonishing. Theirs is the only living civilisation from the past. They have not gone on any murderous rampage and colonising of the weaker countries ever even though they could have easily done so last time. SO its time to accept globalization, accept new powers, new cultures, new ways to do things and indeed new ways to report on China – POSITIVELY!
Bankotsu
It doesn't matter. The Unipolar world will still end. Nothing can change that.
hmm
This website is not for niave do-gooders or for Chinese nationalists but is for current affairs and geopolitical analysis. Read Xinhua if you want airbrushed opinions.
"does you guys critize them (the BoXilai scandal), condemn it (the Daiyou islands), downplay it (the first aircraft landing on the carrier), predict doom (hardlanding for its economy)."
How can you NOT criticize the Bo Xilai scandal or condemn China's actions regarding Daiyou and the facilitated violent anti-Japanese protests? If the landing on the aircraft carrier was not downplayed, you would probably be crying about 'China threat' theories.
larsen
Robin, it sure sucks being critisized for every little thing you do or do not do, isn't it? Welcome to our world. You want to be a superpower, well it's a package deal, and it comes with the good and the bad. Be careful whet you wish for.
Wishing The Worst
The question posed applies to every country, corporation, and leader. There is only one constant – change – in this world. So what's the big deal? If I am not any more discerning, I would say this is just another fear mongering from the US side. They are so full of schaudenfreude and wish the worst for some people. Not very admirable.
Jaques666
Great post!
FYI China's Superbank is already published! I have a copy from Hong Kong