Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

cashinmattress

Nicaragua Gives Chinese Firm Contract To Build Alternative To Panama Canal

Recommended Posts

link

Nicaragua's new waterway will be a higher-capacity alternative to the 99-year-old Panama Canal (pictured), which is currently being widened at the cost of $5.2bn. Photograph: Danny Lehman/Corbis

Nicaragua has awarded a Chinese company a 100-year concession to build an alternative to the Panama Canal, in a step that looks set to have profound geopolitical ramifications.

The president of the country's national assembly, Rene Nuñez, announced the $40bn (£26bn) project, which will reinforce Beijing's growing influence on global trade and weaken US dominance over the key shipping route between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.

The name of the company and other details have yet to be released, but the opposition congressman Luis Callejas said the government planned to grant a 100-year lease to the Chinese operator.

The national assembly will debate two bills on the project, including an outline for an environmental impact assessment, on Friday.

Nicaragua's president, Daniel Ortega, said recently that the new channel would be built through the waters of Lake Nicaragua.

The new route will be a higher-capacity alternative to the 99-year-old Panama Canal, which is currently being widened at the cost of $5.2bn.

Last year, the Nicaraguan government noted that the new canal should be able to allow passage for mega-container ships with a dead weight of up to 250,000 tonnes. This is more than double the size of the vessels that will be able to pass through the Panama Canal after its expansion, it said.

According to a bill submitted to congress last year, Nicaragua's canal will be 22 metres deep and 286 km (178 miles) long - bigger than Panama and Suez in all dimensions.

Under the initial plans for the project, the government was expected to be the majority shareholder, with construction taking 10 years and the first ship passing through the canal within six years. It is unclear if this is still the case.

Two former Colombian officials recently accused China of influencing the international court of justice to secure the territorial waters that Nicaragua needs for the project.

In an op-ed piece for the magazine Semana, Noemí Sanín, a former Colombian foreign secretary, and Miguel Ceballos, a former vice-minister of justice, said a Chinese judge had settled in Nicaragua's favour on a 13-year-old dispute over 75,000 square kilometres of sea.

They said this took place soon after Nicaraguan officials signed a memorandum of understanding last September with Wang Jing, the chairman of Xinwei Telecom and president of the newly established Hong Kong firm HK Nicaragua Canal Development Investment Company, to build and operate the canal.

Nicaragua has accused Colombia and Costa Rica, which has a claim on territory likely to be used by the new canal, of trying to prevent the project going ahead.

Wow. The Chinese are really taking it to the Yanks...using US treasuries no doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

link

Wow. The Chinese are really taking it to the Yanks...using US treasuries no doubt.

The Chinese were interested in building a "dry canal" train line across the top of Colombia a few years ago with a huge factory to assemble the shipped components. The close Colombian/American ties meant pressure was rumoured to scupper this plan. Looks like they have found a more pliable nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest eight

Chipping away at central America.

Maybe they're secretly planning to tow Brazil away in the night.

What would the canal do for global sea levels?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chipping away at central America.

Yes, from the mining hammer point of view.

But really, no. China is chipping away at America's hegemony.

Monroe Doctrine

The occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.

We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.

Substitute the bold bit for Chinese.

Perhaps its time for America to once again enter the contras. (1909–10, 1912–25, and 1926–33, 1981–89)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a very important development. Expect the US to do everything they can to prevent this new canal from ever becoming operational.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. The Chinese are really taking it to the Yanks...using US treasuries no doubt.

?!

The US has had no ownership of the canal for decades...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Struggling with the fuss here.

As I understand it, the Chinese (i) are paid to build the canal (ii) get to charge usage fees for 100 years (iii) that's it. China still doesn't have the power projection if the canal is nationalised in the future to take it back. The US remains the dominant naval power on both sides of the canal.

What am I missing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Struggling with the fuss here.

As I understand it, the Chinese (i) are paid to build the canal (ii) get to charge usage fees for 100 years (iii) that's it. China still doesn't have the power projection if the canal is nationalised in the future to take it back. The US remains the dominant naval power on both sides of the canal.

What am I missing?

I think the fuss is that, in a a world of free markets, the USA won't like competition to the canal that it effectively controls.

In the USA hegemony, American Monopoly is a Good Thing. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

China still doesn't have the power projection if the canal is nationalised in the future to take it back.

Really? Have you seen how many aircraft carriers they plan on having operational within the next decade or so? They have 1 currently in service, are building at least 2 more and have plans for more after that.

Also, 'power projection' is a very Western idea. Not all power is projected with an army or threats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? Have you seen how many aircraft carriers they plan on having operational within the next decade or so?

Also, 'power projection' is a very Western idea. Not all power is projected with an army or threats.

I believe 3 by mid 2020s, including the second hand gin palace which they are currently having problems landing planes on. Scary stuff.

When it comes to canals, power projection is important if you want to keep hold of it. Just ask Eden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the fuss is that, in a a world of free markets, the USA won't like competition to the canal that it effectively controls.

In the USA hegemony, American Monopoly is a Good Thing. <_<

What competition? China builds canal, charges rent. Does not have the ability to post military there. And so what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe 3 by mid 2020s, including the second hand gin palace which they are currently having problems landing planes on. Scary stuff.

I think you are underestimating the Chinese. Something I also think America and other Western nations are guilty of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does not have the ability to post military there.

They seem to have no trouble sending troops to Africa.

China currently controls world shipping. Sending troops somewhere is not exactly hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are underestimating the Chinese. Something I also think America and other Western nations are guilty of.

I used to live there and speak/read the language reasonably well, so I feel I have a fairly solid grasp of Chinese capabilities.

They seem to have no trouble sending troops to Africa.

China currently controls world shipping. Sending troops somewhere is not exactly hard.

Controls world shipping? What does that mean? Global security currently rests with the US, everyone else free rides on the back of this. Why do you think Iran backed down from their threats of shutting the Straits of Hormuz? They were worried about China sending their second hand gin palace (with the two successful plane landings) over?

I feel I can comfortably add this to the extraordinarily long list of things you are wrong about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chinese will send an army of workers out there ......followed by support service entrepreneurs...... How many will go back "home" on completion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to live there and speak/read the language reasonably well, so I feel I have a fairly solid grasp of Chinese capabilities.

Controls world shipping? What does that mean? Global security currently rests with the US, everyone else free rides on the back of this. Why do you think Iran backed down from their threats of shutting the Straits of Hormuz? They were worried about China sending their second hand gin palace (with the two successful plane landings) over?

I feel I can comfortably add this to the extraordinarily long list of things you are wrong about.

Time will tell whether I'm wrong. Give it 10 years and we will see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What competition? China builds canal, charges rent. Does not have the ability to post military there. And so what?

The new canal would compete with the Panama Canal. Americans don't like competition and free trade when they are on the losing side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rene Nuñez, announced the $40bn (£26bn) project

The new route will be a higher-capacity alternative to the 99-year-old Panama Canal, which is currently being widened at the cost of $5.2bn.

This doesn't seem like a great use of $40bn. How much widening and deepening of the Panama Canal could have been bought for $40bn? Plus then you'd only have one set of locks to operate and maintain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 244 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.