中国国有企业持有股份的欧洲/地中海港口 [美国媒体]

European/Mediterranean ports in which Chinese state-owned companies hold stakes

中国国有企业持有股份的欧洲/地中海港口




wormcasting
Do european companies hold any stakes in chinese ports?

有欧洲公司持有中国港口的股份吗？

Bulgaria（保加利亚）
BobBobingston
Some of us did.....once...

我们中的一些人......曾经......有过......

Bulgaria（保加利亚）
ReanimatedX
We did? Really? When?

有吗？真的？啥时候？



Dolphinuglyd
And Germany and Russia

还有德国和俄罗斯

Bongo1020
France too.
And lets not get into legations!

法国也是。
还有别去传教！

Tuscany（托斯卡纳）
Lilleri
And Italy too

还有意大利

Thatoneguy3273
And who could forget the US?

别把美国忘了。

Finland（芬兰）
Thelastgoodemperor
Guys, basically they "signed" a whatever x country all other country will get too agreement. So, yes, everyone had access to ports in China.

伙计们，基本上他们“签署”了任何其他国家都想和他们国家达成的协议。所以，是的，每个人都可以进入中国的港口。

United States of America（美国）
vokegaf
Though to be fair, not everyone owned the ports.

不过公平地说，并不是每个人都拥有港口。

tat310879
Seriously? You don't know?

认真的？你不知道是谁？



Andalusia (Spain)安达卢西亚(西班牙)
spainguy
So how big are these stakes? 1,10, 20, 50% or more

那么这些中国公司的占有的股份有多大？1，10，20，50%或更多？

Here to rep 'Murica to our Euro Allies
vmedhe2
NPR did a report on Piraeus in Greece and said the whole thing is owned by China Ocean Shipping (Group) Company.
List in the article:

NPR对希腊的比雷埃夫斯进行了报道，称整个港口都由中国远洋(集团)公司所有。
下面是这篇文章：
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/09/6 ... ozen-european-ports

aclownofthorns
Technically, the land is still owned by greece and being leased to cosco. Also there's 2 companies that run it, the 100% one was made by cosco from when they started leasing half of the port, and the other one is 51% by cosco since 2016 and they intend to buy 16% more.

从技术上讲，这块土地仍归希腊所有，并被租给中远。此外，还有两家公司在运营，其中之一是中远在开始租赁一半港口时制造的100%归他所有，另一个是中远自2016年以来拥有51%的股份，他们打算再购买16%。

Norway（挪威）
rdoanm_lteters
Some of them through investments in a french company named CMA CGM, were the french hold 51% stake and China Merchants Holdings International stand at 49%. That only accounts for 5 of the ports listed though, haven't found the others yet (Le Havre, Dunkirk, Antwerp, Casablanca, Marsaxlokk.)

其中一些是通过对一家名为CMA CGM的法国公司的投资，其中法国持有51%的股份，中国招商控股国际持有49%的股份。不过这只占所列港口的5个(勒哈弗尔、邓克尔克、安特卫普、卡萨布兰卡、马萨克洛克)，其他的是不是这样还不了解



Bulgaria
Desikiki
It’s quite a general term. Yes it represents all the atrocities the European powers but it is still can be used outside of that context, to simply denote acquisition of control by any means.
You can call it soft colonialism. The word credit colonialism gets thrown around a lot in the journalism circle. And that’s what China is doing. They invest heavily into poor areas, often times with predatory terms. But poor countries accept because it’s immediate cash. Sri Lanka has to give up complete control of a port and the land the port is on to China because they defaulted on their payment (which was always designed with a default in mind). China is building infrastructure in Asian and African countries and exerting intense economic and soon political control over those countries. They pretend to help them but the main goal is to further their own geopolitical objectives.
China is not doing this out of altruism, not out of economical opportunism. It’s a very clear purchase of political influence. The One Road One Belt project basically sponsors Chinese companies to “invest” abroad with very helpful loans that on their own would never happen.

这是一个普遍的术语。是的，它代表了欧洲列强的所有暴行，但它仍然可以在这一背景之外使用，指的仅仅是以任何手段来获得控制权。

你可以称之为软殖民主义。信贷殖民主义这个词现在在新闻界被广泛使用。而这就是中国正在做的事情。他们对贫困地区往往以掠夺性的方式进行大量投资。但穷国接受，因为这是即时现金。斯里兰卡不得不放弃对一个港口的完全控制，而该港口现在位于“中国”的土地上，因为他们拖欠了付款(他们总是在设计的时候就考虑这个情况了)。中国正在亚洲和非洲国家建设基础设施，并对这些国家施加强有力的经济和随之而来的政治控制。他们假装帮助他们，但主要的目标是达成他们自己的地缘政治目标。

中国这样做并不是出于利他主义，也不是出于经济机会主义。这是一个非常明显的政治影响力购买。一带一路项目从根本上说就是帮助中国企业以非常有帮助的贷款“投资”海外，而这些贷款本身如果靠穷国本身根本是不可能偿还的。

Rice_22
And that’s what China is doing.
No, it isn't. Let us take Sri Lanka, the only example of "Chinese Debt Trap" guaranteed to be paraded around by the Western media. Let us hear what Sri Lanka themselves say of the story:
http://www.sundayobserver.lk/201 ... -lanka-tale-5-myths
Loans from Chinese banks only account for 10% of Sri Lanka’s overseas debt. But official statistics show that 39 % of Sri Lanka’s overseas debt is borrowed from international markets - largely US based institutional investors. That said, Chinese loans account for a very large proportion of debt maturing in the next few years – perhaps explaining some of the concern.
As for why the OBOR project exists, Trump's trade war with China present a good reason: the US will never accept an ascendant China. China must diversify its markets, and building up the developing world to sell Chinese goods to them is a good way to ensure China's continued economic growth. China has not once claimed altruism is the motivation behind their version of the Marshall Plan.
Edit: I still disagree that this is somehow "colonialism". They simply can't compare: no number of "Chinese debt-traps" can be added up to equate an Opium War.



Scande
It's one of the biggest problems in my opinion. German politicians in almost all political parties with all kind of "leanings" are super eager to privatize everything. I hate it.
So far almost all privatizing did in Germany was increase in costs for the state.

在我看来，这是最大的问题之一。几乎所有具有"倾向"的政治党派的德国政治家都非常渴望将一切私有化。我讨厌这种做法。到目前为止，德国几乎所有的私有化都增加了政府的成本。

MrFroogger
Same thing in Sweden, and I can’t for the life of me see the benefits. Apart from a few power players getting the upper hand on their competition, it’s at best a crapshoot for everyone else. Nothing is more wasteful than shortsighted commercial enterprises.

在瑞典也是一样，在生活中我看不出这么做带来的好处。除了少数有实力的玩家在他们的竞争中占据优势外，这对其他人来说都是风险很多的事业。没有什么比短视的商业企业更浪费了。

Germany（德国）
pohuing
As well as offer terrible service to the consumer.

同时也为消费者提供糟糕的服务。

TheRedZed
It decreases the costs. But also your income and sovereignity. Privatization isn't bad, if you weren't generating any income. No one wants to privatize in germany just for the sake of it, many people here find it threathening.

这降低了成本。还有你的收入和主权。如果你没有任何收入的话，私有化也不错。在德国，没有人愿意仅仅为了它而私有化，这里的许多人都认为这是三位一体的。



Balearic Islands (Spain)巴利阿里群岛(西班牙)
Tsaibatsu
The difference is that China has 10x Japan's population. And the crashed Japan is still one of the wealthiest countries in the world, but it was very difficult that they could surpass a power with thrice the population, far more land and unrestricted military action

不同的是，中国的人口是日本的10倍。而崩溃的日本仍然是世界上最富有的国家之一，但很难超过一个拥有三倍人口、更多土地和无限制军事行动的大国。

England（英格兰）
JeuyToTheWorld
Japan is an island with piss poor natural resources and filled up to its limit in terms of people
China has more than 4 times the population of the entire US and is approximately the same size, with all the natural resources that entails.

日本是一个自然资源贫乏的岛屿，人口已达到极限。
中国的人口是整个美国的4倍多，面积大致相同，拥有丰富的自然资源。

United States of America（美国）
Longlius
China lacks oil and has about the same amount of arable land as Mexico. The land is more concentrated and easier to manage so it's more productive, but much of China isn't particularly valuable.

中国缺乏石油，拥有与墨西哥差不多的可耕地。土地更集中，更易于管理，因此生产效率更高，但中国大部分地区并不特别有价值。

Mayor__Defacto
Actually, the land is very, very far from being more productive. The US is in some cases 30-40x more productive with our use of farmland. China employs 75 times the number of farmers for just 2x the gross value yield. This is the mark of unproductive workers.

实际上，这片土地远没有更多的生产力。在某些情况下，由于我们使用工业化农田，美国的生产力提高了30-40倍。中国雇用的75倍的农民数量，总价值收益却仅为2倍。这是生产力低下的工人的标志。

United States of America（美国）
vokegaf
Though if your workers aren't productive, it's easier to grow — China can copy what we're doing production-wise, put automated farm machinery in, and make their farmers more productive.
We gotta invent new stuff if we want to push ahead.

不过如果你的工人生产力不是很高，那反而更容易成长-中国可以照搬我们正在做的事情-从生产的角度出发，把自动化的农业机器放进去，让他们的农民更有生产力。
我们要想继续前进就得发明新东西。



Denmark（丹麦）
MrStrange15
10-15 years is way to soon. China's own plan is to be fully developed by 2049, which still might not be enough to surpass the US, especially if the West starts to really turn its attention towards China. China doesn't exist in a vacuum, there's plenty of things, which could slow their growth.
The Belt and Road plan is not going great right now. Ever since it became clear that China aims to link countries to it through debt diplomacy, there's been push-back from involved countries. Not to mention that a lot of these investments aren't actually that safe, especially the one's in Africa, where more established companies (European and American ones) get the good contracts and China gets the risky ones. Then there's also the competing Japanese, Indian, and American plans.
That's not to say that China isn't rising and that we shouldn't act. The rise of China can easily be seen in how they behave in the South China Sea and in Central Asia, but it will take some time before they come out on top, especially considering the formal and informal alliance networks of the West and other democracies, and the fact that China only really has two allies (Pakistan and North Korea) and those are not even certain. We'll definitely see a multi-polar world order in 10-15 years, but China won't be the leader.

10-15年并不遥远。中国自己的计划是在2049年前得到充分发展，但这可能仍不足以超越美国，尤其是如果西方开始真正把注意力转向中国的话。中国不是在真空中存在的，有很多东西可以减缓它们的增长。

一带一路计划现在不是很顺利。自从中国明确打算通过债务外交将国家与其联系起来以来，有关国家一直在回拒。更别提这些投资中的很多实际上并不那么安全，尤其是在非洲，在那里，更多的老牌公司(欧洲和美国的)获得了良好的合同，而中国则得到了高风险的合同。还有与日本、印度和美国的竞争计划。

这并不是说中国不会崛起，我们不应该采取行动。中国的崛起可以很容易地从他们在南中国海和中亚地区的表现中看出，但要想他们脱颖而出还需要一段时间，特别是考虑到西方和其他民主国家的正式和非正式联盟网络，以及中国实际上只有两个盟友(巴基斯坦和朝鲜)，这一点甚至不确定——的事实。我们肯定会在10-15年后看到多极的世界秩序，但中国不会成为领导者。

Romania（罗马尼亚）
anarchisto
Why are we worried?
We in Eastern Europe were told by the Western Europeans that it's OK to have all of our industry, the whole list of top 100 exporters, all the utilities (water, electricity, gas distribution, etc.), most resources, virtually all the big retail companies, etc. in the hands of foreigners.

我们为什么要担心？
我们东欧的人不是被西欧人告知，整个产业、所有的公用事业(水，电，煤气等)、大部分的资源、几乎所有的大型零售公司等被外国人所拥有都是可以接受的。不是吗？

SPQE
U_ve_been_trolled
“China is a sleeping giant. Let her sleep, for when she wakes she will move the world.”
― Napoleon Bonaparte

“中国是一个沉睡的巨人。让她沉睡吧，因为当她醒来的时候，她就会撼动整个世界。”
——拿破仑·波拿巴
*欧洲也流行这一句？*