Asean countries should trade less with China to avoid dependency

In an article by a Sulaiman Daub posted in the mothership.sg, he advocated that Asean countries should trade less with China to avoid a dependency relationship with China and came under the influence of China. In his piece he quoted this,

'In a paper published by the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies-Yusof Ishak Institute (ISEAS), academic Sanchita Bandu Das argues that China is using its growing economic strength to advance its political agenda in Southeast Asia, including its strong position on South China Sea issues and negotiating for the use of Chinese technology, supplies and workers for China-financed infrastructure projects.'

The same article also mentioned 'white elephant' projects initiated by China like the BRI, ports in Sri Lanka and highways in East Malaysia. There is some logic to this kind of thinking. And there are alternatives to just trading and depending on China for infrastructure building. The assumption is that the govts of these countries engaging in trades with China and with China making more profits are daft, especially those that joined the BRI, built ports and highway that are white elephants and have no or little benefits to their countries. I would not try to argue on behalf of these govts and leave it to them to justify their 'stupid' actions.

While trade in these cases favoured China, it is true that these countries need not continue trading with China. They can choose to trade with Japan and the West. But if the products from these countries are too expensive and they could not afford them, they can always look to India for Make in India products. I think these products, if available, would be much cheaper than China's and would be a good substitute. India could replace China to build highways, ports, high speed trains and mobile phones etc.

As for infrastructure projects like the ports in Sri Lanka, the Sri Lankan govt can send trade delegations to Europe, USA or Japan to invite them to build instead of China. Oh, England is a good candidate too, the former colonial master that looted the island but forgot to build a decent port like what the Chinese are building for the Sri Lankans. Likewise countries in land locked Central Asia can follow this option or dispense with the 'white elephant' projects since they are white elephants and remain isolated and cut off from the maritime trade routes..

Actually the Americans are having the biggest trade deficit with China compares with the Asean states. The big question, why would the Americans continue to buy China and not buy European or Japanese products or the cheaper Indian products? The Americans cannot be so stupid right? And this applies to more than half of the world that chose China as their number one or number two trading partner despite the trade deficits. Stupid or what?

China, unlike the colonial masters that came to rob and loot these former colonised countries with gunboats, negotiates and trades with these ex colonies on a willing buyer willing seller basis. No guns pointing at their heads. If the govts of these countries, given all the options available, they are not stupid for sure, still choose to trade with China, there must be some logic to it.

I would like to see these 'disadvantaged ex colonies' steering away from trading with China and choose to buy more expensive products from the West and Japan or cheaper products from India. That is only logical when they put everything under the microscope to compare prices and benefits.

Who is the idiot?

PS. The Indians have conceded that the Chinese are making products that are cheaper than the Indians in India. Even the Indian gods are made in China.