数据

In order to get access to finance, given a very low asset base, Sudan used flows of its resources such as oil and gold to provide collateral to be able to get loans from China – known as Resource Based Loans (RBLs). Such resource-backed loans (RBLs) provided a clear benefit to Sudan’s citizens in the sense of ensuring oil revenues were fully dedicated (i.e. hypothecated) to infrastructure spending projects and ensuring less chances for funds to be lost to tax havens, for instance.  In addition, in some cases, if well negotiated, such instruments can be designed to provide a buffer for borrowers against low oil (or other natural resource) prices, an issue that become pertinent in 2020 when oil prices plummeted.

On the other hand, there are potential opportunity costs associated with RBLs:  Sudanese citizens may have preferred oil revenues to be spent on other issues such as education or health. In addition, such instruments do not eliminate the potential of overinflated project bids, which can be associated with corruption. Finally, if not well negotiated RBLs could still leave Sudan vulnerable to oil price fluctuations, especially unprecedented price shocks. For instance, if debt obligations and loan repayments are linked to a fixed price that has meant as the price falls, Sudan would be obliged to export larger quantities of resources to China to service its debt. However, it is not clear how Sudan has negotiated these RBLs with China, and with the independence of South Sudan obviously these loans are more limited.  For example, in 2013, Sudan took a US$1.5 billion loan with a five-year grace period from China. In 2018, China agreed to provide Sudan US$58 million grants and US$30 million interest-free loan for peace security and the economic development during the China-Africa Cooperation Forum.