US-Papua New Guinea Relationship: Discontent Over Economic Benefits and Military Concerns Sparks Debate

US-Papua New Guinea Relationship: Discontent Over Economic Benefits and Military Concerns Sparks Debate

Deepening the U.S.-Papua New Guinea Relationship: WHAT IS IN IT FOR PNG?

by ROGEN WATO, Director at NiuPower Limited via LinkedIn.


The US's main business is in printing Trillions of Dollars and selling them as debt to the world. They don't use gold or oil to back it up. 

They have created an artificial financial system that assesses and allocates varying investment gradings to each country and each company, and with that impose unjustified interest rates and internal rates of return (IRR) on the struggling economies. 

So despite the fact that we own the gold and oil and gas, it costs us up to 13% in interest rates (when we borrow) and 13% in IRR when Exxon and the likes invest in PNG. 

We are categorized in the same bracket with certain war torn and terrorist ridden countries, despite the fact the PNG, both as a Government and a major investment destination, have NEVER EVER DEFAULTED on any international financial obligation. 

Just a few kilometers across the sea, it would cost 5 to 6% to borrow and invest in or Australia.

Doing business with China is totally different and on very friendly terms, costs and with ease of access even to China's export finance; and we can trade entirely in the Chinese Yan Renminbi (except to repay USD denominated loans). 

The leading export markets for PNG China, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, and Australia. Frankly, there is very little economic benefit to gain from any PNG-US relationship, because just like PNG, the US also relies heavily on China for industry, manufacturing and trade.

If there is a military element to the PNG- US deal which we obviously do not need, they are only re-securing their old battlefield. Remember, they trampled all over the Pacific when they fought World War, and left carnage and wreckage behind in 1945 and did not return with aid, trade, financial accommodation, or war reparations since. 

And they will still trample all over the Pacific again without our permission anyway, if they ever go to war with China in the future; of course they will not allow the war to reach the US territories.

The article starts by describing PNG as "...the largest, most populous and most strategically located nation in the region, … not surprisingly, at the epicenter of reinvigorated U.S. efforts to reengage the Pacific Islands". 

You can't put a price tag on that; it's simply priceless, but on the flipside, PNG can certainly name its price.

So, for whatever it's worth, we should have asked the US to build railway lines connecting the main economic centers of PNG and make airport and sea refurbishment and countrywide internet coverage; with a spend of US50 billion plus over 20 years (they print the money anyway), boomerang the money back using their own contractors and technology, implant wires and listening devices for their military use (who cares), and give us these infrastructure to use. 

At least that way, they pay reparations for WW2 and pay rent for their future battlefield. They have nothing to lose, but at least we gain from signing that defense agreement.