How will China react to lost investments?

[JMA]

Mod's Note (starts)

Original post moved to this new thread 3rd October 2011.

A couple of posts have appeared in a thread on the war in Afghanistan, but raise questions and issues that IMHO need their own thread.

There is to my knowledge little history of China losing overseas investments, partly as it has exported people, not capital. Other nations have considerable history of losing investments, notably post-1945 either in giving up colonies or nationalisation of assets and quite a few small wars have ensued.(Mod's Note ends)

Dahuyan's point about classic colonialism is strong, but why would China want the trouble or bother of managing "Afghanistan." They just want unfettered access and influence over the resources that matter to them (which are not really national, are they?).

In Africa, they are not out to control deserts or cities (no governance interest whatsoever)---just the resources.

The people, within what ever "terms of trade" allow, and protection of China's interests from harm, are free to do what ever they want culturally, socially, religiously, and politically.

It seems to me that because the 'western' approach in places like Africa (in general) and Afghanistan is totally insanely incompetent that somehow (mainly seemingly because it is different) the Chinese approach is smarter.

The Chinese approach has not been tested. When the regimes (who have been bought by the Chinese) fail to protect the Chinese 'investments' (which are being more readily seen as the looting of national resources) or the regime changes and the new one also wants a piece of the action we will see how the Chinese react. Of course one would expect western countries to throw the odd spanner in the works to make it more difficult for the Chinese.

I would be cautious in presenting the once isolationist Chinese as savvy international players.