Arnaud Bertrand Profile picture
Nov 21, 2024 1 tweets 5 min read Read on X
The story around China issuing USD-denominated sovereign bonds in Saudi Arabia is generating an enormous amount of buzz in China, and could potentially be immensely important.

I strongly suspect it's a message to the upcoming Trump administration.

Let me explain what seems to be going on.

On the face of it, it's not a major story: China issued $2 billion in USD-denominated sovereign bonds in Saudi Arabia, which means that investors lent USD to the Chinese government that they promised to pay back. That's what a bond is. So far, relatively boring.

The first somewhat interesting aspect of it is that the bonds were oversubscribed by almost 20x (meaning $40+ billion in demand for $2 billion worth of bonds), which is far more demand than usual for USD sovereign bonds. Typically US Treasury auctions see oversubscription rate between 2x to 3x so there obviously seems to be very strong market appeal for China's dollar-denominated debt.

The second interesting aspect is that the interest rate on the bonds was remarkably close to US Treasury rates (just 1-3 basis points higher, i.e. 0.01-0.03%), which means that China is now able to borrow money - in US dollars (!) - at virtually the same rate as the US government itself. That's the case for no other country in the world. As a benchmark, countries with the highest credit ratings (AAA) typically pay at least 10-20 basis points over US Treasuries in the rare instances when they issue USD bonds.

The third interesting aspect is the venue itself for this bond sale: Saudi Arabia. This is unusual since sovereign bonds are typically issued in major financial centers, not in Riyadh. The choice of Saudi Arabia and the fact that the Saudis agreed to this is particularly significant given its historical role in the global dollar system, the so-called 'petrodollar' system which I don't need to explain... By issuing dollar bonds in Saudi Arabia that compete directly with US Treasuries, and getting essentially the same interest rate, China is demonstrating it can operate as an alternative manager of dollar liquidity right in the heart of the petrodollar system. For Saudi Arabia, which holds hundreds of billions in dollar reserves, this creates a new option for investing their dollars: they can invest it with the Chinese government instead of the US government.

Ok, that's all interesting but still not the main reason why Chinese social media is abuzz. The reason why is because they postulate that this is trial round by China to demonstrate to the US that they can effectively use their own currency against them, with potentially dramatic consequences.

How?

First of all, think it through, imagine if China scales this up and instead of issuing $2 billion worth of bonds, they start issuing 10s or 100s of billions worth of it.

What this means for the US is that China would effectively be competing with the US Treasury in the global dollar market. Instead of countries like Saudi Arabia automatically recycling their dollars into US Treasury bonds, they could put them into Chinese dollar bonds that pay the same rate.

This would create a parallel dollar system where China, not the US, controls part of the flow of dollars. The US would still print the dollars, but China would increasingly manage where they go. Imagine that...

Another critical aspect is that every dollar that goes into Chinese bonds instead of US Treasuries is one less dollar helping to finance US government spending. At a time when the US is running massive deficits and needs to constantly sell Treasury bonds to fund itself, having China emerge as a competing dollar bond issuer that can match Treasury rates could pose immense financing problems for the US government. It could effectively end the US's so-called “exorbitant privilege”.

But wait, you might ask yourself, what's the point of China having so many dollars? Don't they transfer the problem to themselves: they too need to find a place to invest all these dollars, don't they?

You'd be right, the last thing China needs is more US dollars: in 2023 it ran a US dollar trade surplus of $823.2 billion, and for 2024, it's expected to be $940 billion. China is already absolutely awash with dollars.

But that's where the beauty of the Belt & Road Initiative comes in. Out of the 193 countries in the world, 152 of these countries are part of the BRI. And a very common characteristic many of these countries have is: they owe debt in USD, to the US government or other Western lenders.

This is where China's strategy could become truly clever. China could use its US dollars to help Belt & Road countries pay off their dollar debts to Western lenders. But here's the key: in exchange for helping these countries clear their dollar debts, China could arrange to be repaid in yuan, or in strategic resources, or through other bilateral arrangements.

This would create a triple win for China: they get rid of their excess dollars, they help their partner countries escape dollar dependency, and they deepen these countries' economic integration with China instead of the US.

For BRI countries, this is attractive because they can escape the trap of dollar-denominated debt (and the threat of US financial sanctions) and get likely better conditions with China, which will help their development.

In effect this would China placing itself as an intermediary at the heart of the dollar system, where the dollars still eventually make their way back to the US - just through a path that builds Chinese rather than American influence and progressively undermines the US's ability to finance itself (with all the consequences this has on inflation, etc.).

At this stage you probably tell yourself "come on, there's no way China can do that, the US government surely has tools at its disposal to prevent this stuff". And the answer, surprisingly, is that there is actually little the U.S. can do that doesn't undermine them in some shape or form.

The most obvious response would be to threaten sanctions against countries - like Saudi Arabia - or institutions that buy Chinese dollar bonds. But this would further demonstrate that dollar assets aren't actually safe from US political interference, further encouraging countries to diversify, compounding the problem. The dollar's strength partly comes from network effects - everyone uses it because everyone else uses it - but as we've seen with Russia sanctions create a coordinating moment for countries to move away together, weakening these network effects.

Another option would be for the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates to make US Treasuries more attractive. But this would be self-defeating: it would increase the US government's own borrowing costs at a time when they're already struggling with massive deficits, potentially triggering a recession. And China, getting similar rates as the US, could simply match any rate increase.

The US could also go for the "nuclear option" of restricting China's ability to clear dollar transactions but this would effectively immediately fragment the global financial system, undermining the dollar's role as the global reserve currency - exactly what the US wants to avoid. And with China being the most important trading partner of the immense majority of the world's countries, nothing is less sure that the U.S. would win at this game...

In short this seems to be like some sort of Tai Chi 'four ounces moving a thousand pounds' (四兩撥千斤) move by China, using minimal force to redirect the dollar's strength in a way that benefits China.

Like I wrote at the beginning however, at this stage this is most likely just a message by China to the upcoming Trump administration: "we can do this so maybe think very carefully about all the nasty things you have in mind for us..." The beauty of this move is how strategically elegant it is: it costs China almost nothing to demonstrate, but forces Washington to contemplate some very uncomfortable possibilities.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Arnaud Bertrand

Arnaud Bertrand Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @RnaudBertrand

Apr 3
To illustrate just how nonsensically these tariffs were calculated, take the example of Lesotho, one of the poorest countries in Africa with just $2.4 billion in annual GDP, which is being struck with a 50% tariff rate under the Trump plan, the highest rate among all countries on the list.

Why? Does Lesotho apply extortionate tariffs on U.S. products and the U.S. is merely being "reciprocal" here? Not at all, despite what Trump is saying, it's NOT the way these tariffs are defined.

As a matter of fact Lesotho, as a member of the Southern African Customs Union (SACU), applies the common external tariff structure established by this regional trade bloc.

Which means it applies the same tariffs on U.S. products as South Africa does, as well as the 3 other members of the bloc: Namibia, Eswatini and Botswana.

So since the tariffs charged by these 5 countries on U.S. products are exactly the same, they must all be struck with a 50% tariff rate by the U.S., right? Not at all: South Africa is getting 30%, Namibia 21%, Botswana 37% and Eswatini just 10%, the lowest rate possible among all countries.

So what gives? Again, the way these tariffs are calculated has absolutely zero relationship with actual tariffs imposed by these countries on U.S. products. Instead, they appear to be simply derived from trade deficit calculations.

Looking at Lesotho specifically, every year the U.S. imports approximately $236 million in goods from Lesotho (primarily diamonds, textiles and apparel) while exporting only about $7 million worth of goods to Lesotho (wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile…).

Why do they export so little? Again this is an extremely poor country where 56.2% of the population lives with less than $3.65 a day (databankfiles.worldbank.org/public/ddpext_…), i.e. $1,300 a year. They simply can't afford U.S. products, no-one is going to buy an iPhone or a Tesla on that sort of income...

The way the tariffs are ACTUALLY calculated appears to be based on a simplistic and economically senseless formula: you take the trade deficit the U.S. has with a country, divide it by that country's exports to the U.S and declare this - falsely - "the tariff they charge on the U.S."

And then as Trump did in his speech last night, you magnanimously declare that you'll only "reciprocate" by charging half that "tariff" on them.

As such, for Lesotho, the calculation goes like this: ($236M - $7M)/$235M = 97%. That's the "tariff" Lesotho is deemed to charge this U.S. and half of that, i.e. roughly 50% is what the U.S. "reciprocates" with.

It's extremely easy to see why this makes no sense at all.

First of all, there's nothing Lesotho can do about it: they can't change tariffs they allegedly charge the U.S. to reduce the tariff rate the U.S. "reciprocates" with because, again, it's NOT based on any tariff that they charge.

Similarly they can't do much about reducing the trade deficit they have with the U.S. because, again, they simply don't have enough money to buy U.S. products.

Also the main rational Trump gave for the tariffs is to get production back to the U.S., to "bring manufacturing back". 47.3% of Lesotho's exports are diamonds: how do you bring the "manufacturing" of that "back to the U.S."? Anyone can see it makes just about zero sense.

The Lesotho example exposes the fundamental economic incoherence of these tariffs. Rather than addressing actual trade barriers, they punish countries based on trade deficits that arise from structural economic realities. All the more countries like Lesotho which pose zero competitive threat to American industry.

Worse yet, these tariffs will likely make these structural realities even worse: the U.S. is Lesotho's second most important export destination so it's a fair bet that applying 50% tariffs on their products will make people in Lesotho even poorer, and therefore even LESS able to afford U.S. products.

But perhaps the most unfair and detrimental aspect of all this is that these tariffs represent a complete reversal of longstanding U.S. development policy, and therefore a betrayal of countries - like Lesotho - who chose to follow U.S. advice in the past.

For decades the U.S. has used preferential trade access to encourage economic development in the world's poorest nations, recognizing that trade, not just aid, could get them out of poverty and ultimately put them in a position where they too could afford iPhones or Tesla.

They're now effectively penalizing countries for following previous U.S. policy, a lesson which I bet they won't forget anytime soon.

So all in all the irony is painful: in the name of fighting unfair trade, America has just demonstrated what truly unfair trade looks like.

This isn't something designed to address genuine trade issues, but simply a mechanism based on arbitrary math to punish countries for the affront of selling more to the United States than they buy.
The arbitrary math used to define the tariffs (which has nothing to do with tariffs charged on the U.S.) was just unwittingly confirmed by Deputy White House Press Secretary Kush Desai, in a way that shows he himself doesn't understand it 👇😅
Read 6 tweets
Mar 24
This could potentially be quite transformational for peace in Ukraine and for Europe generally: welt.de/politik/auslan…

German newspaper Welt Am Sonntag, citing "EU diplomatic sources familiar with the matter", reports that "China proposed to the EU to participate in the 'Coalition of the Willing'" so as to "increase Russia's acceptance of peacekeeping forces in Ukraine."

Russia has so far vehemently rejected the idea of European peacekeeping troops in Ukraine but could indeed potentially be swayed if China were to be part of the coalition.

Such a move would also of course have the potential to fundamentally change the nature of EU-China relations and mark a huge shift in the continent's security architecture, where China would be an alternative security partner to the US in European affairs.

It would also strategically position Europe in a much more enviable position were it wouldn't be at the mercy of Washington's every whims, and could leverage competition between Beijing and Washington in a way that'd enhance its sovereignty and bargaining position.

All that being said, given the EU's proven history of diplomatic incompetence and strategic inertia, this scenario is more likely than not to remain theoretical.
Some people reply that this could be fake news because this is inconsistent with China's historical position BUT it isn't: China was already one of the guarantor states in the 2022 draft "Treaty on Permanent Neutrality and Security Guarantees for Ukraine" negotiated in Istanbul (see screenshot, from here static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/d…).

2022 treaty on which Lavrov said a peace deal must be based ("Our approach to the potential settlement has not changed: we are ready for dialogue on the basis of the 2022 agreements", mid.ru/en/foreign_pol…) 🤷Image
Retired PLA Senior Colonel Zhou Bo had also recently said on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference that "China could also be part of security guarantees, alongside other powers," depending on the conditions.
scmp.com/news/china/dip…
Read 4 tweets
Feb 26
This "China is depleting the oceans with its huge fishing fleets" story is yet another utterly shameless piece of propaganda when China actually proportionally fishes much less than the rest of the world, since - unlike others - it gets the immense majority of its fish supply from aquaculture 👇 (src: openknowledge.fao.org/items/06690fd0…)

The worst culprit when it comes to depleting the oceans is actually Europe, relative to its population size. They fish about 33kg of fish per person per year compared with 10kg for China, a crazy 230% more!Image
Actually if you read the report it's 13 million tones for China x.com/realSandkraken… Which corresponds to 14.3% of global captures of aquatic animals, which is less than Europe with 15.2 million tones or 16.7% of global captures. This is of course despite China having twice Europe's population...

In other words, Europe has 9% of the world's population but fishes 16.7% of the fishes while China has 18% of the world's population but fishes 14.3% of the fishes.

Now you tell me who is overfishing and who isn't...
Can you even read a graph? China is fishing only about a third the amount of the rest of Asia (13 million tones for China vs 30 million tones for the rest of Asia) 🤷‍♂️
Read 4 tweets
Feb 17
If anyone wonders how to constitute the China allocation of their portfolio, these tickers, based on seating arrangements, are probably not a bad place to start.

That was actually the basic strategy of a friend of mine, very successful investor in China: he simply studied policy statements very deeply as well as signals like this meeting 👇 to understand what were China's strategic economic objectives and which companies would benefit from this. Just like the US has a "don't fight the fed" investment principle, China has in some way a "don't fight the government" equivalent.

(Not investment advice 😉)Image
A list of some of the attendees 👇
And for your portfolio, it's also important to check who was NOT at the meeting 😅
Read 4 tweets
Jan 19
Wow, this is huge. I just tried it myself with a foreign phone number (you can apparently choose any country, see screenshot) and it's true: you can now join Douyin - the Chinese version of TikTok - as an international user.

Which means the Great Firewall is coming down in the most unexpected way: with the world joining the China side of the wall.

Really feels like a Berlin wall moment, except in the opposite direction.Image
Image
For people wondering where the hell I found the app, given it's not on Western app stores: apkpure.com/douyin/com.ss.…
Zero "TikTok refugee" on here so far that I've seen, pure Chinese content
Read 5 tweets
Dec 27, 2024
This 👇 is arguably an even bigger Sputnik moment for China than the 6th generation fighter jet: a Chinese AI Model called DeepSeek v3 rivals - and often surpasses - the latest ChatGPT and Claude models in pretty much all respects for a tiny fraction of the training cost (only $5.5m), and it's open sourced (meaning anyone can use, modify, and improve it).

The fact that it's so cheap to train is particularly important as it completely changes the game of who can participate in advanced AI development. Up until now, the assumption was that you needed hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars to train such a model, yet DeepSeek did it with just $5.5m, a sum of money accessible to just about any startup anywhere. Concretely, this means that DeepSeek has just proven that serious AI development is not limited to tech giants.

And their model is not only cheap to train, it's also extremely efficient to run. They use an architecture called Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) where, while their full model has 671 billion parameters (which is huge), it only uses 37 billion at a time. To compare, Meta has 405 billion parameters in their latest Llama3.1 model and uses all 405 billion at a time. DeepSeek V3 is more than 10 times more efficient, yet performs better than Llama3.1 at almost all benchmarks (English, Math, Coding, etc.).

DeepSeek V3's performance at key benchmarks is impressive across the board:
- Crushes advanced math problems (90.2% on MATH-500, vs 78.3% for Claude-3.5-Sonnet and 74.6% for GPT-4o)
- Excels at coding (82.6% on HumanEval, vs 81.7% for Claude-3.5-Sonnet and 80.5% for GPT-4o)
- Can process huge amounts of text at once (128K tokens, roughly equivalent to 100,000 words in English)
- Processes text at 60 tokens per second, about twice faster than GPT-4o

And the craziest part is that it's open-source, meaning that:
- Anyone can download and study the code
- Developers can modify and improve it
- Companies can integrate it into their products without paying API fees
- The entire AI community can learn from it

Lastly, this obviously comes during an interesting context in China-US relations where the US is doing its utmost to prevent China from progressing technologically, especially in AI. As such, this is an absolutely beautiful response by China: "despite all your restrictions, we just built a world-class AI model for 1% of your cost, made it more efficient than anything you have, and open-sourced it for the whole world to use."

It's also a triumph of brains over money and raw power: with its restrictions the US placed China in a situation where it had to use resources more intelligently. As the saying goes "necessity is the mother of inventions"... And here we now are: China may have just changed the rules of the game forever, democratizing the very technology the US tried to restrict and proving, once more, that human ingenuity always finds a way.
Interesting background on the company behind the model 👇
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(