French Minister Éléonore Caroit questioned the relevance of continuing to provide development loans to China, citing a low volume of funded projects.
The comments suggest a potential shift in how France manages its international partnerships and financial aid. As China's global economic influence grows, the justification for treating the nation as a recipient of development assistance has become a point of contention within the French government.
Caroit, the minister déléguée chargée des Partenariats internationaux, highlighted the inefficiency of the current lending framework. She said that only 48 development projects have been funded in China since 2004 [1]. This figure represents an average of approximately two projects per year [2].
"On peut se poser la question de la pertinence de prêter de l'argent à la Chine. Mais il n'y a eu que 48 projets depuis 2004. Ça fait à peine 2 par an," Caroit said.
Translated from French, the minister said that one can question the relevance of lending money to China, given that there have been only 48 projects since 2004, which amounts to barely two per year.
The minister's assessment comes as France evaluates its international cooperation strategies. The low number of projects indicates that the mechanism for lending to China has remained largely dormant or underutilized for over two decades, a factor that may lead to a formal reconsideration of these financial ties.
By scrutinizing the actual output of these loans, the French government is weighing whether the diplomatic or economic returns justify the maintenance of such a lending channel. Caroit's focus on the numerical scarcity of projects suggests that the existing framework may no longer align with the current economic reality of the recipient nation.
“"On peut se poser la question de la pertinence de prêter de l'argent à la Chine."”
This critique reflects a growing trend among Western nations to re-evaluate the status of China as a developing economy. By highlighting the negligible number of active projects, France is signaling that China may no longer fit the criteria for development aid, potentially paving the way for a transition toward purely commercial or strategic bilateral agreements.
