Northern Tanneries Remember Lessons Learned From Failure

China and Namibia have a very good traditional friendship. Since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries, cooperation in various fields has been developing smoothly, especially in the field of economic cooperation.

But there is also a failure. China's Namibia northern tannery project, which is subsidized by the government, is one example, for many reasons.

Northern tanneries are in trouble.

The northern tannery is located in wannangua City, northern Namibia. The project was formally signed by the parties concerned in March 2000. The construction was completed in April 2002.

This project is provided by the China Import and export bank to the government for 50 million yuan discount discount loan. A Chinese company is responsible for the civil engineering construction of the workshop, the supply, pportation, installation, commissioning of the machinery and equipment, and the technical training for the staff.

After completing the above tasks, the Chinese company promptly handed over the project to Nash, and then operated independently and independently.

The plant was contracted and built by a Chinese company. After its completion, it was operated independently and independently by the Nash side. The request was raised by Nash, and the contract firms of China responded positively.

The turnkey project was supported by the then Chinese Embassy in Namibia and approved by the competent authorities in China.

As a result, Nash is satisfied. The Chinese companies that have won the contract are even more delighted. The gratitude of the leaders who helped them succeed is needless to say.

At that time, it was indeed a great joy to have done, but the seeds of trouble had been sown since then.

Since the project was pferred to Namibia North tannery Co., Ltd. in April 26, 2002, the situation is in a sharp turn.

When I first arrived at the factory in early August 2002, I saw the poor management of the factory, the loss of staff, the damage to the machine, the serious shortage of construction, and the unsalable product, which was in a state of half paralysis.

Some projects are not suitable for contracting.

The northern tannery was soon in trouble after it was handed over to Nash. There are many reasons for this.

I just want to make one point: that is to say, the form of cooperation between contracting and turnkey projects is an important reason for this cooperation to be difficult to succeed.

It is not unfeasible to build projects in developing countries, including African countries, by way of government discount loans and contracting projects.

Whether it is feasible or not depends on the specific circumstances.

For some countries or projects which are not suitable for the cooperation of contracting ways, this way should not be adopted.

Before I worked in Namibia, I served as ambassador of China to Lesotho.

At the same time, the same Chinese company needed to use government discount interest loans to build aid in Lesotho, and also contracted to build the Lesotho wool top factory. The loan amount was 50 million yuan.

At that time, the comrades of the Embassy's Business Department agreed.

The main reason is that the project of the Lesotho National Conference Center, which was built in Lesotho by China, has been completed. Considering the continuous development of friendly cooperation between the two countries, I am not suitable for Lesotho's aid projects.

And now there are already discount discount loan funds, and there are also some woolen factory projects. Why not?

My opinions are different from those of them.

I do not think that we should not engage in new aid projects, but rather do not work on turnkey projects in the form of contracting. Otherwise, it is very likely that they will suffer later.

They urged me to say, "there is no need to worry about this. If the factory is going to have trouble in the future, we will not be in Lesotho anymore, and there will be problems for later generations to deal with."

I don't even agree with them.

I said, "we can not bring trouble to the later generation for the sake of our own" achievements ", especially to the recipient countries for long-term economic losses.

Others can not give us new reasons, but they want me to obey their majority opinion.

I said impolitely: "majority"'s opinion is incorrect, of course, it can not be supported.