The following blog post was written by H. Batsuuri. It develops an analogical analysis between Mongolia’s current economic situation and the late Qing and early revolutionary period, at the beginning of the twentieth century. The similarities lie in the foreign economic and political domination partnered with national rulers that plays an important role in increasing debt, exploitation, poverty, and prompted resistance leading to the revolution.

H. Batsuuri is a Mongolian economist who graduated from the London School of Economics, and is a founder and editor of a social and economic journal Shinjeech meaning ‘Analyst’. He is also an Advisory Board Member of the Emerging Subjects project. In the last couple of years, he has been actively researching, observing, engaging and commenting on Mongolia’s current economy, politics and social issues and has suggested various solutions.

He has published dozens of research and newspaper articles addressing topical debates surrounding the free market, neoliberalism, capitalism, democracy, governance, debt, tax, bank, offshore, trade, mining, sovereign bonds, investment, international politics and so on. He is a leading public well-known figure giving in-depth observations and expertise knowledge, and is currently running in the upcoming national parliamentary election as a candidate for the Independence and Unity Party.

In 1844, a Chinese merchant met the French traveller Évariste Régis Huc in Russia. What the merchant told him is noted in historical records: “We have the same business to eat up the Mongols, right?  You eat them by your prayers, and me, by my trade and loan interests. We, the merchants devour them with their hair and skin. You don’t know the Mongols. Don’t you see? They’re all like children… The debt of the Mongols has no end. It is shifted from generation to generation. Oh, how great is this debt, it’s like the golden chest”.

What I learnt in history class in middle school as “The people made the revolution against the repression and exploitation of the internal and external greedy merchants, the rich and the aristocrats” has been engrained in my mind. To a 13 year old boy, the intensions of the external invaders was clear, but the reflections about the internal oppressors, and the reasons why Mongolians had to oppress each other has left many unanswered questions.

The 1911 National Revolution for Freedom and the 1921 People’s Revolution were both started to overthrow the foreign abuse and domestic repressive system – and they both reached their goals. At that time, the domestic and foreign oppressors worked hand in hand. Historical records show how some Mongolian traitors were bound up with the foreigners and closely cooperated on exploiting people and depleting national wealth.

Figure.1 The article, featured in “The Century News” journal, June 2016

Concerning the external debt of today’s Mongolia, the situation is very similar to that of the debt issues of 1911. When we look at the challenges around Tavan Tolgoi, the condition of Dubai contract deal for Oyu Tolgoi and the ever-increasing debts and loans, it seems like some of our decision-makers share the same life with the foreigners. One of the triggers of the 1911 Revolution was the foreign debt distress that Mongolians suffered from. At that time, Chinese merchants would bribe local chiefs and aristocrats to impose goods like tea, textile and other products that they brought from China to Mongolians with higher prices. In the case of goods loan, they would take interest that doubled or tripled the initial price. The merchants and pawnshop keepers would implement corrupt policy by conspiring with the local aristocrats and impose tough loan conditions and repayments. Even for their personal debts, the local aristocrats would act on behalf of the State and make people pay them.

For instance, a block of green tea, a product of high demand during that period, cost 0,8 lan (29,84 gr) silver piece. The merchants would lend a block of tea for 1 sheep (a sheep cost between 2 and3 lan or 74,6 gr-111,9 gr silver) and get a two-year old lamb for one-year-interest. If the debtor couldn’t repay his/her debt in a year, the lamb was calculated as a mother animal to give another lamb. This logic was applied in raw material trades like hide, leather and wool; so 2-3 sheepskin would be taken as an interest of one sheepskin.

As the Chinese merchants started keeping the part of the livestock (that they swindled from the Mongolian herders) in the pasturelands, the number of the Chinese men married with Mongolian women and herding livestock increased. Some merchants would hire poor Mongolian herders so-called “khuchnii khun” (man of labour) to raise their livestock. These merchants would pay nothing for their exploitation of the Mongolian pasturelands. At that time, the debt was categorized as “albany ör” (official debt) and “aminy ör” (personal/private debt). Both the official and private debts of aristocrats had to be paid by the common people. For the Chinese merchants, making contracts with the local authorities to supply them with great amount of loan for their personal and official use, and have their subordinate people pay these debts was a profitable and easy way to increase their wealth. In the debt solution order, the family and extended family of the debtor repay his/her debt in the case where he/she was not able to repay their debts; and the subordinate people paid the debt of the debtor who was deceased or disappeared. Chinese merchants Bayansan and Dalai mentioned their practice to solve their loan issues by bribe and corruption in the following way, “we get 10 lan for 5 lan and 20 for 10. We submit some part of the extra profit to the authority”.

Some rich Mongolians and aristocrats who sold the country had their own house and land in Beijing. This is similar to today’s political situation where certain decision-makers’ offshore accounts and real estate properties are located abroad. The Chinese merchants would try to keep the initial debt as the source of income by only collecting its interest. Besides, they would run a policy to get the raw materials and wealth of the Mongols with an extremely low price, or even for free.

The issues around the external debt, the conspiracy of the foreign and domestic exploiters, their oppression and corruptions that are recorded in the history, aren’t they familiar to you? To me, they’re too familiar. The Ard Ayush (Ayush The Folk) movement, known as the “Tsetseg Nuuryn Duguilan” (The Flower Lake Circle) in history, was actually a resistance against the external debt distress and the double abuse by the corrupted county chief Manibadar and the Chinese greedy merchants.

Figure 2. Ayush The Folk, the leader of the civil movement against the foreign and domestic exploiters

The records show that in 1911, the total amount of Mongolia’s external debt reached to 30 million lan of silver. If we suppose the price of a sheep for 3 lan silver, we must have had a debt of 10 million sheep at that time. As for today, our external debt is counted at least 24 billion USD. If we calculate one sheep for 60 USD or 120 million tögrögs, it means that we have a debt of around 400 million sheep. But we have only 55 million livestock, in which is numbered 24 million sheep. So we actually live inside a period of debt that is 40 times more than that of the Manchu-domination period. When we look at the expense of 4,5 USD for each income of 1 USD in our economy, it’s clear for the debt to be inevitable. One can naturally wonder what kind of distorted system and whose policy is running here…

When we look at the current socio-economic situation in Mongolia, we could summarize that it is under the same conditions that shaped the Chinese merchant’s exclamation “The debt of the Mongols has no end. It is shifted from generation to generation. Oh, how great is this debt!” that was said more than 170 years ago. Our ancestors resisted the injustice, stealth and repression made by the corrupted domestic and foreign oppressors. They burnt down the debt orders and liberated themselves and their future generations from the internal and external exploitation. But what about us? We shouldn’t leave debt to our children; we don’t have the right to darken their future. We must not accept the open and hidden oppression and swindling. We do have the choice and it’s already the time to make the right choice. The time has come to elect those who know the problems and propose solutions, those who have a clean reputation.

Bibliography

Б.Уламбаяр. МУИС. Түүхийн эрхлэгч Undated Гадаад болон дотоод худалдааны түүхэн тойм, алба татварын тухай, accessed May 2016.

 

This post was written by Byambabaatar Ichinkhorloo, a member of the Emerging Subjects project and a doctoral candidate in anthropology at the National University of Mongolia.

This year, ‘Discover Mongolia’, the 13th Annual International Mining Investors Forum, was held on September 3-4, in Ulaanbaatar. The conference was organized under the sub-theme, ‘Mining Without Populism’. The keynote speakers of the conference claimed that the fundamental issues that have hindered the development of mining in Mongolia are populism, investment decline, and state intervention in business freedom. The conference is organized annually by ‘Prime Info’, a subsidiary company of Mongolian Investment Holding Group, and the Mongolian National Mining Association since 2002 and has become the platform for mining companies to attract investment and discuss urgent issues with the government of Mongolia.

Figure 1. The Opening Ceremony featuring: P. Ochirbat, former President of Mongolia, Du. Jargalsaikhan, Chairman of Mongolian Investment Holding Group, M. Enkhsaikhan, Minister of Mongolia, and R. Jijgid, Minister of Mining.

The conference, as highlighted by former president P. Ochirbat in his opening remarks, collected more participants than the previous year. Over 70 different organizations registered in the conference and the conference hall was full in the morning half, especially during the first three sessions, which included sessions entitled: ‘keynote speeches’, ‘government hour’, and ‘business freedom in the mining sector’.  However, the number of participants decreased significantly in the following sessions and on the second day. Many of the participants, it seemed, expected the Prime Minister and other high officials to speak during the morning half, especially during the government hour. But two cabinet members Mr. Jigjid, Minister of Mining gave short opening remarks, and Mr. Enkhsaikhan, Minister in charge for mega projects, attended the first session, while during the government hour people from the department and division heads level presented.

Figure 2. Afternoon session of the Discover Mongolia conference.

Before discussing the conference and the investor and mining company’s perceptions about the current conditions of Mongolian mining, let me briefly discuss what has happened in Mongolia and the extractive sector in the past few years.

Mongolia suffered a sharp decline in foreign direct investment  (FDI) in the extractive sector from MNT 5.2 trillion in 2011 to MNT 0.8 trillion in 2014 (due to Oyu Tolgoi mine start up in 2010 and suspension of OT underground mine in 2013), according to Mongolian Statistical Office. The World Bank estimates that foreign direct investment in Mongolia declined from US$ 4.7 billion in 2011 to US$ 2.1 billion in 2013.

So investment in-flow has declined, and its effects on the Mongolian economy and politics have fueled many economic and political debates in Mongolia, with some suggesting Mongolia should receive IMF Stand-By arrangements, while others, including Ts. Elbegdorj, President of Mongolia, have urged an increase in debt to GDP ratio up to 80% and to reach an agreement with Consortiums of Investors on Tavan Tolgoi coking coal mine and Rio Tinto on Oyu Tolgoi mine. Mongolian authorities have not been unanimous on raising necessary funds for development of mining infrastructure while arguing about railway track gauge and other mega projects through additional loan and bonds that might fill the investment shortages.

Even the government foreign debt issues have affected public opinion  and created fear among the population, producing lively debates among social media based movements. So after months of debate, the parliament passed the government’s submitted laws related to debt management and fiscal stability and agreed to keep a debt to GDP ratio of up to 58.3% in 2015, 55% in 2016 and 50% in 2017 and 40% in 2018 and beyond.

As investment declines and the economy slows in Mongolia, there has been a rush to place blame on environmental movements that lobbied and supported the law with long name since 2009 (Law on Prohibiting Mineral Exploration and Extraction Near Water Sources, Protected Areas and Forests), which abandoned 488 mining licenses in water sources, protected area, and forests. Gold mining companies claimed compensation of MNT 202 billion from the government and later on moved against environmental movements especially targeting Ongi river movements through mass media while promising to increase foreign investments and Mongolia’s gold reserves.

After suspending the provision of new licenses for 5 years, the government began to issue exploration licenses through an online application system, based on priority rights in eastern and western Mongolia, from January 2015. This was one of the urgent issues that attracted the interest of many of the participants during the ‘government hour’ at the conference. According to the Ministry of Mining, the government is planning to provide 3000 exploration licenses in 30 million hectare lands and will keep all licensed area within 30% of Mongolian territory.

Figure 3. During “Government Hour” session, featuring representatives from Ministry of Mining, Ministry of Finance, head of Mongolian Mineral Resource Authority, Governor of Umnugovi aimag, and Tax Department.

At the end of the conference, it became increasingly clear to us that many foreign mining companies and service providers are still positive about the future of the Mongolian extractive sector.  Chris MacDougall, from Mongolian Investment Banking Group, presented some of what he saw as the positive changes taking place in Mongolia, including the Foreign Investment Law, New Securities Law, Minerals law amendment, Tax Amnesty, OT Underground mining investment resolution and arrival of new Prime Minister Saikhanbileg in the past two years. “These changes made in the past two years are tremendous success of Mongolian government compared to previous ten years” stressed by Erdenes Mongol LLC.

Many participants also agreed that the failure to attract investors in mining projects has arisen due to the propagation of a  bad image of Mongolia by outsiders that has scared new investors away from Mongolia.  Panelists of the ‘business freedom’ session discussed how much Mongolia-related media is not transparent or clear or even true, and relevant institutions and agencies need to check for clarity. These insights were also reiterated in the presentations by Rio Tinto, Xanadu Mines, Aspire Mining, Erdenes Mongol companies. They asserted that Mongolia is open for business even though there are minor issues to be resolved, such as improving the business environment, transparency, and attracting Mongolia-specific investors.

Figure 4. Exhibition and poster by mining companies and mining service providers on the third floor, Corporate Convention Center, Ulaanbaatar.

Many participants expected more investment opportunity in the mining and mining subsidiary services, thanks to larger mining developments including OT underground agreement between Rio Tinto and Government of Mongolia and the soon-to-be expected Tavan Tolgoi agreement. As Minister Enkhsaikhan said at the conference, ‘the success of Tavan Tolgoi approval is around 10% even though it was 50% : 50% when it was submitted to the parliamentary approval’.

Enkhsaikhan and two other presenters highlighted the lost opportunities in relation to global commodity price cycles, and focused on how the Mongolian political cycles lost opportunities derived from global commodity cycles. It is true that many mining companies and development agencies are aware of the election-driven idle political period and try to reach agreements before election years. Many politicians and decision-makers became hesitant during election years and are slow to make any firm decisions that might affect his or her political reputations or election campaign. This in-activity reduces the number of new investments or or projects starting in election years.

In sum, there were two major tendencies among participants in the Discover Mongolia conference. One was to be cautious and pessimistic about the future of extractive industries in Mongolia and encourage laissez-faire or less government intervention in the mining sector, while securing more business freedom without any populism. Others, and often strongly  expressed by private companies,  saw the future of the Mongolian extractive sector in a more positive light, while seeking more secure investment and recommending the government of Mongolia to sell its bright news to the world, rather than focus on internal populist disputes.