It is true that the donar country benefits more than the reciever countries. However, while foreign help are profitable to the lender, I do not agree that the developing countries refusing to pay back their debts.
The donar nations give loan or fund with rules that are useful to them, by insisting the receiver to buy products and higher walkers from their country. Moreover, by providing financial help, they gain diplomatic favours and controls strategic resources by their political power. Finally, the rich nations gets even Richard by the amount of interest payment flowing into their banks. This game Western countries the power to dictate government policy through the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Consequently, the countries have borrowed more money to payback the interest.
Conversely, refusing to payback debts could emerge diverse problems. Defaulting loans leads to trade bans, legal trouble, and asset seizures abroad to the receiver nation. In addition, the developing country gets a poor credit score, which leads to, the banks and the rich country will stop lending money. Other countries were lose trust and cutoff humanitarian or economic help at the time of necessity.
In conclusion, I content that refusing or declining two payment that’s good emerge Internationally breaks the trust. Therefore, repaying the debts is essential, further more, the receiver countries may ask to extend the time period or even to reduce the interest rate which is possible rather than refusing to pay which leads to controversies.