It's your source, it mentions submarine hosting.

I never claimed Sri Lanka did not take substantial risk. As for the loans having nothing to do with CM ports, well it's all a bunch of card tricks. Clearly the loans had an effect on the port ownership so they became defacto related.

True it doesn't appear to be a cut and dry dept-trap. That being said I wouldn't skip the details. Doesn't sound like a dept trap but instead a trap where Sri Lanka is forced to build, host, and maintain (minority) stake in infrastructure the Chinese want to use. Dept it just a stepping stone to the actual intention. Some of the details you decided people should skip are the presence of Chinese submarines at the Chinese affiliated ports operating in Sri Lanka. Also one of the Chinese companies that went into CM ports was the company that constructed the port in the first place. Combine this with their construction of islands in disputed waters and the truth isn't too hard to see.

P.S. I don't think the Chinese are so stupid that they don't understand the concept of bribery, they are not infants.

I doubt the IMF requires collateral upfront in cash as a condition for a majority of their loans, that defeats the purpose of a loan. Although if you had a source, ideally an example of a contract that would help convince me. At least this was nowhere near the case with IMF operations in Greece, right?