I have a question about the greater severity of large national debt caused by borrowing from foreign sources.
I am reading a book about elementary Economics and am currently on a chapter discussing the strengths and weaknesses of demand-side policies.
The book (A-level Economics, Anderton, 2015, pp. 204) states the following:
Keynesian economics states that so long as a government can print money to finance its deficit without fueling inflation or borrow money from the financial markets, then the National Debt is not a problem for the short term. Nearly all economists, however, would argue that, in the long term, large National Debts can be a problem particularly if they are financed mainly by borrowing money from foreigners.
However, I am struggling to understand how they can be worse than borrowing from domestic debt markets (if I have stated the correct market i.e. from a domestic lender).
My understanding was that if the debt was financed through printing more money, and had to pay off the loans to a foreign lender, it would find it harder to reduce the supply of money via reversing quantitative easing i.e. selling bonds back into the bond market, so impending inflation in the long term would occur.
However, the book does not qualify its statement regading large National Debt as above so I am not sure what the justification is for Anderton's statement above.
Why would large National Debts financed by foreign lenders be a greater problem than domestic lenders if the problem was to be solved by printing more money?