Skip to main content

China’s Belt and Road Initiative is here to stay, whether the US likes it or not

David Dodwell says China’s ambitious infrastructure-funding project is a reflection of the country’s vision of itself and a way to ensure the stability of its neighbours

David DodwellUPDATED : Saturday, 2 Feb 2019, 6:51AM


A headline in this newspaper just a week ago said it all: “Dim future seen for Belt and Road programme”. It is in vogue to portray China’s ambitious infrastructure-focused plan, embracing at least 80 countries, as a strategy in trouble.

As some would have it, the Belt and Road Initiative’s project stream has dried to a trickle as countries have wised up to the danger of debt traps and threats to sovereignty.

They are turning their backs on opaquely structured projects that serve China’s interests far more than those of the host country and provide a dumping ground for surplus Chinese steel and cement in a new form of colonialism.

Critics point to the US$20 billion on-again-off-again East Coast Rail Project in Malaysia, to Sri Lanka’s Hambantota port where Chinese contractors have converted debt into a 99-year lease to operate the port, to controversial hydropower dam projects in Pakistan and Myanmar.

They point to dirty coal-fired power plants being built in Serbia, and multibillion-dollar projects being agreed on without transparent, competitive tendering processes.

US Vice-President Mike Pence warned leaders at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Papua New Guinea in November: “Some are offering infrastructure loans to governments across the Indo-Pacific … Yet the terms of those loans are often opaque at best. Projects they support are often unsustainable and of poor quality. And too often, they come with strings attached and lead to staggering debt.”

He followed with an even blunter sales pitch: “Do not accept foreign debt that could compromise your sovereignty. Protect your interests. Preserve your independence … Know that the United States offers a better option.

“We don’t drown our partners in a sea of debt. We don’t coerce or compromise your independence. The United States deals openly, fairly. We do not offer a constricting belt or a one-way road. When you partner with us, we partner with you, and we all prosper.”

This is a bit rich coming from a country that has both directly and through the International Monetary Fund sat at the heart of debt crises in South America, across Asia in 1998, and more recently among the Western economies in 2008.

That aside, the idea that the Belt and Road Initiative is floundering is nonsense. It remains at the heart of Chinese foreign policy.

It is not going away for good reasons. First, the initiative is not a grab-bag of random big-infrastructure projects but a 100-year vision of how China sees its place in the world as it emerges from a century of poverty, turmoil and introversion to re-engage with the global economy.

China’s belt and road can’t meet Asia’s infrastructure needs alone

Infrastructure building is seen not just as “good aid”, but also as a critical precursor to boosting two-way trade.

Research from the French credit insurance agency Euler Hermes predicts that belt and road projects will this year add US$117 billion to global trade – an additional US$56 billion in exports from China and an extra US$61 billion in imports.

Infrastructure building is seen as a critical stabiliser in deeply unstable parts of the world that, from China’s point of view, are too close for comfort. This is particularly true across the “stan” countries in Central Asia on China’s western borders.

The number of projects counted as belt and road projects in any year will ebb and flow, but the strategy and philosophy behind the programme itself is unlikely to falter: if the aid policies around the world of former colonial powers were built around food aid, China’s strategy is based on helping countries build their own infrastructure.

In 2016, Jin Liqun, head of the China-led Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), noted in the Financial Times: “The Chinese experience illustrates that infrastructure investment paves the way for broad-based economic social development, and poverty alleviation comes as a natural consequence of that.”

Can China learn anything from the US Marshall Plan? You’d be surprised

Jin views the AIIB as “an opportunity for China to show it can work with other countries and to better international practice – not just Western practice – so people can be convinced China is a force for peace and prosperity in the world.”

He was talking not about the Belt and Road Initiative, which is run by the Chinese government and mainly employs mainland companies and banks, but about the AIIB, which has 70 shareholders and runs on lines similar to the World Bank or the Asian Development Bank(ADB). But their philosophies come from a common source.

The Belt and Road Initiative is here to stay for another good reason: the need for better infrastructure is gigantic, and largely unmet.

The ADB says the Asia-Pacific alone needs to spend US$26 trillion on infrastructure between now and 2030 – that includes not just roads, bridges, ports and power plants, but clean water systems and strong digital infrastructure too.

Putting aside the politically motivated sniping from the US, the bad belt and road press speaks more to the formidable challenges of building “big infrastructure” in countries with fragile governments, ill-founded legal systems and next to no money.

While I admire Chinese efforts to help countries improve their infrastructure, I wish China had been willing to listen more closely to the World Bank, the ADB and other development banks on the challenges of organising large-budget infrastructure projects in developing economies – especially about the fact that the principle obstacle to infrastructure building is not a shortage of money, but identifying and structuring coherent and commercially viable projects.

There is an unseemly eagerness in some quarters in the US to see the Belt and Road Initiative “fail”. This is myopic and counterproductive.

Asia’s economies need all the improved infrastructure they can get. Rather than attack China, other rich economies should be complementing its efforts, and educating it away from some of the obvious mistakes it has so far made.

As David Dollar, Ryan Hass, and Jeffrey A. Bader at the Brookings Institution recently wrote: “Washington has driven up negative perceptions of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, but has yet to articulate an alternative for countries that are in need of infrastructure.”

David Dodwell researches and writes about global, regional and Hong Kong challenges from a Hong Kong point of view



Popular posts from this blog

SSG Commando Muddassir Iqbal of Pakistan Army

“ Commando Muddassir Iqbal was part of the team who conducted Army Public School operation on 16 December 2014. In this video he reveals that he along with other commandos was ordered to kill the innocent children inside school, when asked why should they kill children after killing all the terrorist he was told that it would be a chance to defame Taliban and get nation on the side. He and all other commandos killed children and later Taliban was blamed.
Muddassir Iqbal has deserted the military and now he is  with mujahedeen somewhere in AF PAK border area”
For authenticity of  this tape journalists can easy reach to his home town to interview his family members or   ISPR as he reveals his army service number”
Asalam o Alaikum: My name is Muddassir Iqbal. My father’s name is Naimat Ali. I belong to Sialkot divison (Punjab province), my village is Shamsher Poor and district, tehsil and post office  Narowal. Unfortunately I was working in Pakistan army. I feel embarrassed to tell you …

CPEC Jobs in Pakistan, salary details

JOBS...نوکریاں چائنہ کمپنی میںPlease help the deserving persons...Salary:Salary package in China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) in these 300,000 jobs shall be on daily wages. The details of the daily wages are as follows;Welder: Rs. 1,700 dailyHeavy Duty Driver: Rs. 1,700 dailyMason: Rs. 1,500 dailyHelper: Rs. 850 dailyElectrician: Rs. 1,700 dailySurveyor: Rs. 2,500 dailySecurity Guard: Rs. 1,600 dailyBulldozer operator: Rs. 2,200 dailyConcrete mixer machine operator: Rs. 2,000 dailyRoller operator: Rs. 2,000 dailySteel fixer: Rs. 2,200 dailyIron Shuttering fixer: Rs. 1,800 dailyAccount clerk: Rs. 2,200 dailyCarpenter: Rs. 1,700 dailyLight duty driver: Rs. 1,700 dailyLabour: Rs. 900 dailyPara Engine mechanic: Rs. 1,700 dailyPipe fitter: Rs. 1,700 dailyStorekeeper: Rs. 1,700 dailyOffice boy: Rs. 1,200 dailyExcavator operator: Rs. 2,200 dailyShovel operator: Rs. 2,200 dailyComputer operator: Rs. 2,200 dailySecurity Supervisor: Rs. 2,200 dailyCook for Chinese food: Rs. 2,000 dailyCook…

Historical relationship between Kurd and Baloch.

The Kurds are the ethnical group living in a region known as Kurdistan which is divided into Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran. They  are struggling for an independent region since decades and they are famous for their female guerrilla fighters.        On 25 September 2017, the referendum for an independent Kurdish region  was held in Iraq with a turn out of 72 %.   On this important occasion, the historical relation between Kurd and Baloch people is worth discussing.       When it comes to history, every nation tends to find its roots and origin. Same goes with the Baloch people. The Baloch people are always curious  about  finding their roots in history. Even if you  talk to a shepherd in Balochistan, he will be curious to talk about his  tribal or ethnical roots.      The Balochs have always conveyed the history to the next generations in different mediums like poems etc. No Baloch before 20th century had written books on  history  or origin of the Baloch nation .