Skip to main content

The administration must respond to the Belt and Road Initiative of China

The administration must respond to the Belt and Road Initiative of China
The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill

Senior officials in the administration of President Biden traveled to Alaska last week and met with Chinese officials who represented an emboldened Beijing with rising economic and political clout and new military strength. Nothing better embodies such increasing confidence and influence than the Belt and Road Initiative, the signature foreign policy endeavor from Xi Jinping and the largest ever global infrastructure venture.

The United States must approach strategic competition with China from a position of strength, and it can only do so with a comprehensive response to the Belt and Road Initiative. Such a response needs to focus on working with partners to provide an attractive and effective alternative, investing in critical American strengths, and advancing our national security interests in these member countries of the Belt and Road Initiative.

A closer examination of the Belt and Road Initiative reveals that China has leveraged infrastructure projects by efforts to make countries dependent on Beijing for trade, finance, and technology. It saddles the countries with high debts and unsustainable megaprojects, leaving them far less able to demand decent labor and environmental standards, and more vulnerable to pressure from Beijing. China has even focused on member countries in priority vaccine access to draw them further into its orbit.

The Belt and Road Initiative filled a void left by the United States and may tilt the playing field away from American companies. Though talking of a level playing field, Beijing has leveraged subsidies and loans that handed Chinese companies almost 90 percent of all contracts. The Belt and Road Initiative makes fighting climate change harder. China has financed more than 240 power plants fueled by coal for more than two dozen countries, creating a lock on a carbon intensive future. China has secured access to overseas ports, while potentially jeopardizing United States use of those critical logistic facilities during times of crisis and conflict.

While the United States must push back against the wide array of Chinese actions which threaten American interests, unless it crafts a coherent and strategic response to the Belt and Road Initiative, it risks the world where Beijing will serve more and more as the hub of global trade and business, with China unafraid to exert its own economic influence over the political decisions of all its partners in the Belt and Road Initiative.

As our new Council on Foreign Relations Task Force report lays out, the United States has a major interest in adopting a strategy that pressures China to alter its practices and offers an effective alternative to the Belt and Road Initiative that promotes sustainable infrastructure, holds high environmental and anticorruption standards, ensures that our American companies can operate on a level playing field, and assists countries in preserving their strategic autonomy and political stances.

The priority is to build on our historic strengths by increasing funding for national research and development. Chinese research and development spending will, according to its plans, rise by 7 percent annually. We must update immigration and visa policies to attract and retain the best talent in the world in critical technology. We must support our companies with development finance while encouraging plus facilitating greater private and public participation in the standards processes which have allowed Beijing to write the rules in favor of its technology agenda.

To offset the negative economic impacts of the Belt and Road Initiative, we must lead a global effort to promote adherence to high standards in lending, transparency, and the environment. We have to offer countries considering negotiations with Beijing robust technical support, so they can discern the true costs of offers on the table as well as other options. We cannot respond sufficiently to the Belt and Road Initiative alone. The United States has no real alternative to offer in high speed rail or 5G. We need to work with our allies and create partnerships between the public and private sectors to find options that are available now.

We must work with similarly minded countries to pressure China to abide by its pledge for a green agenda and to adhere to international standards. We should also implement trade deals where our presence translates into better competitive opportunities for American companies and trade rules with high standards. We must join with our fellow World Bank members to revitalize the institution so the United States can take the lead on offering sustainable infrastructure all around the developing world.

We need a smart and tailored response to the Belt and Road Initiative that accounts for the perils and draws on our strengths of innovative business, robust capital markets, renowned research institutions, and vital alliances to provide the alternative where we can push back where we must. As the administration engages with China, it must do so from a place of power. A response to the Belt and Road Initiative marks the first step.

Jacob Lew served as a former United States Treasury secretary who is now a managing partner with Lindsay Goldberg and also visiting professor with the School of International and Public Affairs for Columbia University. Gary Roughead served as a former chief of operations of the United States Navy and is now a military fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. They were chairs of the Council on Foreign Relations Task Force for China.


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 yo

CPEC Jobs in Pakistan, salary details

JOBS...نوکریاں چائنہ کمپنی میں Please 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 daily Heavy Duty Driver: Rs. 1,700 daily Mason: Rs. 1,500 daily Helper: Rs. 850 daily Electrician: Rs. 1,700 daily Surveyor: Rs. 2,500 daily Security Guard: Rs. 1,600 daily Bulldozer operator: Rs. 2,200 daily Concrete mixer machine operator: Rs. 2,000 daily Roller operator: Rs. 2,000 daily Steel fixer: Rs. 2,200 daily Iron Shuttering fixer: Rs. 1,800 daily Account clerk: Rs. 2,200 daily Carpenter: Rs. 1,700 daily Light duty driver: Rs. 1,700 daily Labour: Rs. 900 daily Para Engine mechanic: Rs. 1,700 daily Pipe fitter: Rs. 1,700 daily Storekeeper: Rs. 1,700 daily Office boy: Rs. 1,200 daily Excavator operator: Rs. 2,200 daily Shovel operator: Rs. 2,200 daily Computer operator: Rs. 2,200 daily Security Supervisor: Rs.

A ‘European Silk Road’

publication_icon Philipp Heimberger ,  Mario Holzner and Artem Kochnev wiiw Research Report No. 430, August 2018  43 pages including 10 Tables and 17 Figures FREE DOWNLOAD The German version can be found  here . In this study we argue for a ‘Big Push’ in infrastructure investments in greater Europe. We propose the building of a European Silk Road, which connects the industrial centres in the west with the populous, but less developed regions in the east of the continent and thereby is meant to generate more growth and employment in the short term as well as in the medium and long term. After its completion, the European Silk Road would extend overland around 11,000 kilometres on a northern route from Lisbon to Uralsk on the Russian-Kazakh border and on a southern route from Milan to Volgograd and Baku. Central parts are the route from Lyon to Moscow in the north and from Milan to Constanţa in the south. The southern route would link Central Europe with the Black Sea area and