Imperial Overreach of China’s Belt and Road Initiative

Pundits often describe present-day China as uber-Strategic, watching its every move carefully coordinated, guided by history, and focused for a long time. But Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s signature foreign policy policy, the Belt and Road Initiative, is indeed poorly defined and badly misinterpreted. As China moves forward with the construction of this massive infrastructure, it is following in the footsteps of previous empires and campaigning seriously.

Belt and Road “said Wang Yi, China’s top diplomat in 2018,” is neither a martial plan nor a geostatistical concept. “In fact, it is even more ambitious. The Marshall Plan exploited the equivalent of $ 130 billion to rebuild Western Europe after World War II. Since the Belt and Road announcement in 2013, China has funded the American Institute of Enterprise According, it has signed $ 460 billion in construction contracts in more than 140 countries. The initiative has now reached Africa, Latin America, cyberspace and even outer space. And as China continues to learn Is, it is much harder to develop than to rebuild economies.

First, Chinese officials would likely regret making Pakistan, in their words, the “head” of the Belt and Road Initiative, with some 40 projects, of an estimated $ 25 billion, on the way there. Beijing believes that Washington can succeed in transforming the country after decades of struggle. But it should not count on him.

In the 1950s, Western economists arrived in Pakistan and tried to help fashion the newly independent country into a long-term development plan. But in the form of poorly coordinated aid, Pakistani officials opposed fixing priorities and making drastic reforms. “When I went to Pakistan, I had $ 60 million to spend and no plans, no programs,” recalled John Bell, who provided US aid to Pakistan in the mid-1950s. When asked for the list of priorities, the head of Pakistan’s Ministry of Economic Planning replied, “No, we need everything, we need everything.”

Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan (left) met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Beijing, October 9, 2019.


Liu Weibing / Xinhua / Zuma Press

In the last 18 months undertaken, foreign advisory missions started more than half a century ago have essentially never ended. Eventually, the World Bank also stepped in and over the years, the US has provided more than $ 80 billion in aid to Pakistan. Last year, the International Monetary Fund expelled Pakistan for the 22nd time. If neighboring Afghanistan is a cemetery of empires, Pakistan is a black hole of foreign aid.

Harris partly explains why Chinese authorities have placed large bets on Pakistan and other risky markets. Following China’s own rise, the dramatic infrastructure has been fueled by spending. Its top leaders have all ascended to a system that rewards GDP growth, which they have learned to promote through building infrastructure. After facing the financial crisis of 2008, during which Western institutions struggled so much, Chinese leaders concluded that their playbook was better and would work overseas.

In its enthusiasm for construction, China has supported projects that the US wisely avoided long ago.

In its enthusiasm for construction, China has supported projects that the US wisely avoided long ago. In 1973, Pakistan asked the US to build a port in Balochistan, its largest and least populous region, and offered the US Navy access to it. “It will probably cost a few hundreds of millions of dollars, and the political impact of the project will depend in part on its not being a white elephant,” Henry Kissinger warned President Nixon that year in a memorandum.

Decades later, China accepted Pakistan’s will and built the port, but very few have reached its docks, which have been cut inland from urban areas. Meanwhile, China’s activities have angered India, which rejects the route of the Belt End Road through the region to the north that claims both Pakistan and India.

China faces more scrutiny over its power abroad than its imperial predecessors. In June, a Kenyan court ruled that China’s contract for a $ 3 billion railway between Nairobi and Mombasa was illegal because it violated public procurement practices. When Britain built the first railway between those cities more than a century ago, it did not have to contend with international standards, local courts, investigative journalists or cellphone cameras.

The Belt and Road Initiative suffers from a severe lack of transparency and accountability.

Belt and Road also suffers from a severe lack of transparency and accountability. China has no firm criteria to qualify for the project and keeps the details secret. It allows Beijing to make friends at high places abroad, but also raises the possibility that commercially dubious projects will get the green light. And after the Belt and Road projects are approved, China often struggles to monitor them.

On the ground, China’s large state-owned enterprises, including seven of the world’s 10 largest construction companies, run the show. These bloated veterans often have more personnel, technical expertise, and local ties than government personnel who are charged with overseeing. Desperate to find new work, these firms seek to build projects as quickly as possible, regardless of their business feasibility or strategic value.

China’s debt expands its influence in foreign capitals, and critics warn that Beijing is using “debt trap” diplomacy, lending so that it can seize the strategic assets of recipient countries. They point to a Sri Lankan port that China has financed and built, for which it now has a 99-year lease – the same length that Britain once achieved for control of Hong Kong. There is no need to drag this relationship for the Sri Lankans who won their independence from British colonial rule seven decades ago.

But the accusation of a “debt trap” is actually too lenient for Chinese officials, casting Beijing’s shameful mismanagement as a strategic masterstroke. In the case of Sri Lanka, like other hot spots along Belt & Road, Chinese authorities have been negligent for projects that other lenders have postponed and are now washing their hands for disposal. When projects fail, Beijing suffers in both its finances and reputation.

Actually, China is treading its own design trap. According to researchers at Oxford University, globally, the cost of most large infrastructure projects is much higher than expected, taking longer than expected and delivering less than expected. To further increase the likelihood of failure, China has chosen hazardous partners: Most countries participating in Belt & Road have sovereign-debt ratings that are either junk or not rated.

The Kovid-19 epidemic is exposing the difficulties that Chinese authorities face in changing times. In June, China estimated that 20% of belt and road projects were “affected by the epidemic”, while 30% to 40% were “somewhat affected”. Bangladesh, Egypt and Tanzania had recently canceled or postponed indefinitely the big ticket projects. But unbelievably, the announcing Chinese official noted that China was not aware of any major project cancellations.

As in many of the earlier imperial adventures, China is struggling to cut its losses, with even fewer new projects announced. There is a debt crisis looming in emerging markets, and historically, most infrastructure declines. But the Belt and Road is defined in the Chinese Communist Party’s constitution as a tattoo during binge-like drunkenness. It cannot be removed or it cannot even be called ugly. This is Mr. Xi’s vision, and until he relinquishes power or says that Chinese officials will march forward with it.

In Pakistan, China and the United States are clashing on China’s One Belt, One Road initiative. To understand what’s at stake, it helps to focus on why China ranks first in Pakistan. (Originally published September 10, 2018)

Copyright © 2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All rights reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.