Daily Times

China’s growing economic muscle helped chalk out the global vision of build-out infrastructure around the world officially spelled asthe Silk Road Economic Belt and Maritime Silk Road, referred to as One Belt, One Road (OBOR).The idea of Silk Roadcarries many dimensions but economics is the key driving force, primarily to improve the connectivitythrough Chinese massive engineering prowess, construction expertise, and investment, aware thatthe potential of building infrastructure abroad promotes development at home.

One of China’s major pillars of economic development approach and President Xi Jinping’s signature diplomacy, OBOR, serves as the embodiment in contemporary Chinese foreign policy, reflected in his speeches often, however, became the major theme of the conferences across the world. The concept of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) that promises to create the vast network of corridors-officials refer to them as ‘corridors of shared destiny-throughdevelopment are likely to affect the lives of 63 percent of the world’s population. That accounts for 29 percent of the global Gross Domestic Product.

China’s global strategy for building-out infrastructure and investment, also known as the BRI,pledges over a trillion dollars of investment, and have attracted 80 countries since it was launched in 2013. Despite negativity about China in some parts,Chinese official sources views the BRI to carry an altruistic approach,an approach that offers mutual benefits and a win-win arrangement. The initiative, arguably, isendorsedby political pundits, analysts and scholars from all parts of the world, as one of the most significant and ambitious geo-economic and geopolitical move of the twenty-first century.

The fact that adds more value and significance to the Chinese initiative is pressing global infrastructure demand in critical sectors indispensable to economic growth.Considering the significance of infrastructure requirement as a backbone of modern economies, world needs an estimated $94 trillion in infrastructure by 2040, out of which 59 percent of estimated global infrastructure spending needs relate to Asia, which means that Asia alone requires $1.7 trillion per year to maintain growth. China’swillingness to take the herculean taskof building-out infrastructure and implement through the OBOR enterprise in sectors that are considered the backbone of modern economies literally fills the vacuum that has continued to emerge with the birth of isolationist forces in America, Europe, and elsewhere in the West.

Beijing’s vision of BRIrelatively fills the void of infrastructure gap, while the United States has failed to create any alternative to address the critical global infrastructure challenge. The US, rather, is trapped in conflict behaviour. China’sRMB brings the much-needed investment to satisfy the appetite for improved infrastructure in developing countries to help keep pace with radical demographic, environmental and economic changes.

From late 1960s onward, the United States has managed to remain an unchallenged sole economic juggernaut in the pacific region until it faced the newly emerged economic behemoth, the People’s Republic of China. The obvious US geostrategic paranoia that views China a revisionist power fears that China would fundamentally reshape the balance of power in Indo-Pacific region, a region that is of enormous strategic value to the US. The US is,hence, unable to see geo-economics offerings of the BRI.

Therefore,the BRI is kind of a bitter pill to swallow for the United States, China’s peer competitor. The US considers the initiative a greater challenge to its economic and security interests in the world, particularly in the geographic regions of importance. The major reason to the US tacit opposition to China’s BRI is its own strategic imperatives.Eswar Prasad, the author of the book titled, The dollar trap, and the former head of the International Monetary Fund’s China division, described the growing erosion of distrust between the US and China saying, “The US doesn’t trust the Chinese, and China doesn’t trust the US.”

The distrust between the two major powers has only seen a rise under the Trump administration, followed by a trade war,which the US president declared as a bargaining chip to get a better deal in order to ‘Make America Great’ Again. It is yet to be seen who wins the war of being great,whether America becomes great again, or China pursues its dream of ‘great rejuvenation’.

China’s global strategy for building-out infrastructure and investmentpledges over a trillion dollars of investment, and have attracted 80 countries since it was launched in 2013

China’s rise has not just outperformed the United States in building hard infrastructure but in digital infrastructure as well.Beijing takes the decisive lead in the emerging field of fifth-generation (5G), and that further annoys America. A greater ambition and power projection is being displayed even in space; Beijing catches up in the space race with the US, surprising the world by landing on the far side of the moon, interrupting thedomination enjoyed by the United States and Russia for a long time.

Moreover, economic investments abroad help China wins the network of allies and partners, and connectivity efforts help make Beijing new friends and reinforce old bonds. One such old bond is realised through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).It is one of the six corridors under BRI’s flag; itepitomisessuccess in varying degrees, but sustainability of CPEC depends entirely on governments’ will to utilise Chinese renminbi to foster inclusive and sustainable socioeconomic growth.

CPEC, definitely, haspaved the way in cementing bilateral relations betweenthe two all-weather friends, Pakistan and China; they have becomecloserthan at any other point in the history of their friendship. Pakistan is one of the few countries along the Silk Road that sits at a critical nod on OBOR, much to the dismay of one of US’ close allies, India. President Xi Jinping made it clear at the 2017 Davos summit, “Our real enemy is not the neighbouring country but hunger, poverty, ignorance, superstition, and prejudice.” Yet the Indian deep-rooted ‘Sinophobia’, and India’s suspicions about the BRI arefar from over, and have been intensified by west’s idea of String of Pearls.

As the BRI moves forward, so grows the suspicion. Not all suspicions are inconsiderable; some vis-à-vis the BRIare not without merit. The positive sign is that Chinese officials have not just recognised the lacunas in the BRI but have also expressed interest to improve their areas of structural inefficiencies and bad practices, which cause reputational damage, and affects China’s soft image internationally.

As the founding president of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank has indicated, there would be willingness to adopt. It is ensured that the institute will be “lean, clean and green”, thus showing China’s adaptability in line with global financial standards.

It might be too irrational to predict the scale and scope ofthe still evolving, loosely-defined initiative, yet a practical assessment of the BRI suggests thatregional infrastructure demands and China’s appetite to invest are likely to raise the likelihood of success, better prospects of growth, and opening up economic opportunities to the regional countries. But what is certain is that the eastwill continue to shine. Closeness to Silk Road would add shine to a country.

The writes can be reached at ranasarfraz3417@gmail.com