Two years ago, the Belt and Road Initiative, Conference of China was well received by the major countries of the world. But now the picture is changing.
 |
| Photo (https://unsplash.com/photos/MykFFC5zolE) |
With the Lok Sabha elections in full swing in India, many developments are taking place on the world stage. Another deadline for the US to blockade Iran is the expiration of the deadline given to oil-importing countries, Britain's life has been shattered by the collapse of Brexit, terrorism is on the rise in Sri Lanka… and what… another important event is the Belt and Road Conference. !
Two years ago, the Belt and Road Conference on the construction of an international highway was held in Beijing with great fanfare. Leaders of over 30 countries were present at the conference. It was the world’s appreciation of China’s ambitious plan to connect the whole world by one road. In fact, the Belt and Road Project Initiative (BRI) was launched in 2013. So the response to the first Belt and Road Conference in international politics two years ago was spontaneous.
Since then, China has consistently received spontaneous responses from around the world. There are signs that the US response has slowed down a bit. The US had sent a high-level delegation to the BRI conference a year ago, underlining the US written importance of China's plan. However, now the tone of America has changed. The United States sent a junior official to this year's conference. It is clear that the US sees the plan as a competition rather than cooperating with China's BRI plan. This is the birth of America's Indo-Pacific architecture and strategy. Through this, the United States seeks to provide regulated connectivity and security options in the region. The United States is making a concerted effort to counter China's BRI plan by carefully planning its own resources, private investment and human capital.
Another important response is the European Community. The European Union has responded collectively to China's BRI plan. Just over a year ago, China sought to join hands with the European Union to curb US economic nationalism. But that attempt failed. Just last month, the European Union branded China a scientific competitor promoting alternative governance models. Seeing China's growing influence in Eurasia forced the European Community to reinvest in geopolitical initiatives. This led to the formulation of the EU-Asia Linking Strategy, which was designed as a direct response to the BRI.
Seeing China's growing influence in Eurasia forced the European Community to reinvest in geopolitical initiatives. This led to the formulation of the EU-Asia Linking Strategy, which was designed as a direct response to the BRI.
Japan and Australia also reviewed the BRI. Japan had earlier criticized the BRI. However, by shifting from its position, Japan has sought to adapt to the plan, with the aim of allowing it to compete with China in a limited way and allow its own businesses to grow. Meanwhile, Australia, which was initially on the fence, later changed roles. This was due to China's investment in projects in Australia's provincial governments and its growing influence. A ड 1.5 billion fund was set up in Canberra to help BRI fight the Indo-Pacific. Economic and geopolitical ties with China have forced both countries to work hard.
The conference will also be affected by China's own changed policy. Since 2013, billions of dollars have been diverted from China to developed nations. The immense cost incurred on a single scheme and the lack of credibility in maintaining transparency in transactions, led to some difficulties. The countries from which BRI is going to go have seen a huge increase in debt. Those countries feel that China's plan has led to their governments going into debt. China has dragged us into a debt trap, a mentality that has plagued many countries. The biggest challenge for China at this conference will be to get them out of it. China has also recently set up the International Development Association (IDA) to take a neutral look at the risks and opportunities in BRI.
The changes made by China are really fundamental, but one of the clear messages is that the BRI scheme is certain to come to fruition. So what hasn't changed? One thing is for sure, even in the wake of the debt scandal allegations, many developed countries are beginning to find some facts about China's investment in infrastructure. The fact is that these countries deliberately opposed the plan to get economic concessions from China. If you want to give an example, you can give Malaysia. Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad was elected prime minister on anti-China propaganda. Within months of becoming prime minister, he had to negotiate with China over the BRI issue. They had to discuss the terms and conditions of the BRI project with China. Billions of dollars are needed to develop the infrastructure of developed countries in Asia and Africa.
Despite the EU's desire for concerted action, the response from members of the community remained cold. Just last month, Italy became the first country in the G7 to sign the BRI. Greece also approved the plan in April. As a result, the number of Central and Eastern European countries signing BRI agreements with China is now 17 + 1 (previously 16 + 1). Some of these members had sided with China on issues of contention, whether in the South China Sea dispute or human rights violations in Xinjiang. Even an economically powerful country like Germany is reluctant to take care of its trade relations with China. The United States has disagreements with China over Huawei's issue, but Germany has allowed Huawei's investment in 5G infrastructure.
Russia's role in all this, however, is cautious. Russia has been cautious in investing in establishing bilateral relations with China. In 2013, Russia was skeptical about BRI. However, strained relations with the West forced Russia to rely heavily on China. These relationships are based on such uncertain long-term impermanence. Conflict could erupt between Russia and China over future economic imbalances. Short-term trends indicate that the relationship is strong; Both countries are transforming into Central Asia as well as the Arctic Ocean.
In 2013, Russia was skeptical about BRI. However, strained relations with the West forced Russia to rely heavily on China. These relationships are based on such uncertain long-term impermanence.
After all, India is nowhere in this. Because India is opposed to the BRI scheme. India's approach to China in this regard is distrustful. India is the first country to speak out against BRI. In May 2017, India boycotted the first conference without sending its delegation. This time too, India had the same role. On the contrary, India has recently set up an Indo-Pacific Department in the Ministry of External Affairs to give a new dimension to its interests in the Pacific and to strengthen its position here. India is also emerging as a rising superpower in Asia and the world. Therefore, India does not want to be a cat under the Chinese plate by participating in such a BRI scheme alone. Because it will limit India's ambitions.
Putting this country-wise response to the BRI Council aside for a moment and looking at the plan in a more subtle way, it is clear that the BRI will further strengthen political, economic and security ties. As a result, member countries around the world are beginning to have a frightening curiosity about the BRI scheme. This could be the foundation of a China-centric global economy. That is why China can use the second conference to shake off the stigma attached to member states. At the same time, however, there may be attempts by developed and hostile countries to thwart these intentions. It will soon be clear how the BRI scheme will be used to shape the world in the 21st century, and what its future direction will be, and it will be interesting to see.
Post a Comment