A new report on Belt and Road economics by the World Bank states that ‘Belt and Road transport corridors could substantially improve trade, foreign investment, and living conditions for citizens in participating countries — but only if China and corridor economies adopt deeper policy reforms that increase transparency, expand trade, improve debt sustainability, and mitigate environmental, social, and corruption risks’ [Belt and Road Economics: Opportunities and Risks of Transport Corridors]. In other words, China’s Belt and Road Initiative has significant potential to contribute to development but to achieve this important steps remain to be taken. The World Bank report identifies three focus areas for further improvement: transparency, country-specific reform, and multilateral cooperation. The extent to which the Chinese government supports progress in these three areas is an important indicator of both the BRI’s likelihood of success and of China’s commitment to global development.
Port investments in Africa are a good example of how BRI is both needed and risky. According to a CSIS study quoted in an article by DW, there are at least 46 existing or planned port projects in Sub-Sahara Africa in which China is involved [Making Chinese investment in African ports work despite risks]. Sub-Sahara Africa does not have a single port hub (a port that acts as an intermediary between two other ports), and shipping costs in Africa are higher than in other regions. Yet Africa’s population is expected to grow very rapidly in the coming decades. There is an obvious need for new port infrastructure in Africa and China seems determined to play a leading role in providing this. Similar to the World Bank, the DW article highlights transparency and multilateral cooperation as important approaches to address the risks involved in African port investment.
The World Bank report provides an important point of reference in discussing. Let us assume for a moment that in the coming years and decades, China and the BRI countries will be increasingly successful in implementing the World Bank’s recommendations. Of course this remains to be seen, but it is not out of the question either. If this happens and the World Bank’s assessment is correct then BRI could emerge as a significant mechanism for global development. How would the West respond to this? Would Western governments support BRI because it addresses the needs of a large number of countries, even though BRI also contributes to power shifting away from the West towards China? It seems doubtful that many people in the non-Western world think the West would support BRI wholeheartedly. This question is not entirely hypothetical. It is present under the surface of the ongoing debate about BRI as a debt trap and a danger to developing countries, and it influences the perception of western criticism of BRI. In the long run the West has no chance of counterbalancing China’s growing global influence unless it convinces developing countries that it genuinely supports their development aims.
Frans-Paul van der Putten
This week's Silk Road Headlines
|
To increase awareness of and facilitate the debate on China's Belt and Road Initiative, the Clingendael Institute publishes Silk Road Headlines, a weekly update on relevant news articles from open sources.
For a free subscription to Silk Road Headlines please click here.
For past editions please view our archive.
We link to sites purely on editorial merit. The inclusion of a link to an external website from Silk Road Headlines should not be understood to be an endorsement of that website or the site's owners (or products/services).
|
