Политика Южной Кореи в отношении китайской инициативы “Пояс и Путь”

The article describes the United States - China rivalry and Chinas Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) through a fine-grained review of primary materials such as major US policy documents and speeches by and media interviews with key American foreign policy decisionmakers, as well as the selective use of secondary materials such as think tank studies and articles in scholarly publications. It shows that the BRI has fueled the bilateral rivalry since its birth in 2013 and that the rivalry, in turn, has affected US views about the BRI. Under President Barack Obama, the US took a muted stance towards the BRI, expressing modestly cooperative sentiments regarding it. In contrast, under President Donald Trump, Washingtons posture towards the BRI dramatically changed with his administration frequently denigrating the BRI, raising it in major security and foreign policy documents, initiating competing development schemes such as the BUILD Act, and building closer cooperation with allies against Chinas venture. Despite its angst about the BRI, however, the Trump administration never launched any large-scale countermeasures. This article contributes to clarifying the situation by correcting some factual errors in past analyses and updating the general understanding about the Trump administrations response. It systematically contemplates how internal and external economic, political, and ideational factors affected the Obama and Trump administrations responses to the BRI, demonstrating that such factors shaped or shifted US policy or bounded its form and intensity. These factors, being similar to those stressed by neoclassical realists who emphasize the role of leaders as interpreters within limits of the external environment and responders to it subject to various domestic constraints, provide a foundation which is used to speculate about the USs probable response to the BRI under President Joseph Biden, Jr.

Purpose - Purpose This study aims to investigate the possibility of participation and strategic cooperation of South Korea and Japan in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). As South Korea and Japan are geopolitically important countries for China sharing common interests in the fields of economy, diplomacy, and security, both countries can be strategic partners to establish a new economic cooperation model. Design/Methodology/Approach - With the review of the purpose and the trend of the BRI until now, cases of cooperation between China and the BRI participating country were examined to understand the China’s influence of bilateral cooperation on the participating country. Based on that, the cooperation strategy of South Korea and Japan toward the BRI was investigated if each country has a strategy for harmonious cooperation with China in a context with the BRI. Findings - It was found that there are common perceptions between South Korea and Japan toward the BRI. First, both countries recognize the importance of investigating on the China-centered economic cooperation system to be prepared for the uncertainties derived from the BRI. Next, Participation through public-private partnerships and multilateral banks can reach further effective cooperation. Lastly, deliberate action is highly required because of the deepened trade dispute between the US and China. Research Implications - This study implicates the necessity of a practical approach for South Korea and Japan toward the BRI under the pressure from the US and China in the post-COVID-19. Considering the common perceptions, the potentiality of Korea-Japan cooperation can be expected to maximize the benefit by participating in the BRI.

In this chapter, the discussion of China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), has extraordinarily influenced US global hegemony. By putting resources into framework projects and advancing networks between countries, China desires to build its financial and international power through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The objective of this chapter is to analyze how China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is presenting serious difficulties to the customary international and financial aims of the US global hegemony. In any case, the US and its partners have eyes on China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and its influences on the world economy cautiously. While certain countries see the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as an opportunity to acquire a better network and add to China’s monetary extension, others have voiced stresses over China's aspirations and the conceivable political influence that could accompany its monetary responsibilities. The US has moved toward the BRI, coordinated effort and rivalry. From one viewpoint, the US recognizes the worth of foundation spending in encouraging turn of events and financial development. They also perceive the likely benefits of improved trade and availability that the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) can give part countries. Accordingly, the US has tried to cooperate with China and participate in BRI (Kim, 2019). In addition, the US has done whatever it takes to protect its own monetary advantages and public security considering China's extending influence. They have passionately inspected the BRI tasks' terms and conditions, focusing on the worth of receptiveness, maintainability, and fair rivalry. The US has worked to foster elective systems and principles that help great foundations venture and dare steady with their standards through programs like the Blue Dot Network. In this chapter, Neo-Realism theory and a subjective information approach in this part. Utilizing the Neo-Realism theory to offer clarifications, this approach empowers us to look at and decipher qualitative data like reports and observations. The US has presented the Form Act and the Infrastructure Transaction and Assistance Network (ITAN) to back foundation projects in the Indo-Pacific region. This part will inspect and discuss how US approaches toward China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) consolidate wariness, participation, and intensity. While recognizing the potential benefits of expanded network and framework speculation, the US likewise attempts to shield its interests and goals while being careful about China's aims. As the BRI pushes ahead and China's influence in the worldwide field develops, so too will the influence of this venture on US plans.

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has become a household name for developing countries, especially in Africa. The BRI proposal by Chinese President Xi Jinping was positively received by many countries, including policymakers in China. In response, the Chinese Government committed to investing USD 1 trillion over ten years from 2013 to 2023. As a result, 152 countries signed a cooperation agreement with China to work under the BRI framework. The BRI has played a vital role in addressing the global infrastructures gap through the construction of modern highways, airports, high-speed railways, bridges, power generation (hydropower), and industrial parks. As a result, this has enhanced connectivity and economic growth between Asia, Europe, and Africa. Despite the BRI’s significant role in strengthening trade, infrastructure and investment links between China and other countries, there is limited literature on specific countries’ experience with the initiative. This study, therefore, will advance our understanding of the BRI, especially on the conceptualization of the term; comparative analysis of Africa–China relationships before and after the BRI; the benefits in relation to the “Five Connectivities” and the challenges the BRI is facing in Africa. The article is based on a literature review and case study as research methodologies mainly used the Policies, Projects, Initiatives, and Strategies (PPIS) as a data source. The study focuses on five African countries; Uganda, Kenya, Egypt, Djibouti, and Mozambique. These countries were selected purposefully for analysis because of their experience, long-term relationships with China, and strategic locations. The findings revealed that the BRI lacked a clear description and that it was difficult to distinguish between BRI projects and other regular economic or diplomatic relations. The study also identified four differences between Africa–China relationships before and after the BRI. Furthermore, the findings revealed that the BRI has positively contributed to all five connectivity pillars. However, the major challenges reported concerning the initiative from the various countries were: procurement corruption, low/lack of involvement of stakeholders, high compensation prices, labor violations, increasing debts, and environmental hazards. In conclusion, while the BRI has brought about significant infrastructure development and economic benefits, the project has also experienced some challenges. This study, therefore, contributes to the body of knowledge on China’s Belt and Road Initiative and its impact on African countries, specifically in Uganda, Kenya, Djibouti, Mozambique, and Egypt. The paper then provides conclusions and policy implications as well as future research opportunities in the current body of the literature.

Key points for green management of water-energy-food in the Belt and Road Initiative: Resource utilization efficiency, final demand behaviors and trade inequalities

China's Belt and Road Initiative and Its Implications for Southeast Asia Hong Yu (bio) During state visits to Kazakhstan and Indonesia in 2013, Xi Jinping announced the land-based Silk Road Economic Belt and the sea-based 21st Century Maritime Silk Road, respectively. Shortly after that, these two initiatives were combined to form one unified concept, known as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). This grand initiative, comprising various routes by sea and land, is intended to connect China with Southeast and South Asia, Central Asia, Pacific Oceania, Africa, and Europe. BRI is centered on both soft and hard infrastructure connectivity, aiming to forge an integrated and extensive network of regional infrastructure with China at its hub. BRI has gradually emerged as a top Chinese national strategy. Given China's emergence as a global power through industrial redeployment and outward investment, this initiative could reshape the geopolitical and geoeconomic landscape of Asia and beyond. BRI signals a shift in China's foreign policy and a departure from its long-held low-profile approach. Since Xi came to power in 2012, the Chinese government has adopted a far more proactive foreign policy stance, driven by global thinking.1 BRI serves as the key driver to advance China's interests overseas and demonstrates China's growing confidence and aspirations to be a rule-shaper in the economic governance of the region and beyond. Meanwhile, the demise of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), following the withdrawal of the United States, offers China further leeway to promote its New Silk Road agenda. The TPP's failure will increase the international momentum behind BRI to accelerate regional economic cooperation and integration through forging infrastructure, trade, and investment linkages. For the Southeast Asian countries, regional economic integration plays a very important role in mitigating external uncertainties and global economic vulnerabilities. The collapse of the TPP hit certain participating countries within Southeast Asia very hard, particularly Singapore. Being a tiny nation without an economic hinterland, Singapore has developed as the [End Page 117] most open and trade-dependent economy in the region. China's realization of BRI depends on the support and participation of other countries; in particular, the neighboring Southeast Asian countries are vital to the success of this grand initiative. The Southeast Asian countries, particularly developing countries like Indonesia and the Philippines, have largely welcomed BRI, which aims to promote close regional trade and investment linkage based on the improvement of interregional physical connectivity. Southeast Asia needs to focus consistently on constructing infrastructure in order to unleash the region's economic growth potential. The Southeast Asian countries consider that participating in BRI will help address their serious infrastructure deficits and accelerate industrial and economic growth. China has offered much-needed investment for connectivity-related infrastructure construction.2 This essay will first examine the opportunities for Southeast Asian countries to participate in BRI and then consider their perspectives on the challenges for the initiative. Opportunities for Southeast Asia Arising from BRI China's rise to become the world's second-largest economy and the largest trading nation has exerted a very powerful pull on the Southeast Asian economies. China has become the largest trading partner for all Southeast Asian countries except for the Philippines. The region, for its part, has benefited enormously from China's economic growth. It has taken advantage of the Sinocentric regional production network created since China's admission to the World Trade Organization in the early 2000s to export raw materials, intermediate goods, and mineral resources to China for final manufacturing into industrial goods before their export to the major consumption markets in the West. Setting aside for the moment the underlying geostrategic and geopolitical considerations, the potential benefits from BRI for Southeast Asia could be enormous. China has committed enormous financial resources to build a number of large-scale transportation projects aiming to improve interregional connectivity. For example, construction has already started on the Jakarta-Bandung high-speed railway in Indonesia and on a railway linking Mohan, on the Chinese border, with Vientiane, the capital of Laos. These two projects, both largely financed by Chinese banks and being [End Page 118] built by Chinese companies, mark Beijing's efforts to...

As of December 2021, China has signed more than 200 cooperation documents on the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) with 145 countries and 32 international organizations. The Belt and Road Initiative has exerted a considerable influence on the world. This research aims to explore the impact of the Belt and Road Initiative on the sustainable development of the resource-based economy of countries participating in the Belt and Road Initiative. Based on the panel data of 130 countries participating in the Belt and Road Initiative and 46 other countries from 2006 to 2019, the difference-in-difference (DID) model was used for empirical evaluation. After multiple robustness tests, the Belt and Road Initiative was found to negatively correlate with the economic dependence on the natural resources of BRI-participating countries, promoting sustainable economic growth. The heterogeneity test results show that BRI participating countries with low income and lower-middle income benefit more than countries with high income and higher-middle income. In comparison, the degree of impact has little correlation with whether they are countries along the Belt and Road. The results of the intermediary effect test show that the level of infrastructure, industrial upgrading, and technological progress has played an essential role in the process of BRI's influence on reducing natural resource dependence to promote the sustainable development of BRI participating countries.

In 2013, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) was established by Chinese President Xi Jinping.However, it is important to note that the origins of this organization date back much further in history.In 1980, several initiatives for the BRI were launched.These initiatives aimed to create a comprehensive trade network and infrastructure for the global system.Regarding this matter, one could assert that the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) represents an ambitious endeavor.The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has led to shifts in perceptions across Eurasia and has sparked significant political, social, and economic transformations.This study is aimed at conducting a comprehensive analysis of these transformations.With the BRI, we can say that trade routes have expanded, countries have grown economically, and economic integration has strengthened."Despite the positive benefits, there have been some emerging challenges.There are concerns about debt risks and fiscal sustainability being jeopardized.The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has significantly impacted regional dynamics by enhancing China's presence and influence in the area.In recent times, China has increased its influence in both Central and South Asia.Nevertheless, it is important to consider the existing dynamics in the region as well.The Belt and Road Initiative has had significant social and environmental implications for the region, leading to both positive and negative effects on the lives of individuals and the sustainability of the natural environment.This study will provide an analysis of both the benefits and drawbacks of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

Acute US rivalry with China includes strong efforts to counter Chinese challenges to US interests within the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). This article goes beyond earlier assessments and identifies and explains the wide range of reasons behind these American efforts and the implications for US–China competition. In particular, the study goes beyond examining US commercial competition with China to assess the serious implications of the BRI for the existing US-backed free market economic order and US-supported international governance. The timeframe used in this assessment is the period from the start of the BRI to 2020. The methodology of the assessment relies on and synthesizes findings of a variety of recent foreign studies on China’s statecraft to offer a largely qualitative examination on how China’s statecraft in the BRI works against US interests economically, strategically and in global governance. The study concludes that the BRI legitimates China’s predatory growth model, and fosters corruption, authoritarian rule, unsustainable lending, and dependence China used by Beijing to leverage and control recipient countries. It foresees no easy way for the US to counter these adverse Chinese-directed developments.KeywordsUSChinaRivalryBelt and Road InitiativeInfrastructureGovernance

Focusing on the US–China rivalry in the Horn of Africa (HoA), this study investigates the geoeconomic implications of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) on long-standing US preeminence, using offensive realism as a theoretical lens. Based on an in-depth literature review and using a qualitative research approach, the authors examine Beijing’s growing geoeconomic engagement with the HoA and its consequences for great power competition on the African continent. It examines the strengths and weaknesses of President Biden’s Build Back Better World (B3W), a development initiative designed to counter China’s BRI economic influence on the HoA. The study concludes that both the BRI and B3W initiatives and their implementation strategies demonstrate that both Beijing and Washington have strong national interests in the HoA regions, resulting in fierce geopolitical competition.

The participation of most Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) countries in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) since 2018 illustrates how China has filled the void left by the US in its traditional sphere of influence. The BRI represents a vague cooperation platform for developing investment, infrastructure projects, and trade between China and its partners with dubious effects in the region but with certain diplomatic gains for China. The review of the literature and the examination of official documents points to two main factors for its achievement in LAC: the flexibility of choosing different degrees of involvement for each government and the mobilization of the connectivity rhetoric in a region affected by structural infrastructure deficits. This chapter suggests that the BRI should be considered a discursive strategy which has had a noticeable impact on the US–China rivalry in the region.

Since the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) was announced in 2013, China’s expanding economic, geopolitical, and business presence demonstrates its eagerness to play a more significant role in the systems of international governance and law. The BRI’s scale and influence have captured immense attention among politicians, policymakers, experts, and academics. They offer numerous interpretations of the BRI’s global and regional impact. If China claims to be a stakeholder in the international system, what are the implications for the legal systems of the BRI countries and their governance systems? To what extent does the BRI lead to the expansion of China’s institutions and legal norms? How can the BRI countries ensure that their interests in BRI projects are adequately protected? This article analyses the Central Asian perspective on the BRI. Central Asia and Kazakhstan, in particular, have strategic relevance to the BRI. Remarkably, the BRI was launched during the visit of President Xi Jinping to Kazakhstan, which means that Kazakhstan plays a critical transit role as China’s pivot to Europe. Although the BRI is an ambitious global strategy, it has provoked much criticism, especially in liberal countries. Despite China’s efforts to promote the BRI as a win–win endeavour, China’s increased economic and political influence has already led to heightened scrutiny of its role in shaping ideology, economic development, and the legal and institutional landscapes. While many academic publications address different perspectives of the BRI, the context behind BRI projects requires further attention. This article contributes to the literature by studying BRI projects in Kazakhstan and their legal framework and governance.

The U.S. Response to the Belt and Road Initiative:Answering New Threats with New Partnerships Arzan Tarapore (bio) The United States has embraced a policy of "strategic competition" with China.1 This competition is most acute in East Asia, where Chinese policies directly challenge the United States' long-standing strategic primacy. China has primed its rapid military modernization to disrupt and deter U.S. forces and has used coercive force to assert territorial revisionism in the South China Sea. But the competition spans multiple regions and dimensions. China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) seeks to build Chinese influence across the entire Eurasian landmass and adjacent waters, often at a cost to U.S. interests. Washington has denounced BRI as a "predatory" program that builds influence through corrupt and secretive "debt trap" deals.2 But alongside its economic edifice, BRI is also freighted with strategic implications. The new trade and infrastructure deals will increase Chinese leverage to shape partner nations' preferences, edge out U.S. influence, and expand Chinese military presence.3 South Asia illustrates these political-military dimensions of BRI. China is cultivating an increasingly dependent ally in Pakistan and building a sprawling military presence across the Indian Ocean region, while India and its partners scramble to mount a counterbalance. This essay outlines the implications of these dynamics for U.S. policy. It shows, first, how BRI in South Asia threatens U.S. strategic interests and how the United States is responding through new partnerships with India and other countries. The essay concludes by discussing some recommended principles for the future of U.S. policy in the Indo-Pacific. [End Page 34] How BRI Threatens U.S. Strategic Interests On the surface, BRI offers tangible and immediate economic benefits for regions like South Asia. The region's developing states have a desperate demand for the speedily constructed transportation, energy, and telecommunications infrastructure that BRI promises. The terms and modalities of BRI projects have generated skepticism and opposition, which may prompt China to adjust its approach in its decades-long BRI campaign. More fundamentally, the concept of BRI—and its South Asian centerpiece, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)—presents a broad threat to U.S. interests in at least three ways. First and most directly, BRI shields governments that harbor anti-U.S. interests and entrenches their inimical policies. The clearest example of this is Pakistan. The United States and Pakistan have long endured a relationship that oscillates between amity and estrangement. After years of mounting frustration over Pakistan's support for terrorist networks, Washington ultimately cut most aid in 2018.4 CPEC, however, was there to cushion the blow. With a source of lavish financial patronage, Pakistan is now free to persist with its strategy of using militant proxy groups for influence in Afghanistan and attacks against India. Not only is China more tolerant of Pakistan's destabilizing policies; it actively shields Pakistan from external pressure—most prominently, by repeatedly blocking UN action against terrorists such as Masood Azhar, the leader of Jaish-e-Muhammad, who claims sanctuary in Pakistan.5 China's patronage of Pakistan, with CPEC at its center, has also contributed to sharpening strategic alignments in the region. Pakistan is now financially beholden to China and firmly within its orbit. Even if the United States were to resume military aid to Pakistan, which is unlikely in the short term, the entrenched presence of CPEC means that Washington would struggle to recover even the minor influence it previously held. The United States, which has simultaneously made clear its support for India, can no longer serve as a credible intermediary in the perennial security crises between India and Pakistan. In February 2019, as India considered its response to the terrorist attack in Pulwama, U.S. national security adviser John Bolton deviated from decades of U.S. practice and encouraged [End Page 35] the Indian military's retaliation at Balakot.6 With greatly diminished external brakes on escalation, India and Pakistan were able to introduce unprecedented levels of risk to the crisis.7 Through BRI, China has and will continue to also shape the political trajectories of other states in the region. The examples of Mahinda Rajapaksa...

초록·키워드 목차 오류제보하기 Despite increasing domestic and international pressure to choose between the US Indo-Pacific Strategy and China"s Belt and Road Initiative, South Korea is still not officially participating in either of the two countries' core strategies. Instead, South Korea introduced a neutral policy called the New Southern Policy. Through the New Southern Policy, South Korea has been encouraging participation by strategic functions in areas that have a common interest between South Korea, the United States, and China, and has been promoting and reinforcing cooperation with the two superpowers simultaneously. This ambiguous strategy taken by South Korea is a typical hedging strategy that the weaker state takes against the competing two great powers while maintaining a certain distance from the fierce competition between them. This shows that a hedging strategy asserted in the balance of power theory is valid in explaining the strategic actions South Korea is taking in relation to the fierce US-China competition in the Indo-Pacific region of the 21st century. #South Korea #United States #China #Indo-Pacific Strategy #Belt and Road Initiative AbstractⅠ. IntroductionⅡ. Theory ReviewⅢ. China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) vs. United States Indo-Pacific StrategyⅣ. South Korea's HedgingⅤ. ConclusionReferences

China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is an important initiative to strengthen connectivity and promote economic growth in many countries. China's strategy to stimulate economic growth by diversifying infrastructure investment under the Belt and Road Initiative demonstrates its commitment to promoting connectivity and sustainable development on a global scale. Through a proactive diversification policy, China reduces risks and seizes opportunities, ensuring sustainability and stability in a minimal economic environment. By embracing digitalization and upgrading financial infrastructure, China is accelerating the pace of economic transactions, supporting innovation and promoting inclusive growth along all BRI routes. As China continues to define future global investments under the BRI, its strategic approach offers a model for accelerating economic growth and connectivity across broad territories and populations. This paper examines the methodology of China's strategy to stimulate economic growth through a variety of infrastructure investments under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). He emphasizes the importance of diversification, digitalization and development of financial infrastructure. China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has attracted worldwide attention as one of the most ambitious infrastructure and economic development initiatives in modern history. Since its inception in 2013, the BRI has sought to revive old trade routes, enhance connectivity and develop economic cooperation in Asia, Europe and Africa.By embracing digital innovation and upgrading financial systems, China is expediting economic transactions, fostering innovation, and promoting inclusive growth along all BRI corridors. As China continues to shape the future trajectory of global investments through the BRI, its strategic blueprint serves as a model for accelerating economic growth and connectivity across vast regions and diverse populations. Through a comprehensive examination of China's approach, this paper contributes to a deeper understanding of the dynamics driving economic development and connectivity within the context of the Belt and Road Initiative. Keywords: diversification, Belt and Road initiative (BRI), digitalization, perfect storm, infrastructure, COVID-19, logistics, sustainable development.