Game Theory‐Based Pathway Selection for Fair and Reciprocal Cooperation among Ports along the Maritime Silk Road

Tao, C.; Liu, S.; Tian, Y.; Gu X. and Cheng, B., 2019. Effects of China's OFDI on Exports: A Context Analysis with the “21st-Century Maritime Silk Road” Regions. In: Gong, D.; Zhu, H. and Liu, R. (eds.), Selected Topics in Coastal Research: Engineering, Industry, Economy, and Sustainable Development. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 94, pp. 903–907. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208.With the implementation of the Belt and Road initiative, China will invest more in countries in the “21st-Century Maritime Silk Road” Regions. Using the data of the 63 countries along “the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road” from 2004 to 2015, this paper empirically analyzes the effect of Chinese outward direct investment on export in “the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road” area. The results reveal that the relationship between Chinese OFDI and export towards the host country is changeable and demonstrates an inverted U shape. As a result, OFDI can make full use of the advantages of each country, realize optimal allocation of resources in the countries along “the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road”, and enable the transfer of China's spare capacity. And it should be adopted as China's long-term initiative.

The Sino-Indian relationship is the most important major-power relationship in Asia and is also the most subtle and complex. It has a significant impact on Asian geopolitical relations and regional economic development. Border disputes have rendered the relationship delicate and unstable for more than half a century. The One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative put forward by the Chinese government is attracting much discussion in the Indian government, think tanks, and media. Indian policymakers will need to determine how to respond to China's grand blueprint for promoting regional economic cooperation in the new era. This essay will examine China's priorities for the maritime component of the OBOR initiative in the Indian Ocean, consider Indian and Chinese concerns about that aspect of the project, and evaluate India's choices with regard to participation.China's Maritime Silk Road: Key PrioritiesWhen Chinese president Xi Jinping visited Indonesia in October 2013, he claimed that Southeast Asia had been a major maritime hub since ancient times and proposed that China and the countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) should jointly build a 21st Century Maritime Silk Road (MSR). The MSR is one component of Xi's OBOR initiative, with the other component being the Silk Road Economic Belt connecting Europe and Asia. Since Xi proposed the OBOR initiative, the Chinese government has strongly embraced the principle of joint construction to meet the interests and development strategies of all states involved. In March 2015, China's State Council issued the document Vision and Actions on Jointly Building Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road, which provides a comprehensive presentation of the OBOR framework.1 It indicates that the MSR initiative will focus on jointly building smooth, secure, and efficient transport routes to connect major sea ports.The long-term blueprint for the project requires careful selection of key countries and entry points before construction begins. Two factors are taken into consideration in choosing countries for the MSR. The first is whether countries are located on maritime trade routes or have marine transportation centers, such as Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Singapore, Myanmar, and Kenya. A second factor is whether states respond positively to the initiative and have a good foundation of economic cooperation with China.The Indian Ocean is a major maritime trade and energy channel for China and is of great strategic significance for the stable development of the Chinese economy. Energy security, in particular, is a key priority. After becoming a net petroleum oil importer in 1993, China became the world's largest oil importer in 2015. In that year, China's imported crude oil reached 335.5 million tons, of which more than 60% was transported via the Indian Ocean. In 2015, imports represented 60.6% of total oil consumption.2 Trade security is also critical. The Indian Ocean is the most important route for imports to East Asia and Southeast Asia and for exports from these regions to Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. The development of port infrastructure in these key regions will not only benefit China's economic development but also greatly facilitate the social and economic development of other countries in East Asia, in Southeast Asia, and around the Indian Ocean rim.Accelerating infrastructure construction is a major factor in encouraging regional economic cooperation. Thus far, the MSR includes joint port construction in Colombo and Hambantota in Sri Lanka, Gwadar in Pakistan, Kyaukpyu in Myanmar, and Chittagong in Bangladesh. Some large Chinese companies are also making investments in ports such as Piraeus in Greece, Said in Egypt. and Antwerp in Belgium in accordance with their own development strategies.MSR Security Issues: Different Concerns between China and IndiaIndia's geographic location and growing economy will have a great influence on the MSR. …

21st-Century Maritime Silk Road is a regional cooperative regime and it will provide public goods for regional countries. 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road is a process of co-building, sharing and open. Co-building of 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road means regional countries share the responsibilities of providing public goods while China as a big country may provide bigger share for the public goods and sharing the public goods by the regional countries. As an open regime, 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road welcome other countries to join the “club” to share the responsibilities and obligation. As a new regime, 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road faces with 7 problems, including: the high trade volume between China and the countries along with Maritime Silk Road, the trade imbalance between China and the countries along with Maritime Silk Road, low level of institutionalization, easily effected economic relations by political or security relations, failed states along Maritime Silk Road, privacy in the Indian Ocean, difficulties in connectivity. These problems show the necessity and difficulties of Maritime Silk Road. Building of Cooperative Regime for 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road including five platforms: trade promotion and trade disputes settlement platform, connectivity platform, finance platform, official development aid platform, and foreign investment platform. The elevation of Cooperative Regime for 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road can be done from the dimensions of effectiveness and legitimacy. 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road is proposed by China and should be beneficial for the national interests of China while it is worth noticed that the interests of Maritime Silk Road as a cooperative regime does not necessary identical with China’s national interests. With the enlarging of members of Maritime Silk Road, the dilemma between effectiveness and legitimacy will become significant which requires more delicate design.

Chinese President Xi Jinping raised the initiative of jointly building the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road in 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the Belt and Road). The paper aims to analyze the background and the significance of China’s “Belt and Road Initiative”. And it finds out that the “Belt and Road Initiative” has profound international and domestic background and it has strategic significance to China’s geopolitical and economic security, energy security, RMB internationalization, economic transformation and upgrading, etc.

In recent years, China has expanded its relations with other nations through the Belt and Road Initiative. This initiative was formally introduced after it was launched in 2013 by President Xi Jinping. It comprises two components, namely, the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road Initiative, both of which aim to stimulate the acceleration of economic growth in Asia, Africa and Europe. This research attempts to provide a detailed review of the execution of this initiative through empirical studies based on qualitative analysis, which are closely related to BRI implementation in Malaysia. The focus of this research, however, is not limited to studying the viewpoints of leaders and scholars on the initiative; rather, it will also attempt to discuss theBRI’s progress and the obstacles encountered to date from the political aspects of both China and Malaysia. By identifying the potential challenges to come, this research will prove to be significant, as it proposes some comprehensive measures to address and forestall any setbacks that may arise, which may affect the implementation of the BRI between the two nations. Keywords: Belt and Road Initiative (BRI); Malaysia–China relations; Silk Road; China–ASEAN relations; Maritime Silk Road A

The “Belt and Road Initiative” (BRI) has been an eye-catching term among social scientists, including human geographers, across the world. Pointing to the Chinese call for new modes of regional and international cooperation, the BRI originates from Chinese President Xi Jinping’s proposal to develop a “Silk Road Economic Belt” (“One Belt”) and a “21st Century Maritime Silk Road” (“One Road”) during his visits to Kazakhstan and Indonesia in 2013. In 2015, the Chinese central government released an Action Plan of the BRI, publicizing its designated principles, framework, as well as cooperation priorities and mechanisms of promoting the BRI. This White Paper has also specified five focuses of future BRI development, including policy coordination, connectivity of infrastructure and facilities, unimpeded trade, financial integration, and closer people-to-people ties. At the end of the BRI’s first five-year development in 2018, the Chinese government announced that it had signed BRI-oriented cooperative agreements with more than one hundred countries and international organizations. Since then, the Chinese government proposed to promote the “high quality” development of the BRI and gradually added new keywords to this grand scheme, including but not limited to “green,” “digital,” and “health.” Existing literature on BRI has incorporated insights of geography, economics, international relations, development studies, and environmental studies. This article contours existing knowledge on the BRI in geography and related disciplines in social sciences, with an integrated sensitivity to spatial embeddedness of specific BRI practices and its consequences. A considerable thread of BRI literature has examined the political economic nature of BRI. The BRI is understood as a Chinese preferred “spatial fix” to its domestic overaccumulation problems as well as a tool to serve China’s geopolitical interests through the making of discourses, imaginaries, and on-ground practices. BRI boosts investment and trade flows through infrastructure and connectivity projects. Although scholarly attention is often paid to the Chinese state as a whole in the discursive and strategic making of BRI, subnational state actors and non-state actors also actively engage with host country actors for specific BRI projects, the implementation of which can be affected by the combined path dependency and temporal-spatial conditions. BRI, in turn, is also examined to inform the nature of contemporary Chinese politics, the ways in which it benefits or affects the economic development and well-being of other populations and the wider environment, the uncertainties and changing spatiality concerning social, cultural, urban and intellectual issues, as well as for methodological reflections.

On March 28, 2015, Chinese President Xi Jinping detailed his vision for the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road (hereinafter referred to as the Belt and Road) when attending the Boao Forum for Asia. After this, China’s National Development and Reform Commission, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Ministry of Commerce jointly issued the “Vision and Actions on Jointly Building Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st Century Maritime Silk Road”, a sign that the Belt and Road Initiative promoted by China as a foreign cooperation platform entered its first year of implementation. This vision covers over half of the global population and involves more than 60 countries along the routes, the economic aggregates of which account for about one-third of the world. During 2015, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Keqiang paid frequent visits to all continents in an effort to promote the implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative. At present, the Belt and Road Initiative has received positive responses from the countries along the routes, and a number of cooperation projects have been underway smoothly. With the implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative, China is forming a grand diplomatic landscape with “double legs” (a new type of major power relations and the Belt and Road Initiative) and a “single circle” (peripheral diplomacy). The Belt and Road Initiative highlights the spirit of the age, characterized by “peace, mutual respect, openness, and inclusiveness”, and has major international significance in helping China break through the security dilemma among nations, shoulder the responsibilities of a great power, and build China’s soft power in the international arena.

The countries along the 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road (MSRCs) are important geo-economic spaces for China. The implementation of the Belt and Road initiative is drawing a new geo-economic network of the Maritime Silk Road. Based on trade and investment flows, this study uses social network analysis to examine the characteristics and structure of trade and investment networks between China and the MSRCs. The results show that the MSRCs’ trade network is approximately an irregular quadrilateral, the node weighted degree distribution follows the law of long-tail distribution, and the trade network has shifted from the tripartite confrontation of China, Japan, and South Korea to China’s single-core dominance. The MSRCs’ trade group has changed greatly, and the trade cohesion of China, Japan, and South Korea is strong. The MSRCs’ investment network is not fully developed and the network connections are sparse. China, Japan, and Singapore are its core nodes. The weight degree of the MSRCs’ investment inflow network first increased and then decreased, and the weight degree of the MSRCs’ investment outflow network increased. The MSRCs’ investment network followed the “core-peripheral” structure. The cohesive subgroup of the investment inflow network did not have significant regional characteristics, and the cohesion of the core subgroups in the MSRCs’ investment outflow network was strong. To promote the development of geo-economic relations between China and the MSRCs, China should focus on regional powers, upgrade the investment network of MSRCs, and implement differentiated geo-economic cooperation strategies.

The 21st Century Maritime Silk Road (shortened to “Maritime Silk Road” hereafter) initiative represents China’s consistent theme of peace and development. It is conducive to achieve common prosperity and progress of human society. However, challenges and opportunities often coexist. The Maritime Silk Road links the South China Sea and the northern Indian Ocean, involving a large number of countries, a wide range, and long distances. The challenging natural environment, scarcity of electricity and freshwater resources, different political and cultural bases, etc. greatly increase the difficulty of constructing the Maritime Silk Road. Obviously, an understanding the characteristics of the marine environment, energy, legal counsel and so on is a prerequisite for the safe and efficient construction of the Maritime Silk Road. However, relatively weak basic research and scarce marine data seriously restrict the full implementation of the Maritime Silk Road initiative and urgently need to be addressed. This chapter discusses the significance and challenges of the Maritime Silk Road initiative and provides corresponding countermeasures.

Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), a signature foreign policy initiative by China’s President Xi Jinping, is the largest global infrastructure undertaking, surpassing the Marshall Plan. Chinese banks and companies have invested billions in funding and building infrastructure in numerous countries. Two significant initiatives are related to and referred to the BRI. One is the Silk Road Economic Belt (SREB) and the 21st-century Maritime Silk Road (MSR). However, with the commencement, the initiative has attracted enormous global attention. Background information about SREB and the MSR and its implementation have been discussed in this article. This article highlights China’s strategic considerations for the BRI and its significance to the country. This article additionally concentrates on the progress of BRI and how the West and China’s neighbours view it and offers insight into the recently unfolding criticisms. Keywords Belt and Road Initiative, Silk Road Economic Belt, Maritime Silk Road, Xi Jinping

The “One Belt One Road” strategy is the abbreviation of “Silk Road Economic Belt” and “21st Century Maritime Silk Road.” In September and October of 2013, Chinese President Xi Jinping proposed to build the cooperation initiative of “New Silk Road Economic Belt” and “The 21st Century Maritime Silk Road.” President Xi Jinping projected to establish the “21st Century Maritime Silk Road” during his visit in Indonesia in October 2013. Finally, the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Ministry of Commerce cooperatively issued the “Vision and Action for Promoting the Construction of the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road” on March 28, 2015. The “One Belt One Road” countries were key areas of cooperation in the context of China's policy in communication, road connectivity, smooth trade, currency circulation, people's mutual understanding, strategic coordination to strengthen bilateral and multilateral teamwork, and corresponding development.

This paper analyses the ancient Maritime Silk Road through a relational island studies approach. Island ports and island cities represented key sites of water-facilitated transport and exchange in the ancient Indian Ocean and South China Sea. Building our analysis upon a historical overview of the ancient Maritime Silk Road from the perspective of China’s Guangdong Province and the city of Guangzhou, we envision a millennia-long ‘Silk Road Archipelago’ encompassing island cities and island territories stretching across East Asia, Southeast Asia, South Asia, West Asia, and East Africa. Bearing in mind the complex movements of peoples, places, and processes involved, we conceptualise the ancient Maritime Silk Road as an uncentred network of archipelagic relation. This conceptualisation of the ancient Maritime Silk Road as a vast archipelago can have relevance for our understanding of China’s present-day promotion of a 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road as part of the Belt and Road Initiative. We ultimately argue against forcing the Maritime Silk Road concept within a binary perspective of essentialised East-West conflict or hierarchical relations and instead argue for the value of a nuanced understanding of relationality.

Over the past five years, China’s ‘The Belt and Road Initiative’ strategy has brought about diverse interpretations and controversy since the 2013 Xi Jinping brought up the ‘Silk Road Economic Belt’ and ‘21st-Century Maritime Silk Road’ construction. There is positive public opinion and negative public opinion. Of course, the Chinese government also clearly recognizes that overcoming this negative public opinion is a key task in determining the success or failure of ‘The Belt and Road Initiative’. The Chinese government is extremely vigilant in recognizing ‘The Belt and Road Initiative’ along with Chinese expansionism or supremacy. For this reason, the Chinese government emphasizes the role of ‘People-to-people bond(民心相通)’ more than anything else. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the cultural policies and the progress of the Chinese government in relation to ‘The Belt and Road Initiative’ in the past five years, and to analyze its achievements and problems. The Chinese government’s foreign cultural policy aimed at countries along the Belt and Road is still focused on the direction of Chinese culture ‘Go global strategy(走出去)’. I think that if China continues this policy, it will be more difficult for the ‘People-to-people bond’. China’s foreign cultural policy in the 21st century was centered on two axes: cultural security and soft power. It is mainly in advanced countries, with strong regulatory policies on foreign cultural products and overseas expansion of Chinese culture. However, countries along the Belt and Road are mostly developing countries. Therefore, ‘one on one’ countries are also likely to look at China with the same perspective that China has for the advanced Western capitalist countries. From this point of view, China’s “The Belt and Road Initiative” cultural policy should be transformed dramatically in the future. If you want to borrow Chinese expression, the Chinese government should abandon its policy of ‘Go global strategy(走出去)’ Chinese culture abroad from a strategic point of view, and to focus on ‘Bring in (引進來)’ foreign culture into China. The Chinese government is not trying to force China to spread its values and to empathize with countries along the Belt and Road. Instead, it is trying to create a new era spirit in the process of actively experiencing and consuming the culture of countries along the Belt and Road.

In 2013, Chinese President Xi proposed “the Belt and Road Initiative”, which is short for the "New Silk Road Economic Belt" and "the 21st-century Maritime Silk Road". “The Belt and Road Initiative” is based on the idea of common development and prosperity, aiming to better connect the Asian and European markets, will enrich the idea of the Silk Road with a new meaning, and benefit all the people along the belt. As the international business language, accounting sets up a bridge for economic exchanges between countries. Under “the Belt and Road Initiative”, accounting will play an essential role on communication and coordination of various economic relations. This study figures out the main problems exist in current mode for accounting talent cultivation and tries to find out the better model which can adapt to “the Belt and Road Initiative” appropriately.

Introduction Nadège Rolland (bio) In recent years the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), previously known as the "One Belt, One Road" strategy, has emerged as the cornerstone of China's foreign policy under Xi Jinping. Presented as a cooperative endeavor motivated by China's willingness to bring economic prosperity, growth, and stability to its wider periphery, BRI nevertheless has more than one purpose. As part of its New Silk Road project launched in 2015, the National Bureau of Asian Research (NBR) has been studying BRI in detail over the last several years. We have unpacked its drivers, ambitions, and strategic implications.1 We have analyzed its possible impact on the Eurasian continental and maritime energy environment,2 described and assessed regional responses,3 underlined the challenges and uncertainties it faces,4 and participated in policymaking assessments of the initiative.5 This Asia Policy roundtable follows in the footsteps of these groundbreaking research activities, this time with the intention to shed light on BRI's military and security implications in South Asia. The roundtable has been made possible by the generous support of the Daniel Morgan Graduate School of National Security, which partnered with NBR on a new project launched in 2018 dedicated to examining how China's expanding interests along the belt and road affect its military and security calculations and shape its external security behavior. [End Page 2] As China's economic and political footprint expands along the continental Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road, an increasing number of Chinese diplomats, businessmen, and workers are venturing into areas that were until now largely outside China's traditional reach. Along the belt and road, the security situation is often volatile due to insurgency and destabilizing spillovers from regional conflicts. How the Chinese military and security elite are trying to protect and secure China's interests along the new Silk Roads is one of the issues critical to BRI's sustainability and success. Nowhere is China's tentative response to BRI's security challenges more apparent than in South Asia. The significance of this geographic space is self-evident, as this subregion is where the continental "belt" meets the maritime "road" and connects three continents—Europe, Africa, and Asia—via land and the Indian Ocean, a crucial artery for international commerce and energy supplies. But it is also where BRI faces a whole gamut of serious security challenges, from traditional conflicts centered on territorial and border disputes, to potential naval competition with India, to nontraditional terrorist and religious insurgencies, to energy security challenges. Pakistan epitomizes most of the security challenges BRI faces. Using the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor as a test case to assess how China attempts to secure its assets, Filippo Boni finds that the responsibility to protect Chinese citizens and assets is delegated to the Pakistani military and police forces, who have benefited from increased cooperation with their Chinese counterparts. Pakistan is also the only example of a South Asian country where Chinese private security companies operate so far. Meia Nouwens notes that the lack of either international or domestic regulations, combined with these companies' relative inexperience with operating in hostile environments, increases risks of miscalculation. Widening the geographic focus to the entire Indian Ocean, Nilanthi Samaranayake looks at China's first attempts in securing the Maritime Silk Road. Although Beijing's efforts still seem limited in scope and constricted by local and regional counterbalancing, the situation could change in the long run. It is precisely against the possibility of losing their strategic edge in the Indian Ocean to an expanded Chinese naval presence that both India and the United States should strengthen their countervailing response, argue Gurpreet Khurana and Arzan Tarapore. Considering the national security risks posed by China's expanded influence on its traditional periphery, India should promote military and geoeconomic [End Page 3] solutions, argues Khurana. Viewing BRI as an essential element of China's grand strategy, Tarapore advocates enhanced U.S. partnerships with regional states, with India at the core, and a comprehensive U.S. strategy that blurs the traditional economic and security fault lines (not unlike BRI itself). Taken together, the essays presented in this roundtable offer a...