Narrating a global order with Chinese characteristics

Scholars have focused on how the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) facilitates Chinese economic statecraft and its likely impact on the global order. A common thread thereby is how connectivity through China’s construction of physical infrastructures (e.g. ports, roads, railways) represents a source of power. However, such a focus on physical infrastructures obscures the importance of BRI-related financial infrastructures. Addressing this gap, this article analyses the construction of Chinese financial infrastructures along the BRI as an exercise of economic statecraft within the context of the liberal, US-dominated global financial order. The article traces the activities of China’s state-owned exchanges as crucial actors that facilitate financial connectivity by enabling investment into BRI projects (investment opportunities), bringing Chinese investors into BRI markets (investors structure) and gradually shaping how these markets work (investment rules). First, I analyse three individual countries (Pakistan, Kazakhstan and Bangladesh) as examples of ‘bilateral’ and ‘offensive’ statecraft. Second, I analyse an emerging China-centred global network of financial infrastructures as exercise of ‘systemic’ and ‘defensive’ statecraft that shields China’s foreign policy objectives (i.e. BRI) from global pressures, potentially creating a parallel system of capital markets with Chinese characteristics. Beyond BRI, I therefore argue for including financial infrastructures more thoroughly into International Relations (IR)/International Political Economy (IPE) scholarship as important object of analysis.

Purpose: The authors of the article try to situate the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) - Chinese flag international project - in theory and turn attention to the risks accompanying it. The article examines the applicability of a theoretical concept connected with the sharing economy towards the Belt and Road Initiative. Presenting the idea of shared development is a novelty in the approach towards BRI. It puts China at the center of the future globalization wave, describing the process with Chinese characteristics and comparing it with Western-style globalization. The aim of this research is also to assess and discuss the disadvantages and threats of the Belt and Road Initiative from different points of view countries/participants involved, the world economy, and China itself. Design/Methodology/Approach: The main tool used in the first part of the research is a literature analysis, whereas, in the second part, logical reasoning based on a critical analysis of recent and older literature and official Chinese statements have been used. The third part of the reasoning is based on empirical examples from Belt and Road countries – this being a base for synthesizing the research. A qualitative method was applied to this research. Findings: The study results have confirmed that given the various aspects concerning the BRI, the initiative is a source of both opportunities and threats for all the participating sides. Practical Implications: The results can be used to estimate the positive and negative consequences of individual economies' engagement in the BRI project. They may enhance or warn the engaged countries as far as this grand project's participation is concerned. Originality/value: The concept of shared development as the theoretical base for the Belt and Road Initiative is a complete novelty. The multifaceted approach towards the positive and negative sides of BRI is also not popular in the literature. The model used in the article is the effect of the authors' own work.

What are the roles China plays and what approaches does China take to the global order? This paper goes beyond the singular and static view on the roles of states as either status quo or revisionist and introduces more subtle roles of states with multi-approaches of Status Quo, Parallel Supplement, Nested Enhancement, Regime Shifting, Competitive Regime Creation and Ideological Confrontation. After coding 1889 events from the ‘Belt and Road Portal’ and then taking eight most frequent case clusters of the BRI as representative cases, the congruence analysis leads to the main argument that China plays multiple roles of rule taker, rule reformer, rule breaker and rule innovator. The contribution is both theoretical and practical. It improves the typology of states’ approaches to the global order and helps to interpret the roles of emerging powers for the global order. By designing the BRI Index and coding the case cluster, this paper provides a new way to identify the representative case of the BRI.

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a central policy of the Chinese government. The initiative is directly associated with President Xi Jinping, who first put forward the BRI in Kazakhstan and Indonesia in 2013, initially as One Belt One Road. Different from repetitive literature that concludes the BRI as China's global strategy, this article makes a contribution to argue that the BRI is China's domestic and non-strategic policy. To justify this argument, this article analyses how the BRI has been embedded into aspects of Chinese domestic policy by revealing its nexuses with Chinese domestic economy, politics and ideology. To deepen the understanding of the BRI's connection with the Chinese economy, this article explores the link between the BRI and China's supply-side structural reform. Meanwhile, this research demystifies the BRI as a global strategy and the difference between joining and rejecting the BRI to prove the BRI's non-strategic essence. In the end, this article discusses the BRI's far-reaching geopolitical influence.

Since its inception in 2013, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) by Chinese President Xi Jinping has emerged as a transformative economic strategy aiming to reshape the economic landscape across Asia, Eastern Europe, and Africa. This paper examines the connection between the BRI and network theory, a relatively underexplored area in the existing body of research. The BRI, covering five continents and over 100 countries, focuses mainly on South Asia, Central Asia, and Europe, including Russia, due to their central role in the initiative. The core of this paper lies in analyzing the network effects and lock-in dynamics associated with the BRI, especially in the context of developing countries. Part II delves into the positive arguments for BRIs network effects and lock-in dynamics, drawing on Bryan Druzins theories and adding the concepts of resilience and cultural connectivity. Conversely, challenges to these network effects and dynamics are scrutinized, including sustainability issues, institutional flaws, fragmentism with Chinese characteristics, neo-colonial critiques, and cultural and ideological disparities. A case study focusing on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) in Part III sheds light on both the strengths and weaknesses of the BRIs approach. In conclusion, the paper posits that while the BRI is successfully building both material and conceptual foundations for its network, the significance of its network effects and lock-in dynamics is moderated by numerous challenges.

The term “end-poverty” is adopted by the World Bank (WB) in working with the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and countries within the sphere of influence of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). This chapter contextualizes the BRI in a world of struggle, one in which actors, including sovereign nations as well as new and traditional financial institutions involved in the BRI, take actions, based on their own field of expertise and knowledge. “End poverty” is the common-ground between these various actors. The moral endowment and indeterminacy of the term “end-poverty” enable WB and the new financial institutions like AIIB and the New Development Bank (NDB), to engage with the BRI. These actors engage with the BRI primarily for their own interests. The new financial institutions engage with BRI out of their member countries’ interest in the BRI projects, instead of filling in the infrastructure investment gap in the targeted regions and ending poverty. The founding members of the new financial institutions aim to challenge the existing world order in multilateral lending and development financing rather than to “end poverty”. Likewise, China deploys its global strategy and furthers its interest through the BRI. The financing mechanism of the BRI exemplifies a combined contract-based infrastructure financing and political-objective defined development financing. While the term “end poverty” enables the actors’ struggle for interests, these struggles contradict with the term “end poverty”. Lack of analytical rigor on the term “end poverty” risks, with the BRI projects, strengthening the elites and their power in the recipient countries over their populations.

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 proclaimed by President Xi in 2013, a strategy developed by the Chinese government, is very important to China but is not confined to China. In order for the initiative to be successful it needs to be embraced by the countries on the terrestrial and maritime route indicated in the plan. In the late 1980s Deng Xiaoping proposed to integrate Socialism with Chinese Characteristics (Zhongguo Tese Shehui Zhuyi, ) into global capitalism and in the 1990s the Jiang Zemin leadership initiated the Going out policy (Zouchuqu Zhanlue, ) – the current Belt and Road Initiative is China’s continuation in implementing those policies into actual deeds. China’s accession to WTO in 2001 marked China’s full integration into the global economy and since then the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has become the largest trading partner for more than 180 countries. The Xi-Li administration has been extremely proactive since it was established in 2012; from that year on, Chinese behavior in international affairs has gained an ever-growing role as a forger of economic and diplomatic ties between countries. The primary example of this behavior is the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). As every serious foreign policy plan, the BRI is an accumulation of various other initiatives. For example, the cooperation mechanism “16+1”, with which the PRC has approached Central and Eastern European Countries (CEEC), can be integrated under the BRI. This paper analizes the “16+1” China-CEEC cooperation mechanism in the context of the bigger BRI initiative, and tries to comprehend the economic and political factors intertwined with its implementation.

Since its launch in 2013, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has become synonymous with Chinese foreign policy under Xi Jinping. While China has seen its relations with Africa institutionalized in the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) since 2000, little attention, however, has been paid to exploring the role of African countries in China’s Belt and Road Initiative. This chapter seeks to understand Africa-China relations in the context of Beijing’s new-found interest in inserting Africa into the Belt and Road route. Contrary to China’s official rhetoric on sharing the benefits of the country’s economic growth globally, it argues that Africa’s inclusion in the Belt and Road Initiative—President Xi Jinping’s signature foreign policy—is to demonstrate China’s system self-confidence and belief that it can offer a Chinese model of economic development—the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics as an alternative to Western model for developing countries in Africa to learn from.

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.

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).

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.

Reviewed by: China’s Eurasian Century? Political and Strategic Implications of the Belt and Road Initiative by Nadège Rolland Shanthi Kalathil (bio) China’s Eurasian Century? Political and Strategic Implications of the Belt and Road Initiative. By Nadège Rolland. National Bureau of Asian Research, 2017. 195pp. During the 2017 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, one leader made an impassioned plea for globalization, admonishing the audience to “rise to the challenge,” for “history is made by the brave.” Champions of globalization are common at Davos, but this leader was not one of the usual suspects. Instead, it was Xi Jinping, president of the world’s largest autocracy, the People’s Republic of China. Yet as China specialist Nadège Rolland says in her new book, this should come as no surprise. In fact, she notes, globalization and its underpinnings are at the heart of Xi’s vision for a reshaped global order, of which China is to be the center. Rolland outlines the drivers and possible implications of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Xi’s plan to link Asia, Europe, and Africa through a vast network of infrastructure projects in an ambitious twenty-first–century reimagining of the ancient Silk Road. Despite the fanfare surrounding BRI’s May 2017 coming-out party in Beijing at the Belt and Road Forum, BRI’s geopolitical implications have been relatively underappreciated within international-security circles: More analysts prefer to study China’s maritime (as opposed to continental) ambitions. Moreover, many Western commentators—surveying vague official statements and clunky, outward-directed propaganda—have dismissed the initiative as impossible to realize. [End Page 170] Yet to see BRI as merely a wish list of construction projects or China’s latest plan for Eurasian connectivity is to miss the forest for the trees, Rolland suggests. In fact, the plan represents a direct strike at the rules-based system championed by democracies and, ultimately, at the liberal international order. Rolland discerns China’s interpretation of infrastructure (both concrete and digital) as the “physical manifestation of globalization” (p. 39). In doing so, she connects Beijing’s current regional and global aspirations to a history of analogous post–Cold War, largely Western-led initiatives of similar scale and scope. Like BRI, those earlier projects sought to stimulate economic development and sociopolitical change by linking goods and people. They aimed to tie together the Eurasian landmass—Earth’s most populous region— into a densely interdependent and integrated network. Unlike BRI, however, these initiatives also implicitly endorsed political liberalization and participation in the rules-based order, an emphasis deliberately excised from Beijing’s vision. Indeed, Rolland notes, many countries—particularly those with an authoritarian bent—may have been reluctant to embrace the subtext of openness that lay beneath infrastructure projects led by Western countries and international financial institutions (IFIs). Given today’s stronger illiberal current and China’s established rhetoric of political noninterference, BRI’s implicit tagline of “connectivity without political openness” may prove relatively appealing. The Belt and Road Initiative projects a core diplomatic message, Rolland argues. It is that connection, interaction, and cooperation with China can lead to development in areas where Western countries and IFIs have failed to deliver. If Beijing’s vision comes to fruition, Rolland contends, the upshot may be the replacement of the liberal international order by a vast, illiberal, China-centric network of states entwined economically, socially, and politically under Beijing’s strategic sway. Rolland puts BRI into historical context, examining its regional precursors and evolution. She proceeds by methodically analyzing the initiative’s drivers, components, and domestic and international objectives. To study how Chinese policy makers and scholars conceive of this project, Rolland bypasses China’s English-language public-relations efforts. She draws instead from official Chinese-language sources that speak for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership; influential Chinese journals; and interviews with CCP officials and Chinese analysts familiar with the (largely unaired) discussions of BRI within China’s ruling circles. Her inquiry reveals an intentionally flexible and shifting arrangement driven by internal economic and external strategic considerations. In the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis, Beijing perceived the Obama administration’s “rebalancing” in favor of the...

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.

The notion of globalization and modernization encourages bilateral cooperation and strategic connections between states. In 2013, China launched the Belt and Road Initiative under the “Going global strategy.” The present study's primary goal is to investigate the relationship between political risk, globalization, and ecological footprints for 75 Belt and Road Initiative countries from 1984 to 2019. It also investigates the moderating effect of the Belt and Road Initiative on ecological footprint. Moreover, the outcomes from the Generalized Method of Moments revealed that globalization increases environmental deterioration while a better political environment enhances environmental quality by minimizing their ecological footprint.