It’s almost impossible to dispute that China is rising. Due to the fact that China is quite rapidly approaching great power status, if it hasn’t reached it already. This seems, in my view, to colour the way in which certain groups of people see China and everything Chinese. For example, Americans tend to see China’s rise as a problem, and a threat to the US’ position as the dominant great power in the world. This view is also shared by some, usually the more hawkish in other parts of the world. Sometimes, and in some places, this sceptic view of China is justified, and sometimes it isn’t. I don’t believe that Europeans have much to fear from China or its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). In this week’s blog post I’ll explain why economics will matter far more than politics when it comes to the BRI and Europe.
The BRI is a loosely defined policy from the Chinese government whereby it invests in infrastructure across Asia and the world in an effort to create a belt and a road by which China can trade with others. Some see the BRI as a very political endeavour where China tries to create a ‘debt-trap’ for its poor neighbours so that it can exert influence, like what happened in Sri Lanka for example. It would be foolish of me to dismiss these accusations as there are clearly areas in Asia where China has a lot to gain by leveraging its economy to generate outcomes benefiting it politically or militarily but when the BRI expands outside of China’s home region the politics behind the programme becomes, at least in my view, secondary to the economics of the programme. One of the problems with the BRI is that it’s general and vague and is more or less open to any country willing. For example, there was some talk recently about Italy in relation to the BRI. This is not some grand master plan where China will trick or bribe Italy into joining the Chinese camp against the Americans.
The BRI has a political and strategic dimension to it but that only applies as far as China can realistically project power. Let’s go back to Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka gave China a 99-year lease on a port due to not being able to pay back a BRI loan. That is China making moves to antagonise India and to give itself a stronger position in east Asia, but that wouldn’t be analogous to if Italy were to join the BRI. If China does undertake BRI projects in Europe there will not be a strong political aspect to it, despite what the Americans think, because China isn’t strong enough (yet) to have important interests in Europe and the strength necessary to force European states to give politically sensitive or strategically important concessions for Chinese investment.
The discourse around the BRI reminds me of a scene from “The Godfather” where a local baker asks Don Corleone to do him a favour, and the Don responds that he will but in return the baker will owe him a favour which he must return should the day ever come that the Don asks the baker to do something for him. China is the Don and the favour is Chinese investment, and if the baker is a state located close to China then the threat of having to return the favour is very real and the favour will almost certainly be called in. But if the baker is a state on the other side of the globe, say in Europe, then the favour might never be called in, and if it is then it’s fairly easy to ignore as China is very far away.
This is why I think the BRI only matters in terms of politics and strategy in Asia, most other places in the world can probably get away with getting Chinese investment without having to return the favour. What do you think? Feel free to tell me why I’m wrong on Twitter. If you’re interested in more of my writing you can check out last week’s blog post here and please come back next Sunday night for the next blog post! Thank you for reading!
Photo by Suzy Hazelwood from Pexels
Comments