The Belt and Road Initiative in Global Perspectives

Su Ge

?

The Belt and Road Initiative in Global Perspectives

Su Ge

Su Ge is President of China Institute of International Studies. He is also former Chinese ambassador to the Republic of Iceland and to the Republic of Suriname.

W hat is the Belt and Road Initiative? In September 2013 in Kazakhstan, Chinese President Xi Jinping first proposed countries work together to build a Silk Road Economic Belt. A month later in Indonesia, he further proposed to join hands with other countries to create a 21st Century Maritime Silk Road. Connecting the two economic circles of Asia-Pacific and Europe and covering such regions as Central Asia, South Asia, Southeast Asia, West Asia and Africa, the Belt and Road Initiative—as the two new Silk Roads are now known—is widely regarded as the economic cooperation with the largest coverage and greatest potential in the world. The routes of the ancient Silk Road promoted the progress of human civilization and East-West exchanges and cooperation, and became the world’s historical and cultural heritage. Thanks to the Belt and Road Initiative, the Silk Road spirit, which has been passed down from generation to generation, once again shines through time and space, attracting the world’s attention.

The International Background of the Birth of Belt and Road Initiative

Multi-polarization has accelerated the in-depth adjustment of the international structure

“Those unprepared to take it all are unable to take even one piece; thosewho fail to manage ten thousand coming generations cannot manage even a moment.”To analyze the Belt and Road Initiative, one needs to have a clear understanding of both the world and China.

Since the beginning of the 21st century, the international structure has witnessed in-depth and historic adjustment and transition. There were four landmark events affecting the process of international relations at the beginning of the new century: the terrorist attacks on the United States on Sept 11, 2001, the rise of emerging nations, the 2008/09 global financial crisis, and the adjustment of the United States’ international strategy. At the same time, four characteristics have been outstanding in international relations: cooperation and conflicts coexist in international political relations; interdependence and competition coexist in international economic relations; non-traditional security issues have become prominent; and national “soft power”has become more significant in the information age.

The onset of the global financial crisis in 2008 catalyzed another round of adjustments in the international order. The strength of the United States was drained in the two wars it engaged in the new century. And the financial tsunami that evolved from the bubbles of Wall Street hurt the US economy and image. Regarding their proportions of the global GDP, the status of emerging economies kept rising. Despite ups and downs in the growth of emerging economies due to United States’ quantitative easing and other factors, they have remained key propellers of the world economy. The economy of China, for example, accounted for only 1.7 percent of the world’s total in 1991; but in 2014, China’s GDP reached $10.32 trillion, accounting for 13.3 percent of the world’s total. Thus, the process of multipolarization has been accelerated and globalization is gaining momentum.

Since the United States intensified its steps to implement its “rebalancing to the Asia-Pacific”strategy, the priority of its global strategy has switched from counter-terrorism to preventing the challenges posed by other rising powers. As a result, the Pacific region has become less “pacified.”The United States believes that the existing international economic and trade rules are to blame for its predicament, arguing that emerging economiestook advantage of certain “l(fā)oopholes”and were able to compete unfairly. Domestically, the United States has speeded up reviving its own industries, increasing jobs and expanding exports; globally, it has been vigorously promoting the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), trying to create a new set of rules outside of the framework of World Trade Organization (WTO). Exclusive terms may be discerned in the above-mentioned new sets of rules in the global economic and trade systems in the making.

Chinese President Xi Jinping arrives in the Czech Republic for a three-day state visit on March 28, 2016. The Belt and Road Initiative has presented huge opportunities for the cooperation between the two countries.

Thus, emerging economies need to find other ways to promote and facilitate liberal development of their own trade and investment. As the saying goes, as the tree stands out in a forest, the wind is going to blow at it. China has attracted much attention from the rest of the world. Since its entry into the WTO, the country has always followed the rules of the Organization and tried hard to tackle all obstacles. Nowadays, there is a great transition ofthe international economic and trade systems. What China needs to do is to seize the momentum and properly handle the profound changes that have been taking place.

Globalization is under pressure from transition

Globalization has promoted the cross-border movement of various economic factors, such as capital, information, resources and products, as well as other relevant factors such as people, technology and ideas. This has significantly boosted global economic growth. However, some problems caused by globalization have not yet been addressed. One of these is the phenomenon that coastal areas and maritime nations lead the world in development, while inland economies lag behind. This has resulted in a huge gap in wealth. The vast inland areas possess both the desire and potential for development.

Moreover, following the global financial crisis, the contribution of cross-border trade to global economic growth has declined. In the past 30 years or more, trade growth has been an important driver for rapid global economic development, equivalent to twice the amount of economic growth. However, in recent years, trade growth has been slower than the growth of the global economy. In 2014, the world witnessed 3.4 percent growth, while trade only increased by 2.7 percent. According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the global economy grew by 3.7 percent in 2015. However, WTO statistics show that global trade only increased by 2.8 percent in the same year. This discrepancy shows that the role of trade has weakened as a driving force for global growth. How to rebalance the unbalanced “globalization”? How to expand the potential and space for economic development? How to promote the sustainable economic growth of the world as a whole after the financial crisis? These have become significant topics for study in our times.

Global governance needs to be improved

With economic globalization gaining momentum, countries havebecome more closely linked and interdependent, gradually forming a community of shared destiny. At the same time, the effects of globalization as a “double-edged sword”have become more apparent. A series of transnational issues have become prominent against the backdrop of globalization, and these complicated problems can hardly be handled by any single country. It is an inevitable trend for countries to work together to promote reforms so as to improve the international system.

Faced with ever-increasing challenges and the need for better global governance, the international community has responded inefficiently: First, international organizations in the existing system of global governance are mainly led by developed countries and many issues thereof reflect the ideas and interests of developed countries. However, developing countries are more concerned about issues such as reforming the inequitable economic order, unbalanced development and unfair resource allocation mechanism, which fail to get the attention they deserve. Second, there is a growing demand for global governance with the development of society, while the supply from the global governance system is increasingly inadequate. Defects in the international economic structure have been exposed since the onset of the financial crisis in 2008, but the willingness and capability of developed countries to govern have decreased significantly. Third, global governance calls for the coordination of various parties, but instead the global governance system has become more “fragmented.”The inefficiency and ineffectiveness of some existing rules are demonstrated in dealing with transnational threats.

Reform of the global governance system has a bearing on the setting of rules and the direction for adjustment of the international order and international system, on the competition for moral grounds of development, on the long-term status and roles of countries in global institutions, and on the influence and display of “soft”national power. Facing various challenges posed by global issues, China, as the world’s second-largest economy and biggest developing country, should make her due contributions to building a fair, orderly, balanced and inclusive new type of global governance system.