The Belt and Road Initiative The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is one of the most elaborate foreign policy projects of Xi Jinping. In this chapter, we will cover the origin, concept, motivations, and repercussions of one of the characterizing strategies of Xi. Origin and Inititaive His predecessor, Hu Jintao, had laid on the table an intention to develop a renewed Silk Road, but it never materialized. The current leader then took the baton and started mobilizing negotiations with central Asian countries, first Kazakhstan, promoting the idea of an "economic belt." Later, the same idea was spread by the prime minister to Southeast Asian countries, which was known as "the Road." The project was baptized as the "One Belt, One Road" (OBOR). The merging of these plans, crystalized in the "Belt and Road Initiative" (BRI), would involve the construction of trade facilities such as ports and railways that would connect more than 61 countries, whose economies comprise a third of the global GDP (Summers, 2015). The funding for the project was underwritten by the Chinese Government, with the set-up of The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), aimed initially at competing with the American and Japanese control over the Asian Development Bank. Rationale The motivations behind the BRI are intimately related to Xi Jinping's Thoughts and China's Dream. Some scholars argue that the initiative is a crucial aspect of China's new and more assertive statecraft and a rejuvenation and boost of the nation. Behind this thought, we can distinguish key aspects responding to economic and geopolitical demands. Firstly, the BRI acted as a hurdle to the US's "pivot to Asia," Under the Obama administration, American foreign policy tilled towards the Asia-Pacific with an enhancement of military and an economic expansion through an increase in trade (McBride, 2023). Also, the initiative serves as a path to develop new secure Chinese trade routes decreasing the reliance on maritime trade, given the disputes with the US on the southeast China Sea and the American alliances with countries in the region. On another note, turning to a more national approach, China is driven to stimulate economic ties with western and central areas, which throughout history have lagged behind coastal regions, traditionally wealthier. The Chinese Government aims to stimulate growth and development by allocating substantial funding to support businesses in these areas and encouraging them to compete for BRI contracts. An essential priority in this matter for the CCP is spurring economic growth in Xinjiang and ensuring long-run energy supply from Central Asia and the Middle East through paths undisputable by the US military (C., 2022). All the above parallelly strive for the reform of the economy to escape the "Middle Income Trap," heightened by a decline in birth rate and aging population. Finally, the BRI pursues the creation of an interdependency between the participating countries and China. As the country is shifting toward a new global governance model, characterized by a lesser dependency on the West, it relies on nations who conform to the Global South to act as potential allies if any dispute with Western powers emerges. In this regard, the contracts for participation in the BRI contain conditions that enable China to claim "repayment" at any given moment. Therefore, the CCP can and will use infrastructure financing as an instrument to fulfill its controversial objectives, such as Taiwan. For instance, Nicaragua, who signed the BRI contract to be part of it at the beginning of 2022 officially, cut diplomatic relations with the Republic of China (Taiwan) (McBride, 2023). Repercussions With the tenth anniversary of the BRI launch, policymakers and scholars examine the effectiveness and repercussions of the ambitious plan. Domestically, PRC has seen BRI landbased efforts fructify as western regions are increasingly globalizing, and the region of Xinjiang has seen booming growth with a doubled GDP since 2012 (Global Times, 2022). Also, there have been significant advancements regarding the country's state-owned enterprises, which have expanded their investments to sustainability and digitization, potentially increasing the chances of the PRC of avoiding the Middle-Income Trap, one of the CPC's concerns in its most recent Five Year Plan. Internationally, the BRI represents a shift in Chinese foreign policy towards a greater emphasis on geopolitical considerations and pursuing strategic advantages and power on the global stage. These advancements have raised concern among democratic countries aiming to counter China's influence and increasing power. The BRI has encountered criticism among these actors, especially from India, Japan, and the US. India deems the BRI as part of China's larger strategy to overshadow Asia by creating a debt – trap for its participants in the Indian Ocean region to take control of strategic bottlenecks. Also, the country is specifically concerned about China's close relationship with Pakistan, as they share the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which connects PRP to Pakistan's Gwadar Port, granting access to the Arabian Sea. As a result, India has provided development assistance to neighboring countries, such as Afghanistan, to counter China's growing influence in the region. Along these lines, the US sees India as a like-minded country and, therefore, a potential counterweight to China's hegemony. For this reason, it has been strengthening its strategic ties through various initiatives like the 2022 Indo- Pacific Framework. Japan is following a similar strategy to India's, balancing its interest in regional infrastructure development with concerns about China's intentions. In May 2015, Prime Minister at the time, Shinzo Abe, launched the "Partnership for Quality Infrastructure (PQI)" in May 2015 to foster quality infrastructure investment alongside other countries and international organizations. Additionally, the country aligned with India in 2017 to develop the Asia-Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC), aiming to connect ports from Myanmar to East Africa. Similarly, the US has promoted alternatives to BRI to offset its rival's influence and global dominance. All three last presidents of the US have established policies to reach this target. For instance, the Obama administration launched Pivot to Asia, and later on, Trump's passage of the BUILD act aimed to build infrastructure and foster cooperation between low-income countries. More recently, in 2021, the Biden administration initiated the Build Back Better World Initiative (B3W) alongside G7. This initiative is an infrastructure investment program targeted at competing with the BRI. Nevertheless, B3W's lack of financing has prevented it from seriously challenging China's initiative. China has received criticism, opposition, and accusations of creating a global-scale manipulative scheme by financing infrastructure-building projects in emerging countries, providing unmanageable loans, and utilizing the liability to obtain leverage over these countries' States. These types of claims and concerns arose mainly because of the Hambantota Port Development in Sri Lanka. This country's administration could not pay the debt from the Chinese loan, and consequently, they came to an agreement through which the port was given to PRC on a 99-year lease. Some echoes of criticism suggest that these negotiations reminisce the unequal treaties imposed by European Imperialists on the Qing Dynasty in the 19th century. In this way, given the comparison with the Century of Humiliation, some would argue that the narrative of China's Dream and "Never Again Mentality" not only materialized in the BRI but also reflected a power shift in which China turned from oppressed to oppressor.
