41.6 C
Thursday, May 23, 2024
HomeChinaHow China is Weaponising its BRI Investments

How China is Weaponising its BRI Investments


Related stories

Free Balochistan Movement to protest against Pakistan’s nuclear weapons

 The Free Balochistan Movement (UK Chapter) has announced plans...

‘Stop threatening Taiwan’, its new president William Lai tells China

Taiwan's newly inaugurated president William Lai has called on...

BCCI Launches State-of-the-Art Indoor Cricket Academies in North-East

The Indian Cricket Board (BCCI) on Monday laid the...

“India marching towards economic glory”: Sri Lanka Foreign Minister sees mutual benefits

Hailing the ‘excellent’ relationship between Colombo and New Delhi,...

The US-China competition is getting intense with each passing day, with China having fast-emerged as a systemic rival to both the US and other members of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization). This is evident from NATO’s 2022 Strategic Concept approved at NATO’s Summit in Madrid on 29 June. Although, according to some reports, the US and the UK hold much stronger views on China compared to Germany, France and the EU, the strategic concept itself has taken a giant qualitative leap forward in comparison to its previous avatar launched in 2010, which did not even mention China as a cause of concern for NATO and its allies.

In its 2022 strategic concept, NATO notes that as a “systemic challenge”, China has been exploiting politico-military, economic and diplomatic tools for its power projection and greater regional and global presence. The paper also takes note of China’s hybrid and cyber overt and covert operations premised on its mala fide intentions, which often run counter to its calls for peaceful co-existence and “win-win” foreign policy rhetoric.

Along with its island reclamation and militarisation activities, China is increasingly using maritime militia to dominate the South China Sea. It is rapidly equipping itself with anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) capabilities in its so-called first island chain which includes Okinawa (Japan), Taiwan, and the Philippines within the wider East and South China Seas. With the use of swarms and advances made in artificial intelligence in military warfare, China is trying to establish its domination over pockets of the South China Sea region.

On the economic side, and politico-strategic projection of trade, investment and economic aspects, the central piece of China’s power projection through greater regional and international presence has been its Belt and Road Initiative. According to the Green Finance & Development Center, of Shanghai’s Fudan University, 147 countries have so far agreed to collaborate with China’s Belt and Road Initiative projects. This, by no means, is a small number. Through its investments, loans, and grants, China has built stronger ties with countries across continents.

So formidable is China’s BRI challenge that it led the G7 countries to come up with an infrastructure development partnership initiative to counter China’s BRI in their latest summit held in Germany. The Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII), earlier termed the Build Back Better World (B3W), is a joint initiative to fund infrastructure projects in developing countries. The G7 members aim to mobilise $600 billion by 2027 to counter China’s BRI, which, according to critics, has been ‘predatory’ in nature and tends to create strategic dependencies in the host countries making them dependent on Chinese money and potential victims of ‘debt trap’ diplomacy of China.

The economic collapse of Sri Lanka is one such example. Not complying with universally accepted norms and rules of investment practices lead to a Sri Lanka-like fiasco. Between 2010 and 2019, China (plus Hong Kong) accounted for 37.4 percent of total inbound investment in the country. While panda huggers would still blame Sri Lanka for all that is happening in the country, the question that begs an answer is: Why did China overlook international norms and rules of providing loans and investments in Sri Lanka when other major powers and international agencies such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank were not willing to provide any more investments or loans to Sri Lanka?

Latest stories