Commentary
James Schwemlein
{
"authors": [
"James Schwemlein"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "SAP",
"programs": [
"South Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"South Asia",
"Pakistan",
"East Asia",
"China"
],
"topics": [
"Economy",
"Security"
]
}
Source: Getty
Other
Flawed by Design: The Challenge of Flawed Democracies to China’s Rise
BRI recipient states undergoing democratic transitions are asserting greater influence over the direction of China’s efforts. This is likely to continue as long as China’s flawed business model remains unchanged.
Published on May 7, 2019
Source: Asian Affairs
Much ink has been spilled about China’s Belt & Road Initiative (BRI), President Xi Jinping’s grand vision for leveraging China’s growing wealth to expand economic, political, and military influence. The initiative is typically defined as encompassing projects in some 65 countries across three continents, and in sum it represents the greatest directed investment in history with an estimated value of over $1 trillion over the lifetime of the initiative.1 But five years in, Xi’s “project of the century” is facing turbulence – from indications that China’s economy is slowing, routine construction and project management delays, and most interestingly efforts on the part of recipient countries to assert greater control over the direction of China’s efforts.
Much attention has been paid to the notion of local challenges to China’s BRI. But this commentary is misdirected. At this point, the issue is not an expansion of authoritarianism or the proliferation of a “China model.”2 Nor is it that local “pushback” marks emerging “resistance” to China’s effort, or indeed to China’s rise to great power status. Rather, what has been referred to as “pushback” or “resistance” should be understood narrowly as tactical efforts to amend, renegotiate, or cancel contracts or initiatives previously agreed and announced by Beijing and its local governmental partners. These signs need to be understood in more localized terms than they are typically applied. It is a mistake to confuse local efforts to assert greater influence or control over Chinese investments as a rebuke against China’s rise to global power status. Individual states may choose to curtail or alter Chinese investment plans, but China will remain a large, potentially dominant, actor in most Asian markets, despite tactical challenges against some of its individual programmes.3
This article posits that incidents where recipient states have attempt to assert greater influence share a common characteristic–democracy. Or, to be more precise, partial or flawed democracy.
Notes
1. https://www.fbicgroup.com/sites/default/files/B&R_Initiative_65_Countries_and_ Beyond.pdf (accessed 14 March 2019).
2. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/05/16/on-chinas-new-silk-road-democracy-pays-atoll/ (accessed 14 March 2019).
3. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2018-10-24/why-democracies-areturning-against-belt-and-road (accessed 14 March 2019).
About the Author
James Schwemlein
Former Nonresident Scholar, South Asia Program
James Schwemlein was a nonresident scholar in the South Asia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
- The Military Disrupts Pakistan’s Democracy Once Again
- Why Imran Khan Isn’t Going AwayQ&A
James Schwemlein
Recent Work
More Work from Carnegie China
- The Plaza Accord and Its Relevance for ChinaCommentary
The Plaza Accord was not an externally imposed punishment of Japan but part of a broader restructuring that Japanese economists and policymakers themselves recognized was necessary. Its effects were undermined, however, when Tokyo responded to the resulting slowdown with policies that exacerbated investment, credit expansion, and the very imbalances the adjustment was intended to resolve.
Michael Pettis
- Untangling the Nuclear Knot: A Constructive Agenda for Managing China’s Nuclear Relations with the United States and Its AlliesPaper
The nuclear relationship between China and the United States is increasingly shaped by widening perception gaps rather than deliberate strategic design.
Tong Zhao
- Who Paid for China’s Last Debt Cleanup, and Who Will Pay for the Next?Commentary
China’s banking crisis in the 2000s was resolved by transferring the costs to households through financial repression—a decision that recapitalized the banks while exacerbating the structural imbalances that continue to shape the Chinese economy today.
Michael Pettis
- Caught in the Middle: Chinese Biotech Firms’ Divergent Responses to U.S. SanctionsCommentary
Chinese biotech companies have been on the receiving end of U.S. economic coercion. Yet their responses have differed significantly because firm and state interests are not uniformly aligned. For Washington, treating all Chinese tech firms the same, irrespective of their actual interests, risks pushing them farther into Beijing’s corner.
Xue Gong
- Are Data Centers the Solution to China’s Renewables Excess Capacity?Commentary
China’s latest energy plan explicitly calls for integrating data centers into the electricity system, particularly connecting them to green energy. It appears Beijing wants to use compute as a source of domestic demand to absorb renewables excess capacity.
Damien Ma
