國
立 政 治 大
㈻
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
43 3.2.1 COMPARISON OF CHINESE AND EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVES
The existing literature about the New Silk Roads is abundant, but it is characterized by repeating trends and themes, that will be analyzed in this section. To clarify, the literature can be divided into two main classifications: the first one compares the Chinese viewpoints with the Western, and especially European, perspectives; whereas the second one distinguishes the liberal views from the realist approach. Actually the authors have not yet presented any clear theory explicitly based on one of the IR theories, but it is possible to discern them from the ideas expressed by the authors. Therefore, this paper tries to give an interpretation of the viewpoints expressed in the sources.
Generally speaking, the Chinese point of view can be best explained by the liberalist school of the international relations, and especially by its branch of economic liberalism and institutional liberalism. On the other hand, the papers written by European scholars are more diversified. Some of them are very optimistic and similar to the Chinese ones, therefore they are also well interpreted as liberalist; whereas others are more negative and reluctant about OBOR, they can represent some ideas of the realist school.
CHINESE PERSPECTIVES
The papers written by scholars from Chinese think-tank and universities are very similar in content and purpose: they aim at advertising the New Silk Roads project as a win-win, inclusive initiative, that will bring benefits to all the participants and will promote development for everybody, achieving a new form of international cooperation, a "new pattern of globalization", and a "new political and economic order" (Wang Y. , 2015:95; Zhang, 2016 ). In most of the cases, the papers provide great details about the positive aspects and potential profits that will be generated by the OBOR to China itself, and to the world in general (He, 2015; Ma, 2015; Wang Y. , 2015;
Xinhua , 2015; Zhang Y. , 2015; Haggai, 2016); but they lack any explanation about the negativities of the initiative, such as disadvantages or risks that the initiative could bring to the partners. For this reason, this research will also try and provide an unbiased analysis of the challenges and the flaws
•
國立 政 治 大
㈻
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
44 of Beijing's main obstacle, in particular for the European Union. The Chinese scholars all refer to the "Vision and Actions on Jointly Building Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road", often abbreviated as "Vision and Actions", which was issued jointly by the National Development and Reform Commission, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China, with State Council authorization, as an official strategic paper that presents the initiative in all its aspects. Kanenga Haggai, from the Southeast University in Nanjing, China describes the objectives of OBOR in a very attractive and persuasive way:
"The goal of the initiative is to promote five major goals among its constituent nation states: policy coordination, facilities, connectivity, unimpeded trade, financial integration and people-to-people bonds. The initiative to jointly build the Belt and Road, embracing the trend towards a multipolar world, economic globalization, cultural diversity and greater IT application, is designed to uphold the global free trade regime and the open world economy in the spirit of open regional cooperation. It is aimed at promoting orderly and free flow of economic factors, highly efficient allocation of resources and deep integration of markets;
encouraging the countries along the Belt and Road to achieve economic policy coordination and carry out broader and more in-depth regional cooperation of higher standards; and jointly creating an open, inclusive and balanced regional economic cooperation architecture that benefits all. [..] When completed, this massive and ambitious project is expected to help societies in the concerned countries increase their wealth and the citizens’ standard of living." (Haggai, 2016:11).
On the same line, Wang Yiwei (2015:94) affirms that the project will generate an "integrated economic corridor" in the Eurasia region, also called "large Eurasian market", with the consequence of "promoting reform through opening up". Moreover, the authors emphasize the idea of the "joint discussion, joint construction, joint sharing", connected to the "Shared Trinity", that is to say:
•
國立 政 治 大
㈻
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
45
"Common Interest, in politics, economics, culture through working together", "Common Responsibility, from shared concerns and combined efforts for OBOR governance", and "Common Destiny", which means reaching a common prosperity by overcoming challenges together (Wang Y. , 2015:97; Wang Y. , 2016c).
Another common aspect of the Chinese literature is that the journalists and scholars exert themselves to convince the readers, and the international society, that the PRC is a peaceful actor that just wants to cooperate with and improve the existing global system. In other words, they want to demonstrate that OBOR does not serve a hegemonic purpose, and it cannot be considered as a
"Counter-pivot" (Zhang Y. , 2015:10). On the contrary, China is willing to become a more responsible player in the world, economically, politically and in regards to security issues. In this sense the Belt & Road can be considered as a response to the critics towards Beijing for not taking enough responsibilities, not playing an active role in the world arena and for being a free-rider.
Many scholars claimed that "China has no intention, no need" and no ability "to overthrow the existing international system, since it has benefited from participating in it"; but the system is not adequate for the fast changing world, "where emerging market economies already play important roles", and it "needs new institutions to meet" the "new demands" and new characteristics (Wang Y. , 2015:10; Xu, 2015; Zhang Y. , 2015; Huang, 2016; Robert S. Strauss Center, 2016). Both He Yafei and Xi Jinping himself, during a meeting of the Communist Party, used the concept of the
"Thucydides Trap" to explain that historically those states that engaged in a aggressive expansion have always failed (Scravaglieri, 2016). Moreover, "'One Belt, One Road' holds no strategic intent to control countries along the route - the vast geographical range as well as the large number of states involved make it impossible for any single country to dominate" (Wang Y. , 2015:11). The same approach is used when addressing directly European counties, in order to convince them of the numerous benefits they will enjoy if they join the initiative. Among the scholars who are enthusiastically advertising OBOR in Europe there are: Wang Yiwei, Kanenga Haggai, Fu Mengzi, Xu Jianwei, Cui Hongjian, the Minister for Economic & Commercial Affairs Zhang Kening (of the
•
國立 政 治 大
㈻
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
46 Chinese Mission to the EU), the Ambassador Yang Yanyi to Europe, and the journalists of Xinhua Agency and China Daily newspapers.
Generally speaking, as previously explained the Chinese sources tend to present only the virtues of the initiative while omitting the disadvantages. However, they do analyze the possible risks and challenges that China firstly as the organizer, as well as the other participants, will have to deal with while implementing the OBOR (Zhang Y. , 2015; Zhu, 2015; Huang, 2016; Haggai, 2016;
Swiss Chinese Chamber of Commerce, 2016; Wang Y. , 2016). As previously mentioned, this research will further analyze and present all the risks and challenges that might arise during the development of the initiative, for both its promoter and the participants.
As it is possible to learn from the Chinese literature analyzed, liberalism, and especially its branch of economic liberalism and institutional liberalism, is the school of International Relations that best explains the OBOR from the point of view of the Chinese leadership. Indeed, many liberal scholars could describe the New Silk Road as a way to promote international institutions, to solve disputes through negotiations and free trade, to deepen the economic interdependence. In particular, in order to obtain the necessary investments, Beijing has been creating new international financial institutions, showing its willingness to maintain peace and reducing the security dilemma. These international institutions will be able to check on the behavior and actions of China, and consequently will make sure that it will not cheat on the agreements. The scope of preventing conflicts can be reached also through the bilateral and multilateral FTAs signed recently in the background of the OBOR, for example those with the 16+1 Platform or with the Central Asia countries, and through the free market that the implementation of the New Silk Road will create.
This economic interdependence will help maintain peaceful relations because of the extremely high costs of a potential war, as explained by the commercial or economic liberalism (Morgan, 2013).
Finally, the Belt and Road is viewed as a domestically oriented plan to develop China's economy and to close the gap between the Western and Eastern regions, rather than an expansionist plan to enhance China's international power. In general the win-win outcome promised by the OBOR
•
國立 政 治 大
㈻
•
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
47 initiative is announced by the majority of the Chinese writers: (Wang Y. , 2016c; Wang Y. , 2015;
Huang, 2016; Haggai, 2016; Zhu, 2015; Zhang F. , 2016 ; He, 2015); but only Zhang Feng explicitly refers to the theory of the International Relations, affirming that:
"According to the Action Plan, the overarching goal is to safeguard the global free trade system and an open world economy. This goal is rooted in a quintessentially Western liberal internationalist economic doctrine. The irony is that China, which has never had a liberal internationalist tradition in its intellectual history until modern times, is now claiming to be assuming the mantle of international economic liberalism." (Zhang F. , 2016:124).