(Special reference to Zambia, Pakistan, Angola, Laos and Sri Lanka)
Executive Summary
It has been nearly nine years since Chinese President Xi Jinping launched the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in the autumn of 2013. A lot of progress has been made thus far. BRI has the potential to be the world’s largest development project, which already covers more than 60% of global population. Over the coming decade, it is expected grow its scope and application. Mutual benefit is a feature of this global programme which will also help develop markets for Chinese products in the long run, and to alleviate industrial excess capacity in the short term.
Despite these successes and advancements, it shouldn’t be ignored the challenges encountered throughout the BRI’s implementation. For instance, some initiatives were implemented too quickly and without enough thought given to the long-term financial advantages. The initiatives frequently rely too heavily on the backing of governments and policies. Another extreme is when the BRI’s implementation agencies overemphasize China’s own advantages, especially when they simply take into account their own limited corporate interests and disregard the concerns of local populations, governments and enterprises. Additionally, several nations support this, but are hesitant to contribute on their own. They assume that because China is so eager in pushing the project, it should cover the majority of the costs. They also assume that China should cover the majority of the expenses because it is actively supporting the BRI and must stand to gain much from it. Last but not least, there is no shortage of skepticism, opposition and even open condemnation of the BRI in the face of the international community, including certain regional powers and those nations along the One Belt, One Road (OBOR).
There might be a number of causes for those suspicions. The BRI has multiple meanings and understandings, which are exceedingly bewildering to the world community, much as there are a thousand different versions of Hamlet in a thousand different hearts. There are many parties involved in the execution of it, but China has mostly focused on interacting with the government institutions without giving enough consideration to the worries of corporations, civil society groups and local residents. This issue was best illustrated by China’s engagement with Zambia, Pakistan, Angola, Laos and Sri Lanka.
Report has been going through each and every country’s economic, social and political changes by evident and tries to evaluate BRI in real term. The Zambian government has not put in place any strategies to benefit the manufacturing sector from Chinese investments. Instead, they continue to turn a blind eye on what the Chinese investors continue to do which is destroying the industrial sector. Simultaneously, Pakistan’s fears have become reality, with many now unable to sustain themselves and compete with the large Chinese fishing vessels. Accordingly, it is clear that China’s BRI project has triggered social unrest in Pakistan and has also led to economic instability. The more Laos is indebted to China; the latter can use its power to influence the policy-making process in that country. Inevitably, Angola’s reluctance in providing its own financing avoided investing in real estate due to lack of legislative reforms to create a functional real estate market. These government measures have increased the dissatisfaction of the population that cannot benefit from the outcome of the Chinese investments.
The research extensively studies on Sri Lanka, mainly The Colombo International Financial City, Hambantota Port, Colombo port expansion, Mattala Airport and other infrastructure development such as Noraichcholai power plant. BRI may boost employment within Sri Lanka. Colombo port city has been forecast to provide new jobs. However, Sri Lanka sacrifices a level of autonomy around how to manage these infrastructures. With a significant portion of investment in BRI coming from Chinese public entities, there is concern of Sri Lanka’s growing debt burden and loss of sovereignty. BRI projects in Sri Lanka showed lack of transparency and corruption. There are some environmental impacts as well.
Subsequently, the research identified number of positive and negative impacts of BRI on partner countries through analyzing the status and facts of Zambia, Pakistan, Laos, Angola and Sri Lanka. Moreover, it finds some loopholes of positive impacts of the programme on partner countries. Overall, the research provide an overview on existing status of BRI and the issues and challenges, which could emerge from BRI mainly on partner countries.
(This research was initiated and organized by the South South Research initiative group, which spear headed the project. Key contributions were received from experts who has extensive knowledge of law, economics and geopolitics.)
