Of late, Japan & USA are increasingly endorsing India’s dissent against China’s trillion dollar ‘Belt & Road Initiative – BRI’.
This presents a chance to build a credible alternative to the BRI for enhancing connectivity in the Asia-Pacific.
What is BRI?
BRI is a set of projects being piloted by China to enhance connectivity between Asia, Europe & Africa by land and sea.
It is humongous in scale and is touted as one that would establish China’s primacy in the world geo-politics.
BRI was viewed with awe around the world and enthusiastically embraced by most of China’s neighbours in the region.
As it is a pet project of President Xi, his strengthening clout within the China is expected to enhance the vigour of the initiative.
What are India’s Concerns?
India on the contrary gave a stinging public rebuke, arguing that projects under China’s BRI have not met international standards.
It opined that ‘connectivity initiatives’ must follow principles of financial responsibility to avoid unsustainable debt creation.
It also stressed on BRI’s disregard for environmental issues, lack of transparency in cost assessments.
Also, technology transfer modules that are need for long term project sustainability isn’t clear.
In a reference to ‘China Pakistan Economic Corridor’ that passes through Kashmir (PoK) – India voiced that connectivity projects must respect sovereignty and territorial integrity of states.
How is the consensus on the Indian Standpoint?
Although, Japan & USA had sent representatives to the Beijing summit on BRI (that India boycotted) – they have increasingly become critical of it now.
Delhi, Tokyo and Washington have even begun discussions on joint projects for Indo-Pacific infrastructure development as alternatives to the BRI.
USA - has recently drubbed China’s development assistance as ‘predatory economics’ and also echoed many of India’s views.
Large debt conditions, it argued would force countries to swap debt for equity - thereby seeding strategic control to China.
The US has also begun Investing in infrastructure projects in the region and is in consultation with many countries.
Its agreement with Nepal to augment electricity and transportation infrastructure is a case in point.
Japan – Japan has been vouching for joint connectivity & infrastructure projects even before the conception of BRI.
In 2015, Japan announced the ‘Partnership for Quality Infrastructure - PQI’ and plans to spend about $200 billion during the next five years.
More recently, talks on a “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” and enhanced connectivity between Africa & Asia has been mooted.
Notably, Japan has a better experience in executing projects in third world countries and is also offering better terms than China.
What is the way ahead?
Many small nations have limited alternatives when it comes to infrastructure investments and financing.
Hence, transparent and sensible regional lending mechanisms need to be strengthened to help nations avoid debt traps like BRI.
India’s Role - India needs to enhance its infrastructure initiatives with its own resources in the Subcontinent.
It also needs to get partner countries like US, Japan, Europe to coordinate their initiatives as well as take up joint projects.
It should also learn to overcome its many institutional limitations in implementing projects in other countries.
The Purpose - While building an alternative to China’s BRI is needed, it shouldn’t become an irrational rivalry.
Rather, it should be a demonstration of possibility for sustainable infrastructure development.
By doing this, Delhi and its partners can improve the bargaining capacity of smaller countries vis-a-vis China.
It is expected to eventually push Beijing to discard the predatory provisions in its BRI and make it a genuinely cooperative venture.
