China’s New Pattern of Economic Opening-up Led by the Belt and Road Initiative

The Belt and Road Initiative is one of China’s key strategic projects to contribute more to global economic growth and governance. The initiative has led the Chinese economy into a new pattern of comprehensive opening up, and seeks to be a benchmark and a new vehicle for other developing and emerging countries to address their development needs.

Since Chinese President Xi Jinping proposed the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in 2013, the project has sparked off intense discussions worldwide. Media outlets in more than 170 countries have published numerous analyses and commentaries on the BRI.1 Internet archives show that the number of academic papers which include the terms “Belt and Road,” “One Belt, One Road” or “China’s New Silk Road” in the title have grown dramatically in 2019. Opinions and conclusions concerning the many aspects of the BRI vary greatly. Therefore, only by analyzing the background and policy objectives of the BRI can the impact of the initiative on the world economy and on China’s economy be correctly evaluated.

This article starts off with a review of the background and motivation of the BRI, and subsequently examines the changing objectives of the initiative amid turbulent international circumstances, followed by an assessment of the role of the BRI in encouraging the further opening of China’s economy.

Background and Motivation of BRI

When Chinese president Xi Jinping visited Kazakhstan and Indonesia in 2013, he proposed the initiatives of jointly building the “Silk Road

Economic Belt” and the “21st Century Maritime Silk Road,” which have become collectively referred to as the Belt and Road Initiative. The world at that time was almost surprisingly confronted with the question: What is the meaning and motivation of this initiative? Why did China put forward this initiative at that very moment? To better understand these issues, one has to place it in the evolving international background, especially in connection with the attitude of the United States towards China’s development.

The United States has accelerated its efforts to contain the development of China

International attention today is mainly focused on the China-us trade dispute and their dissention on the coronavirus, the effects of which are progressively being felt globally. However, the increasingly confrontational stance towards China did not begin with Donald Trump’s accession to the presidency. The 2008 US National Defense Strategy had already positioned China as a potential competitor to the United States. When Barack Obama entered the White House, the United States immediately joined and shortly after led the negotiations on the Trans-pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement. In spite of the fact that China is one of the largest economies in the Asia-pacific area, the country was not invited to sit at the negotiating table. In 2011, then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton proposed her “Pivot to Asia” strategy to limit China’s growing regional influence. This move significantly intensified tensions in the South China Sea and, from the viewpoint of China’s government, has affected the sovereignty of China’s islands and has endangered national security. When the Xi administration took over in 2012, the Chinese government was convinced that the country faced a severe external economic and national security emergency, and sought measures to mitigate the perceived risks to China’s development.

It is in this context that the initiation of the BRI needs to be understood. Since the United States is increasingly dedicating resources to marginalizing and containing China’s development, China, in return, has

more vocally expressed willingness to strengthen its economic cooperation with neighboring countries and beyond.

The BRI seeks to convey the promotion of peace, development and win-win cooperation to the world

But then, why use the term Silk Road? According to Professor Liu Weidong at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Silk Road flourished mainly in periods of peace and broke down during war times; hence, the phrase carries the connotation of peace, friendship, exchange, and prosperity.2 The Silk Road has historically referred to peaceful and prosperous transit corridors for commodities, cultural goods and religious ideas between the continents of Asia and Europe, which were first explored by the Chinese envoy Zhang Qian more than 2,000 years ago.3 Later, the term was gradually also used to describe the historic maritime trade routes between Asia, Europe, and Africa, including those of the 15th-century grand voyages of Zheng He in the Ming Dynasty. These ancient roots of the Silk Road have influenced the language and stated aims of current policy initiatives. The Chinese government has borrowed the cultural symbolism of the Silk Road, to convey its willingness to promote “peace, development and win-win cooperation” to the world.4

The BRI is therefore not some geopolitical game plan designed to impinge upon US interests and the Us-centric world order, but it was in part conceived of as a way of mitigating risks associated with China’s changing relationship with the United States. More broadly, however, the BRI is best understood as an attempt to strengthen economic cooperation with neighboring countries and beyond, in order to maintain a stable economic environment for sustaining China’s development. The BRI is neither an endeavor by China to move towards the center of the world stage, nor is it a

geopolitically motivated scheme to expand China’s influence and to establish global leadership. China has no intention of challenging the present world order.5 The Chinese government has instead provided a fact-based assessment of China’s economic situation, given that China’s per capita GDP remains at about US$10,000, which is lower than the World Bank’s minimum threshold for high-income countries. China is convinced that it should continue to pursue medium-to-high speed economic growth and further raise living standards for its people, while seeking to escape the middle-income trap. Overall, the BRI should maintain stable conditions for China’s development by enhancing economic cooperation with its neighboring countries and beyond, as well as by providing additional impetus for the development of the global economy.

The BRI is an inclusive cooperation platform for global economy

The nature of the BRI has shifted over time, evolving in response to changing international trends and mounting geopolitical challenges. As protectionism and unilateralism rise internationally, and globalization seems to be receding, China now hopes to counter this trend by jointly building the Belt and Road with more and more countries through promoting infrastructure connectivity, investment, trade, and people-to-people exchanges, which is expected to inject new vitality into global economic development. Events over the past six years have increased the need for this approach to regional cooperation, and has subsequently shaped how the BRI has evolved in two key ways: first, by expanding from a regional to a truly global initiative, and second, by extending its scope from a vision mainly tailored to enhance China’s economic requirements, to becoming a driver for global economic growth.

America’s recent orientation towards unilateral protectionism, particularly in trade and investment policies, has prompted this shift of the

6 “Xi Jinping’s Keynote Speech at the Opening Ceremony of the Boao Forum for Asia Annual Conference 2018,” Xinhua, April 10, 2018, http://www.xinhuanet.com/politics/2018-04/10/c_1122659873.htm. 7 China’s Belt and Road Portal, https://www.yidaiyilu.gov.cn/xwzx/roll/77298.htm.

8 Alicia Herrero and Xu Jianwei, “Countries’ Perceptions of China’s Belt and Road Initiative: A Big Data Analysis,” Bruegel Working Paper, Issue 01, 2019.

9 Based on the direction of the ancient Silk Road, scholars have listed 65 countries in Asia, Europe, and Africa, including China, as countries along the BRI route; but this essay deviates from this concept and refers to those countries which have signed MOUS with China to cooperate on the construction of the Belt and Road.

10 Francois De Soyres, et al., “How Much Will the Belt and Road Initiative Reduce Trade Costs?” World Bank Policy Research Working Papers, No.8614; Baniya Suprabha, Rocha Nadia Patrizia, and Ruta Michele, “Trade Effects of the New Silk Road: A Gravity Analysis,” World Bank Policy Research Working Papers, No.8694.

11 Hideo Ohashi, “The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in the Context of the China’s Opening Up Policy,” Journal of Contemporary East Asia Studies, Vol.7, No.2, 2018, pp.85-103.

12 “Full Text of Xi Jinping’s Report at 19th CPC National Congress,” Xinhua, November 3, 2017. http:// www.xinhuanet.com/english/special/2017-11/03/c_136725942.htm.

13 “Press Conference of the State Council Information Office,” People.cn, tv.people.com.cn/n1/2020/0116/c43911-31551748.html.

January 17, 2020, http://

14 National Development and Reform Commission, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Ministry of Commerce of the People’s Republic of China, “Vision and Actions on Jointly Building Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st-century Maritime Silk Road,” March 2015.