By Alexandra Anargyrou, Analyst KEDISA
Introduction
The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), launched by China in 2013, has rapidly evolved into one of the most ambitious and consequential infrastructural and diplomatic undertakings of the 21st century. Officially referred to as the “One Belt, One Road” initiative, it is a vast and multifaceted development strategy that spans across Asia, Africa, Europe, and beyond. The BRI seeks to improve trade connectivity and economic cooperation by developing trade routes reminiscent of the ancient Silk Road. However, beyond its infrastructural ambition, the BRI encapsulates a broader geopolitical strategy—one that consolidates China’s growing influence and redefines its role on the global stage. This article explores the implications of the BRI in the context of international relations theory, assessing its geopolitical ramifications, economic promise, and strategic challenges.
Theoretical Framework: BRI and the Geopolitical Landscape
To understand the BRI’s significance, it is essential to situate it within broader theories of international relations, specifically in terms of realism, liberalism, and constructivism.
From a realist perspective, the BRI represents China’s strategic maneuver to secure its position as a dominant power in a multipolar world. Realist theories emphasize the pursuit of national interest through power accumulation, and the BRI serves as a vehicle for China to expand its economic and political footprint globally. By enhancing infrastructure and connectivity across critical regions, China bolsters its leverage over participating countries and strengthens its geopolitical influence (Mearsheimer, 2001; Tiezzi, 2017).
In contrast, liberal institutionalism views the BRI as an opportunity for fostering multilateral cooperation and promoting global governance. According to liberal theory, economic interdependence and institutional cooperation are key to achieving international peace and stability. The BRI, with its emphasis on cross-border infrastructure and trade, can potentially deepen economic ties and facilitate broader cooperation, especially in developing countries (Keohane, 1984; Ikenberry, 2011).
Lastly, constructivist theories underscore the importance of identity, norms, and shared ideas in international relations. From this lens, the BRI is not only about trade and infrastructure; it is also about shaping perceptions of China’s leadership in the global order. Through cultural exchanges, soft power strategies, and educational initiatives, China aims to position itself as a benevolent global actor promoting development, peace, and connectivity (Wendt, 1999; Lanteigne, 2018).
Geopolitical Ramifications of the BRI: Soft Power and Strategic Leverage
China’s BRI has wide-reaching geopolitical consequences, most notably in the realm of soft power and strategic leverage. Through infrastructure development, China not only facilitates trade but also cultivates long-term relationships with participating countries. These relationships, founded on mutual dependence, are essential for expanding China’s influence in regions traditionally dominated by Western powers.
One of the most profound geopolitical outcomes of the BRI has been China’s growing influence in Central Asia and Africa, regions that have long been spheres of influence for Russia, the U.S., and the European Union. The BRI enables China to bypass traditional Western-dominated financial institutions by offering investment with fewer political strings attached. For instance, African countries, historically constrained by the conditionality of Western aid, have welcomed Chinese investments in infrastructure development, from railways to ports. While such investments contribute to economic growth, they also cement China’s political clout in these regions, as countries increasingly rely on Chinese financing and expertise (Shen, 2017).
However, the BRI’s geopolitical footprint is not without contention. Critics argue that the initiative creates a debt trap for participating countries, particularly those in South Asia and East Africa, where Chinese loans often exceed the economic capacity of recipient nations to repay. This dynamic has generated concerns regarding China’s growing control over strategic infrastructure such as ports and railways. The example of Sri Lanka, which ceded control of the Hambantota Port to China after failing to meet debt repayment terms, has raised alarms about the potential for China to acquire critical assets in strategically important regions, thereby increasing its influence over maritime trade routes and regional security (Chellaney, 2017).
BRI in the Context of U.S.-China Competition
The BRI is inextricably linked to the U.S.-China rivalry and represents a direct challenge to the established international order dominated by Western powers, particularly the United States. The U.S. has consistently viewed China’s growing influence with skepticism, seeing the BRI as a means to undermine American dominance in global affairs.
From Washington’s perspective, the BRI reflects China’s strategic shift from merely integrating into the international system to actively reshaping the global order. U.S. policymakers have voiced concerns that China’s infrastructure projects could pave the way for military bases and surveillance infrastructure under the guise of economic development. This is especially evident in the Indian Ocean region, where Chinese investments in port facilities raise questions about China’s long-term military intentions (Lanteigne, 2018).
In response to the BRI, the U.S. has sought to counterbalance China’s influence through initiatives such as the Indo-Pacific Strategy and the Blue Dot Network, which aims to promote transparent, environmentally sustainable, and high-standard infrastructure projects. However, these countermeasures have not yet matched the scale or reach of China’s BRI, which has secured commitments from over 140 countries and international organizations (Nye, 2019).
China’s BRI in Europe: Opportunities and Challenges
Europe presents both opportunities and challenges for the BRI. On the one hand, the European Union has become a key player in the Belt and Road initiative, particularly through the 16+1 Cooperation mechanism, which involves 16 Central and Eastern European countries and China. The initiative has spurred investments in infrastructure, transportation, and trade routes, linking China with Europe via the Eurasian Land Bridge. This has the potential to reshape European trade dynamics and provide a direct connection between Chinese manufacturers and European markets.
However, the BRI’s expansion into Europe also raises questions about the political implications of Chinese influence. Some EU member states, such as Italy, have signed onto the BRI, while others, particularly those in the Western Balkans, are wary of Beijing’s political influence. Additionally, European leaders are increasingly concerned about the transparency and governance of Chinese investments and the potential risks posed by strategic sectors such as energy and technology (Feng, 2020).
Environmental and Ethical Considerations
An often-overlooked aspect of the BRI is its environmental and ethical implications. While the initiative has made significant strides in infrastructure development, it has faced criticism for its environmental impact. Many of the BRI’s infrastructure projects, particularly in Africa and Southeast Asia, have raised concerns regarding deforestation, ecosystem destruction, and the exploitation of natural resources. Environmentalists argue that the BRI’s rapid development priorities sometimes come at the expense of environmental sustainability (Global Witness, 2020).
Moreover, the ethical implications of the BRI are complex. Critics argue that China’s focus on economic interests and infrastructure projects without adequate regard for social and environmental welfare reflects a neocolonial approach. The lack of strong governance frameworks, transparency, and accountability in some BRI projects has led to accusations that China is exploiting the vulnerabilities of developing countries for its own geopolitical gain (Chellaney, 2017).
Conclusion: The Future of the Belt and Road Initiative
The Belt and Road Initiative has proven to be a game-changer in global infrastructure and trade, but its full impact remains uncertain. As the world moves towards a more multipolar international system, China’s ability to leverage the BRI to strengthen its position will be crucial. However, the challenges and criticisms faced by the BRI—from debt-trap diplomacy to environmental concerns—must be addressed for the initiative to maintain its long-term success.
As the BRI continues to unfold, China’s strategic use of the initiative will be scrutinized by both supporters and critics. The question remains: can the BRI evolve into a truly cooperative, sustainable model for global development, or will it remain a tool of geopolitical competition? The answers will have profound implications for China’s place in the international system and the future of global governance.
References
Chellaney, Brahma. Asian Juggernaut: The Rise of China, India, and Japan. HarperCollins, 2017.
Feng, Chongyi. “China’s Belt and Road Initiative and the Struggle for Political Control.” Asian Studies Review 44, no. 1 (2020): 34-53.
Global Witness. The Belt and Road: A New Silk Road of Environmental Destruction. Global Witness, 2020.
Ikenberry, G. John. Liberal Leviathan: The Origins, Crisis, and Transformation of the American World Order. Princeton University Press, 2011.
Keohane, Robert O. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton University Press, 1984.
Lanteigne, Marc. Chinese Foreign Policy: An Introduction. Routledge, 2018.
Mearsheimer, John J. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. W.W. Norton & Company, 2001.
Tiezzi, Shannon. “China’s Belt and Road Initiative: A Global Push for Economic Dominance.” The Diplomat, August 1, 2017.
Wendt, Alexander. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge University Press, 1999.
