Building back better against belt and road

By Rohit K P

The 47th G7 summit was held last week in the United Kingdom. The G7 or the ‘Group of 7’,

consists of France, Canada, Japan, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, the United States, and is

formed with the raison d'être of resolving global issues. Build Back Better World or B3W was the

prime outcome of the summit. According to the White House, the B3W will collectively provide

millions of dollars to low and middle income countries with emphasis on climate, labour rights and

transparency. Now in today’s world, where China’s ambitious, multi-billion dollar project, the Belt

and Road Initiative (BRI) is strewn across the world, the B3W is intended to act as a counterweight

to the BRI.

Before we delve into further details concerning the B3W, let us have a quick primer about the Belt

and Road Initiative (BRI) of China. The Belt and Road initiative was first announced by Chinese

president Xi Jinping back in 2013. It is a project that spans across the globe and is aimed at

strengthening trade, infrastructure and investment links between China and an estimated 52 other

countries across the globe. It is said that centuries ago, there existed a silk route, an ancient trade route

which connected mainland China with the rest of the world through land and maritime routes. It is

from this silk route that the Chinese derived the idea of the BRI, a new generation silk route, facilitated

and augmented by modern infrastructure to carry out trade expeditiously.

As indicated in the name of the project, the Belt and Road, the Belt refers to overland routes and

economic corridors stretching from Central Asia to Europe and the Road refers to maritime shipping

routes. The infrastructure includes railways, roads, bridges and ports. China has set its eyes upon

developed, developing and under developed countries. The amount of money China has committed

into the Belt and road initiative is in the range of $1 trillion and $8 trillion and China has pumped in

billions of dollars already into countries like Kenya, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, etc.

China however, has a track record of going back on its words. If we observe closely, China has

funded a spate of countries that has the tag line of being either too poor or too corrupt. The poor

nations, where the infrastructure and the economy are in shambles, accept the Chinese capital as

godsend, whereas in the corrupt one’s, the top echelons of the political machinery has their palms

greased by the Chinese to accept the loans and to provide them unfettered access in their turf.

Naturally, such countries are more likely to default on their loans, compared to the developed

countries which China is funding. So China’s plan is to capitalize on the debt defaulting. When such

countries fail to repay the loans, China arm twists them into handing over the infrastructure which

was built with the Chinese loans. Sri Lanka and Djibouti are prime examples; ports of both these

countries have been seized by China, who is now using them at its own discretion. In such seized

properties, China exercises its activities, be it military or economic with carte blanche. So in short,

the BRI is a net cast far and wide to trap the low income and corrupt countries in debt. China has set

its eyes on this objective from the word go.

To trust the Chinese to not use the seized properties for their own ends would be wishful thinking

and much of the countries in China’s debt trap still capitulate to China for further loans. Therefore,

much of the area of these countries are likely to be captured by the Chinese as collateral when they

fail to repay the additional loans. This trend will go on until China secures a solid foothold on many

of the countries to whom it has been a shylock to.

After the end of the Second Cold war in 1945, the world was left with two power centres, the

United States of America and the Soviet Union. From 1945, after the war ended, the world has

witnessed a cold war, in which the world split and sided either with the U.S or the Soviets. It did not escalate into a full blown war as feared and ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. In

the 21st century, the world is witnessing another Cold War, in which, China has replaced the Soviet

Union and has pitted itself against the U.S. So the race is on and whatever the U.S does, China

replicates it and vice-versa. The idea of an infrastructure project, to counter the BRI was mooted by

the U.S to the European Union (EU) a year ago. But its members were in no mood to accept the

proposal as it was grappling with the pandemic back then. Now, as many of the EU members and the

U.S has vaccinated its population and the rampant virus brought to its knees in the west, the B3W is

on the anvil again. This time in the G7 summit, members other than the E.U and the U.S, such as

Japan and Canada has also joined hands to bring this colossal project to bear.

The project will be similar to the BRI and will be global in scope. The four key areas where the

collective focus will be zeroed in, are climate change, health security, digital security and gender

equity. Labour rights, transparency and anti-corruption policies will also be enforced in tandem.

An approximate $40 trillion dollars is the estimated cost of infrastructure in the B3W. Although

every members of the G7 has committed to this project, wide spread speculation is that the U.S will

be providing the lion’s share of funding for this project. As the economies of other G7 members still

try to get back on their feet amidst the raging pandemic, they have not yet made any financial

commitments towards this project, public.

Although not a member of the G7, India also has high stakes in matters related B3W as it concerns

China. Since its stand off with China in 2020, India has been at loggerheads with the middle kingdom

for over a year and neighbouring countries such as Pakistan and Sri Lanka, succumbing to China’s

devious debt trap, India has been alert of the Chinese muscle flexing. If B3W is brought to bear, then

the poor nations around the globe need not bend their knees to China, nor should they be afraid of

defaulting on loans. The countries will see a surge in economic drivers such as education,

employment, universal healthcare, etc under the B3W and better transparency, gender equality and

human rights will also be enforced.

Yet, the question arises as to how the G7 will implement the project without inviting Beijing’s ire.

Some countries in the G7 are part of the Belt and Road initiative and has trade relations with China.

Italy, a member of the G7, is part of the BRI and is a beneficiary of Chinese loans. Another G7

member, Germany, is a major stakeholder in China’s 5G programme and has struck a deal with

Huawei, a Chinese company. So are these countries in for the long haul against China? The question

remains moot.

In conclusion, one can say that if set to sail, the B3W will help create a better, more hospitable and

equitable world. Millions of impoverished, illiterate and under-nourished populace of poor nations

across the globe will benefit from it. As mentioned earlier, the B3W is part of the next generation

Cold War; if implemented, it will be proof that sometimes a war need not always necessarily involve

death and destruction. By uplifting the powerless and equipping them to fend for themselves, the G7

will set a global precedent of fighting wars on a constructive scale.