One Belt, One Road through the Global Lens

By Huma Baqai
The One Belt One Road Chinese initiative that was proposed in 2013, had a global
curtain raiser through its first ever international co-operation conference held in Beijing
on May 14 and 15, 2017, indeed had a global ring. It was attended by 1500 people from
more than 130 nations. 28 countries were represented by top leadership and 60
international organizations.
President Xi calls it his country’s greatest diplomatic event. In an address at the forum’s
opening ceremony, Xi said his nation would “foster a new type of International
Relations” based on mutual co-operation, co-existence and co-prosperity, there by
attempting to place a check on the existing order that is centered on the United States.
This is of particular interest because this coincides with the Trump’s administration
decision to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific partnership free trade pact. The three main
countries originally skeptical of it were India, US and Japan. The last minute decision by
the US to send top Asia Expert Mathew Pottinger, a national security council officer to
the summit as a result of a trade deal, with China, which has for one opened up Chinese
markets to American beef, natural gas and certain financial services, and in return
allowed Chinese banks to expand operations in the US. It was seen in Beijing as a huge
success. Pottinger said, US firms have a long and successful track record in global
infrastructure development and are ready to participate in the “OBOR.” China in
particular and the global community in general are seeing it as a major policy shift of the
Trump administration towards China and not merely a quid pro. More consolidation is
perhaps in the offing.
It is estimated that $ 1.7 trillion would be required for annual infrastructure investments
in the OBOR, the three funding institution namely – the Asian infrastructure, the New
Development Bank, and the Silk Road Fund – only have capital totaling $ 240 billion.
The US clout over institutions like United Nations, World Bank and IMF is no secret.
The US support may go a long way in meeting the gap. The US role cannot be subtracted
from the security and geo-politic challenges that exist in the path of the implementation
of OBOR.
The sudden US U-turn in its policies towards China is good news for China and Pakistan
and has put tremendous pressure on India. Jagannath Panday, a research fellow at the
Institute for the Defense Studies and Analysis, in New Delhi, said, “India is in a
dilemma.” The participation in India is seen as an early signal that the Trump
administration is reframing the US-China relationship.
India chose to stay away, its main objection stemming from its position on parts of errs-
while Jammu and Kashmir state that India claims as its territory. India also stone-walled
China’s offers of accommodation. Sane voices inside India are of the view that it made a
huge mistake and was not even missed at the event which is seen by many as one of the
most ambitious global trade infrastructure initiatives in history where leaders from across
Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin America participated. India will have difficulty defending
the position it has taken especially at a time when it can barely control the Kashmir under
its direct control. It stands isolated and comes across as a whimsical rather than a
practical state that is an emerging economy. India’s politics of self-importance and
aggressive assertion of its point of view did not pay off.
It is important for India to make note of the fact that China had built the Karakoram
Highway decades ago. The 1963 border agreement between Pakistan and China had
accommodated Indian sensitivities. How can the upgradation of the existing
infrastructure threaten India’s illusionary claims of sovereignty over Gilgit and Baltistan.
India should revisit its stance on OBOR initiative and its relations with Pakistan. Pakistan
is going through a major paradigm shift in its foreign policy. Pakistan’s commitment to
China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is complete and long-term, which will automatically
address India’s concerns. Moreover, for the larger benefit of this region both India and
Afghanistan have to stop blaming Pakistan for their internal failures.
Pakistan has moved on responding to the changing ground realities to improve its
economy and the condition of its people. Is India ready to do the same? OBOR is a new
geo-economic reality, which is fast-becoming irreversible. It will by default change the
relational equations of the region. The reactive attitude of New Delhi where Indian media
has actually called for tougher actions to obstruct the OBOR project is an approach which
is uncomprehendable from a country of India’s stature. Moreover, India had blocked the
holding of the SAARC, however both Sri Lanka and Nepal attended the summit. This is
the new reality of South Asia.
Countries like Japan, Vietnam and Indonesia who have direct issues with China chose to
participate in the summit realizing the rising role of China in the global economic matrix.
Moreover, a very pertinent aspect is that participation of the developed world with
countries like US, Britain and Germany coming onboard will exigently put a check on
China, which is a good thing.
The issues of transparency, labour laws and environmental protection are on the table.
Mathew Pottinger, while committing US support had also warned that the project success
would depend on a number of factors including transparency in government procurement,
high quality financing to avoid unsustainable debt burdens. Greece and several European
Union countries indicated they would not sign one of the summit documents of trade
because it did not sufficiently address European concerns on transparency of public
procurement and social and environmental standards. German economic minister Brigitte
Zypries called for transparency to ensure that the call for investment bids are “non-
discriminatory.” China has agreed to go by international trade agreements and has made a
public commitment to both inclusiveness and openness. It is now upon individual
countries to protect their interests. The venues to do so exists.
Last but not least many in Pakistan see our convergence with China as an alternative to
our relationship with the US. This is a deeply flawed paradigm. China is very keen on
both US and India amongst other countries becoming a part of its economic initiative. It
will not become a part of any contentious equations. The entire thrust of Chinese
diplomacy in the region is to bring down levels of acrimony in the region and beyond to
promote connectivity. Its China’s new world order.
A major concern, however remains, especially for countries like Indonesia, Japan, US,
India, South Korea and Vietnam is that the grand initiative may really be a smokescreen
for strategic control. Countries that are direct beneficiaries and have welcomed the
initiative are asking for greater clarity on the part of China about its intentions.
Something China will have to address to take it to the next level.

(Dr. Huma Baqai is an Associate Professor in Institute of Business Administration,

Karachi in the Department of Social Sciences and Liberal Arts)