The Walls of OBOR: China’s Boon or Burden?

As per Noam Chomsky “A tremendous amount of the entrepreneurial initiative, if you want to call it that, comes from the dynamic state sector on which most of the economy relies to socialize costs and risks and privatize eventual profit. And that’s achieved by, if you like, advertising’’. The same could be applied on China’s One Belt One Road (OBOR) project. But that doesn’t sound too easy for Beijing.

Surely, its entrepreneurial inventiveness has managed to get wide support from more than 60 countries but uncertainties still prevail in its positive operation. China has been criticized for carving out maximum benefits leaving other stake holders with few. The United Nation has raised concerns over economic, financial, environment & social risks over China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) which could lead to huge debts for Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan & Pakistan. Sri Lanka is already facing a huge debt because they had allowed Chinese funded project which they are finding difficult to repay. As it has already bagged huge areas across several countries, concerns over displacements and marginalization of local communities and indigenous group is also there. On the one hand, where OBOR has high chances of cultural degradation, environmental concerns have been of less importance to China looking at its motives.

Regional dynamics, geo-politics, conflicts and counter actions are always part of International politics. It can also be witnessed in OBOR operations. While the initiative has always stretched towards South East Asian countries beside conflicts over South China Sea does not sound fruitful for OBOR especially with the virtual presence of the United States. With respect to India as an important South Asian nation, its close ties with Vietnam, unsettled border question, and the  China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) that passes through ‘Pakistan Occupied Kashmir’ may not work positively for Beijing. The recent Indo-Japan initiative for “Asia-Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC)” under “Indo-Pacific Freedom Corridor (IIFC)” and possible developing of Chabahar Port jointly could surely counterbalance China. The prime aspect of AAGC is to contribute towards the socio-economic development of the local society and indigenous communities. Surely such an initiative will be given preference. On other hand providing safeguards to the interests of the region that passes through BRI could be a bigger challenge for Beijing. In the Middle East, tackling both Saudi Arabia and Iran is a bigger challenge too. Iran’s strategic location is crucial for OBOR. Thus maintaining good relations for its larger goal in a polarized region may be not an easy task for China.

Without any doubt, China possess has the calibre to execute such a mammoth initiative but the bigger question that arises is to what extent it will succeed following an idea related to their civilization? The Dragon has to face several obstacles from the existing world order in its attempts to make itself an alternative power centre. At the regional level, India has got attention from the other power centers, but it has a long way to go to achieve an equilibrium position.

Ashish Singh, MPhil Student, Institute Of Foreign Policy Studies, Calcutta University.