STANFORD – As 2016 begins, an historic contest is underway over competing development models – that is, strategies to promote economic growth – between China, on the one hand, and the US and other Western countries on the other. Although this contest has been largely hidden from public view, the outcome will determine the fate of much of Eurasia for decades to come.
Most Westerners are aware that growth has slowed substantially in China, from over 10% per year in recent decades to below 7% today (and possibly lower). The country’s leaders have not been sitting still in response, seeking to accelerate the shift from an export-oriented, environmentally damaging growth model based on heavy manufacturing to one based on domestic consumption and services.
But there is a large external dimension to China’s plans as well. In 2013, President Xi Jinping announced a massive initiative called “One Belt, One Road,” which would transform the economic core of Eurasia. The One Belt component consists of rail links from western China through Central Asia and thence to Europe, the Middle East, and South Asia. The strangely named One Road component consists of ports and facilities to increase seaborne traffic from East Asia and connect these countries to the One Belt, giving them a way to move their goods overland, rather than across two oceans, as they currently do.
The China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), which the US earlier this year refused to join, is designed, in part, to finance One Belt, One Road. But the project’s investment requirements will dwarf the resources of the proposed new institution.
Indeed, One Belt, One Road represents a striking departure in Chinese policy. For the first time, China is seeking to export its development model to other countries. Chinese companies, of course, have been hugely active throughout Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa in the past decade, investing in commodities and extractive industries and the infrastructure needed to move them to China. But One Belt, One Road is different: its purpose is to develop industrial capacity and consumer demand in countries outside of China. Rather than extracting raw materials, China is seeking to shift its heavy industry to less developed countries, making them richer and encouraging demand for Chinese products.
China’s development model is different from the one currently fashionable in the West. It is based on massive state-led investments in infrastructure – roads, ports, electricity, railways, and airports – that facilitate industrial development. American economists abjure this build-it-and-they-will-come path, owing to concerns about corruption and self-dealing when the state is so heavily involved. In recent years, by contrast, US and European development strategy has focused on large investments in public health, women’s empowerment, support for global civil society, and anti-corruption measures.
Laudable as these Western goals are, no country has ever gotten rich by investing in them alone. Public health is an important background condition for sustained growth; but if a clinic lacks reliable electricity and clean water, or there are no good roads leading to it, it won’t do much good. China’s infrastructure-based strategy has worked remarkably well in China itself, and was an important component of the strategies pursued by other East Asian countries, from Japan to South Korea to Singapore.
The big question for the future of global politics is straightforward: Whose model will prevail? If One Belt, One Road meets Chinese planners’ expectations, the whole of Eurasia, from Indonesia to Poland will be transformed in the coming generation. China’s model will blossom outside of China, raising incomes and thus demand for Chinese products to replace stagnating markets in other parts of the world. Polluting industries, too, will be offloaded to other parts of the world. Rather than being at the periphery of the global economy, Central Asia will be at its core. And China’s form of authoritarian government will gain immense prestige, implying a large negative effect on democracy worldwide.
But there are important reasons to question whether One Belt, One Road will succeed. Infrastructure-led growth has worked well in China up to now because the Chinese government could control the political environment. This will not be the case abroad, where instability, conflict, and corruption will interfere with Chinese plans.
Indeed, China has already found itself confronting angry stakeholders, nationalistic legislators, and fickle friends in places like Ecuador and Venezuela, where it already has massive investments. China has dealt with restive Muslims in its own Xinjiang province largely through denial and repression; similar tactics won’t work in Pakistan or Kazakhstan.
This does not mean, however, that the US and other Western governments should sit by complacently and wait for China to fail. The strategy of massive infrastructure development may have reached a limit inside China, and it may not work in foreign countries, but it is still critical to global growth.
The US used to build massive dams and road networks back in the 1950s and 1960s, until such projects fell out of fashion. Today, the US has relatively little to offer developing countries in this regard. President Barack Obama’s Power Africa initiative is a good one, but it has been slow to get off the ground; efforts to build the Fort Liberté port in Haiti have been a fiasco.
The US should have become a founding member of the AIIB; it could yet join and move China toward greater compliance with international environmental, safety, and labor standards. At the same time, the US and other Western countries need to ask themselves why infrastructure has become so difficult to build, not just in developing countries but at home as well. Unless we do, we risk ceding the future of Eurasia and other important parts of the world to China and its development model.
Comments
Hide Comments Read Comments (6)Please sign in or register to leave a comment.
Comment Commented j. von Hettlingen
Francis Fukuyama, author of the iconic "The End of History", sees "an historic contest...underway over competing development models." There is China's "One Belt, One Road" - a grand development project that deals with global transport-infrastructure - a new Silk Road for a globalised age. There is the "US and European development strategy", which is "fashionalbe", but very different, as it has "focused on large investments in public health, women’s empowerment, support for global civil society, and anti-corruption measures".
However Fukuyama has serious doubts about "whether One Belt, One Road will succeed." While some critics have likened President Xi Jinping's pet project to a "Chinese Marshall Plan", China's foreign minister bridled at this suggestion, saying China's strategic "Belt and Road" initiatives - an ambitious project with a land route integrating continental Asia and Europe, and a sea route threading Chinese ports and bases all the way from southern China throught the Indian Ocean to the Horn of Africa and the Mediterranean - were "not a solo but a symphony of all relevant parties". To date "infrastructure-led growth has worked well in China," because state authorities could "control the political environment". Unfortunately "this will not be the case abroad, where instability, conflict, and corruption will interfere with Chinese plans." In recent years, from Africa to Latin America, where China has ecnomic interests in strategic projects, "angry stakeholders, nationalistic legislators, and fickle friends" resent China's investment policies in their countries. The author asks, how would China deal with Muslims in Pakistan or Kazakhstan, judging how the Muslims in the restive Xinjiang province are being treated - "largely through denial and repression"?
How successful China will be to "export its development model to other countries" remains to be seen. It aims to reshape the physical and diplomatic architecture of Asia, by wraping its own influence with infrastructural project westward by land and by sea. This new Silk Road project is "a striking departure" in China's previous poicy, which has mainly been "investing in commodities" and "extracting raw materials" in resource-rich countries. For the first time China will focus on developing "industrial capacity and consumer demand in countries outside of China," while "seeking to shift its heavy industry to less developed countries, making them richer and encouraging demand for Chinese products."
Along with the "One Belt, One Road" strategy, China had, with its huge foreign currency reserves, set up the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), seen by the US as a rival to the World Bank and a challenge to its dominance of global financial institutions. The AIIB is intended to put China's engineering might to use, building a new regional infrastructure with Chinese masterplan, technology and influence firmly at heart. More than 50 countries including all the major European powers, have joined. Fukuyama insists, the US "should have become a founding member of the AIIB", saying it could still join to ensure that China would comply with "international environmental, safety, and labor standards." Meanwhile "the US and other Western countries need to ask themselves why infrastructure has become so difficult to build, not just in developing countries but at home as well." In case China succeeds, those who stay away from the project "risk ceding the future of Eurasia and other important parts of the world to China and its development model."
While China is expanding, Russia is keeping a wary eye on the development. Putin has his ideal greater Europe, stretching from Lisbon to Vladivostok, but it will not take off, given Russia's aggression. In Central Asia - seen by Russia as its backyard - the world may see a clash between China and Russia, even though Beijing and Moscow had agreed on cooperating on this "One Belt, One Road" project - a greater Asia, from Shanghai to St. Petersburg. Read more
Comment Commented Marendo Müller
China has seemingly a background of mutualism and long-termism while the West has seemingly a background of parasitism and short-termism with the colonial empires and the 3rd Reich being epic illustrations. As the population of China is nearly double the size of the whole West, and the population of Asia represent 60% of humanity vs 10% for the West it is likely that the western world will be a blitz civilization in history. To make matters more difficult for the West, the average voter in democracies can be expected to vote for his short term self-interest, not to mention that the largely held belief in the west that western scientific development is a scientific proof of racial and/or cultural superiority undermines constructive and mutually beneficially exchanges between the westerners and the non-westerners. Read more
Comment Commented Art Chen
How does "move China toward greater compliance with international environmental, safety, and labor standards" solve the problem" of overcoming "concerns about corruption and self-dealing when the state is so heavily involved." Nothing gets done. Is Africa's recent projection of 7% growth is due in part due to China's investment in it's infrastructure? Ask Africans!!! Read more
Comment Commented Robbie Jena
Unfortunately China used Engineers to develop Industrial Ecosystems while rest of the West use Economists to play with Finance. So, just think.... Read more
Comment Commented hari naidu
The guy who invented the *end of history* now appears sanguine about mainland China's model of development, as it is based on a single political party (CPC) led by selected politburo.
Principally the model doesn't consider interfering in domestic affairs of a sovereign state; by now we've plenty of examples of it.
Strategically PRC is principally seeking to isolate US from not only Asia but, as Fukuyama suggests, may be Eurasia. Read more
Comment Commented Michael Public
To live in China you need a compliant personality. Anyone who feels that the rights of individuals are above those of the state is swiftly dealt with. While it has clearly worked in China, I think it will meet with monumental failure when exported elsewhere - in the same way "Western Democracy and Neoliberal Economic Models" have basically failed outside of America and the UK. Read more
Featured
Shaping the Fourth Industrial Revolution
Klaus Schwab calls for public deliberation in creating the technology-driven global order that lies ahead.
The Chinese Economy’s Great Wall
Mohamed A. El-Erian is worried that placing domestic economic obligations first will jeopardize global stability.
Carpet Bombing History in America
Ian Buruma sees no parallels between today's wars in the Middle East and the rise of Hitler.