As the BRI continues to expand and evolve, mutual understanding and balanced narratives become crucial. — Xinhua
As the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) marks its 11th anniversary in 2024, it has evolved into a global framework aiming to foster sustainable development and shared prosperity among participating nations.
At its core, the BRI embodies the wisdom of fostering connections between diverse nations, encouraging collaborative economic growth, and addressing mutual challenges through shared technology and infrastructure projects.
In principle, the initiative’s emphasis on inclusivity and balance is evident in its goal to create a community with a shared future for mankind.
This vision extends beyond mere economic cooperation. It aspires to interlink trade routes, enhance technological prowess and build economic partnerships that benefit all parties involved.
By focusing on sharing the know-how rather than merely exporting technologies, the BRI aims to empower nations, particularly those traditionally marginalised in the global economy, to achieve sustainable development through capacity-building and knowledge transfer.
This thinking, when combined with learning, will be different from the principle that we have seen in all these years.
Despite its principled aspirations, the BRI has faced significant resistance in the form of criticism, especially from leading Western publications such as The Economist, the Financial Times and Foreign Affairs.
An analysis of 500 articles from four leading English magazines between 2013 and 2023 shows that negative sentiments embedded into variegated writings have increased as the BRI approached its 10th anniversary.
Political magazines tend to focus on the geopolitical ramifications of the BRI innovation, and its critics argue that the initiative is a strategic move to extend China’s influence across continents, potentially reshaping global power dynamics and challenging existing institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
They have diffused an impactful concept called the “debt trap”, which has been a recurring theme in Western media narratives. Sceptics assert that the BRI’s financing mechanisms could burden participating countries with unsustainable debts, compromising their sovereignty.
However, the facts are that the BRI is focused on helping countries and regions with access to technology, resources and distribution.
Economist Amartya Sen was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics because he explained that India was not poor in resources but the absence of infrastructure and flow of resources are keeping it poor.
If such links are good for the Western world and they are good for India, then they should be good for the nations that have subscribed to the BRI’s benefits.
Western critics have often overlooked China’s genuine developmental goals and efforts to foster regional stability and prosperity.
Because Western capitalism is based on “capital above the human well-being”, they are unable to see that the BRI offers much-needed infrastructure development and economic opportunities to countries that have long been neglected by traditional Western-led financial institutions because of their transaction principles to transform host countries’ cultures and ideologies.
Then there are some environmental critiques, with apprehensions about the impact of large-scale infrastructure projects on fragile ecosystems.
Western media outlets have questioned whether China’s environmental commitments are consistently upheld, pointing to the carbon footprint associated with the Belt and Road construction projects.
In response, China has increasingly argued that it has incorporated sustainability as a fundamental component of the initiative.
Efforts to align projects with environmental standards and invest in green infrastructure reflect an intention to balance development with ecological responsibility.
While these measures indicate progress, critics emphasise the need for greater transparency and consistent implementation across all projects.
Despite such criticism, there are tangible examples that highlight that the BRI’s positive impact goes beyond physical infrastructure to digital infrastructure to alleviate the burden of carbon emissions.
The recent high technology exhibition in Dubai displayed China’s growing role in supporting Middle Eastern countries’ desire to diversify their economies beyond oil and building a digital future.
Chinese technological companies are leading projects to develop local tech talents and infrastructure, demonstrating the initiative’s potential to foster innovation and economic diversification.
This divergence in perspectives underscores a broader issue: the lack of understanding and, at times, misrepresentation of China’s intentions in Western narratives. The tendency to view the BRI projects through a prism of scepticism and protectionism can lead to missed opportunities for collaboration and mutual benefit for all.
The exclusivity in the Western version of capitalism benefits a few at the cost of most others. History has shown that nations often prosper together through promoting openness and cooperation rather than isolation and protectionism.
Contrary to the negative sentiments of the Western media toward the BRI’s intended goals, the developing nations participating in the initiative generally exhibit a more positive stance, appreciating the opportunities for infrastructure improvement, industrial growth, cultural exchange and employment.
An analysis of the narratives and rhetoric in news articles during the last 10 years shows that this disparity in perceptions reflects varying economic needs and political perspectives across global landscapes.
For many of these countries in the developing world, the BRI represents not just an economic venture but a visionary statement underscoring global development and collective well-being.
The bridging rather than buffering in inter-country relationships toward the narrative of mutual understanding is the desire of the initiative’s partners.
One can easily go beyond the concept of the assumption of “an instrument of dominance and hegemony”, as promulgated by the leading Western media to serve some specific interest.
Instead, it is an instrument of collective well-being. The BRI’s portrayal in the Western media reveals the unnecessary, unvalidated and uncalled-for apprehensions of the United States and its partners.
As the BRI continues to expand and evolve, mutual understanding and balanced narratives become crucial.
The initiative’s potential as a driver of global well-being hinges on its ability to foster inclusive growth and sustainable development.
It is ignorance of the highest level if someone assumes there will be no natural challenges such as pandemics, weather anomalies and earthquakes or human-made challenges such as negative sentiments and resistance to change.
Every innovative activity may be viewed as a threat to the existing systems, and biased Western critics always see it through the prism of fear, risk and threat regardless of how beneficial something new is to the overall socioeconomic well-being.
Thus, the initiative will face even stronger resistance in the times to come, but it will not be able to stop its expansion because the opposite wind is necessary for any type of flight. By embracing openness and cooperation, the BRI has the potential to become a cornerstone of global progress in the 21st Century. — China Daily/ANN
Tariq H. Malik is director and professor of the International Centre for Organisation and Innovation Studies with Liaoning University. The views expressed here are the writer’s own.
