China’s global foreign policies have changed from a keeping a low profile to one. That is striving towards achievement since the 2008 global financial crisis. China’s diplomatic practice and thinking has been shaped by its political, economic and symbolic capital. It is not only concerned with the short-term economic gain. It has emphasized the long-term effects of its actions on both international system outlook and country’s position within it.
China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is one way it is attempting to do this. Also known as the 21st century Silk Road, The BRI was officially announced in 2013. It brings together many pre-existing and new elements to strengthen. The link between China’s global imperatives as well as its domestic imperatives. It is now a central point for China’s ideas, resources, and institutions.
The BRI is an idea with Chinese characteristics. It is characterised in incrementalism, inductive thought, and experimentation. It is not one project. The different sections and legs of the project differ greatly from each other. For example, it includes a significant China-Pakistan Economic Corridor that has a significant developmental component.
On May 14-15, dozens of heads and other representatives from governments around the globe gathered at Beijing’s BRI Forum. While initially announced with a focus on Asia, Europe, and parts of Africa. The BRI now aims to include the Americas as well as Oceania.
China has experienced economic growth over the past four decades through its integration in the global economy, and gradual improvement in its position around the world. Without the growth of others, China’s economic growth would not have been possible.
China is today the second-largest country in the world (and poised to surpass the US in the very near future), and the engine of the global economy. It is the key to global economic growth. China is expect to play a greater role in shaping the future global economy. The BRI is just one of many ways it will do so. The BRI promotes strategic economic partnerships and multilateral lending to address investment, employment, and economic development. This is in the interest of reinvigorating global economy growth.
China’s main concept is production capacity cooperation. This can be describe as pooling resources to meet one another’s needs. This is a way to strengthen trade routes and supply chains and ensure sustainable flows for goods and services. This global initiative surpasses all other plans and is seven times more than the post-second World War US Marshall Plan.
Global Market And State
Chinese policymakers have used their own experiences of reforming and opening up as well as the evolving ideology of Communist Party of China (CPC) to develop the BRI. The BRI is based on the core tenets and principles of Sinified Marxism today: The state is responsible for bringing about prosperity and the market is the primary instrument to achieve this.
Alvin Y., a developmental sociologist, used the term state-market nexus to describe the complex state-market nexus that exists in China. So and YinWah Chu suggest the deliberately self-contradicting term, state neoliberalism, as opposed to Western-styled market neoliberalism.
It states that party-states must be strong and politically stable to be able act decisively in fine-tuning market flows (both advancing, and reversing), the scope and intensity regulation, and to create exceptions such as free economic zones.
The BRI emphasizes that the state is responsible for stimulating innovation, which is key to economic growth. This form of governance allows the state integration in global neoliberalism while also developing a particular, neoliberal governmentality, or rather political technology, within the web of laws and policies.
The example of China and the so-called China Model are often mention as examples in the debate about bringing back the state in the economy. Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel laureate, has described the rise of China as a wake up call for how we view the global economy. This has been use by Chinese policymakers to increase their legitimacy and soft power.
The notion of a strong, stable state has led to debates about the impact of China’s BRI. Upon democracy around the world. However, Chinese scholars and policymakers have also argued against universal blueprints. They repeatedly stressed the inability to replicate China’s experience. They urged all countries to exercise their sovereignty and decide what development model is best suit to their particular circumstances.