BRI: high quality, low definition

A 5 August People’s Daily appraisal of ‘China’s foreign policy achievements in the first half of 2019' asserts The ‘China solution’ provides guidance for high quality development. Facing current issues of imbalance, ill coordination and lack of sustainability in world economic development, President Xi Jinping has prescribed a ‘cure’: cooperative high quality development. The 2nd Belt and Road International Cooperation Summit started a new journey of high-quality, joint construction of the Belt and Road. What are the contents of the claimed ‘cure’? We find a blend of soft power aspiration (‘joint creation’) and managerialism (‘high quality’).

BRI under fire

Like ‘American knowhow’, the ‘China solution’ (Zhongguo fang’an 中国方案) introduced by the Xi administration in 2016 is a PR vehicle that tends to work best on home audiences. An appeal to exceptionalism, its initially reasonable claims (‘China has broken the mould of emerging economies’) are easily spun into a sermonising creed (‘China’s solutions to its own problems are applicable everywhere and scalable to global proportions’). In PR terms, the BRI shares these features and adds some of its own. Initially reasonable claims helped it take off from a vague program sketched by President Xi in 2013 into a phase of unprecedented growth and grateful uptake by a legion of foreign partner states. It later encountered turbulence, and its denigration as ‘debt trap diplomacy’ is now a cliché. But even before that, domestic commentators warned of ill-qualified, rent-seeking interests, of dialled-up hype emanating from the propaganda system, and of pervasive misreading of participating states’ political landscapes.

‘high-quality BRI’ push to address concerns

The new focus on ‘high quality’ is a reaction to such criticisms that the BRI has been beset by corruption, set ‘debt traps’ for participating countries and failed to genuinely benefit local populations. ‘High-quality BRI’ was in the air in 2018, but did not become a prominent slogan until the Second Belt and Road Forum in April 2019. The basic aim, says Wang Yi 王毅 Minister of Foreign Affairs, is to make the initiative more sustainable and attractive for all involved. In his keynote speech, Xi Jinping called on all participants to ‘jointly promote high-quality BRI cooperation’ by following the principle of ‘extensive consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits’, pursuing ‘open, green and clean cooperation’ and conducting ‘high-standard cooperation to improve people's lives and promote sustainable development’. Xi’s aspirational language spurred recommendations from a range of policy influencers in government and academia on how to improve quality in their fields.

high-quality financing

Addressing the ‘debt trap’ criticism, Liu Kun 刘昆 Minister of Finance says China is building a ‘diverse, inclusive and sustainable BRI financing system’, stepping up cooperation with finance departments of partner countries, multilateral banks and other financial institutions. Huang Renwei 黄仁伟 Fudan University Institute of Belt and Road and Global Governance executive vice-dean agrees more global financing is necessary to avoid ‘debt traps’, reduce risk and guarantee BRI projects’ security.

direct industrial investment

But financial terms are not the only problem, proposes Xue Xu 薛旭 Peking University Department of International Economics and Trade. BRI has so far been driven by infrastructure projects, but its driving force should, Xue argues, shift from infrastructure to industrial investment. According to Xue, ‘debt traps’ can result from developing countries’ inability to take advantage of infrastructure support due to lack of key resources and industrial knowhow. Chinese firms can help fill the gap through direct investment, helping such countries reap the benefits of new infrastructure and grow their economies.

international rules

On the general criticism that BRI projects fail to meet international standards, Fu Mengzi 傅梦孜 China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations calls for projects to actively follow existing international rules. Guaranteeing fair and transparent environmental assessment, recruitment, and bidding processes will go a long way towards maintaining public support, Fu suggests. But some see problems with the rules, rather than BRI itself. Huang Renwei suggests new regulations be developed for the BRI. This can be achieved, he urges, by combining laws of partner countries with Chinese law, helping gradually modify current Western market rules.

‘soft’ projects

Jiang Xiheng 蒋希蘅 China Centre for International Knowledge on Development suggests launching more small projects, as their direct impacts can help local people see concrete benefits from the BRI more clearly. Huang Renwei likewise stresses the importance of ‘soft' projects in the fields of culture, education, public health, tourism and the environment. Compared with ‘hard’ infrastructure and industrial projects, soft projects are much cheaper, and bring more immediate benefits.

low-key propaganda

There has also been some reflection on China’s propaganda on the BRI, some of which is said to have been counterproductive. According to Li Jinfeng 李进峰, deputy director of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Belt and Road Initiative Research Centre, overselling the initiative may have contributed to US concerns over China and its designation of China as its main strategic competitor. He stresses that China should be objective about the Belt and Road—it is an economic plan, not a grand geopolitical strategy or China’s ‘Marshall Plan’.

high quality, low definition

Shifting the policy settings towards high-quality development, the Second BRI summit attempted to refocus on international public goods creation. The flurry of publications on the topic signal that both domestic and international audiences were targets. But few responses provide concrete ideas likely to effect change, and there is little consensus on what ‘high quality’ means in practice. Strengthening cooperation, increasing transparency, and improving PR will not hurt, but none are specific policy recommendations. The resulting blend of soft power considerations and managerialism remains largely in the realm of propaganda.

---

profiles