By: Shreya Dabral, Research Analyst, GSDN
The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) that was introduced by Chinese President Xi Jinping back in 2013 is one of the most groundbreaking international infrastructure and development initiatives in the contemporary era. It is based on the ancient Silk Road and is meant to increase the connectivity of the region, trade, and economic development in Asia, Europe, Africa, and Latin America. The program involves more than 150 countries/ international organizations, and it is the largest international cooperation framework by an individual country in the 21st century. But ten years after the establishment, there is still an ongoing debate on whether the BRI has managed to reach its objectives or it has failed on account of political, financial and geopolitical factors. Whether or not it has been successful is a complicated question, as the initiative is multidimensional, its organization changes over time, and the interests of the involved countries contradict each other.
The Vision and Scope of the BRI
The BRI was conceptualized as a two-tier system including the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road. An overland Silk Road Economic Belt, which links China to Central Asia, Russia, and Europe, is built by means of extensive railway and road networks. At the same time, the Maritime Silk Road is oriented towards sea routes to Chinese ports and Southeast Asia, South Asia, Africa and the Mediterranean. The main aim of the project is to establish a smooth network of trading routes, industrial belts, and energy pipelines that will help in economic interdependence and make China the central part of the global trade.
The Chinese government has indicated that the BRI is geared toward facilitating policy alignment, the connectivity of infrastructure, the free movement of trade, the integration of the financial system, and human to human interactions. It is not just a project of infrastructures but is also an integrated structure of economic diplomacy. By 2024, approximately 75 percent of the population of the world and more than half of the global GDP had signed cooperation agreements with China under the BRI framework. The figures show how the project has gigantic geographic and economic scale, and China has a desire to transform the world trade routes and economic governance.
Economic Performances and Scale of Investments.
Economically, the BRI has brought great results. The USD 1 trillion of investment by China between 2013 and 2023 on the BRI related projects occurred through energy plants, highways, railways, ports, and telecommunication networks. As the Green Finance and Development Center of Fudan University asserts, in 2023 alone, the Chinese invested more than USD 67.8 billion in BRI countries. The project has facilitated the building of key infrastructures like China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), Mombasa-Nairobi Standard Gauge Railway in Kenya, the Addis Ababa-Djibouti Railway and the Port of Piraeus in Greece.
In Africa, transportation and energy networks have been changed due to Chinese investments. Roads and railways that have been funded by the BRI have linked landlocked nations such as Ethiopia and Rwanda with international markets. The logistic hubs and rail connectivity in China have been used in Europe to reduce the time taken to transport between China and key cities in Europe such as Duisburg and Rotterdam to ensure that the supply chain activities are facilitated. China-Europe freight train network, which is one of the biggest entities of the BRI, has also undergone impressive growth; in 2023, more than 16000 trips were made compared to only 80 in 2013.
Also, the BRI has triggered trade flows between China and the member countries. In 2023, China traded more than USD 2.1 trillion with countries in BRI, which is an increment of 6.2 percent over the years. The program has also offered the development financing options to the countries that experience financial crunch by Western organizations such as the World Bank or IMF. The BRI loans and infrastructure assistance have allowed most developing countries to modernize their sectors of transport, energy and digital communication rapidly.
Strategic and Geopolitical Resolutions.
The BRI is not only a matter of economic success, but it is also important to consider it through the prism of geopolitics and strategy. The long term China has a vision of establishing its influence in the world by establishing an economic network which relies on it. The project enhances China to be a more global creditor and investor, as it can cast soft power and control over decision-making processes of partner states, politically and economically. Construction of ports, railways and industrial belt in South and southeast Asian, African and Mediterranean areas has provided China with strategic positions in areas of strategic significance to world trade.
As an example, the Gwadar Port in Pakistan, as a constituent of CPEC, gives China direct access to the Arabian Sea and avoids the Strait of Malacca, which is a crucial yet vulnerable strategic point at sea. Equally, the Chinese investments at Hambantota Port in Sri Lanka and Piraeus Port in Greece have seen it increase its presence in the maritime industry beyond the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean. Such actions have cast doubt in the mind of the Western countries over the motives of this move by China as some tend to call the BRI a geopolitical instrument of world domination and not a program of cooperative development.
The United States and European Union have retaliated by launching other programs, including the Build Back Better World (B3W) and the Global Gateway to offset the increasing patriarchal influence of China. The fact that this competition denotes that although the BRI has increased the global reach of China, it has also increased geopolitical conflicts especially with the major western powers, and India, which is quite sceptical about the intentions of the initiative.
Criticism and Challenges
The BRI has been challenged by much criticism though its success despite the achievements it has had cannot be overlooked. The problem of the so-called debt-trap diplomacy is among the most durable ones. Opponents claim that China makes huge loans to developing countries to fund infrastructure projects that do not give sufficient economic payoffs thus leaving the developing countries in a position of unrepayable debts. The situation in Sri Lanka with the leasing of Hambantota Port to China on a 99 years basis after the island was unable to pay loans is often referred to as the best example of this phenomenon. The same debt issues have emerged in Zambia, Kenya, and Pakistan where the issue of repayment has burdened the national budgets.
The other significant issue is that there is no transparency in BRI agreements. Various initiatives have been accused of having obscured contract agreements, exorbitant prices, and of being corrupt. Indicatively, in Malaysia, the government successfully halted a number of BRI projects, in the year 2018, owing to corruption scandals, and overrun. These projects despite being renegotiated later revealed flaws in governance and accountability in the BRI model.
Current issues of concern have also been environmental and social sustainability. Many BRI projects are linked with the carbon intensive sectors like coal and cement thus casting doubts on whether China will ever adhere to green development. The world bank has observed that as much as the BRI can enhance trade in the world up to 9.7 percent, it can also lead to extreme environmental destruction in case the issue of sustainability is not given serious consideration. Moreover, local communities in some of the participating countries have also complained of being displaced, unemployed, transfer of skills to the Chinese companies and this has created resentment and social turmoil in some areas.
Economic Sustainability and Changing Trends.
The own slowdown of the Chinese economy and the world economy in general have also challenged the BRI on its long-term sustainability. Since 2020, the COVID-19 and global debt have made China to rebalance its foreign investment. Numerous BRI projects were postponed or reduced because China was oriented to local recovery and debt management. Boston University Global Development Policy Center states that the average annual Chinese development financing to BRI countries reduced to less than USD 5 billion in 2022 as compared to an average of USD 75 billion between 2013 and 2017. This drastic contraction points to the movement of big investments to the more selective and strategically important projects.
China has attempted to reorient BRI over the past years to the emphasis on high-quality development. This stage highlights the green initiatives, digital connectivity and sustainable financing. The introduction of the Green Silk road and Digital Silk road elements is an indicator that Beijing is trying to close the gaps of the BRI to the global sustainability agenda and the new industries. As an example, China has made more investments in renewable energy projects in Africa and Southeast Asia and encouraged digital infrastructure via the 5G network and cross-border e-commerce systems. This change implies a shift of the quantity based cooperation to quality based implying that the BRI is changing to meet the global economic realities.
Regional Impacts: Successes and Failures.
The BRI has not been successful in all regions. The development of new infrastructures such as the China-Laos Railway has shown real positive returns in the region and this has improved connectivity and improved tourism and trade in South East Asia. The railway was finished in 2021 and it now takes less than 10 hours to transport people between Kunming and Vientiane, which took two days previously. Equally, in Central Asia, BRI investment has re-established ancient trade routes and has eased energy exportation in pipelines to China in the form of Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan.
There have been mixed results in South Asia however. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor that was initially expected to result in transformational growth has been faced with delays, financial pressure, and local resistance after environmental and political reasons. In Africa, Chinese-constructed rail systems and power plants have increased the infrastructure, but certain nations are experiencing an increased debt crisis and reliance on Chinese contractors. In Europe, there has been a lack of interest in the BRI since the EU has become more stringent in investment screening as well as keeping in line with the United States on the issues of strategic reliance on China.
Ample or Economic, Strategic, or Symbolic Success?
The success of the BRI is relative, as it is mostly determined by the definition of success. In its economic aspects, the BRI has undoubtedly helped in the infrastructure growth and in the trade growth in the Global South. In a strategic undertaking it has increased the geopolitical sway of China and made it a pioneer of the third world. Symbolically, it has portrayed China as a superpower in the world with the capacity of reforming international relations by collaborating with others, as opposed to fighting them.
But when the measurement of success is in terms of financial sustainability, transparency, and mutually benefiting, then the picture is not so bright. Some of the projects have not achieved anticipated returns on the economy and some nations have ended up with unsustainable debts. Moreover, lack of unified systems of governance has given rise to inefficiencies and a dented reputation in China. Basically, the success of the BRI is relative, it has succeeded in giving China a geopolitical presence and international prominence, yet it has not succeeded in creating an internationally reliable model of global development.
Conclusion
The Belt and Road Initiative is one of the most revolutionary yet debatable projects of contemporary geopolitics that is more than ten years old. It is unmatched in terms of magnitude, ambitions, and spread over the globe and its influence on supporting the development of infrastructure, trade, and connectivity in the developing world cannot be overlooked. Nevertheless, its disproportional execution, debt crisis and political scandals demonstrate fundamental structural weaknesses that make its conduction into a genuinely sustainable and collaborative project challenging. The fact that China is moving towards high-quality BRI development is an indication that the country appreciates these drawbacks and strives to meet the evolving demands of the world.
To sum it up, the BRI is a success and a struggle. It has managed to make China the centre stage of the global economic networks and offer an alternative to the western dominated financial systems. However, it is having problems of credibility, sustainability and inclusiveness. The way through which China will be able to reconcile geopolitical aspirations with real needs of global development is the future of the BRI.
The end product of the endeavor will only be evaluated not by the number of bridges and ports constructed but by the fact that the project led to equitable development, long-term sustainability, and actual international collaboration in a more multipolar world.
About the Author
Shreya Dabral is pursuing her Master’s in Mass Communication from Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, New Delhi. She balances her academic journey with active roles in research and digital media. Her research paper on consumer repurchase behaviour in the skincare industry, published in the International Journal of Scientific Research and Engineering Trends (IJSRET), is a testament to her curiosity, clarity, and commitment to exploring audience-brand dynamics in a digital age.
