It is impossible to give a brief summary, that allows for an adequate asessment. Just the Reactions and criticism section wikipedia is about a ten minutes read.
Very broadly it is a gigantic infrastructure investment project by China, with the goal to strengthen and industrialize along certain trade routes through central asia and east africa connectinc China and Europe.
It could bring strong economic development especially for the central asian and african countries along the route but also further dependance on China. A particular point of criticism is the financing through China, where potentially entrapping debts for the countries are insured through access to natural ressources and the infrastructure itself. At worst a country could build a railway line or other infrastructure that ends up being owned and operated by China, employing chinese workers. On the other hand the criticism from the west needs to be also put into context of who gets to exert geopolitical control in areas like the middle east. The countries there could prefer chinese over US influence as US influence brought destabilisation and war.
Others summarised below, I just add that in chinese it’s 一带一路, terms broader than “belt” or “road” - 路 translates better as way as it can also cover sea-ways, railways etc. , 带 can also mean carry or zone, etc… So, it implies cooperation on infrastructure projects, but was not a great choice of name for global translation.
I support developing overland transport rather than flying, for climate reasons, however it’s obviously also about geopolitical deals - otherwise why would Italy be on the way from China to anywhere?
It’s politicized because everything China does is bad. But of you look at it objectively China is exporting infrastructure as a form of soft power. The US relies on fear and compliance for allies. China is trying a carrot and stick to make friends.
They are building railroads, bridges, farms, power plants, renewable energy, shipping docks, etc. It’s widely accepted in economics, US studies of economics, that infrastructure is key to business and GDP.
A modern example is India. India has low wages, good manufacturing, and good materials. But it couldn’t make anything on the global stage because getting it from the factory to the ship was too difficult at scale. Now there are dedicated rail networks, modern highways for trucks, huge new ports, and voila things are being made there.
China is enabling other countries to realize their potential by building infrastructure. Then they can export their goods or raw materials, build up their economy, and get out of poverty.
This isn’t free. It’s a loan. The goal is that in decades from now when you’ve succeeded, you repay the loan. If you don’t and default, you owe something to China. And that’s what the US is afraid of.
But keep in mind the US does similar things. Bomb a country to bear extinction, rebuild basic infrastructure and tremendous cost, and charge the new government for the work that has to be repaid. Ukraine is not getting all this ammo for free, the US is the Sugar Daddy. England from WW2 only just paid back its loan to the US!
So it is good to do some research on what it is. And be aware that almost all Western media immediately calls it bad because its China and it means they aren’t making the money.
This isn’t free. It’s a loan. The goal is that in decades from now when you’ve succeeded, you repay the loan. If you don’t and default, you owe something to China.
That’s certainly one way to frame it.
Another way would be selling oversized infrastructure projects t developing nations, financed by predatory loans backed by a country’s natural resources.
Also the work itself is performed by Chinese companies, so unlike regular domestic infrastructure projects, it doesn’t even benefit the local construction industry.
China is effectively subsidizing its own industry with other nations’ money.
And if the project fails to deliver the “optimistic” expectations. China has more or less free access to natural resources without having to stage an invasion.
I’ve heard about the “belt and road initiative” a few times, but I don’t know exactly what it is. Does anyone have a link to a good summary?
It is impossible to give a brief summary, that allows for an adequate asessment. Just the Reactions and criticism section wikipedia is about a ten minutes read.
Very broadly it is a gigantic infrastructure investment project by China, with the goal to strengthen and industrialize along certain trade routes through central asia and east africa connectinc China and Europe.
It could bring strong economic development especially for the central asian and african countries along the route but also further dependance on China. A particular point of criticism is the financing through China, where potentially entrapping debts for the countries are insured through access to natural ressources and the infrastructure itself. At worst a country could build a railway line or other infrastructure that ends up being owned and operated by China, employing chinese workers. On the other hand the criticism from the west needs to be also put into context of who gets to exert geopolitical control in areas like the middle east. The countries there could prefer chinese over US influence as US influence brought destabilisation and war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative
Others summarised below, I just add that in chinese it’s 一带一路, terms broader than “belt” or “road” - 路 translates better as way as it can also cover sea-ways, railways etc. , 带 can also mean carry or zone, etc… So, it implies cooperation on infrastructure projects, but was not a great choice of name for global translation.
I support developing overland transport rather than flying, for climate reasons, however it’s obviously also about geopolitical deals - otherwise why would Italy be on the way from China to anywhere?
It’s politicized because everything China does is bad. But of you look at it objectively China is exporting infrastructure as a form of soft power. The US relies on fear and compliance for allies. China is trying a carrot and stick to make friends.
They are building railroads, bridges, farms, power plants, renewable energy, shipping docks, etc. It’s widely accepted in economics, US studies of economics, that infrastructure is key to business and GDP.
A modern example is India. India has low wages, good manufacturing, and good materials. But it couldn’t make anything on the global stage because getting it from the factory to the ship was too difficult at scale. Now there are dedicated rail networks, modern highways for trucks, huge new ports, and voila things are being made there.
China is enabling other countries to realize their potential by building infrastructure. Then they can export their goods or raw materials, build up their economy, and get out of poverty.
This isn’t free. It’s a loan. The goal is that in decades from now when you’ve succeeded, you repay the loan. If you don’t and default, you owe something to China. And that’s what the US is afraid of.
But keep in mind the US does similar things. Bomb a country to bear extinction, rebuild basic infrastructure and tremendous cost, and charge the new government for the work that has to be repaid. Ukraine is not getting all this ammo for free, the US is the Sugar Daddy. England from WW2 only just paid back its loan to the US!
So it is good to do some research on what it is. And be aware that almost all Western media immediately calls it bad because its China and it means they aren’t making the money.
When will people learn that “but country B does it too” is not a good argument against “what country A does here is bad”?
That’s certainly one way to frame it.
Another way would be selling oversized infrastructure projects t developing nations, financed by predatory loans backed by a country’s natural resources.
Also the work itself is performed by Chinese companies, so unlike regular domestic infrastructure projects, it doesn’t even benefit the local construction industry.
China is effectively subsidizing its own industry with other nations’ money.
And if the project fails to deliver the “optimistic” expectations. China has more or less free access to natural resources without having to stage an invasion.
Although for many countries in Asia it would have a much easier time invading by driving tanks along the new road
The hate for China is really dumb but people are too brainwashed to understand anything beyond “China bad”.
Well that and the two million Uyghurs in a concentration camp.
Not to mention Tibet, Hongkong and the posturing towards Taiwan.
Oh, I’ve always read of one million.
Lemmy.ml Tankies still pretending not to be Lemmygrad. 🤡