Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)

With U.S. aid diminished, it seems unlikely that China will fill the gap. Beijing favors investments in infrastructure over civil society.

While free trade has become politically infeasible in Washington, there are other ways to shore up the U.S. presence in one of the world's fastest-growing regions.

The country's experience highlights both the transformative potential of Chinese investment and the challenges that risk undermining Beijing’s credibility.

The case of CMEC and other Chinese business activities in Myanmar show how exposed China is to escalating conflict risks, and offer insight to the role it is playing in the ongoing civil war. 

Interviews offer first-hand insights into how the Chinese people perceive the BRI and its global and domestic implications.

Gwadar and Chabahar emerge as more than ports – they are strategic battlegrounds where economic ambitions, regional and global power collide.

To truly counter China’s Belt and Road, the G-7 needs a new development business model with the Global South.

China’s growing footprint in South and Central Asia has been made possible by the influx of grants, loans, mergers, and economic concessions for projects.

The country has traditionally relied on the U.S. for economic and strategic support, but Beijing is rapidly making in-roads.

Intense competition, epitomized by competing “corridors,” is emerging in Asia and beyond between the U.S., China, and Russia. 

For decades, the Chinese economy has soared. This has allowed mass investment in projects worldwide, but the question remains if it was worth it.

As a proof of concept for the G-7's Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment, there is a lot riding on the initiative in the northern Philippines.

Any alternative corridor (like IMEC) is likely to leverage BRI hubs and completed projects – thus making them complementary rather than competing initiatives.

Insights from Henry Gao.

Despite unfulfilled pledges of more than $50 billion, Beijing still remains the region's largest infrastructure funder by a considerable margin.

A conversation with Frank Maracchione on Central Asia studies in China.

Promoting various economic corridors as “alternatives” to the BRI misses the mark, for three reasons.

A decade on, the country faces crippling economic challenges and environmental degradation from the ambitious (and still incomplete) highway project. 

In contrast to the past, when youth from Central Asia largely migrated to Russia and other countries to do hard, physical labor, the younger generation is more focused on looking for educational opportunities abroad.

The nature of domestic institutions in China’s partners determines whether the BRI actually advances socioeconomic development or simply enriches elites.

As uncertainties deepen, what lies ahead for these dueling connectivity projects?

A closer look at the future prospects of Beijing’s BRI in the region.

The BRF is no longer attracting new faces and expanding China’s influence, as it once did.

The BRI is not set to fade away. It has already changed China’s position in the world, and it will continue to do so moving forward.