Their economic route

International

China is aggressive with its neighbors for its territorial disputes

Asia in their economic route

By: Carlos Damian                                                    June 10, 2015

The new politics is to promote the infrastructure development

Mexico. -   The Chinese government impels a combination of initiatives of long term designed to increase the economic paper and the world leadership of their nation. Called by some foreign observers the “Plan Chinese Marshall", the new strategy imitates the later American pattern to the Second World War of winning influence by means of the trade and the help to the development. However, it is probable that the Chinese version hardly believes a distant affiliation, because the neighboring countries look for to protect their bets deepening at the same time bonds with other powers. The Chinese version of the Plan Marshall has evolved for a series of vague rhetorical analogies that little by little low all together is had a unified title. In September and October of 2013, the Chinese president Xi Jin-ping began to float ideas of “Economic Belt of the Route of the Silk". The basic idea behind the sentence is to promote the infrastructure development in Asia, and this way to facilitate a deeper economic cooperation. By means of this strategy China can increase its influence and at the same time, in an indirect way, to support its national economy impelling the trade and creating business opportunities abroad for its companies.  Some also come in this a means from using the capacity industrial spare intern and they trace parallel with the form in that the Plan Marshall maintained busy to the companies of United States after the Second World War. During the summit of Asia - Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) in November, Xi began to sketch more concrete numbers for the strategy, revealing a bottom for infrastructure for 400 thousand million dollars that it will help to connect the Chinese counties with markets foreigners. As complement of the politics, A belt, a route, the Chinese government has also exposed the bases of the Asian Bank of Investment in Infrastructure (BAII) that will be used to promote the construction of infrastructure of transport and communications in poorer Asian countries. The BAII has found resistance of United States and Japan, because apparently it would compete with the influence that you/they exercise through the World Bank and the Asian Bank of Development (BAD). The politics' specific aspects A belt, a Route remains vague. A map published by the newsy agency Xinhua shows 14 " stops " in the terrestrial route of the silk through Central, and other Asia 14 in the marine part. However, 10 of the total are in Chinese cities, that which shows that the politics can be influenced by domestic sectors to favor certain investment projects.   Pragmatic route  In the route for earth, the cities not included Chinese are Almaty (Kazajstan), Bishkek (Kirgizia), Samarkand (Uzbekistan), Dushanbe (Tajikistan), Teheran (Iran), Istanbul (Turkey), Moscow (Russia), Duisburgo (Germany), Rotterdam (Holland), and Venice (Italy). The marine route Athens also incorporates (Greece), Nairobi (Kenya), Colombo (Sri Lanka), Chittagong (Bangladesh), Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia), Jakarta (Indonesia) and Hanoi (Vietnam). The list of cities is developing. It is remarkable, for example that the terrestrial route doesn't seem to follow the plan of developing infrastructure to accelerate the shipment of products of interior cities of China, as Chongqing, to continental Europe via Russia. In other parts, Chinese authorities have presented this initiative under the heading of “the route of the silk". In a similar way, the marine route doesn't embrace places like Gwadar (Pakistan), or Kyaukpyu (Myanmar), where the Chinese investments have raised fears that the country tries to build a “necklace of pearls", ports that project its naval might toward the Indian Ocean. These absences suggest that the politics ‘A Belt, a Route’ is even vaguely defined. It seems an effort to try to give a strategic turn to what is still a jumble of bilateral and regional initiatives in the bottom. Not with this it wants to diminish the scale of the involved plans.   Even before the bottom of 40 thousand billions of dollars was revealed, agreements signed in Central Asia and other parts committed to it Encircles to invest big sums of money. It is also possible that with the time a more coherent focus arises in the politics of ‘A Belt, a Route’ is obvious that this work is still in process. While the Plan Marshall generated good will toward United States that was good to strengthen its strategic influence, it is not clear that China will enjoy the same diplomatic dividend for its efforts. Many Asian countries are happy of accepting them money, but it is probable that to distrust in their strategic objectives tunnels the deepest cooperation that some rulers glimpse. China has fed the suspicions from its neighbors when taking aggressive postures in territorial disputes in recent years, mentioning repeated times the possibility of military collusions to claims of lands with Japan, Philippine, Vietnam and India. The states of Central Asia fear to replace the economic domain of Russia with a Chinese version, also, the enormous population from China causes certain edginess on a potential emigration in the region.     Chinese generosity  Even at the same time of enjoying the benefits of the politics of ‘A Belt, a Route’, many governments will look for to counteract their economic dependence of China strengthening bonds with other powers, in particular United States. In terms of soft power, United States continues being much more influential that China in Asia. In some countries this is based on shared values but the geographical distance and the sense that United States is a well-known actor it also has its part. Although the Asian governments sometimes end up perceiving to the American country as busybody, their strategic objectives are considered in general relatively defined and limited. The Chinese ascent, in sum is ignored. To medium term, the capacity financial to sustain their golden project is restricted more and more. In their experiences in Venezuela, and Mexico the Chinese banks begin to become more cautious.  Among so much, the experiences in Myanmar and Sri Lanka have shown that the economic bonds have strengthened the bilateral relationships; the political events can tunnel knots that it took years to build quickly.     As the fiscal pressures go into they rise in years to come, the government will become more cautious in the use of their money in the exterior. With all this, if the politics of its golden project is even able partly to elevate the levels of infrastructure development in Central Asia and along the marine route of the silk, it will have had an important impact. Long term, the improvement of bonds will help to support the economic growth and the trade in those regions, and therefore to reduce the political tensions. For China, this is a good strategic result (Economist Intelligence Unit). On the other hand in The States the president, proposed in her budget initiative for 2016 a new tax of 14% to the capital accumulated by the big American multinationals in the exterior, those too big ones to fall". It consists on burdening the benefits that the companies obtain abroad. They are in the plan all those companies with more than 50 thousand million dollars in active, as General Electric, Microsoft, Pfizer or Apple. A fiscal lagoon that allows to the companies not to pay for the earnings that they are not entered United States exists. The measure has potential to collect 238 thousand million dollars that will be dedicated to maintenance of infrastructure highway. But and those that have their capital in Mexico, what it happens? Perhaps our country serves them as protection for not paying in its origin country and separate them they charge the service, we say it is question.  (La Jornada, economía, p.p. 27-28, February 3, 2015)