The New Silk Road

Globalisation is heralded as a new concept and chided as the destroyer of jobs and livelihoods in developed higher cost nations. Are high standards of living being eroded in developed nations through high costs and benefits? 

Nothing is further from the truth as trading has been around since ancient time with the Greeks, Romans, Egyptians and Phoenicians as every nation must remain competitive in international markets. 

It wasn't just the Mediterranean seafaring nations engaging in international trade, further east the central Asian nations were pretty adept at trade as well.

The Silk Road was an ancient network of trading pathways and communication channels linking the countries of Eurasia to not only merchandise and commodities but ideas, knowledge, values and beliefs. 

The Silk Road was not just limited to overland passage but also included maritime routes through a network of ports and coastal villages. 

The overland thoroughfares linked the Greco-Roman civilisations to the far east with passages traversing the deserts of Syria through Iraq, Iran and Mongolia to China. 

This wasn't a single route but a network of paths and roads purely linking China to Europe as India, Indonesia and the gulf countries were also connected by sea and land routes.

Chinese President Xi Jinping announced in 2013 an ambitious plan to build a new Silk Road known as the Belt and Road Initiative requiring the largest infrastructure programs the world has seen. An expected trillion dollar budget with Beijing announcing up to 8 trillion dollars will be lend to participating nations. 

So, who stands to benefit from the New Silk Road? Naturally China, their manufacturing base has an over capacity and seeks not only new markets but higher value industrial goods. 

Chinese engineering and transportation is poised to benefit with construction and heavy equipment required during not only the construction phase but also ongoing maintenance. 

Nations that may have been seeking to move into cheaper low-cost manufacturing had been looking to undermine current low-cost Chinese manufacturing will undoubtedly be suspicious. 

Some nations have expressed concern that this is domestic Chinese policy with geopolitical consequences. It is argued that whilst some countries are moving to a more self-centric policy withdrawing from international affairs. The Chinese government is seeking to build bridges and not walls.     

So who else benefits? The China Development Bank has set aside funds for infrastructure projects including gas pipelines, roads, bridges, ports and rail. A number of poorer underdeveloped nations appear to be the biggest beneficiaries although the terms of capital input. 

There appears to be plenty of concerns with claims of a lack of transparency, negligible contract arrangements, high debt burdens and possible inabilities to repay loans. The question then arises, who takes control of the assets in these countries with poorer nations possibly losing sovereignty? 

There are claims of neo-colonialism and the expanding military presence seeking to economically marginalise the United States whilst expanding Chinese cultural influence. Whilst China has assured nations their intentions are pure, are richer developed nations concerns driven by paranoia or fear of marginalisation?