Pubblicato in: Cina, Stati Uniti, Unione Europea

Belt and Road. La Cina rigetta il rapporto C4ADS. Gli Usa fuori dagli appalti: sono liberal.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-04-26.

2018-04-22__Belt_and_Road__001

Pochi giorni or sono era stata l’Unione Europea.

E questa Unione Europea sbatté il grugno contro la Silk Road. Frattura scomposta.

Ventisette ambasciatori a Pechino dell’Unione Europea, quello Ungherese defilato, formarono un duro documento di critica al progetto cinese Silk Road. Nodo del contendere era che le imprese dell’Unione Europea restavano, restano, escluse dagli appalti banditi dai cinesi perché questi ultimi non avevano voluto recepire la scala valoriale liberal che contraddistingue l’Unione Europea. Il Presidente Xi aveva diplomaticamente declinato l’ingiunzione a farsi gay ed aveva glissato la richiesta che si dimettesse elevando a Presidente della Cina un femmina in quota rosa.

Se chiaramente le imprese dell’Unione Europea non possono per questi ovvii motivi dare il loro contributo al Progetto Silk Road d’altra parte gli ambasciatori constatavano come i cinesi facessero tranquillamente a meno del loro contributo, privando così le imprese europee di quel giusto e meritato guadagno che sarebbe loro spettato a mente della teoria liberal sulla globalizzazione.

Mr Xi ed il suo Governo hanno persino avuto la sfrontatezza di ribattere che i 1,000 miliardi Usd investiti in Silk and Road erano i loro, e che li avrebbero spesi secondo convenienza.

Se ne impippano di Mr Juncker, Mr Macron e di Frau Merkel.

*

Ebbene, ora dopo l’infruttuoso tentativo degli Ambasciatori dell’Unione Europea, ci ritentano gli Stati Uniti.

*

L’Istituto di Ricerca C4ADS ha rilasciato un ponderoso Report.

Harbored ambitions. How China’s Port Investments are strategically reshaping the Indo-Pacific.

2018-04-22__Belt_and_Road__002

«C4ADS (www.c4ads.org) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to data-driven analysis and evidence-based reporting of conflict and security issues worldwide. We seek to alleviate the analytical burden carried by public sector institutions by applying manpower, depth, and rigor to questions of conflict and security.

Our approach leverages nontraditional investigative techniques and emerging analytical technologies. We recognize the value of working on the ground in the field, capturing local knowledge, and collecting original data to inform our analysis. At the same time, we employ cutting edge technology to manage and analyze that data. The result is an innovative analytical approach to conflict prevention and mitigation.»

*

«Although Cambodia could benefit from the industrial development proposed for the concession, the deal has precipitated alleged human rights abuses and economic losses»

*

«The agreements around all 15 ports examined in this report were highly opaque, with limited detail on the companies involved, the status of negotiations, the terms of deals (including financial arrangements), the organizational structures of projects, and the progress of development. Information was incomplete on two or more of the above metrics for each of the 15 ports in the sample. In some cases, such as Tanjun Priok, as many as four out of five Chinese investors have not yet been publicly identified»

*

«In December 2007, allegations emerged that China Harbour Engineering Company had bribed members of the Bangladesh government to receive favorable conditions regarding the development of Chittagong»

* * *

«China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a dynamic foreign policy doctrine that is driving Chinese infrastructure investment around the world and, if completed as planned, will likely shape the global economy for many decades to come. On the surface, the only objective of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s hallmark Initiative is to increase infrastructure connectivity within Asia and beyond so as to facilitate “win-win” economic development and prosperity. Officially, then, China’s maritime infrastructure investments are intended to serve these benign—even altruistic—goals. BRI policy documents do not indicate any strategic agenda, and Chinese officials routinely disavow Western geostrategic analyses of the BRI, claiming that Western analysts possess a “Cold War” mentality.»

*

«Chinese analysts suggest that investments in ports and related industrial infrastructure can be used to build political influence and create “strategic support states.” Ports are further described as potential “strategic support points” through which China can develop logistics hubs that support expanded military presence. Thus, Chinese analysts suggest China can preserve its access to vital SLOCs, circumvent the Malacca Dilemma, and overcome perceived containment by foreign powers.»

*

«Beijing’s port investments yield strategic advantages, exhibit common control schemes, and manifest latent indicators of ulterior motives. As evaluated through this report’s analytical framework, the investments described above are both serving China’s national security interests and altering the strategic operating environment of the United States and its allies »

*

«If states do not heed the lessons of the Indo-Pacific, China will continue to pursue a security strategy that utilizes infrastructure investments to generate political influence, stealthily expand Beijing’s military presence, and create an advantageous strategic environment.»

* * * * * * * *

Sintetizzando.

«If states do not heed the lessons of the Indo-Pacific, China will continue to pursue a security strategy that utilizes infrastructure investments to generate political influence, stealthily expand Beijing’s military presence, and create an advantageous strategic environment.»

Capiamo molto bene quello che questa frase significa, ma sappiamo anche come gli ideologi liberal e socialisti siano tetragoni alla realtà: né la vedono né la comprendono.

«analyzing 15 Chinese-funded port projects, a research institute called C4ADS concluded that the projects were not driven by win-win economic development, but intended to expand China’s “political influence and military presence.”»

Se siamo perfettamente di accordo come i rapporti win-win siano quelli di elezione, non troveremmo peraltro motivo alcuno di stupore che i cinesi stiano investendo mille miliardi di dollari per espandere il loro sistema economico e militare.

«China has no geopolitical calculations, seeks no exclusionary blocs and imposes no business deals on others, …. Belt and Road is a mutually beneficial and win-win initiative …. During the Belt and Road construction, the Chinese side sticks to market rules and takes all parties’ interests and concerns into consideration …. a large number of relevant cooperation projects are being carried out, and they have bettered the local economy and benefited the local people»

*

Per dirla con il Presidente Xi, nulla vieta che l’Occidente raggranelli anche lui un migliaio di miliardi e si faccia uno suo proprio progetto Belt and Road.

*

Se gli Occidentali non si daranno una mossa, ed anche velocemente, finiranno a raccogliere il riso in Cina, sempre che i cinesi li ammettano sul loro territorio.


C4ADS. 2018-04-17. Harbored ambitions

Over the last decade, China has significantly increase its global investments, particularly in international and maritime infrastructure. Chinese firms have pledged billions of dollars to develop maritime ports and related projects across the Indo-Pacific Region since China announced its strategy to increase global trade connectivity through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).  The BRI, China’s guiding foreign policy doctrine and one of the most ambitious economic initiatives in modern history, is portrayed by Chinese leaders as creating win-win economic development for all nations. Yet, some states questions whether China’s infrastructure investments are driven by strategic interests.  This report evaluates China’s maritime infrastructure investment goals in the Indo-Pacific within the context of both policy from official documents and analyses from state- and Communist Party-affiliated publications.


China Org. 2018-04-21. China refutes US research report on Belt and Road Initiative

China on Wednesday refuted a U.S. research group report on the Belt and Road Initiative, reiterating that the initiative aims to achieve win-win economic cooperation.

According to the Associated Press, after analyzing 15 Chinese-funded port projects, a research institute called C4ADS concluded that the projects were not driven by win-win economic development, but intended to expand China’s “political influence and military presence.”

Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying stressed at a daily press briefing that the Belt and Road Initiative is essentially about economic cooperation, and the core concept of the initiative is to promote common development by advancing connectivity in infrastructure and other fields.

The initiative has gained support from more than 100 countries and international organizations, with more than 80 of them signing cooperation agreements with China.

She noted this worldwide support would never have been impossible were the initiative not adapted to the trend of the times and beneficial to people of various countries.

The spokesperson emphasized that the initiative has been open and transparent, with all participants involved in consultations in both planning and project implementation.

“China has no geopolitical calculations, seeks no exclusionary blocs and imposes no business deals on others,” she said.

“Belt and Road is a mutually beneficial and win-win initiative,” Hua said, adding that it will allow other countries to share opportunities from China’s development and help solve development problems facing the world.

“During the Belt and Road construction, the Chinese side sticks to market rules and takes all parties’ interests and concerns into consideration,” Hua said.

She added that a large number of relevant cooperation projects are being carried out, and they have bettered the local economy and benefited the local people.


The New York Times. 2018-04-21. Researchers: Silk Road Projects Give China Strategic Benefit

HONG KONG — A massive Chinese infrastructure program that Beijing says is aimed at promoting global trade and economic growth is actually intended to expand the country’s political influence and military presence, according to a report issued Tuesday.

The report by the U.S.-based research group C4ADS questions China’s portrayal of the trillion-dollar program, called the “Belt and Road Initiative,” as strictly meant to promote economic development.

President Xi Jinping’s signature foreign policy program, it is working to reinforce China’s links to Southeast Asia, Europe and Africa through networks of roads, ports, railways, power plants and other infrastructure projects.

C4ADS, a nonprofit research institute that specializes in data analysis and security, examined official Chinese policy documents and unofficial reports by Chinese analysts to analyze the intentions of Beijing’s ambitious economic development program, which seeks to connect 65 percent of the world’s population in more than 60 countries.

Chinese officials say the initiative, also known as a modern “Silk Road” harkening back to maritime and land-based trade routes of centuries past, is driven by commercial considerations. They have rejected assertions that it is also meant to expand Beijing’s global influence.

The report analyzed 15 Chinese-funded port projects in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Australia, Oman, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Djibouti and elsewhere in the Indo-Pacific region. It concluded that projects aren’t driven by “win-win” economic development for the individual host countries, as Beijing claims.

“Rather, the investments appear to generate political influence, stealthily expand China’s military presence and create an advantageous strategic environment in the region,” it said.

China’s Foreign Ministry rejected the findings, saying in a statement that Belt and Road is “essentially an economic cooperation initiative” promoting common development through infrastructure.

“China is not playing a geopolitical game,” it said.

While there’s no official policy document linking Belt and Road to China’s national security interests, Chinese analysts have written that developing the program and pursuing Chinese security are “intimately linked,” the report said. The analysts don’t represent official thinking but the authors believe what they say could influence decision-makers promoting the Belt and Road Initiative.

“Many of these observers recognize that a network of maritime logistics hubs throughout the Indo-Pacific, including ports, has the potential to change the region’s strategic landscape, and several explicitly describe the role of infrastructure investment in Chinese grand strategy,” the report said.

The projects shared characteristics that, taken together, pointed to China’s security intent, the report said. These include being in strategic locations such as entrances to the contested South China Sea, in an apparent effort by Beijing to ease its worries about energy imports and potential blockades.

The port projects involve dual civilian-military use, Communist Party influence through the involvement of Chinese state-owned companies and control through equity stakes or long-term leases and a lack of transparency and expected profitability, it said.

Peter Cai, a fellow at Australia’s Lowy Institute think tank who has studied Belt and Road, said he was somewhat skeptical about claims China was using port projects to advance military goals, given the difficulty of coordinating so many different investments, some of which might involve “independent actors.”

However, he said it’s clear China’s political influence would expand over countries it connects with.

The new links will increase economic activity, which means “you’re going to have economic influence and we all know that economic influence easily translates into political leverage and power,” Cai said.

One of the most controversial projects is in Sri Lanka, where the government signed a 99-year lease agreement for the unprofitable Hambantota Port, located along a busy Indian Ocean shipping lane, along with land to develop a free-trade zone, to a Chinese-controlled company, in a deal opposed by neighboring residents and monks.

“China appears to have established financial leverage over Sri Lanka through investment in alleged vanity projects” worth billions of dollars signed as Beijing courted the country’s previous president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, the report said. Debt levels for those projects prevented his successor from extricating the country from the deals and pivoting Sri Lanka away from China’s influence, it said.

Annunci