The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank: A Watershed of Power Transition between China and the United States in the Asia Pacific?

2017 ◽  
Vol 09 (02) ◽  
pp. 43-53
Author(s):  
Xiaoping WU ◽  
LYE Liang Fook

With increasing clout in world affairs, China has begun to enhance its International Public Goods (IPG) provision in the footsteps of the Great Britain and the United States. Its IPG provision could be enhanced through existing IPGs, such as increasing its budget share in the United Nations, and producing IPGs out of its own initiation and design, such as the establishment of the Shanghai Corporation Organisation and Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.


2015 ◽  
Vol 01 (04) ◽  
pp. 667-685 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petra G. Kubalkova

The Chinese-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) faces monumental challenges derived from institutional and financial accountability, as well as the ability to deliver on its promises of increased economic integration in the Asia-Pacific region. Nevertheless, China is resolute in cementing its economic position in the global market and expanding its regional influence. The main justification for instituting AIIB is to provide secured loans to underdeveloped Asia-Pacific countries ineligible to obtain funds through other global financial institutions. However, by lessening loan barriers, AIIB’s approach threatens to give rise to regional economic volatility — a vice adamantly despised under the Bretton Woods system. The pivotal element that defines AIIB’s outcome is a well-diversified cofounding member cohort insistent on implementing sound regulatory measures. AIIB needs a divergent membership that considers the socio-economic determinants of individual requestors, allowing for well-diversified and well-balanced opinions on operating principles. Without this element China might be subjugating its clients, the Asia-Pacific countries, to yet another form of manipulation that was shunned under the Bretton Woods system. Would this be another subtle attempt of Chinese influence for a stake in regional hegemony under a guise of alleviating the impoverished regions of Asia-Pacific? Transparency, emphasis on operating principles enacted with democratic accord and accountability should serve as guiding blocks of the well-diversified cofounding cohort. These measures would hold China to its vows of increased prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region, which it is attempting to deliver through AIIB. This paper examines the advantages of the AIIB as well as drawbacks that could place the Asia-Pacific countries into another “golden straitjacket” if these propositions are not taken into consideration.


2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 542-569
Author(s):  
Chien-Huei Wu

Abstract This article examines China’s participation in the trade, monetary and development assistance fields and concludes that China’s rise does not undermine the centrality of the Bretton Woods institutions or Word Trade Organization (WTO) in global economic governance. Whereas China’s participation in the WTO presents some challenges to the long dominance of the United States and the European Union, it reaffirms the central role of the WTO. China’s monetary strategy also indicates the continuing importance of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in the international monetary regime. Whereas the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) introduces some competition to the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank (ADB), China’s efforts in establishing new multilateral development banks are mainly driven by its frustration with stalled reforms of the Bretton Woods institutions. By and large, China’s economic emergence does not challenge, but reaffirms, the post-World War II global economic architecture.


2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 205316801877003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vinícius Rodrigues Vieira

What makes states join intergovernmental organizations intended to challenge a hegemon? The China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), founded in June 2015, targets the primacy of the US-led Asian Development Bank (ADB) in the Asia-Pacific region, and is a crucial case for answering this question. I argue that early AIIB members are likely to be politically distant from the US in both international and domestic terms. In contrast, subsequent states seeking AIIB membership include democratic states, existing ADB members and countries internationally aligned with the US, as measured by voting similarity at the United Nations General Assembly. Through logit models, I test these propositions and analyze which states adhered to the 2014 Memorandum of Understanding that signaled Beijing’s willingness to form the Bank and which states joined the AIIB subsequently at its foundation in 2015. The results support my claim that early members tend to score low in democratic governance, while late members are US allies.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Morris

AbstractHow China will contribute to global governance has become a critical question in international relations, amplified by the linkages between the Covid-19 pandemic, escalating geopolitical contest and multilateralism in crisis. China has been doubling down on its authoritarian model of domestic governance while becoming more internationally assertive, including in existing and new multilateral institutions. Meanwhile, the United States appeared in recent years to be undermining the institutions, norms and rules of the liberal international order that it, itself, built. The subsequent decline in international cooperation poses grave risks to public health, economic and other forms of security. Can China cooperate with other actors to contribute public goods and stabilisation of global governance in such a deteriorating international environment? While there is a wide range of institutions in which to examine China's growing role in international governance, from United Nations bodies such as the World Health Organisation and World Trade Organisation to regional initiatives such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, this paper examines the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), an example of Chinese innovation in multilateralism. Established amidst geopolitical contest, the new institution seeks to address the Asian deficit of financing for sustainable development. The bank challenges a number of prevailing norms, including replacing the disproportionate power of the US and the advanced economies in the multilateral system with a more proportionate role for China and other developing countries; a new focus on infrastructure-led development which is built on Chinese confidence in the East Asian development model; and a shift away from the Bretton Woods practices of using financing conditions to drive liberal democratic and neo-liberal economic reforms. At the same time as representing a challenge to the traditional order, the bank exhibits – at least to date – best practices in implementation and addresses previously unmet concerns of the developing world. While it is not possible to extrapolate from only one initiative to draw comprehensive conclusions about China's likely future role in global governance, the AIIB case nonetheless suggests that, at least in some fields, China will challenge liberal norms to reform rather than revolutionise the international order.


2020 ◽  
pp. 80-109
Author(s):  
Alexander Cooley ◽  
Daniel Nexon

Russia and China are engaged in substantial efforts to contest existing international architecture while building alternative infrastructure. A desire for greater influence and status drives some of these efforts. At the same time, a number of autocratic regimes, including Russia and China, now consider international political liberalism—especially when supported by the United States—as a direct threat to their security. Moscow and Beijing first developed ways of insulating themselves against liberalizing pressure. They next turned to contesting and reversing that international political liberalism. This chapter traces specific ways that Moscow and Beijing have “exited from above,” such as via the New Development Bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. It shows how such efforts have already transformed the ecology of international order, creating a parallel “world without the West” and disrupting the jurisdictions and functions of existing, more liberal, international government organizations.


2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph A. Cossa ◽  
Brad Glosserman ◽  
Michael A. McDevitt ◽  
Nirav Patel ◽  
James Przystup ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document