Way of Authoritarian Regional Hegemon? Formation of the RCEP From the Perspective of China

2021 ◽  
pp. 002190962110497
Author(s):  
In Tae Yoo ◽  
Charles Chong-Han Wu
Keyword(s):  
International Development ◽  
Significant Contribution ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Opinion Leaders ◽  
Investment Bank ◽  
Belt And Road ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership ◽  
The Belt And Road ◽  
Form Region

How has China contributed toward the conclusion of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP)? The extant literature tends to either undervalue China’s role or emphasizes the absence of China’s willingness to realize the RCEP. However, it is difficult to form region-wide multilateral preferential trade agreements (PTAs), such as RCEP, without any significant contribution from a regional hegemon, such as China. This paper, thus, argues that China has contributed significantly toward the conclusion of RCEP by engendering incentives for member countries to join through multiple cooperative structures. These cooperative structures involve China-led bilateral PTAs and international development forums, which include the Belt and Road Initiative and Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. With the gradual shift from bilateral to multilateral PTAs and forum-linkage strategies, China turned to be more assertive in concluding the RCEP than in the early years of RCEP negotiations, as evidenced by the discourse of political and opinion leaders.

THE DECENTRALIZING INTERNATIONAL TRADE ARCHITECTURE: PERSPECTIVES FROM AND ROLE OF ASIA

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
PRADUMNA B. RANA ◽  
WAI-MUN CHIA ◽  
XIANBAI JI
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Regional Institutions ◽  
Bretton Woods ◽  
Belt And Road ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership ◽  
The Belt And Road ◽  
Global Economic Governance

Global economic governance is in flux. The centralized international trade architecture of the post-Bretton Woods era is decentralizing as new regional institutions are being established for various reasons. Decentralization per se is neither good nor bad. It depends on whether there is “healthy” competition and functional complementarity or “unhealthy” competition between global and new regional institutions. This paper has three objectives, to: (i) review the decentralization of the international trade architecture; (ii) identify the benefits and the risks of the decentralization process and its implications for the centrality of the World Trade Organization (WTO), and (iii) recommend policies for the WTO to manage the process. The paper argues that, so far, the benefits of new regional institutions and trade decentralization appear to have outweighed the risks, and as a result global economic governance may have improved. Looking ahead, the paper recommends a number of policy actions that the WTO should take to manage trade decentralization. The paper argues that Asian countries, especially those that are members of the G20, should play a greater role in lobbying and driving the needed reforms of the WTO. They should also seek to expedite the conclusion and ratification of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and eventually institutionalize the complementarity between RCEP, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

MCDF: A New Beacon of Multilateralism in Development Finance

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 665-684
Author(s):  
Bin Gu
Keyword(s):  
International Development ◽  
Chinese Culture ◽  
Leadership Role ◽  
Investment Bank ◽  
Development Finance ◽  
Multilateral Cooperation ◽  
Funding Mechanism ◽  
Belt And Road ◽  
International Body ◽  
The Belt And Road

ABSTRACT The Multilateral Cooperation Center for Development Finance (MCDF) is an infant but prospectively important initiative in international development finance, initiated by China at the inaugural Belt and Road Forum in 2017, and now endorsed by eight leading international development banks worldwide. The MCDF is expected to work closely with global agendas such as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), as well as with other peer institutions including the Global Infrastructure Connectivity Alliance (GICA), the Global Infrastructure Hub (GI Hub), and the Global Infrastructure Facility (GIF), in pursuing their shared goals of promoting infrastructure and connectivity investment. This article endeavors to investigate some key institutional matters for the development of the MCDF; they are the structure of its Secretariat, the funding mechanism, and the designated functions. Along the spectrum of hardening soft law, the MCDF is expected to evolve as an independent international body, to be equipped with a charter as its constituent instrument. The prospect of China’s role in the MCDF is predicated upon the understanding of Chinese culture and China’s approach toward global governance, which has been consistently demonstrated during the development of the AIIB and the BRI. China will play a leadership role in the MCDF, while behaving responsibly to other participants, including to borrower countries.

Summit moves China's OBOR towards internationalisation

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Infrastructure Investment ◽  
Xi Jinping ◽  
Investment Bank ◽  
Multilateral Development Banks ◽  
Content Type ◽  
One Belt One Road ◽  
Belt And Road ◽  
Regional Organisations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Belt And Road

Subject The future of China's One Belt One Road initiative. Significance China convened the first summit of the Belt and Road Initiative (previously known as 'One Belt One Road', OBOR) on May 14-15. With this major diplomatic event, President Xi Jinping aimed to showcase and buttress international support for his central foreign policy initiative, the success of which will hinge on the participation of other countries, regional organisations and international financial institutions. Their contribution, or lack thereof, will affect the nature of OBOR and determine the impact of the Chinese initiative on Asia’s infrastructure connectivity and economic system, as well as on the international order. Impacts Cooperation between China and multilateral development banks may increase the number of OBOR projects with competitive procurement. Plans for OBOR’s corridors may be altered to accommodate competing visions for Asia’s connectivity, such as Russia’s. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank may more formally align its mandate with OBOR’s.

scholarly journals International Development Assistance Policy of the PRC: Goals, Methods, Tools, Assessments

2021 ◽  
pp. 43
Author(s):  
Vladimir Nezhdanov
Keyword(s):  
International Development ◽  
Development Assistance ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The People ◽  
Belt And Road ◽  
Solid Foundation ◽  
The Chinese Dream ◽  
International Interaction ◽  
Common Destiny ◽  
The Belt And Road

International development assistance policy of the People's Republic of China was launched almost immediately after the formation of the nation-state in 1949, which has made it possible by now to create a solid foundation and an extensive system of international interaction. Nevertheless, today we are witnessing the beginning of a new stage in China's international development assistance policy, which is expressed both in a sharp increase in funding for this field and associated with its use as a mechanism to achieve the goals of the «Chinese Dream», the development of the «Belt and Road Initiative» and promoting the construction of the «Community of common destiny for mankind». As a result, the allocation by Beijing of international assistance, grants and soft loans is becoming one of the most effective ways to strengthen international positions and form a more active foreign policy course.

scholarly journals CEEC’s-China mechanism of cooperation and the belt and road initiative: From idea to institutionalisation - six years later

2020 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 311-336
Author(s):  
Dusko Dimitrijevic ◽  
Nikola Jokanovic
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Development ◽  
Development Strategy ◽  
Dominant Role ◽  
Policy Position ◽  
Belt And Road Initiative ◽  
Intergovernmental Cooperation ◽  
Belt And Road ◽  
The Belt And Road

The paper analyzes the process of institutionalization of intergovernmental cooperation and coordination of state policies through the mechanism of cooperation between the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEEC) and China, known in the public as ?16 + 1? (i.e., ?17 + 1? starting in 2019). Through an eclectic picture of the development of contemporary international relations, the authors indicate in a methodologically accessible manner that this mechanism of cooperation is a significant impetus for the development of international relations. Since China has taken a dominant role in redefining the Global Management System, whose goals are balanced and sustainable international development, to achieve them, China has identified certain ideological frameworks that are present in its foreign policy through the Belt and Road Initiative. Through this Initiative, China seeks to achieve the broader goals of the New Silk Road development strategy, which not only determines the directions of China?s internal development, but provides guidance for its strategic cooperation with neighbouring countries as well as with countries on other continents. Consequently, the mechanism itself thus plays an important role in strengthening China?s foreign policy position, not only with respect to CEEC, but also with respect to other European countries, including the EU as a whole.

China and the Struggle over the Future of International Order

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhongying Pang
Keyword(s):  
International Institutions ◽  
International Order ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Infrastructure Investment ◽  
Belt And Road Initiative ◽  
Investment Bank ◽  
The Future ◽  
Belt And Road ◽  
Governance Institutions ◽  
The Belt And Road

This chapter discusses China’s changing attitude, doctrine, and policy actions towards international order and offers some tentative findings on the complexity of China’s role in the struggle over the future of international order. This complexity results from China’s efforts simultaneously to consolidate its presence in the existing international order but also to reform existing global governance institutions. The ambition to seek an alternative international order makes it, at least to some extent, a revisionist state. While pursuing an agenda to reform the existing international order from within, China additionally has begun to sponsor an unprecedented number of new international institutions and initiatives of its own, such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). How this will play out will depend above all on the interaction of China with a USA still wedded to its hegemonic role in world politics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document