What's new

Pivot to Pakistan: Pakistan is the key for Sino-Russian aim for "Greater Asia"

From Eurasia to Greater Asia— A product of Sino-Russia integration

Geopolitical impact on Pakistan:
1. Support for Paklistan from Russia, Iran and Central Asian States looking to benefit from Integration.
2. Simultaneous development of Central Asia, Russia, Western China, Iran and Pakistan will create strong bonds which can last for decades to come.
3. Stabilization of relationships with Iran and further enhancements of relationships with Turkey.

4. Isolating India or at least compelling it to change its behavior towards Pakistan and China.
5. Need to keep GOOD relations with KSA and USA; they need to see the benefits of regional integration and Pakistan's development. Don't play into India's hand by severing ties with the US.

Agha Iqrar Haroon

A Greater Asia bloc is emerging over Eurasian foundations. It will be an expansion of Eurasian idea of Russian President Vladimir Putin who did not include South Asia into his vision when he drawing map of Eurasia. His conceptual map wished to link Lisbon with Vladivostok —- the deep Eastern part of Russia that is heading over Southeast Asia leaving South Asia untouched. However, the Sino-Russia integration has provided a strong base to expand Eurasia into a Greater Asia bloc.

Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) was offered by President Putin only to former Soviet Union states of Central Asia and Eastern Europe for linking Vladivostok with Europe economically. EEU is operational reasonably but failed to attract many countries of former USSR like Uzbekistan.

Russia was not as closer to China as it is today when Vladimir Putin was drawing Conceptual Map of Eurasia though Sino-Russia integration was on its way but was not as consolidated as it is today. Ukraine crises changed the entire scenario of Europe and Eastern Europe. Russia who wanted to stay with Europe as a friend was declared a “badly behaved boy” by western powers.

Western sanctions and stiff reaction of US backed European Union (EU) against Russia reconfirmed that Russia was neither a friend nor an enemy for countries like Germany and France. Almost same time when Ukraine crises was alienating Russia from Europe, Middle Eastern crises provided an opportunity to Moscow to managed its reentry into Middle East Stage where United State was playing solo role after disintegration of USSR.

Meddle East crises and process of lifting international sanctions on Iran provided a break to Russia and China to stand as allies and both immediately intercepted US desire to play alone in Middle East. Now, Turkey— a strong country of Europe as well as of Asia also stands with Russia though it is a NATO member and had been instrumental for realizing US agendas in Middle East till a failed coup that took place against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in July 2016. This week, Russia and Turkey brokered a ceasefire in Syria with the help of Iran—leaving no room for United States to play a role of “Sole Master” in Middle East. Therefore, with changing world around Russia, the vision of President Putin of a “Greater Europe” (European Union and the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union), is being replaced by a “Greater Asia — a form of a bloc comprising of China, Russia, Central Asian States, Turkey, Iran and Pakistan.

The only irritant for Pakistan to join Greater Asia is its current Middle Eastern policy where Pakistan is closest ally of Saudi Arabia in South Asia while Saudi Arabia has its own interests in Middle East that are in contraction with Turkish, Russian and Chinese interests and Iran is being considered as enemy by Saudi Arabia while Iran is being seen as major component for emerging Greater Asia.

Russian Think Tanks consider Pakistan a country that wishes to live with Middle Eastern world under the leadership of United States and Saudi Arabia instead of joining Greater Asia while Chinese Think Tanks stress that Pakistan is one of the closest friends of China and Greater Asia is not possible without embracing Pakistan into folds. Pakistan China Economic Corridor (CPEC) is the biggest example of Chinese dependence on Pakistan in the region and One Belt One Road idea of China look impossible without CPEC and Gwadar Port of Pakistan.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is also in favour of linking Pakistan with Greater Asia because of its geopotical situation and proximity with Central Asia—South Asia and Middle East. Central Asian States also look towards Pakistani Deep Sea Gwadar Port as shortest route to sea as CPEC road network is also operational through Kashgar (Kashi) forgetting linkages through troubled Afghanistan. Though China has invested a lot in Afghanistan and laid down a railway network to link Afghanistan with China via Central Asia but hopes are not high for keeping this railway track. Increasing presence of India in Afghanistan is not irritating Pakistan only but also making cautious China about future of its investments in Afghanistan because India considers itself the only super power of Asia and had been in wars with China in past. India is also a strategic partner of United States in the region and of course it wishes to curtail China as much as it can.

Meanwhile, Russia is already becoming closer to Pakistan and drifting away from India due to Indian diplomatic wedlock with United States.

In this scenario, it looks that India may not be a part of “Greater Asia” designed by China and Russia. In simple words, India has no place in Greater Asia as this concept is emerging under “Sino-Russia integration”.


Two architects of Greater Asia bloc
“Greater Asia” is likely to emerge as a military cum trade and investment zone covering all of central, northern, and eastern Eurasia. Beijing-led and Moscow-endorsed initiatives including One Belt One Road, CPEC, Silk Road Economic Belt and Northern Sea Route have already provided economic base for “Greater Asia”.

“China is playing its role as Bank and Russia can be a big Gun for Greater Asia that will have a strategic context also”, believe Eurasian development observers.

http://www.dnd.com.pk/greater-asia-bloc/121822
@Horus @DESERT FIGHTER @nightRider @Max @Kaptaan @Akheilos @somebozo
 
.
From Eurasia to Greater Asia— A product of Sino-Russia integration

Geopolitical impact on Pakistan:
1. Support for Paklistan from Russia, Iran and Central Asian States looking to benefit from Integration.
2. Simultaneous development of Central Asia, Russia, Western China, Iran and Pakistan will create strong bonds which can last for decades to come.
3. Stabilization of relationships with Iran and further enhancements of relationships with Turkey.

4. Isolating India or at least compelling it to change its behavior towards Pakistan and China.
5. Need to keep GOOD relations with KSA and USA; they need to see the benefits of regional integration and Pakistan's development. Don't play into India's hand by severing ties with the US.

Agha Iqrar Haroon

A Greater Asia bloc is emerging over Eurasian foundations. It will be an expansion of Eurasian idea of Russian President Vladimir Putin who did not include South Asia into his vision when he drawing map of Eurasia. His conceptual map wished to link Lisbon with Vladivostok —- the deep Eastern part of Russia that is heading over Southeast Asia leaving South Asia untouched. However, the Sino-Russia integration has provided a strong base to expand Eurasia into a Greater Asia bloc.

Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) was offered by President Putin only to former Soviet Union states of Central Asia and Eastern Europe for linking Vladivostok with Europe economically. EEU is operational reasonably but failed to attract many countries of former USSR like Uzbekistan.

Russia was not as closer to China as it is today when Vladimir Putin was drawing Conceptual Map of Eurasia though Sino-Russia integration was on its way but was not as consolidated as it is today. Ukraine crises changed the entire scenario of Europe and Eastern Europe. Russia who wanted to stay with Europe as a friend was declared a “badly behaved boy” by western powers.

Western sanctions and stiff reaction of US backed European Union (EU) against Russia reconfirmed that Russia was neither a friend nor an enemy for countries like Germany and France. Almost same time when Ukraine crises was alienating Russia from Europe, Middle Eastern crises provided an opportunity to Moscow to managed its reentry into Middle East Stage where United State was playing solo role after disintegration of USSR.

Meddle East crises and process of lifting international sanctions on Iran provided a break to Russia and China to stand as allies and both immediately intercepted US desire to play alone in Middle East. Now, Turkey— a strong country of Europe as well as of Asia also stands with Russia though it is a NATO member and had been instrumental for realizing US agendas in Middle East till a failed coup that took place against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in July 2016. This week, Russia and Turkey brokered a ceasefire in Syria with the help of Iran—leaving no room for United States to play a role of “Sole Master” in Middle East. Therefore, with changing world around Russia, the vision of President Putin of a “Greater Europe” (European Union and the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union), is being replaced by a “Greater Asia — a form of a bloc comprising of China, Russia, Central Asian States, Turkey, Iran and Pakistan.

The only irritant for Pakistan to join Greater Asia is its current Middle Eastern policy where Pakistan is closest ally of Saudi Arabia in South Asia while Saudi Arabia has its own interests in Middle East that are in contraction with Turkish, Russian and Chinese interests and Iran is being considered as enemy by Saudi Arabia while Iran is being seen as major component for emerging Greater Asia.

Russian Think Tanks consider Pakistan a country that wishes to live with Middle Eastern world under the leadership of United States and Saudi Arabia instead of joining Greater Asia while Chinese Think Tanks stress that Pakistan is one of the closest friends of China and Greater Asia is not possible without embracing Pakistan into folds. Pakistan China Economic Corridor (CPEC) is the biggest example of Chinese dependence on Pakistan in the region and One Belt One Road idea of China look impossible without CPEC and Gwadar Port of Pakistan.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is also in favour of linking Pakistan with Greater Asia because of its geopotical situation and proximity with Central Asia—South Asia and Middle East. Central Asian States also look towards Pakistani Deep Sea Gwadar Port as shortest route to sea as CPEC road network is also operational through Kashgar (Kashi) forgetting linkages through troubled Afghanistan. Though China has invested a lot in Afghanistan and laid down a railway network to link Afghanistan with China via Central Asia but hopes are not high for keeping this railway track. Increasing presence of India in Afghanistan is not irritating Pakistan only but also making cautious China about future of its investments in Afghanistan because India considers itself the only super power of Asia and had been in wars with China in past. India is also a strategic partner of United States in the region and of course it wishes to curtail China as much as it can.

Meanwhile, Russia is already becoming closer to Pakistan and drifting away from India due to Indian diplomatic wedlock with United States.

In this scenario, it looks that India may not be a part of “Greater Asia” designed by China and Russia. In simple words, India has no place in Greater Asia as this concept is emerging under “Sino-Russia integration”.


Two architects of Greater Asia bloc
“Greater Asia” is likely to emerge as a military cum trade and investment zone covering all of central, northern, and eastern Eurasia. Beijing-led and Moscow-endorsed initiatives including One Belt One Road, CPEC, Silk Road Economic Belt and Northern Sea Route have already provided economic base for “Greater Asia”.

“China is playing its role as Bank and Russia can be a big Gun for Greater Asia that will have a strategic context also”, believe Eurasian development observers.

http://www.dnd.com.pk/greater-asia-bloc/121822

apply all the lipstick you care to but the pig will remain a pig. As teh last sentence says, Russia, Iran, Pakistan et al need cash desperately and only place they can hope to get some is China. China itself finds itself in dire straits right now (they have burnt through 25% of their dollar reserves in one year trying to save reminbi without crashing the economy) so the rewards for such sucking up will be less than before.
 
.
China itself finds itself in dire straits right now (they have burnt through 25% of their dollar reserves in one year trying to save reminbi without crashing the economy)

Another mistake you make: Decline in ForEx is over 2 years. But, China's ForEx is still over USD $3,000.00. (That's 10x India's)

China's ForEx drives its investments in CPEC source (ExIm bank) and OBOR (China Develop Bank is one of two vehicles. The other financing vehicle being AIIB in which India is also an investor.)

China's ForEx will ebb and flow. As long as they continue to protect their energy supplies and the manufacturing supply chain, they will continue to have few hundred billion USD in trade surplus year after year. For last year, it was over USD $500 Billion. In case of slow-down of OBOR investments, it will impact an unfriendly country Like India first before impacting Pakistan or other OBOR countries. You are the one who needs to hope China continues to make investment in your country a priority.

OBOR makes sense and it's beyond just infrastructure investment.
My Indian friends seem to miss this basic foundation. Here is World Bank's China Country Director's take on why OBOR: (http://blogs.worldbank.org/eastasiapacific/china-one-belt-one-road-initiative-what-we-know-thus-far)

China’s One Belt One Road Initiative: What we know thus far
By Bert Hoffman

How big is it?

OBOR can be big, indeed. In its largest definition, OBOR would include 65 countries, 4.4 billion people and about 40 percent of global GDP. China is backing the plan with considerable resources, setting up a New Silk Road Fund of $40 billion to promote private investment along OBOR. The New Silk Road Fund is sponsored by China’s foreign exchange reserves, as well as government investment and lending arms.

In addition, the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank is widely expected to support the initiative with a considerable share of its $100 billion in lending, and the China Development Bank reportedly said it would invest almost $900 billion into more than 900 projects involving 60 countries to bolster the initiative. The Economist magazine reported that $1 trillion in “government money” would be spent on the initiative.

More than infrastructure

The vision document for OBOR goes well beyond infrastructure, envisioning closer coordination of economic development policies, harmonization of technical standards for infrastructure, removal of investment and trade barriers, establishment of free trade areas, financial cooperation and “people to people bonds” involving cultural and academic exchanges, personnel exchanges and cooperation, media cooperation, youth and women exchanges, and volunteer services.


What could be the impact of the initiative?

OBOR could stimulate Asian and global economic growth and make it more sustainable. In particular, countries along the corridor — especially those with underdeveloped infrastructure, low investment rates, and low per-capita incomes — could experience a boost in trade flows and benefit from infrastructure development. China would be able to better secure its energy and raw materials supply — which now predominantly gets shipped through the Strait of Malacca and the South China Sea.

Why OBOR?

Some consider the initiative China’s plan to ensure markets for its growing excess capacity in the construction industries as economic expansion and domestic investment slow. While it is true that the New Silk Road needs a lot of investment, even the highest estimates would constitute a relatively modest share of China’s $5 trillion annual investments back home. Investments of $1 trillion over 10-15 years is not going to absorb a lot of China’s overcapacity.

There are at least four reasons why OBOR can succeed better than individual countries fending for themselves: network effects, finance, leadership and China’s current stage of economic development.

On network effects, benefits to individual countries accrue if each part of the Belt and Road gets built. It simply does not pay for individual countries to move forward on their own. In addition, the initiative helps individual countries align with each other, and China’s finances and leadership provide vital credibility.

In my view, China’s current stage of development further bolsters the credibility of OBOR. In the past decade, China has become a major player in foreign investment based on natural resources development. As China’s domestic economy is now changing, its overseas investment is gradually shifting toward manufacturing rather than just natural resources. There are good reasons for this transition: at home, China faces rising labor costs and increasing environmental demands on production. Shifting some of its production base overseas makes sense — as long as the infrastructure exists to move the goods produced there. Chinese investment through OBOR provides countries along the Road and Belt an added incentive to join the initiative.

Will it work?

China’s top planning body, the National Development and Reform Commission, has issued a document on its vision for OBOR that discusses strengthening bilateral cooperation and improving existing regional cooperation mechanisms. However the document stops short of “multilaterilazation” of the initiative, such as a formal treaty or partnership.

The question is whether OBOR would need a more formal agreement at some point — covering trade, investment and business climate issues — to maximize its benefits. For now, countries along the Belt and Road have highly diverse development conditions, and some have challenging governance environment that has made investment in infrastructure hard.


Biggest at Risk Country: India loses out due to the network effect: If Modi's shenanigans continue to isolate India from the rest of the OBOR countries.
 
.
Another mistake you make: Decline in ForEx is over 2 years. But, China's ForEx is still over USD $3,000.00. (That's 10x India's)

China's ForEx drives its investments in CPEC source (ExIm bank) and OBOR (China Develop Bank is one of two vehicles. The other financing vehicle being AIIB in which India is also an investor.)

China's ForEx will ebb and flow. As long as they continue to protect their energy supplies and the manufacturing supply chain, they will continue to have few hundred billion USD in trade surplus year after year. For last year, it was over USD $500 Billion. In case of slow-down of OBOR investments, it will impact an unfriendly country Like India first before impacting Pakistan or other OBOR countries. You are the one who needs to hope China continues to make investment in your country a priority.

OBOR makes sense and it's beyond just infrastructure investment.
My Indian friends seem to miss this basic foundation. Here is World Bank's China Country Director's take on why OBOR: (http://blogs.worldbank.org/eastasiapacific/china-one-belt-one-road-initiative-what-we-know-thus-far)

China’s One Belt One Road Initiative: What we know thus far
By Bert Hoffman

How big is it?

OBOR can be big, indeed. In its largest definition, OBOR would include 65 countries, 4.4 billion people and about 40 percent of global GDP. China is backing the plan with considerable resources, setting up a New Silk Road Fund of $40 billion to promote private investment along OBOR. The New Silk Road Fund is sponsored by China’s foreign exchange reserves, as well as government investment and lending arms.

In addition, the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank is widely expected to support the initiative with a considerable share of its $100 billion in lending, and the China Development Bank reportedly said it would invest almost $900 billion into more than 900 projects involving 60 countries to bolster the initiative. The Economist magazine reported that $1 trillion in “government money” would be spent on the initiative.

More than infrastructure

The vision document for OBOR goes well beyond infrastructure, envisioning closer coordination of economic development policies, harmonization of technical standards for infrastructure, removal of investment and trade barriers, establishment of free trade areas, financial cooperation and “people to people bonds” involving cultural and academic exchanges, personnel exchanges and cooperation, media cooperation, youth and women exchanges, and volunteer services.


What could be the impact of the initiative?

OBOR could stimulate Asian and global economic growth and make it more sustainable. In particular, countries along the corridor — especially those with underdeveloped infrastructure, low investment rates, and low per-capita incomes — could experience a boost in trade flows and benefit from infrastructure development. China would be able to better secure its energy and raw materials supply — which now predominantly gets shipped through the Strait of Malacca and the South China Sea.

Why OBOR?

Some consider the initiative China’s plan to ensure markets for its growing excess capacity in the construction industries as economic expansion and domestic investment slow. While it is true that the New Silk Road needs a lot of investment, even the highest estimates would constitute a relatively modest share of China’s $5 trillion annual investments back home. Investments of $1 trillion over 10-15 years is not going to absorb a lot of China’s overcapacity.

There are at least four reasons why OBOR can succeed better than individual countries fending for themselves: network effects, finance, leadership and China’s current stage of economic development.

On network effects, benefits to individual countries accrue if each part of the Belt and Road gets built. It simply does not pay for individual countries to move forward on their own. In addition, the initiative helps individual countries align with each other, and China’s finances and leadership provide vital credibility.

In my view, China’s current stage of development further bolsters the credibility of OBOR. In the past decade, China has become a major player in foreign investment based on natural resources development. As China’s domestic economy is now changing, its overseas investment is gradually shifting toward manufacturing rather than just natural resources. There are good reasons for this transition: at home, China faces rising labor costs and increasing environmental demands on production. Shifting some of its production base overseas makes sense — as long as the infrastructure exists to move the goods produced there. Chinese investment through OBOR provides countries along the Road and Belt an added incentive to join the initiative.

Will it work?

China’s top planning body, the National Development and Reform Commission, has issued a document on its vision for OBOR that discusses strengthening bilateral cooperation and improving existing regional cooperation mechanisms. However the document stops short of “multilaterilazation” of the initiative, such as a formal treaty or partnership.

The question is whether OBOR would need a more formal agreement at some point — covering trade, investment and business climate issues — to maximize its benefits. For now, countries along the Belt and Road have highly diverse development conditions, and some have challenging governance environment that has made investment in infrastructure hard.


Biggest at Risk Country: India loses out due to the network effect: If Modi's shenanigans continue to isolate India from the rest of the OBOR countries.

I don't think you understand what you yourself wrote.

Losing 25% of the dollar reserves is differing from using 25% of dollar reserves. China, in its first amateurish attempts at hiding bad loans and manipulating reminbi value, squandered away that. In their second attempt (which started about 6 weeks ago and currently on going) they are doing a slightly better job.

their leasing Pakistan for 45/50/100B is inconsequential to them and rest of the world, but sure is the only game in play for Pakistan. So it is critically important, but only for Pakistan. As your own press had amply described, Pakistan has been making up for mortal shortage of foreign exchange funds by way loans from China - which simply further bring down the price China will pay for Pakistan. But that is a different story.

Just leave with the thought that an increasingly desperate China which currently has a reminbi crisis on its hand, which realizes it squandered away a full 25% by sheer in experience, which now needs all the funds it can manage to keep the bad load crap hitting the fan internally...that same China, the only guy with cash, has all that new demand plus Russia and Pakistan want to put the touch on it more and more.

So what is the consequence? China will have to exercise even more capital cost on you. In other words, Russia has come to compete for the cash that you guys had cheaply before. And you are all celebrating it as fellowship! enjoy innocently like lamb for slaughter!
 
.
Progress Continues....Update on CPEC and OBOR from The Wall Street Journal:

‘New Silk Road’ projects keep the spirit of globalization alive: Globalization to increase travel and commerce between 65 countries in Eurasia.
BN-RN848_davosc_GR_20170109101150.jpg

The first freight train service linking Xi'an, capital of northwest China's Shaanxi Province, with Moscow via Kazakhstan, departs Xi'an in December. PHOTO: XINHUA/ZUMA PRESS

By : MARK MAGNIER
Jan. 16, 2017

BEIJING—As the U.S., U.K. and others hit pause on globalization, China is flexing its economic muscle with an ambitious infrastructure-building spree that would connect up to a third of the world’s people.

In recent years, Beijing has set up a range of institutions and groupings that are being mobilized to promote China’s interests—from the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank to separate regional development investment forums from Latin America and the Middle East to Central and Eastern Europe.

Chinese President Xi Jinping, who has pushed a more forward-leaning foreign policy than his recent predecessors, has used recent global summits to call for freer trade and urge against protectionism. He is expected to reiterate the message in a keynote speech Tuesday at the World Economic Forum.

Mr. Xi’s—and China’s—biggest calling card is the mega-infrastructure Silk Road initiative, also known in China as One Belt, One Road, which envisions building railways, ports, roads, dams, pipelines and industrial corridors across dozens of countries in Asia, Europe and Africa.

WO-BC655_DAVCTR_9U_20170112191217.jpg

Billions of tons of cement and steel, hundreds of thousands of workers and tens of thousands of cranes and diggers could be involved in the effort, according to a report by BNP Paribas Investment Partners.

The initiative offers China a way to boost its flagging economy, push development into its western regions, open new markets, strengthen links with resource-rich countries and extend China’s political clout. Many countries likely to be on the receiving end of investment have signed on.

Foreign engineering and equipment companies such as Caterpillar Inc., ABB Group and Vermeer Corp. said they are hoping for a slice of future projects, working with Chinese state-owned companies.

Less clear, however, is whether Beijing can avoid pitfalls such as wasting investment, exacerbating corruption, driving up indebtedness and arousing suspicion about Chinese intentions in many of the countries. An earlier surge into Africa and Latin America brought accusations that Chinese companies disregarded environmental standards, fanned graft and displayed limited concern for local communities or industries.

“China’s making a pretty concerted effort to improve its image,” said Tom Miller, author of a coming book on the new Silk Road initiative. “But it has a long way to go.”

BN-RN857_davosc_P_20170109104527.jpg

Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, in vest, in November celebrated the arrival of a Chinese trade convoy at Gwadar port, a key part of the planned $46 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. PHOTO: METIN AKTAS/ANADOLU AGENCY/GETTY IMAGES

In Kazakhstan, where Mr. Xi unveiled the infrastructure plan in 2013, more than 50 projects have been signed, at a price tag of over $20 billion. Some regional rail projects have moved ahead, but the Western Europe-Western China Expressway road project has foundered. China’s part of the road corridor, which aims to connect the Yellow Sea with Russia’s St. Petersburg, is largely done. And Kazakhstan’s portion of the 5,000-mile project is partly done, but Russia’s languishes.

China is stepping up at a time when the incoming Trump administration is rethinking trade commitments and promising to focus on U.S. interests, and the European Union is finding its position in the world tested by Britain’s vote to leave the group and political shifts in other members.

China can concentrate considerable resources in support of its vision. Beijing is backing the $100 billion, China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank; its own $40 billion Silk Road Fund; and the $100 billion New Development Bank, created by the Brics group of emerging economies. The infrastructure bank’s capital alone could generate $1.3 trillion in financing, though that is still shy of the trillions in estimated infrastructure demand.

In the past two years, China reported pouring nearly $30 billion in direct investment into more than 50 countries along the overland and maritime routes that make up the updated Silk Road. Some of this money went into longstanding projects—such as the Eurasian Land Bridge rail project connecting China with Europe and the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar transport corridor—that have been repackaged as part of the updated initiative.

BN-RN855_davosc_P_20170109104230.jpg

A cargo vessel is moored at Gwadar, Pakistan, in November, as the port, marked its first export of a large number of containers to overseas destinations. PHOTO: LIU TIAN/XINHUA/ZUMA PRESS

Even so, Beijing has set a daunting task, especially for the state-owned companies it expects to join the effort. In a 2015 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Ltd. survey of state-owned companies likely to spearhead Beijing’s One Belt, One Road vision, 10% reported having no overseas business department. Those companies will need to build up oversight and legal expertise to avoid potential pitfalls of operating abroad.

Some companies, including Shaanxi Construction Machinery Co., a Shanghai listed state-owned maker of road-building equipment, say they will focus initially on more familiar markets in Southeast Asia.

“You can lose money very quickly if you’re not careful,” said Peking University professor Zha Daojiong. “How industry programs take root locally in these landlocked, poor and small economies is a big question.”

—Pei Li contributed to this article.

Write to Mark Magnier at mark.magnier@wsj.com
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom