200211February, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen confidently announced that the EU's new infrastructure plan would be a "real alternative" to China's Belt and Road Initiative.
Ursula von der Leyen said, "We can do this. Countries have realized what it is like to deal with China investment, and they need better and different choices. " According to the "Global Gateway" plan, the EU promises to raise about 300 billion euros for infrastructure upgrading outside the EU by 2027.
Faced with China's "One Belt, One Road" initiative, Europe and the United States are prepared to propose different models, hoping to build on democratic standards, transparency of funds and sustainable goals.
But a year later, observers are increasingly skeptical of Ursula von der Leyen's statement.
So far, the "Global Gateway" plan has been widely publicized, but there are few specific projects, and people inside and outside the EU are confused about the essence of this plan.
At the hearing held by the European Parliament last month, some members urged EU officials to announce the details of the "Global Gateway" plan, but learned that among the 300 billion euros, no 1 euro was "new money".
Barry Andrews, an Irish member of the centrist group "Reviving Europe" in the European Parliament, said: "The global gateway plan does not contain new funds. I have always believed that without new funds, there will be no new policies. "
Regarding the difference between the global portal project and the Belt and Road Initiative, Piero Della francesca Ghiretti, an analyst at the German Mercator China Institute in Brussels, said: "I think the idea of trying to compete with the Belt and Road Initiative was wrong from the beginning, because the Belt and Road Initiative was launched under completely different circumstances and was initiated by completely different countries. At that time, that country filled the gap and put forward a new model.
Emmanuel Matambo, research director of the Center for Non-Chinese Studies at the University of Johannesburg in South Africa, believes that the EU has failed to conduct "effective publicity" like Beijing.
"Europe promised to make a good investment plan in Africa, but then it attacked China and other non-European participants, which weakened the importance and intention of Europe's participation in Africa's construction."
On different occasions, the EU has promised to invest 654.38+05 billion euros in digital, green and sustainable development projects in Africa and 654.38+00 billion euros in similar projects in Southeast Asia, but it is difficult for reporters to know the specific situation of individual projects.
The EU did not disclose specific projects, but only introduced in general what kind of projects it hoped to promote.
Jude Moore, a senior policy researcher at the Center for Global Development in the United States, said: "We will never know what the global portal program has added. It is said that it is a feasible alternative to China's Belt and Road Initiative-an alternative based on the values of transparency and sustainability. But it still stays in words. "
related news
Did you catch the "Belt and Road"? The United States and Europe played the same old tune at the G20 summit.
Here we go again. At the G20 Summit, the leaders of the United States and the European Union promised countless times that they would not be surpassed by China's Belt and Road Initiative, which is a modern Silk Road composed of infrastructure investment.
On Tuesday, local time, European and American leaders gathered in Bali to support a $600 billion infrastructure investment plan to counter the Belt and Road Initiative. The plan will make large-scale investments in emerging economies to build ports, highways, railways and energy networks to demonstrate the soft power of Europe and the United States.
The problem is: the same tune has already made our ears hear calluses.
In Bali, everything is carefully arranged to harvest traffic and attention. In the luxurious Kempinski Hotel, US President Joe Biden and Council of Europe President Ursula Ursula von der Leyen sit in the center of the conference hall overlooking the Indian Ocean. Accompanied by Indonesian President joko widodo, the host of the G20 summit, they announced the global infrastructure and investment partnership plan.
Ursula von der Leyen promised: "We will provide infrastructure partnerships based on value, high standards and transparency to low-income and middle-income countries."
Biden and Ursula von der Leyen announced global infrastructure and partnership investment plans during the G20 summit, but few developing countries responded.
Don't be surprised if this sounds familiar. Because we've heard it countless times. The PGII program was initiated at the G-7 Summit held in Britain last year and officially launched at the G-7 Summit in June this year. You must have heard how the slogan "Rebuild a Better World" is enriched into the infrastructure plan in the United States. Europe has been striving to realize its "Global Gateway Initiative". The West is very good at naming and launching various plans to compete with the "Belt and Road". But the biggest question is whether these plans can stand the test of reality and compete with China's initiative.
For Biden and Ursula von der Leyen, a worrying sign is that few developing countries have participated in activities that they expect will send a strong signal to the Belt and Road Initiative. India and host Indonesia are the only developing countries attending the meeting.
The west has been struggling to build brands for years. When China's "One Belt, One Road" initiative was rapidly transformed into solid reinforced concrete, the western response remained elusive.
Erin Murphy, an expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank, admits that an infrastructure investment plan of this scale means "integrating a lot of practical technical knowledge, professional technical knowledge and, most importantly, integrating funds from several countries".
Bondaz, a China researcher at the Paris-based think tank Strategic Research Foundation, criticized the West for failing to propose specific projects. "If we want to restore our credibility, we should talk less and start promoting specific infrastructure projects in the Indian Ocean-Pacific region."
The disadvantages of the EU
Through the "Belt and Road Initiative", China is providing competitive infrastructure investment with a one-step advantage. The "Belt and Road Initiative" was first proposed in 20 13 and is regarded as an opportunity to promote economic development by many developing countries.
Although Beijing promotes its global strategy through large state-owned enterprises, Brussels and Washington cannot force western companies to do so, although they very much want the private sector to be part of their global strategy.
The United States and the European Union did make some plans, but once the specific details were involved, they began to "play Tai Chi", and the project time span was too long. Although these plans are often very important from the perspective of aid and development, they are far less than a set of major trade levers constructed by China. The EU plans to build a floating photovoltaic power station in Albania and water conservancy projects in Namibia, Egypt, Kazakhstan, India and Chile. American plans include building health projects in East Timor and establishing medical services in Brazil.
The floating photovoltaic power station invested by the European Union in Albania was damaged by the storm immediately after it was completed in June last year.
Murphy stressed that western investment in global infrastructure is basically catching up with China. It is simply unrealistic to catch up with the scale and breadth of the "Belt and Road Initiative". "We can choose a smarter approach, focusing on the quality of infrastructure projects, not the quantity, and focusing on areas that China has not yet set foot in."
In the eyes of some people in Brussels, the EU's "Global Gateway Initiative" actually exposed institutional problems. For example, the European Commission for International Partnerships is fully responsible for this project. An EU diplomat believes that "considering the strategic significance of this project, it is a better choice for the EU External Action Agency to take over. Because this kind of infrastructure investment has little to do with the aid and development theme that the Ministry of International Partnerships pays attention to, it is more about how to deal with China's challenges. "
Givran, a researcher at Mercator China Institute, believes that if the West can make a concrete counterattack in the field of infrastructure investment, it will certainly enhance the geopolitical and economic interests of the West.
However, if the West cannot gain a foothold in countries or regions with active investment in China, "our relations with those countries will retrogress, which will not only affect the balance of power in multilateral platforms such as the United Nations, but also affect the future economic prosperity of the West."
"Therefore, it is extremely important for us to do the right thing. But unfortunately, we have taken a wrong step several times. "
Whether global infrastructure investment should serve development or pay more attention to its strategic purpose has long plagued the West, making it difficult for it to compete with China's "One Belt, One Road" initiative. Gifran said: "We always swing from side to side on the issue of providing assistance to developing countries. They are just eager to do business with us and are unwilling to cater to our strategic and commercial interests. "
Other information about Liu Zhihong