China as a World Leader: Assessing Implications of COVID-19, BRI and a “Global Common Destiny

Abstract

Amidst the COVID-19 induced global lockdown, it is significant to re-listen to Chinese President Xi Jinping’s 2017 Davos speech in which he articulated his vision to build a community of “common destiny”. It was in Davos, that Xi’s regional vision of common destiny transcended towards becoming the common destiny of humankind, exemplifying China’s urge to elevate the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) from a mere development model to a strategic landscape. Xi has been consistent in claiming high moral ground of inclusivity for BRI, opposing Manifest Destiny, the founding principle of United States’ foreign policy. This articulation of global destiny overtly stated China’s quest to redesign or rather offer a Chinese version of the world order. Despite the strategic and economic concerns across the globe, BRI did offer its partner countries a better-connected world by focusing on massive infrastructure and digital projects. However, the fundamental challenge for China remained its failure to be a responsible global power, as has been exposed once again in the COVID-19 outbreak narrative.

The Chinese model of development, which is classified as authoritarian capitalism, strives for political stability and regime legitimacy through assured economic development. China has often been driven by its domestic concerns, and so it has always been an inward looking reluctant global player. BRI was a paradigm shift in this policy as China expressed its desire to lead a world greatly interconnected under the BRI network, making it the first step towards the “opening of China to the world”. Until the COVID-19 outbreak, the world was more concerned about the lack of transparency among other flaws in this development model, which normalised securitisation and idealised a surveillance state. Even when, the partner countries are predominantly quasi-democracies, failed democracies or autocracies and their preferred choice was the Chinese model over what Washington provided. The early spread of novel Coronavirus and its declaration as a global pandemic exposed the vulnerabilities of the Chinese regime and has jolted the Chinese model. Moreover, it is ironic to find that the global pandemic that originated in Wuhan, essentially followed the Chinese path of global common destiny in terms of the damage it caused to entire humankind.

The significant concerns that arise here, are the frailties of the BRI amidst COVID-19, and China’s response to the COVID-19 outbreak. Even though BRI is a loosely-governed infrastructure initiative, it has been designed not only to benefit the Chinese state but also to significantly increasing foreign dependencies on China. Subsequently, the BRI projects depend extensively on Chinese companies for labour, materials supply and credit. As global travel restrictions on Chinese people continue, it is a significant factor for the disruption of these projects. Even after China shows signs of recovery internally and has recouped after a countrywide lockdown, the longer the Chinese labour and supplies are denied entry to the partner countries, the more it will droop these projects. This raises questions about the Chinese model, as it demonstrates the inherent vulnerability of partner nations in being excessively dependent on Beijing, and there is no scope for devolution. The immediate future of globalisation seems to be bleak as the virus has accelerated the need for localisation. Subsequently, this has compromised initiatives like the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), and various BRI projects in South-east Asian countries. Though reports indicate China’s fast recovery, it would not reflect in its projects outside China any sooner.