Three Geopolitical Theories and the Belt and Road Initiative

By Teng Jianqun,

The Belt and Road Construction

Three Geopolitical Theories and the Belt and Road Initiative

By Teng Jianqun,

CPAPD Council member, and Professor of American Studies, CASS

Since proposed over 5 years ago, the Belt and Road Initiative has received attention of the international community and support of vast number of countries. Its idea of "extensive consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits" is regarded as the banner of international cooperation in the new era. However, the Initiative has also caused some worry and anxiety in Western countries. American politicians and scholars mention the Initiative with the traditional geopolitical theory in the same breath, and think that the Initiative is a theory and program serving China to move toward global hegemony and a copy of the Marshall Plan. In this regard, we must clarify the differences between them.

I. Some People mention the Initiative with the traditional geopolitical theory in the same breath

Early in 2018, U.S. experts, military intelligence officials and congressmen conducted congressional hearings on China's Belt and Road construction over the past 5 years. The conclusion is that the Initiative has the shadow of the U.S. Marshall Plan to Europe, and poses a threat of "certain degree" to the U.S. global influence. There are three theories to support the above conclusion: Mahan's theory of sea power, Mackinder's heartland theory and Spykman's Rimland theory. The core of the three theories is the control of a certain region on the earth can control the world.

On December 17, 2017, Stephen Bannon, a former Trump campaign director and senior White House aide, delivered a speech in Japan, saying that there are three great geopolitical theories in the 19th and 20th centuries, which shaped the 19th and 20th centuries. The boldness of China's Belt and Road is to integrate three geopolitical factors into a complete plan. It combines with Mackinder's theory that whoever controls the hinterland of Central Asia will control the world island; whoever controls the world island will control the world. Alexander, Napoleon, Hitler, Peter the Great, these well-known conquerors of the world all know it, and Mackinder created his theory from them. The expansion of the Silk Road links those important countries in Central Asia, and uses Confucius' mercantilist market model to truly integrate Islamic politics into a market, that is the "Road"... The "Road" is the product of Mahan's theory, which is also the basis of the British Empire and later the U.S. strategic plan, i.e. to link the main ports along the Road.

Stephen Banon said that today China has done so in the Persian Gulf, Djibouti and the South China Sea. Whoever controls the world island with Navy or port will control the world. "They combined Mackinder's theory and Mahan's theory, which no one had ever done before. But the third step is actually bolder, and there aren't many people who know Spykman. His theory is about a line of communication from sea to inland, that you should to keep aggressors out of the country and beyond their sphere of influence. In Bannon's view, China's actions in the sea, especially in the South China Sea, are the key to preventing the United States from launching a large-scale invasion of China and cutting off the U.S. -Indo-Pacific ties. Therefore, various countries must resist them.

The main points of Stephen Banon's sensational speech is that the Belt and Road Initiative covers the three geopolitical theories, and China is using the Belt and Road Initiative to control the world. During the period of China's rapid rise and the rising anxiety of the United States towards China, some people describe the Initiative as a geopolitical theory. Obviously, it is not simple academic discussions, but rather an exaggeration of the "China Threat Theory" and guiding China and the United States into the confrontation for world dominance. The three geopolitical theories and the Belt and Road Initiative have their own historical background. They believe that the Belt and Road Initiative is a theory that controls the world, which is not only biased, but also very dangerous.

II. Three Theories Focus on Different Regional Controls in order to Control the World

The rise of geopolitics to state theory began in the late 19th century. German geographer Friedrich Ratzel put forward the concept of "national organism" in 1897, and then published the concept of Lebensraum or "living space". "Geopolitics" originated from Swedish scholar Rudolf Kjellen, who used geographical location to explain international political phenomena; and analyses and predicts the strategic situation in the world or in a region as well as the political behavior of countries concerned according to the geographical elements and the regional forms of the political pattern; regards the geographical factor as a basic factor influencing or even deciding the political behavior of a country, which is absorbed by the theory of international relations and has considerable impact on the political decision-making of a country. In the 19th century when the industrial revolution matured, people found that the sea, land and land-sea junctions became the concentrated areas of national development and an important means of controlling the world. Based on the above aspects, three geopolitical theories emerged.

The old Silk Road is formidable, but people-to-people exchanges never stop.

(1) Mahan's sea power theory

Alfred S. Mahan's works entitled "The Influence of Sea Power upon History" and "Naval Power" show the value and effectiveness of sea power to the state, and put forward the conditions for strengthening sea power. He believes that a strong maritime power, namely the navy, must be established. He points out that when an ocean is not only the border of a country, or not only just surrounds a country, but also divides a country into two or more parts, controlling the ocean is not only a desire, but a matter of vital importance to the survival of a country. Such natural conditions either contribute to the birth and strength of its navy or weaken its country.

In his view, ocean is the center of the world stage. Whoever has mastered the key points of the world's throat will control the economic and security lifelines of all countries in the world, and then further control the world in a disguised way. From a historical point of view, he links the rise and fall of a world power with the maritime war, and concludes that the struggle for the dominance of the sea would play a decisive impact on the dominating country and even the fate of the world, as well as the sea power and the rise and fall of the country are closely related. In his view, the importance of sea power is twofold: one is to control the sea through naval superiority; the other is to build a wealthy and powerful country synergy by developing maritime trade, seizing overseas territory, and gaining the privileges of overseas markets. The so-called sea power has both military and international trade implications. A maritime country for competitions must master an offensive naval fleet.

Mahan lived in an era when the United States began expanding overseas. Whether it was maritime trade or the struggle for overseas colonies, American maritime strength did play a decisive role. Superficially, Mahan studied the importance of oceans to the growth of a country over hundred years before, actually, his sea power theory is just adapted to the theoretical needs of American overseas expansion. The United States, surrounded by two oceans, always regards Mahan's theory of sea power as the basic strategy of governing and rejuvenating the country.

(2) Mackinder's Heart land Theory

In 1904, Halford Mackinder published a paper entitled "Geographical Hub of History", which called the central region of Eurasia the Hub Zone and the hub for world politics. In 1919, he changed the "hub zone" to the "heartland" of the "world island", covering the three continents of Europe, Asia and Africa. Mackinder maintains that world history can be interpreted as a confrontation between land power and sea power from the geopolitical perspective, and holds that the two counterparts are always in a state of rising and declining strength, and match each other. He points out that the central hub region of international politics extends from the Eastern European Plain to the Siberian Plain, which is a broad region, the "hub zone". When we have a rapid review of this vast historical wave, don’t we feel that there is a clear continuity of some geographical relationship? Isn't the vast region of Eurasia, where ships couldn't reach but horsemen and herdsmen could gallop around in ancient times, and are full of railways nowadays, a hub zone of world politics? Mackinder envisioned that the heartland would include Germany, Turkey, India and China on the edge of Eurasia, as well as Britain, South Africa and Japan.

In the year 1919, changes took place in Russia. Mackinder proposed that the scope of the hub zone should be further expanded, including Eastern Europe and Siberia, which he calls the "heartland". Mackinder takes Asia, Europe and Africa as "world islands" and proposes that "whoever rules Eastern Europe will control the "heartland"; whoever rules the "heartland" will control the world islands; and whoever rules the world islands will control the world." Similarly, Mackinder lived in the era when Asian and European powers competed for the sphere of influence on land. His description of the Heartland theory had a profound impact on the contentions among the strong powers.

(3) Spykman's Rimland Theory

In the 20th century, Nicholas Spykman, an American, believes that it is not the heartland of Eurasia that poses a threat to the strong maritime powers, but the rimland of Eurasia between the heartland of Eurasia and the coastal zones controlled by Western powers that is the key to the contention for global sovereignty.

In his view, the rimland status of the world will continue to rise in the future world political architecture and become the key regions to dominate the coastal areas. This region has a large population, abundant natural resources and human wealth, around which there is surrounding sea and transportation line linking with the whole so-called sea power states agglomerated region, with developed sea-land transportation. Spykman points out that the region where the world's wealth is concentrated is no longer the heartland of the relatively closed and backward Eurasian continent. Since the Industrial Revolution, the industrial and trade systems developed along the continental margins of Europe and Asia have shifted the focus of the world to the marginal regions. Spykman sees that after the 19th century, the rapid development of navigation technology laid a solid foundation for maritime trade. European and American powers continues to extend their borders along the ocean or buffer zones between them to compete for colonies. Therefore, controlling the rimland (marginal zone) is to control the Eurasian continent, and controlling the Eurasian continent is to control the world.

Spykman divides the world into three centers of gravity: North America and its Pacific coastal region, Europe and its coastal region, and the Far East coastal region of Eurasia. The alliance between Germany and Japan means that the two countries will join hands to control the three power centers in Eurasia and poses a threat to the United States. The United States must join hands with Britain and other countries to ensure its status as a world-class power. Spykman changed Makinder's wording to "whoever controls the rimland rules Eurasia; whoever rules Eurasia controls the destiny of the world.

III. The geographical theory becomes the theoretical basis for the great powers to compete for hegemony a century ago

Geopolitical theory comes into being with development of the times, and also poses an impact on the evolution of the times. Here we may just discuss how Makinder and Spykman influence the decision-making of the countries concerned.

(1) Makinder's Heartland Theory

After the outbreak of World War II, President Roosevelt of the United States was worried about the occupation of Eurasia by the Axis powers. He said that if we allow the world outside the United States to fall under the control of the Axis countries, the Axis countries would acquire much more shipbuilding facilities in Europe, the British Isles and the Far East than the current and potential shipbuilding facilities throughout the North America - not simply more, but twice or three times more. Under such circumstances, even if the United States spares no effort to double or even redouble its naval power, the Axis countries, because of controlling the rest of the world, would have enough capacity and material resources to make them several times more powerful.

After the outbreak of the Soviet-German war, President Truman of the United States declared that if Germany was wining, we should help the Soviet Union; if the Soviet Union was wining, we should help Germany, and let them fight together, the more fierce the better. Describing the importance of controlling the heartland, George Kennan of the United States said that the Soviet Union should make efforts to advance the formal boundaries of the Soviet regime wherever they thought the time was right and wherever it was promising. Back then, such efforts were temporarily limited to some nearby locations deemed to be directly needed strategically, such as northern Iran, Turkey... A potential Soviet political power expanded to new regions, and problems may occur elsewhere at any time. After the beginning of the Cold War, Makinder's Heartland Theory was the basis for Western countries to launch containment against the Soviet Union. Truman, Kennan and others continued Makinder's theory.

The disintegration of the Soviet Union did not desalinate Western concerns about the control of the heartland by Eurasian countries. Former President's National Security Adviser Brzezinski said that for the United States, Eurasia is the most important geopolitical goal... Now, the United States, a big non-Eurasian country, has gained a pivotal position here. Whether the United States can maintain this position in a lasting and effective manner will directly affect its control over global affairs. He further pointed out that from Lisbon to Vladivostok, the Eurasian chessboard is the central stage for determining the future stability and prosperity of the world and the dominant position of the United States in the world... The primary task of the United States is to ensure that no country or a group of countries has the ability to drive the United States out of Eurasia, or even greatly weaken the critical arbitration role of the United States.

Just after the end of the Cold War, the Western countries issued a blank check to Russia: NATO will not expand eastward. Today, NATO has expanded to Russia’s border. The deployment of missile defense systems by the United States in Eastern Europe and Northeast Asia is not a simple military project, but a strategic means to squeeze the two major countries on the Eurasian continents. The United States openly said that it is directed at Iran and North Korea, but the missile defense plan aimed at China and Russia is very obvious.

From December 2017 to February 2018, the Trump Administration issues several reports, having proposed to compete strategically with China and Russia, and believes that Iran and North Korea are only direct and realistic threats in the near future, and in the long run, the rapid development of China and the revival of Russia pose challenges to the hegemonic status of the United States. The Trump Administration is making the biggest adjustment of strategic focus after the end of the Cold War. The United States tries to encircle the two major countries in Eurasia from political, economic, military and diplomatic fields. Currently, whether Trump can complete the shift of strategic focus depends not only on their strategic objectives, but also on the U.S. ability to challenge Russia and China at the same time.

(2) Spykman's Rimland Theory

Spykman points out that with the modern navigation and communication technology, ocean is no longer a barrier, but a super highway. Therefore, the United States cannot become isolated and must intervene in Eurasia to maintain the balance of power. The end of the war is not the end of power struggle. Spykman argues that complete annihilation of Germany or Japan should be avoided because Russia from the Urals to the North Sea in Europe is no better than Germany, while complete elimination of Japan in Asia also be avoided. Russia is the largest strong power in Eurasia, while China is the strong power in East Asia. Germany should be balanced by France and Eastern Europe (including Russia), while Britain and the United States must maintain the Eurasian sea and air connection. The marginal regions of Europe, the Middle East and the Far East will be the areas with the highest strategic significance in the postwar. And the United States must ensure that no strong power will emerge in these regions. Because he predicts that based on China's size, geographical location, natural resources and population size, China would become a strong mainland power, then, the United States would have to work with Japan to maintain the balance of power in Asia.

Spykman in his works believes that the Eurasian continental marginal regions must be seen as an intermediate region between the continental heartland and the marginal sea. When maritime forces clash with land forces, this area can become a huge buffer zone. Facing this area, we must defend ourselves from both land and sea and play a role. In the past, it had to contend with land forces at the rim-land of the continents and offshore islands forces such as Britain and Japan. Therefore, the land-water duality of this marginal zone is the basis of its security. Spykman's Rimland theory provides a theory for Western countries to initiate containment of two socialist countries in Eurasia. U.S. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, State Department official George Kennan and other initiators of containment policies had learned a lot from Spykman.

After the Cold War, the United States put forward the strategy of power projection from "sea to land", the main idea of which is that with the disappearing Soviet navy, the task of the U.S. Navy to engage in warfare in the ocean and control the high seas has changed to the control of the coastal areas. The rim-land areas are densely populated, economically developed and defensively weak. The U.S. Navy, on the one hand, must control the coastal areas, on the other hand, must also have the ability to deliver power from sea to land. From the 1991 Gulf War, the 1999 Kosovo War, and the 2003 Iraq War that overthrew the Saddam Hussein's regime, the United States and its allies took the maritime advantages to launch attacks against land targets and achieved strategic objectives. Then, the U.S. military put forward the operational concept of "air-sea battle" and regarded the sea-land junction areas as the main battlefield in the future for the United States, with the same purpose of strengthening control over the coastal areas. In January 2015, Air Force Lieutenant General David Goldfein, director and Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, signed a memorandum renaming the operational concept of "air-sea battle" as joint concept for access and maneuver in the global commons (JAM-GC), but the United States does not leave the control and contention at the land-sea junctions.

IV. The Belt and Road Initiative transcends the traditional geopolitical theory.

In September 2013, President Xi Jinping visited Kazakhstan and proposed to build the Silk Road Economic Belt with innovative cooperation mode at Nazarbayev University. In October of the same year, President Xi Jinping visited ASEAN and proposed in Indonesia to develop a good maritime partnership and jointly build the Maritime Silk Road of the 21st Century. The Belt and Road Initiative enter the world's vision and has become an important part of China's foreign policy. In March 2015, the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Commerce jointly issue a document on the Vision and Action to Promote the Construction of the Silk Road Economic Belt and the Maritime Silk Road in 21st Century, and expound the connotation and denotation of Belt and Road Initiative. The Silk Road is a symbol of East-West exchanges and cooperation, as well as a world historical and cultural heritage. Its spiritual essence is peaceful cooperation, openness and inclusiveness, mutual learning and drawing strength from each other, mutual benefit and win-win results. President Xi Jinping proposed the Belt and Road Initiative in order to revitalize the ancient Silk Road.

The basic principle of the Belt and Road Initiative is extensive consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits. The Initiative refers to two tangible roads and a cooperation spirit, with which various countries voluntarily participate, work together to share their achievements and pursue common development. The basic connotation is "five connectivity": policy communication, facility linkage, trade uninterrupted, capital financing and people-to-people ties. The Belt and Road runs through Europe, Asia and Africa. One end is China, which has undergone fundamental changes in the past 40 years of reform and opening up, is the engine of the world economy and has a growing influence in the world. The other end is the developed countries in Europe, the countries in between have great potential for economic development.

The Belt and Road Initiative is not closed but inclusive and open. In the process of construction, it is not a Chinese solo, but a chorus of various countries along the routes. Over the past 5 years, more than 100 countries and international organizations have actively supported and participated in the construction of the Belt and Road. The Initiative has been incorporated into important resolutions such as the UN Security Council. Former Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi said that as an Italian, this is a historical memory, and the then Silk Road from Venice to China now comes back.

The Belt and Road Initiative brings new energy to African development, a 480-km long railway by China was in operation in 2017 in Kenya.

V. The three geopolitical theories should not be mentioned with the Belt and Road Initiative in the same breath

Superficially, the Belt and Road Initiative covers three traditional geopolitical theories: the Maritime Silk Road in 21st Century involves long sea lanes including Southeast Asia, and the Silk Road Economic Belt passes through the heartland described by Makinder. If we take the Belt and Road Initiative and the three geopolitical theories in the historical and realistic studies, we will find that the inferences made by the American elites do not conform to historical trajectary, realistic logic and future trend. Let me discuss from the perspectives of the times, technological development. etc.

(1) Geo-doctrine bears a distinct brand of the times and space.

The emergence and development of any theory and its impact on national decision-making and international relations must be the concrete reflection of the times. Contentions among different countries in different periods for sea, land and sea-land junctions become geopolitical experts focus. At the end of the 15th century, with the opening of the great maritime navigation era, the discussions of geopolitical theorists were extended to the ocean. In the 17th century, the theories of international trade, maritime navigation and navigation freedom on the high seas came into being. At the end of the 19th century, the major powers equipped with guns and canons, various states spare no effort to use war in order to compete for geo-advantages. During the two world wars, the rise of geopolitical theory was largely related to the division of the sphere of influence by belligerents. After the beginning of the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union established military alliances of their own, and the confrontation extended from land to sea to outer space, resulting in the emergence of the "high frontier theory".

The emergence and expansion of geopolitical theory are not but closely related to the background of the times. Before the Industrial Revolution, the national strength of a country originated from vast land and large population, and the growth of social wealth mainly depend on agriculture and animal husbandry. To become strong, a country must build up a strong army to acquire strategic areas by attacking cities, grabbing land and conquering more people. The birth background of the heartland theory showed a strong portrayal of the agricultural revolution. Many wars sweeping across Europe before the First World War meant contending for continental dominance.

After the Industrial Revolution, the demand of capital for markets and raw materials is far beyond the scope of a country. Capital accumulation becomes the source of social wealth growth, the nature of which has a strong expansibility. Thus, national political leaders and business giants focus their attention on the world, coupled with the development of navigation industry, trade across oceans is bound to become a new space for powerful country to contest. Strong powers conquer more colonies and acquire markets and resources by controlling sea power. In this context, maintaining control over maritime lanes become inevitable for the strong powers to contend, so as to consolidate and expand their overseas colonies and refuse other strong powers to gain more markets and raw materials.

The Second World War redefined the geopolitical boundaries. Anti-colonialism surged after the war, and national liberation and independence became the main contents of geopolitical research. Comrade Mao Zedong's Theory of Three Worlds is widely recognized by the international community. In addition, with the advent weapons of nuclear missiles, policy-makers of major countries dare not rashly resort to force to resolve disputes. During this period, three geopolitical theories withdrew from the center of the stage, and the Cold War became the core content of geopolitical theory.

After entering the 21st century, the process of political multipolarization, economic globalization, information society and cultural diversity has accelerated. The era goes far beyond the single convergence of "geography + political power", which binds various countries together in terms of mutual connection, either prosperity or loss. British scholars point out that geopolitics represent a new consciousness... The old geopolitical viewpoints focused on the analysis of a part of the territory, and the States pay attention to the pursuit of its maximum interests, even though these would lead to confrontation and war, which they usually did. Its common theme is space, power and the relationship between the two. …While the new geopolitical vision is global. Its fundamental proposition is taking the world as a whole, is an effective way to solve many problems with global impact, and that no solution to the "regional" problem is isolated and divorced from its broader context.

The defects of traditional geo-theories is that it takes a certain space as its basic point. From the initial sea power and heartland power to the later rimland power theory, they show obvious limitations of time and space. When looking at the geo-theories of the 20th century, on many occasions, theorists summary becomes the theoretical basis for a country's pursuit of becoming an empire, carrying out colonial plunder, expansion, aggression and even serving war. Compared with the traditional geopolitical theories, China's Belt and Road Initiative has the characteristics of the times, does not pursue the control of a certain region as a starting point, but advocates extensive consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits, building a new international relationship and building a community with a shared destiny. In terms of the national development strategy, China has neither strategic intentions nor has the ability to control sea, land and sea-land junctions.

(2) Technological progress catalyzes different geopolitical theories

The advancement of science and technology is the motive force of social change, and catalyzes the theory of geopolitics from different aspects. New science and technology have brought about changes in the mode of production, industrial revolution, international division of labor, capital flow, resources and market allocation, etc. which also lead to profound changes in international politics, international relations and international trade, and provide new imagination and practical space for geopolitical research.

In the late nineteenth century, the United States took the lead in launching the scientific and technological revolution represented by electricity, steel and transportation, and then rapidly expanded to Europe. This global technological revolution upgraded social productivity, changed production relations, reshaped the form of war, formed monopolies and financial oligarchs, and established national interest groups, whose needs for overseas markets influenced the operation of state machinery, and to ensure control over the oceans is self-evident in front of national policy makers. The information technology revolution that began in the 1970s has brought about the interconnectivity and interoperability of the international community. The density and frequency of exchanges between countries are strengthened unprecedentedly, and the interdependence also greatly increases, so the geopolitical theory that only advocates controlling a certain region is obviously out of date.

Technological innovation expands human activity space, and the power meaning of different space increases. The three geopolitical theories have the color of technological progress. Following the sailing boat, mankind enters the era of steam power. It is the Mahan's theory of sea power that portrays the human use of ocean transportation technology and the use of the ocean to pursue national power. In the early 20th century, the development of railway technology changed the advantages of maritime power, especially the construction of diesel locomotives and modern highway network, which make the land more accessible than the ocean. Since then, the vast Eurasian continents become an important competitive field in world geopolitics. Makinder therefore believes that the technology once beneficial to maritime power begins to turn to land power in the early 20th century, and put forward the theory of Heartland. With the development of technology, human activities in ocean, on land and in air show the characteristics of integration, while the wealth of prosperous countries is more concentrated at the land-ocean junction areas, which is what Spykman described as the Rimland zone.

In the 1970s, driven by the tide of globalization, the world formed a more interdependent and intensive network. Broadly speaking, we have moved from a system of building walls to separate each other to a system of building a world-wide network to connect people closely. Human beings are moving towards a new space -- cyberspace. Geopolitics is also showing a trend of global networking: the global Internet, communication facilities, databases, cable TV, all of which make the dependence on resources and markets and actions enter a new space. This space has completely broken the domestic and foreign strict restrictions in the traditional sense. No country can establish its own internal affairs and diplomacy without considering the geopolitical space of other countries, and can only safeguard its own national interests.

An open and mutually beneficial mode of cooperation must replace the outdated relationship among capital, market and raw materials. A country must organically integrate its geopolitical needs with those of other countries and even the global geopolitical needs. Strong powers can only have national interests recognized by other countries, which are arranged through relevant international mechanisms so as to ensure that these interests can be consolidated and developed. Geopolitics under the conditions of globalization must acquire a commonly recognized community with a shared destiny, rather than an one-dimensional land, ocean or land-ocean junction. The Belt and Road advocated by China is the crystallization of human technological progress. The "five connectivity" it advocates need to be supported by contemporary technology, conversely, they will also inevitably promote the upgrading and progress of technology.

VI. The Belt and Road Initiative leads development of the times

To sum up, China's Belt and Road Initiative is definitely neither the integration of the three traditional geopolitical theories, nor provides theoretical services for China to dominate the world, nor simply the practice of either heartland power theory, or sea power theory or Rimland theory.

First, it conforms to the trend of the times. Political multipolarity prevents any country from becoming self-centered and acting alone as it did in the past. Economic globalization makes various countries in the world industrial chain interlinked and complement each other, and the interdependence of economic life among various countries is unprecedented. Information society accelerates the evolution of resource, capital, talent, information and market allocation, closing oneself behind door can only be separated from the world. Cultural diversity also adds luster to the earth we live on, and it is difficult for a single flower to stand out for a long time. "No country can respond to the challenges facing mankind alone, nor can any country retreat to a self-enclosed island."

Secondly, it upholds the spirit of open regional cooperation and is committed to safeguarding the global free trade system and the open world economy. The Belt and Road aims at promoting orderly and free flow of economic elements, efficient allocation of resources and market deep integration, and promoting the coordination of economic policies among various countries along the routes, carrying out regional cooperation in a wider range, and at higher level with greater in-depth, and jointly building an open, inclusive, balanced and universal regional economic cooperation framework.

Thirdly, it proposes a global governance program full of Chinese wisdom. "Building the Belt and Road is in line with the fundamental interests of the international community, highlighting the common ideals and aspirations of the human society, and is a positive exploration of a new mode for international cooperation and global governance, and will add new positive energy to world peace and development. In the period of great development, great change and great adjustment, different countries have adopted different responses. After Trump took over the White House, he frequently withdrew from collectively signed documents, showing an inclination of narrow unilateralism, and the trade war he launched even more chilled the international community. Against such a backdrop, China's programs such as the Belt and Road Initiative are particularly important and valuable.

(Edited excerpts of the article in China Foreign Affairs No. 3, 2019)