Skip to main content

Ideologically biased Western media distort Belt and Road coverage


By Leonid Mironov | China Daily Global | Updated: 2020-08-25 09:01
ZHONG JINYE/FOR CHINA DAILY

Studying the Belt and Road Initiative, after the fact that too few people in the West pay attention to it at all, a more striking disappointment is the fact that the Western media seem to have made up their collective minds on the subject with preconceptions and political bias.

Much of their coverage persists with blaming China, carrying on a framework of deeply negative perspectives on the BRI painted by the Center for a New American Security, a United States-based think tank, in its report last year.

As a result, they got a lot of things wrong, often missing the point of the BRI and the benefits it could bring to partner countries.

The report makes two central points: Economically, the projects aren't beneficial to the host country, as they are wasteful, unnecessary, opaque and place undue burden on the host state's coffers. Politically, they present risks of erosion of sovereignty and environmental degradation and jeopardize the host country's data integrity.

Such statements bespeak the ignorance with which BRI projects are perceived.

An obvious example to consider is the Hambantota port deal. The Western media's take is that China lent money to build the port. When the bills were due, Sri Lanka could not pay and, consequently, China requisitioned the port. But this is not what happened.

The port still belongs to Sri Lanka, since it merely sold the right to operate to China Merchants Port Holdings Co for $1.12 billion due to its accumulated losses of $300 million by 2016. After bringing in a capable operator, the port was able to generate a profit, and last year reached the mark of 1 million tons per year.

The issues with the port have always been about public purse management rather than an imaginary, rapacious Chinese hegemon attempting to exploit a much poorer country.

The reality is that the project has created new trade routes for the local economy and new jobs for Sri Lankans. It is already paying for itself, which is exactly what BRI projects are designed to do.

After unjustly castigating the port project, not a single publication has issued a retraction on the matter three years after the naysayers have been proved wrong.

Things get murkier when examining the BRI under a political prism. The Western media and government critics' perennial theme on Chinese joint ventures is graft and political influence.

Let's consider the Malaysian example. The Western media likes to belittle BRI projects as "aircraft carrier-ready" ports and have cheered the postponement of the rail link. Now that the dust has settled, the fact that the projects have been reinstated is a clear validation of the project's concept.

The "new broom" brought in by the new Malaysian administration could not find much wrong with the original project.

The Western narrative can be summarized as the BRI's exploitation of Malaysia, when, in reality, it has always been the problem of Malaysia putting its house in order. It has never been about China treading on its partner country's national sovereignty or economic interests.

This also showcases China's flexibility in implementing the BRI projects. Once it becomes clear that the host country, Malaysia in this case, wants to review its spending commitments, the Chinese side has accommodated the host.

China views the host nations as equal partners, and it is more than willing to adjust should the local popular sentiment demand it. Has China's accommodating attitude been lauded by the Western media? Not once.

The truth is that China is not employing the BRI to extend its influence at the expense of its partner countries, as some Western media would have you believe.

It is just a straightforward developmental initiative to help emerging economies achieve their economic potential, usually by developing their infrastructure, a vital backbone for any economic development.

The Chinese companies are involved for their capital and expertise, and their share of interest is very clearly specified. It is neither aid nor influence-buying. No underhanded dealings are involved.

Unlike some leading Western democracies, China does not comment on, much less interfere with, the internal politics or leadership of other countries. On that basis, it was able to deal with the governments of all countries to help lift their people out of poverty, as China has done so successfully with its own people.

The Western media coverage of the BRI has clearly been distorted by ideological bias, in some cases obviously egged on by various political leaders. Hence, it is up to the Chinese stakeholders, mostly media and financial institutions, to rectify the misconceptions among readers and investors.

But Western media's penchant for demonizing China must cease, as it will serve no useful purpose for any party.

The author is an analyst, portfolio manager and private equity adviser focusing on commodities and infrastructure projects, with particular emphasis on energy and the Belt and Road Initiative. The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Menon meets Karzai, discusses security of Indians

Kabul/New Delhi/Washington, March 5 (IANS) India Friday said that the Feb 26 terror attack in Kabul will not deter it from helping rebuild Afghanistan as National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon met Afghan President Hamid Karzai in Kabul to review the security of around 4,000 Indians working in that country. Menon, who arrived here Friday morning on a two-day visit, discussed with Karzai some proposals to bolster security of Indians engaged in a wide array of reconstruction activities, ranging from building roads, bridges and power stations to social sector projects. The Indian government is contemplating a slew of steps to secure Indians in Afghanistan, including setting up protected venues where the Indians working on various reconstruction projects will be based. Deploying dedicated security personnel at places where Indians work is also being considered. Menon also met his Afghan counterpart Rangin Dadfar Spanta and enquired about the progress in the probe into the Kabul atta

Iran is losing the game to regional actors in its strategic depth

Rethink before It’s Too Late http://www.irdiplomacy.ir/index.php?Lang=en&Page=21&TypeId=15&ArticleId=7108&BranchId=19&Action=ArticleBodyView Iran is losing the game to regional actors in its strategic depth –Afghanistan. By Houman Dolati It is no more a surprise to see Iran absent in Afghanistan affairs. Nowadays, the Bonn Conference and Iran’s contributions to Afghanistan look more like a fading memory. Iran, which had promised of loans and credit worth five-hundred million dollars for Afghanistan, and tried to serve a key role, more than many other countries, for reconstruction and stabilization of Afghanistan, is now trying to efface that memory, saying it is a wrong path, even for the international community. Iran’s empty seat in the Rome Conference was another step backward for Afghanistan’s influential neighbor. Many other countries were surprised with Iran’s absence. Finding out the vanity of its efforts to justify absence in Rome, Iran tried to start its

Pakistani firm whose chemicals were used to kill US troops seeks subsidy for Indiana plant

By Jennifer Griffin, Justin Fishel Published March 22, 2013   A Pakistani fertilizer maker whose chemicals have been used in 80 percent of the roadside bombs that have killed and maimed American troops in Afghanistan is now seeking U.S. taxpayer subsidies in order to open a factory in Indiana.  The request appears to be on hold pending further review, but the situation has stirred outrage in Congress, where some accuse the Pakistani government of halting efforts to clamp down on the bomb-making.  For the past seven years, the U.S. government has known that the raw material calcium ammonium nitrate, or CAN, is making its way across the border into Afghanistan where the Taliban use it to fuel their most deadly weapons, namely the improvised explosive device. IEDs have long been the number one killer of U.S. and coalition troops.  The material largely comes from Pakistani fertilizer maker the Fatima Group. But the Pakistani government has stymied attempts by the Pentagon to stop the