BRI and the Scientific method

 

The story below suggests that China has overreached with BRI. It may be the case. I see the “facts” as evidence of something else.

 

We will all recall that China imposed a severe break on funds moving out of China under the guise of Going Global. Much was questioned as flight capital, and getting on a bandwagon when the Chinese investor was not experienced enough to do what they were doing.

 

What followed was a review of which the slowdown was a first signal. Many private sector companies were “reorganised” and their offshore investments divested, or in the process of being divested.

 

Controls were also imposed to limit any attempts by companies to establish offshore shelters.

 

Soe’s were brought under a stricter alignment with the national plan in their moves offshore. The role of the Party Committees was more clearly established, and repeated in several arenas.

 

The institutions of Party and Government , once separated between Policy – Party, and Implementation – Government, with NDRC the bridge for major policy, is now being compressed into a fused set of management structures. It is not the end of Party and Government, but a realignment during the transition of China into its next phase towards 2049 – a story in itself.

 

So the Going out, or Going global was reassessed as part of their well tested Scientific Method. We can begin to see the effects of the policy changes.

 

But back to BRI and is it slowing down or proving flawed? Maybe. Maybe it is the next phase when a review is being undertaken after the first phase of implementation.

 

My experience tells me it is a phase of review. In that phase the analysis of what has happened is finalised, approvals are tightened, and the new policies, or amended policies, are agreed and quietly implemented.

 

So much has changed in the world since they began, and so much has changed in the outcomes of BRI, that it absolutely needs updating.

 

I would view this time as the moment BRI was prepared for a more effective targeting and its targets moved.

 

Of course some might say I look at China with tinted glasses, but I do think that reaction to China leads to misreading of China. I have something in common with President Trump in that regard!

 

Just my sense.

 

Stephen

 

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/06/29/business/china-belt-and-road-slows.html?emc=edit_th_180630&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=662216830630

 

 

 



Categories: Uncategorized

%d bloggers like this: