Just to be clear, the military is the probably the best institution that can deliver on this sort of project.
But in terms of overall political governance of the country, having the military in charge is a recipe for disaster
China's Westward One Belt One Road Strategy
- Thread starter tidalwave
- Start date
Just to be clear, the military is the probably the best institution that can deliver on this sort of project.
But in terms of overall political governance of the country, having the military in charge is a recipe for disaster
Then it's a good thing that half the world's population lives within 500km of the sea, and that 80% of the world's population lives within 800km of the sea. As stated before, 500km is a day return trip by a car or truck, for door-to-door transport.
Plus you have to factor in access via rivers, like the Yangtse or Mississipi which extend maritime commerce deep inland.
I don't disagree that there needs to be investments in both inland and coastal infrastructure, but the vast majority of investment should end up supporting waterborne commerce.
This was the same model that was practiced in China. Develop the coastal regions first because they have easy access to the ocean. Because there is far more opportunity, profit and economic benefit than inland.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
I believe the reason why they started with the coast is simply because the east coast is easily the most developed part of China, and the center of industry. Having been port treaty throughout the 20th century. They already have the basic infrastructure
When the reform started most of the port in the east coast is still undeveloped . It was not until 1980 that they developed modern port beside Shanghai and Tianjin with the help of Japanese expertise I believe it involve something like 20 ports modernization
The other consideration is access and proximity to capital, expertise and market . Case in point is Guangzhou to Hongkong, Tianjin to Japan, Xiamen to SEA etc.
At that time China is still poor and the first consideration getting all the good imported from the sea . There is no grand plan for BRI or maritime silk road.
It is more of survival mode with the hope that the development will spread inland
Trade with outside world is limited to Guangzhou fair very limited
Last edited:
plawolf
Lieutenant General
I seriously question your maths here. 500km round trip is 1000km total distance. You need to average 100km/h to make that journey in 10hs, which is pretty much as long as someone could reasonable drive in a day safety.
So in order to make that journey by your timetable, you need very good motorways in place, which is exactly what OBOR is doing.
Without that infrastructure already in place, 500km might as well be 5 million km if there are only dirty roads, or even no roads, and weak ancient bridges that could not hope to bare the weight of a truck empty, never mind crammed with goods.
Problem with that reasoning is that you are totally ignoring all the investment that has already been poured into supporting water borne transport over the decades and centuries.
If you already have good infrastructure in place, adding more will yield diminishing returns on your investment.
The Chinese government is aiming for maximum bang for their buck here.
And they are operating on a timeframe of decades, not just the next quarterly profit report.
As the old saying goes, build a road and they will come.
We are already seeing this in Europe, with previously sleepy and in terminal decline towns and cities getting a massive revival and new growth explosion as a result of the China-Europe railway line stopping there.
In time, existing towns along the new Silk Road will grow to become cities, and entirely new cities will come into being along its route, much as the ancient Silk Road helped to spawn and sustain major population centres along its route.
All of these new cities and their populations will be fully integrated into a China-centric transport and trade network, so would become consumers of Chinese goods/services and suppliers for Chinese companies.
In time, these newly creates markets and trade opportunities will help western China develop and modernise, much like how sea bases trade did for eastern China.
solarz
Brigadier
Just because something is, doesn't mean it will always be. With the world's local population densities becoming more and more of a problem, it pays in the long term to invest in technologies that can distribute population centers more evenly.
The flaw with your sea/land shipping comparison is that you assume they are in competition. Land-based trade routes are not about finding alternatives to sea routes, they are about exploring new markets and creating new opportunities.
Now you're trying to argue with the laws of physics between land based transport and water based transport. How much energy is needed for each mode of transport, and well does each mode scale upwards?
And it would be lovely if we all had access to a new technology like a low cost teleporter which would make everywhere accessible at any time.
But one has to plan on what is achievable in the real world.
===
And land based trade routes are in competition with water borne routes.
We can see that with the Europe-China trains, where low value goods still take the boat, and only higher value time-sensitive goods take the faster train.
But given the huge amount of trade from China to Europe, this rail route should still be a huge success just by capturing a fraction of the trade. But at the end of the day, it is the seaborne trading network that will be many times larger and more important.
500km is a the ballpark maximum distance, and yes, that would make a 10 hour day for a truck or car.
I don't doubt that new cities will appear on the land based transport routes that China is building and will create a China-centric trading network. But the biggest bang for buck will come from the coastal investments.
If we just look at Gwadar, that has the potential to become another Shenzhen at breakneck speed. We're talking about an entirely new city of 10+ million people over the past 30 years, which is now at the wealth and R&D levels of Korea/Taiwan.
There is simply no way that a Shenzhen could happen unless situated next to the coast with a major seaport.
But in general, it's a good thing that China has ample resources to expand both the land and maritime routes.
solarz
Brigadier
A ship can reach only the ports on its route. A train can stop at any location along its railway. Trains can go where ships can't. Train technology don't need to be more efficient than ships, they just need to generate enough revenue to justify their cost.
That's partially correct.
For example, Guangdong was poor and de-industrialised because it was viewed as too vulnerable to foreign attack.
But because Shenzhen was just across the border from Hong Kong and had access to the seaport, it was an easy place to locate factories.
And you have to ask, why does industry tend to cluster on the coast? Is it because the coast has easy access to the low coast global trading network?
A rail route is fixed.
In comparison, there are thousands of ports in the global shipping network.