China's Westward One Belt One Road Strategy

azesus

Junior Member
Registered Member
For every Venice Beach there are tons more the less lucky ones that live in the hinterlands. OBOR is about building roads and connect them into the market. You must've think most people are like surfer dude growing up with Baywatch babes and enjoying an afternoon White Man can't Jump pick up basketball games. You must've never been LA's 405 Freeway for such rosy traffic estimates
 

delft

Brigadier
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.
Another way to look at this matter:
Around 1800 any land in US more than 15 miles from navigable water was pretty useless unless to farm cattle that could walk to market. Think of the immense impact of the Erie canal that was opened in 1824. The real change came with the building of the rail roads. China is doing the same on a vastly larger scale, not reaching from the Atlantic to the Pacific but from the Pacific to the Atlantic.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Uh what? You're comparing the global shipping network with a single rail route now?

You said that a ship can only reach ports on its route.
However, ships do and can change which ports they serve, whereas a railway line is fixed.
Plus it is a lot easier to tranship containers in a port whereas the railways have generally lagged behind in this regard.

Plus it is valid to perform cost-benefit analyses of investments in ports versus a railway line, and it would be foolish not to.

We only have to look at the experience within China to what will likely happen with the railway investments in BRI. If we're talking about building brand new railways, there will be years of financial losses, but if we look at a 30 year timescale, there should be a huge economic return.

In comparison, ports require a much smaller upfront investment, and can be expanded incrementally to meet demand. Therefore they can remain profitable at every stage.

Again, I agree that China should be making both rail and sea investments as they all do make economic sense over the long-run, and China clearly has the spare industrial and financial capacity to do both.

But we should all recognise that maritime investments have a much stronger economic case.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Another way to look at this matter:
Around 1800 any land in US more than 15 miles from navigable water was pretty useless unless to farm cattle that could walk to market. Think of the immense impact of the Erie canal that was opened in 1824. The real change came with the building of the rail roads. China is doing the same on a vastly larger scale, not reaching from the Atlantic to the Pacific but from the Pacific to the Atlantic.

Absolutely correct.

Look at the experience of the UK for example.

The first transport revolution was based around Canals.
Then there was the development of the railways.

If a railway is built deep into an interior land, it will open up many opportunities that would never otherwise exist.

But the US experience is also very instructive in that most of the railways built in the 19th century LOST money for their investors, but still resulted in huge long-term economic gains for the US economy as a whole.
 

delft

Brigadier
But the US experience is also very instructive in that most of the railways built in the 19th century LOST money for their investors, but still resulted in huge long-term economic gains for the US economy as a whole.
That was because these investors were convinced by stories about the railways making money next year instead of in twelve or more years time. You saw the same in many British canal projects in the late 18th century. And with many of the turnpikes. But China is being led mostly by engineers with a good grasp of the timespan needed to make a success of such investments.
See my post in the American Economics thread on the rail road misery in Chicago.
 

Yvrch

Junior Member
Registered Member
You said that a ship can only reach ports on its route.
However, ships do and can change which ports they serve, whereas a railway line is fixed.
Plus it is a lot easier to tranship containers in a port whereas the railways have generally lagged behind in this regard.

Plus it is valid to perform cost-benefit analyses of investments in ports versus a railway line, and it would be foolish not to.

We only have to look at the experience within China to what will likely happen with the railway investments in BRI. If we're talking about building brand new railways, there will be years of financial losses, but if we look at a 30 year timescale, there should be a huge economic return.

In comparison, ports require a much smaller upfront investment, and can be expanded incrementally to meet demand. Therefore they can remain profitable at every stage.

Again, I agree that China should be making both rail and sea investments as they all do make economic sense over the long-run, and China clearly has the spare industrial and financial capacity to do both.

But we should all recognise that maritime investments have a much stronger economic case.

No single freight transportation mode reigns supreme. As in real life, there are always competing ground factors that decide which one is cheapest and which one is most practical for the purpose at hand.

North American NAFTA trade doesn't rely on maritime transportation, instead it heavily relies on trucks. Maybe seaborne shipping to/from Mexico a distant second. Air freight is second widely used mode in US Canada trade.

Land portion of OBOR is referred to as an economic belt, so these rail links are connectivity platforms that will stimulate exchange and growth of economic ideas and activity along this economic belt. Think of it like what Bloomberg do in financial services as a platform, everything at your finger tip in one go, all you need is multiple screens and time. Or a Wushi Nextcode. This Belt is a platform. And rails are cheapest in overland surface freight.

The focus is to provide a platform for connecting and stimulating the local economies and people along the belt over a very long period of time, not the theoretical value of how much a 21000 TEU container ship can save in freight charges if China can built a 70 feet deep canal along 47th parallel across Eurasia landmass.

A vision is only for risk takers.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
The overseas Chinese are at dilemma on one side they are lumped together with the recent arrival yet when they are in China they are considered foreigner. But they are the agent of prosperity.Interesting article about Myanmar China relation that hobbled by suspicion

Trade between China and Myanmar's second-largest city is bustling as Myanmar opens up its economic potential

PUBLISHED:
MAY 16, 2017, 5:00 AM SGT
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Regional Correspondent In Mandalay (Myanmar)
In a dusty corner of Mandalay, rows of Chinese nationals sit impassively by tables lined with white cloth on a betel-splattered sidewalk. Burmese traders crowd before them, holding up chunks of raw jade or sacks of bangles in a bid to interest them. The prospective buyers scrutinise the offerings, rejecting some with a flick of their finger.

This is a buyer's market, and a symbol of what many locals see as the kind of relationship Myanmar has with its powerful northern neighbour.

For decades, China was the main economic outlet for a Myanmar squeezed by Western sanctions, making it the largest cumulative investor in one of Asean's poorest countries. While Myanmar's transition from military to civilian rule is now opening the door to rival prospectors, China's imprint is deepening in Mandalay.

"People call this place Yunnan- Mandalay," says Mr Win Htay, a vice-president of the Mandalay Region Chamber of Commerce and Industry, referring to the Chinese province bordering Myanmar. "If you do business, and you don't work with Chinese, you simply can't make money."

Myanmar's second-largest city sits about 450km from the border with China by a major overland artery, along which anything from watermelons and sugar to fertiliser and machinery are transported between the two countries.

The former royal capital, once lined with traditional wooden homes, now bustles with hotpot restaurants and Chinese boutiques selling Duoyi women's fashion, Erke sportswear and Huawei smartphones.


ST_20170516_HYCHINESE1_3137855.jpg

A food stall at a night market in Mandalay advertises Chinese dishes on its menu. “They like Chinese people here,” said a Chinese construction worker. “We eat with the locals and we relax with them. It’s not difficult for us because they speak Mandarin too.” ST PHOTOS: TAN HUI YEE


Sidewalks by the moat surrounding its painstakingly restored ancient palace throb with the beat of Chinese techno music on mornings when groups of middle-aged women gather for line-dancing.

Yunnan traders are a fixture in Mandalay's sprawling jade market, wheeling and dealing in the Burmese language. Chinese migrant workers haggle in Mandarin with vegetable sellers on the street.



ST_20170516_HYCHINESE2_3137856.jpg

At the sprawling Mandalay jade market, a Chinese buyer inspects the jade pieces on offer by a Burmese trader. Yunnan traders are a fixture here, wheeling and dealing in the Burmese language. ST PHOTOS: TAN HUI YEE


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


On a national level, bilateral relations have recovered from a low in 2011, when then President Thein Sein, trying to address concerns about Myanmar's over-dependence on China, suspended work on the controversial China-backed Myitsone hydroelectric dam.

Chinese firms are still waiting to start work on parts of a special economic zone in Rakhine state that was awarded to them in 2015. But current President Htin Kyaw's visit to Beijing last month was capped by an agreement that fired up a 771km-long oil pipeline running from the coast of western Myanmar to the Yunnan capital of Kunming.

"They like Chinese people here," a Chinese construction worker, who gave only his surname Wang, told The Straits Times, after bantering with a vendor in a night market dubbed Mandalay's Chinatown. "We eat with the locals and we relax with them. It's not difficult for us because they speak Mandarin too."

The ethnic Chinese, who officially make up about 5 per cent of the city's 1.4-million population, control some of the biggest businesses around. For example, a 200 billion kyat (S$210 million), 20ha development comprising a mall, condominiums, offices and a five-star hotel called Mingalar Mandalay is being developed by a company founded by Myanmar-born ethnic Chinese entrepreneur Kyaw Kyaw Win.

Many of the second- or third-generation Chinese in Mandalay have their roots in Yunnan, though they are now Myanmar citizens. Yet, China's growing dominance in the region has put them in an awkward spotlight. They are often lumped together with recent arrivals, who were accused of using bribes to get identity documents when Myanmar was still under military rule, allowing them to start businesses and snap up prime property downtown. While various estimates of the influx have been made - including one of 300,000 Chinese in the 1990s - none can be proven.

"In Mandalay, they call us China people," laments Mr Yang Choung Myint, a third-generation Chinese and vice-chairman of the Mandalay Chinese Yunnan Association. "But when we go to China, they call us foreigners."



ST_20170516_HYCHINESE3RJD7_3137859.jpg

Advertisements for Chinese brands light up downtown Mandalay. The former royal capital, once lined with traditional wooden homes, now bustles with hotpot restaurants and Chinese boutiques selling Duoyi women’s fashion, Erke sportswear and Oppo smartphones. ST PHOTOS: TAN HUI YEE


On the ground, antipathy towards the Chinese is partly triggered by their wealth, but also coloured by the fear that China will export its pollutive industries and inferior products to Myanmar. "They do not protect the environment," says Mr Myo Naing Soe, a 27-year-old tour guide.

Mandalay mayor Ye Lwin, in an interview with The Straits Times, related how he had been approached by a Chinese company to build a solar energy plant in the city. He added: "For solar panels, quality is very important."


Among other things, Dr Ye Lwin hopes to eventually introduce a waste-to-energy plant, a real-time traffic light control system and a fibre-optic network in the city. But he will not rush into awarding projects to companies.



ST_20170516_HYCHINESE3XFK6_3137861.jpg

Chinese nationals at a Mandalay night market. China’s growing dominance in the region has put second- or third-generation Chinese in Mandalay in an awkward spotlight. They are often lumped together with recent arrivals, who were accused of using bribes to get identity documents when Myanmar was still under military rule, allowing them to start businesses and snap up prime property downtown. ST PHOTOS: TAN HUI YEE


"I will not allow a Chinese 'invasion'," he said. "There will be an equal chance for all."

In the meantime, Mandalay's Chinese hope bilateral relations will get cosier. "If China and Myanmar's relations get better, the local Chinese will benefit too," says Mr Myint Naing, director of the Mandalay Overseas Chinese Service Centre. "People would not resent us."
 
Last edited:

ahho

Junior Member
Well I think the locals should be angry about the local government on accepting the bribe. Sometimes, in order to build there, you have to pay local authority. Even if you go the legit road, the local authority would still block you from developing until you pay.
 

tidalwave

Senior Member
Registered Member
Burma is going back to China. It really disappointed that it initially turned away from China and toward the west. But after all said and done, No or every little western investment to show for in the country. On top of that, Burma got blasted internationally for its treatment of minority muslim in rakhime state.

It feels it fooled by the west , so now it going back to China.
 
Top