<p>The disengagement of both Chinese and Indian troops in Doklam has fortunately led to a less tense atmosphere for the ninth BRICS Summit. China as the host would naturally like to make it a big success.</p>

<p><strong>Evolution</strong></p>

<p>BRIC&nbsp;has come a long way from Jim O&rsquo;Neill&rsquo;s (of Goldman Sachs) 2001 concept of four attractive investment destinations comprising of Brazil, Russia, India and China. It expanded into BRICS with the inclusion of South Africa. The agenda has also steadily expanded and there is a growing awareness about its relevance. The group brought a unique and alternative narrative for global growth and development.</p>

<p>In the beginning, the group was confusing for many people, since it did not fit in with any of the recognised foundations for forming such groups. It was not based on region, ideology, language, religion or commodities. The common factor for the group was the success that these five countries had made out of the process globalisation and the rapid economic growth that they registered. The raison d&rsquo;etre of the group was the growth potential of these emerging markets.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Intra BRICS cooperation in sectors like health, education, urbanisation, inclusive growth, gender issues and the environment has been making steady gains, though these do not make headline news.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Intra BRICS cooperation in sectors like health, education, urbanisation, inclusive growth, gender issues and the environment has been making steady gains, though these do not make headline news." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>Initially, BRICS countries concentrated on three main pillars &ndash; reform of the Global Financial Institutions (IMF and World Bank), intra-BRICS cooperation in various sectors and addressing Global Governance Issues. In all three, there has been considerable progress. At the Seoul G-20 Summit in 2010, a decision was taken to change the share quotas and voting powers in the IMF and World Bank. It was a modest success but the US Congress has stalled further progress on the issue.</p>

<p>Intra-BRICS cooperation in sectors, such as health, education, urbanisation, inclusive growth, gender issues and the environment have been making steady gains, though these do not make headline news. Here, the idea is to learn from each other&rsquo;s experiences and follow best practices.</p>

<p>On Global Governance, the group has been demanding an equitable sharing of global leadership commensurate with the economic and political influence of BRICS. The Global Financial Crisis of 2008 clearly reiterated the need for a new approach to Global Economic and Political Governance with the inclusion of new emerging economies.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The most impressive achievement of BRICS, of course, is the establishment of the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingency Reserve Arrangement (CRA) in a very short time.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The most impressive achievement of BRICS, of course, is the establishment of the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingency Reserve Arrangement (CRA) in a very short time." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>The most impressive achievement of BRICS, of course, is the establishment of the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingency Reserve Arrangement (CRA) in a very short time. These come about because of the inability of the World Bank and the IMF to evolve with changing circumstances. This development proved that BRICS could indeed establish global institutions wherever needed.</p>

<p><strong>What are the expectations from the Xiamen Summit?&nbsp;</strong></p>

<p>Even though there are no big-ticket items like the NDB on the cards, some pending ideas like the establishment of a BRICS Credit Rating Agency and BRICS standardisation and benchmarking would be pursued. There are also new initiatives on cyber security and sustainable development goals.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>BRICS should step in to take the leadership role in promoting globalisation, free trade and multilateralism.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=BRICS should step in to take the leadership role in promoting globalisation, free trade and multilateralism." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>The international scenario today is truly at a crossroads. This provides a unique opportunity for BRICS to step into global leadership roles. The US and the Western countries have retreated from promoting their pet themes of globalisation and free trade. These are issues of critical importance to BRICS because their economic success has been predicated on these principles. With the West taking a back seat on these questions, BRICS should step in to take the leadership role in promoting globalisation, free trade and multilateralism.</p>

<p>The question is does BRICS have the bandwidth to do it? If not, it will have to find it because it is an excellent opportunity for BRICS to play a role in Global Governance. Of course, it will not be easy because there is a divergence in BRICS on many of these issues. The original convergence that the five countries had on Global Governance does not appear to be strengthening. Nonetheless, BRICS should not miss this opportunity of taking over a leadership role in these three critical areas.&nbsp;</p>

<p>BRICS also suffers from structural and procedural issues. Summits every year hosted by different countries lead to a proliferation of agenda items with each host trying to outdo the predecessor. There is hardly any follow-up on many of these items. The time has come for BRICS to prioritise a select number of critical areas and work towards achieving concrete goals.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>China has invited leaders of Thailand, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Egypt, Mexico and Guinea (African Union Chair) to the Xiamen Summit.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=China has invited leaders of Thailand, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Egypt, Mexico and Guinea (African Union Chair) to the Xiamen Summit." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p><strong>BRICS Plus is not a good idea</strong></p>

<p>The question of deepening vs broadening BRICS has been debated many times. The consensus, so far, has been to deepen cooperation between the five before broadening the group. Of course, since the Summit in Durban (South Africa), there has been outreach activities as part of South-South Cooperation (AU countries in Durban, Latin American leaders in Fortaleza, SCO members in Ufa and BIMSTEC members in Goa). China has been keen to take it to a higher level with a &ldquo;BRICS plus&rdquo; concept. So long as it is within the outreach approach, it would work well. Any attempt to increase the membership could be counter-productive.</p>

<p>China has invited leaders of Thailand, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Egypt, Mexico and Guinea (African Union Chair) to the Xiamen Summit. As an outreach activity, there is no harm so long as there is no formal induction into the group. It appears that China has since given up the idea of BRICS Plus due to objections from other members. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi made a remark to this effect on August 30.</p>

<p>Another aspect that India will have to look out for in the Xiamen Final Declaration is a reference to China&rsquo;s pet project of One Belt-One Road (OBOR) or the Belt-Road Initiative (BRI). India has held the view that this is a unilateral project of China without any multilateral consultations. Further, the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) of the project impinges on India&rsquo;s sovereignty. Therefore, India has to make sure that there is no reference to this initiative in the Final Declaration.</p>


For BRICS to play an important role in Global Governance, it should step in to take the leadership role in promoting globalisation, free trade and multilateralism.

The disengagement of both Chinese and Indian troops in Doklam has fortunately led to a less tense atmosphere for the ninth BRICS Summit. China as the host would naturally like to make it a big success. Evolution BRIC has come a long way from Jim O’Neill’s (of Goldman Sachs) 2001 concept of four attractive investment destinations comprising of Brazil, Russia, India and China. It expanded into BRICS with the inclusion of South Africa. The agenda has also steadily expanded and there is a growing awareness about its relevance. The group brought a unique and alternative narrative for global growth and development. In the beginning, the group was confusing for many people, since it did not fit in with any of the recognised foundations for forming such groups. It was not based on region, ideology, language, religion or commodities. The common factor for the group was the success that these five countries had made out of the process globalisation and the rapid economic growth that they registered. The raison d’etre of the group was the growth potential of these emerging markets. Intra BRICS cooperation in sectors like health, education, urbanisation, inclusive growth, gender issues and the environment has been making steady gains, though these do not make headline news. × Initially, BRICS countries concentrated on three main pillars – reform of the Global Financial Institutions (IMF and World Bank), intra-BRICS cooperation in various sectors and addressing Global Governance Issues. In all three, there has been considerable progress. At the Seoul G-20 Summit in 2010, a decision was taken to change the share quotas and voting powers in the IMF and World Bank. It was a modest success but the US Congress has stalled further progress on the issue. Intra-BRICS cooperation in sectors, such as health, education, urbanisation, inclusive growth, gender issues and the environment have been making steady gains, though these do not make headline news. Here, the idea is to learn from each other’s experiences and follow best practices. On Global Governance, the group has been demanding an equitable sharing of global leadership commensurate with the economic and political influence of BRICS. The Global Financial Crisis of 2008 clearly reiterated the need for a new approach to Global Economic and Political Governance with the inclusion of new emerging economies. The most impressive achievement of BRICS, of course, is the establishment of the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingency Reserve Arrangement (CRA) in a very short time. × The most impressive achievement of BRICS, of course, is the establishment of the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingency Reserve Arrangement (CRA) in a very short time. These come about because of the inability of the World Bank and the IMF to evolve with changing circumstances. This development proved that BRICS could indeed establish global institutions wherever needed. What are the expectations from the Xiamen Summit? Even though there are no big-ticket items like the NDB on the cards, some pending ideas like the establishment of a BRICS Credit Rating Agency and BRICS standardisation and benchmarking would be pursued. There are also new initiatives on cyber security and sustainable development goals. BRICS should step in to take the leadership role in promoting globalisation, free trade and multilateralism. × The international scenario today is truly at a crossroads. This provides a unique opportunity for BRICS to step into global leadership roles. The US and the Western countries have retreated from promoting their pet themes of globalisation and free trade. These are issues of critical importance to BRICS because their economic success has been predicated on these principles. With the West taking a back seat on these questions, BRICS should step in to take the leadership role in promoting globalisation, free trade and multilateralism. The question is does BRICS have the bandwidth to do it? If not, it will have to find it because it is an excellent opportunity for BRICS to play a role in Global Governance. Of course, it will not be easy because there is a divergence in BRICS on many of these issues. The original convergence that the five countries had on Global Governance does not appear to be strengthening. Nonetheless, BRICS should not miss this opportunity of taking over a leadership role in these three critical areas. BRICS also suffers from structural and procedural issues. Summits every year hosted by different countries lead to a proliferation of agenda items with each host trying to outdo the predecessor. There is hardly any follow-up on many of these items. The time has come for BRICS to prioritise a select number of critical areas and work towards achieving concrete goals. China has invited leaders of Thailand, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Egypt, Mexico and Guinea (African Union Chair) to the Xiamen Summit. × BRICS Plus is not a good idea The question of deepening vs broadening BRICS has been debated many times. The consensus, so far, has been to deepen cooperation between the five before broadening the group. Of course, since the Summit in Durban (South Africa), there has been outreach activities as part of South-South Cooperation (AU countries in Durban, Latin American leaders in Fortaleza, SCO members in Ufa and BIMSTEC members in Goa). China has been keen to take it to a higher level with a “BRICS plus” concept. So long as it is within the outreach approach, it would work well. Any attempt to increase the membership could be counter-productive. China has invited leaders of Thailand, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Egypt, Mexico and Guinea (African Union Chair) to the Xiamen Summit. As an outreach activity, there is no harm so long as there is no formal induction into the group. It appears that China has since given up the idea of BRICS Plus due to objections from other members. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi made a remark to this effect on August 30. Another aspect that India will have to look out for in the Xiamen Final Declaration is a reference to China’s pet project of One Belt-One Road (OBOR) or the Belt-Road Initiative (BRI). India has held the view that this is a unilateral project of China without any multilateral consultations. Further, the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) of the project impinges on India’s sovereignty. Therefore, India has to make sure that there is no reference to this initiative in the Final Declaration.

What can the Xiamen BRICS Summit get for India and others?

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>The One Belt and One Road (OBOR) initiative pioneered by China is a supra-infrastructural project. Intending to re-energise Afrasia and Eurasia as a connected and integrated economic zone, China is buttressing OBOR by trade agreements and conventions. Physically, the project assumes the form of economic corridors and highways, including a string of sea ports. Financially, the enormous outlays the of the project come with impressive investment potential for China&rsquo;s manufacturing sectors.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>There are two inter-related dimensions to the project: first, a silk route designed to connect China&rsquo;s coast to Europe through the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean and from the Chinese coast to the South Pacific and second, a land route consisting of a number of economic corridors, connecting China with Central Asia, Russia, West Asia and Indo-China. The gargantuan proportions of the project are evident even as they have generated varying responses from countries that directly benefit and/or are affected by the initiative. India, for example, has been especially vocal in its criticism, arguing that the initiative has been unmindful of the principles of sovereignty and integrity. Particularly, as some of the pathways in the project run through territories over which India has claims.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>India takes a more contemporary position on critiquing the network and its implications for the various countries through which it intersects</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=India takes a more contemporary position on critiquing the network and its implications for the various countries through which it intersects" target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>Interestingly, India takes a more contemporary position on critiquing the network and its implications for the various countries through which it intersects. For instance, extractive exploitation and debt obligations are two of the prime concerns raised by India. China, on the other hand, has deployed history and the more conventional narrative of the celebrated silk route that it wishes to see revived in a new setting. It is easy to counter India&rsquo;s well-meaning critique by reminding ourselves that he who calls the piper calls the tune. However, the critics need to equally to underline that older networks were not single-handedly controlled by any one entity. Funded and supported by world empires, these were used for trade, social and cultural exchanges by huge movements of populations.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>On the other hand, China&rsquo;s use of the silk route narrative with its cultural and symbolic salience is not only anachronistic but out of step with scholarship that has effectively interrogated the great silk road story. Such a story has almost always been written from the Chinese perspective with Central Asians playing the role of subordinate intermediaries, moving Chinese staple to the Mediterranean and India.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>We now know that the Silk Road had actually very little silk. It was a network of many routes and structures operated by competing and collaborating groups that linked Central Asia with Eurasia. In that scheme of things, Central Asia was often seen as and consigned to the periphery and a back of beyond status actually played a key role in forging connections with Eurasia. We also know how this complex reality was submerged within a discursive overlay produced by 19th century Russian Orientalist scholarship and a dominant Sino-centric perspective. Similarly, a lot of the more recent archaeological research suggests that Southeast Asian trading presence was much more substantial than that of the Chinese in the South China Sea.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>China, on the other hand, has deployed history and the more conventional narrative of the celebrated silk route that it wishes to see revived in a new setting</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=China, on the other hand, has deployed history and the more conventional narrative of the celebrated silk route that it wishes to see revived in a new setting" target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>In fact, one of the most compelling ideas to have emerged from scholarship on maritime Asia and the Indian Ocean of the early modern period is the vitality of networks that world empires and merchant communities supported and sustained. It enabled an impressive integration of large territorial units of South and Southeast Asia, West Asia Central Asia and Europe. Political stability, territorial expansion and the mutual interdependence of large economies for goods and bullion ensured that trade routes were active. Together they constituted an enormous network with major and minor nodes, and with a specific concentration of communities and groups. Indians, Malays, Arabs, Central Asians and Chinese were active in distinct segments and overlapped with others but worked in tandem to ensure the vitality of a network that survived political vicissitudes and even the ravages of early colonialism.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>Over the last four decades, much of the scholarship of the &quot;Silk Road&quot; has served to redress the earlier Sino-centrism and to recuperate the importance and operations of local groups in the global network that tied Europe and Asia in intricate ways.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>To what extent can that network be replicated or to rephrase it why is that network being invoked in the name of OBOR that has overt nationalistic ambitions and has the weight of one country&rsquo;s massive capital power to drive it?&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The obvious explanation would be the importance China invests in the idea of a vibrant network that embodies the enterprise of Chinese capital and energy, and of its potential to create a new platform for economic activity</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The obvious explanation would be the importance China invests in the idea of a vibrant network that embodies the enterprise of Chinese capital and energy, and of its potential to create a new platform for economic activity" target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>The obvious explanation would be the importance China invests in the idea of a vibrant network that embodies the enterprise of Chinese capital and energy, and of its potential to create a new platform for economic activity. Though China has been able to assure OBOR partners so far on the benign nature of its intentions, the centrality of the Middle Kingdom as a potent imaginary or its place in the&nbsp; Chinese civilisational values can hardly be missed.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>On the other hand, the ex-Soviet Central Asian republics, having undergone the trials of the Soviet, are eager to partake of the new opportunities and benefits that OBOR seem to promise. Since 2013, China has been a major trading partner for Central Asia and it is likely that the OBOR will lessen their dependence on Russia. Thus present history and past historical imagination seems to be on the side of China, which is losing no opportunity to run full steam ahead.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>How this will alter the economic balance in the region, especially as Europe and the United States crawl back into their national selves is an open-ended issue.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>It is tempting to contrast the idea of the great Silk Route with that of Greater India. The latter term came into vogue in both historical and journalistic circles in the first decades of the 20th century as India showed eagerness to reclaim a degree of prestige and civilisation grandeur. It referred to &quot;Akhand Bharat&quot; as a category, epitomising the benign and positive energies of Indic civilization that moved far and wide, and also embodied the energy and labor of Indians toiling outside India as capital and labour.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>Greater India remained wedded to narratives of culture and spiritual regeneration and of Indian toil. However, the Great Silk route traversed the imagination of material success and robust Chinese enterprise that integrated and unified vast expanses of territory, while leaving its cultural trace. The contrast is especially striking if we recall how for centuries, it was India that dominated the Indian Ocean while China remained content to work behind the veil and operate through a restricted treaty system. Old history has given way not merely to new histories but to new geographies as well.&nbsp;</p>


Scholars find China?s use of the silk route narrative not only anachronistic but hegemonic in intent.

The One Belt and One Road (OBOR) initiative pioneered by China is a supra-infrastructural project. Intending to re-energise Afrasia and Eurasia as a connected and integrated economic zone, China is buttressing OBOR by trade agreements and conventions. Physically, the project assumes the form of economic corridors and highways, including a string of sea ports. Financially, the enormous outlays the of the project come with impressive investment potential for China’s manufacturing sectors. There are two inter-related dimensions to the project: first, a silk route designed to connect China’s coast to Europe through the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean and from the Chinese coast to the South Pacific and second, a land route consisting of a number of economic corridors, connecting China with Central Asia, Russia, West Asia and Indo-China. The gargantuan proportions of the project are evident even as they have generated varying responses from countries that directly benefit and/or are affected by the initiative. India, for example, has been especially vocal in its criticism, arguing that the initiative has been unmindful of the principles of sovereignty and integrity. Particularly, as some of the pathways in the project run through territories over which India has claims. India takes a more contemporary position on critiquing the network and its implications for the various countries through which it intersects × Interestingly, India takes a more contemporary position on critiquing the network and its implications for the various countries through which it intersects. For instance, extractive exploitation and debt obligations are two of the prime concerns raised by India. China, on the other hand, has deployed history and the more conventional narrative of the celebrated silk route that it wishes to see revived in a new setting. It is easy to counter India’s well-meaning critique by reminding ourselves that he who calls the piper calls the tune. However, the critics need to equally to underline that older networks were not single-handedly controlled by any one entity. Funded and supported by world empires, these were used for trade, social and cultural exchanges by huge movements of populations. On the other hand, China’s use of the silk route narrative with its cultural and symbolic salience is not only anachronistic but out of step with scholarship that has effectively interrogated the great silk road story. Such a story has almost always been written from the Chinese perspective with Central Asians playing the role of subordinate intermediaries, moving Chinese staple to the Mediterranean and India. We now know that the Silk Road had actually very little silk. It was a network of many routes and structures operated by competing and collaborating groups that linked Central Asia with Eurasia. In that scheme of things, Central Asia was often seen as and consigned to the periphery and a back of beyond status actually played a key role in forging connections with Eurasia. We also know how this complex reality was submerged within a discursive overlay produced by 19th century Russian Orientalist scholarship and a dominant Sino-centric perspective. Similarly, a lot of the more recent archaeological research suggests that Southeast Asian trading presence was much more substantial than that of the Chinese in the South China Sea. China, on the other hand, has deployed history and the more conventional narrative of the celebrated silk route that it wishes to see revived in a new setting × In fact, one of the most compelling ideas to have emerged from scholarship on maritime Asia and the Indian Ocean of the early modern period is the vitality of networks that world empires and merchant communities supported and sustained. It enabled an impressive integration of large territorial units of South and Southeast Asia, West Asia Central Asia and Europe. Political stability, territorial expansion and the mutual interdependence of large economies for goods and bullion ensured that trade routes were active. Together they constituted an enormous network with major and minor nodes, and with a specific concentration of communities and groups. Indians, Malays, Arabs, Central Asians and Chinese were active in distinct segments and overlapped with others but worked in tandem to ensure the vitality of a network that survived political vicissitudes and even the ravages of early colonialism. Over the last four decades, much of the scholarship of the "Silk Road" has served to redress the earlier Sino-centrism and to recuperate the importance and operations of local groups in the global network that tied Europe and Asia in intricate ways. To what extent can that network be replicated or to rephrase it why is that network being invoked in the name of OBOR that has overt nationalistic ambitions and has the weight of one country’s massive capital power to drive it? The obvious explanation would be the importance China invests in the idea of a vibrant network that embodies the enterprise of Chinese capital and energy, and of its potential to create a new platform for economic activity × The obvious explanation would be the importance China invests in the idea of a vibrant network that embodies the enterprise of Chinese capital and energy, and of its potential to create a new platform for economic activity. Though China has been able to assure OBOR partners so far on the benign nature of its intentions, the centrality of the Middle Kingdom as a potent imaginary or its place in the Chinese civilisational values can hardly be missed. On the other hand, the ex-Soviet Central Asian republics, having undergone the trials of the Soviet, are eager to partake of the new opportunities and benefits that OBOR seem to promise. Since 2013, China has been a major trading partner for Central Asia and it is likely that the OBOR will lessen their dependence on Russia. Thus present history and past historical imagination seems to be on the side of China, which is losing no opportunity to run full steam ahead. How this will alter the economic balance in the region, especially as Europe and the United States crawl back into their national selves is an open-ended issue. It is tempting to contrast the idea of the great Silk Route with that of Greater India. The latter term came into vogue in both historical and journalistic circles in the first decades of the 20th century as India showed eagerness to reclaim a degree of prestige and civilisation grandeur. It referred to "Akhand Bharat" as a category, epitomising the benign and positive energies of Indic civilization that moved far and wide, and also embodied the energy and labor of Indians toiling outside India as capital and labour. Greater India remained wedded to narratives of culture and spiritual regeneration and of Indian toil. However, the Great Silk route traversed the imagination of material success and robust Chinese enterprise that integrated and unified vast expanses of territory, while leaving its cultural trace. The contrast is especially striking if we recall how for centuries, it was India that dominated the Indian Ocean while China remained content to work behind the veil and operate through a restricted treaty system. Old history has given way not merely to new histories but to new geographies as well.

China aims global salience in invoking the Great Silk Road through OBOR

<p>India&#39;s refusal to join China&#39;s high-profile Belt and Road initiative is &quot;regrettable&quot; but New Delhi&#39;s boycott will not at all affect the cooperation in infrastructure development among its neighbouring countries, a report in a state-run newspaper said today.</p>

<p>The two-day Belt and Road Forum which is being attended by leaders from 29 countries, including Pakistan, has been boycotted by India due to sovereignty concerns over the USD 50 billion CPEC (China-Pakistan Economic Corridor), which passes through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.</p>

<p>&quot;While India recently issued an official statement saying it would not be part of the &quot;One Belt and One Road&quot; (B&amp;R) initiative, it will not affect the trend towards cooperation in infrastructure development among its neighbouring countries at all,&quot; Global Times reported today.</p>

<p>&quot;India was openly sceptical of China&#39;s Belt and Road Forum (BRF) hours ahead of the opening of the event, mainly due to concerns over the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a key project of the B&amp;R, and whether it might influence the disputed Kashmir region,&quot; it said.</p>

<p>The B&amp;R is a grand economic cooperation and development plan open to everyone, and is aimed at improving infrastructure in countries along the B&amp;R route, thus benefiting the local people, it said.</p>

<p>&quot;China would never force any country to participate in the B&amp;R if it was too sceptical and nervous to do so. It is regrettable but not a problem that India still maintains its strong opposition to the B&amp;R, even though China has repeatedly said its position on the Kashmir dispute would not change because of the CPEC,&quot; the article said.</p>

<p>Referring to the statement issued by the Ministry of External Affairs on March 13, a day before the two-day B&amp;R summit, it said India also cited the potential debt burden as one of its other concerns, saying that, &quot;connectivity initiatives must follow the principles of financial responsibility to avoid projects that would create an unsustainable debt burden for communities.&quot;</p>

<p>&quot;It is strange that the onlooker is more anxious than the players. While India cares about its neighbours&#39; debt burden, the neighbours appear willing to take on more,&quot; it said.</p>

<p>On Saturday, Pakistan and China inked new deals worth nearly USD 500 million, covering airport, port and highway construction, it said.</p>

<p>&quot;As regards the potential debt burden, Pakistan&#39;s repayments will peak at around USD 5 billion in 2022, but this will be offset by transit fees charged in the CPEC,&quot; it quoted a media report and referred to Nepal officially signing a deal with China to join the B&amp;R with plans to build a cross-border rail link that may cost up to USD 8 billion.</p>

<p>The article further stated that given the active responses from countries along the route, there is no way for India to impede its neighbouring countries from cooperating with China in infrastructure development.</p>

<p>&quot;China has formally invited India to join the B&amp;R. If India doesn&#39;t want to take a part on the stage, then it should just be a good member of the audience. The role is still available if India changes its mind, but it may only be a small role if it is left too late,&quot; it said.</p>

<p>(PTI)</p>


The Global Times called India's refusal to participate in the initiative, which looks to revive the ancient Silk Route, 'regrettable'

India's refusal to join China's high-profile Belt and Road initiative is "regrettable" but New Delhi's boycott will not at all affect the cooperation in infrastructure development among its neighbouring countries, a report in a state-run newspaper said today. The two-day Belt and Road Forum which is being attended by leaders from 29 countries, including Pakistan, has been boycotted by India due to sovereignty concerns over the USD 50 billion CPEC (China-Pakistan Economic Corridor), which passes through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. "While India recently issued an official statement saying it would not be part of the "One Belt and One Road" (B&R) initiative, it will not affect the trend towards cooperation in infrastructure development among its neighbouring countries at all," Global Times reported today. "India was openly sceptical of China's Belt and Road Forum (BRF) hours ahead of the opening of the event, mainly due to concerns over the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a key project of the B&R, and whether it might influence the disputed Kashmir region," it said. The B&R is a grand economic cooperation and development plan open to everyone, and is aimed at improving infrastructure in countries along the B&R route, thus benefiting the local people, it said. "China would never force any country to participate in the B&R if it was too sceptical and nervous to do so. It is regrettable but not a problem that India still maintains its strong opposition to the B&R, even though China has repeatedly said its position on the Kashmir dispute would not change because of the CPEC," the article said. Referring to the statement issued by the Ministry of External Affairs on March 13, a day before the two-day B&R summit, it said India also cited the potential debt burden as one of its other concerns, saying that, "connectivity initiatives must follow the principles of financial responsibility to avoid projects that would create an unsustainable debt burden for communities." "It is strange that the onlooker is more anxious than the players. While India cares about its neighbours' debt burden, the neighbours appear willing to take on more," it said. On Saturday, Pakistan and China inked new deals worth nearly USD 500 million, covering airport, port and highway construction, it said. "As regards the potential debt burden, Pakistan's repayments will peak at around USD 5 billion in 2022, but this will be offset by transit fees charged in the CPEC," it quoted a media report and referred to Nepal officially signing a deal with China to join the B&R with plans to build a cross-border rail link that may cost up to USD 8 billion. The article further stated that given the active responses from countries along the route, there is no way for India to impede its neighbouring countries from cooperating with China in infrastructure development. "China has formally invited India to join the B&R. If India doesn't want to take a part on the stage, then it should just be a good member of the audience. The role is still available if India changes its mind, but it may only be a small role if it is left too late," it said. (PTI)

'Be good audience', China state media says after India skips OBOR

<p>Chinese President Xi Jinping today said all countries should respect each other&#39;s sovereignty and territorial integrity, as he inaugurated the high profile Belt and Road forum boycotted by India due to concerns relating to a controversial economic corridor traversing through PoK.</p>

<p>In his opening address outlining China&#39;s vision, 63- year-old Xi referred to ancient Silk Road and spoke about significance of various civilisations, including the &quot;Indus and Ganges civilisations&quot;.</p>

<p>Without referring to India&#39;s objections to the China- Pakistan-Economic Corridor (CPEC), Xi said, &quot;all countries should respect each other&#39;s sovereignty, dignity and territorial integrity, each other&#39;s development paths and social systems, and each other&#39;s core interests and major concerns.</p>

<p>India skipped the meeting due to its sovereignty concerns over the USD 50 billion CPEC, which goes through Pakistan- occupied Kashmir (PoK). However, few Indian scholars attended the opening session of the two-day &quot;Belt and Road&quot; conference in Beijing that brought together leaders from 29 countries.</p>

<p>Xi said the Belt and Road initiative is &quot;a project of the century&quot; that will benefit people across the world.</p>

<p>Denying any attempts to form a &quot;small group&quot; of nations taking part in the Belt and Road initiative of which CPEC is a part, Xi said China plans to build it as a road to peace and link his country to much of Asia, Europe and Africa.</p>

<p>&quot;Pursuing the B and Road initiative, China has no intention to form a small group detrimental to stability,&quot; he was quoted as saying by the state-run Xinhua news agency.</p>

<p>The B and Road initiative should be built into a road for peace, as the pursuit of the initiative requires a peaceful and stable environment, Xi told the forum attended by 29 heads of state and government besides representatives of over 100 countries and international organisations.</p>

<p>Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, his Sri Lankan counterpart Ranil Wickramasinge, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan were among world leaders who attended the high-profile meeting.</p>

<p>The United States sent a delegation led by Matt Pottinger, special assistant to the president and senior director for Asia at the National Security Council.</p>

<p>Other delegates include officials, entrepreneurs and financiers from over 130 countries, and representatives of key international organisations such as UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, World Bank President Jim Yong Kim, and International Monetary Fund Director Christine Lagarde.</p>

<p>&quot;The ancient silk routes thrived in times of peace, but lost vigour in times of war. The pursuit of the Belt and Road initiative requires a peaceful and stable environment,&quot; Xi said.</p>

<p>&quot;We should foster a new type of international relations featuring win-win cooperation; and we should forge partnerships of dialogue with no confrontation and of friendship rather than alliance,&quot; he said.</p>

<p>Xi announced China would contribute an additional USD 14.5 billion to the Silk Road Fund, which was set up in 2014 to finance infrastructure projects, taking it to USD 55 billion and USD 8.75 billion financial assistance to the countries taking part in his Belt and Road initiative aimed at expanding China&#39;s influence and global connectivity.</p>

<p>In his speech, Xi said Belt and Road initiative focuses on the Asian, European and African countries, but is also open to all other countries.</p>

<p>He said China will provide assistance worth 60 billion yuan (USD 8.7 billion) to developing nations and international organizations participating in the Belt and Road initiative to launch more projects to improve people&#39;s well-being.</p>

<p>China will set up 50 joint laboratories with countries participating in the Belt and Road initiative to enhance cooperation on innovation, he said.</p>

<p>Also China will encourage financial institutions to conduct overseas RMB fund business with an estimated amount of 300 billion yuan (about USD 43.5 billion), Xi said.</p>

<p>Named after the historic Silk Road, the Belt and Road initiative was proposed by Xi in 2013 to chart out new territories for international cooperation.</p>

<p>&quot;Spanning thousands of miles and years, the ancient silk routes embody the spirit of peace and cooperation, openness and inclusiveness, mutual learning and mutual benefit,&quot; Xi told an audience of more than 1,500 from across the globe.</p>

<p>&quot;The Silk Road spirit has become a great heritage of human civilization,&quot; he said.</p>

<p>The B&amp;R includes a maze of roads and port projects. While CPEC is highlighted as &quot;flagship project&quot;, the B&amp;R included Bangladesh, China, India and Myanmar (BCIM) Economic Corridor, New Eurasian Land Bridge, China-Mongolia-Russia Economic Corridor, China-Indochina Peninsula Economic Corridor and 21st century Maritime Silk Road.</p>

<p>(PTI)</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


In his opening address, Xi referred to the ancient Silk Road and spoke of the significance of various civilisations, including the 'Indus and Ganges civilisations'

Chinese President Xi Jinping today said all countries should respect each other's sovereignty and territorial integrity, as he inaugurated the high profile Belt and Road forum boycotted by India due to concerns relating to a controversial economic corridor traversing through PoK. In his opening address outlining China's vision, 63- year-old Xi referred to ancient Silk Road and spoke about significance of various civilisations, including the "Indus and Ganges civilisations". Without referring to India's objections to the China- Pakistan-Economic Corridor (CPEC), Xi said, "all countries should respect each other's sovereignty, dignity and territorial integrity, each other's development paths and social systems, and each other's core interests and major concerns. India skipped the meeting due to its sovereignty concerns over the USD 50 billion CPEC, which goes through Pakistan- occupied Kashmir (PoK). However, few Indian scholars attended the opening session of the two-day "Belt and Road" conference in Beijing that brought together leaders from 29 countries. Xi said the Belt and Road initiative is "a project of the century" that will benefit people across the world. Denying any attempts to form a "small group" of nations taking part in the Belt and Road initiative of which CPEC is a part, Xi said China plans to build it as a road to peace and link his country to much of Asia, Europe and Africa. "Pursuing the B and Road initiative, China has no intention to form a small group detrimental to stability," he was quoted as saying by the state-run Xinhua news agency. The B and Road initiative should be built into a road for peace, as the pursuit of the initiative requires a peaceful and stable environment, Xi told the forum attended by 29 heads of state and government besides representatives of over 100 countries and international organisations. Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, his Sri Lankan counterpart Ranil Wickramasinge, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan were among world leaders who attended the high-profile meeting. The United States sent a delegation led by Matt Pottinger, special assistant to the president and senior director for Asia at the National Security Council. Other delegates include officials, entrepreneurs and financiers from over 130 countries, and representatives of key international organisations such as UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, World Bank President Jim Yong Kim, and International Monetary Fund Director Christine Lagarde. "The ancient silk routes thrived in times of peace, but lost vigour in times of war. The pursuit of the Belt and Road initiative requires a peaceful and stable environment," Xi said. "We should foster a new type of international relations featuring win-win cooperation; and we should forge partnerships of dialogue with no confrontation and of friendship rather than alliance," he said. Xi announced China would contribute an additional USD 14.5 billion to the Silk Road Fund, which was set up in 2014 to finance infrastructure projects, taking it to USD 55 billion and USD 8.75 billion financial assistance to the countries taking part in his Belt and Road initiative aimed at expanding China's influence and global connectivity. In his speech, Xi said Belt and Road initiative focuses on the Asian, European and African countries, but is also open to all other countries. He said China will provide assistance worth 60 billion yuan (USD 8.7 billion) to developing nations and international organizations participating in the Belt and Road initiative to launch more projects to improve people's well-being. China will set up 50 joint laboratories with countries participating in the Belt and Road initiative to enhance cooperation on innovation, he said. Also China will encourage financial institutions to conduct overseas RMB fund business with an estimated amount of 300 billion yuan (about USD 43.5 billion), Xi said. Named after the historic Silk Road, the Belt and Road initiative was proposed by Xi in 2013 to chart out new territories for international cooperation. "Spanning thousands of miles and years, the ancient silk routes embody the spirit of peace and cooperation, openness and inclusiveness, mutual learning and mutual benefit," Xi told an audience of more than 1,500 from across the globe. "The Silk Road spirit has become a great heritage of human civilization," he said. The B&R includes a maze of roads and port projects. While CPEC is highlighted as "flagship project", the B&R included Bangladesh, China, India and Myanmar (BCIM) Economic Corridor, New Eurasian Land Bridge, China-Mongolia-Russia Economic Corridor, China-Indochina Peninsula Economic Corridor and 21st century Maritime Silk Road. (PTI)

All countries should respect each other's sovereignty: China's Xi at OBOR

<p>Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping expressed concern about rising tensions on the Korean peninsula after a North Korean missile test on Sunday, Putin&#39;s spokesman said.</p>

<p>Meeting on the sidelines of an international forum in Beijing, Putin and Xi &quot;discussed the situation on the Korean peninsula in detail&quot; and &quot;both parties expressed their concern over the escalation of tensions,&quot; Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters.</p>

<p>According to China&#39;s official Xinhua news agency, Xi said during the meeting that Moscow and Beijing have played the role of a &quot;ballast stone&quot; in safeguarding regional and global peace and stability.</p>

<p>Xinhua did not publish other remarks.</p>

<p>Putin and Xi met after the opening ceremony of a summit on the Chinese president&#39;s One Belt, One Road initative -- a massive global trade infrastructure project to connect China to Asian neighbours, Europe and Africa.&nbsp;</p>

<p>(AFP)</p>


Putin and Xi met on the sidelines of OBOR

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping expressed concern about rising tensions on the Korean peninsula after a North Korean missile test on Sunday, Putin's spokesman said. Meeting on the sidelines of an international forum in Beijing, Putin and Xi "discussed the situation on the Korean peninsula in detail" and "both parties expressed their concern over the escalation of tensions," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters. According to China's official Xinhua news agency, Xi said during the meeting that Moscow and Beijing have played the role of a "ballast stone" in safeguarding regional and global peace and stability. Xinhua did not publish other remarks. Putin and Xi met after the opening ceremony of a summit on the Chinese president's One Belt, One Road initative -- a massive global trade infrastructure project to connect China to Asian neighbours, Europe and Africa. (AFP)

Russia, China worried about rising tensions over North Korea

<p>India today skipped the opening ceremony of China&#39;s Belt and Road Forum following sovereignty concerns over the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).</p>

<p>No Indian delegation was seen at the opening ceremony addressed by Chinese President, Xi Jinping.</p>

<p>When inquired, Indian diplomats here pointed to the statement issued by MEA spokesperson Gopal Bagley last night.</p>

<p>&quot;...No country can accept a project that ignores its core concerns on sovereignty and territorial integrity,&quot; he said.</p>

<p>Few Indian scholars attended the meeting. Media was not permitted into the conference hall, where the opening ceremony took place.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The meeting called the Belt and Road Forum (BRF) is being attended by 29 heads of state and governments including Prime Minister of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif and his Sri Lankan counterpart Ranil Wickrmasinghe</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The meeting called the Belt and Road Forum (BRF) is being attended by 29 heads of state and governments including Prime Minister of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif and his Sri Lankan counterpart Ranil Wickrmasinghe" target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>Indian scholars who took part in the meeting said no Indian delegation was spotted.</p>

<p>The meeting called the Belt and Road Forum (BRF) is being attended by 29 heads of state and governments including Prime Minister of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif and his Sri Lankan counterpart Ranil Wickrmasinghe, besides official delegations from other South Asian countries.</p>

<p>Leaders and officials from various countries including Russia, US, Japan, UK, Germany and France are attending the meeting.</p>

<p>In a strongly-worded statement issued last night, India had said that the connectivity initiative must be pursued in a manner that respects sovereignty and territorial integrity.</p>

<p>&quot;Guided by our principled position in the matter, we have been urging China to engage in a meaningful dialogue on its connectivity initiative, &#39;One Belt, One Road&#39; which was later renamed as &#39;Belt and</p>

<p>Road Initiative&#39;. We are awaiting a positive response from the Chinese side,&quot; External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Gopal Baglay had said in a statement.</p>

<p>(PTI)</p>


The 'One Belt, One Road' initiative will try and revive the ancient Silk Route

India today skipped the opening ceremony of China's Belt and Road Forum following sovereignty concerns over the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). No Indian delegation was seen at the opening ceremony addressed by Chinese President, Xi Jinping. When inquired, Indian diplomats here pointed to the statement issued by MEA spokesperson Gopal Bagley last night. "...No country can accept a project that ignores its core concerns on sovereignty and territorial integrity," he said. Few Indian scholars attended the meeting. Media was not permitted into the conference hall, where the opening ceremony took place. The meeting called the Belt and Road Forum (BRF) is being attended by 29 heads of state and governments including Prime Minister of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif and his Sri Lankan counterpart Ranil Wickrmasinghe × Indian scholars who took part in the meeting said no Indian delegation was spotted. The meeting called the Belt and Road Forum (BRF) is being attended by 29 heads of state and governments including Prime Minister of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif and his Sri Lankan counterpart Ranil Wickrmasinghe, besides official delegations from other South Asian countries. Leaders and officials from various countries including Russia, US, Japan, UK, Germany and France are attending the meeting. In a strongly-worded statement issued last night, India had said that the connectivity initiative must be pursued in a manner that respects sovereignty and territorial integrity. "Guided by our principled position in the matter, we have been urging China to engage in a meaningful dialogue on its connectivity initiative, 'One Belt, One Road' which was later renamed as 'Belt and Road Initiative'. We are awaiting a positive response from the Chinese side," External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Gopal Baglay had said in a statement. (PTI)

India skips China's 'OBOR' summit over sovereignty concerns

obor

Obor, News on Obor, stories on Obor, articles on Obor, Obor stories at Wion, Obor news, Obor latest news