Belt and Road Initiative and the Counters of India
20/02/2025 - Written by Saaud Mushtaq
Introduction
The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has been in the limelight for the last decade because of its ambition to reshape the global economic and strategic landscape. This initiative of China has received mixed reactions from nations, with a lot of support and criticism at the same time. As we know, the relationship between India and China has been turbulent for years. India has been vocal against the BRI since its launch. This report gives a contextual analysis of BRI and India’s concerns regarding it. The report highlights the challenges that BRICS is likely to face with a Trump presidency. It also highlights the key stakeholders like the US, Japan, and the EU and their approach towards the BRI.
Contextual Analysis
The BRI was launched by China in 2013 and is considered one of the most significant infrastructure projects in human history. Initially, BRI planned to connect East Asia and Europe through a network of roads. However, the project expanded to Africa, Oceania, and Latin America almost a decade after its launch. Since the launch of BRI, China has portrayed it as a win-win project for its partner countries and has invested millions of dollars in its partner states. Despite the project's economic benefits, BRI faces criticism for its lack of transparency and hidden geopolitical motives.
India has been vocal against the BRI, and its primary concern has been the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). The CPEC is a flagship project of the BRI, which passes through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). India claims that China has violated its sovereignty under this project by not respecting its territorial integrity and reputation. India’s main concern regarding the CPEC is the presence of the Chinese military in PoK, which poses significant security concerns for India.
Apart from CPEC, the Indian government has raised concerns that BRI could lead to excessive debt burdens. India claims that the large amount of loans under BRI leaves smaller states with unsustainable debts and eventually makes them compromise their sovereignty and economic stability. The Hambantota port case in Sri Lanka has added more to India's concerns, as China leased a Sri Lankan port for 99 years. Various commentators have described this incident differently; some claim it was a debt trap diplomacy, and others claim the contrary.
Another concern regarding BRI for India has been China's increasing investment in South Asia. In recent years, China has increased its investments in countries like Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka. These increased investments have challenged India’s traditional influence in the region. India believes China is using its economic might to make new regional partners historically aligned with India - in an attempt undermine New Delhi. Under the Maritime Silk Road (MSR) initiative, China has increased its influence in the Indian Ocean region, challenging India’s maritime security. India has initiated different counters by aligning with its regional and global partners to counter China's growing regional influence.
Counters of India
Historically, India has adhered to a policy of strategic autonomy and non-alignment. However, China's increased regional influence has pushed India to adopt a more proactive strategy. Through platforms like QUAD, India has strengthened its partnerships and alliances with countries such as Japan, the US, and Australia. These states are promoting the policy of a free and open Indo-Pacific, portraying a united front against China.
India has been trying to counter China’s BRI through economic, strategic, and diplomatic measures. Under India's Act East Policy, it has been trying to strengthen its ties with ASEAN nations through trade, infrastructure projects, and defence agreements. India has initiated alternate infrastructure projects like the Asia-Africa Growth Corridor, International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC), and the India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway. India has invested and gained access to strategic ports like Oman’s Duqm Port and Iran’s Chabahar Port to counter China’s “Strings of Pearls” strategy. India’s presence in these ports has helped it secure access to vital trade routes and given it a geopolitical edge in the Indian Ocean Region. India has also been increasing its defence ties and promoting joint naval drills, like Malabar exercises, to enhance its maritime capabilities in the Indo-Pacific - Malabar is also the site of India’s first deep-water container transhipment port, signalling New Delhi’s future plans to enhance its maritime trade.
BRI counters and BRICS
The countermeasures taken by India to counter the BRI pose a significant concern for their relationship in BRICS.
∙ India’s opposition to BRI and promotion of alternative projects are likely to create frictions within the Bloc. This competition between two big powers can potentially slow down BRICS policy of coordination and unity.
∙ China has been pushing for BRICS expansion and include nations aligned with its BRI, such as Pakistan. India has not yet publicly opposed this step, but has shown scepticism over Pakistan joining the bloc.
∙ The India-China rivalry over infrastructure development could erode trust and diplomatic cohesion within BRICS. This rivalry is likely to affect the joint initiatives and trade policies introduced within the BRICS.
Impact of Trump administration on India-China Relations
October 2024, China and India reached an agreement on military patrols along their disputed border in the Himalayas, which set the stage for ending years long dispute over shared borders. This agreement was signed on the side-lines of BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia. This realignment came towards the end of Biden administration and now with Donald Trump back in office, this thaw between India and China is likely to face new challenges. Trump has already started his trade war by tariffing countries like Mexico, Canada and China. He has warned to impose 100 percent on BRICS nations, if they attempt to challenge the dollar dominance. Given India’s strategic alignment with the US on security issues, Trump’s warnings are likely to put New Delhi into difficult choices of whether to prioritise economic engagement with China under BRICS or align closely with Washington’s anti-China stance. The recent conference between Trump and Modi, however, appeared to be beneficial as both countries committed to doubling bilateral trade by 2030 to $500 billion.
Key Players and Stakeholders
Japan: BRI has challenged Japan's traditional position as the region's infrastructure development leader. Since BRI’s launch, Japan has shown a dual approach, with cautious and conditional acceptance. Japan is aware of the BRI’s economic benefits but does not neglect that it could significantly affect the balance of power in the region. Japan has also initiated alternate infrastructure development projects to counter the influence of BRI.
United States: With BRI’s developments in the last decade, Washington believes BRI is a tool of China’s grand strategy to challenge US domination and interests worldwide. BRI has emerged as a significant catalyst for the “threat inflation” issue regarding the United States’ image of China. The US has been promoting the free and open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) policy and cooperating with its partners in platforms like QUAD to counter the growing Chinese influence.
European Union: The EU also plays a key role in countering the influence of BRI. The EU believes that BRI is a tool China uses to undermine global trade norms and promote non-transparent means of development. The significance of the Indo-Pacific region for the EU’s trade has compelled the EU to initiate countermeasures to stop China’s growing influence. The EU has launched initiatives like Global Gateway, an alternative to BRI that promotes high-quality and transparent infrastructure projects. EU has also been collaborating with countries like India to promote connectivity projects based on shared values and adherence to International norms.
Opportunities and Risks
Opportunities
∙ The Investments in strategic ports like Duqm and Chabahar enhance India’s connectivity by providing it with an alternate trade route to Central Asia, which earlier transited through Pakistan.
∙ It also allows India to challenge Chinese dominance in the Gwadar port of Pakistan, which is just 170 km away from Chabahar.
∙ India’s policies, like the Act East Policy, help it promote stronger diplomatic, economic, and cultural ties with its neighbours and beyond.
∙ Participation In alliances like QUAD helps India strengthen its maritime security and promote the vision of an open Indo-Pacific, which challenges China’s expansion.
Risks
∙ India’s economic limitations hinder its ability to match the scale of China’s investments under the BRI.
∙ Many ASEAN nations rely on Chinese investments and trade, which makes it challenging for India to present itself as an immediate alternative.
∙ The projects that India has launched to counter BRI have shown little to no results because of bureaucratic delays and policy inefficiencies.
∙ India has also been too slow to take on the leadership of countering China, showing a rather heavy dependence on the US in the ideological and operational space.
Policy Recommendations
India needs to work on executing and accelerating the completion of investment projects that it has implemented to counter China.
India should strengthen its partnerships with regional and global allies like the US, Japan, and Australia and focus on joint infrastructure projects and defence agreements.
India must expand its maritime security network and increase joint naval and military drills with like minded countries to counter China’s “String of Pearls “and “Grey Zone” activities.
India should promote its soft power diplomacy by introducing educational and cultural exchange with African, Southeast, and Central Asian countries.
India should also try to improve its ties with China by initiating diplomatic dialogues and agreements. This will help reduce tensions and create a framework for peaceful coexistence.
Conclusion
India’s opposition and counters to BRI reflects a strategic blend to safeguard its sovereignty, regional influence and in the meantime navigating China-India-US triangle. Despite aligning with QUAD and pursuing alternative infrastructure projects, India faces economic and diplomatic challenges, including limited investment capabilities and bureaucratic inefficiencies. The recent India-China thaw at the BRICS Summit in Kazan demonstrated a willingness to de-escalate tensions, but with Trump’s return and his aggressive trade policies, India will have to reassess its position within BRICS. While the US remains a key security partner, India may choose economic pragmatism with China to safeguard its trade and industrial growth. However, deepening ties with China risks strategic friction, especially in the Indo-Pacific and border disputes. The coming years will test whether India can sustain its balancing act, leveraging diplomatic engagements, infrastructure investments, and regional partnerships to counter China’s influence while ensuring its own economic and security interests.