As great as it sounds on paper there are quite a few economists who are skeptical about the ROI from all of these investments.
But I do like how bold it is, which you rarely find in western countries (large scale infrastructure projects). They can barely build a stretch of road without it costing 10x the budget and getting caught up in years of political horse trading.
Ships try to deliver cargo as deep in the country as possible. Then trucks take over ( Europe), because of different destinations.
You think they are joining the world trade order, I just see an expensive debt trap that won't even change 0,1% in a countries trade
2 weeks is also no replacement for ships, because of scale. It's something in the middle where there is no alternative.
It's also insignificant alternative in the scale against ships.
Especially given the CCP's documented history with bribing foreign leaders to agree to similar deals.
Yes but the BRI is not designed solely for economic gain, but to lay the basis of a new Sino-centric order.
The closest comparison is with the Marshall plan. The US spent huge sums to rebuild Western Europe, countries that by the 1970s began to undercut the US economy. But it was essential to the post-war US order, the defeat of Soviet Union, and other long-range strategic goals.
> Over the past five years, China’s trade in goods with countries along the Belt and Road has exceeded $5.5 trillion
It's that I call bullshit on the one road one belt.
That trains vs container ships is irrelevant. Trains lose big time
That's it's more a "build useless infrastructure that you otherwise can't afford and that Chinese will build with no locals" debt trap for countries to China.