Putting the BRI in Perspective: History, Hegemony and Geoeconomics

Beeson, M; Crawford, C

Putting the BRI in Perspective: History, Hegemony and Geoeconomics

Beeson, M

Crawford, C

Permalink

Publisher:: SPRINGER SINGAPORE PTE LTD
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Chinese Political Science Review, 2023, 8, (1), pp. 45-62
Issue Date:: 2023-03-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published versionAdobe PDF (620.98 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Beeson, M https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8659-262X
dc.contributor.author	Crawford, C
dc.date.accessioned	2024-05-23T01:38:27Z
dc.date.available	2024-05-23T01:38:27Z
dc.date.issued	2023-03-01
dc.identifier.citation	Chinese Political Science Review, 2023, 8, (1), pp. 45-62
dc.identifier.issn	2365-4244
dc.identifier.issn	2365-4252
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/179156
dc.description.abstract	If successfully realised, the Belt and Road Initiative will be the most ambitious and expansive developmental project the world has ever seen. It is not, however, unprecedented. In the aftermath of the Second World War the United States developed what was then an equally unprecedented and ambitious initiative designed to simultaneously facilitate the (re)development of some of the world’s key economies and reinforce its own position as the leader of the western world. Both the American Marshall Plan and China’s BRI are important expressions of geoeconomic influence and power. This paper compares the two projects from the perspectives of ‘hegemonic transitions’ and ‘comparative hegemony’ in order to highlight some striking similarities and noteworthy differences, and gauge the prospects for the BRI and its possible scenarios. Comparatively speaking, the BRI does not have the same sort of compelling geopolitical imperatives and narrative that the emerging Cold War provided for American hegemonic leadership. The Chinese project also lacks the comprehensive global institutional architecture developed in the aftermath of the Second World War that facilitated American influence. Consequently, it may prove more difficult for China to utilise the BRI to translate potential geoeconomic leverage into the sort of hegemonic influence that the US enjoyed during the Cold War, despite its unparalleled ambitions.
dc.language	English
dc.publisher	SPRINGER SINGAPORE PTE LTD
dc.relation.ispartof	Chinese Political Science Review
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1007/s41111-022-00210-y
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.title	Putting the BRI in Perspective: History, Hegemony and Geoeconomics
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	8
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney/DVC (International)
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney/DVC (International)/Australia-China Relations Institute
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
dc.date.updated	2024-05-23T01:38:26Z
pubs.issue	1
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	8
utslib.citation.issue	1

Abstract:

If successfully realised, the Belt and Road Initiative will be the most ambitious and expansive developmental project the world has ever seen. It is not, however, unprecedented. In the aftermath of the Second World War the United States developed what was then an equally unprecedented and ambitious initiative designed to simultaneously facilitate the (re)development of some of the world’s key economies and reinforce its own position as the leader of the western world. Both the American Marshall Plan and China’s BRI are important expressions of geoeconomic influence and power. This paper compares the two projects from the perspectives of ‘hegemonic transitions’ and ‘comparative hegemony’ in order to highlight some striking similarities and noteworthy differences, and gauge the prospects for the BRI and its possible scenarios. Comparatively speaking, the BRI does not have the same sort of compelling geopolitical imperatives and narrative that the emerging Cold War provided for American hegemonic leadership. The Chinese project also lacks the comprehensive global institutional architecture developed in the aftermath of the Second World War that facilitated American influence. Consequently, it may prove more difficult for China to utilise the BRI to translate potential geoeconomic leverage into the sort of hegemonic influence that the US enjoyed during the Cold War, despite its unparalleled ambitions.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/179156