Since its introduction, the Belt and Road initiative (BRI) has become a central Chinese foreign policy project and has consequently received a lot attention in the international sphere. By...Show moreSince its introduction, the Belt and Road initiative (BRI) has become a central Chinese foreign policy project and has consequently received a lot attention in the international sphere. By referring to ancient Silk Road times, China shows it is dedicated to take an inclusive approach by its desire to develop the initiative in all the countries that are willing to cooperate. One could argue that it is a product of China’s rise to becoming an economic and political heavy-weight over the last decades. Therefore, it is important for scholars to better understand the Chinese BRI. This paper seeks to contribute to this understanding by investigating the specific case of the BRI in Kazakhstan. As the largest country of the Central Asian region in terms of land, Kazakhstan holds a key position in the BRI as the area that will connect China to the Middle-East and Europe. This study aims to build on the idea that the BRI qualifies as a Chinese strategy in conducting this case study research. To produce such a study, this paper will draw on the framework of power as introduced by influential political scientist and assistant Secretary of Defense under former president Bill Clinton, Joseph S. Nye. In the remainder of this paper, Nye’s concepts of hard, soft and smart power will be understood as mechanisms for influence when looking at the Chinese BRI in Kazakhstan. More specifically, the ambition of this paper is to investigate whether China is combining hard and soft power elements in Kazakhstan into a strategy that could be understood as smart power.Show less
The spatial and temporal scale and complexity of the ancient Silk Road has been transformed into a brand that supports a range of development and modernization projects taking pace across Eurasia....Show moreThe spatial and temporal scale and complexity of the ancient Silk Road has been transformed into a brand that supports a range of development and modernization projects taking pace across Eurasia. Many nation-states are tapping into their Silk Road past for the purposes of modernization, development, and creation of national identities. This process is critically explored examining the “authorized heritage discourse” of the Silk Road – those parts that are highlighted in particular, and dominate over others, according to top-down principles of “value” and “knowledge”. The alleged benefits of the authorized Silk Road discourse are contrasted through an examination of the lands that they purport to represent. Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) is an area where urban sites have been transformed according to the top-down values of the authorized Silk Road discourse. However, it is argued that many of the local residents of these cities do not find benefit in these transformations, and instead reveal some of the core issues of the contemporary usage of the Silk Road. Two of these issues are highlighted in particular: gentrification and spatial cleansing. These have affected entire communities, which are assimilated into the Chinese nation through changing modes of identity formation. Meanwhile, cities are given of a false veneer of benefit that masks the new processes of exploitation that are taking place.Show less
As the largest developing nation of the world, it is the self-professed Chinese Dream to build a “democratic, culturally-advanced and harmonious modern socialist country” that projects a “new type...Show moreAs the largest developing nation of the world, it is the self-professed Chinese Dream to build a “democratic, culturally-advanced and harmonious modern socialist country” that projects a “new type of international relations featuring win-win cooperation,” (Arab Policy, FMPRC 2016). China’s economic rise in the 21st century has received immense speculation of both mainstream and Critical International Political Economy (IPE) scholars as to whether the country and its political establishment presents an ideological or economic challenge to neoliberal hegemony and the ideology of the Washington Consensus institutions. In the context of neo-Gramscian theory, this paper will focus on China’s One Belt One Road (OBOR) as a case study to determine how China may be building a counter-hegemonic challenge through the promotion of this “new type of international relations”. What began as a far-flung dream of recreating the ancient Silk Road through the Eurasian continent has now evolved into a serious endeavor including more than 60 countries. Besides offering these countries richer ties to the global economy, the OBOR allows for wide-ranging projects to build super highways and bullet trains, to pipelines and deep sea ports linking a global supply chain for the swift transportation of goods and services. Accelerated development of the OBOR initiative spawn from two recent experiences which have fundamentally changed China’s position in the international political economy.Show less
Although it appears that mainstream history has second ranked Central Eurasia, throughout most of history, the region has been at the forefront of world politics. Successively called Sogdiana by...Show moreAlthough it appears that mainstream history has second ranked Central Eurasia, throughout most of history, the region has been at the forefront of world politics. Successively called Sogdiana by the Arabs, Transoxiana by westerners or Turkestan, literally ‘land of the Turks’ by the Persians; the region has come to our minds as Central Asia. Until the Age of Discoveries, Central Asia constituted the nervous system of the Eurasian international system (Frankopan 2015). Historically, whoever dominated trade along Central Asia dominated the Eurasian landmass. Trade took place primarily between China and Europe while Central Asia acted as the middle man. As such, the native nomadic tribes pacified the region in order to foster trade. Intensive exchanges in goods, peoples and ideas were the hallmark of the Eurasian economy in which continental trade dominated. Land and see routes where integrated into a single international system in which Central Asia was located at the center while the rest of the world constituted the periphery (Beckwith 2009). In 1877, the distinguished German geologist Ferdinand von Richthofen coined the Eurasian economic system as the ‘Seidenstraße’: the Silk Route. Nevertheless, Central Asia’s golden era did not last. With the maritime expeditions of Columbus and Vasco de Gama the ‘Eurasian continental system’ began to unravel. The revolutionary discoveries of alternative sea routes led to the establishment of new trade lanes (Frankopan 2015). As Beckwith explains in his book Empires of the Silk Road, the final blow to the continental system was struck by the partitioning of Central Eurasia by the Russian and Chinese empires. Newly erected borders led to soaring tariffs and increasing insecurity causing trade to spiral downward. Economic disintegration brought about intellectual decay which further isolated the region (Starr et al 2015). As a result, trade along sea lanes became much more competitive. The fundamental shift in trade patterns ushered the ‘Littoral system’ characterized by mass maritime trade (Beckwith 2009). Consequently, the center of gravity shifted from Central Asia to the coastal peripheries who dominated the sea lanes. Mastering state of the art naval technology, European countries such as Britain became the primary beneficiaries of the new ‘Littoral system’. The maritime system endured with the creation of the canal of Suez and the establishment of the Soviet Union which redirected the ancient networks of the Silk Road to Moscow. For the next three centuries, the world witnessed the European Era followed by the American Era. However, the ‘Littoral system’ is not invulnerable. In his renowned article ‘The Geographical Pivot of History’, MacKinder outlines the threats facing the Littoral system; noteworthy, a reunified Eurasia. It seems that the tide is turning once more. In 1991, the Soviet Union disintegrated in what President Putin called “the greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century". The momentous event enabled Central Asian people to regain their independence. Almost immediately, the European Union and Eastern European countries launched a bold trade and transportation project named the Transport Corridor Europe-Caucasus-Asia (TRACECA) with the aim of restoring the “Historical Silk Road” (Starr et al 2015). Inaugurated in great pomp, the weakly executed project met with little success (Matveeva 2006). Then, in the wake of the September 11 attacks, the United States intervened in Afghanistan in order to gain a foothold in the Central Asian area (Genté Régis 2014). In 2010, recognizing Afghanistan’s historical importance, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton instigated the News Silk Road initiative aimed at establishing Afghanistan as a key trade hub (Hormats 2011). Nonetheless, the project failed to receive the vital endorsement of the U.S. President and soon thereafter fell apart (Starr et al, 2015). Three years later, China’s supreme leader, President Xi Jinping, made an ambitious proposal for the revival of the Silk Road. Could Xi’s momentous plans succeed in revitalizing the Eurasian system?Show less
Trade is seen by most archaeologist, working with Medieval Southeast Asia, as the main reason for economic development and social interaction. However, through a study of the archaeological and...Show moreTrade is seen by most archaeologist, working with Medieval Southeast Asia, as the main reason for economic development and social interaction. However, through a study of the archaeological and historical material in Cambodia that impression is challenged. The presently known archaeological data in fact suggest that international trade was limited; Chinese ceramics seems to have been restricted, The Kingdom had no currency or standardized values and Cambodian exports are few and only found in the neighboring countries (provinces). The academic emphasis on trade has instead relied on historical sources, however,the interpretation of these seems to be embedded in a post WW II economic theoretical bias (Marxism & Cliometrics). The thesis questions the relevance of modern economic logic in the past and the significance trade had in Medieval Cambodia, both socially and economically.Show less
