Blackstone
Brigadier
No one will ever accuse China of not thinking big. However, one can't help but notice Philippines isn't included in the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road. Mapmaker mistake perhaps.
Last edited by a moderator:
China's overland Silk Road and Maritime Silk Road Thread
- Thread starter SampanViking
- Start date
Neither is Japan nor Taiwan. There is something subtle about pulling in countries connected to China by land where she has greater influence and keeping countries separated by sea, which it has less, 'in limbo'.
Then again you could said that it is those countries' foreign policies that contributed to this.
And actually it is easier for those countries to miss out on the economic pie too.
Then again you could said that it is those countries' foreign policies that contributed to this.
And actually it is easier for those countries to miss out on the economic pie too.
broadsword
Brigadier
I think it is because the Philippines is off the maritime highway that serves to connect China and Africa. Otherwise, China would have made known and if the Philippines were keen, so much the better. The exclusion has nothing to do with politics.
Ultra
Junior Member
Partner with China in this endeavor?
That ship has sailed long ago. I think the current and future strategy from US involves active sabotage at all levels. And the effort will intensify both overtly and covertly. Collaboration and cooperation is not in US's agenda anymore after years of active psychological warfare on US's own population on "China-threat" they can't turn that ship around anymore. Any politician trying to extend the olive branch will be seen as weak to general public, so this anti-China show must go on til its conclusion.
Ultra
Junior Member
What do you mean Philippines isn't included? Did they not draw it on the map? I can clearly see it on the map.
But if you meant China did not include Philippines in the strategy, I think that has to do with Philippines's own making then China. Philippines effectively excluded itself out after its own behavior for the past few years, the strong anti-China rhetorics from the Philippines's leaderships for the past few years, and the strong anti-China sentiment pervasive there making it difficult to include Philiphines; but the biggest deal breaker is probably being that Philippines is and always wants to be American allies - this is the reason why they are excluded and Vietnam is chosen instead. While Vietnam has similar strong anti-China sentiment in the past few years, but the Vietnam leadership has always come out to support China one way or another to make political statement (plus they are also fellow "capitalist-communist" with very similar political structure). The filipino leadership cannot be trusted thus they cannot included in the maritime trade route.
Blackstone
Brigadier
Japan is one of China's primary trade partners, and that wouldn't change- much. Taiwan Province was economically absorbed by Beijing more than a decade ago, and nothing will change that, no matter what pro-indepedence DPP politicians do or say. Both Japan and Taiwan are solidly connected to "One Belt, One Road." Philippines, on the other hand, is in danger of being left out of some major economic opportunities, and it's unfortunate for Filipinos. Regrettable.
Last edited:
Blackstone
Brigadier
China skipping Philippines may be political or may not be. Time will tell. On the other hand, one might be forgiven for noticing the reek of rotten bananas all over Beijing's omision.
Let's not confuse the "One Belt, One Road" strategy with an alliance system or mistaken it to be some political design. China envisions a trade and economic development strategy that links both ends of Eurasia where two of the three largest economies in the world reside. The belt and the road string together a host of developing countries in between where China sees trade and investment opportunities, leveraging its financial muscle, infrastructure development skills and overall development model.
Japan and Taiwan continue to be among China's largest trading partners, but they don't need China's financing and infrastructure building skills. There is no need to put them as stops along the "One Belt, One Road" - they have direct links with China. As for Philippine, they're off the belt and road, and is not particularly attractive as an investment destination or trading opportunity - what Philippine would trade with China for infrastructure investments? Banana? The fact that Philippine is politically hostile to China obviously does not help - but that in and of itself is not the barrier for trade and investment relationship. Think about Japan.
Of course, China will gain international influence if its belt-and-road strategy is successful, aside from reaping economic benefits. But that's a side benefit and is not what its strategy is based on.
Japan and Taiwan continue to be among China's largest trading partners, but they don't need China's financing and infrastructure building skills. There is no need to put them as stops along the "One Belt, One Road" - they have direct links with China. As for Philippine, they're off the belt and road, and is not particularly attractive as an investment destination or trading opportunity - what Philippine would trade with China for infrastructure investments? Banana? The fact that Philippine is politically hostile to China obviously does not help - but that in and of itself is not the barrier for trade and investment relationship. Think about Japan.
Of course, China will gain international influence if its belt-and-road strategy is successful, aside from reaping economic benefits. But that's a side benefit and is not what its strategy is based on.
joshuatree
Captain
I tend to agree the map is merely a summary of what SLOCs would be between China and Africa/Mid East rather than an exclusion of countries like the Philippines. China did not exclude the Philippines from AIIB for example.
As for bananas, it's been a two way street with the groundless expulsion of Chinese power grid technicians working in the NGCP even though the SGCC has a 40% stake in the former since it is a joint venture.
broadsword
Brigadier
I am the lone holdout here, but I still believe the omission is due to Philippines' geographical position. Ships will have to make a detour, but if the volume justifies it on their way to China or Africa, who is to stop them? COSCO, like other shipping lines, has to mind its bottom line and market share and is answerable to its shareholders.