Abstract
China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BR) projects a distinctive rendering of global space(s). The plans and maps invoked by Chinese investments are suggestive of shifting geopolitical imaginaries that envision the future of Eurasia. This chapter employs a co-productive lens to approach the geo-visions inherent to these visual materials and related infrastructural projects. It probes into the socio-technical reconstruction of space in general and maritime space in South Asia in particular. While the newly emerging image of the world moves India and the Indian Ocean to the center, territory seems to be organized by “corridorization” rather than regions or nation states. As China and India aim to cooperate for investments, their differing territorial imaginaries complicate the implementation of the Silk Road initiative.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Alastair Iain Johnston, “Is Chinese Nationalism Rising? Evidence from Beijing,” International Security 41.3 (2016/17): 39.
- 2.
We are thankful for all precious comments and feedback to this chapter by Chen Dingding, Cora Lacatus, Walter Andersen, Christian Bueger, and many others received during presentations at Tongji University, School of Advanced International Studies of Johns Hopkins University, and at the 2017 International Studies Association annual convention in Baltimore.
- 3.
Peter Ferdinand, “Westward ho—the China Dream and ‘One Belt, One Road’: Chinese Foreign Policy Under Xi Jinping,” International Affairs 92.4 (2016): 941–957.
- 4.
Gearóid Ó Tuathail, Critical Geopolitics: The Politics of Writing Global Space Vol. 6. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996), 10; Michel Foucault, The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences (London: Routledge, 2004).
- 5.
Sheila Jasanoff and Sang-Hyun Kim, eds., Dreamscapes of Modernity: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2015); Sheila Jasanoff and Sang-Hyun Kim, “Containing the atom: Sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea ,” Minerva 47.2 (2009): 119–146.
- 6.
Shashi Tharoor, “China’s Silk Road Revival—and the Fears It Stirs—Are Deeply Rooted in the Country’s History,” New Perspectives Quarterly 32.1 (2015): 18–21.
- 7.
Jeremy Page, “China Sees Itself at Center of New Asian Order,” The Wall Street Journal, November 9, 2014, accessed on January 20, 2017, https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-new-trade-routes-center-it-on-geopolitical-map-1415559290; Yang Razali Kassim, “China and a rebalancing of world order,” The Straits Times, November 19, 2015, accessed January 21, 2017, http://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/china-and-a-rebalancing-of-world-order. Hong Yu. “Motivation behind China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’ Initiatives and Establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank,” Journal of Contemporary China (2016): 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2016.1245894
- 8.
Moritz Rudolf, Mikko Huotari, Johannes Buckow und Sebastian Heilmann, “Chinas Schatten – Außenpolitik: Parallelstrukturen fordern die internationale Ordnung heraus,” China Monitor 18, September 23, 2014, accessed March 15, 2017, https://www.merics.org/fileadmin/templates/download/china-monitor/China_Monitor_No_18.pdf. See for the debate: John G. Ikenberry, “The Rise of China and the Future of the West: Can the Liberal System Survive?,” Foreign Affairs (2008): 23–37; Gerald Chan, “The Rise of Multipolarity, the Reshaping of Order: China in a Brave New World?,” International Journal of China Studies 4.1 (2013): 1–16; Oliver Stuenkel, Post-Western World: How Emerging Powers Are Remaking Global Order (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2016).
- 9.
James Der Derian, “The (s) pace of international relations: Simulation, surveillance, and speed,” International Studies Quarterly 34.3 (1990): 295–310; Paul N. Edwards, The Closed World: Computers and the Politics of Discourse in Cold War America (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997).
- 10.
Jordan Branch, “Mapping the Sovereign State: Technology, Authority, and Systemic Change,” International Organization 65.1 (2011): 1–36; Jeremy W. Crampton and Stuart Elden, “Space, Politics, Calculation: An Introduction,” Social & Cultural Geography 7.5 (2006): 681–685.
- 11.
Jeppe Strandsbjerg, Territory, Globalization and International Relations: The Cartographic Reality of Space (London, Palgrave, 2010), 69.
- 12.
Ó Tuathail, Critical Geopolitics, 4.
- 13.
Michel Foucault, Territory, Security, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–1978. Trans. G. Burchell (New York: Palgrave Macmillan 2007).
- 14.
David Harvey, “Cartographic identities: Geographical knowledges under globalization,” in Spaces of Capital: Towards a Critical Geography, ed., David Harvey (New York: Routledge, 2001), 208–33.
- 15.
William A. Callahan, “Chinese Visions of World Order: Post-hegemonic or a New Hegemony?,” International Studies Review 10 (2008): 749–761.
- 16.
Nele Noesselt, “One Belt, One Road: A New Roadmap for a Sinocentric World?,” The Asan Forum, October 20, 2016, accessed January 25, 2017, http://www.theasanforum.org/one-belt-one-road-a-new-roadmap-for-a-sinocentric-world/
- 17.
Nadine Godehardt, “No End of History: A Chinese Alternative Concept of International Order?,” SWP Research Paper 2 (Berlin: Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, 2016): 5.
- 18.
Xie Tao, “Is China’s ‘Belt and Road’ a Strategy?,” The Diplomat, December 16, 2015, accessed December 20, 2016, http://thediplomat.com/2015/12/is-chinas-belt-and-road-a-strategy/; Marcin Kaczmarski, “‘Silk Globalization.’ China’s Vision of International Order,” OSW Point of View, 2016, accessed October 10, 2016, http://aei.pitt.edu/80606/1/pw_60_ang_silk_globalisation_net.pdf
- 19.
Jean-Marc F. Blanchard, “Probing China’s Twenty-First-Century Maritime Silk Road Initiative (MSRI): An Examination of MSRI Narratives,“ Geopolitics (2016): 1–23, https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2016.1267147; Yiwei Wang, Belt and Road Initiative: What Will China Offer the World in Its Rise (Beijing: New World Press, 2016), 38 and Zhang in this volume. An example of intensive transnational governmental practices coordinated with China is the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), see: “Introduction,” China Pakistan Economic Corridor, accessed January 21, 2017, http://cpec.gov.pk/introduction/1
- 20.
Xin Zhang, “Chinese Capitalism and the Maritime Silk Road: A World-Systems Perspective,” Geopolitics (2017): 1–22, accessed April 1, 2017, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14650045.2017.1289371; Aiwa Ong, “The Chinese axis: zoning technologies and variegated sovereignty,” Journal of East Asian Studies 4.1 (2004): 69–96.
- 21.
Gearóid Ó Tuathail and Simon Dalby, eds., Rethinking Geopolitics (London: Routledge, 1996); Susan Roberts, Anna Secor, and Matthew Sparke, “Neoliberal geopolitics,” Antipode 35.5 (2003): 886–897; Harvey, “Cartographic Identities.”
- 22.
Jasanoff and Kim, Dreamscapes of Modernity, 4.
- 23.
Stuart Elden, “Thinking Territory Historically,” Geopolitics 15.4 (2010): 757–761.
- 24.
Jasanoff and Kim, Dreamscapes of Modernity, 4.
- 25.
“Vision and Actions on Jointly Building Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st Century Maritime Silk Road,” National Development and Reform Commission, March 28, 2015, accessed January 15, 2016, http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/t1249618.shtml
- 26.
Jasanoff and Kim, “Containing the Atom.”
- 27.
Arjun Appadurai, Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996).
- 28.
Steinberg identifies three archetypes. First, the construction of the ocean by Indian Ocean societies in the pre-Vasco De Gama period views the sea as a space external to society, a large abyss, and a “transport surface” separating actors from each other. The main aim of actors was to overcome the distance in order to maintain the circulation of goods. The second, Micronesian, construction regards ocean space to be identical to continental space. In this imaginary, the ocean connects rather than separates people and it is an inherent part of society and territory. Similar to the Indian Ocean societies, the people of Micronesia were largely reluctant to project power in the maritime sphere. The third, Mediterranean, type of construction lies between the aforementioned two extremities: it does not regard the ocean to be asocial and negligible space. Yet it does not consider the sea to be a part of (national) territory either. Actors in this type of oceanic construction asserted stewardship over maritime space to underpin their hegemonic position. Philip E. Steinberg, The Social Construction of the Ocean (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 41–67.
- 29.
Wang, Belt and Road Initiative, 45.
- 30.
Abanti Bhattacharya, “Conceptualizing the Silk Road Initiative in China’s Periphery Policy,” East Asia 33.4 (2016): 309–328.
- 31.
Yiwei Wang, “Misconceptions About the Belt and Road,” China Daily, November 28, 2015, accessed December 15, 2015, http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2015-11/28/content_22525643.htm
- 32.
Enda Curran, “China’s Marshall Plan,” Bloomberg, August 8, 2016, accessed September 10, 2016, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-07/china-s-marshall-plan; Jin Ling, “The ‘New Silk Road’ Initiative: China’s Marshall Plan?,” China Institute of International Studies, June 11, 2015, accessed June 30, 2015, http://www.ciis.org.cn/english/2015-06/11/content_7982914.htm
- 33.
“China vows to build community of common destiny with ASEAN,” Xinhua, October 3, 2013, accessed September 15, 2015, http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-10/03/c_132770494.htm
- 34.
These dialogues took place during a plethora of forums and conference broad together companies, international organizations, researchers and policy makers from countries along the BR.
- 35.
Zhouxian Zhao, “‘Yi Dai Yi Lu’ Zhongguo meng yushijie meng de jiaohui jiaoliang,” [“Belt and Road”: The Bridge between China’s Dream and the World’s Dream], Renmin Ribao. December 24, 2014, accessed October 15, 2015, http://finance.people.com.cn/n/2014/1224/c1004-26263778.html
- 36.
See Jing Gu, Alex Shankland, Anuradha Chenoy, eds., The BRICS in International Development (London: Palgrave, 2016); see also Jiang and Demissie in this volume.
- 37.
The collection of original maps, stemming from both official and unofficial sources, on which this part of the study is based includes 25 Chinese maps and 5 non-Chinese renderings of the Silk Road Initiative. The maps where all published between 2014 and 2017.
- 38.
Jia Liu, “No Blind Curves on Silk Road Routes,” China Daily, May 29, 2015, accessed November 4, 2015, http://europe.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2015-05/29/content_20851621.htm. It is obvious that this is quite different from the “closed world” vision that was produced by the US during the Cold War.
- 39.
William A. Callahan, “The Cartography of National Humiliation and the Emergence of China’s Geobody,” Public Culture 21.1 (2009): 141–173.
- 40.
See Callahan, “Chinese Visions of World Order.”
- 41.
Marc Lanteigne, “China’s Maritime Security and the ‘Malacca Dilemma’,” Asian Security 4.2 (2008): 143–161.
- 42.
Yu Qin, “China’s transport infrastructure investment: past, present, and future,” Asian Economic Policy Review 11.2 (2016): 199–217.
- 43.
Jonathan Holslag, “China’s Roads to Influence,” Asian Survey 50.4 (2010): 641–662.
- 44.
Sharen Kaur, “HSR Offers Massive Economic Spillovers,” New Straits Times, December 12, 2015, accessed December 20, 2015, http://www.nst.com.my/news/2015/12/116912/hsr-offers-massive-economic-spillovers
- 45.
See Hu Zhang in this volume.
- 46.
Shengnan Zhao, “Xi Pledges $40b for Silk Road Fund,” China Daily, November 9, 2014, accessed November 25, 2015, http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2014-11/09/content_18888916.htm
- 47.
Yiwei Wang, Shi jie shi tong de yi dai yi luo ji, [The World is Connected. The Logic of the Belt and Road], (Beiiing: The Commercial Press, 2016), 44f.
- 48.
Andrew Small, The China–Pakistan Axis: Asia’s New Geopolitics (London: Hurst & Company, 2015).
- 49.
Vision and Actions; Huaqin Liu, Sichou zhilu jingji dai—ouya dalu xinqiju, [Silk Road Economic Belt. The New Eurasia Opportunity], (Beijing: China Commerce and Trade Press, 2015).
- 50.
“China to invest $50 billion to develop Indus River Cascade: Report,” Indian Express, August 30, 2017, http://www.newindianexpress.com/world/2017/may/13/china-to-invest-50-billion-to-develop-indus-rivercascade-report-1604407.html
- 51.
The BR includes the China-Mongolia-Russia Economic Corridor (CMREC); New Eurasian Land Bridge (NELB); China-Central and West Asia Economic Corridor (CCWAEC); China-Indo-China Peninsula Economic Corridor (CICPEC); China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) ; and Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar Economic Corridor (BCIMEC).
- 52.
Anatol Lieven, “The China-Pakistan Corridor: A Fate-Changer?,” Aljazeera. November 16, 2015, accessed November 20, 2015, http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2015/11/china-pakistan-corridor-fate-changer-151111080012375.html
- 53.
Kanishka Singh, “China Wants to Talk OBOR with India,” Sunday Guardian, December 12, 2015, accessed December 20, 2015, http://www.sundayguardianlive.com/news/2216-china-wants-talk-obor-india
- 54.
“China Rebuts Modi Criticism of CPEC,” The News, January 19, 2017, accessed January 20, 2017, https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/180272-China-rebuts-Modi-criticism-of-CPEC
- 55.
Expert Interviews, Washington March 2017.
- 56.
Maqbool Ahmed, “CPEC: Hopes and fears as China comes to Gwadar,” Herald, March 14, 2017, accessed March 22, 2017, http://herald.dawn.com/news/1153685
- 57.
Ali Malik, “Pakistan Risks Losing Sovereignty to China with Its CPEC Gamble,” Dailyo, January 4, 2017, accessed January 5, 2017, http://www.dailyo.in/politics/cpec-china-pakistan-gwadar-port-economic-corridor-balochistan/story/1/14896.html
- 58.
See Malik, “Pakistan Risks Losing Sovereignty to China with Its CPEC Gamble.”
- 59.
Thomas Zimmerman, “The New Silk Roads: China, The U.S., and the Future of Central Asia,” Center On International Cooperation, October, 2015, accessed January 20, 2016, http://cic.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/zimmerman_new_silk_road_final_2.pdf
- 60.
Khurram Hussain, “Hidden Costs of CPEC,” Dawn, January 5, 2017, accessed January 10, 2017, https://www.dawn.com/news/1286698/hidden-costs-of-cpec
- 61.
Nadeem M. Qureshi, “Critical Analysis of China Pakistan Economic Corridor,” Eurasia Review, September 22, 2015, accessed September 30, 2015, http://www.eurasiareview.com/22092015-critical-analysis-of-china-pakistan-economic-corridor-oped/
- 62.
See Ashley Carse, Beyond the Big Ditch: Politics, Ecology, and Infrastructure at the Panama Canal (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2014).
- 63.
Behram Baloch, “China hands over two ships to Pakistan for maritime security,” Dawn, January 16, 2017, accessed January 20, 2017, https://www.dawn.com/news/1308491
- 64.
“Ensuring Secure Seas: Indian Maritime Security Strategy,” Indian Navy, October, 2015, accessed January 30, 2016, https://www.indiannavy.nic.in/sites/default/files/Indian_Maritime_Security_Strategy_Document_25Jan16.pdf
- 65.
Quoted in Harsh V. Pant, “India in the Indian Ocean: Growing Mismatch Between Ambitions and Capabilities,” Pacific Affairs 82.2 (2009): 281.
- 66.
Pant, “India in the Indian Ocean,” 282; David Brewster, “Indian Strategic Thinking about the Indian Ocean: Striving Towards Strategic Leadership,” India Review, 14.2 (2015): 230.
- 67.
Andrew C. Winner, “India: Dominance, Balance or Predominance in the Indian Ocean?,” in Deep Currents and Rising Tides: The Indian Ocean and International Security, eds., John Garofano and Andrea J. Dew (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2012), 111–137.
- 68.
James R. Holmes and Toshi Yoshihara, “Redlines for Sino-Indian Naval Rivalry,” in Deep Currents and Rising Tides: The Indian Ocean and International Security, eds., John Garofano and Andrea J. Dew (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2012), 185–213.
- 69.
Brewster, “Indian Strategic Thinking,” 231.
- 70.
Brewster, “Indian Strategic Thinking,” 232–233.
- 71.
Pant, “India in the Indian Ocean,” 280.
- 72.
Brewster, “Indian Strategic Thinking,” 223–224.
- 73.
Steinberg , The Social Construction of the Ocean, 61.
- 74.
The understanding that the Indian Ocean is India’s sphere of interest is widespread. The Indian Navy claims to be the maritime policeman in the area spanning from the Red Sea to Singapore. The Ministry of Defence and various Foreign Ministers labeled the territory stretching from the Persian Gulf to the Strait of Malacca as India’s “security environment,” “sphere of influence,” and “strategic footprint.” Additionally, the extensive domain surrounded by the Persian Gulf, Antarctica, the Cape of Good Hope, the African East Coast, the Strait of Malacca, and Indonesia has been identified as the “primary area of Indian maritime interest.” Brewster, “Indian Strategic Thinking,” 232.
- 75.
Pramit Pal Chaudhuri, “New Delhi at Sea: The China Factor in the Indian Ocean Policy of the Modi and Singh Governments,” Asia Policy 22.1 (2016): 27–34.
- 76.
See Baruah and Mohan in this volume; Eswaran Sridharan, “Where is India headed? Possible future directions in Indian foreign policy,” International Affairs 93.1 (2017): 51–68.
- 77.
“Colombo Breaks Through as South Asia’s Next Big Transshipment Port,” joc.com , accessed March 22, 2017, http://www.joc.com/port-news/asian-ports/port-colombo/colombo-breaks-through-south-asia%E2%80%99s-next-big-transshipment-port_20151020.html
- 78.
C. Raja Mohan, “Modi and The Indian Ocean: Restoring India’s Sphere Of Influence,” Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative, June 18, 2015, accessed January 20, 2017, https://amti.csis.org/modi-and-the-indian-ocean-restoring-indias-sphere-of-influence/
- 79.
Brewster, “Indian Strategic Thinking,” 225.
- 80.
See “World Hydrography Day 2013: Hydrography – Underpinning The Blue Economy,” International Hydrographic Organization, June 20, 2013, accessed March 20, 2017, http://www.iho.int/mtg_docs/WHD/2013/WHDBulletin_Final.pdf
- 81.
“The Oceans Economy: Opportunities and Challenges for Small Island Developing States,” UNCTAD, 2014, accessed March 15, 2017, http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditcted2014d5_en.pdf
- 82.
“Prime Minister’s Media Statement During His Visit to Seychelles (March 11, 2015),” Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, March 11, 2015, accessed October 15, 2015, http://www.mea.gov.in/Speeches-Statements.htm?dtl/24895/Prime+Ministers+media+statement+during+his+visit+to+Seychelles+March+11+2015
- 83.
Ashok B. Sharma, “Modi’s New Ocean Politics: Gluing Security and the Blue Economy,” The Jakarta Post, March 31, 2015, accessed December 5, 2015, http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2015/03/31/modi-s-new-ocean-politics-gluing-security-and-blue-economy.html
- 84.
Aman Saberwal, “Time to Revitalise and Expand the Trilateral Maritime Security Cooperation between India, Sri Lanka and Maldives,” Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, March 22, 2016, accessed March 24, 2017, http://www.idsa.in/idsacomments/trilateral-maritime-security-cooperation-india-sri-lanka-maldives_asaberwal_220316
- 85.
Shashi Thahoor, “Modi’s Indian Ocean Tour Shows that India’s Watching China,” The World Post, accessed March 24, 2017, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shashi-tharoor/modi-indian-ocean-tour-china_b_6849936.html
- 86.
“World Hydrography Day 2013.”
- 87.
“Role of Navy,” Indian Navy, accessed February 18, 2017, https://www.indiannavy.nic.in/content/role-navy
- 88.
“International Cooperation,” National Hydrographic Office, accessed February 18, 2017, http://www.hydrobharat.nic.in/views/international_cooperation.php
- 89.
Indrani Bagchi, “PM Modi Must Make Indian Ocean the Nation’s Geopolitical Nerve Centre,” The Economic Times, March 10, 2015, accessed February 18, 2017, http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/pm-modi-must-make-indian-ocean-the-nations-geopolitical-nerve-centre/articleshow/46513092.cms
- 90.
Hema Ramakrishnan, “The Blue Economy Declaration is More Than Aspirational,” The Economic Times, September 3, 2015, accessed February 18, 2017, http://blogs.economictimes.indiatimes.com/Exchequer/the-blue-economy-declaration-is-more-than-aspirational/; Vijay Sakhuja, “Blue Economy: An Agenda for the Indian Government,” Center for International Maritime Security, September 19, 2014, accessed February 18, 2017, http://cimsec.org/blue-economy-agenda-indian-government/12996
- 91.
Kamal Uddin Bhuiyan and Jahangir Alam, “Integrated Maritime Policy for Blue Economy,” The Daily Star, October 20, 2014, accessed February 20, 2017, http://www.thedailystar.net/integrated-maritime-policy-for-blue-economy-46456; David Rider, “Enhance Security, Promote Blue Economy,” Maritime Security Review, September 17, 2014, accessed February 18, 2017, http://www.marsecreview.com/2014/09/enhance-maritime-security-to-promote-blue-economy/
- 92.
Sharma, “Modi’s New Ocean Politics.”
- 93.
Tuathail, Critical geopolitics, 7.
- 94.
David Scott, “The Great Power ‘Great Game’ between India and China: ‘The Logic of Geography’,” Geopolitics 13.1 (2008): 1–26; C. Raja Mohan, Samudra Manthan: Sino-Indian Rivalry in the Indo-Pacific (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2013).
- 95.
See Baruah and Mohan in this volume.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mayer, M., Balázs, D. (2018). Modern Silk Road Imaginaries and the Co-production of Space. In: Mayer, M. (eds) Rethinking the Silk Road. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5915-5_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5915-5_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-5914-8
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-5915-5
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)