Why Chinese manufacturers have problems to obtain contracts in democratic rows to build the new MTSI road imagined by Xi Jinping

Chinese construction companies have bigger problems to obtain contracts in the Pharaonic project of Xi Jinping to build the new MTSII route.

Recent research by the University of Exeter and Duke Kunshan University in China show that Chinese construction and engineering entrepreneurs are working in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) project – a large program by which China wishes to invest in several countries in Europe, the Middle East and Africa – I am confronted with more important challenges. To obtain contracts, report the publication The new engineer.

The report of the two universities shows that links with the United States and the presence of institutions that oppose the initiative in less authoritarian countries have led to a dramatic enterprise for Chinese entrepreneurs.

Approach for the United States and NATO, democratic institutions and public pressure – obstacles for Chinese companies

The study, published n Quarterly international studies From Oxford, he artified by Chinese entrepreneurs, several contracts with more natural resources and who receive more official funding from China.

The search for the two universities also shows that there is a significant relationship between the presence of democratic institutions in the host and the low value of contracts found by Chinese entrepreneurs in these countries.

The study also explains that Chinese entrepreneurs in the field of infrastructure make far fewer companies which are more geographically by China I which are less similar to China concerning the voting behavior to the UN.

In addition, Chinese manufacturers seem to do fewer companies in those who receive fewer financiers from the World Bank. There is also a negative association between belonging to NATO and the contracts summoned by Chinese entrepreneurs, reports the new engineer.

China's objectives with the new MTSII road, contradictory

On the Belt and Road initiative (or a belt, a road – a cenume, a road) – submarine and the new road to MTSII – Construction contracts have often been funded by loans granted by Chinese financial institutions or even by NII entrepreneurs. Loans are supported by garages from host governments which often involve natural resources such as oil, gases or minerals.

The BRI has two objectives, namely the increase in diplomatic coverage of China worldwide and, at the same time, the extension of the presence of Chinese companies.

University research now indicates that these objectives are contradictory, because the membership of host governments is negatively associated with infrastructure contracts for Chinese companies in respective countries, because when it was on the initiative, there is higher public pressure for entrepreneurs outside China.

Access to the BRI triggers pressure on states to limit China's involvement to the economy

Andrea Ghisolli, lecturer in international relations at the University of Exeter and University of Labor, indicates that the objective of the initiative to increase the diplomatic influence of China and to extend the presence of Chinese companies in conflict when the partner is a democracy.

Chinese entrepreneurs may be more likely to be on anti -democratic skins, thus increasing the challenges of the Chinese government in the stability of these countries by increasing the presence of Chinese citizens and assets, explains Ghiseli.

Pippa Morgan, lecturer in political science at the University of Duke Kunshan and co-author of research, argues that there is a negative relationship between the democratic institutions of the host State and infrastructure contracts reinforced by Chinese companies.

Democratic institutions allow a mixture of internal and international forests to limit commercial opportunities for Chinese entrepreneurs. This is the result of the response MA against the BRI within democracies, because membership of the initiative triggers the executive to limit the involvement of China in the economy, with negative consequences for Chinese entrepreneurs, I consider Morgan.

Beijing faces a significant and inattentive compromise between diplomatic and economic objectives when it comes to convincing a democratic to adhere to BRI. Even successful diplomatic attempts to promote political and diplomatic alignment cannot compensate for the negative effects caused by the differences between the regimes of the two trade partners, above Morgan.

The Chinese government has indirectly reached research by publishing a newspaper on the public by publishing the government's activity report.

Chinese executive states CN 2024 have recorded the highest productivity in PN, with $ 70.7 billion in construction contracts and $ 51 billion in investments. The report also specifies that the construction contracts continue to be dominated by the state entries.

Despite this, the government's report underlines the fact that the weight of Chinese engagement in BRI through investinitis, compared to constructions, decreased in 2024, reaching around 42% of contracts in terms of contracts and investment, compared to 53% in 2023.

BRI or promise of money with ruthless China

In 2013, Chinese President Xi Anununa during a visit to Kazakhstan and Indonesia a very large infrastructure project known at the time under the name of One Belt, One Road, then Belt and Road Initiatives (BRI).

The idea was that large Chinese companies are building fields such as transport, telecommunications and energy in dozens of people, China will offer loans to them, thanks to the largest BNCI. China has offered all states that could not obtain funding from the West.

The project was gradually put in 2014 and many things were built, rails in Serbia, Indonesia, Kenya I Laos, the Ports of Sri Lanka and Autostrzi in Papua Nouvelle-Guinée. Several dozen countries have received coherent investments.

China has worked for its large companies and estimates are that around 3,000 projects have been carried out, with total investments of almost $ 1,000 billion. More than 150 countries have signed to participate in the BRI program, including Italy, but all these enormous investments have not been made.

China has chosen in particular with the authoritarian regime, but many states that would have never allowed it to invest hundreds of millions of dollars, or even billions in a mega-project of infrastructure.

China presented the BRI program as one that will lead to the standard of living, by building useful objectives of the population, but it was clear that it is also a project by which China wants to become more and more political. It is I is a soft power project and we thought of entering Chinese influence in places where Americans have not invested.

What criticism say of brus

Some of the leaders of Crora China leaders granted them loans were the fact that they came with less constraints, but if money came from the West, the constraints linked to respect for human rights and environmental protection.

The most controversial aspect of the BRI was what the British calls a debt trap, which means that small states and srace do not have to pay the debts to China, debts resulting from investments in the BRI project. The consequence has been that these super-support states, China will influence the policy due to them.

Another criticism of the fact that all projects were not really useful and that there are examples of too expensive airports, but railways that will not make their money for portions that have not had many passengers, even after being rebuilt. Obviously, here is a question of managing an investment by the respective ARA authorities.

There were criticisms in the average chapter: some projects destroyed beautiful areas, other investments were made by dislocating a large number of people. A critic met in some cases was that these projects were not designed with the head because it was not really necessary, especially in Srace where there were other priorities.