Is China Promoting Autocracy through OBOR Initiative

Is China Promoting Autocracy through OBOR Initiative
Students Name:
Institution:
Introduction

2
In the globally competitive world, countries are seeking bilateral relationship for the
purpose of investment opportunities and expert among others. China is one of the countries
which have extended extensively to the emerging markets through the use of OBOR initiative
(Chhibber, 2015). The OBOR initiative is good and accepted by many nations. However, one
remains with the question, is China promoting autocracy through OBOR initiative or not? This is
the question the researcher is going to answer through literature analysis and come up with an
opinion in the end.
My argument is that China is not promoting autocracy because the initiative serves to
promote the common good of all where the parties involved mutually benefits in the long run.
First, we begin by giving a definition of autocracy, autocracy promotion and OBOR. The
following section examines the world from the realist and liberal lenses in the perspective of
international relation theories, the motivation of China to undertake OBOR initiative, examine
whether the OBOR project is an autocracy, examines the case of India, and end with a
conclusion.
An autocracy is a way of governance where the entire power is central to one person
whose decisions is not subject to external legal restraint or regularized control. Autocracy
promotion therefore is the initiative of promoting autocracy governance, it is an initiative to
control or be governed by a subject of one power.
One Belt One Road (OBOR) is a project by the Chinese government which focuses on
enhancing connectivity as well as cooperation among nations spreading across the continent-
Europe, Asia, and Africa. The OBOR has covered 78 nations and involves building roadways,
maritime ports, railways, power grids, and other related projects (Banerjee, 2016). OBOR is not
only focusing on infrastructural connectivity but also endeavor to encourage policy

3
harmonization, connectivity enablement, unhindered trade, financial assimilation and creation of
people-to people-bond (Winter, 2016). Additionally, the initiative target areas of low-income
economies and which have the potential for growth and when proper conditions are put in place
they can create cooperation with China and also provide new destination opportunities for
Chinese investment as well as exports.
The World from the Realist and Liberal Lenses
The world is seen by realist theorist as anarchistic states of affairs where there is strive
for authority with the assumptions that all intercontinental relations are zero-sum (Rosenau,
2018). It is asserted that the struggle for international affairs among nations with similar interests
is the struggle for power and pessimistic on the outcome for solving conflict and war (Rana,
2015). In realist realms, the interpretation of a nation’s action yields a variance of the classical
theory’s interpretation thus providing a different perspective of the motivation of states. The
defensive realists highlight that powerful states do not seek power because it does not guarantee
security but rather look for ways to remain in the position (Jackson, Sørensen, and Møller, 2019).
Offensive realists, on the other hand, contend that the powerful states always continue to look for
power and safety in a zero-sum game and fear other powerful states. The only goals are to
endeavor to maintain regional hegemony so that they remain the only excessive influence in an
area and develop a regional domination; it is through regional hegemony that they can create
rivalry among other country hegemonies to eradicate peer rivalry (Rana, 2015).
Liberal theories describe that interdependencies among states happen through societal
norms, global systems, and economic exchange which encourages positive-sum interactions
between countries (Rosenau, 2018). The liberalism gives philosophies that support the inter-
dependence of countries via an economic-exchange, international organizations, and communal