替代“一带一路”？欧洲方案毫无进展
2023-01-11 08:10阅读：
欧洲着眼于通过“全球门户”战略对抗“一带一路”倡议
“一带一路”倡议是中国推动的大型项目，旨在通过它与西亚和欧洲世界建立联系。部分欧洲国家对“一带一路”倡议保持沉默，或许他们正在等待该项目的影响，抑或他们正等待一起而非单独作出反应。
欧盟最终提出“全球门户”战略，到2027年为欧盟以外基础设施项目投资高达3000亿欧元。2021年12月，欧盟委员会主席冯德莱恩自信地宣布，该战略将成为中国“一带一路”倡议的替代方案。“我们能做到这一点，”她在谈到这个承诺时说。
但一年多过去了，人们无论在官方层面还是在实地都没看到该项目取得任何进展。观察人士怀疑冯德莱恩主席的声明是否能变成现实，以及将欧洲与东方相连的雄心壮志是否能实现。在欧洲议会上月召开的一次听证会上，议员要求披露该项目的细节。令他们困惑的是，他们被告知有关3000亿欧元的计划中没有任何新资金注入。“‘全球门户’并没有带来新的金融手段——从欧盟层面来说，没有拿出任何额外资金。”
这些说法引起议员们的怀疑。他们不知道这样一个大项目的资金从何而来。令他们困惑的是，欧盟委员会主席也并没对资金从何而来的问题给出任何说明。这些议员以不同方式发泄他们的失望。来自欧洲议会人民党党团的德国议员本特利表示，她一直试图找到参与该项目的德国企业，但未能找到任何一家。欧盟委员会的一名发言人表示，目前无法提供核心项目清单，也无法列出总支出数字。
令人不解的是，欧盟为何选择做一些带有与中国竞争意味的事。这种竞争游戏几乎没有任何意义。中国和欧盟有不同的意识形态、生态系统和地缘考量。我们找不到欧盟以几乎秘密的方式冒险开展任何项目的理由。
Alternative To China's Belt &am
p; Road Initiative, European Union Eyes 'Global Gateway' To Counter
The BRI
By KN Pandita (Padma Shri)
Belt & Road Initiative (BRI) is a mega project of China through
which it wants connectivity to West Asia and the European world.
China has given a vast media hype to the initiative and declared it
would undertake a significant financing share in the project.
It tried to convince the Eurasian and European countries that they
would benefit highly from the project. In a sense, Beijing wants to
revive the mystique of the ancient Silk Road, which remained the
main trading route between the East and west in the olden
world.
European countries have maintained silence about their reaction to
the project. Perhaps they would wait and see the implications of
this mega project. Maybe the European countries were waiting to
form a consensus and not react individually.
EU's Global Gateway
Thus, the EU has finally come up with the Global Gateway at the end
of the day. Reverting to December 2021, European Commission
President Ursula von der Leyen confidently announced in a Brussels
rally that the European Union’s new infrastructure drive would be a
genuine alternative to China’s Belt and Road Initiative.
She added, “We can do that. Countries made their experience,” she
said of Global Gateway, a spending drive that promised to mobilize
up to Euro 300 billion (US$318 billion) by 2027 for modern
infrastructure projects outside the EU.
The B&R Initiative of China is a trillion-dollar project to
connect China with the rest of the world after high-profile
allegations of “debt-trap diplomacy.” The pandemic that has visited
China and the world at large, and is again on a killing spree in
parts of China, forced the suspension of work on projects, albeit
temporarily, to be resumed when normalcy returns.
But the EU and the United States are concentrating on Global
Gateway, which, according to its authors, would offer a different
model grounded in democratic norms, funding transparency, and
sustainable objectives.
Once the Global Gateway is brought on the ground, the interesting
thing will be to compare the two projects of two blocks with
divergent ideologies.
A Mere Ambitious Dream?
But more than a year has passed, and the project has seen no
movement either at the official level or on the ground. Observers
have doubts about whether the announcements made by the Madam
President will ever become a reality and whether the ambitious
dream of connecting Europe with the East will come true. In
Brussels, there is a lot of confusion among the members.
At a hearing in the European Parliament last month, lawmakers
demanded that the details of the contemplated project are
disclosed. To their bewilderment, they were told that none of the
Euro 300 billion would be new. “Global Gateway does not bring new
financial means – there is no additional money when it comes to the
EU level,” said Vincent Grimaud, an acting Director in the
Commission’s department for the international partnership.
Statements like these emanating from sources sparked incredulity
among the parliamentarians. They were at a loss to determine where
the money for such a mega project would come from. What baffled
them was that the President did not hint at the question of
wherefrom the funds would come from.
She said with an air of certainty and confidence that the project
Global Gateway has the desired potential and even underlined the
estimated expenditure cost. There is no new policy.
The Irish lawmaker with the centrist Renew group made the cryptic
remarks: “There is no money. And I have always held the view that
if there is no new money, there is no new policy.”
A confusion of sorts prevails among lawmakers when they say they
fail to understand the narrative of responsible authorities. The
members give vent their disappointment in different ways. Hildegard
Bentlee, a German member from the center-right European Peoples’
Party, said she had been trying to find German companies who are
part of this adventure but had failed to locate any.
She added: “If I talk to journalists, they ask me what these Global
Gate projects are. If I go on the website of the European
Commission, I do not find it – this is difficult.”
Recently, Japan pledged US$ 30 billion of aid and investment for
Africa to counter Chinese influence. But the EU is counting the
chicken before these are hatched. Recently, a gala event was held
in Brussels to explain to participants of the age group of 18-35
what the Global Gateway concept was.
It was lampooned online after a few users logged in. At least a sum
of US$ 410,000 was spent on the event. Where is the project in the
name of which a considerable amount has been spent by giving it
media hype?
One Twitter user wrote the following under an EU post: “There is a
massive drought in East Africa, UNHCR doesn’t have enough funds for
food for refugees in camps, etc., and this is what you chose to
spend money on?”
A spokesperson for the Commission said there was no central list of
projects available, nor could they put a figure on total spending
to date. Many doubts can be raised, mainly when there is no list of
pre-defined Global Gateway projects and investments worth Euro 300
million.
Global Gateway Vs. B&RI
However, in an interview with Politico last week, senior EU
officials promised that “the projects would come next year. Once we
have rolled out much more substantially the concept of Global
Gateway, it will prove to be an attractive option, precisely as
Belt & Road has been seen with all the negativity … with all
the problems that it was creating,” said Stefano Sanin, Secretary
General of the European External Action Service to the
publication.
The question that baffles serious observers is why the EU has
chosen to do something that smacks of competition with Chinese
projects. There is little sense in this game of the competition.
China and the EU stem from different ideologies, ecosystems, and
geographical considerations.
China’s B&RI is a one-person show, while the Global Gateway is
a contribution by multilateral doctrine in which the targets are
the people of the regions involved as against the Chinese model
where maximum gains are of the investor.
We do not find any reason why the EU should hazard any project,
almost secretly, a method that goes entirely against the practices
of the European Commission.
