An Evolving Conceptual Palimpsest

The China proposed Belt and Road initiative (B&R) aims to integrate economies, communities and people. It holds significant potential in addressing the infrastructure gap of the developing world and bringing benefits in terms of inclusiveness and economic cooperation. The initiative aims to achieve this through investment, trade, financial, infrastructural and people-to-people connectivity while maintaining economic and financial stability. B&R can yield a connectivity dividend for affiliate countries. The “connectivity dividend” refers to the rise in economic growth rate due to increased inter-regional connectivity.

After exhausting the demographic dividend to achieve rapid growth towards the end of the 20th and early 21st century, China can replicate similar effects on its economy through the connectivity dividend.[1]

B&R should not be termed a threat to the international system of governance but a means to reinvigorate the international system of governance across the world to address the issues confronting the developing world and ailing Europe.

The B&R initiative is an evolving conceptual palimpsest consisting of multi-dimensional factors that is influencing the international state order and global institutional order. It is giving rise to notions of skepticism in the US-led West which considers it a camouflage by China to increase its influence on the global stage. Countries opposing the initiative have made space for it in an evolving discourse of globalization to accommodate China’s peaceful rise after it avoided a hard landing expected of its economy in the aftermath of the economic recession of 2007-2008. Since 2013 China has been the leading global trade power.[2] Furthermore the “America first” strategy pursued by the Trump-administration has provided China with sufficient space therefore enabling it to take a leadership role in the globalization drive of the 21st century.

B&Ris expected to transform economic and security architectures of Asia, Europe and Africa. The effects of increased integration and connectivity through the Chinese development model under B&R are yet to be fully understood and realized because it is the world’s largest on-going project encompassing more than 65 countries.

One of the six major corridors of this grand initiative is the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) which links the land-based Central Asian route with the Western maritime belt of B&R. This has elevated Pakistan’s geostrategic position in the region and opened up opportunities for Pakistan’s economy. Since CPEC initiates in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, Indian opposition to the project has intensified straining India-Pakistan relations. India fundamentally disagrees with the B&R initiative as has been evident from its refusal to attend the Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation that was held in Beijing from 14-15 May 2017.

The initiative has serious strategic benefits for China. It will counter the strategy of encirclement of China by the US, Japan and India. It will accelerate the pace of development of Western China and since B&R overlaps with Russia’s proposed Eurasian economic zone, it will help in creating a new engine of growth for the world economy.

The Sino-Russian cooperation on the B&R initiative is likely to antagonize the US-led West but with increased transparency, notions of conflict emanating from Western skepticism of the China-centered B&R Initiative will recede in the long run.

 

Outlet for Investment

China has come up with a set of multilateral financial institutions and has set up a Silk Road Fund to help bridge the infrastructure gap in the B&R region. Total financial commitments stand at $1.4 trillion for the B&R region, which far exceeds what the Bretton Woods institutions have been able to do and is considered several times larger than the US-administered Marshall plan which was initiated after the end of the Second World War.

The importance of the US involving itself in the China-initiated globalization project is such that it would enable Washington to sustain its position in the evolving geo-economics of the 21st century. The US could help in directing some of the USD 120 trillion funds under management by banks and institutional investors towards financing infrastructure projects in the B&R region.[3]

The B&R initiative will enable China to reduce its reliance on US treasury bonds by diversifying its investments while at the same time utilizing its industrial overcapacity. On the other hand, critical financing would be unlocked for the developing countries that are part of B&R thereby helping them improve their economic growth rates. Increased connectivity through better infrastructure will create the most efficient Asia-centered global value chain network creating a win-win situation for China and the B&R countries.

The risks associated with these investments are widespread corruption, political instability, and structural weaknesses in B&R countries. Under greater policy coordination and financial integrations these risks can be reduced but nevertheless they are major impediments to the realization of B&R.

China has set an ambitious trade goal of USD 2.5 trillion with the B&R region by the end of 2025 up from USD 1 trillion.[4][5][6] For the realization of this goal China is doing more than merely setting up financial institutions. It is encouraging mergers, acquisitions, and green-field investments to create Chinese multinationals across the B&R region and develop the largest platform for international business collaboration.

In addition, China and B&R countries are striving to improve the efficiency of customs clearance, enable interoperability across different rail gauges, reduce tariff barriers, assure security along the corridors, and harmonize institutional, financial, and regulatory structures. The B&R initiative is creating a supra-structure for economic cooperation in Eurasia and beyond.

In the recently concluded Belt and Road Forum (BRF) for International Cooperation held in Beijing, new areas of collaboration have been identified and more financial commitments from the Chinese side have been made. Key planks of the Belt and Road Forum are:

• Increase in the size of the silk road fund by USD 14.5 Billion.[7]
• Setting up of special lending schemes worth USD 36 Billion and USD 22 billion to support Belt and Road cooperation of industrial capacity, insurance and finance by China development Bank and the Export-Import Bank of China.[8]
• Trade cooperation and free trade agreements with over 30 B&R countries.[9]
• Provision of USD 9 billion as development assistance to B&R developing countries and participating organizations.[10]
• Launch of the science and technology people-to-people exchange initiative, the joint laboratory initiative, the science and park cooperation initiative and the technology transfer initiative.[11]
• Collaborative research and setting up 50 joint laboratories.[12]
• Appropriation of USD 1 Billion by China for international organizations to implement cooperation projects.[13]
• Development of 100 poverty alleviation projects, 100 happy home projects and 100 health care and rehabilitation projects in the B&R region.[14]Each highlight of BRF is tailored to address certain needs of the developing world in terms of economic stability thereby contributing to the realization of the B&R initiative at the earliest.

 

Potential Dividends for the Developing World

The development economics paradigm suggests that poor countries become wealthier over time as trade gives rise to economic growth while infrastructure promotes trade in turn. This results in win-win cooperation and eases political tensions. Hence B&R provides an opportunity of fostering stability in the developing world. According to USAID in the second decade of the 21st century:

• About 2.6 billion people, mostly located in developing Asia and Africa, lack access to 24/7 electricity.[15]• Nearly 800 million people worldwide lack access to water, and about 2.5 billion people lack access to basic sanitation.[16]
• Approximately 1-1.5 billion people have no reliable phone service.[17]
• Just over 20 percent of people in developing countries have access to the internet.[18]

China’s B&R addresses the supply side of the basic needs of the developing world, by helping bridge the infrastructure, technology, finance and knowledge gap. The 5 key B&R goals which will help reduce this gap are:

1. Promoting policy coordination[19]
2. Facilitating connectivity[20]
3. Ensuring unimpeded trade[21]
4. Financial integration[22]
5. Establishing people-to-people contacts. [23]

The B&R is one way China seeks to give back to the global community while at the same time bolstering its own economic might. More than 65 countries are currently part of B&R thereby giving China a sizeable leadership role in the globalization drive. With the commencement of the China-led globalization drive many developing countries which are a complex comity of nations constantly striving to achieve prosperity and influence on the global stage under the banner of B&R and Chinese optimism have raised their voice in the power corridors of the world, primarily in the US-led West. This has resulted in increasing amounts of friction between the US and China.

 

An Anchor of Stability

The world requires:

• $49.1 trillion till 2030 to overcome the greatest infrastructure gap the global economy has ever faced. China’s B&R is the primary initiative that can effectively contribute to global infrastructure demand but China alone cannot overcome the gap without the support of other major powers.[24]
• A reformed globalization drive which ensures reforms in the Bretton Woods institutions that are more reflective of the changing needs of the 21st century.
• New economic zones that can become future engines of growth for the global economy.
• Global economic system that reduces the anxiety of the public in the developed economies, which largely oppose the process of globalization because in their view it has cost them jobs and businesses.[25]
• Contingency plans as disruptive technologies change existing patterns of employment. More robust and concrete human capital management strategies should be developed to identify future human capital demand areas and address issues of unemployment due to globalization.

 

B&R provides:

• Critical financing has not been forthcoming in the past on one pretext or the other to the developing world from Western financial institutions. With the formation of the Silk Road Fund and Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), China has now erected organizations that if teamed up with Western financial institutions could create a synergetic relationship which would address financing needs of the developing world.
• An opportunity for the formation of the integrated Eurasian market, which is expected to be the future driver of growth for the global economy.
• Economic stability and security to volatile states that are battling terrorism and extremism.
• An opportunity for the reformation and reconstruction of the war-ravaged Middle East by linking the hydrocarbon-rich Middle East, with the biggest consumer of energy, China.
• Hope to the lagging African Continent with an opportunity for integration with the Eurasian markets, thereby stimulating its economies.

B&R has initiated the recalibration of the international order on the basis of multilateralism to advance global economic integration and put the process of globalization on fast track.

China wants to be a partner in the international system of governance through a shared vision involving the appreciation of emerging and developing countries at the world stage. The cry is for a greater say and a greater share in a larger than before pie of the global economy.

The US is reluctant to collaborate with China in the B&R initiative even where interests converge because it sees B&R as an attempt by China to deconstruct the US-led world order. But the Post-World War II order has collapsed on many occasions. It has failed to secure and integrate the Middle East, has failed to address the issues of the developing world and now it has failed in creating new sustainable avenues of growth for the global economy.[26] B&R is an evolving answer to these multi-faceted, rapidly changing and complex set of problems that the world currently faces.

Currently, a period of transition is underway which can be impaired by uncertainties, rebalancing of power, geopolitical risks and the prospect of a security dilemma running high at the regional level but the grand strategic concern is the evolving struggle between the US-led alliance and the so-called revisionist states, namely Russia and China. Rising multi-polarity in the power calculus of the world is resulting in unwarranted notions of danger emanating from B&R, primarily due to the geopolitical implications it will have on the global security architecture. These threat perceptions would remain high in the short and medium term.

In the long run B&R has the potential to downplay or reduce these negative and harmful forms of rivalry

since it opens numerous economic opportunities where cooperation mechanisms can be developed in majority of the B&R states and between the great powers.

The rapid surge in the financial power of China and the overwhelming economic nature of B&R will make it very difficult for the US-led West, India, Japan and other non-B&R countries to remain aloof from this massive initiative. Hence B&R can be used to develop a new paradigm of Sino-American, Sino-Japan and Sino-Indian cooperation which will be extremely beneficial for the global economy and global governance.

 

Geopolitical Competition and the Security Dilemma

After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 a unipolar world led by the United States came into being. The US led the process of globalization until the re-emergence of Russia and the rise of China in the second decade of the 21st century which has now given rise to a multi-polar world. This multi-polarity has resulted in the formation of “spheres of influence” or as the Americans call it “situations of strength.”[27] Friction along the contours of these “spheres of influence” has been accelerating at a higher rate primarily after the roll out of China’s B&R. Such friction could lead to two scenarios:

◆  A heightened security dilemma along the fault-lines of the B&R region can lead to clashes between regional powers.

The security dilemma, also referred to as the spiral model, is a term used in International Relations and refers to a situation in which, under anarchy, actions by a state intended to strengthen its security, such as increasing its military strength, committing to use weapons or making alliances, can lead other states to respond with similar measures, producing increased tensions that create conflict, even when no side really desires it.[28]

◆  If spiraled out of control it can lead to the outbreak of a world war involving the regional and global powers.

Contrary to Western skepticism B&R has the potential of mitigating regional rivalries and US-China tensions in the long run if used as a platform for cooperation and collaboration in advancing global stability and a more reformed globalization drive. It must be mentioned that friction is not a natural attribute of the B&R and is by and large a condition external to B&R methodology and spirit.

 

The Middle Eastern Geopolitical Quagmire

Middle East is a geopolitical quagmire which has erupted into a multidimensional crisis due to the involvement of regional and global powers. Mutated versions of Islam with geopolitical and geostrategic objectives have emerged that have pushed the region into conflict. After the emergence of the militant group “ISIS”(Islamic state of Iraq and Syria) multiple actors in the region have intervened in the crises. They include Russia, US, Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Iran. The most immediate problem after the Arab-Israel dispute is the rising security dilemma between Saudi Arabia and Iran which has fueled proxy wars in Yemen, Iraq and Syria. Both the countries are striving to increase their defense budget and modernize their militaries. They have also formed regional alliances to expand their spheres of influence in the Middle East. Numerous geopolitical players in the Middle Eastern arena have sabotaged prospects of stability in the region. In the short to medium run, the Middle East will experience significant security risks until the geopolitical competition calms down. While Syria, Iraq and Yemen would remain conflict zones and the involvement of regional and global powers will continue until the terrorist organizations in the region are defeated and eliminated and a stable Middle Eastern order is negotiated.

Conflict zones in this region pose no direct threat to B&R routes but it hampers the realization of the greater Eurasian market.

 

Eastern Europe Fault-Line

Russian intervention in Ukraine has complicated the security environment of Eastern Europe. It has raised tensions between Russia and the US-led alliance. Eastern European states have increased their defense budgets while the Western European countries have renewed their commitment to increase their defense budget to 2% of GDP after President Trump pointed out that US would only provide security to the “threatened state” that had paid its fair share of defense expenditure.[29] This immediate spike in defense budgets, caused by the pay-as-you-go approval of President Trump to security alliances, can lead to escalation of tensions as Russia is countering this threat with modernization of its nuclear weapons. The Russian aim of building its sphere of influence in Eastern Europe is giving rise to tensions between Russia and Western Europe at an alarming rate. After involving itself in the Crimean and Syrian crises, Russia is now considered a major challenge for the West.

Much of the Eurasian economic zone lies between Eastern Europe and Central Asia, for this reason Russian involvement is crucially important in the B&R initiative. Sino-Russian cooperation on developing the Eurasian bridge and creating a new Eurasian economic zone is evidence of a fast-growing symbiotic relationship between the two great powers.

B&R in this region would integrate economies and create positive dependencies. But the process of integration between Eastern Europe and Central Asia is giving rise to a security dilemma between the US-led alliance and Putin’s Russia. This dilemma requires serious communication between Western Europe and Russia if it is to be curtailed. It also requires the recalibration of the security architecture of Europe by treating the security interests of Russia at par with that of Europe. Since Russia is supporting B&R, Eastern European countries and even bankrupt European Nations like Greece are likely to experience a positive shift in their economies due to the stimulus that the B&R initiative will provide. China’s acquisition of the Piraeus port in Greece is giving the Greeks hope of an economic revival.[30]

Prevention of further escalation of tensions in the short and medium run between the major powers in this region should be China’s priority if it is to realize the full potential of the B&R initiative. B&R in the long run would contribute towards strengthening the EU’s economic outlook.

 

South Asia Fault-Line and CPEC

Geostrategic significance of China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) lies in the fact that it links the maritime silk route with the land based silk route, provides an alternative for the Strait of Malacca, and internationalizes the Kashmir dispute for its quick resolution.[31][32]

South Asia is marred by conflict in Afghanistan, India-Pakistan rivalry and the hegemonic ambitions of India in the region against smaller and less powerful states. This region is an active fault-line since tensions between India and Pakistan have remained high after Prime Minister Modi took office. The thorniest issue here is the Kashmir independence movement that has resurfaced in the Indian-occupied Kashmir after the killing of Burhan Wani, a Kashmiri youth.[33]

India blames Pakistan for the recent uprisings in the Indian-occupied Kashmir while documentary evidence exists of Indian aggression and human rights violations in Indian-occupied Kashmir by Indian armed forces. India also has reservations against the China-Pakistan Economic corridor (CPEC) which it claims passes through disputed territory. Whereas Pakistan has invited India to join CPEC in the greatest interest of the region. Pakistan wants a settlement to the Kashmir issue based on the previously passed UN resolutions and in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri people.

Many Indian leaders see in CPEC a serious threat to India simply because CPEC is a plan for the development of Pakistan. This Indian opposition to CPEC is a testament of Indian hegemonic ambitions in South Asia. Contrary to Indian ambivalence, Pakistan has constantly highlighted the benefits CPEC can reap for the Indian economy. CPEC can be used as platform for developing a broad-based cooperation mechanism between the two nuclear armed nations.

The competitive advantage that CPEC will provide for an export powerhouse like India would lead to normalization of ties and reduction in threat perceptions emanating from across the border provided the political leadership in India no more considers Pakistan its enemy number one and settles the Kashmir issue in accordance with UN resolutions and the wishes of the Kashmiri people once and for all.

Nuclear deterrence in South Asia is a factor of stability in the region that has effectively shielded Pakistan from Indian designs. Such a trajectory would remain in the near future. However in the short and medium run tension along Pakistan-India border are likely to exacerbate given the growing opposition to CPEC and B&R in Modi-led India. This is likely to further increase the security dilemma in the region.

The major security challenge that exists for Pakistan is internal security. After Operation Zarb-e-Azab and the now ongoing Operation Rad-ul-Fasaad, internal security has substantially improved and it is now globally accepted that Pakistan has successfully broken the back of militancy and established the writ of the state. This will enable Pakistan to quickly operationalize CPEC by providing much-needed security to the routes while its construction gains momentum. A sense of optimism has arisen in Pakistan which is likely to increase in the future as its GDP growth rate climbs by 2.5 percentage points due to CPEC.[34]

CPEC will bilk Indian aims in the region and therefore encourage India to further its agenda of destabilizing Pakistan. CPEC has increased the security dilemma along the South Asian fault-line due to Indian opposition. This trajectory is likely to continue till the project materializes and will keep on existing even after that, considering Indian intransigence.

 

East Asia Fault-Line

East Asia is a region where geopolitical competition has heightened between the US-led alliance and China. Over the past few years the Nine-Dash line, rebalancing to Asia, and the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) have adequately showcased the increasing amount of strategic rivalry between the US and China.[35][36][37] The fact that the US has abandoned the TPP does not change much in so far as tensions in East Asia are concerned.

Taiwan and the Korean peninsula are critical flashpoints in the South and East China Seas. The recent attempt by US President Donald Trump to sabotage the One-China policy by contacting the Taiwanese leadership resulted in a diplomatic row between the US and China.[38] Similarly the US-South Korea joint naval exercises and the installation of the Thaad anti-missile system in South Korea after multiple missile tests by North Korea are indications of an increased security dilemma in the region.[39] This region would remain a critical fault-line until President Trump and President Xi Jinping reach a consensus on the order that needs to be established in the South and East China Seas.

East Asia is now the center stage of great power rivalry. Outbreak of war near China’s east coast would be a major setback to China’s vision of shared destiny, integration and connectivity that it has developed under B&R. A stable order that guarantees the sovereignty of China and smaller states remain to be crafted if B&R is to achieve full potential in this region.

Increasing tensions along this fault-line are likely to disrupt the eastern routes of the B&R initiative by reducing prospects of Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) internal integration and ASEAN-China integration under a new global value chain.

 

Conclusion

With the global powers taking sides in this period of intense geopolitical competition the prospects of tensions remain high in B&R region. The current conflict zones under B&R region pose no major threats to the security of the primary routes and economic corridors but the fault-lines if activated could result in serious challenges for the routes and corridors’ security. Conflict zones threaten the rapid integration of the Eurasian market while the fault-lines threaten the security of the routes and corridors. Keeping volatility of the fault-lines in check till B&R is materialized will be a major challenge for China and B&R countries.

With more openness and more active lines of communications, US and China can turn their strategic flashpoints such as the South China Sea into a model of strategic cooperation and extend that model of cooperation across the entire B&R region. For such frameworks to evolve US has to show restraint and think more on the lines of a multipolar world.

Managing the threat perceptions emanating from B&R would require increased transparency and open communication channels between the great powers and regional powers.

The B&R is a panoramic initiative that is bringing together objectives of all the member countries while ensuring global economic growth. It is guided by a vision of innovative, coordinated, green, open and shared development.[40][41]

In the long run when B&R is fully realized it will contribute a great deal to global stability. Economic interdependence would be created along the trade routes which would make war and conflict more unlikely if not impossible.

References

[1] Angang, Hu. China in 2020. Washington: Brookings Institution Press, 2011.

[2] Francoise Lemoine, Deniz Unal. “China’s Foreign Trade: A “New Normal”.” China & World Economy 25, no. 2 (2017): 1-21

[3] Mckinsey Global Institute. “Bridging Global Infrastructure Gaps.” June 2016

[4] Xinhuanet. (2015, March 29). Xinhuanet. Retrieved from Xinhuanet:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-03/29/c_134107329.htm

[5] Xinhuanet. (2016, June 22). Xinhuanet. Retrieved from Xinhuanet:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-06/22/c_135458107.htm

[6] HSBC. (2017). Belt and Road Initiative brings mutual economic benefits. Kuala Lumpur: HSBC Bank Malaysia Berhad.

[7] China Centre of International Economic exchanges Shangai Academy of Social Sciences. (2017, May 17). Belt and Road Forum: Numbers from President Xi Jinping’s speech. Retrieved from Silkroad Info:

http://silkroadinfo.org.cn/index-en.html#/article/voqmyym3apz5at0ovtzmg70hnkf0pzmw?_k=r1y30b

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ibid.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Luft, Gal. 2016. It takes a Road. Think Tank report, Institute for the analysis of Global Security.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Xinhua. (2017, May 7). xinhuanet. Retrieved from Xinhuanet English News website:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2017-05/06/c_136261504.htm

[20] Ibid.

[21] Ibid.

[22] Ibid.

[23] Ibid.

[24] OECD-Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development . (2012). “Strategic Transport Infrastructure Needs to 2030. Paris: OECD Publishing.

[25] Brookings Institute. 2017. Building Situations of Strength. Brookings Institute.

[26] Ibid.

[27] Ibid.

[28] R.Jervis. 1978. “Cooperation under the security Dilemma.” In World Politics Vol.30, by R.Jervis, 167-174.

[29] The Economist. 2017. “Military spending by NATO members.” The Economist Web Site. February 16. Accessed May 2, 2017.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/02/daily-chart-11.

[30] SANO, AKIHIRO. “Nikkei Asian Review.” Nikkei Asian Review website. March 16, 2017.

http://asia.nikkei.com/magazine/20170316/Politics-Economy/China-s-Greek-investment-is-making-waves-in-the-Aegean (accessed May 9, 2017).

[31] PwC B&R Watch. 2017. China belt and road infrastructure 2016 review and outlook. Review, Hong Kong: PwC Hong Kong.

[32] Richard Ghiasy, Jiayi Zhou. 2017. Silk Road Economic Belt – considering security implications and the EU-China cooperation prospects. Think tank Research report, Stockholm: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute .

[33] Kumar, Hari. 2017. “The New York Times.” The new York times website. February 12. Accessed April 28, 2017.

[34] The Nation. 2017. “The Nation .” The Nation. Accessed April 28, 2017.

http://nation.com.pk/business/10-Oct-2016/cpec-to-boost-pakistan-gdp-growth-to-7-5pc

[35] Zhiguo Gao, Bing Bing Jia. “The Nine-Dash Line in the South China Sea: History, Status, and Implications.” American Society of International Law, 2013: 98-124.

[36] GRAHAM, EUAN. “Southeast Asia in the US Rebalance: Perceptions from a Divided Region.” Contemporary Southeast Asia 35, no. 3 (2013): 305-32.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/43281262

[37] BBC News. “BBC News.” BBC News. January 23, 2017.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-32498715 (accessed April 28, 2017)

[38] Tom Phillips, Nicola Smith ,Nicky Woolf. 2016. “The Guardian.” The Guardian. December 3. Accessed May 25, 2017.

[39] Gerry Mulanay, Michael R. Gordan. 2017. “The New York times.” The New York times website. March 6.Accessed May 25, 2017.https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/06/world/asia/north-korea-thaadmissile-defense-us-china.html

[40] Koleski, Katherine. 2017. The 13th Five Year Plan.Staff Research Report, Washington: US-China Economicand Security Review Commison. Accessed May 30, 2017.https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Research/The%2013th%20Five-Year%20Plan.pdf.

[41] Li Keqiang, Report on the Work of the Government(Fourth Session of the 12th National People’s Congress,Beijing, China, March 5, 2016), 10. http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/NPC2016_WorkReport_English.pdf; People’s Republic of China,13th Five-Year Plan on National Economic and SocialDevelopment, March 17, 2016. Translation.http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2016-03/17/content_5054992.htm.