Home Contact Us  

Southeast Asia - Articles

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
#4967, 21 January 2016
AIIB: Regional and Global Responses
Madhura Balasubramaniam
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, IIT Madras

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) was formally inaugurated on 16 January 2016. The AIIB is a multilateral development bank envisaged to "promote interconnectivity and economic integration" in Asia. Headquartered in Beijing, China, the Bank has 57 Prospective Founding Members. In June 2015, the startup capital of $50 billion was increased to $100 billion. The Bank has aroused different reactions from each part of the world. The articles tends to analyse these responses at the regional and global levels.

The foreign policy and economic concerns that underlie the establishment of the AIIB include the need to bridge the infrastructure investment gap of $8 trillion in the East Asian region. The AIIB, with its initial capital of $100 billion to be invested in energy, transportation, rural and urban development and logistics becomes significant in light of the investment gap.  Other major reasons for China to promote the Bank include the under-representation of non-western economies in existing global financial institutions, and the need to channel surplus Chinese capital into overseas investment.

Beijing argues that because 75 per cent of the seats and shares in the AIIB are reserved for Asian countries, the imbalance in representation of non-western economies in the existing international financial system will get addressed. This is an attempt to attend to a broader Chinese foreign policy agenda of playing a more proactive role in global institutions. Finally, infrastructure investment via the AIIB is to serve as a vehicle to drain surplus capital - estimated at $137 billion in the second quarter of 2015 - as well as to address concerns of regarding the capacity of construction material.

Regional Responses
The AIIB has received mixed reactions in major Asian countries. The Philippines has decided to hold off its decision to participate in the AIIB citing the non-binding nature of the Articles of Agreement (AOA). Japan is not participating in the AIIB to avoid a potential negative impact on Tokyo-Washington relations. Vietnam and India, on the other hand, have decided to participate in the AIIB citing their infrastructure demands. The regional response to the AIIB is significant. The Philippines, Vietnam, India and Japan each have territorial disputes with China. It is possible that negotiating opportunities might present themselves as these countries balance their territorial disputes with their growing economic relations with Beijing.

The AIIB is also a new platform for Taiwan to advance its bid for international recognition. Taiwan submitted its bid to join the AIIB and it was rejected on grounds of nomenclature. This is in tune with Beijing’s policy of strictly opposing any representation of Taiwan as an independent state. The rejection of Taiwan on grounds of nomenclature, as opposed to compromises in other international organisations such as the ADB or WTO, is a clear indication that Beijing’s political concerns trump the economic agenda in the establishment of the AIIB. This raises concerns that the AIIB will serve as tool for China to pursue its geopolitical ambitions, particularly in the light of regional territorial disputes. It would, therefore, be significant to observe the AIIB’s response to Taiwan’s bid for ordinary membership in 2016.

Global Responses: EU and the US
The EU's response to the AIIB reflects the willingness of member-states such as UK, Germany and France to engage more closely with Beijing as well as to encourage China to assume a more significant role in multilateral institutions. As members, they do have a potential role to shape the Bank from within. However, the divergence in stances taken by EU members regarding membership bids reflect the need for a coordinated response.

The US had refused to join the AIIB and is also said to have lobbied against the bank, leading to an increasingly isolated position as key US allies joined the Bank. The establishment of the AIIB is viewed as an erosion of US’ influence in the region.

Washington's concerns about the AIIB presenting a challenge to the existing financial institutions, and on whether or not it would meet standards of governance and environmental safeguards, were addressed during Chinese President Xi Jinping's US visit in November 2015. In a joint statement released by the White House, the US acknowledged China's contributions to the financial infrastructure in Asia and beyond, reflecting a nuanced change in Washington's position in an attempt to perhaps mitigate some of the political costs it incurred due to non-participation as well as attempts to dissuade its regional and European allies from joining the Bank.

The establishment of the AIIB highlights China’s attempt to shape the international financial architecture in a manner that is economically beneficial to the region and also serves to portray China as a responsible stakeholder in the international system. Simultaneously, the regional and global responses reflect the complexity involved in each country’s decision-making process on participate in the AIIB; and the decisions are informed by both economic and political considerations vis-à-vis their respective bilateral relations with China.

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
IPCS Columnists
Af-Pak Diary
D Suba Chandran
Resetting Kabul-Islamabad Relations: Three Key Issues
Can Pakistan Reset its Relations with Afghanistan?
The New Afghanistan: Four Major Challenges for President Ghani
Big Picture
Prof Varun Sahni
Understanding Democracy and Diversity in J&K
When Xi Met Modi: Juxtaposing China and India
Pakistan?s Tactical Nuclear Weapons: The Inevitability of Instability

Dateline Colombo

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera.
Sri Lanka: Moving Towards a Higher Collective Outcome
The Importance of Electing the Best to our Nation's Parliament
Sri Lanka: Toward a Diaspora Re-Engagement Plan
Dateline Islamabad
Salma Malik
Pakistan's Hurt Locker: What Next?
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
India-Pakistan Relations in 2015: Through a Looking Glass
Dhaka Discourse
Prof Delwar Hossain
IPCS Forecast: Bangladesh in 2015
18th SAARC Summit: A Perspective from Bangladesh
Bangladesh in Global Forums: Diplomacy vs. Domestic Politics
Eagle Eye
Prof Chintamani Mahapatra
India-US: Significance of the Second Modi-Obama Meet
Has President Obama Turned Lame Duck?
Modi-Obama Summit: Criticism for Criticism?s Sake?

East Asia Compass
Dr Sandip Mishra
India-Japan-US Trilateral: India?s Policy for the Indo-Pacific
China-South Korea Ties: Implications for the US Pivot to Asia
Many ?Pivots to Asia?: What Does It Mean For Regional Stability?
Himalayan Frontier
Pramod Jaiswal
Nepal?s New Constitution: Instrument towards Peace or Catalyst to Conflict?
IPCS Forecast: Nepal in 2015
Constitution-making: Will Nepal Miss its Second Deadline?

Prof Shankari Sundararaman
IPCS Forecast: Southeast Asia in 2015
Indonesia's Pacific Identity: What Jakarta Must Do in West Papua
Modi in Myanmar: From ?Look East? to ?Act East?
Sushant Sareen
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
Islamic State: Prospects in Pakistan
Pakistan: The Futility of Internationalising Kashmir

Looking East
Wasbir Hussain
Myanmar in New Delhi's Naga Riddle
China: ?Peaceful? Display of Military Might
Naga Peace Accord: Need to Reserve Euphoria
Maritime Matters
Vijay Sakhuja
Indian Ocean: Modi on a Maritime Pilgrimage
Indian Ocean: Exploring Maritime Domain Awareness
IPCS Forecast: The Indian Ocean in 2015

Nuke Street
Amb Sheelkant Sharma
US-Russia and Global Nuclear Security: Under a Frosty Spell?
India's Nuclear Capable Cruise Missile: The Nirbhay Test
India-Australia Nuclear Agreement: Bespeaking of a New Age
Red Affairs
Bibhu Prasad
Countering Left Wing Extremism: Failures within Successes
Return of the Native: CPI-Maoist in Kerala
The Rising Civilian Costs of the State-Vs-Extremists Conflict

Regional Economy
Amita Batra
India and the APEC
IPCS Forecast: South Asian Regional Integration
South Asia: Rupee Regionalisation and Intra-regional Trade Enhancement
South Asian Dialectic
PR Chari
Resuming the Indo-Pak Dialogue: Evolving a New Focus
Defence Management in India: An Agenda for Parrikar
Pakistani Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan: Implications for Asian Security

Spotlight West Asia
Amb Ranjit Gupta
Prime Minister Modi Finally Begins His Interaction with West Asia*
A Potential Indian Role in West Asia?
US-GCC Summit: More Hype than Substance
Strategic Space
Manpreet Sethi
India-Russia Nuclear Vision Statement: See that it Delivers
Global Nuclear Disarmament: The Humanitarian Consequences Route
Nasr: Dangers of Pakistan's Short Range Ballistic Missile

The Strategist
Vice Admiral Vijay Shankar
Jihadi Aggression and Nuclear Deterrence
The Blight of Ambiguity
Falun Gong: The Fear Within

OTHER REGULAR contributors
Gurmeet Kanwal
Harun ur Rashid
N Manoharan
Wasbir Hussain
Rana Banerji
N Manoharan

Ruhee Neog
Teshu Singh
Aparupa Bhattacherjee
Roomana Hukil
Aparupa Bhattacherjee


Browse by Publications

Issue Briefs 
Special Reports 
Research Papers 
Seminar Reports 
Conference Reports 

Browse by Region/Countries

East Asia 
South Asia 
Southeast Asia 
US & South Asia 

Browse by Issues

India & the world  
Naxalite Violence 
Suicide Terrorism 
Peace & Conflict Database 
Y! MyWeb
Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
Year 2018
 January  February
 2017  2016  2015  2014  2013  2012  2011  2010
 2009  2008  2007  2006  2005  2004  2003  2002
 2001  2000  1999  1998  1997

The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS) is the premier South Asian think tank which conducts independent research on and provides an in depth analysis of conventional and non-conventional issues related to national and South Asian security including nuclear issues, disarmament, non-proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, the war on terrorism, counter terrorism , strategies security sector reforms, and armed conflict and peace processes in the region.

For those in South Asia and elsewhere, the IPCS website provides a comprehensive analysis of the happenings within India with a special focus on Jammu and Kashmir and Naxalite Violence. Our research promotes greater understanding of India's foreign policy especially India-China relations, India's relations with SAARC countries and South East Asia.

Through close interaction with leading strategic thinkers, former members of the Indian Administrative Service, the Foreign Service and the three wings of the Armed Forces - the Indian Army, Indian Navy, and Indian Air Force, - the academic community as well as the media, the IPCS has contributed considerably to the strategic discourse in India.

Subscribe to Newswire | Site Map
18, Link Road, Jungpura Extension, New Delhi 110014, INDIA.

Tel: 91-11-4100-1902    Email: officemail@ipcs.org

© Copyright 2018, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.