Washington Should Join AIIB, Taipei Can Hardly Remain Outside

Washington Should Join AIIB, Taipei Can Hardly Remain Outside
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
March 23, 2015

Executive Summary: US attempts to prevent its allies from joining the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, or AIIB, have clearly failed. Britain recently announced that it has just joined the AIIB. Germany, France, Italy, and others have declared their support. Australia, South Korea, and others are expected to follow suit. How will the AIIB work? That has yet to be specified. Washington has suffered a diplomatic setback. Beijing has scored a victory in Sino-US strategic wrangling.

Full Text Below: 

US attempts to prevent its allies from joining the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, or AIIB, have clearly failed. Britain recently announced that it has just joined the AIIB. Germany, France, Italy, and others have declared their support. Australia, South Korea, and others are expected to follow suit. How will the AIIB work? That has yet to be specified. Washington has suffered a diplomatic setback. Beijing has scored a victory in Sino-US strategic wrangling.

British support for the AIIB is not about choosing between the United States and Mainland China. It is about national interests. It seeks opportunities for economic growth and investment in Asia. The US has criticized Britain for "accommodating" Mainland China. Instead, it merely demonstrated its own narrow-mindedness. It merely demonstrated that it lacked the generosity of spirit befitting a great nation. Washington cast aspersions on AIIB governance and operating standards. It implied that a Beijing led AIIB would disregard international lending principles and eventually become Mainland China's diplomatic and political tool.

Actually, the United States is worried that the AIIB will weaken the monopoly over international financial organizations the US has enjoyed since the end of World War II, and its unrestricted ability to print money. Takehiko Nakao, president of the Japanese Asian Development Bank (ADB), opposed the AIIB, on grounds that the US-led postwar norms of international finance must remain unchanged.

US attempts to prevent other nations from joining the AIIB were a serious strategic miscalculation. The AIIB is designed to meet Asian countries' need for large investments in energy, electricity, transportation, telecommunications, and other infrastructure. It will promote regional interoperability, and accelerate regional economic growth. The statutory requirement for AIIB capital is 100 billion USD. The founding members have decided that member nation rights and shares will be apportioned according to GDP. As the world's second largest economy, Mainland China plans to invest 50 billion USD. Naturally it will have the largest number of shares. But that does not mean Beijing can do whatever it wants.

Washington's resistance to the AIIB confirms that its Asian-Pacific rebalancing strategy was aimed at containing Mainland China. Its alleged desire for “Asian regional peace, stability and prosperity" was mere lip service. The result of obdurate US unilateralism, will probably only further alienate Asian countries.

Beijing has repeatedly stressed that the AIIB is an open, inclusive, accountable, transparent, and equitable multilateral development institution. Its governance structure and operating policies will draw on existing international financial organizations, and strive to reduce costs and improve operational efficiency. Mainland China welcomes countries outside Asia as founding members of the AIIB. It wants broad outside AIIB representation, to create a win-win situation in both Asia and Europe.

Mainland China's GDP accounts for 16% of total global GDP. But in the World Bank, it has only 4.87% of the voting rights, far less than the United States, with 16.28% of the voting rights. It has 3.81% of the voting rights in the IMF, while the United States has a disproportionate 16.75%. In 2010, Obama began promoting international financial organization reform. But so far it has not received Congressional support. This has led to a major loss of trust among US allies.

The United States is unable to raise the status of emerging economies in international financial organizations. It also objects to increases in ADB capital. So why not join the AIIB? On the one hand, it could encourage existing international financial organizations to work closely with the AIIB. On the other hand, it could invite Mainland China to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, and jointly establish new norms for international finance.

Britain will urge the AIIB to set high standards for its operational procedures. Britain has repeatedly urged the United States not to boycott the AIIB. It reminded the US of its hope that Mainland China would become a responsible major power. If Washington is worried about its waning political and economic influence, it would be wise to join the AIIB. US Treasury Secretary Jack Lew recently warned that when the Mainland China led AIIB gains general support from US allies, it means America's international influence has declined. Lew's intention was to persuade Republicans to support international financial organization reform. But it also highlighted repeated US attempts to silence Mainland China and other emerging economies. This will eventually weaken the ability of the US to shape international economic standards. This is something the United States must consider.

Fighting for the right to lead global economic and financial regulation during this century, has apparently become one of America's core issues. Mainland China has promoted the AIIB. Last year it led the establishment of the BRICS Development Bank, and invested over 40 billion USD in the Silk Road. America is going to find it difficult to stop the Mainland Chinese from building a new generation international financial order. Washington is worried that Beijing will use AIIB loans to gain political and military strategic advantage. It may conclude that "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."

The British joined the AIIB in a dramatic fashion. It realized that the rise of China has led to a reshuffling of the global order. The establishment of the AIIB and "one belt, one road" grand strategy, (Eurasian Economic silk belt and the Maritime Silk Road of the 21st century) will accelerate the economic integration of Eurasia. The global economy is about to be overtur turned on its head. Washington must join. Taipei can hardly remain outside.

美應加入亞投行 我更不能自外
2015年03月23日 中國時報

美國反對其盟邦加入「亞洲基礎設施投資銀行」（AIIB）的政策，儼然已經失敗。英國日前宣布加入AIIB，德國、法國、義大利等隨後表態支持，一般預期澳洲與南韓等國也會陸續跟進。AIIB運作方案尚未具體，華府外交先行受挫，北京則在中美戰略競逐中扳回一城。

英國支持AIIB，並非在中美兩強間選邊站，只是著眼國家利益，為自身與亞洲共創經濟成長與投資的機會。美國批評英國「遷就」中國，反顯出自身缺乏大國的胸襟與氣度。表面上，華府否定AIIB的治理能力與制定低標準的運作規範，質疑北京主導的AIIB恐無視國際貸款原則，最終淪為中國外交與政治工具。

實際上，美國的不安是憂慮AIIB將削弱美國自二次大戰結束後長期在國際金融組織的壟斷性影響力，讓美國擁有無限制的印鈔權。「亞洲開發銀行」（ADB）日籍總裁中尾武彥表明反對AIIB成立，理由就是不想改變戰後美國主導的既定國際金融規範。

美國反對他國加入AIIB，犯了嚴重的戰略誤判。AIIB旨在協助亞洲國家滿足能源、電力、交通、電信等基礎設施所需求的龐大投資金額，進而促進區域互聯互通，加速區域經濟發展。AIIB的法定資本為千億美元，創始成員國決議以國內生產總值（GDP）衡量權力比重與股份配額，身為全球第二大經濟體的中國計畫投入500億美元，自然持有最多股份，但不代表北京可為所欲為。

華府抵制AIIB只印證了亞太再平衡戰略意在圍堵中國，凸顯「樂見亞洲地區和平、穩定、繁榮」只淪於口惠。美國執意孤行的結果，恐難避免與亞洲國家的關係漸行漸遠。

北京曾多次強調，AIIB屬開放、包容、負責、透明與公平的多邊開發機構，未來的治理架構與營運政策會借鏡現有國際金融組織，力求降低成本及提高營運效能。中國表態歡迎亞洲以外國家成為AIIB的創始成員，除了想體現AIIB的廣泛代表性外，主要還是營造亞歐互助共贏的局面。

中國的GDP已占全球總量的16%，在世界銀行卻僅擁有4.87%的投票權，遠低於美國的16.28%，在國際貨幣基金組織的3.81%投票權，與美國的16.75%也不成正比。歐巴馬從2010年開始推動國際金融組織的改革，迄今仍未獲國會支持，間接導致美國在盟邦心中的信用大打折扣。

美國目前既無法提升新興經濟體在國際金融組織的角色和地位，又反對ADB增資，何不考慮加入AIIB，一方面能敦促現存國際金融組織與AIIB緊密合作，另一方面也試著邀請中國加入《跨太平洋夥伴關係協定》的談判，共同建立出國際金融的新規範。

英國承諾會敦促AIIB制定高標準的營運規範，多次期望中國扮演負責任大國角色的美國，更不宜置身事外。華府與其憂心政經影響力是否受到削弱，不如參與AIIB的體制運作。美國財政部長盧傑克最近就提出警示，當中國主導的AIIB獲得美國盟邦普遍支持，亦即表示美國的國際影響力已逐漸下降。他的用心雖然是為了說服共和黨支持國際金融組織改革，但也凸顯了美國再三壓縮中國或其他新興經濟體的發言權，終將削弱美國今後塑造國際經濟規範能力的事實，美國應該有所體認。

爭取本世紀主導全球經濟與金融規範權，顯然已成為中美競逐的核心議題，中國除了倡議AIIB，去年還主導成立金磚國家開發銀行，更投資400億美元成立絲路基金。美國此刻已難阻擋中國打造新一代國際金融秩序的雄心，華府若憂心北京利用AIIB貸款獲取政治與軍事戰略利益，或許「不能打敗他，就加入他」。

就台灣而言，應該就英國戲劇性表態加入AIIB事件，體認中國崛起已帶動全球秩序重組的事實，AIIB的成立與「一帶一路」大戰略（歐亞絲綢經濟帶與21世紀海上絲綢之路）的啟動，將加速推動歐亞板塊經濟一體化的實現，全球經濟座標即將翻轉，美國必須加入，台灣更不能自外。