Brazil Opts For Strategic Distance From China’s BRI, Joining India’s Stand

In a move that challenges China’s flagship Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Brazil has opted not to join the multi-billion-dollar global infrastructure project, making it the second BRICS country, after India, to reject participation. Brazil’s Special Presidential Adviser for International Affairs, Celso Amorim, confirmed the decision on 28 October 2024, indicating Brazil’s desire to pursue investments from China independently without formally aligning with the BRI.

Introduced in 2013 by Chinese President Xi Jinping, the BRI aims to enhance global trade and connectivity through large-scale investments in infrastructure projects across Asia, Africa, Europe, and beyond. The initiative encompasses the Silk Road Economic Belt, focused on land routes, and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road, connecting countries through sea routes. Over 150 nations and 30 international organisations have joined the BRI, signing agreements with China to develop railways, ports, power plants, and highways. However, alongside the infrastructure boost, the BRI has drawn criticism over concerns of economic dependency and expanded Chinese influence.

Brazil's Stance On BRI
In an interview with Brazilian newspaper O Globo, Amorim explained Brazil’s approach: "We want to elevate our relationship with China, but without signing an accession contract." Amorim noted that while Brazil seeks economic synergy with Chinese investors, it aims to retain control over prioritising projects aligned with its national interests. “They [China] call it the Belt and Road… but what matters is that Brazil has defined its priorities,” Amorim added, stressing that Brazil is not entering into a treaty but will explore individual project-based collaborations.

This decision contrasts with expectations from Beijing, as Xi Jinping’s administration had anticipated Brazil’s formal endorsement of the BRI during his upcoming visit to Brasilia in November. Brazilian officials expressed doubts about the initiative, especially from the economy and foreign affairs ministries, citing concerns that BRI participation could complicate relations with major economies, including a potential future Trump administration in the United States. Brazil’s approach aims to balance investment inflow from China while maintaining strategic autonomy.

India’s Long-standing Opposition
Brazil’s choice aligns it more closely with India, which has remained vocal in its opposition to the BRI since its inception. India’s key objection stems from the USD 60 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a BRI project traversing Pakistan-occupied Kashmir—a region India claims as its own. India argues that the BRI disregards sovereignty and transparency norms and fails to adhere to international principles, such as financial sustainability.

Indian diplomats have repeatedly underscored their stance in various forums, including BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). Notably, India has refrained from attending the past three annual BRI summits in Beijing, viewing the BRI as a China-centric framework that undermines mutual respect for national boundaries.

Debt Distress And Dependency Among BRI Participants
For many BRI participants, financial strain has become a growing concern. Nations such as Pakistan, Djibouti, Kyrgyzstan, and the Maldives are grappling with debt linked to BRI loans, which critics argue could lead to a “debt trap.”

Pakistan, for instance, has heavily invested in the CPEC, significantly boosting infrastructure but raising its debt to China to nearly USD 20 billion. This mounting debt has left Pakistan in a vulnerable economic position, with limited options for repayment, sparking fears of a potential default. Similar challenges are visible in other BRI countries:

Djibouti: This East African nation, strategically located near global shipping routes, has taken on substantial Chinese debt, putting it at risk of default.

Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan: These Central Asian nations have seen their debt burdens soar from investments in infrastructure, leaving them in a precarious financial state. 

Laos and the Maldives: Both countries face steep debt servicing challenges due to BRI-funded projects in energy, transport, and tourism infrastructure.

Examples like Sri Lanka’s Hambantota Port, leased to China for 99 years in a debt-for-equity swap after failing to repay loans, underscore the risk of economic dependency on Chinese investment. This trend has led to heightened scrutiny, with critics labelling the BRI as “debt diplomacy” that compromises national sovereignty.

BRI's Economic And Geopolitical Implications
Despite the debt concerns, China has continued to champion the BRI as a pathway for global development, emphasising its economic and geopolitical benefits. Economically, the BRI facilitates trade expansion, helping China secure new markets and enhance its construction and engineering sectors. For participating countries, the BRI provides access to infrastructure they might struggle to finance independently.

Geopolitically, the BRI extends China’s influence, creating a network of economically dependent countries across Asia, Africa, and Europe. Critics warn that this influence translates into political leverage for China, allowing it to expand its soft power and potentially its military presence through strategic footholds.

A Growing Divide In BRICS On BRI Participation
With Brazil’s rejection of the BRI, Beijing’s diplomatic efforts within BRICS face a potential realignment. The decision highlights a significant divergence among BRICS nations, which had largely been seen as unified in their approach to global issues. While Russia and South Africa continue to engage with the BRI, Brazil and India’s stances underscore an emerging divide on China’s global infrastructure agenda.

For China, this reluctance from two of its BRICS partners may necessitate a reassessment of how it engages in multilateral forums. It also signals to the international community that concerns around debt, sovereignty, and geopolitical independence continue to influence national decisions regarding the BRI.

Brazil’s rejection of the BRI represents not just a national policy decision but a broader trend within BRICS, where nations are increasingly wary of China’s expanding influence and the financial burden associated with BRI projects. This development, coupled with India’s consistent opposition, signals a shift in BRICS dynamics and raises questions about the future of China’s Belt and Road ambitions amidst growing calls for transparency, financial stability, and respect for national sovereignty.