What's new

AIIB (Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank) news

Poland could be in. waiting for more details.

Poland seeks to join Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank| Reuters

(Reuters) - Poland plans to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), Deputy Finance Minister Artur Radziwill said on Thursday.

"Poland sent to the secretary of the newly created Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank the so-called endorsement letter," Radziwill said in a statement.

The AIIB has been seen as a potential rival to the World Bank and Asian Development Bank. (Reporting by Pawel Sobczak; Writing by Agnieszka Barteczko; Editing by Pravin Char)

---------------------------------------------------
ADB plans to co-finance projects with China's lenders: China Daily| Reuters

(Reuters) - The Asian Development Bank (ADB) plans to work with China's lenders to co-finance Asian projects outside China, ADB vice-president Stephen Groff was quoted on Friday as saying.

ADB has signed a memorandum of understanding with the China Development Bank (CDB) and Export-Import Bank of China to "look for opportunities outside China," the China Daily newspaper reported from its interview with Groff.

The ADB had not yet identified appropriate projects for co-investment, Groff noted.

The moves toward cooperation come amid the emergence of new institutions such as the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, with initial capital of $50 billion.

The ADB has a capital base of S165 billion, while the China Development Bank's total assets stand at $1.6 trillion.

"It can be $1 from the ADB, $1 from the World Bank, $1 from the AIIB, and (we will) encourage multiple additional dollars from other sources," Groff told the newspaper.

"The ADB has a goal of eliminating poverty in the Asia-Pacific region. We aim to achieve this goal largely through infrastructure," he said.

Last month, ADB President Takehiko Nakao said that it could cooperate with the AIIB through co-financing if the ADB's standards for loans were met.



(Reporting by Brenda Goh; Editing by Eric Meijer)
 
An Australian viewpoint.

------------------------------------------.
Why the AIIB should not be governed like the World Bank and IMF

Why the AIIB should not be governed like the World Bank and IMF
Mike Callaghan
1 April 2015 5:10PM

What is best practice for the governance of the Chinese-initiated Asian Infrastructure and Investment Bank (AIIB)? Australia says this remains a major concern, even though it has finally agreed to become a prospective founding member of the bank.

Appropriate governance arrangements are important, but as Susan Harris-Rimmer has noted, Australia handled the issue of AIIB membership badly. At first it appeared to be succumbing to American pressure. Then it appeared to be caught out by Britain's decision to join in defiance of the US, quickly followed by other European countries. We signed on just before the end of March deadline.

This is not really the image of an independent country showing international leadership. Australia appeared flat footed and totally reactive.

But Australia was right to emphasise the importance of good governance arrangements. The debate seems to have focused on whether the AIIB should have a full-time, resident board of directors representing shareholders. This is the arrangement in the World Bank, IMF and some other international bodies. Australia appears to be supporting a resident board for the AIIB.

The president of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), Takehiko Nakao, said the AIIB has to follow 'best practice'. In response, Chinese Finance Minister Lou Jiwei said arrangements in the existing multinational banking institutions 'do not necessarily represent best practice'.

He is right.

In fact, there is a lot of scope to reform the governance of the Bretton Woods institutions. The recent focus on the reform of the IMF and World Bank has been on relatively small changes, and mainly in the distribution of their quotas/shares. While important, the real challenge is to change the way these institutions think, make decisions and relate to their shareholders. This will depend on reforms to internal governance – particularly the role and operation of their boards.

The issue of whether international institutions should have resident or non-resident boards is not new. It was the focus of a major debate in 1944 between the founding fathers of the IMF and World Bank – John Maynard Keynes and Harry Dexter White.

Keynes wanted a high-level, part-time non-resident board which would focus on the strategic direction of the institutions and not be immersed in day-to-day operations. Keynes also thought if directors divided their time between the headquarters of the institutions (he failed to have them based in London or New York rather than Washington DC) and their capitals, this would help avoid undue influence by the US Government.

But White prevailed and the World Bank and IMF were established with a full-time resident board that met in continuous session. The US wanted the board to be a political check on every decision taken by management and staff.

The ease of travel and communications was also a factor in this debate. In the mid-1940s, international travel was by sea and took many weeks, while communications were mainly by telegraph. There was no opportunity for capitals to closely monitor what was happening in the international bodies.

Things have changed. Capitals can have almost instant access to every policy paper produced by the institutions and can quickly relay their views, questions or concerns.

Notwithstanding the advance in communications, the governance structure of many subsequent multilateral institutions — such as the Inter-American Development Bank, African Development Bank, ADB and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development — followed the Bretton Woods model.

But not all international bodies have a resident board. The European Investment Bank (EIB) has a non-resident board that is removed from day-to-day affairs. The EIB also has 'outside 'directors who are appointed as experts rather than a representative of a specific country.

The arrangement selected for the AIIB board structure should depend on what is considered to be the role of the board. If the shareholders want the board to be the political counterweight to management and seek to ensure that every decision is consistent with each shareholder's interest, then a resident board deeply engaged in day-to-day activities may be in order.

But there are trade-offs and inefficiencies. In this set-up, there is a confusing mix of roles and responsibilities between management and the board. Also, a board deeply engaged in the details does not have the same capacity to consider the strategic issues confronting the institution or monitor its overall performance. Moreover, staff know the best way to neuter directors is to swamp them with paper and details.

Best-practice governance arrangements for the AIIB should involve articulating the roles and objectives of the AIIB, preparing clear operating principles and guidelines to achieve these objectives, outlining the roles and responsibilities of management and staff, and having robust review and accountability mechanisms.

Such an approach is more in line with a high-level, non-resident board. Capitals will need to take a close interest in the activities of the bank, but with modern technology this no longer requires a full-time resident board.

It is to be hoped that the AIIB does adopt best-practice governance arrangements. Who knows, it may be a catalyst to reform the governance of the other development banks.
 
The banks would not “compete” in economic terms, as neither of them alone or even working together could finance all of Asia’s infrastructure needs, but there is a sense that the AIIB’s lower standards could undercut local goals that ADB’s more stringent conditions promote.

I do not know how they are concerned about something that they have no idea about? Because the details of the workings of the new institution are not out yet. This is more like US-led scare-mongering, which arrests Japanese politicians' hands for some unknown reason.

Besides, what is lower standards? And what is wrong with lower standards? Are they lower than the United Fruit Company funding and training mercenaries to stage a bloody coup in Guatemala and install a dictator?

"The hell with your high standards," Japan should tell to the US fascist.

There is no reason why the AIIB and the ADB as well as the WB cannot work together, afterall, competition drives excellence and qualitative processes.

I agree. I guess, the AIIB is bound to raise the standards and fill up the many loopholes in the existing development regime. AIIB is to be an upgrade to the existing system, if not to slowly replace it.
 
AIIB aims at shared benefits, not vanity
Global Times Published: 2015-4-3 0:33:01

The application of over 50 economies for founding member status in the China-initiated Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) has surprised the world. It was also followed by some discouraging voices, some of which even emanate from our domestic field of public opinion. Yet experiencing a little chill wind isn't necessarily a bad thing. It will serve as a warning to remind us not to be conceited in the moment of success.

However, an explanation is still needed for those absurd arguments, in order to set the record straight.

Some are fundamentally rejecting the establishment of the AIIB, claiming it is a vanity project, which will do more harm than good to China. According to an online article promoting this view, there is too much risk over infrastructure investment in developing countries. China should continue to purchase US treasury bonds with our surplus foreign exchange, while arguing that helping the development of developing countries will be nurturing our future competitors.

It seems that the person who wrote this article does know a bit about finance, but is absolutely clueless when it comes to the competition of international multilateral financial institutions or the growing process of major powers. The world economy does not follow standard economic theory, but the rules of the "political economy."

The world has clearly understood that the AIIB will be an important breakthrough in the international orders. Despite the fact that this was not our intention, it is after all a good start for China.

The AIIB is not just a bank with the mission of external development, but it is an international multilateral financial organization with interests- and risk-sharing mechanisms. If the AIIB really is a bum deal, then why have policy makers from so many countries decided to join?

Chinese often lack confidence and are suspicious toward the outside world. Sometimes we even have no idea how to deal with success. With this many nations joining the AIIB, some people are afraid to be fooled by the more experienced game players. Those fears are normal, since we are indeed short of experience.

Nevertheless, continuing to learn as well as practicing is vital for being a major power.

All great powers learned their lessons from failures. And we will pay much more if we only act like a parrot and copy others' experience.

China has set up the China Development Bank and Import-Export Bank to encourage Chinese companies to expand in overseas markets. Supporting domestic enterprises to go global with state funds is a common experience shared by the major powers around the world.

Yet the AIIB is not another Chinese "Development Bank" or "Import-Export Bank." And the increasingly high popularity of the AIIB is not for vanity, but reveals a crucial political significance. More challenges will come to the AIIB in the future. There is no point in being humble about our accomplishment, and we will persevere to our utmost to achieve more success in the future.
 
Stampede to Join China’s Development Bank Stuns Even Its Founder
By JANE PERLEZAPRIL 2, 2015

China’s new Asian development bank by this week’s deadline, including last-minute applications by countries hardly considered Beijing’s best friends, astonished even the Chinese.

Few in Beijing had believed that Taiwan, still considered a breakaway territory by China, would want in. Same for Norway, whose relations with the Chinese have been chilly since its decision five years ago to award the Nobel Peace Prize to a Chinese writer.

  • But after the deadline, China announced that it had attracted 46 founding members for its Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Among the surprises: While China had expected to be joined by its neighbors, the final tally of countries looking to participate included 14 advanced economies of the Group of 20, many of them, like Brazil,France and Germany, from outside Asia.

    “Such wide and warm support was unexpected,” said Jin Canrong, professor of international studies at

    American officials seem to see the new institution as an effort to undercut the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, international financial institutions dominated by the United States and Japan. Obama administration officials have also expressed concern that the new bank, under China’s leadership, would ignore lending protections created to ensure, for instance, that vulnerable populations are not pushed from their land in the rush for development.

    By this week, Japan, China’s chief rival in Asia, was the only major Asian ally still standing with the Obama administration, while usually staunch allies like South Korea and Australia had pledged to join, reversing earlier decisions.

    The avalanche of countries wanting to join was set off in recent weeks by Britain, one of the United States’ most trusted friends, which concluded that China was such a large export and investment market that it could not afford to stay on the sidelines of one of that country’s pet projects.

    That the United States’ allies in Europe and Asia flouted Washington’s appeals not to join the bank has brought a sense of triumph to Chinese officials and scholars who say that China has now demonstrated it can construct a broad-based institution without the United States in the lead.

    “This has shown China that you don’t always have to work your way with the United States, that you can work your way with the region and many others outside the region,” said Wu Xinbo, the director of the American Studies Center at Fudan University in Shanghai. “As long as people think what you are doing is beneficial and that you are providing for the public good, you don’t need U.S. approval.”

    Washington basically undermined itself by failing to allow a bigger voice for China in the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, said David Daokui Li, a former adviser to the People’s Bank of China who has a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard.

    “The Americans got nervous, saying to its allies, ‘You guys can’t join, they are not dependable,’ ” Mr. Li said. “But in the end, all of America’s best allies ended up joining. We should be the ones most surprised, not the Americans.”

    Washington had warned some major allies not to join. And President Obama took a hard-line stance against China’s attempts to exert power in the region in his State of the Union address this year, said Bonnie Glaser, senior Asia adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

    “He said China should not be able to write the rules — the United States should write the rules,” Ms. Glaser said.

    Now that the United States has lost the battle, it has softened its position, saying that it will encourage the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank to cooperate with the new bank, provided projects meet certain standards.


    Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew flew to Beijing this week to deliver that message to Prime Minister Li Keqiang. Yet the shift to a more constructive position was viewed as late, and the repercussions of what many considered poor handling by Washington were on display at the Boao Forum for Asia in southern China last weekend, where President Xi Jinping spoke about his views on Asia to more than 1,000 delegates, many from outside China.

    “I was struck by how much praise there was for China from elsewhere, and how the United States seemed to be absent,” Ms. Glaser said.

    Now, the onus is on the Chinese organizers to build an institution that meets transparency, lending and environmental standards, and that fits the demands of many kinds of members with different agendas.

    The interim head of the bank, Jin Liqun, who has worked at the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, is “an experienced, savvy guy,” said Nicholas R. Lardy, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington. “He’s hiring an able staff of about 40 people, half from China’s Finance Ministry, half recruited internationally. He says he wants to hire the best staff he can get.”

  • The last-minute surge to join the bank was considered a major victory for China in a rare public showdown with the United States, which opposed the bank, as the two powers try to outmaneuver each other for influence in Asia. It was also a recognition of economic reality. China has deep pockets, and the institutions backed by the United States have not met the growing demands for roads, railroads and pipelines in Asia.
 
.
AIIB: Chinese cash versus American might | The Japan Times

AIIB: Chinese cash versus American might
Noah Feldman
Bloomberg Apr 2, 2015

CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS – If you’d never heard the acronym AIIB until this week, don’t blame yourself.

Strictly speaking, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank doesn’t even exist yet. But the Chinese-created alternative to the World Bank and International Monetary Fund is turning out to be extremely important. More than 40 countries have applied to join, almost all of them close U.S. allies — and they’ve applied despite aggressive American efforts to discourage them.

The upstart bank is already emerging as a major foreign policy victory for China, one all the sweeter because it’s a direct diplomatic win over the United States.

It raises a very basic question: What’s going on here? How can nations that depend on the American superpower for their security — including protection against China — so cavalierly ignore U.S. interests in favor of the only global state that can credibly challenge U.S. superpower status?

The answer begins with the Chinese gambit of creating a new international financial institution to fund infrastructure projects in Asia.

China’s most salient explanation for creating the bank is that it doesn’t exercise power in the existing international financial institutions commensurate with its global importance and economic heft.

In 2010, IMF members reached an agreement to give more governance authority to China and Brazil, but Congress has never ratified it. World Bank reform that would enhance China’s governance role is no more apparent.

That explanation functions as a useful proxy for an underlying geo-economic reality.

The architecture of the international economic and financial order was crafted in an era before China’s epochal rise. It reflects an older distribution of economic and financial power, one that heavily favors the U.S. and Western Europe. That, of course, is why the U.S. would like to preserve it.

As China was rising, it found it advantageous to join international economic institutions, especially the World Trade Organization, and to adhere, for the most part, to their rules — even if those rules were stacked against China. Now that China has become more economically powerful, it naturally wants to change the rules of the game.

The founding of the AIIB is important because it represents an overt Chinese effort to gain leverage in the arena of international financial institutions — by creating an alternative institution that it would dominate in much the way the U.S. dominates the World Bank and IMF.

The message from China to the U.S. is clear: either concede to us the place we deserve in existing international institutions, or we will go around you and start our own.

Given that the AIIB is functioning as a direct threat to American hegemony in international financial institutions, it’s no surprise that the U.S. would try to discourage its allies from joining. Yet those efforts have been spectacularly unsuccessful.

It’s not just that staunch U.S. allies such as the United Kingdom and Germany have applied to join, which would be bad enough from the American perspective.

Countries that rely wholly on bilateral security treaties with the U.S. to protect themselves against China have applied, too. These include Australia, South Korea and, perhaps most remarkably, Taiwan, which China considers to be a natural part of its own country. Japan, which is so concerned about the Chinese security threat that it’s considering amending the pacifist Constitution, hasn’t applied yet — but one of its ambassadors recently said that it expects to apply in the future.

In the past, countries whose security depended on a superpower didn’t run headlong into the economic arms of the country they feared. During the Cold War, for example, America’s Western European allies didn’t enjoy close trade ties with the Soviet Union.

Similarly, Eastern Bloc countries didn’t form economic bonds with the U.S. Seen through the Cold War lens, it would be almost impossible to picture the kind of institutional embrace of China that has taken place in connection with the AIIB.

But the new era of Cool War operates on very different rules from the Cold War. The essence of the new Cool War is precisely that countries that are geopolitical opponents are simultaneously economic cooperators.

China and the U.S. are the prime exemplars. One is the rising power and the other is the status quo power, so they are locked in a struggle for geopolitical dominance.

Yet the U.S. is China’s most important export partner, and China owns a higher percentage of U.S. government debt than any entity other than the U.S. government itself.

Other countries, including Asian tigers that fear Chinese security dominance, follow suit. South Korea and Taiwan trade extensively with China, as does Japan, not to mention Australia and the Philippines.

These countries participate in the so-called hub-and-spokes Pacific security system, with the U.S. at the center and bilateral security arrangements reaching out to each. And somehow all this is compatible, notwithstanding the appearance of contradiction.

The flight to join the AIIB over U.S. protests is the latest manifestation of the contradiction of Cool War. U.S. security allies feel comfortable deepening their international economic relationship with China, because the U.S. itself has led the way.

We’re now learning that, under the new rules of the game, there’s not much the U.S. can do to discourage them.

--------
Noah Feldman, a Bloomberg View columnist, is a professor of constitutional and international law at Harvard University, and the author of six books, most recently “Cool War: The Future of Global Competition.”
 
Japan has acted like headless chicken concering AIIB.Which is not surprising -USA has too strong hold over Japan.No point to twist reality-for almost 70 years Japan is USA colony.Other of so-called USA "allies" jumped the ship alreaday and joined AIIB.It is a sign for deep rift inside of so-called international comminity.Japan has a choice-break free and join or keep leaving under occupation.But with or without Japanese participation AIIB is here to stay and grow up.
Despite the talks ultimate goal is to boot out WB/IMF out of East Asia and ideally out of Asia.And there are more than enough countries who will take part and actively help reach the goal.WB/IMF as any other Western build and dominated institutions are not tools for help and development,they are tools for control and destruction-Perkins,Klein,Fitts etc have lots to say how the above mentioned organizations "help" the countries.All the other talks for standards,regulation etc are just USA nonsense and BS talking and shame on those of people who parrot them without thinking and make yourself familiar with the dirty affairs in Western financial system.Everyday there are more than examples about behaiviour of "law-abiding" Wall Street/City.
 
.
Germany Becomes AIIB Prospective Founding Member

Germany Becomes AIIB Prospective Founding Member
2015-04-01 21:11:36 CRIENGLISH.com Web Editor: Li

Germany has been approved as a prospective founding member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, China's Ministry of Finance announced on Wednesday.

The decision was made by discussions among all existing members including China, India, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and Kazakhstan.

The total number of prospective founding members has now increased to 31.

The deadline for applications to join as founding members was March 31.
:
:
The final number of founding members will be confirmed on April 15, after the opinions of all founding members are considered.

Founding members have the right to create governance and operating rules for the bank. Countries that join after the deadline will have voting rights only, with less say in the rule-making process.

The AIIB is expected to be established by the end of this year, with a mission to support infrastructure projects in Asian countries.
 
Italy and France officially become founding AIIB members | CCTV America
Italy and France officially become founding AIIB members

AIIB.pic.illustration.jpg

Photo illustration by China Foto Press.

April 2, 2015

Italy and France have been approved as prospective founding members of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, China’s Ministry of Finance announced on Thursday.

The decision was made by all existing members after discussion, bringing the total number of founding members to 33, the statement said.

The final number of founding members will be confirmed on April 15, after the opinions of all founding members are considered.

Founding members have the right to create governance and operating rules for the bank. Countries that join after the deadline will have voting rights only, with less say in the rule-making process.

The AIIB is expected to be established by the end of this year, with a mission to support infrastructure projects in Asian counties.

Story complied from Xinhua News




 
1020355816.jpg


Russia to Play Big Role in China-Led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank

11:08 03.04.2015

Russia expects to play a hefty role in the China-proposed Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) which it hopes will become a major driver of Eurasian integration, Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said on Thursday.

Russia to Become Founding State of China-Led Development Bank in Mid-April

“Being part of the Bank’s operations area, Russia will be encouraging investments into infrastructure projects in Siberia and the Far East. We hope that this bank will become instrumental in promoting transcontinental integration,” Alexander Lukashevich told a news briefing in Moscow.

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) is an international financial institution proposed by China in 2014 to provide finance to infrastructure projects in the Asia region.

The new bank plans to invest $100 billion in infrastructure projects in Asian countries. Half of that amount has already been budgeted by China.

More than 40 countries, including Australia, South Korea, Britain, France, Germany and Italy, have said they would sign up to the AIIB, with Japan and the United States the two notable absentees.

Russia is set to join the AIIB as a founding member on April 14.




Read more: Russia to Play Big Role in China-Led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank / Sputnik International
 
China is not going to let North Korea into its new Asian development bank
Shane Ferro Markets Apr. 1, 2015, 1:53 AM
kim-jong-un-skilift-2.jpg

Kim Jong Un riding a ski lift.

China is leading an initiative to start a new development bank, Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

North Korea very much would like to join that development bank.

China’s response? No way.

According to EmergingMarkets.org, China rejected North Korea’s proposal to join the development bank after the latter country would not provide sufficient evidence of the state of its finances.

North Korea has never revealed much about its finances to the world, but according to Emerging Markets:

“[North Korea] saw membership of the new China-led development bank as a realistic ambition, sources said, given that China regularly and unilaterally lends money to the isolated DPRK regime in return for uranium and other mineral ores.”

The development bank, however, will make commercial loans and have many members, including various European countries.

China is not going to let North Korea into its new Asian development bank - Business Insider
 
The saga for Taiwan's application to AIIB goes on ... they are yet to agree on a "proper name" for Taiwan to use.

Cross-strait talks in Xian to discuss AIIB bid name - Taipei Times

Cross-strait talks in Xian to discuss AIIB bid name
Fri, Apr 03, 2015

upload_2015-4-4_20-51-12.png

Minister of Finance Chang Sheng-ford tells a meeting of the legislature’s Finance Committee yesterday that the name under which Taiwan would take part in the AIIB would be on the agenda of a cross-strait meeting on Friday next week.

The issue of what name the nation might use to join the China-proposed Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) is to be discussed during the next round of high-level cross-strait talks, Finance Minister Chang Sheng-ford (張盛和) said yesterday.

The name issue is to be raised during an upcoming meeting between Straits Exchange Foundation Chairman Lin Join-sane (林中森) and Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS) Chairman Chen Deming (陳德銘) on Friday next week in the northwestern Chinese city of Xian, Chang told a meeting of the legislature’s Finance Committee.

On Tuesday, Taiwan submitted a letter of intent to join the bank to the interim Secretariat for Establishing the AIIB via China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO), pledging to invest US$200 million.

The office said the following day that it had received the application and that it welcomes Taiwan’s participation under the “proper name.”

Atop the agenda during the Lin-Chen meeting would also be a new Chinese tax law that has canceled preferential taxation for foreign enterprises, foundation Vice Chairman Chou Jih-shine (周繼祥) said on Wednesday.

China issued Notice No. 62 requiring all local governments to “clean up” their investment tax incentives, as the central government is to set up a united investment administration system.

Although the preferential tax policies are offered to businesses owned or controlled by foreign investors, Taiwanese-invested firms will reportedly bear the brunt of the impact from the new requirements, as they have long enjoyed more incentives than other foreign companies offered by local governments in China, Chou said.

The foundation and ARATS are preparing for the 11th round of cross-strait talks by the two semi-official negotiating bodies and expect the talks to be held before the end of this month, though Lin and Chen might not determine the exact time during next week’s meeting, Chou added.

Lin is to lead a 20-member delegation comprising officials from various government agencies to visit China.

They are scheduled to visit Zhengzhou, the capital city of Henan Province, on Tuesday before heading to Luoyang in the province and then Xian, the capital of Shaanxi Province, on Thursday and Friday next week.

Most members of the delegation are to return home after their trip to Xian, but Lin is to travel to China’s Fujian Province to attend a cross-strait economic and trade forum there before returning Taiwan on April 12, Chou said.

-----------
Name issue for Taiwan's AIIB bid on agenda of cross-strait talks|WantChinaTimes.com

Name issue for Taiwan's AIIB bid on agenda of cross-strait talks
2015-04-03 11:09

upload_2015-4-4_20-55-41.png

Chang Sheng-ford speaks at Taiwan's legislature, April 2. (Photo/CNA)

The issue of what name might be used by Taiwan to join the China-proposed Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) will be discussed during the next round of high-level cross-Taiwan Strait talks, finance minister Chang Sheng-ford said Thursday.

Chang said Taiwan cannot give up any chance it gets to take part in international organizations but will make sure to do so under the principles of equality and dignity.

The name issue will be raised during the upcoming meeting between Lin Join-sane, chair of Taiwan's semi-official Straits Exchange Foundation and his Chinese counterpart, Chen Deming of the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits, slated to take place April 10 in the northwestern Chinese city of Xi'an, according to Chang.

On Tuesday, Taiwan submitted its letter of intent to join the AIIB to the interim Secretariat for Establishing the AIIB via China's Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO), pledging to invest US$200 million in the bank.

The TAO said the following day that it had received Taiwan's application and said it welcomes Taiwan's participation under the "proper name."

When asked what name Taiwan might use to join the AIIB, China's foreign minister Wang Yi said last week that the matter can be handled in accordance with "international practice."

Due to China's opposition, Taiwan often has trouble joining international organizations and when it does, it cannot use its official title, the Republic of China. In most cases, Taiwan uses the name "Chinese Taipei."

Speaking during a weekly cabinet meeting Thursday, Premier Mao Chi-kuo reiterated that the government will not compromise the nation's dignity and will pursue fair treatment as a member of the AIIB.

After Taiwan becomes a member of AIIB, its rights and investment in the bank will enjoy the same protection as all the other member countries, Mao said.
 
Last edited:
More From the "How Clueless Can You Get" Wastebasket File.

Now we have the incorrigible Meixin Pei chiming in. Pei, is the inexorable China bashing ex-pat who is the go to "China Man" for flawed analyzes of contemporary Chinese affairs. How China's initiatives to leverage it's vast forex holdings into developmental funds for emerging markets can be misconstrued as "greed-driven diplomacy" is beyond me. The whole idea behind the AIIB, the NDB (BRICS Bank) and the Silk Road Fund is to foster win-win solutions by which everybody profits. China will be opening new markets, but those new markets will also be able to participate in the global economy to a much greater extent than before and profit as well. Everybody gains, nobody loses.

The IMF, WB, AIB neo-liberal model however is to tie developing economies to US apron-strings and make them subservient to US imperial interests. It is the US model that has been greed driven. The emerging Chinese global financial order is based on China's decades old, consistent policy of mutual benefit, mutual respect and non-interference or intervention in other nations internal affairs. That model is now being promoted and funded on a scale previously unobtainable.

The dysfunctional US has now found itself painted into a corner of its own making. It has the appearance of being a real tiger, stalking its prey and poncing on it when ready, but in reality it is a paper tiger being hemmed in on all sides, finding its options more and more delimited. In fact the world is moving on and eventually it will leave the US in the dust.


How the U.S. should counter China’s economic power play - Fortune
 
For a change, the following is from a Vietnamese expert POV.

---------------------
Establishment of AIIB to bring myriad of advantages: expert

Establishment of AIIB to bring myriad of advantages: expert
2015-04-04 10:13 Xinhua Editor: Wang Fan

The establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) initiated by China is expected to bring many advantages to the region, said a Vietnamese expert.

Tran Viet Thai, deputy director of the Institute for Foreign Policy and Strategic Studies, under Vietnam's Ministry of Foreign Affairs' Diplomatic Academy, made the remark in an interview with Xinhua on Thursday about the launch of the AIIB.

The expert held an optimistic view over the establishment of the AIIB, saying that the bank has more advantages than other financial institutions.

"First of all, the Chinese government has showed a strong determination over the establishment of AIIB. Moreover, AIIB has an enormous financial potential. Initially, the bank can use U.S. dollar as its currency. After becoming operationally stable, the bank's loans may be in Chinese Renminbi. Thirdly, being born after the world's other international financial institutions, the AIIB has a chance to learn from the experience of its forerunners. The last advantage is about huge domestic and overseas human resources joining the Chinese banking system," Thai explained.

Forecast to be put into operation by the end of this year, the AIIB is expected to create more capital mobilization channels for countries in Asia in infrastructure development, especially developing countries in the Southeast, Central and Southern Asian regions, according to the expert.

In the past few days, the upcoming establishment of the AIIB has drawn a great deal of attention from experts and analysts worldwide. The number of countries applying to be founding members of the AIIB rose to around 50 by the March 31 deadline.

The AIIB is an international financial institution proposed by the Chinese government. The purpose of the multilateral development bank is to provide finance to infrastructure projects in the Asia region.

According to Thai, one reason that China decided to establish the AIIB is that the country's foreign exchange reserve is at high level and it is ready for the AIIB's development projects.

Thai quoted statistics as showing that as of the end of 2014, the total foreign exchange reserves of China reached around 4 trillion U.S. dollars.

At the same time, interest rates of the U.S. government bonds kept decreasing, so profit from buying U.S. government bonds is not as much as it used to be.

While looking at the experience of the Asian Development Bank ( ADB), Thai said the appearance of the AIIB lays the foundation to create competitiveness among the existing financial institutions, urging them to boost reforms and increase their operational efficiency.

"The AIIB brings irresistible soft power to many countries," proffered Thai.

The establishment of the AIIB has raised debate all over the world recently. Many think that the launch of the AIIB poses a challenge to the world's existing financial institutions which are under the influence of the United States and Europe.

Some analysts even think that the establishment of the AIIB can contribute to demolish the global economic order that has been maintained for the past 70 years.

Thai expressed his opinion over the debate, saying that, "Nowadays, world order is changing. Emerging countries like China, India, Russia, and South Africa are rising strongly. The G7 has turned into the G20. A new world order is evolving, including new world financial and monetary order. With such change, the countries' reaction is normal."

According to Thai, "Whether the establishment of the AIIB destroys the existing order or becomes a supplement to it, remains a question to be answered. In the near future, after the AIIB comes into operation, the answer to such a question will be found. However, the initial establishment of the AIIB will certainly bring advantages."
.
 
Back
Top Bottom