Category: United States

It was the spring of 2013, and the world was still finding its footing after the global financial crisis. In the grand halls of Beijing, a new leader, Xi Jinping, was settling into his role as China’s President. His vision was bold, ambitious, and, as we would later see, world-changing.

Across the Pacific, in Washington D.C., the seasoned diplomat John Kerry, then the U.S. Secretary of State, embarked on a crucial trip to China. The air between the two great powers was a mix of cooperation and cautious competition. During their meeting, President Xi, with a glint of what might have been genuine partnership in his eye, laid out a nascent idea to Secretary Kerry: a grand initiative to connect the world through infrastructure, trade, and investment. He called it, in those early days, something akin to a “new Silk Road,” and importantly, he suggested that China and the United States should build it together.

Kerry, a man known for his forward-thinking approach, was intrigued. The scale of the proposal, the potential for global cooperation, and the promise of shared prosperity resonated with his diplomatic instincts. He saw a glimmer of a historic opportunity, a chance for the two largest economies to collaborate on a venture that could benefit billions.

However, the wheels of government often turn slowly, and sometimes, with a heavy hand. As Kerry’s delegation prepared to leave Beijing, the proposal landed on the desk of a senior official in the U.S. Treasury Department – a “mandarin,” as Kerry would later recall, perhaps referencing the perceived bureaucratic stiffness. This official, acting within the prevailing strategic framework of the Obama administration, saw not opportunity, but risk.

The Obama White House, while seeking cooperation with China on certain issues, was deeply invested in its “Pivot to Asia,” a strategy designed to reassert American leadership and influence in the Indo-Pacific. This pivot was manifested in initiatives like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), an ambitious trade agreement aimed at knitting together economies around U.S.-led standards, often seen as a counterweight to China’s rising economic might.

From the Treasury Department’s perspective, the proposed “new Silk Road” carried significant concerns:

Competition, not collaboration: It was viewed as a potential rival to U.S.-led global institutions and economic frameworks, rather than a complementary effort.

Transparency and governance: There were nascent worries about the transparency of Chinese financing and the potential for debt traps in developing nations – concerns that would only grow louder in the years to come.

Strategic implications: The initiative was seen through the lens of strategic competition, a potential vehicle for China to expand its geopolitical influence and undermine U.S. interests.

And so, before John Kerry’s plane even touched down back on American soil, the nascent idea of a U.S.-China joint “Belt and Road” was “nixed.”

Xi Jinping officially launched the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in September 2013, a few months after his meeting with Kerry. It grew into a colossal undertaking, reshaping landscapes and economies across Asia, Africa, Europe, and beyond. It brought both development and debt, opportunities and challenges.

John Kerry would later reflect on that moment with a pang of regret, calling it “the single biggest missed opportunity of my life.” He saw what might have been: a world where the two great powers could have channeled their immense resources and ingenuity into a truly collaborative global development project, shaping its principles and ensuring its benefits were broadly shared.

The Tale’s Lessons:

The Weight of Missed Opportunity: Sometimes, the greatest regrets are not about what we did, but what we failed to do, the doors we chose not to open. Visionary ideas, especially in international relations, can be fragile and time-sensitive.

The Power of Perspective: What one person sees as a grand opportunity for collaboration, another, from a different vantage point, might perceive as a strategic threat or an unacceptable risk. National interests, pre-existing strategies, and deeply ingrained suspicions can overshadow potential partnerships.

The Bureaucratic Filter: Even the most senior leaders’ instincts can be overridden by the layered decision-making processes of large governments, where department-specific concerns can become paramount.

The Cost of Non-Engagement: When a rising power proposes a significant global initiative, the choice to disengage rather than engage and influence can lead to that initiative developing in ways that are less aligned with one’s own values and interests.

Hindsight is 20/20: It’s easy to look back and see the “what-ifs.” The challenge for leaders is to balance immediate strategic concerns with long-term vision, to distinguish between a genuine threat and a potential avenue for shared progress.

The story of the U.S. and the early BRI is a reminder that the path of international relations is paved with choices, each with profound and lasting consequences, often unforeseen in the moment they are made.

https://www.facebook.com/jeff.mah.5/videos/1107081534573551/?cft[0]=AZW19F150vzsfQC8BNfjDahPvaUSTWT6H1AVQf6q-WBB07Y9KCVpwH43zrM1q0G9r2bvbN83c3Y8Htm0E9o4vluTzbMfL5StbMKJVpwokOhJhJlAJ1bXZDEzNef2GPVlgrh1C5_xHjEEwx3fDl_jlv_5HD-5IOlTO4k3KsASmxNUyg&tn=%2CO%2CP-R