Op-Ed April 9, 2015 - Financial Times
Summary The shaping of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank should be seen not as a threat to achieving the highest standards, but as a rare opportunity to help existing multilateral agencies develop the right standards.
With nearly 50 applicants so far, the attention of the China-initiated Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank has shifted from concerns that it would not secure enough participants for a credible presence on the international stage to having possibly too many to coalesce on important issues. Now comes the hard part: creating a development institution that is responsive to both the diverse needs of its Asian borrowers and the governance concerns of its broader funding countries in Europe and elsewhere. Joining the bank is not politically feasible for Washington in the foreseeable future given the negative congressional sentiments, but the messages coming from the US have become more constructive, shifting from adamant opposition to signalling a willingness to co-operate in statements from senior Treasury officials. Yet these statements continue to raise concerns about whether the AIIB — with an intended $100bn registered capital — will adhere to the “highest standards” and over conditions on safeguards relating to social and environmental consequences at project level. Some of the later applicant countries such as Australia have cited such reservations to justify their initially lukewarm approach to joining.
READ MORE.....
With
nearly 50 applicants so far, the attention of the China-initiated Asian
Infrastructure Investment Bank has shifted from concerns that it would
not secure enough participants for a credible presence on the
international stage to having possibly too many to coalesce on important
issues. Now comes the hard part: creating a development institution
that is responsive to both the diverse needs of its Asian borrowers and
the governance concerns of its broader funding countries in Europe and
elsewhere.
Joining the bank is not politically feasible for Washington in the foreseeable future given the negative congressional sentiments, but the messages coming from the US have become more constructive, shifting from adamant opposition to signalling a willingness to co-operate in statements from senior Treasury officials. Yet these statements continue to raise concerns about whether the AIIB — with an intended $100bn registered capital — will adhere to the “highest standards” and over conditions on safeguards relating to social and environmental consequences at project level. Some of the later applicant countries such as Australia have cited such reservations to justify their initially lukewarm approach to joining.
Read more at: http://carnegieendowment.org/2015/04/09/china-has-role-to-play-in-setting-right-standards/i68e?mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRois6jKZKXonjHpfsX76O8uXKSg38431UFwdcjKPmjr1YcHT8p0aPyQAgobGp5I5FEIQ7XYTLB2t60MWA%3D%3D
Joining the bank is not politically feasible for Washington in the foreseeable future given the negative congressional sentiments, but the messages coming from the US have become more constructive, shifting from adamant opposition to signalling a willingness to co-operate in statements from senior Treasury officials. Yet these statements continue to raise concerns about whether the AIIB — with an intended $100bn registered capital — will adhere to the “highest standards” and over conditions on safeguards relating to social and environmental consequences at project level. Some of the later applicant countries such as Australia have cited such reservations to justify their initially lukewarm approach to joining.
Read more at: http://carnegieendowment.org/2015/04/09/china-has-role-to-play-in-setting-right-standards/i68e?mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRois6jKZKXonjHpfsX76O8uXKSg38431UFwdcjKPmjr1YcHT8p0aPyQAgobGp5I5FEIQ7XYTLB2t60MWA%3D%3D
