On October 24, 2014 (September 1, 2014), the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank was established. The founding members signed a contract in Beijing. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (English: AsianInfrastructureInvestmentBank, referred to as the AIIB, English abbreviation: AIIB) is an intergovernmental multilateral development institution in Asia, focusing on supporting infrastructure building, headquartered in Beijing. The AIIB's statutory capital is 100 billion US dollars. On October 2, 2013, President Xi Jinping put forward a preparatory initiative. On October 24, 2014, the finance ministers and authorized representatives of the first 22 prospective founding members, including China, India, Singapore, etc., signed a contract in Beijing and jointly decided to establish the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. On March 12, 2015, the United Kingdom formally applied to join the AIIB, becoming the first major Western country to apply to join the AIIB. In March 2015, France, Germany and Italy agreed to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which will expand the AIIB to 31 member countries. As of April 15, 2015, the number of prospective founding members of the AIIB increased to 57, including Austria, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Brazil, Brunei, Cambodia, China, Denmark, Egypt, France, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan and Vietnam. Promote the RMB to join the SDRDecember 25, 2015 According to the Ministry of Finance website, the "Agreement on the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank" (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement") reached the conditions for entry into force on the 25th, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (hereinafter referred to as the "AIIB") was officially established. In response to a reporter's question, Finance Minister Lou Jiwei pointed out that according to the preparatory work plan, the opening ceremony of the AIIB and the inaugural meeting of the board of directors will be held in Beijing on January 16-18, 2016. What does the AIIB do? What does the AIIB do? Why do countries "go to the AIIB" Why do countries "go to the AIIB? How does the AIIB work?" Belt and Road Initiative "Strategy At the opening meeting of the 2014 Boao Forum for Asia Annual Conference, China comprehensively elaborated the" Belt and Road Initiative "strategic concept." Belt and Road Initiative "refers to the" Silk Road Economic Belt "and" 21st Century Maritime Silk Road "." Belt and Road Initiative "route: a northern line: Beijing - Russia - Germany - Northern Europe; a middle line: Beijing - Xi'an - Urumqi - Afghanistan - Kazakhstan - Hungary - Paris; a southern line: Beijing - southern Xinjiang - Pakistan - Iran - Iraq - Turkey - Italy - Spain; If you take a closer look, this" Belt and Road Initiative "runs through Eurasia, connecting the Asia-Pacific economic circle in the east and the European economic circle in the west. Whether it is developing the economy, improving people's livelihood, or responding to crises and speeding up adjustments, many countries along the route share common interests with our country. In history, the overland Silk Road and the Maritime Silk Road are the major channels for economic, trade and cultural exchanges between our country and Central Asia, South East Asia, South Asia, West Asia, East Africa, and Europe. The "Belt and Road Initiative" is the inheritance and improvement of the ancient Silk Road, which has been widely recognized. In addition, this "Belt and Road Initiative" strategy has integrated the original Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Eurasian Economic Union, and the China-ASEAN 101 mechanism. It has completely changed the previous point-like and block-like development pattern. Horizontally, it runs through eastern, central and western China, and vertically, it connects major coastal port cities, and continues to extend to Central Asia and ASEAN. Belt and Road Initiative Extended reading: China's abandonment of the AIIB's "one-vote veto power" is really too ruthless, and the United States is very regretful! Extended reading: China's abandonment of the AIIB's "one-vote veto power" is really too ruthless, and the United States is very regretful! We know that the world economic order after World War II was underpinned by the Bretton Woods system formulated by Western countries led by the United States. This system is an economic system with the dollar as the core. The actual pillar of the system is not the dollar gold standard as the textbook claims, but the World Bank, the international monetary fund and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (developed into the World Trade Organization in 1994), which determine the rules of international trade. These three major organizations have always been dominated by the West led by the United States. The United States has the privilege of "veto power" in the World Bank and the international monetary fund. This privilege means that in the World Bank and the international monetary fund, as long as the United States does not agree, it cannot be implemented. Although the chairperson of the international monetary fund has always been a European, the United States still has the master switch. What's more, the hegemony of the dollar is also the fundamental support of these two organizations. We also know that since the 2008 world economic crisis, developing countries led by China have been calling for the adjustment of the ownership structure of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to increase the authority and representation of the two institutions. However, after several years of delay, although the Europeans were willing to give up some shares and the US government signed the relevant agreement, due to the failure of the US Congress to pass the reform of the two institutions, there has been no progress so far. It is in this context that the BRICS countries, led by China, have been forced to establish the BRICS New Development Bank and Emergency Fund, the SCO Development Bank within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and in 2013 China proposed the establishment of the AIIB. At the beginning of the AIIB's preparation, the United States began to set up layers of obstacles, and criticized the unestablished institution, and even publicly asked its allies not to join. Many countries are riding on China's economic growth express. However, to the helplessness of the White House, before the APEC summit in 2014, 21 member states expressed their willingness to jointly initiate the establishment of the AIIB, including some US allies, including the Philippines, which has always been anti-China. What made Americans' eyes drop to the ground is that the United Kingdom made it clear at the last moment that it would join the AIIB, and then Germany, France, Italy, Australia, South Korea, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Saudi Arabia and other countries would join. According to the preparatory committee, at least 35 countries will join. Recently, even Canada and Japan have been rumored to want to join. However, surprisingly, according to US media articles, China has taken the initiative to put forward a proposal to give up the veto power in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It is reported that China's move is aimed at attracting major European countries to join the bank led by China. Since the United States has veto power in the World Bank and international monetary funds, China, as the dominant country, according to Western logic, China should also retain a veto to gain super power in the organization. However, China has given up this book to gain power. Why did China take the initiative to give up this super power? There are five fundamental reasons: First, to win over developed countries. American media reports said that China took the initiative to give up a veto power in order to win over developed countries. The Wall Street Journal's statement is undoubtedly an objective fact, because in the eyes of the West, since China has ceded power in this way and has invited it sincerely enough, why not participate in things that are beneficial to everyone? What's more, China's doing so has also given Europeans a reason to fight back against American allies. In the face of the United States, they can justifiably say that your criticism of the old United States is simply nonsense. They even gave up a veto. Don't you still hold on to a veto? What right do you, a guy of 1.6 meters, have to say that someone is 1.8 meters short? Therefore, without China's initiative to "give up", it may not be possible to usher in the determination of the United States' European allies to "break" with the United States on this issue. To put it bluntly, when the Europeans were dozing off and couldn't find a pillow, the Chinese gave them a hot pillow, so they immediately fell asleep collectively. Second, the "one-vote veto" system is not in line with China's political and cultural values. As of March 20, the number of founding members of the AIIB has increased to 33. China's diplomacy has always adhered to the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. Internationally, China has always shown justice and fairness, and never interfered in other countries' internal affairs. Therefore, countries around the world do not have much pressure when interacting with China. Although such exchanges have certain side effects, the positive energy is still far higher than the negative effect. Moreover, from the perspective of Chinese history, in most cases, China's rule over vassal countries is not handled by hegemonic rules of the game, but by kingship. Therefore, hegemony and coercion are not the values of Chinese political culture, and China often does not choose the hegemonic model. In this case, the international organization established by China cannot naturally be the same as the hegemonic United States. Therefore, at this time, China voluntarily gives up veto power, which can not only silence the mouth of the United States, but also keep the hearts of other countries in the world. Objectively, this is a clever move. It seems to be vertical, but it is actually a catch, because it enhances the international centripetal force of the AIIB, making it impossible for the United States to destroy it for a while, but it has instead fallen into political passivity. The AIIB led by China III. China's active reform needs more support. China's establishment of the AIIB is objectively a change to the existing international order. Although this change is essentially a supplement to the current world rules, this supplement also means the transfer of world power to China. This kind of reform undoubtedly moves the lifeblood of the United States, a major power, which is also the fundamental reason why the United States continues to obstruct China. Strategic and Economic Dialogue In this case, in addition to expressing that it has no intention of replacing the United States, it is more important for China to get more countries to support China's proposal. Without the support of other countries in the world, China's initiative to use knives against the rules of the world economic game will be difficult because of the authoritarian existence of the United States. China's initiative to give up "one veto power" is welcomed and supported by all countries. Moreover, countries can also use this as a reason to counter the accusations of the United States. It is based on this factor that Western media believe that if the United States continues to obstruct, it will be isolated in the international community. The isolation of the United States is simply unprecedented. Fourth, China has the ability to dominate the AIIB without relying on "one veto power". Why does China invite more countries to participate in the AIIB? It has also analyzed why China is not afraid that the participation of foreign powers will affect China's dominance. In fact, the fundamental reason is that with China's current economic influence, it has enough ability to speak for itself in Asia. In other words, China can handle the AIIB without the participation of these developed countries at all. The reason for inviting them is to hope that the AIIB will develop faster and better, and that China's "Belt and Road Initiative" strategy will be realized faster. As the saying goes, everyone picks up firewood. China gives up "one veto power", and with the real influence of China's economy, it can also influence the voting direction of other Asian countries. In other words, the operation of the AIIB will not be able to leave China. In this case, why does China need this veto power? Once the AIIB runs smoothly, with the support of China's "Belt and Road Initiative" strategy, China's comprehensive national strength will be stronger, and then there will be no need for one veto power. What's more, the AIIB invests in Asian infrastructure, and the improvement of Asian infrastructure is conducive to the realization of the "Belt and Road Initiative" strategy. What reason does China have to oppose it? As long as you are willing to invest in construction, China will definitely support it. Moreover, in this world, I am afraid that only China can engage in these infrastructure projects at a high quality and low price. Naturally, China will not easily oppose things that are beneficial to China. Many countries have joined the AIIB, so objectively, this veto power is of no use to China at all. As long as China is willing, it can do things under the rules of the AIIB. I am afraid that no one can do what China does not want to do. Of course, even if you bypass me to do these things, it will only benefit me and not hurt me. The AIIB itself is a sub-system based on the "Belt and Road Initiative" strategy, and China does not have to worry about it. Really, when the infrastructure of Asia is developed and the mission of the AIIB is completed, why do you need that "one veto"? Fifth, force the reform of the current international organization. The AIIB challenges the world financial system dominated by the United States. We know that the reform of the international monetary fund and the World Bank in the past six or seven years has been difficult due to the obstruction of the United States. This reality that two global international organizations cannot reform and cannot move because of the opposition of one country shows that this is not a democratic institution, nor is it a sufficiently representative international institution. However, since these rules are all rules established after World War II and formed by history, countries are naturally helpless. However, the situation has changed after China led the establishment of the AIIB. Compared with the international monetary fund and the World Bank, China not only voluntarily gave up the "one veto" power, but also in principle used GDP as the basic basis for distributing shares. Objectively, this rule led by China is more transparent, democratic and more internationally representative than the relevant rules led by the United States. In this case, the two institutions mainly dominated by Western countries will inevitably be used by Europeans to promote reform. In this way, the United States will undoubtedly come under tremendous political pressure. China has exchanged a concession of its own for the power to reform international rules, which can be said to be a lot of money.On October 24, 2014 (September 1, 2014), the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank was established. The founding members signed a contract in Beijing. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (English: AsianInfrastructureInvestmentBank, referred to as the AIIB, English abbreviation: AIIB) is an intergovernmental multilateral development institution in Asia, focusing on supporting infrastructure building, headquartered in Beijing. The AIIB's statutory capital is 100 billion US dollars. On October 2, 2013, President Xi Jinping put forward a preparatory initiative. On October 24, 2014, the finance ministers and authorized representatives of the first 22 prospective founding members, including China, India, Singapore, etc., signed a contract in Beijing and jointly decided to establish the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. On March 12, 2015, the United Kingdom formally applied to join the AIIB, becoming the first major Western country to apply to join the AIIB. In March 2015, France, Germany and Italy agreed to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which will expand the AIIB to 31 member countries. As of April 15, 2015, the number of prospective founding members of the AIIB increased to 57, including Austria, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Brazil, Brunei, Cambodia, China, Denmark, Egypt, France, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan and Vietnam. Promote the RMB to join the SDRDecember 25, 2015 According to the Ministry of Finance website, the "Agreement on the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank" (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement") reached the conditions for entry into force on the 25th, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (hereinafter referred to as the "AIIB") was officially established. In response to a reporter's question, Finance Minister Lou Jiwei pointed out that according to the preparatory work plan, the opening ceremony of the AIIB and the inaugural meeting of the board of directors will be held in Beijing on January 16-18, 2016. What does the AIIB do? What does the AIIB do? Why do countries "go to the AIIB" Why do countries "go to the AIIB? How does the AIIB work?" Belt and Road Initiative "Strategy At the opening meeting of the 2014 Boao Forum for Asia Annual Conference, China comprehensively elaborated the" Belt and Road Initiative "strategic concept." Belt and Road Initiative "refers to the" Silk Road Economic Belt "and" 21st Century Maritime Silk Road "." Belt and Road Initiative "route: a northern line: Beijing - Russia - Germany - Northern Europe; a middle line: Beijing - Xi'an - Urumqi - Afghanistan - Kazakhstan - Hungary - Paris; a southern line: Beijing - southern Xinjiang - Pakistan - Iran - Iraq - Turkey - Italy - Spain; If you take a closer look, this" Belt and Road Initiative "runs through Eurasia, connecting the Asia-Pacific economic circle in the east and the European economic circle in the west. Whether it is developing the economy, improving people's livelihood, or responding to crises and speeding up adjustments, many countries along the route share common interests with our country. In history, the overland Silk Road and the Maritime Silk Road are the major channels for economic, trade and cultural exchanges between our country and Central Asia, South East Asia, South Asia, West Asia, East Africa, and Europe. The "Belt and Road Initiative" is the inheritance and improvement of the ancient Silk Road, which has been widely recognized. In addition, this "Belt and Road Initiative" strategy has integrated the original Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Eurasian Economic Union, and the China-ASEAN 101 mechanism. It has completely changed the previous point-like and block-like development pattern. Horizontally, it runs through eastern, central and western China, and vertically, it connects major coastal port cities, and continues to extend to Central Asia and ASEAN. Belt and Road Initiative Extended reading: China's abandonment of the AIIB's "one-vote veto power" is really too ruthless, and the United States is very regretful! Extended reading: China's abandonment of the AIIB's "one-vote veto power" is really too ruthless, and the United States is very regretful! We know that the world economic order after World War II was underpinned by the Bretton Woods system formulated by Western countries led by the United States. This system is an economic system with the dollar as the core. The actual pillar of the system is not the dollar gold standard as the textbook claims, but the World Bank, the international monetary fund and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (developed into the World Trade Organization in 1994), which determine the rules of international trade. These three major organizations have always been dominated by the West led by the United States. The United States has the privilege of "veto power" in the World Bank and the international monetary fund. This privilege means that in the World Bank and the international monetary fund, as long as the United States does not agree, it cannot be implemented. Although the chairperson of the international monetary fund has always been a European, the United States still has the master switch. What's more, the hegemony of the dollar is also the fundamental support of these two organizations. We also know that since the 2008 world economic crisis, developing countries led by China have been calling for the adjustment of the ownership structure of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to increase the authority and representation of the two institutions. However, after several years of delay, although the Europeans were willing to give up some shares and the US government signed the relevant agreement, due to the failure of the US Congress to pass the reform of the two institutions, there has been no progress so far. It is in this context that the BRICS countries, led by China, have been forced to establish the BRICS New Development Bank and Emergency Fund, the SCO Development Bank within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and in 2013 China proposed the establishment of the AIIB. At the beginning of the AIIB's preparation, the United States began to set up layers of obstacles, and criticized the unestablished institution, and even publicly asked its allies not to join. Many countries are riding on China's economic growth express. However, to the helplessness of the White House, before the APEC summit in 2014, 21 member states expressed their willingness to jointly initiate the establishment of the AIIB, including some US allies, including the Philippines, which has always been anti-China. What made Americans' eyes drop to the ground is that the United Kingdom made it clear at the last moment that it would join the AIIB, and then Germany, France, Italy, Australia, South Korea, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Saudi Arabia and other countries would join. According to the preparatory committee, at least 35 countries will join. Recently, even Canada and Japan have been rumored to want to join. However, surprisingly, according to US media articles, China has taken the initiative to put forward a proposal to give up the veto power in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It is reported that China's move is aimed at attracting major European countries to join the bank led by China. Since the United States has veto power in the World Bank and international monetary funds, China, as the dominant country, according to Western logic, China should also retain a veto to gain super power in the organization. However, China has given up this book to gain power. Why did China take the initiative to give up this super power? There are five fundamental reasons: First, to win over developed countries. American media reports said that China took the initiative to give up a veto power in order to win over developed countries. The Wall Street Journal's statement is undoubtedly an objective fact, because in the eyes of the West, since China has ceded power in this way and has invited it sincerely enough, why not participate in things that are beneficial to everyone? What's more, China's doing so has also given Europeans a reason to fight back against American allies. In the face of the United States, they can justifiably say that your criticism of the old United States is simply nonsense. They even gave up a veto. Don't you still hold on to a veto? What right do you, a guy of 1.6 meters, have to say that someone is 1.8 meters short? Therefore, without China's initiative to "give up", it may not be possible to usher in the determination of the United States' European allies to "break" with the United States on this issue. To put it bluntly, when the Europeans were dozing off and couldn't find a pillow, the Chinese gave them a hot pillow, so they immediately fell asleep collectively. Second, the "one-vote veto" system is not in line with China's political and cultural values. As of March 20, the number of founding members of the AIIB has increased to 33. China's diplomacy has always adhered to the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. Internationally, China has always shown justice and fairness, and never interfered in other countries' internal affairs. Therefore, countries around the world do not have much pressure when interacting with China. Although such exchanges have certain side effects, the positive energy is still far higher than the negative effect. Moreover, from the perspective of Chinese history, in most cases, China's rule over vassal countries is not handled by hegemonic rules of the game, but by kingship. Therefore, hegemony and coercion are not the values of Chinese political culture, and China often does not choose the hegemonic model. In this case, the international organization established by China cannot naturally be the same as the hegemonic United States. Therefore, at this time, China voluntarily gives up veto power, which can not only silence the mouth of the United States, but also keep the hearts of other countries in the world. Objectively, this is a clever move. It seems to be vertical, but it is actually a catch, because it enhances the international centripetal force of the AIIB, making it impossible for the United States to destroy it for a while, but it has instead fallen into political passivity. The AIIB led by China III. China's active reform needs more support. China's establishment of the AIIB is objectively a change to the existing international order. Although this change is essentially a supplement to the current world rules, this supplement also means the transfer of world power to China. This kind of reform undoubtedly moves the lifeblood of the United States, a major power, which is also the fundamental reason why the United States continues to obstruct China. Strategic and Economic Dialogue In this case, in addition to expressing that it has no intention of replacing the United States, it is more important for China to get more countries to support China's proposal. Without the support of other countries in the world, China's initiative to use knives against the rules of the world economic game will be difficult because of the authoritarian existence of the United States. China's initiative to give up "one veto power" is welcomed and supported by all countries. Moreover, countries can also use this as a reason to counter the accusations of the United States. It is based on this factor that Western media believe that if the United States continues to obstruct, it will be isolated in the international community. The isolation of the United States is simply unprecedented. Fourth, China has the ability to dominate the AIIB without relying on "one veto power". Why does China invite more countries to participate in the AIIB? It has also analyzed why China is not afraid that the participation of foreign powers will affect China's dominance. In fact, the fundamental reason is that with China's current economic influence, it has enough ability to speak for itself in Asia. In other words, China can handle the AIIB without the participation of these developed countries at all. The reason for inviting them is to hope that the AIIB will develop faster and better, and that China's "Belt and Road Initiative" strategy will be realized faster. As the saying goes, everyone picks up firewood. China gives up "one veto power", and with the real influence of China's economy, it can also influence the voting direction of other Asian countries. In other words, the operation of the AIIB will not be able to leave China. In this case, why does China need this veto power? Once the AIIB runs smoothly, with the support of China's "Belt and Road Initiative" strategy, China's comprehensive national strength will be stronger, and then there will be no need for one veto power. What's more, the AIIB invests in Asian infrastructure, and the improvement of Asian infrastructure is conducive to the realization of the "Belt and Road Initiative" strategy. What reason does China have to oppose it? As long as you are willing to invest in construction, China will definitely support it. Moreover, in this world, I am afraid that only China can engage in these infrastructure projects at a high quality and low price. Naturally, China will not easily oppose things that are beneficial to China. Many countries have joined the AIIB, so objectively, this veto power is of no use to China at all. As long as China is willing, it can do things under the rules of the AIIB. I am afraid that no one can do what China does not want to do. Of course, even if you bypass me to do these things, it will only benefit me and not hurt me. The AIIB itself is a sub-system based on the "Belt and Road Initiative" strategy, and China does not have to worry about it. Really, when the infrastructure of Asia is developed and the mission of the AIIB is completed, why do you need that "one veto"? Fifth, force the reform of the current international organization. The AIIB challenges the world financial system dominated by the United States. We know that the reform of the international monetary fund and the World Bank in the past six or seven years has been difficult due to the obstruction of the United States. This reality that two global international organizations cannot reform and cannot move because of the opposition of one country shows that this is not a democratic institution, nor is it a sufficiently representative international institution. However, since these rules are all rules established after World War II and formed by history, countries are naturally helpless. However, the situation has changed after China led the establishment of the AIIB. Compared with the international monetary fund and the World Bank, China not only voluntarily gave up the "one veto" power, but also in principle used GDP as the basic basis for distributing shares. Objectively, this rule led by China is more transparent, democratic and more internationally representative than the relevant rules led by the United States. In this case, the two institutions mainly dominated by Western countries will inevitably be used by Europeans to promote reform. In this way, the United States will undoubtedly come under tremendous political pressure. China has exchanged a concession of its own for the power to reform international rules, which can be said to be a lot of money.