Description
Whereas the Obama administration had equivocated, the Trump White House declared its vehement
opposition to the Belt & Road Initiative, a shift that went together with its designation of China as a
strategic competitor. The paper draws upon theoretical frameworks associated with the study of
American political development (APD) to argue that policy formation and development should be
understood through the lens of conflicting logics. If policy towards the BRI is considered there were
profound tensions between the Trump administration’s initial instincts that were structured around
bilateralism and a rejection of “soft power” and the foreign policy views long promulgated by the
foreign policy “establishment” which were rooted in adherence to at least some features of the
post-war international order. Once administration policy focused upon the BRI and competition
with China there was a shift in White House thinking towards an embrace of “soft power”,
infrastructural development and multilateralism through for example the BUILD Act. There were
parallel attempts develop a closer alignment with Japanese and Indian initiatives and develop
“connectivity” projects. Nonetheless, because there were clashes between policy logics, these
efforts were pursued but only episodically and they were hobbled by a lack of resources.
