China's EVIL Plan To CONTROL The World

A mega project in which more than 150 countries participated… where promises were made to build new airports, motorways, and seaports… where dreams were sold of creating future Dubais and Singapores.

But today, in many of these same countries, those mega projects remain incomplete, and those dreams lie shattered. Some are buried under heavy debt, while others stand as abandoned ruins.

This was China’s biggest global mega project, called the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

There was a time when it was called the “Project of the Century.” But today, many describe it as a geopolitical disaster—and the countries that suffered the most were the poorer nations that were sold these grand dreams.

So what went wrong that people are now questioning a superpower like China?

In 2013, when China’s president Xi Jinping announced the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), it was described as the largest plan of the century. The goal was to create a modern Silk Road—connecting Asia, Africa, and Europe through railways, highways, and ports.

China’s mission was to help developing countries grow and to present itself as a global leader.

This vision impressed the world. Over 140 countries showed interest, and many developing nations quickly began taking loans from China. Soon, China had invested around $1.2 trillion into these projects.

However, this money was mostly given as loans to countries that Western banks or the IMF considered too risky.

Soon, the reality of BRI began to emerge. It wasn’t just an infrastructure project—it was also a geopolitical and economic strategy.

China had massive industrial overcapacity, producing millions of engineers and workers every year. It became difficult to provide them jobs domestically. So China decided to export its workforce and expand its geopolitical influence.

The plan was simple: give loans to developing countries for infrastructure projects, and then use Chinese companies and workers to complete those projects—benefiting China’s own economy.

One of the biggest criticisms of BRI is “debt-trap diplomacy.” This means giving such large loans to poorer countries that they struggle to repay them, eventually forcing them to hand over land or strategic assets.

The most famous example is Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka was promised that building a new port on the Indian Ocean would turn it into a major trade hub like Dubai. China financed the Hambantota Port with loans.

But feasibility studies later showed the port wasn’t necessary. It attracted very little traffic—only around 30–40 ships per year.

As Sri Lanka struggled to repay the loans, in 2017 it had to lease the port to a Chinese company for 99 years. Now, most of the revenue goes to China, and Sri Lanka effectively lost control over a key asset.

Sri Lanka wasn’t the only case.

Zambia, a country dependent on copper exports, also took large Chinese loans for development projects. By 2020, about 43% of Zambia’s external debt was owed to China. When COVID-19 hit and demand dropped, Zambia defaulted.

Many BRI projects are also called “white elephant projects”—large, expensive projects with little practical use.

For example, Montenegro borrowed $1 billion from China to build a highway. Due to poor planning, only a 41 km section was completed, leading nowhere—while the country’s debt soared to over 80% of its GDP.

Sri Lanka also built the Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport near Hambantota. It cost $200 million—but barely any flights operate there. It is now known as the “world’s emptiest airport,” sometimes even visited by animals on the runway.

In Ecuador, China financed a $2.6 billion dam project (Coca Codo Sinclair). However, poor construction quality led to over 17,000 cracks, making it a potential disaster.

Then comes Pakistan.

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), worth around $60 billion, promised electricity, jobs, and development. But many projects were delayed or failed.

In Gwadar, locals protested due to lack of basic services like water and electricity. Job promises were not fulfilled, and Pakistan’s debt increased. Today, most revenue from Gwadar Port goes to China.

BRI also faced a major setback when Italy—the only G7 country involved—withdrew from the initiative, calling it a mistake due to limited economic benefits.

Other countries like Malaysia, Myanmar, Bangladesh, and Nepal have also canceled or renegotiated projects.

In response, the US and Europe launched alternative initiatives like PGII (Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment) and the EU’s Global Gateway program, offering more transparent and lower-interest financing.

Meanwhile, China has strengthened ties with Russia, especially after the Ukraine war, creating a new geopolitical alignment that challenges Western dominance.

After a decade and trillions of dollars, BRI is now often considered one of the biggest foreign policy failures in modern history.

Critics argue it was never truly about development, but about China’s own interests—exporting excess capacity, securing resources, expanding influence, and promoting its currency (yuan).

Now, China is rebranding it as “BRI 2.0,” focusing on digital infrastructure, green energy, and sustainable projects.

However, the world is no longer ready to trust promises alone. Countries now want real economic benefits, not just increasing debt.

So the final question is: did China benefit from BRI?

Not entirely as planned. Instead of gaining influence smoothly, China faced criticism and economic pressure. Recovering loans and managing projects has also become a burden.

However, China has gained stakes in over 100 ports worldwide, which supports its export economy.

If fully completed, BRI could still connect Asia to Europe, covering around 65% of the world’s population.