The Belt and Road Initiative is the most ambitious project in the 21^st century. Its main goals are infrastructure development, financial integration, people to people connectivity. Developing countries which desperately need infrastructure upgrade welcomed Chinese investments, finding an opportunity to be connected to global economy. Although economic and political consequences are discussed in the literature, the spatial consequences of the Belt and Road Initiative are neglected. The Belt and Road Initiative lays out six main economic corridors, reconfiguring the space across the continents. Eurasia, where three of six economic corridors pass through, is mostly affected by this spatial process. The countries in Eurasia are linked with corridors on which dry ports, special economic zones, and free trade areas are set up. This signifies new spatial characteristics in Eurasia.

Bu kitap, Avrupa ve Asya ülkesi olması bakımından özgün bir öneme sahip olan Türkiye’nin, hem Avrasya hem de Avrupa alanlarında oluşan ekonomik entegrasyonlara dahil olmasının AB üyelik süreçlerine bir engel ya da tehdit oluşturmadığını, bunun eksen kayması değil aksine bölgesel ve uluslararası barışa katkı sağlayacağını savunuyor. Türkiye Avrupa ve Avrasya’yı ayıran bir köprü olmaktan daha fazlasıdır. Bu yüzden, Türkiye’nin Avrasya ülkesi olma özgünlüğünü kullanarak, bölgesel ekonomik entegrasyonlara katılımının mümkün hatta zorunlu olduğunu vurgulamaktadır. Bu savını; Uluslararası Sistemin Tarafları, Batı’dan Doğu’ya Küresel Güç Kayması, Ekonomik Büyümenin Tarihi, Küresel Güç Kayması ve Türkiye, Avrasya’da Yeni Ekonomik Entegrasyonlar, Avrasya ve Türkiye’nin Politik Ekonomileri vb. ana başlıkları altında açıklamaktadır.

Underlying all these questions of right is the question how they are to be secured and maintained. By enforcing the responsibility of the executive and legislature to the community as a whole? Such is the general answer, and it indicates one of the lines of connection between the general theory of liberty and the doctrine of universal suffrage and the sovereignty of the people. The answer, however, does not meet all the possibilities of the case. The people as a whole might be careless of their rights and incapable of managing them. They might be set on the conquest of others, the expropriation of the rich, or on any form of collective tyranny or folly. It is perfectly possible that from the point of view of general liberty and social progress a limited franchise might give better results than one that is more extended. Even in this country it is a tenable view that the extension of the suffrage in 1884 tended for some years to arrest the development of liberty in various directions. On what theory does the principle of popular sovereignty rest, and within what limits does it hold good? Is it a part of the general principles of liberty and equality, or are other ideas involved? These are among the questions which we shall have to examine.

1. T. HOBHOUSE – 1911