This article critically analyzes the function of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) in funding climate resilience in the Global South, contrasting it with the conventional development framework of the Bretton Woods Institutions (BWIs). Utilizing Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL), the study initially critiques the BWI model, contending that its transition towards green conditionalities represents a form of green structural adjustment. We argue that this mechanism may perpetuate neocolonial dependencies and enable a form of green colonialism that favors Global North capital at the expense of local ecological sovereignty. In this context, the AIIB is frequently promoted as a normative alternative grounded in the principles of non-interference and South-South solidarity. This article transcends a simplistic binary comparison to provide a nuanced analysis of the AIIB as a contested space. Our study shows that the bank is successful in challenging Western institutional hegemony, but it also risks creating new hierarchies in the Global South. By critically analyzing the AIIB’s governance framework—particularly China’s de facto veto power—and employing the Belt and Road Initiative as an empirical case study, the paper elucidates the discord between the diplomatic discourse of green connectivity and the tangible realities. We contest the singular perspective of the Global South, emphasizing the diversity of interests among emerging powers and peripheral states. The article concludes that the AIIB is a necessary break from the BWI model. Still, it must be carefully examined to ensure it does not simply replace Western dominance with a new form of South-South hegemony. It calls for a new way of thinking about climate finance that really puts local sovereignty and ecological justice first.
Douglas de Castro (Mon,) studied this question.