Original Article
International Relations
Asghar Keivan Hoseini
Volume 2, Issue 5 , April 2025
Abstract
IntroductionThe first signs of the institutionalization of "nuclear non-proliferation" date back to 1943, but in line with the US pursuits, especially the "Atom for Peace" plan at the United Nations (December 8, 1953), the "Global Agenda for the Management and Supervision of Nuclear Policy" acquired ...
Read More
IntroductionThe first signs of the institutionalization of "nuclear non-proliferation" date back to 1943, but in line with the US pursuits, especially the "Atom for Peace" plan at the United Nations (December 8, 1953), the "Global Agenda for the Management and Supervision of Nuclear Policy" acquired a special identity. The Shah's nuclear program in the 1960s and 1970s offered the prospect of a "broad civilian nuclear energy program" in terms of diversifying electricity generation sources and reducing sole reliance on oil exports. An important point is related to the disclosure of the bias of the aforementioned program towards nuclear fuel reprocessing (enrichment) and the production of nuclear weapons. The hypothesis is that the Shah's nuclear program, especially in the 1970s/1970s, faced the US's confrontational policy centered on non-proliferation sanctions.Research Question(s)The main question is: How were the strategic relations between the US and the Shah affected by his nuclear program?Literature ReviewForeign writers such as Kordzaman (2003) have also considered a historical approach in the form of a calendar in the context of the subject matter, or, like Sheryl (2012), have paid attention to the nuclear efforts of the second Pahlavi dynasty as a marginal discussion in the context of the nuclear tension between Iran and the United States after the Islamic Revolution. In this regard, it is helpful to focus on two perspectives: first, the view that Mohammad Reza Shah's nuclear program was purely developmental and peaceful, claiming that it was a win-win situation for all parties involved (Mcglinchey, Choksy 2025); and second, that from the very beginning of the program, under the guise of a civilian nuclear program, the goal was to achieve nuclear weapons capability (Milani 2010).Methodology The research method used is a historical-documentary study along with a "process tracing" approach. Historical-documentary research is a qualitative method in which the researcher reconstructs and analyzes the evolution of a phenomenon over a specific period of time using documents, reports, laws, statements, statistics, speeches, and reliable sources. In this method, data are not generated through direct observation, but are extracted and analyzed from existing documents. Advantages of the historical-documentary method: The ability to examine developments over a long period of time;Access to reliable and official data;The ability to compare policies and behavior of different actors;Suitable for analyzing foreign policy and international relations.Process tracing is one of the most important qualitative research methods for explaining causal relationships. In this approach, the researcher does not simply show that two variables are related, but also explains through what mechanisms this relationship was formed.In other words, this method answers the question "How?", not simply "What relationship is there?".ResultsContrary to the view that Mohammad Reza Shah's nuclear targeting model, in the form of "providing domestic energy needs through nuclear fission and, as a result, preserving petrochemical wealth for export to energy-hungry foreigners," was a purely developmental and peaceful program that was a win-win situation for all parties involved. Until the mid-1970s, US officials not only did not view Mohammad Reza Pahlavi's nuclear program as a "backdoor" to a nuclear weapons program; they even encouraged Iran's possession of nuclear power plants and advanced technology due to its strategic position within the framework of the US Cold War-oriented foreign policy. some analysts, based on declassified documents from the US National Security Council and the Pentagon, have concluded that Iran sought to acquire nuclear weapons capability from the very beginning of the program, under the cover of a civilian nuclear program. In the period 1974-1979/1332-1357, certain signs of the pursuit of military nuclear goals became apparent. In this regard, the following have been cited as “catalysts” of this approach:- The rise in oil prices, especially after the Arab-Israeli war of 1973, allowed the Iranian government to continue the nuclear program with adequate financial support.- India’s nuclear test in 1974,- The link between self-help and fear: Fuller emphasizes a kind of link between the Shah’s interests in increasing influence and credibility beyond the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean (thinking in global geostrategic terms) and the US-centric Cold War considerations of the 1970s, which led him (in the context of strategic ties with the United States) to play a counter-role to Soviet influence. Thus, the motivation for Mohammad Reza Pahlavi's insistence on achieving nuclear military capabilities can be traced to "a mixture of self-help and fear"- Iran's development prospects as an undeniable necessity,- The adventures of the Iraqi Baathist regime.In connection with the above explanations, some positions and behaviors, both declared and practiced (by the Iranian government), are worth mentioning. According to some evidence, the Shah's secret efforts to acquire nuclear energy were also obvious to some officials close. Gradually, signs of tension and the United States' tendency to impose technological and arms restrictions on Iran and oppose its military nuclear demand became apparent. In this regard, in addition to the sensitivities expressed in the positions of Kissinger and Ford, the claims of some nuclear experts of this government are also noteworthy; that Iran's nuclear program includes research for the production of low-level nuclear weapons (centered on the Amirabad nuclear research center), especially the laser enrichment program (which began in 1975). The outcome of the aforementioned macro-conditions can be traced in classified US government documents from 1974 to 1977, which state "opposition to Iran's efforts for reprocessing capability. Reports in the 1970s indicated that Iran had sought laser enrichment technology from the United States and had conducted experiments related to reprocessing. Intelligence reports suggested that the Shah had a secret group working on nuclear weapons .The final finding is that although the Shah's nuclear program proceeded based on multilateral support from the United States and its European allies, due to his insistence on secret enrichment of nuclear fuel, the strategic relationship between Iran and the United States was overshadowed, to the extent that the United States imposed a type of "non-proliferation sanctions" against Tehran, a behavioral pattern that demonstrated its level of adherence to the global logic of non-proliferation.
Original Article
International Relations
Sajad Bahrami Moghadam; Ahmad Satarzadeh
Volume 2, Issue 5 , April 2025
Abstract
Introduction
The post-Cold War international landscape has been marked by the remarkable rise of China and its integration into the global order. While this phenomenon has been widely analyzed through the lens of Western international relations (IR) theories, these frameworks often fall short in fully ...
Read More
Introduction
The post-Cold War international landscape has been marked by the remarkable rise of China and its integration into the global order. While this phenomenon has been widely analyzed through the lens of Western international relations (IR) theories, these frameworks often fall short in fully explaining China’s civilizational approach and normative behavior in global affairs. Rooted in European geopolitical experiences, mainstream IR theories largely ignore the unique historical, philosophical, and cultural foundations of non-Western societies. China, as a civilizational state, approaches global engagement from a different ontological and ethical standpoint. This paper aims to explore how Chinese IR theories—distinct from Western realism and liberalism—interpret China’s rise not as a threat but as a morally legitimate and harmonious process. Following the post-Mao transition, especially since the 14th Communist Party Congress in 1992, Chinese scholars have increasingly developed indigenous IR theories that combine traditional Chinese philosophies, such as Confucianism, with critical and post-Western theoretical orientations. The central research question is: How do Chinese IR theories conceptualize and legitimize China’s rise as a great power? The main hypothesis suggests that Chinese IR theorists emphasize harmony, moral authority, and peaceful development, drawing from Confucian ideals and the notion of Tianxia (All Under Heaven), thereby challenging the power-centric views of dominant Western IR paradigms
Literature Review
Scholarly interpretations of China’s rise can be grouped into three major theoretical perspectives. Realist thinkers such as Mearsheimer (2001) warn that China’s growing power will provoke instability and hegemonic rivalry. Liberal theorists argue instead that deep economic interdependence can mitigate conflict and promote cooperation (Ikenberry, 2011). In contrast, Chinese IR theorists present a culturally rooted and non-adversarial model. Qin Yaqing (2009) advocates a relational theory emphasizing process and harmony over fixed interests and zero-sum competition. Zhao Tingyang (2006) reinvigorates the ancient Chinese concept of Tianxia, envisioning a world system based on moral order and inclusive governance. These perspectives are closely aligned with postcolonial critiques of epistemic hegemony in IR theory (Acharya & Buzan, 2010), and they call for a pluralistic theoretical landscape that accommodates civilizational diversity and alternative sources of international legitimacy.
Methodology
This research employs an explanatory-analytical methodology grounded in the Tianxia system theoretical framework. Tianxia, meaning "all under the sky," is one of the most fundamental concepts in Chinese political thought. This concept has three different meanings: 1- all under the sky as a territorial element, 2- a common choice as a normative element, and 3- a global institution. In the Tianxia system, a governance model prevails that emphasizes military attraction rather than military deterrence. In other words, it replaces the benefits of cooperation with military power and an order based on dominance and superiority. Thus, in the Tianxia system, member states emphasized security, common order, and the protection of member interests.
. The study analyzes key texts by leading Chinese IR scholars and institutions to uncover how China's rise is framed within indigenous theoretical constructs. Through comparative analysis, the paper juxtaposes Chinese IR thought with mainstream Western paradigms to evaluate their underlying assumptions and strategic implications. By drawing from primary sources and Chinese intellectual traditions, the study seeks to offer a deeper and context-sensitive understanding of how Chinese scholars legitimize their country’s evolving global role.
Results
The results reveal that Chinese IR theories regard the rise of China not as a revisionist or destabilizing force but as a historically and morally grounded phenomenon. Chinese scholars view their country’s growing power as a return to its rightful place in the global hierarchy rather than a challenge to international order. Concepts such as harmonious development, benevolent hegemony, and Tianxia are central to this narrative.
These theories stress the significance of soft power, cultural diplomacy, and participation in multilateral institutions as tools for fostering a peaceful and stable international environment. Rather than prioritizing dominance or confrontation, Chinese IR theorists emphasize moral legitimacy, ethical statecraft, and a commitment to global harmony. The theories also underscore China's interest in reshaping global norms through constructive engagement rather than violent disruption. Such perspectives offer a sharp contrast to the threat-oriented interpretations prevalent in Western realist discourse.
Discussion
The discourse on China’s rise has been largely dominated by Western IR theories that frame power transitions through the lens of conflict and systemic insecurity. Realism predicts that as China grows, it will seek to challenge the existing hegemon, resulting in inevitable tensions. However, this view is increasingly contested by Chinese IR theorists who offer a fundamentally different interpretation. Grounded in philosophical traditions such as Confucianism and Daoism, Chinese IR theory emphasizes relationality, moral order, and the pursuit of harmony over competition. The Confucian ideal of wang dao (humane authority) provides an ethical basis for leadership, contrasting with the coercive logic of Western hegemony. The concept of Tianxia envisions a global order based on cultural inclusivity and mutual respect, where power is exercised not through domination but through virtue and consensus. From a postcolonial standpoint, Chinese IR theory represents an act of epistemic resistance to the universalist claims of Western modernity. It aligns with the broader Global South’s effort to decolonize knowledge and articulate indigenous visions of international relations. Moreover, China’s behavior in global forums—its emphasis on non-intervention, support for South-South cooperation, and its investment in multilateral institutions like the AIIB and BRICS—reflects the strategic application of these normative ideals. Nonetheless, critiques remain. Some scholars argue that these theories are more prescriptive than predictive and may serve as instruments of soft power rather than rigorous scientific frameworks. Others question whether China’s actual foreign policy behavior fully aligns with its theoretical propositions. Still, Chinese IR theory offers a compelling alternative for rethinking power, identity, and legitimacy in global politics. It opens up the possibility of a more pluralistic IR scholarship that is not only more inclusive but also more reflective of the evolving structure of the international syste.
Conclusion
This paper concludes that Chinese international relations theories constitute a significant epistemological and normative departure from mainstream Western paradigms. By integrating Confucian ethics, civilizational identity, and historical continuity, these theories provide a culturally resonant framework for understanding China’s peaceful rise. Unlike realism and liberalism, which often perceive rising powers as threats or competitors, Chinese theories frame power as a moral responsibility aimed at fostering harmony and shared development. The Confucian concept of “benevolent hegemony” redefines leadership as relational rather than hierarchical. Chinese IR theory also contributes to the broader postcolonial project of challenging Western intellectual hegemony and reclaiming space for indigenous knowledge systems. While these theories face ongoing scrutiny regarding their practical relevance and global acceptance, they offer a valuable lens for interpreting China’s strategic posture and its vision for international order. Ultimately, embracing theoretical pluralism in IR not only enhances the discipline’s analytical capacity but also affirms the legitimacy of diverse worldviews in shaping the future of global politics. As China continues to grow and engage with the world, its evolving IR theories may increasingly influence how states conceptualize power, authority, and cooperation in the 21st century.
Original Article
International Relations
Abbas Mehraliyan; Seyed Jalal Dehghani Firooz Abadi
Volume 2, Issue 5 , April 2025
Abstract
IntroductionSecurity is inherent to humankind and is one of the most prominent issues in the field of international relations. It is a fundamental issue that is woven into all areas of life, social structures, the government, non-governmental organizations, the structure of the international system, ...
Read More
IntroductionSecurity is inherent to humankind and is one of the most prominent issues in the field of international relations. It is a fundamental issue that is woven into all areas of life, social structures, the government, non-governmental organizations, the structure of the international system, and all local and international actors. Due to its importance and relevance, security can be studied in various approaches. At first glance, this issue may fit into the mainstream framework. However, the breadth and complexity of security seem to prevent a single theory from covering all its aspects. In addition to the hard elements involved in security issues, new technologies such as artificial intelligence can pose challenges to humans, societies, institutions, and ultimately international security. In this study, while not ignoring the importance and influential and growing position of all forms of new technologies, artificial intelligence, due to some distinctive indicators compared to other scientific and technical technologies, seems to have and will have a higher position in international security issues in the future. The present study focuses on artificial intelligence and the hopes arising from its positive impact on various areas of national and international security, as well as the fears arising from the consequences of irresponsible use and the exacerbation of the gap, leading to the creation/intensification of security threats at the regional and international levels. This research seeks to present a broad picture of the positions of artificial intelligence as one of the leading and transformative technologies in the games of actors in the international system.Research Question(s): What is the impact and position of artificial intelligence in security issues and maintaining and strengthening national and international state power? What are the promises and information technology resulting come from? What direction will foreign policy take? Will anarchy continue in international relations? What will the perception of hard power and soft power in the field of security look like with the advent of artificial intelligence? How will artificial intelligence transform the balance of power on a global scale? Literature ReviewArtificial intelligence, as one of the most influential technologies and as a simultaneous source of power and potential threat, has gained a significant place in international relations discussions and analyses since the early 21st century. Rosena can perhaps be mentioned as one of the first among those, in the article "Information, Artificial Intelligence, and the Development of Analytical Skills" (James Rosena et al., 2011), who highlighted the category of artificial human intelligence and drew the attention of leaders and politicians to the value and importance of this technology. (Singh Gill, 2019) The article "Artificial Intelligence and International Security: The Long View" seeks to examine and demonstrate the importance of artificial intelligence in various areas of competition between countries, especially from a defense perspective. The article "Artificial Intelligence and Nuclear Weapons" focuses on the military use of artificial intelligence, its technical aspects, as well as the development and risks of this technology, and its impact on companies active in the nuclear sector, and attempts to explain and explain the future of this advancing technology. (Johnson, 2023)MethodologyThis research, employing a descriptive-analytical method, aims to address the aforementioned questions and assess the extent of this technology's impact on social life, particularly in the context of international security, a pressing and sensitive concern for governments.ResultsThe findings of this article suggest that actors in the international system are seeking to capitalize on technological opportunities and address potential challenges to create new platforms for the application of artificial intelligence, thereby leveraging it to enhance national security and establish international standards and norms aligned with their national interests.It is also important to pay attention to the distance between official actors and moral agents in relation to artificial intelligence.
Original Article
International Relations
Alireza Koohkan; Fatemeh Asgarian
Volume 2, Issue 5 , April 2025
Abstract
Introduction
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as one of the most influential driving forces of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and has profoundly transformed various dimensions of human life, from individual lifestyles to macro-level social, economic, political, and security structures. Beyond ...
Read More
Introduction
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as one of the most influential driving forces of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and has profoundly transformed various dimensions of human life, from individual lifestyles to macro-level social, economic, political, and security structures. Beyond its technological nature, AI has increasingly become a strategic instrument in global competition for power, shaping new patterns of interaction among states and non-state actors. This transformation has raised fundamental questions within the field of International Relations (IR), particularly regarding the traditional state-centric understanding of global politics.
Classical and neorealist approaches to International Relations emphasize the centrality of the state as the primary actor in global affairs and conceptualize power mainly in military and material terms. However, recent scholarship has highlighted the limitations of this perspective in explaining contemporary global dynamics driven by emerging technologies. Studies on digital power, algorithmic governance, and technological sovereignty suggest that Artificial Intelligence challenges traditional notions of power, agency, and authority by enabling new actors—such as multinational technology corporations, transnational networks, and even intelligent systems—to influence global relations.
Existing literature has examined AI’s implications in specific domains, including economic competitiveness, military modernization, cybersecurity, and governance. Nevertheless, there remains a theoretical and analytical gap regarding how Artificial Intelligence collectively contributes to abroader transition from state-centric international relations to a multi-level system of global relations. This study seeks to address this gap by analyzing the mechanisms through which AI reshapes global relations and redistributes power across multiple levels of interaction.
Research Objectives
The main objective of this research is to examine the role of Artificial Intelligence in redefining global relations within the emerging international order. Specifically, the study aims to analyze how AI contributes to the transformation of power, agency, and actorness in global relations and how it weakens the exclusive dominance of states in international politics.
The central research question guiding this study is: Through which mechanisms does Artificial Intelligence facilitate the transition from state-centric international relations to multi-level global relations? Based on this question, the research advances the following hypothesis: Artificial Intelligence, by redefining the concepts of power, agency, and political action, and by undermining the monopoly of states in international relations, contributes to a transition from state-centric international relations toward multi-level global relations. By addressing this objective, the study seeks to contribute to the theoretical debates in International Relations and Global Studies concerning technological change, global power shifts, and the future of the international order.
Research Methodology
This research adopts a descriptive–analytical methodology. Data have been collected using documentary and archival methods, including academic books, peer-reviewed journal articles, policy reports, and publications from international organizations related to Artificial Intelligence and global relations.
The analytical framework of the study integrates insights from International Relations theory, particularly debates on power transformation, global governance, and multi-level analysis. Artificial Intelligence is examined as an independent variable influencing various domains of global relations—economic, political, cultural, and security—while changes in power distribution and patterns of interaction serve as the dependent variables.
Through qualitative analysis of existing documents and theoretical interpretations, the study identifies key mechanisms through which AI reshapes global relations and contributes to the emergence of a multi-level global system.
Research Findings
The findings of the research indicate that Artificial Intelligence plays a significant and multidimensional role in transforming global relations across four major domains:
Economic Relations: In the economic sphere, Artificial Intelligence has become a critical source of power and competitiveness. Advanced AI capabilities are predominantly concentrated in developed countries, leading to an increasing power gap between developed and developing states. This technological asymmetry reinforces existing global inequalities and creates new forms of dependency. AI-driven economic power reshapes global value chains, trade patterns, and financial systems, thereby redefining economic relations at both state and non-state levels.
Political Relations: In the political domain, Artificial Intelligence enhances diplomatic communication and decision-making processes. AI-based data analysis and prediction tools enable governments and international actors to anticipate political events, crises, and conflicts several days before their occurrence. This predictive capacity contributes to a redefinition of political power and authority, as those who control AI technologies gain strategic advantages in agenda-setting, crisis management, and diplomacy.
Cultural Relations: In the cultural sphere, Artificial Intelligence facilitates cross-cultural communication through language education, automated translation, and enhanced understanding of cultural diversity. These capabilities support the expansion of cultural diplomacy and soft power by enabling states and non-state actors to engage with foreign societies more effectively. As a result, AI contributes to the diffusion of cultural influence beyond traditional state-controlled channels.
Security Relations: In the security domain, Artificial Intelligence has become a central element of strategic competition among states. AI-driven military technologies, surveillance systems, and cyber capabilities intensify global rivalries and signal profound transformations in the emerging international order. AI reshapes the nature of security threats and defense strategies, reinforcing the shift toward a technologically driven balance of power.
Overall, the findings demonstrate that Artificial Intelligence operates as a transformative force that redistributes power and agency across multiple levels of global relations.
Discussion
The findings of this study indicate that Artificial Intelligence plays a decisive role in the transition from state-centric international relations to multi-level global relations by transforming power and agency across economic, political, cultural, and security domains. Rather than operating merely as a technological tool, AI functions as a structural force that reshapes global interactions and redistributes authority among states and non-state actors.
In the economic domain, Artificial Intelligence has intensified inequalities between developed and developing countries. Advanced economies have successfully integrated AI into trade policy design and economic diplomacy, enhancing exports and competitiveness, while many developing states remain marginalized due to limited technological capacity and data access. This asymmetry reflects a shift in economic power from material resources toward data and algorithmic control.
Politically, AI introduces a dual dynamic. Its predictive capabilities enable policymakers to anticipate political events and manage crises more effectively, yet its potential for data manipulation and opinion control also facilitates digital authoritarianism. Consequently, political power is increasingly exercised through control over algorithms and information flows rather than solely through formal state institutions.
In the cultural sphere, Artificial Intelligence expands opportunities for cultural diplomacy by facilitating language learning and cross-cultural communication. However, algorithmic bias remains a significant challenge, as biased systems may reproduce cultural stereotypes and undermine global cultural engagement.
From a security perspective, Artificial Intelligence has become a key arena of strategic competition. Control over advanced AI models and data infrastructures increasingly determines security power, signaling a profound transformation in the emerging international order.
Overall, Artificial Intelligence accelerates the transnationalization of power and agency by empowering technology firms, digital platforms, and global users alongside states. This redistribution of authority clearly demonstrates a shift toward multi-level global relations and challenges traditional state-centric approaches in International Relations.
Conclusion
This study concludes that Artificial Intelligence is not merely a technological innovation but a structural force reshaping the foundations of global relations. By redefining power, agency, and actorness, AI undermines the traditional state-centric framework of international relations and accelerates the transition toward a multi-level global system.
The research confirms the proposed hypothesis by demonstrating that Artificial Intelligence weakens the exclusive dominance of states and empowers new actors in economic, political, cultural, and security domains. Consequently, global relations in the emerging international order are increasingly shaped by complex interactions among states, non-state actors, and technological systems. Understanding the role of Artificial Intelligence in global relations is therefore essential for rethinking theoretical approaches in International Relations and for designing effective policies in an increasingly AI-driven world.
Original Article
International Relations
Arsalan Ghurbani Shikh nashin; Safiullah Mawlavi zada
Volume 2, Issue 5 , April 2025
Abstract
Introduction
The Belt and Road Initiative, launched by Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2013, represents one of the most ambitious infrastructure and connectivity projects in contemporary history. Encompassing over 150 countries across six land-based economic corridors and the 21st Century Maritime Silk ...
Read More
Introduction
The Belt and Road Initiative, launched by Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2013, represents one of the most ambitious infrastructure and connectivity projects in contemporary history. Encompassing over 150 countries across six land-based economic corridors and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road, the BRI aims to foster global integration through investments exceeding $1 trillion by 2027. While ostensibly focused on economic cooperation, trade facilitation, and infrastructure development, the initiative has profound geopolitical implications, reshaping power dynamics in Eurasia and beyond. China employs strategies such as "debt-trap diplomacy" and opaque contracts to expand its influence in strategic domains, including ports, energy routes, and economic corridors. For India, a traditional dominant power in the Indian Ocean and South Asia, the BRI poses an existential threat to national security and regional hegemony. Key elements like the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which traverses disputed Kashmir territories, are perceived as direct violations of India's sovereignty. Ports such as Gwadar in Pakistan, Hambantota in Sri Lanka, and Djibouti form China's "String of Pearls" strategy, challenging India's maritime superiority and encircling its strategic interests. This expansion has transformed India-China relations into a paradox of economic warming—bilateral trade reaching $128 billion in 2024—and security cooling, evidenced by border clashes in Galwan (2020) and Tawang (2022). The BRI has evolved from a developmental project into a tool for containing India, prompting New Delhi to revise its long-standing strategic neutrality toward hard balancing measures. This study examines the hidden competition underlying the apparent warming of India-China ties, focusing on how the BRI exacerbates geopolitical rivalry and border tensions. Drawing on theoretical frameworks from international relations, it analyzes China's global integration strategy and India's counter-responses, highlighting the structural instability in South Asia's security architecture.
Research Question(s)
How has China's Belt and Road Initiative influenced the intensification of geopolitical competition and border tensions between India and China?
Results
The findings reveal that the BRI has significantly intensified geopolitical competition between India and China, turning what were initially economic initiatives into broader security challenges. China’s strategy is implemented through three major types of corridors: maritime (e.g., the Maritime Silk Road in the Indian Ocean), hybrid (e.g., CPEC and the Bangladesh–China–India–Myanmar corridor), and land-based (e.g., the China–Central Asia–West Asia route). By 2025, more than 147 countries had joined the BRI, accounting for roughly one-third of global GDP and half of the world’s population. Investments reached $550 billion by early 2023, with projections estimating up to $7.5 trillion in annual additions to global GDP by 2040.The evidence also shows that BRI corridors converging on India’s periphery pose strategic implications. Along the disputed Line of Actual Control (LAC)—divided into western (Ladakh), middle, and eastern sectors—China occupies 38,000 sq km of Jammu and Kashmir, while Pakistan ceded an additional 5,183 sq km to China in 1963. CPEC, valued at $62 billion, passes through Gilgit-Baltistan, facilitating the presence of more than 30,000 Chinese personnel. Confrontations at Galwan (2020) and Tawang (2022) further highlight the security implications. In the Indian Ocean, the “String of Pearls” network—including Chittagong ($2.41 billion), Kyaukpyu ($7.4 billion), Gwadar ($50.6 billion), and Hambantota ($1.47 billion)—supports China’s naval shift from “near seas defense” to “far seas protection.” Incidents such as submarine visits to Colombo (2014), naval patrols (2017), and the establishment of the Djibouti base (2016) reflect China’s expanding security footprint. Regionally, China’s influence surpasses India’s: investments in South and Central Asia each exceeded $25 billion by mid-2025, and ASEAN trade reached $468.8 billion compared to India’s $78.9 billion.
Discussion
For India, the BRI constitutes a multidimensional challenge that intersects border security, regional influence, and maritime strategy. The integration of economic corridors with military and infrastructural capabilities—particularly in CPEC and the Indian Ocean—creates overlapping layers of vulnerability. China’s growing presence in Gilgit-Baltistan challenges India’s territorial claims and reinforces Sino-Pakistani alignment, complicating India's border management along the LAC. Maritime developments similarly weaken India’s self-perception as the “net security provider” in the Indian Ocean. India’s response has involved a mix of internal, regional, and global strategies. Domestically, steps such as the revocation of Article 370 in 2019 aimed to consolidate governance in Jammu and Kashmir. Regionally, projects like Chabahar Port ($500 million), the International North–South Transport Corridor, and the India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC, launched at the 2023 G20 Summit) seek to provide alternatives to BRI routes. Globally, India has strengthened its participation in the Quad, supported G7’s B3W initiative, and engaged with the EU’s Global Gateway as part of broader coalition-building. From a balance-of-threat perspective, India’s hybrid balancing—combining limited internal balancing with selective external alignments—slows China’s strategic expansion but does not eliminate underlying tensions. The long-term stability of South Asia will depend on greater transparency in BRI financing, improved border management mechanisms, and more equitable regional market access. BRI’s persistent opacity and security externalities continue to shape a competitive and uncertain regional environment.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Belt and Road Initiative has not only created economic opportunities but has fueled a hidden competition in India-China relations, posing severe threats to India's national security through territorial encroachments, maritime encirclement, and regional dominance. India's multifaceted balancing—via policy shifts in Kashmir, parallel initiatives like IMEC and Chabahar, and alliances such as the Quad—has partially preserved geopolitical equilibrium but intensified border disputes and security challenges. Findings affirm that without transparency, respect for sovereignty, and non-interference in territorial conflicts, the BRI will continue catalyzing instability in South Asia. India must sustain active balancing against Beijing, reshaping regional security architecture. Future research could explore economic impacts post-2030 or comparative analyses with other BRI-affected powers.
Original Article
International Relations
Saeed Shookohi; Zahra Ghasempour Shirazi
Volume 2, Issue 5 , April 2025
Abstract
The South Caucasus region, due to its geopolitical location, energy resources, and its position as a crossroads between Asia and Europe, has always been a focal point of competition among great powers. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, players such as Russia, the United States, and China have sought ...
Read More
The South Caucasus region, due to its geopolitical location, energy resources, and its position as a crossroads between Asia and Europe, has always been a focal point of competition among great powers. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, players such as Russia, the United States, and China have sought to establish their presence in this region. In this context, China has strengthened its presence in the Caucasus by leveraging its economic growth and implementing the "Belt and Road Initiative." This presence can be analyzed within Beijing’s financial, energy, and geostrategic interests. On the other hand, the geopolitical developments resulting from the Russia-Ukraine war have altered the positions of regional and extra-regional actors, providing an opportunity for China to expand its influence in the Caucasus. In this context, the development of the Trans-Caspian International Transport Corridor has become a strategically important alternative route for connecting China to Europe, bypassing Russia. This study, using the framework of offensive realism, examines the question of how China’s foreign policy in the Caucasus might impact Iran’s national interests. Accordingly, this research hypothesizes that China aims to create a balance between Russia and the United States in the region, and this approach could open the door for aligning interests with Iran. The paper seeks to analyze the geopolitical, economic, and strategic dimensions of this issue.
