Log in to star items.
- Convenor:
-
Pengfei Hou
(Xinjiang University)
Send message to Convenor
- Format:
- Open panel
- Theme:
- Political Science, International Relations, and Law
Abstract
After being announced at the 2023 China-Central Asia Summit in Xi’an and further promoted at the 2025 Summit in Astana, the push to build a China–Central Asia Community with a Shared Future has been concretised into development projects and other plans. This proposed open panel examines the pathways and prospects of the community-building initiative between China and Central Asia.
The trade volume between China and Central Asian countries hit a historic high of over $100 billion in 2025, making China the leading trade partner for Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. The significance of this achievement amid the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the growing global competition for critical raw materials is worthy of examination. From a geopolitical heartland to a geoeconomic hub, Central Asia has transformed into a new strategic focus for major powers vying for influence. With that said, the topics of interest for this panel include, but are not limited to:
• Implications of the community-building initiative for South-South cooperation
• Relations between the initiative and China’s Global Development, Security, Civilization, and Governance Initiatives
• China’s regional integration paradigm versus the Western ones
• Heritage diplomacy and infrastructure connectivity
• The materiality of mineral resources
• Roles of non-state (supranational and sub-state) actors in the initiative
In an era of increasing uncertainty driven by trade disputes, ongoing wars, and populist movements, which China describes as great changes unseen in a century, the topics above are worth studying not only because Central Asia has gained new strategic importance in the rivalry among major powers but also because it provides a window into China’s global ambitions from a regional perspective.
Accepted papers
Abstract
As global investment corridors reshape the spatial dynamics of economic power, Central Eurasia is emerging as a pivotal intersection in the reconfiguration of trade, technology, and governance flows across Asia, the Middle East, and Europe. This paper examines how evolving frameworks of international economic law and investment regimes are transforming the region’s geopolitical and socio-legal landscapes. Drawing from comparative analyses of Central Asian and Latin American experiences, it explores how post-pandemic recovery strategies, energy transitions, and infrastructure partnerships—notably under China’s Belt and Road Initiative—redefine sovereignty, development priorities, and institutional agency within smaller states. The research argues that Central Eurasia’s legal geographies are not merely zones of external influence but active laboratories of legal innovation and hybrid governance. By bridging insights from treaty interpretation, investment arbitration, and South–South cooperation, this study invites a (re)thinking of Central Eurasia as a fluid, negotiated space where societal agency and global power coevolve through law.
Abstract
Central Eurasia is one unique world region that has been a subject of scholarly inquiry and theoretical debate. Key geopolitical concepts such as heartland and rimland theories have evolved with reference to the region. At the same time, Barry Buzan's regional security complex theory (RSCT) may also serve as a framework to analyze and define the nature of this dynamic region. The region's uniqueness largely lies in temporal alteration between patterns of competition and cooperation within the same geographical space. This variation offers an anomaly to the mainstream 'realist perspectives on great-power engagement in the region' that otherwise dominate the discourse.
While the key geostrategic interests that each of the big players (USA, EU, Russia and China) seek in the broader region are well-known, this research argues that the struggle for spheres of influence here is different from other world regions. Compared to the common pattern where 'one outlasting the competition claims greatest influence' - in Central Eurasia, the Great power that outperforms the others in the domain of collaboration and regional development will have the largest sphere of influence. This implies that the struggle for long-term influence must go beyond transactional and sector-focused dealings with the Central Eurasian states.
By virtue of proximity and connectedness, the Central Eurasian geographic space has gradually become identifiable as a Regional Security Complex where members have developed an understanding of their shared interests in order to balance the strategic ingress by major/great powers. Thus, alignment with region's long-term survival and sustenance will be a key determining variable in how the spheres of influence may be demarcated.
This qualitative study will build upon an analysis of how two sides (the major powers and the regional states) have behaved, responded and dealt with each other regarding key issues that bring long-term well-being into question, such as: intra-regional conflict, energy security, infrastructure development, and water scarcity/stress in Central Asia.
Abstract
The Organization of Turkic States (OTS)—comprising Türkiye, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, and Kyrgyzstan—has emerged as a significant political platform for coordinating energy policy amid the complex geopolitical landscape of Central Asia and the Caucasus. While the OTS aims to enhance regional energy security by diversifying sources and promoting collaborative infrastructure, its aspirations are tempered by the pre-existing infrastructural and economic dependencies of its member states on neighboring powers. This paper investigates the tension between the OTS’s institutional capacity and its geopolitical ambitions.
To dissect this dynamic, the study addresses the research question: "How does the internal cohesion of the Organization of Turkic States (OTS)—specifically regarding divergent member-state interests and institutional capacity—condition its ability to function as a primary energy security provider and effectively counterbalance the energy leverage of other regional powers (such as Russia, China, and Iran)?" Utilizing a qualitative research design grounded in comparative policy analysis and geopolitical assessment, the study examines cooperative initiatives across three key pillars: energy source diversification, geopolitical collaboration, and renewable energy development.
The analysis reveals that the OTS’s effectiveness is contingent upon its ability to reconcile collective regional goals with the entrenched bilateral relationships its members maintain with Moscow, Beijing, and Tehran. The findings suggest that while the OTS possesses the institutional frameworks to act as a strategic balancing mechanism, its capacity to function as a primary security provider is significantly conditioned by internal divergences regarding the pace and scope of diversification. Consequently, the study concludes that the OTS represents a critical forum for enhancing sovereignty, but its transition from a supplementary platform to a primary counterbalancing force remains dependent on overcoming deep-seated structural and economic frictions among its members.