Send message to Author

Paper short abstract:

China’s growing influence in the Central Asian states is seized upon by many geopoliticians as evidence of a great power on the edge of the Eurasian heartland emerging hegemonic in world politics. I argue that China's influence in Central Asia is neither straightforward nor likely to be complete.

Paper long abstract:

China’s expanding maritime reach from its oceanic frontage grabs much attention among policymakers and analysts of geopolitics. As an amphibious power, China’s interests also point inward towards the Eurasian landmass, or what geopolitician Halford Mackinder coined in the early twentieth century the “heartland.” Mackinder prophesied that a great power on edge of the heartland (the rimland, in Mackinder speak) able to control it would emerge hegemonic in world politics. China’s increasing influence in the Central Asian states – sitting in the core of the heartland – and the lack of a Eurasian counterweight power to balance it is seized upon by some geopoliticians as evidence of this prophesy coming true. We argue that China’s prospective dominance of the heartland is neither straightforward nor likely to be complete, at least when viewed through the lens of traditional geopolitics. Conceptualizations of geopolitical rivalry that overemphasize 'control' of territory and the overseas stationing of conventional military forces, however, serve to distort analysis on involvement of great powers in the crucial Central Asian region. China's role in the region is multifaceted and often times not driven by central government policy. At the same time, the article posits that current efforts by the U.S. and its allies to stem Beijing’s rising political and military sway neglect the crucial Eurasian dimension of Chinese long-term grand strategy. If Washington's so-called Indo-Pacific strategy is to contain Beijing so it does not become hegemonic, then American policymakers would do well to remember that China is first and foremost a continental power.