Introduction
China’s place in international relations is becoming more prominent with the solidifying position of the state on the global trade and economic stage. The One Belt and One Road initiative developed by the Chinese government has functioned as a trade link between Asia and Europe, integrating several important countries into one trade route. However, with the intensification of the war between Russia and Ukraine and unrest in Iran, the threats to the consistency and effectiveness of the previously used trade routes have become more severe. For that matter, Turkey has proposed a new route referred to as the Middle Corridor, which addresses the current geopolitical issues in the region and is claimed to maximize international benefits for China and the new countries involved. However, it remains unclear whether the Middle Corridor initiative will comply with the old routes or replace them, as well as how it will impact China’s international relations. For that matter, this research was conducted using comparative analysis methodology and the case study method within the framework of the Offensive Realism Theory to compare the Middle Corridor initiative and the One Belt and One Road Initiative. The results of the comparative analysis have indicated that the Middle Corridor substitutes the formerly established trade routes within the One Belt and One Road project, which allows for mitigating the risks of strategy disruption under the current geopolitical and military threats, as well as facilitates alternative international relations for maximization of China’s presence in the global economic context. Thus, these findings might inform further decisions of China and involved entities in the international community as per the implementation of the new Middle Corridor initiative.
China’s international relations are largely predetermined by its economic presence globally, and through the role of a leader it plays in the Asian-European trade pathways. The One Belt and One Road project initiated by China as a system of transportation routes for effective trade across the countries of Asia and Europe might be challenged due to the current geopolitical shifts. In particular, with the change in global and regional geopolitics, namely the Russian-Ukrainian war and unrest in Iran, Turkey has activated its efforts to engage in trade agreements with Central Asian countries. Moreover, Turkey has generated a new Middle Corridor initiative as an alternative for China to be used as a connecting route between Asia and Europe.
In such a manner, the new initiative opens new opportunities for China in terms of establishing international relations and reshaping its routes, given the newly developed political circumstances. Thus, the implications of the Middle Corridor initiative suggested by Turkey for the accomplishment of China’s goals within the framework of its One Belt and One Road initiative require comparative analysis to identify the similarities and differences of the two initiatives. It is important to identify whether the Middle Corridor is capable of meeting the aim of China to become a dominant economy in the international arena.
For that matter, the research questions of this thesis will be “Will the new middle corridor be a complement to the previous trade routes or replace them entirely?” and “Which trade route best complies with China’s international relations interests?” To answer these questions, the comparative research methodology is used with the theoretical justification of the issue under the Offensive Realism theory. The data is collected and analyzed by means of the case study method via the comparison of secondary data on the two routes. Thus, the research contributes to the body of scholarly literature on the international political problem related to the future economic perspectives of China in terms of its One Belt and One Road initiative in the context of the contemporary conflicts in Iran and between Russia and Ukraine.
Literature Review
The review of a body of scholarly literature on the topic of China’s shift in the accomplishment of its One Belt and One Road project provides an opportunity for setting the investigated problem in a proper academic context. Moreover, it allows situating the investigated issue in the context of international relations, connectivity, and opportunities for China’s future economic advancement and comparing the old routes’ implications with the new one’s. The Middle Corridor initiative proposed by Turkey is addressed in the academic literature from the perspective of its changes to the existing routes.
Indeed, with the introduction of the Middle Corridor initiative, scholars have referred to the role of Turkey in shaping the new economic opportunities of China. According to Chaziza (2021), the Middle Corridor “was designed to provide an alternative to the northern routes of the New Silk Road, which sends cargo through Russia, Kazakhstan, and Belarus, to enter Europe at the border with Poland; it runs from China to Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, and Georgia to Turkey, thus providing another gateway to Europe via the Black Sea” (p. 36). The map of the Middle Corridor route is presented in Figure 1, which visually represents the newly proposed pathways from China to Europe as suggested by Turkey. Similarly, Akman (2019) state that “if this corridor is effectively used it helps Turkey and Central Asian countries to benefit from China-Europe trade and infrastructural investments” (p. 2). Thus, it benefits the improved economic relationship of China with the countries through which the route passes.
Moreover, the introduction of the Middle Corridor initiative is significant in terms of the advancement of the international security cooperation between China and Turkey. In particular, Isik and Zou (2019) state that given the geographical position of the two countries and the rising threats of international terrorism, security-based and military cooperation with the two countries might be facilitated by means of closer relationships within the framework of the Middle Corridor. Similarly, Hussain (2021) states that given the connecting role of Turkey in establishing the link between Europe and Asia, it obtains a significant benefit of influencing Asian economic and strategic affairs, which implies possible challenges of China’s sustained implementation of its dominant position. According to Hussain (2021), the maintenance of regional peace by China is essential in terms of security issues enabling proper trade agreements between the countries involved in the One Belt and One Road project and the Middle Corridor initiative. Thus, the selection of the routes and alteration to the one proposed by Turkey would allow for eliminating the risks of being involved with countries that threaten security.
In addition, one of the recurring themes in contemporary scholarly literature researching the particularities of China’s Belt and Road initiative is its overall strategy on a global scale. Indeed, in Wang’s (2018) opinion, there is no agreement in the academic literature on whether China pursues hegemony or merely strives to eliminate the slowdown in its economy by implementing Belt and Road initiative and routes. However, the scholar claims that China uses the intensification of its presence in Asian and European economies to instill its power of influence and suppress the rising power of rivals and competitors (Wang, 2018). Thus, the reviewed literature allows for identifying the economic benefit for China and involved countries from the Middle Corridor initiative, security implications, and competition-based control for China in the international arena. These findings imply that there is a lack of proper comparison of the two initiatives, as well as the insufficient articulation of whether the Middle Corridor initiative complements or contradicts the One Belt and One Road project’s goals. Moreover, in light of the established contradiction or compliance, it is still relevant to investigate the implications of the shifting to the Middle Corridor for China’s international relations with other countries.
Research Design
The topic of the thesis is focused on the implications of the Middle Corridor initiative on China’s international relations under the One Belt and One Road Strategy alterations due to the war in Ukraine. Therefore, the research design will allow for answering the main research question of whether the Middle Corridor will complement the previous trade routes and facilitate existing international relations or replace them completely with the forming of new relations. Overall, the selection of a research design is a pivotal stage of any research project due to its role as a scenario for the overall research process (Halperin and Heath, 2020). In particular, the research design involves the use of a particular methodological approach, a theoretical framework, and a specific method for data analysis. In this regard, this section of the paper will be focused on the justification and explanation of the methodological approach, theory, and method.
Theory
A theoretical framework predetermines the conceptualization of addressed issues and helps structure the research process by focusing on the elements most relevant to the research question. In this regard, since the field of international relations is vastly theory-based, one will use the Offensive Realism Theory as a framework for the research project. This theory was introduced by John Mearsheimer, who applied this theory specifically to China’s rise strategy in the international arena (Mysicka, 2021). The premises of this theory imply that “the anarchical structure of international relations provides states with strong incentives to achieve security by pursuing aggressive foreign policies” (Mysicka, 2021, p. 65). In particular, according to the Offensive Realism Theory, great states with a significant power of influence maximize their competitive advantage for survival in an anarchical global setting. They pursue this goal by relentlessly “trying to achieve regional hegemony at the expense of other powerful actors” (Mysicka, 2021, p. 63). Thus, when applied to China’s strategy of domination in the Asian region through the use of the One Belt and One Road initiative is viewed as an attempt at China’s regional hegemony.
In this regard, this perspective on international relations within the economic realm of interaction with other states will help situate the shift to the Middle Corridor within the scope of China’s international strategy. These implications of the Offensive Realism Theory in the context of China’s trade initiative are consistent with the findings of scholars researching the topic of the geopolitical impact of war in Ukraine on China’s economic perspectives. In particular, Colakoglu (2019) claims that the compatibility of Middle Corridor initiative is not compatible with the goals of China to lead trade in the region. Furthermore, Hussain (2021) investigates the implications of Turkey’s involvement in Asian economic affairs through the implementation of the Middle Corridor initiative to the strategy of China for its dominance in the region. Therefore, the theory helps to identify the academic controversies in the literature by identifying the competitive or conflicting implications of the shift toward the Middle Corridor for China.
Methodological Approach
The methodological approach selected for the minor thesis’ topic investigation is comparative research. The choice of this method is validated by the opportunities it provides to the researcher in terms of comparing the manifestations and outcomes of two alternatives. In the context of the investigated topic focused on China’s One Belt, One Road initiative, the changes in the routes imply a significant impact on the economic and international relations between the involved countries and China’s outcomes. The methodology is particularly useful for comparing the routes between one another and the relationships of China with Turkey (which is intensively interested in creating a so-called middle corridor), Russia, and Iran. According to Halperin and Heath (2020), “comparative methods can be used to merge different levels of analysis and link international, national, and domestic factors in order to explain a particular political phenomenon” (p. 233). For that matter, the justification for using this approach in the context of China’s trade routes shift under the influence of geopolitical changes is based on the opportunity to find advantages and disadvantages of both the One Belt and One Road strategy and the Middle Corridor initiative.
Method
Finally, the comparative methodology allows for using the method of case study to maximize the benefits of comparison in research. Indeed, as stated by Halperin and Heath (2020), case studies should state something meaningful and valuable about the cases compared, ensuring the internal validity of the study. In addition, they should put the investigated issue in the larger context by contributing to the existing body of evidence on the topic, thus ensuring the study’s external validity (Halperin and Heath, 2020). Therefore, this research project uses a case study method to compare the One Belt and One Road initiative with the Middle Corridor initiative to identify their implications for China’s international relations.
This method is particularly relevant in attempting to answer the research questions since it allows for focusing on the two initiatives in isolation and comparing them to identify their similarities and differences in the context of China’s strategy. While the benefits of this method imply the accuracy of data and the opportunity to contextualize findings, its limitations are related to the possible bias due to the reliance on the researcher’s interpretation of the similarities and differences. To answer the research questions, the findings of already existing studies have been searched, reviewed, and combined. Indeed, for the case study, the secondary data were collected from available resources.
Specifically, ten articles covering the particularities and implications of the Middle Corridor and One Belt and One Road initiatives were investigated to identify key ideas and findings for further comparison. To limit the scope of the research, studies published no earlier than 2017 were included in the sources used for the data retrieval, given the relevance of findings and the relative novelty of the Middle Corridor initiative in the context of the latest geopolitical events. The use of not only academic articles but the publications of economic and international relations analysts and experts is validated by the purpose of the current research to accumulate and compare the perspectives of the Middle Corridor in the context of China’s economic advancement strategy.
The analysis of data was carried out by means of comparative analysis, which was manifested through the identification of the characteristics of both initiatives separately and the following establishment of their complementing and contradicting features. The analysis of the data was contextualized according to the selected theory and methodology. In particular, the use of the Offensive Realism theory implies the referral to China as a hegemon in the economic and political settings of the global community (Mysicka, 2021). When setting the case study in the context of the Offensive Realism theory, the research allows for narrowing its focus on the implications of prior and new Middle Corridor routes for Chinese international relations.
Indeed, the theoretical assumption for this research project is that China seeks to instill its dominance in the region by maximizing its control over the economic, trade, and security cooperations with the countries that are engaged in the One Belt and One Road initiative (Mysicka, 2021). For that matter, the implications of both compared initiatives will be viewed through the lens of their benefits for China’s international strategy. Thus, the use of the theory provides the conceptual framework where hegemony and strategy are core concepts. In addition, it allows for narrowing the scope of the research from the identification of benefits for all the participants of the economic cooperation under the initiatives and emphasizes the advantages that China might enjoy in the future.
Furthermore, the compatibility of the selected theory, method, and methodology is justified by the contribution of the comparative analysis approach that will help situate the benefits of international trade initiatives while focusing on two options. The methodology helps to identify the advantages and disadvantages of the two routes in the context of the contemporary geopolitical situation, which helps answer the research questions clearly and informatively. Thus, this research design allows for collecting relevant data and answering the research question in the most efficient way, contributing to the credibility and reliability of the research results due to the coherence of theory, methodological approach, and method.
Analysis
The use of the comparative analysis methodology necessitates the case study’s focus on the two initiatives with the identification of their core particularities. First, the One Belt and One Road project as China’s new silk road initiative will be reviewed for its applicability in the contemporary geopolitical context. Second, the Middle Corridor initiative will be characterized from the perspective of its positive and negative implications for China’s strategy under the current events. Finally, the implications of the two initiatives’ analysis will be compared to validate whether the Middle Corridor substitutes or complements the One Belt and One Road initiative and if it yields valuable opportunities for China’s achievement of its international relations goals as a hegemon.
One Belt and One Road Initiative
The strategy of China to facilitate its economy and promote its regional trade and political dominance has been manifested through the One Belt and One Road initiative. The motivation for the implementation of the Belt and Road initiative was related to the domestic need to find new investment opportunities and markets due to “overcapacity and excessive foreign exchange reserve” (Wang, 2018, p. 66). As for the international motivation, China was seeking to respond to the USA’s expansion into Asia in terms of economic and political influence, which is why the implementation of the Belt and Road initiative is essential, and the facilitation of its transport routes is important (Wang, 2018). Moreover, the established routes of the Belt and Road initiative enable both maritime and land connectivity between the countries of Central Asia and Europe with their dependence on China (Carafano and Nate, 2022). Thus, the relevance of the One Belt and One Road initiative remains up-to-date in the context of the competition for global economic and political dominance with other strong international actors.
Within the Belt and Road project, several transportation routes have been developed to ensure infrastructure development in the countries through which the routes pass. In such a manner, the involved countries are dependent on China, which invests in their economies and provides them with significant developmental opportunities (Jiang, 2021). One of the directions of these routes became disrupted due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, namely the routes that involved Russia (Papatolios, 2022). For that matter, China is interested in alternating the One Belt and One Road initiative toward other possible routes that would complement its strategy of instilling dominance yet balancing the capacity of the trade routes under the impact of the geopolitical changes.
The Middle Corridor Initiative
One of the particularities of the Middle Corridor initiative proposed by Turkey is that it introduces a new actor into China’s international relation framework, namely Turkey. According to Hussain (2021), “starting from Turkey, the route goes to Georgia and Azerbaijan (via railway) and then through the Caspian Sea (via ferry) to Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan” (p. 69). This route involves alternative ways for China, which is characterized by the intensification of relations with Turkey. Indeed, Turkey had not been in a close relationship with China until recently, when their cooperation emerged as inevitable and mutually beneficial (Chaziza, 2021). The Middle Corridor addresses the challenges of the One Belt and One Road initiative by proposing alternative pathways. In particular, it remains part of the already existing middle corridor of the Belt and Road project but with some adjustments in light of the newly emerged re-shaping of the transportation capacities without northern pathways. Indeed, as stated by Papatolios (2022), the Turkish Middle Corridor initiative provides efficient maritime transportation opportunities and benefits since “the sea freight rates are cheaper, and the transit time to EU main ports is faster” (para. 10). Thus, the new route will substitute the previous northern ones and ensure the facilitation of Turkey-China economic, political, and security cooperation.
In addition, the countries through which the Middle Corridor passes will be involved in closer relationships with China, namely Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Georgia, and others. While these countries benefit from infrastructure investment, like Azerbaijan, the economy of which gains significant benefits from cooperating with China, Chinese interests in terms of political and economic relationships with these countries require closer investigation (Hasanli and Mansimov, 2018). Indeed, according to Carafano and Nate (2022), European countries are interested in China’s use of the Turkish Middle Corridor initiative due to the need to find new energy suppliers under the influence of Russia’s war against Ukraine. In this regard, the Middle Corridor might be used as an energy supply route.
Comparison of the Two Initiatives’ Implications for China’s International Relations
Firstly, different motivation for the implementation of the initiatives serves as a pivotal distinctive feature between the two compared alternatives. The One Belt and One Road project is motivated by the domestic economic slowdown in China and the need to facilitate its competitive advantage on a global economic stage (Wang, 2018). As for the Middle Corridor route’s motivation, it is validated by the growing need for China to address the regional and global geopolitical complexities to prevent the disruption of international trade and security strategies (Colakoglu, 2019). Thus, as stated by Wang (2018), “cooperation between Turkey and China on the BRI should be realized since China has its own intentions and strategies to turn itself into a great power in the future through certain discourses, such as projects being mutually beneficial” (p. 71). Therefore, since the initial motivations for the One Belt and One Road project might still be fulfilled by the Middle Corridor, it should be pursued as a beneficial option for China.
Secondly, the distinction between the previous routes under the original One Belt and One Road initiative and the Middle Corridor is related to the difference in China’s security opportunities due to the involvement of connectivity with pro-European entities. Importantly, the Middle Corridor initiative is a significant political and security-based project which allows China to ensure its security goals via cooperation with Turkey. Indeed, as stated by Isik and Zou (2019), cooperation between the two governments will improve security efforts on the international level. Moreover, since Turkey is a connecting entity between Asia and Europe, the security cooperation with this state will provide China with opportunities for establishing better ties with the EU while preserving its competitive advantage in Europe over the USA.
Thirdly, the distinction between the formerly relevant One Belt and One Road project and the Middle Corridor is related to the occurrence of geopolitical issues that cannot be mitigated within the framework of original Belt and Road routes but can be addressed via the Middle Corridor. In the context of China’s search for economic, security, and military ties with Turkey in light of the latest geopolitical events, the implementation of Belt and Road strategies might be facilitated by the Middle Corridor initiative. Indeed, as stated by Hussain (2021), the cooperation between the two countries within the Middle Corridor route will reshape China’s political and economic interests in the region.
It is validated by the establishment of new relations with the countries of Central Asia instead of prolonging prior routes that involved unfavorable states, such as Russia and Iran. Indeed, when comparing the implications of the two initiatives, one might emphasize that the Middle Corridor’s capacity fails to meet the requirements of the trade volumes of the Northern Corridor used in the past (Papatolios, 2022). Thus, the goals of establishing regional and global economic and political dominance by China are jeopardized by the shift toward the Middle Corridor due to its incapacity to fully meet the needs of China.
However, the exclusion of Russia and Iran from the prior routes due to the shift in geopolitics opens alternative opportunities for China to cooperate with such important states as Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, and others. While the benefits of investment in their economies are obvious for these countries, China, as a dominant power, might be challenged by the establishment of qualitatively new and closer ties with these states (Szumski, 2022). Although such efforts might be complicated in terms of the additional efforts for foreign affairs strategy formulation, China might benefit from them due to the establishment of a more prominent presence in the international ties with a wider range of states outside the northern routes.
Nonetheless, the most important similarity of the two initiatives is their provision of international dominance of China through intensified cooperation. In the context of the Offensive Realist theory, the dominance-based goals of China in opposition to the USA is the core motivation to shift to the Middle Corridor initiative and strengthen the relationships with Turkey. Indeed, as stated by Wang (2021), Turkey is a potential cooperating actor for the USA since Turkey is a connecting point between Europe and Asia. However, since on the regional level, Turkey is interested in maintaining beneficial cooperation with China within the framework of its One Belt and One Road initiative, its prioritization by China will help Chinese authorities establish a more solid place in the international arena. Thus, although the Middle Corridor substitutes the previous routes with more efficient and effective pathways for trade, energy, and political ties, China should consider the Turkish initiative to maintain its power as a dominant actor in the region and on a global scale.
Results and Conclusion
The results of the comparative analysis of this case study show that the One Belt and One Road initiative and the Middle Corridor initiative have more differences than similarities in the context of the contemporary geopolitical situation. Firstly, the motivations for implementing the initiatives are shaped by different internal and external factors, while China’s interest in dominance remains relevant in the context of both alternatives. Secondly, the Middle Corridor provides more security opportunities for China than previous routes. Thirdly, the cooperation with different countries under the Middle Corridor initiative expands China’s ties with Europe. Thus, the goals of China to instill its hegemony and strengthen its competitive advantage against the USA in the region might be fulfilled within the Middle Corridor initiative.
To summarize the research, the conducted comparative analysis of the Middle Corridor initiative and the past routes of the One Belt and One Road initiative has demonstrated that the Middle Corridor substitutes the previous routes. Moreover, it provides new opportunities for international relations and economic cooperation. Using the comparative case study and implementing the theoretical framework of the Offensive Realism theory, the project used secondary scholarly data to retrieve the characteristics of the Middle Corridor’s initiative and prior routes of the One Belt and One Road initiative. The findings were compared for the similarities and differences to be found.
The results indicate that while the Middle Corridor yields more efficiency, security, and speed for transportation and trade connectivity between Asia and Europe, it substitutes previously established routes and changes the international relationship opportunities for China. However, the differences that the Middle Corridor provides benefit China’s security strategic opportunities and allow for the decision-makers to reshape international relations toward strengthening ties with Turkey and other Central Asian countries. Thus, the findings imply that the new Middle Corridor initiative substitutes previous routes and might be considered a beneficial option for international relations forming in the context of contemporary geopolitical issues in Iran and Russia, and Ukraine.
Reference List
Akman, M.S. (2019) ‘Turkey’s Middle Corridor and Belt and Road initiative: coherent or conflicting?’, Economic Policy Research Foundation of Turkey. Web.
Borrell, J. (2022) ‘Central Asia’s growing importance globally and for the EU’, European Union External Action. Web.
Carafano, J. J., and Nate, S. (2022) ‘The West should welcome the Middle Corridor’, The Heritage Foundation. Web.
Chaziza, M. (2021) ‘China’s New Silk Road strategy and the Turkish Middle Corridor vision’, Asian Journal of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, 15(1), pp.34-50.
Colakoglu, S. (2019) China’s Belt and Road initiative and Turkey’s Middle Corridor: a question of compatibility. Middle East Institute. Web.
Halperin, S. and Heath, O. (2020) Political research: methods and practical skills. 3d edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hasanli, P.K. and Mansimov, S. (2018) ‘Azerbaijan’s position in the East-West Transport Corridor, LPI index and container transportation’, Indicator, 2019(2020), pp.81-86.
Hussain, E. (2021) ‘The Belt and Road initiative and the Middle Corridor: complementarity or competition?’, Insight Turkey, 23(3), pp. 233-250.
Isik, A.F. and Zou, Z. (2019) ‘China-Turkey security cooperation under the background of the ‘Belt and Road’ and the ‘Middle Corridor’ initiatives’. Asian Journal of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, 13(2), pp.278-293.
Jiang, Y. (2021) ‘Demystifying the Belt and Road initiative: China’s domestic and non-strategic policy?’, Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, 6(4), pp.468-481.
Mysicka, S. (2021) ‘Offensive realism and the future of China’s rise’, Pacific Focus, 36(1), pp. 63-91.
Papatolios, N. (2022) ‘Middle Corridor unable to absorb northern volumes, opportunities still there’, Rail Freight. Web.
Szumski, C. (2022) ‘Kazakhstan key ‘Middle Corridor’ linking China to EU‘, Euractive. Web.
Wang, S.W. (2018) ‘The strategic thinking of China’s “Belt and Road” initiative (BRI), Middle Corridor and the BRI’, Avrasya Dunyasi, 3, pp.1-7.