Geopolitics is incessantly at play within International relations, but its key functioning and presence is evident from China’s various geo-political endeavors. Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is prime project manifesting China’s geopolitical endeavor with more than 150 states being part of it. Launched by the President of China Xi Jinping in 2013, BRI comprises of the land component-Silk Road Economic Belt and a maritime component-21st century Maritime Silk Road. The BRI would open pathways for China to Asia, Middle East, Africa, Europe, and beyond. The BRI indeed has substantial repercussions for the South Asia as well.
. The successful realization of BRI will depict the aforementioned geo-political theories of Mackinder and Mahan as symbiotic, colossally enhancing the China’s influence and power in world in general and with respect to South Asia in particular. Currently, the China and India have been significant power contenders and rivals in the South Asia in political, economic, and military domain. India has been bolstered by the USA as a regional influencer and key actor in containment of China’s BRI project. Despite that, China through its ambitious BRI project has been making considerable space in the South Asia region through its complementary land and maritime components under BRI.
1) Halford Mackinder’s Heartland Theory
Defining the Heartland: As per the Mackinder, the Eurasia’s vast area, marked by Arctic as well as inland drainage is regarded as the Heartland. The 900, 000 square miles geographical area extend from Volga River to Siberia’s Eastern and then from the Mountainous Himalayas to Arctic Ocean. Mainly it was drained into lakes and inland seas as well as in the Arctic Ocean which in turn is characterized by its frozen nature all over the year which made it inaccessible to the sea power and ocean ships. In 1904, politically, the ‘Pivot Area’ was completely Russian Eastern Europe as well as in Asia because it encompassed Afghanistan, Iran, Baluchistan, part of Mongolia and Western China. However, in 1919 the Heartland didn’t remain similar to the 1904 Pivot Area and was broadened westward in order to include entire European Russia. Areas added were the Black Sea, Baltic Sea, navigable middle coupled with lower Danube, Armenia, Asia minor, Mongolia, Tibet, and Persia. Hence the Heartland in 1919 lost its feature of solely area of Arctic and inland drainage. In 1943, Heartland’s geographical contours were modified by the Mackinder as he excluded the Serbia’s easternmost part. Entire Soviet Union excluding the Lenaland was added in the Heartland.
The marginal or Inner Crescent:
Eurasia’s marginal lands surround on its east, west, and south, which were called as the “marginal or the inner crescent’ by the Mackinder. It makes the circular arc of the Eurasia’s coastlands raging from the Scandinavian area to the Manchuria. The areas included in the marginal crescent are entire Europe excluding the Russia part, Middle East most area, Asia’s monsoon-lands-India, Far East and South East Asia, and North Africa. Contrarily to the Heartland, the area of navigable rivers and oceanic drainage is the inner crescent, approachable to the sea-power.
Insular or Outer Crescent:
The world’s geopolitical organization as per the Mackinder regarded as the insular or outer crescent beyond the marginal crescent are positioned along with the widely segregated lands of the insular or outer crescent. It entailed mainly the South and North Americas, British Isles, Australia, South of Sahara, Africa, and Japanese island, which Mackinder labelled as second Heartland.
Key Assumption
As per the Mackinder, the Heartland is deemed more essential as compare to the outer or inner crescent, and the key reason was that the Heartland was enclosed by the physical barriers which makes it secure outside attack. The key postulate of his theory are that “whoever rules East Europe commands the Heartland; whoever rules the Heartland commands the World-Island; whoever rules the World-Island commands the World.” Here the ‘World Island’ refers to the three interlinked continents also termed as the Afro-Eurasia. Mackinder envisaged the emergence of the Great land power in area what he called as Heartland that would spread towards the Eurasia’s marginal lands which in turn would expand to the remaining world.
Silk Road Economic Belt and Mackinder
The Heartland theory of the Mackinder is a significant prism in order to envisage the great power competition in South as well as Central Asia. The interests of the China and Russia intersect, and the US is incessantly trying maintain a grueling-cum-fragile influence. The resurgence of the China and the changed geo-political landscape gives a chance to reconcile the Heartland perspectives with regards to BRI.
Physical reach of China in South and Central Asia
The mammoth potential of China to become a Eurasian land power along with the sea power hasn’t been accounted by the various classical geo-politics. As a maritime power, the role of China is well-comprehended, but the Heartland conception of China is mostly ignored. Predominantly, the Heartland’s European aspects were given importance, but in 21st century, the Eurasia’s Asian conception and its geo-political importance cannot be underestimated while taking into consideration the rise of the revisionist power China. The increasing military and economic growth of China coupled with the Sino-Russian security cooperation provides an opportunity of economic as well as political collaboration, while simultaneously carry out the power projection from the inner crescent. The convergence of the interests between China and Russia might generate a situation where maritime access by China can be controlled towards Eastern Eurasia by observing the A2AD-Anti Access Area Denial Strategy and simultaneously getting the economic leverage through economic corridors on lands linking Asia to Europe’s Western part via the Central Asian Region. However, the potential cooperation between Russia and China in order to get this end seems a dangerous and novel shift. The case of this collaboration is crucially vulnerable given the situation where the Russian and Chinese physical reach in the South and Central Asia began to diminish or the conflictual situation arises between the China and/ or Russia and US.
Probability of new Heartland and South Asia at the cross road
As the Russian and Chinese collaboration with respect to controlling the Heartland seems a distant idea, it is mostly presumed that a new Heartland will be created by the China consisting of the mega landmass based on the China, CARs-Central Asian States, parts of Western and Eastern Europe, which has tremendous similarity with the original landmass proposed by the Mackinder excluding Russia. In case of materialization of this idea and the proposed and undergoing corridors under the BRI, a new power’s fulcrum projecting immense influence over continental area of Eurasia will become a source of economic and strategic prowess of the China. All these developments are not in isolation with the South Asia, as the BRI’s pivotal corridors and the states are located in the South Asia and it’s the region where MSR and SREB intersect giving China the gateway to other continents. South Asia at the cross roads of the Central Asia would undoubtedly be effected the China’s access to this region. It would indeed enhance the multiple implications for the South Asia Region. Mainly, the strategic, political and economic clout of the China would be increased and it would be adverse for the regional hegemony seeking state- India in the South Asia. Moreover, the USA’s power and interests in the region would be indeed challenged due to China’s presence.
China is incessantly seeking to resurrect the ancient Silk Road which is envisaged as the superhighway of the Eurasia traversing the Heartland and connecting the China with continents other parts such as South Asia, South East Asia, Middle East and Europe. The BRI proposed or underway railway projects also seems to resonate with the Mackinder’s emphasis on the trans-continental rail network in order to enhance the state’s prowess.
2) Alfred Thayer Mahan: Theory of Sea Power
Alfrared Thayer Mahan a theorist as well as founder of school of geopolitics in US is a renowned name because of his ideas regarding sea power of states. As far as Mahan ideas are concerned his vision reflects zero-sum game in context of international trade and shows approaches of mercantilism. His core ideas were that in order to protect the state interests as well as trade against enemy state, the acquisition of staunch navy is indispensable in this regard.
Three key principles
The underline principles of Mahan theory are:
- Building a very strong navy (naval power)
- Building overseas bases
- Developing merchant marines (it refers to commercial ships).
These three core elements will ultimately lead to opportunities for state at global level. Mahan further reinforced the fact that significant SOLCs (Sea lines of communication) as well as vested economic interests of a state can be protected by the navy. Besides this the navy could maneuver and can increase the strategic interests as well as expansion through overseas bases.
Control over Sea and relay points
Monetary means for building as well as sustaining navy would come from the trade revenues. This strategy could be materialized by gaining control over Sea lines of communication, canals as well as straits that act as choke points or narrow passages essential for trade. Mahan staunchly supported the communication by attaining control over sea and this can be achieved either by possessing that territory and making it as states own or through other means and for this a well-established and carefully spaced posts should be made originating from the home state. Mahan in his book “The influence of Sea power on History” said that possession over sea means possession over everything. Mahan’s theory of sea power stresses the fact that economic security of a state and its prowess is directly related to the power and command over sea. Mahan talked about the relay points in the sea more specifically significant maritime routes for trade and economic interests and to make them secure is essential for economic strength of state.
Command of sea
Mahan asserted that the state’s foundation is established by the strong navy in order to have a ‘command of sea’. But attaining former doesn’t ensure the latter. Aside from strength of navy, actual command of the sea requires the formation of prudent naval strategy. As per the Mahan, the naval strategy’s ultimate goal is to enhance and safeguard the sea power of the sea, either in times of peace and war. Sea power, particularly the command of sea is colossally reliant on the naval strategy and navy of state. Without effective naval strategy and strong navy, a particular sea area cannot be commanded as attack could be launched or blockade can be imposed via sea area by hostile state.
China’s Maritime Silk Road and Mahan
China’s 21st century Maritime Silk Road (MSR) was carefully mooted alongside the SREB-Silk Road Economic Belt as component of the Belt and Road Initiative in order to strengthen the maritime connectivity of China with the Indian Ocean Region, Africa and Southeast Asia. Besides increasing the regional connectivity, the BRI envisages to resurrect the cultural and historical linkages of China with states along the old Silk Road affiliated maritime routes. The Maritime Silk Road entails multiple infrastructure projects such as roads, ports, bridges, highways, underwater gas and oil pipelines. In case of South Asia, the MSR traverses the various South Asian States and the Indian Ocean, enhancing the China’s strategic clout there.
Although China is not Indian Ocean littoral state but it has invested huge sum of money even billion dollars in the littoral states of Indian Ocean or the South Asian such as in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Maldives, in order to establish China maritime hubs that are essential for securing energy supply and raw material import and for export to Africa as well as Europe. The materialization of China’s mega infrastructural projects would provide it secure access to Indian Ocean and simultaneously pave way for enhancing its geo-political clout in region. As per China’s view these China ports and bases would act as commercial relays and are also for anti-piracy and for increasing its trade even towards the African region.
South Asia as potential gateway
As far as South Asia is concerned, it would serve as potential gateway to guarantee the access to Indian Ocean required for oil trade from Africa and Middle East to China, thereby addressing the Malacca Dilemma. MSR traversing through South Asia has is a gateway to connect landlocked southwestern provinces of China to coastal region. The stake of the China ports of South Asia would enable the People’s Republic of China to carry out power projection beyond its borders coupled with the deterring the external threats.
Sri Lanka and Hambantota port
China has built the Hambantota port at the fishing village site in Sri Lanka, which is regarded as the MSR’s inception project in 2017. The Chinese company got the port at lease for 99 years. It is rapidly growing as RO-RO transshipment hub which handled 700, 000 trans-shipment vehicles in 2023.
Pakistan and Gwadar port
In Pakistan, the China has also created it’s another significant and strategically important Gwadar port Baluchistan province under the flagship China-Pakistan Economic Corridor worth of 64 billion dollars. Gwadar port comes third in line after the two ports in Pakistan that are Qasim port and Karachi port that constitute for nearly Pakistan 95 percent of trade through sea. The strategically located Gwadar port, adjacent to the Persian Gulf right below the Choke point Strait of Hormuz is pivotal component of CPEC. COPHC- China Overseas Port Holding Company which is a state run company is responsible for conducting operations as well as building mega projects and other work of development nature. In order to ensure the security of Gwadar port, Pakistan has created Task-Force 88. This port signifies the staunch strategic partnership between China and Pakistan and ot would tremendously enhance the maritime presence of China in Indian Ocean region.
Bangladesh and Chittagong port
In Bangladesh, China has built a Chittagong port and this port has facility for containers and it includes commercial as well as comprehensive naval facility and access. Besides this, China is also providing military assets to Bangladesh such as submarines through the process of soft loans and this a major step in building the cordial relationship between two states. Importance of soft loans can be determined by the fact that these soft loans are less challenging for the booming Bangladesh economy as compare to the commercial loans which have much high rate of interest and harsh conditions. The development of the Chittagong port would enormously help China in maintaining safety of the energy channels. Additionally, this port can carry out colossal role by acting as significant bridge for South Asia in order to reach the East Asia, Southeast Asia, and beyond.. This would provide China with the maritime infrastructure to carry out the sea trade and enhance its maritime prowess. The government of Sheih Haseena also sought investments from China build another port at the Bay of Bengal’s gateway, particularly in Sonadia.
Maldives
As far as Maldives is concerned, it has mammoth strategic significance for the Peoples Republic of China. India as well as China consider Maldives as the focal point of the political-cum-strategic aspirations in the Indian Ocean. Since the election of Mohamed Muizzu as Maldives’ President, the strategic partnership between both states is incessantly growing. Under the BRI, China developed ‘China-Maldives Friendship Bridge’ in 2018; however, recently both states signed a military agreement whereby China pledged to provide free of cost non-lethal military equipment. Moreover, research vessel of China ‘Xiang Yang Hong’ docked in Male in February 2024, signifying its geo-political clout in region.
Comparative Analysis
The amalgamation of the strategic and geo-political thoughts of the Mahan and Mackinder gives plausible interpretation with respect to the BRI strategic intent of the China. The successful materialization of the BRI would provide China ‘Command of the Seas’ as well as the ‘Rule of the Heartland’, both indispensable to the geographical and strategic contexts of the China.
As far as the maritime sphere of the BRI is concerned, it will provide the indispensable logical support basis in order to buttress and sustain the strategic interests and naval strategy which as per the Alfred Thayer Mahan are the crucial variables in order to ensure capability as well as sustain maritime power of the nation and enhancing the geo-political presence in the South Asia and beyond. The co-development of maritime support centers and ports in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Maldives and Pakistan under the sea-route of BRI in South Asian would provide China the relay points, base for merchant ships and significantly enhance its maritime prowess. Port’s networks will buttress the future growth of China as a maritime power which would initially provide support to the merchant fleet of China and gradually the blue water navy. With respect to South Asia, the Maritime Silk Road traversing through the South Asia is crucial component of the BRI and would provide China access to the Middle East, Africa and Europe.
In case of the Heartland, it has been reinvigorated and considered as Great Power politics’ forefront, pushing a reconsideration of military and diplomatic priorities in region. With respect to the Eurasian vision of China, the intertwining of the geo-strategic and economic considerations is visible. In terms of economy, the creation of integrated area under its auspices will tremendously benefit China. The Silk Road Economic Belt, the land-construct of the BRI, if successful would bring the land-connectivity in the Eurasian region under China’s leadership and in this regard South Asia is important as it is at cross road to the Afghanistan and CARs, particularly through Pakistan in order to ensure the access to Eurasian Heartland. The proposed and underway corridors in South Asia under BRI (such as CPEC, Trans-Himalayan Corridor, Bangladesh, China, India, and Myanmar (BCIM) Maldives, would bring the connectivity to the Heartland
Hence the geo-politics of China under the auspices of BRI and its pivotal SRM and SREC component in South Asia as a source of connectivity and linkage to other continents for trade purposes would enhance the economic prowess of China which would undoubtedly provide the strategic and political leverage.