راهبرد اتحادیۀ اروپا نسبت به نفوذ چین در آسیای مرکزی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار، گروه علوم سیاسی و روابط بین‌الملل، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر،

2 دانشجوی دکتری روابط بین‌الملل، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران

10.22059/jcep.2025.390911.450307

چکیده

به موازات گسترش روزافزون دامنۀ ناتو و اتحادیۀ اروپا در منطقۀ آسیای مرکزی، نفوذ چین نیز در این منطقه درحال گسترش است. از این‌رو  این پرسش مطرح می‌شود که اتحادیۀ اروپا چگونه در برابر توسعۀ حضور چین در آسیای مرکزی واکنش نشان داده است؟ در پاسخ این فرضیه مطرح می‌شود که «اتحادیۀ اروپا تلاش می‌کند با توجه به گسترش نفوذ چین در آسیای مرکزی، به ایجاد موازنه و تحدید هوشمند نسبت به حضور این کشور اقدام کند، تا پیامدهای کاهش هژمونی آمریکا در منطقه را نیز مدیریت کند». رویکرد این پژوهش تحلیلی- تبیینی است. روش گرد‌آوری اطلاعات به صورت کیفی در قالب منابع کتابخانه‌ای و اینترنتی صورت گرفته است. روش تجزیه و تحلیل اطلاعات نیز با استفاده از تحلیل محتوای کیفی منابع انجام شده است. بررسی این موضوع در چارچوب موازنۀ قوا با رویکرد نوواقع‌گرایی تهاجمی به بحث گذاشته می‌شود. بنابر یافته‌های نوشتار، اتحادیۀ اروپا با توجه به دو واقعیت «خیزش هژمونی چین» و هم‌زمان «ریزش هژمونی ایالات متحد» در منطقۀ آسیای مرکزی، به‌سوی تحدید هوشمند چین و جانب‌داری از وزنۀ ائتلاف آمریکا تمایل یافته است. در دایرۀ ادراکی سران اتحادیۀ اروپا، خیزش هژمونی چین و هم‌زمان ریزش هژمونی آمریکا در آسیای مرکزی، واقعیتی مسلم برآورد می‌شود. بنابراین سیاست‌های راهبردی این اتحادیه در راستای بقای هژمونی ایالات متحد با هدف تحدید هوشمند چین در چارچوب موازنۀ قوا بنا شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The European Union's Strategy towards China's Influence in Central Asia

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mokhtar Salehi 1
  • Marziyeh Mohammadinasab 2
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
2 A Ph.D. Candidate of International Relations, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
چکیده [English]

 
Introduction: While NATO and the European Union have been increasingly seeking to expand their influence in Central Asia, China has also significantly expanded its presence in the region in recent years. The geopolitical importance of this region made it the focal point of the “Great Game” in the 19th century and a significant arena of competition during the Cold War in the 20th century. In the 21st century, Central Asia has once again emerged as a dynamic center of hegemonic competition. Following the dissolution of the bipolar international system and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the unipolar order led by the United States enabled the gradual expansion of NATO and the European Union into the post-Soviet space. The strategic centrality of this region as a geopolitical axis makes a thorough understanding of the evolving power dynamics, especially for regional actors such as Iran, which seeks to enhance its bargaining power in the international system. Therefore, this study emphasizes the necessity of analyzing interactions among major powers in the region, especially regarding Iran's potential strategic engagement.
Research question: The main question of the research is: How has the European Union responded to China's expanding influence in Central Asia?
Research hypothesis: This hypothesis posits that the EU aims to maintain a strategic balance and employ “smart containment” in response to China’s increasing presence as a means of mitigating the consequences of the decline of US hegemony in the region.
Methodology and theoretical framework: This study employs a qualitative methodology with an analytical-explanatory approach, relying on documentary and library-based research. Drawing on documentary and library research, this article examines the evolving strategic competition between the European Union and China. The theoretical foundation of this study is based on offensive Neo-realism, which emphasizes the efforts of states to maximize power in an anarchic international system. According to Mearsheimer, offensive realism is based on five main assumptions: the anarchy of the international system, the offensive capabilities of great powers, uncertainty among states about each other's intentions, survival as the primary goal of great powers, and Great powers as rational and logical actors. Ultimately, combining these assumptions, Mearsheimer concludes that the most effective way to ensure survival in the anarchic environment of the international system is to become the strongest power, that is, a hegemon. However, not all states can maximize their relative power simultaneously. Therefore, as long as anarchy persists, the international system will remain an arena of security competition. Within this framework, China's survival in the anarchic international system can only be ensured by gaining a hegemonic position; this dynamic has transformed the Central Asian region into a security competition arena between great powers. Indeed, according to Mearsheimer, what makes the future threat from China so worrisome is the possibility that China could become more powerful and dangerous than any of the potential hegemons the United States faced in the 20th century.
Results and discussion: Qualitative analysis reveals a direct correlation between the rise of Chinese hegemony in Central Asia and the decline of American hegemony. China’s growing influence – as manifested through institutional mechanisms such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and infrastructure initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) – has coincided with a relative decline in US dominance in the region. As a result, the European Union, in coordination with its strategic ally, the United States, has adopted policies aimed at containing China's influence through a strategy of maintaining a decisive balance of power. These developments reflect a broader hegemonic transition in the region, in which the EU and NATO are acting in concert to contain Chinese dominance and preserve Western geopolitical interests.
Conclusion: The present study identifies and analyzes two core dynamics -“the rise of Chinese hegemony” and “the fall of U.S. hegemony” - as fundamental drivers of the EU's strategic stance in Central Asia. This study presents a new analytical framework by conceptualizing EU policy as an attempt to maintain a delicate balance of power aimed at preserving the remnants of US hegemony. The findings suggest that EU leaders, as key stakeholders in NATO, have institutionalized the strategic perception of China's rise as an independent variable and the decline of the United States as an intervening variable. As a result, EU policies have been shaped around the concept of “smart containment” of China, operationalized through selective participation in U.S.-led geopolitical projects, such as the Indo-Pacific Strategy and the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), as well as related initiatives. These strategies are designed not only to prevent the rise of Chinese hegemony but also to prevent the complete erosion of US strategic superiority.
However, the study also highlights an inherent paradox: the EU's efforts to strengthen the security of the West through the balance of power inadvertently reduce the security of the East, reinforcing the cyclical logic of strategic competition. China is unlikely to remain passive in the face of Western containment. Instead, it is set to strengthen regional alliances, particularly through the China-Iran-Russia trilateral axis, and seek to rebalance the regional balance of power in favor of the East, as well as localize its security architecture. By doing so, China aims to challenge Western aggression and present a counter-narrative to American and European interference in Asia. Ultimately, the EU's strategic response to the dual realities of China's rise and the United States' decline is characterized by an alignment with U.S.-led containment strategies. This reflects a broader reconfiguration of the international order centered on hegemonic transition and competitive multipolarity.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Balance of Power
  • Hegemony. China
  • USA
  • Central Asia.European Union
- اشمیت، هلموت (1386)، چین ابرقدرت آینده: هلموت اشمیت در گفتگو با فرانک سیرن، ترجمه هادی بلوری، تهران: قطره.
- برچیل، اسکات، اندرو لینکلیتر، جک دانلی و ماتیو پترسن (1392)، نظریه‌های روابط بین‌الملل، سجاد حیدری فرد، تهران: انتشارات جهاد دانشگاهی.
- جعفری، علی‌اکبر و وحید ذوالفقاری (1401)، تحول پارادیمیک در نظریه‌های روابط بین‌الملل، بابلسر: دانشگاه مازندران.
- حکیم، حمید و عماد هلالات (1402)، «سیاست توسعه‌طلبی دولت چین در آسیای مرکزی بر مبنای قدرت نرم»، دولت‌پژوهی، دوره 9، شماره 36، صص. 209-242، (doi.org/10.22054/tssq.2024.74271.1424).
رئیسی‌نژاد، آرش (1399)، «کلان‌استراتژی راه ابریشم نوین؛ بایدهایی که در راه ابریشم نوین چین برای ایران وجود دارد»، دیپلماسی ایرانی، قابل دسترسی در: http://www.irdiplomacy.ir/fa/news/1993002/، (تاریخ دسترسی: 15/05/1404).
- زارعی، بهادر و مصطفی رشیدی (1397)، قرن بیست و یکم قرن آسیا پاسیفیک (تمرکز فعالیت و رقابت اقتصادی و چالش‌های ژئوپلیتیکی)، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
- شربیانی، قوام (1387)، امنیت ایران و رویکرد ناتو در آسیای مرکزی، تهران: انتشارات وزارت امور خارجه.
- صالحی، مختار (1398)، «ابتکار راه ابریشم جدید چین و راهبرد اتحادیه اروپا»، پژوهش‌های راهبردی سیاست، دوره 8، شماره 30، صص. 195-226، (doi: 10.22054/qpss.2019.42229.2311).
- عزیزی، حمیدرضا (1395)، چین و آسیای مرکزی؛ نفوذ منطقه‌ای و هژمونی بین‌المللی، تهران: مخاطب.
- فاخری، مهدی (1400)، «تأثیر ترتیبات منطقه‌ای بر سیاست خارجی چین در آسیای مرکزی»، مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی، دوره 14، شماره 1، صص. 251-274، (doi: 10.22059/jcep.2021.310112.449952).
- فاخری، مهدی و سمیه مختاری (1402)، «کمک‌های توسعه‌ای چین به آسیای مرکزی»، مطالعات آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، دوره 29، شماره 124، صص. 3-28، قابل دسترسی در: http://ca.ipisjournals.ir/article_710567.html، (تاریخ دسترسی: 12/05/1404).
- فرجی نصیری، شهریار، افشین متقی و محمد جولانی (1402)، «کریدور عرب‌مد و نقش آن در معماری جدید اتصال فرامنطقه‌ای»، اقیانوس‌شناسی، دوره 14، شماره 56، صص. 63-79،
doi: 10.52547/joc.14.56.5)).
- قوام، عبدالعلی و داوود کیانی (1389)، اتحادیه اروپا: هویت، امنیت و سیاست، تهران: انتشارات پژوهشکده مطالعات راهبردی.
- کوزه‌گر کالجی، ولی (1394)، ایران، روسیه و چین در آسیای مرکزی: تعامل و تقابل با سیاست خارجی آمریکا، تهران: انتشارات وزارت امور خارجه.
- کولایی، الهه و نبی‌الله امامی ایوکی (1400)، «جایگاه بندر چابهار در تعمیق همکاری ایران و آسیای مرکزی»، مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی، دوره 16، شماره 2، صص. 273-298،
doi: 10.22059/jcep.2021.317262.449974)).
- لیتل، ریچارد (1389)، تحول در نظریه‌های موازنۀ قوا، غلامعلی چگنی‌زاده، تهران: ابرار معاصر تهران.
- محمدنیا، مهدی و عبدالمجید سیفی (1403)، «جایگاه موازنه‌گری ناحیه‌ای در سیاست خارجی چین در قبال ایالات متحده در خلیج فارس»، سیاست جهانی، دوره 13، شماره 1، صص. 59-81،
(doi: 10.22124/wp.2024.26253.3293).
- مشیرزاده، حمیرا (1390)، تحول در نظریه‌های روابط بین‌الملل، تهران: سمت.
- میرشایمر، جان (1388)، تراژدی سیاست قدرت‌های بزرگ، غلامعلی چگنی‌زاده، تهران: انتشارات وزارت امور خارجه.
- مورگنتا، هانس‌جی (1389)، سیاست میان ملت‌ها: تلاش در راه قدرت و صلح، ترجمه حمیرا مشیرزاده، تهران: انتشارات وزارت امور خارجه.
- ناصری، علی و ابوالفضل شکوری (1403). «ایران و ژئوپلیتیک دالان زنگه‌زور»، مطالعات آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، دوره 30، شماره 125، صص. 94-55، قابل دسترسی در: http://ca.ipisjournals.ir/article_714199.html (دسترسی در: 12/05/1404).
- نای، جوزف ‌اس (1390)، آیندۀ قدرت، رضامراد صحرایی، تهران: حروفیه.
- نگروپونته، جان‌دی (1390)، قدرت نرم و تهدید سخت: ارزیابی تهدیدات دولت آمریکا(2009-2007)، سیدحمیدرضا سیدی و محمد عباسی، تهران: دانشگاه امام صادق(ع).
English
Azizi, Saeed (2024), “China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI): The Role of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in Geopolitical Security and Economic Cooperation”, Open Journal of Political Science, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 111-129, (doi: 10.4236/ojps.2024.141007).
Borrell, Josep (2024), “EU Indo-Pacific Ministerial Forum: Opening remarks by High Representative/Vice-President Josep Borrell”, Available at: https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/eu-indo-pacific-ministerial-forum-opening-remarks-high-representativevice-president-josep-borrell_en,(Accessed on: 2/2/2025). 
Bossuyt, Fabienne (2018), The EU’s and China’s Development Assistance Towards Central Asia: low Versus Contested Impact, Eurasian Geography and Economics, Vol. 59, No. 5-6, pp. 606–631, (https://doi.org/10.1080/15387216.2019.1581635).
Delivorias, Angelos and Dorothee Falkenberg (2024), “India's Connectivity Initiatives a Multi-Faceted Strategy”, EPRS (European Parliamentary Research Service), pp. 1-12. Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2024/762471/EPRS_BRI(2024)762471_EN.pdf, (Accessed on: 4/2/2025).
Dominic, Johnson and Thayer Bradley (2016), “The Evolution of Offensive Realism Survival under Anarchy from the Pleistocene to the Present”, Politics and the Life Sciences, Spring, Vol. 35, No. 1. pp. 1-26, Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26372766, (Accessed on: 11/2/2025).
Drost, Niels, Giulia Cretti & Babette van Giersbergen (2025), Central Asia Emerging from the Shadows; European Union – Central Asia Relations in Evolving Eurasian Geopolitics, Netherlands: Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’.
Engvall, Johan (2025), “The Convergence of the South Caucasus and Central Asia:  An Opportunity for a New EU Partnership”, Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program, pp. 1-9. Available at: https://cacianalyst.org/resources/240122_FT_Engvall.pdf, (Accessed on: 20/2/2025).
Four Countries Make Joint Investment to Develop Transit Corridor (2022), ILNA, Available at: https://www.ilna.ir/en/tiny/news-1217382, (Accessed on: 9/2/2025). 
Global Gateway: €10 Billion Commitment to Invest in Trans Caspian Transport Corridor Connecting Europe and Central Asia Announced at Investors Forum (2024), European Commission, Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_501, (Accessed on: 8/2/2025).
Kaveh, Ali, Ghasem Torabi and Alireza Rezaei (2021), “China Silk Road Initiative and Hegemony in Central Asia”, Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 75-98,
(doi: 10.22059/jcep.2021.314577.449964). [in Persian].
Koenig, Pamina, Sandra Poncet, Mathieu Sanch-Maritan and Claude Duvallet, Yoann Pigne (2023), “Sold to China: Container Traffic in the Port of Piraeus”, Review of International Economics, pp. 1–35, (doi.org/10.1111/roie.12675).
Lin, Wang and Rukhsana Iftikhar (2024), “CEPC and Gwadar Port: Viabilities and Challenges”, Annals of Human and Social Sciences, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 575-581, (http://doi.org/10.35484/ahss.2024(5-II-S)54). 
Map of the Geopolitical Competition in the Indo-Pacific (2024), Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Available at: https://asia.fes.de/news/geopolitical-competition-indo-pacific.html, (Accessed on: 2/1/2025). 
Mursaliev, Araz O. (2021), "China in the SCO: History of Involvement and Interests", Social Sciences: Transformations & Transitions (JOSSTT) Vol. 1, No. 01, pp. 1-10, (doi: https://doi.org/10.52459/josstt3210101).
Norov, Vladimir (2024), “Shanghai Cooperation Organization is Playing an Important Role in Ensuring Regional Security and Stability”, Available at: https://eng.sectsco.org/20240125/1244550.html, (Accessed on: 2/1/2025).
President Vonder Leyen Marks the EU's Commitment to the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII) During the Event Hosted at the G20 in New Delhi (2023), European Commission, Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/it/ip_23_4421, (Accessed on: 4/2/2025).
Raghavan, Sharad (2025), “Middle East Crisis Could Pose an Obstacle to India-Middle East-Europe Corridor: MEA Official”, Available at: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/middle-east-crisis-could-pose-an-obstacle-to-india-middle-east-europe-corridor-mea-official/article69655968.ece, (Accessed on: 7/7/2025).
Rizzi, Alberto (2024), “The Infinite Connection: How to Make the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor Happen”, European Council on Foreign Relations, ECFR/531, pp. 1-31, Available at: https://ecfr.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-infinite-connection-How-to-make-the-India-Middle-East-Europe-economic-corridor-happen.pdf, (Accessed on: 5/2/2025).
Sarker, Nazirul, Altab Hossin, Xiaohua Yin and Kamruzzaman Sarker (2018), “One Belt One Road Initiative of China: Implication for Future of Global Development”, Modern Economy, Vol. 9.  No. 4. pp. 623-638, (doi: 10.4236/me.2018.94040).
Sauvignon, Fanny and Benaglia, Stefania (2024), “An India-Middle East-Europe Corridor for Peace: The EU’s Role in Transforming a Grand Announcement into an Inclusive Forum”, the European Union, Policy Brief, No. 136. pp. 1-8. Available at: https://www.euromesco.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Policy-Brief-N%C2%BA136.pdf. (Accessed on: 3/1/2025).
Shao, Yuqun (2008), “The EU’s Central Asia Policy and its Implications for China”, Bonn: DIE, 2008. – (Discussion Paper / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik; 9/2008), pp. 1-35, Available at: https://www.idos-research.de/uploads/media/DP_9.2008.pdf. (Accessed on: 11/2/2025).
Shreeves, Rosamund, Angelos Delivorias and Anna Caprile (2024), “The EU Strategy on Central Asia: Towards a New Momentum?” European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS), Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2024/762300/EPRS_BRI(2024)762300_EN.pdf. (Accessed on: 3/2/2025).
 Snyder, Glenn H (2002), “Mearsheimer’s World-Offensive Realism and the Struggle for Security”, International Security, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 149–173, Available at:  https://muse.jhu.edu/article/14393/summary (Accessed on: 2/7/2025).
Tanchum, Michael (2021), India’s Arab-Mediterranean Corridor: A Paradigm Shift in Strategic Connectivity to Europe, Singapore: Institute of South Asian Studies National University of Singapore, Available at: https://www.isas.nus.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/South-Asia-Scan-Aug-2021-V4.pdf. (Accessed on: 2/7/2025).
Teekah, Ethan (2025), “Indo-Pacific Maritime Region, Indian and Pacific Oceans”, Available at: https://www.britannica.com/place/Indo-Pacific, (Accessed on: 15/2/2025).
The US' Bid to Take on China with the New IMEC Transit Corridor leaves Regional Powers Jockeying for Influence, but will it Actually be Used? (2023), Middle East Eye, Available at: https://www.middleeasteye.net/big-story/india-middle-east-trade-corridor-region-jockeying-influence, (Accessed on: 4/2/2025). 
Toft, Peter (2005), “John J. Mearsheimer: An Offensive Realist between Geopolitics and Power”, International Relations and Development, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 381-408,
(doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jird.1800065).
Toghrul, Ali (2024), “European and International Financial Institutions to Invest $10 Billion in the Middle Corridor”, Available at: https://www.caspianpolicy.org/research/economy/european-and-international-financial-institutions-to-invest-10-billion-in-the-middle-corridor, (Accessed on: 9/2/2025).
Valenza, Domenico, Elke Boers and Alessandra Cappelletti (2022), “Between the EU, Russia and China: Cultural Diplomacy Competition in Central Asia: The European Union, China and Central Asia: Global and Regional Cooperation in a New Era, pp. 200-220, (doi: 10.4324/9781003022336-11).
Vandermeeren, Frank (2024), “Understanding EU-China exposure”, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, (doi: 10.2873/425398), Available at: https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2024-01/EconomicBrief_4_ETBD_23_004ENN_V2.pdf (Accessed on: 2/7/2025).
Winn, Neil and Stefan Ganzle (2023), “Recalibrating EU Foreign Policy Vis-à-vis Central Asia: Towards Principled Pragmatism and Resilience”, Geopolitics, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 1342-1361, (doi: 10.1080/14650045.2022.2042260).
Weitz, Richard (2025), “Sino-Russian Interactions Regarding the Shanghai Cooperation Organization”, Hudson Institute, Available at:  https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/media.hudson.org/Sino-Russian+Interactions+Regarding+the+Shanghai+Cooperation+Organization+-+Richard+Weitz.pdf. (Accessed on: 28/7/2025).
Xichao, Yu (2014), “China’s Rise in Central Asia Implications for EU Interests”, European Institute for Asian Studies, rue de la Loi 67, B-1040 Brussels, Belgium, pp. 3-7, Available at: https://www.eias.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/EU-Asia-at-a-glance-Yu_Xichao-China-Central-Asia.pdf. (Accessed on: 21/2/2025).
Zhao, Pieter W. G. and Sayed Mahdi Munadi (2023), “The Role of Gwadar in China’s Maritime Strategy: A Geostrategic Dialogue between Mahan and Mackinder”, Comparative Strategy, Vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 489-508, (doi.org/10.1080/01495933.2023.2219192).