Penetration in Target Areas: A Comparison of the Chinese and Russian Worlds

Articles in Press

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran

10.22059/jcep.2026.389897.450300

Abstract

Introduction: China and Russia, as key players in the evolving international System, are seeking to expand their influence by uniting against the current order. One of the most important forms of this expansion of influence is their influence in various regions to create coalitions and increase their ability to act. The aim of this study is to examine the nature of Chinese and Russian influence and the methods they use to achieve it. The research main question is: What forms of power and tools do China and Russia use to influence target regions? The research hypothesis is that differences in worldviews between China and Russia have led to different approaches to exerting influence. This difference is reflected in the different tools each country uses to expand its influence in target regions. The methodology of this qualitative research and its data include library sources. The findings suggest that China's influence is achieved primarily through a combination of structural and symbolic power. In line with this approach, Beijing uses a variety of tactics, including investment, normalization and institutional membership, to strenghten its influence. In contrast, Russia's influence is based on coercive power, exerted through military mechanisms, pressure, energy and media narratives.
Introduction: China and Russia, as two major global actors, seek to expand their spheres of influence based on a shared opposition to the Western-Centric international order. However, despite this convergence in strategic ambition, their underlying methods, tools and worldviews are fundamentally different. China’s approach to influence is rooted in its economic and cultural superiority, characterized by persuasion, institutional participation and long-term interdependence. In contrast, Russia continues to emphasize coercive power through military, political and energy-based means. Understanding the nature and mechanisms of their influence in target regions provides important insights into the reconfiguration of power in today's complex multipolar order. This study examines the nature of China's and Russia's influence strategies, identifying their underlying forms of power and the tools they employ to achieve influence.
     Research question: The main question guiding this study is: on what forms of power and through which means is Chinese and Russian influence in the target regions based?
Research hypothesis: The study assumes that the divergence between the Chinese and Russian worldviews, rooted in their respective strategic cultures, has led to distinct manifestations of power and consequently, different sets of influence tools.
Methodology: Adopting a qualitative comparative approach, combining descriptive and explanatory analysis, this study examines the similarities and differences between Chinese and Russian influence strategies. Data were collected through extensive document analysis, including academic journals, policy articles, international reports and official documents in both digital and printed forms. The comparative method employed here goes beyond simple description; it identifies causal relationships between cultural perceptions of power and the choice of instruments in each country’s foreign policy.
Results and discussion: Influenced by the principles of Tianxia and Confucian harmony, China’s worldview promotes coexistence, mutual benefit and multilateral cooperation. It rejects rigid divisions between “us” and “them” and instead envisions a shared global future based on balance and reciprocity. On the other hand, Russia’s worldview is rooted in historical insecurity and shaped by a long-standing sense of confrontation with the West. Moscow’s strategic culture prioritizes power, control and deterrence, interpreting international politics as a zero-sum arena in which security can only be maintained through dominance and resistance. This divergence in worldview explains why China’s influence strategy relies on absorption and integration, while Russia’s relies on coercion and pressure. China extends its influence primarily through institutional engagement and normative appeal rather than military coercion. It promotes the “Chinese model” of governance, which combines economic development and political stability, as an alternative to Western liberal democracy. Beijing is shaping positive perceptions of itself by investing in education, culture and international aid, presenting its rise as peaceful and mutually beneficial. Structurally, China is building long-term influence through initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative, the establishment of new financial institutions and leadership roles in multilateral organizations such as BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). These mechanisms create enduring economic and political dependencies while embedding Chinese preferences within global norms. Together, these structural and symbolic strategies enable China to expand its sphere of influence not through dominance but through integration, legitimacy and institutional influence.
Russia’s approach is in stark contrast to this, relying heavily on hard and coercive means. The country’s use of military power is evident in its interventions in Ukraine, Syria and parts of Africa, where it seeks to maintain control and exert regional dominance. Energy serves as another key element of Moscow’s influence: Russia uses its oil and gas exports to exert political pressure on dependent countries by manipulating prices and controlling supply chains. In addition, Russia uses political and media operations as a means of influence, supporting sympathetic elites, exploiting internal divisions and spreading narratives through global outlets such as Sputnik. These channels challenge Western hegemony, justify Russian actions and present an image of Russia as a major player in a multipolar world. Collectively, these tools reveal a model of influence that focuses on control, deterrence and resistance, rather than persuasion or cooperation.
In comparison, several key distinctions emerge between the two strategies. In terms of the nature of power, China’s approach is developmental and participatory, while Russia’s is coercive and security-oriented. China operates with a long-term horizon, seeking to build gradual and sustained influence through economic and institutional engagement, while Russia seeks short-term geopolitical gains achieved through assertive or disruptive tactics. China promotes economic interdependence that connects others to its markets and infrastructure projects, while Russia enforces interdependence through security and energy mechanisms that maintain leverage over its partners.
Conclusion: China’s structural-symbolic model reflects a long-term, integrated strategy rooted in soft and institutional power. Its influence is enhanced through persuasion, economic interdependence and active participation in global governance. By embedding its values and standards in international institutions, China is gradually redefining the norms of the global order to align with its interests.
Russia’s instrumental model, by contrast, is shaped by an adversarial worldview and reliance on coercive means. Its influence depends on the projection of military power, the manipulation of energy markets and the construction of strategic narratives that challenge Western dominance. Ultimately, China seeks to reshape the global order from within through normalization and absorption, while Russia aims to challenge it from without through confrontation and resistance. These two paths - one participatory and structural, the other coercive and reactive - represent the dual trajectories of power in the emerging multipolar world. Understanding these dynamics is essential for anticipating future alignments and conflicts in an increasingly fragmented international landscape where power is no longer defined solely by force, but by the capacity to shape meaning, norms and institutions.

Keywords

References

فارسی
امیدی، علی و سعیده مرادی‌فر (۱۴۰۰)، «سیر تکامل دیپلماسی عمومی مسکو از شوروی تا روسیه نوین: از جهان‏محوری به روس‏محوری»، مطالعات آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، دوره 27، شماره ۱۱۴، صص. ۳۴-۱، دسترسی در: https://ca.ipisjournals.ir/article_247321.html، (تاریخ دسترسی: 02/10/1403)
تخشید، محمدرضا و مرتضی شجاع (۱۳۹۸)، «حفظ قلمروی نفوذ: تبیینی بر سیاست خارجی روسیه در برابر بحران سوریه»، مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی، دوره 12، شماره2، صص. 309-325، (doi:10.22059/jcep.2019.269981.449810).
ترکی، هادی و ارسلان قربانی شیخ‏نشین (1398)، «چالش نظم نولیبرال و رویکرد اجماع پکن با تمرکز بر قدرت اقتصادی»، فصلنامه روابط خارجی، دوره 11، شماره 43، صص. 160-133، دسترسی در: https://frqjournal.csr.ir/article_117949.html (تاریخ دسترسی: 02/10/1403)
ثانی‏آبادی، الهام و سعید عطار و فاطمه فارسی (1398)، «بررسی سیاست خارجی روسیه براساس نظریه سیاست قدرت‏های بزرگ مرشایمر»، مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی، دوره 12، شماره 1، صص. 73-56، (doi:10.22059/jcep.2019.272203.449816).
دهقانی فیروزآبادی، سیدجلال و مهدی امیری (۱۳۹۷)، «زمینه‌یابی سه‌وجهیِ جایگاه قدرت نرم در سیاست خارجی روسیه ‏(2000-2019)‏»، سیاست جهانی، دوره 7، شماره ۴، صص. ۹۹-۱۳۲، (doi:10.22124/wp.1970.3472).
رضاپور، دانیال (1403)، «همکاری چین با آسیای مرکزی با تأکید بر هوش مصنوعی»، مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی، دوره 17، شماره 2، صص. 187-157،
(doi: 10.22059/jcep.2024.378369.450229).
زهرانی، مصطفی و صارم شیراوند (۱۳۹۶)، «بررسی تأثیر فرهنگ راهبردی بر سیاست خارجی فدراسیون روسیه»، مطالعات آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، دوره 23، شماره 97، صص. ۱۳۷-۱۰۳، دسترسی در: https://ca.ipisjournals.ir/article_24967.html (تاریخ دسترسی: 02/10/1403)
شفیعی، نوذر (۱۴۰۱)، «دیپلماسی چینی دام بدهی و کسب موقعیت هژمون»، پژوهش‏نامه ایرانی سیاست بین‏الملل، دوره 11، شماره ۱، صص. ۲۴۵-۲۱۹،
(doi: 10.22067/irlip.2022.21450.0).
صالحی، مختار و مرضیه محمدی‏نسب (1404)، «راهبرد اتحادیۀ اروپا نسبت به نفوذ چین در آسیای مرکزی»، مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی، دوره 15، شماره 1، صص. 279-257،
(doi: 10.22059/jcep.2022.323814.450004).
قربانی شیخ‏نشین، ارسلان و حمید احمدی‌نژاد (1402)، نظام بین‏الملل پساکرونا، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه خوارزمی.
کاوه، علی، قاسم ترابی و علیرضا  رضایی (1400)، «ابتکار راه ابرایشم و هژمونی چین در آسیای مرکزی»، مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی، دوره 14، شماره 1، صص 98-76،
 (doi: 10.22059/jcep.2022.325939.450012).
کرمی، جهانگیر (۱۴۰۱)، «راهبرد امنیت لویاتانی: بازتاب محیط ژئوپلیتیک در اندیشه حکمرانی روسی»، فصلنامه ژئوپلیتیک، دوره 11، شماره ۳، صص. ۳۱-۶۹، دسترسی در: https://journal.iag.ir/article_140822.html (تاریخ دسترسی: 02/10/1403)
کرمی، جهانگیر (1403)، «مکتب ژئوپلیتیک روسی: معمای پایدار آسیب‌پذیری و گسترش‌گرایی»، مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی، دوره 17، شماره 1، صص. 333-309،
 (doi: 10.22059/jcep.2024.374703.450211)
کولایی، الهه و میثم هادی پور (۱۳۹۹)، «تحلیل سیاست خارجی روسیه در قفقاز جنوبی بر پایۀ‌ ژنوژئوپلیتیک»، مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی، دوره 13، شماره ۲، صص. ۶۴۵-۶۶۴،
)doi: 10.22059/jcep.2020.204960.449646.)
 
English
Adler-Nissen, Rebecca (2013), “Symbolic power in European diplomacy”, Review of International Studies, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 657-681,
(doi: 10.1017/S0260210513000326).
Baev, Pavel K. (2020), “Transformation of Russia's Strategic Culture: Impacts from Local Wars and Global Confrontation”, Russie.Nei.Visions, 118, Paris: IFRI, pp. 1-16, Available at: https://www.prio.org/publications/12362 (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Barnett, Michael and Raymond Duvall (2005), “Power in International Politics”, International Organization, Vol. 59, No. 1, pp. 39-75, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Beeson, Mark and Fujian Li (2016), “China’s Place in Regional and Global Governance”, Global Policy, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 1-9, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Berls Jr, Robert E. (2021), “Strengthening Russia’s Influence in International Affairs, Part I: The Quest for Great Power Status”, Available at: https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/strengthening-russias-influence-in-international-affairs-part-i-the-quest-for-great-power-status/, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Buse, Dorel (2012), “The Concept of Power in International Relations”, Bulletin of "Carol I" National Defense University, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 5-12, Available at: https://revista.unap.ro/index.php/bulletin/article/view/5-12 (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Česnakas, Giedrius (2016), “Energy Resources as the Tools of Foreign Policy: the Case of Russia”, Lithuanian Foreign Policy Review, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 9-40, (doi: 10.1515/lfpr-2016-0022)
Chen, Yu Ting and Charles Wu (2025), “Beyond Missiles and Trade: China’s Use of Cultural Ties to Influence Taiwan”, the Diplomat, 11 January, Available at: https://thediplomat.com/2025/01/beyond-missiles-and-trade-chinas-use-of-cultural-ties-to-influence-taiwan/, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Duggan, Niall and Marcin Grabowski (2021), “The Influence of Covid-19 on the Power Transition between the United States and China: The Case of Southeast Asia”, Irish Studies in International Affairs, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 83-102, (doi:10.1353/isia.2021.0047).
European Parliament (2018), Energy as a Tool of Foreign Policy of Authoritarian States, in Particular Russia, Belgium: Publications Office of the European Union, Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/603868/EXPO_STU(2018)603868_EN.pdf (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Ezeanyika, S., I. Opurum, E. Ibekwe and J. Adigwe (2024), “China’s Economic Diplomacy and Soft Power Strategy”, Administratio Publica, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 202-226, Available at:  https://journals.co.za/doi/pdf/10.61967/adminpub.2024.32.3.11 (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Forsberg, Tuomas (2011), “Power in International Relations: An Interdisciplinary Perspective”, pp. 207-227, in: P. Aalto, V. Harle, and S. Moisio (eds.), International Studies: Interdisciplinary Approaches (Palgrave Studies in International Relations), London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Galeotti, Mark (2022), Putin's Wars: From Chechnya to Ukraine, Oxford: Osprey Publishing.
Götz, Elias and Jørgen Staun (2022), “Why Russia Attacked Ukraine: Strategic Culture and Radicalized Narratives”, Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 482-497, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Guaschi, Eleonora (2024), “Know Thy Enemy: Understanding China’s Worldview”, Modern Diplomacy, Available at: https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2024/06/12/know-thy-enemy-understanding-chinas-worldview/, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Gubaidullina, M. Sh. and S.A. Insebayeva (2013), “The Concept of Power in International Relations: Basic Approaches, the Analysis, and Interpretation”, International Relations and International Law Series, Vol. 2, No. 62, pp. 83-87, Available at: https://bulletin-ir-law.kaznu.kz/index.php/1-mo/article/view/315 (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Gwynn, Maria A. (2019), “Structural Power and International Regimes”, Journal of Political Power, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 200-223,
 (doi: 10.1080/2158379X.2019.1618486).
Hart, Jeffrey (1976), “Three Approaches to the Measurement of Power in International Relations”, International Organization, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 289-305, (doi: 10.1017/S00208183000182820).
Helmus, Todd C. (2018), Russian Social Media Influence Understanding Russian Propaganda in Eastern Europe, California: Published RAND Corporation.
Ho, Benjamin (2021), China’s Political Worldview and Chinese Exceptionalism: International Order and Global Leadership, Amsterdam, Amsterdam University: Publisher Colophon.
Huotari, Jussi (2011), Energy Policy and (Energy Security) as a Part of Russian Foreign Policy, Nordia Geographical Publications, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 121-132, Available at: https://nordia.journal.fi/article/view/75955 (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Ikenberry, John G. (2014), The Rise of China and the Future of Liberal World Order, Douglas Dillon Lecture Transcript, Chatham House, pp. 1-9, Available at: https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/field/field_document/20140507RiseofChina.pdf (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Karlsen, Geir Hågen (2019), “Divide and Rule: Ten Lessons about Russian Political Influence Activities in Europe”, Palgrave Communications, Vol. 5, No. 19, pp. 1-14, (doi: 10.1057/s41599-019-0227-8).
Macikenaite, Vida (2020), “China’s Economic Statecraft: The Use of Economic Power in an Interdependent World”, Journal of Contemporary East Asia Studies, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 108-126, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
National Defense University (n.d), “Russia Military Power”, Available at: https://keystone.ndu.edu/Portals/86/Russia%20Military%20Power%20-%20MAJ%20Swanton.pdf, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Nordin, Astrid and Graham Smith (2019), “Relating Self and Other in Chinese and Western Thought”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol. 32, No. 5, pp. 636-653, (doi:10.1080/09557571.2019.1576160).
Orlicka, Jana (2016), “Strategic Culture as an Important Way of Security”, Kultura Bezpieczeństwa, Vol. 21, No. 21, pp. 193-209, Available at: https://kulturabezpieczenstwa.publisherspanel.com/article/122699/en (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Pape, Robert A. (2005), “Soft Balancing against the United States”, International Security, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 7-45, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Paradis, Joseph (2018), Putin’s Use of Hard Power as Foreign Policy, General Note, Toronto: Canadian Forces College, https://www.cfc.forces.gc.ca/259/290/402/305/paradis.pdf (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Paszak, Paweł (2020), “China’s Growing Influence in International Organizations”, Warsaw Institute, Available at: http//warsawinstitute.org/chinas-growing-influence-international-organizations/, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Peters, Michael A. (2023), “The Emerging Multipolar World Order: A Preliminary Analysis”, Educational Philosophy and Theory, Vol. 55, No. 14, pp. 1653-1663, (doi:10.1080/00131857.2022.2151896).
Rahman, Saifur (2019), “China’s Foreign Policy and Its Choice for Cultural Soft Power: The Tools”, Social Change Review, Vol. 1, No. 17, pp. 90-115, (doi:10.2478/scr-2019-0003).
Ranjbar, Daniyal, Saken M. Mukan, and Aigul Niyazgulova (2024), “Central Asia Center Gas Pipeline System: Challenges and Opportunities for Modern Russia- Central Asia Energy Relations, Vestnik RUDN, International Relations, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 216-226, (doi:10.22363/2313-0660-2024-24-2-216-226)
Rossbach, Niklas H. (2018), the Geopolitics of Russian Energy, Stockholm: FOI.
Rumer, Eugene and Richard Sokolsky (2020), “The Building Blocks of Russian Strategic Culture”, in Eugene Rumer and Richard Sokolsky, Etched in Stone: Russian Strategic Culture and the Future of Transatlantic Security, pp. 1-36, Massachusetts: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Available at: https://assets.production.carnegie.fusionary.io/static/files/files__Russian_Strategic_Culture_Rumer_Sokolsky.pdf (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Sagild, Rebekka Åsnes and Christopher Hsiung (2024), “Chinese Re-Examinations of Russia? The Strategic Partnership in the Wake of Russia’s War Against Ukraine”, Journal of Contemporary China, Vol. 34, No. 155, pp. 1-16, (doi:10.1080/10670564.2024.2358876).
Shaheen, Salma (2023), “The Russia-Ukraine War through the Lens of Strategic Culture: Implications for South Asia”, Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 75, No. 2, pp. 247-264, Available at: link.gale.com/apps/doc/A762990154/AONE?u=anon~94dad8f0&sid=sitemap&xid=e8a1fd26 (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Szeptycki, Andrzej (2007), “Russian Policy Towards Ukraine: Tools of Influence”, The Polish Quarterly of International Affairs, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 68-93, Available at: https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=152055 (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Vangeli, Anastas (2018), “Global China and Symbolic Power: The Case of 16 + 1 Cooperation”, Journal of Contemporary China, Vol. 27, No. 113, pp. 674-687, (doi:10.1080/10670564.2018.1458056).
Visual Capitalist (2020), “How China Overtook the U.S. as the World’s Major Trading Partner”, Available at: https://www.newcapitalmgmt.com/news/how-china-overtook-the-us-as-the-worlds-major-trading-partner, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Vuving, Alexander (2009), “How Soft Power Works”, American Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Toronto, pp. 1-19, Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1466220, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Wang, Xiaolong, (2022), “The Embassy of the People's Republic of China in New Zealand (Cook Islands, Niue)”, Available at: http://nz.china-embassy.gov.cn/zxgx/202211/t20221115_10975033.htm, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Wiltenburg, Ivor (2020), “The Importance of Understanding Russian Strategic Culture”, Atlantisch Perspectief, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 7-12, Available at:  https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/48600538, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
World Economics (2025), “Russia’s Negligible GDP Growth Contrasts Sharply with China’s Massive Advance”, Available at: https://www.worldeconomics.com/Thoughts/Chinas-GDP-Growth-Leaves-Other-BRICs-Member-Russia-Standing.aspx, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Wu, Bin, Shujie Yao and Jian Chen (2013), China's Development and Harmonization: Towards a Balance with Nature, Society and the International Community, London: Routledge.‏
Zakem, V., P. Saunders, U. Hashimova and P. K. Frier (2017), “Mapping Russian Media Network: Media’s Role in Russian Foreign Policy and Decision-Making”, Center for Naval Analyses, Available at: https://www.cna.org/reports/2018/01/mapping-russian-media-network, (Accessed on: 22/12/2024).
Central Eurasia Studies

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 24 May 2026

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics