Development-oriented regionalism and its practice

Liu Zongyi    source：Pakistan OBSERVER

China launched the “Belt and Road Initiative” (BRI) in 2013. To date, it has achieved considerable success while also encountering numerous challenges. In response to the achievements of the BRI, US, Indian, and Western governments and scholars have expressed significant surprise and concern. They have attempted to explain it using familiar theories and sought ways to counterbalance and overcome the BRI. The two most popular Western explanations are “Competitive Regionalism” and “Developmental Geopolitics.”

“Competitive Regionalism” emphasizes mutual competition and institutional exclusivity among different regional cooperation mechanisms. Some Western scholars, andIndian scholars, utilize this theory to analyze the BRI, arguing that the BRI constructs a “new regional network centered on China” through infrastructure and financial cooperation, forming institutional competition with Western-dominated regional structures.

“Developmental Geopolitics,” by contrast, is a theory that views development cooperation as a tool for geopolitical competition, contending that China pursues geopolitical influence expansion through the BRI using economic means. Western scholars and Indian scholars argue that China’s investments and infrastructure initiatives through the BRI aim not only at economic benefits but also at reshaping the Euro-Asian geopolitical landscape, with the BRI serving as an economic tool for China to secure geopolitical strategic space.

On the Chinese side, in recent years, some scholars have defined the BRI as a development-oriented regional economic cooperation mechanism, forming a clear theoretical distinction from the Western mainstream theories of “Developmental Geopolitics” and “Competitive Regionalism.” This distinction not only reflects differences in understanding the essence of regional cooperation against different civilizational backgrounds but also embodies ideological competition between emerging economies and existing hegemonic powers in shaping the international order. I believe this theoretical explanation by Chinese scholars can be termed “Development-Oriented Regionalism.”

Compared with Western Regionalism Theories, we can find:

Development-Oriented Regionalism Theory is A New Paradigm Centered on Common Development. Compared with existing rule-oriented regional cooperation mechanisms, the BRI exhibits development-oriented characteristics. This core characteristic lies in placing economic development before institutional rules, adopting a pragmatic approach of “cooperation first, rules later.” Specifically, development-oriented regionalism theory has four prominent features:

First, openness and inclusivity. It does not set strict entry thresholds, allowing countries at different development levels to participate, with consultation, joint construction, and shared benefits. This contrasts sharply with traditional exclusive regional integration.

Second is its development priority principle. The development orientation of the BRI determines its adherence to the principle of “doing first, establishing rules later.” In other words, rules are formulated according to the needs of deepened cooperation. This principle reflects profound insight into the practical needs of developing countries.

Third, diversified mechanism design. This theory accommodates various forms of cooperation such as free trade zones, sub-regional cooperation, and economic corridors, reflecting the flexibility of institutional arrangements.

Fourth, a correct perspective on righteousness and interests. It emphasizes “balancing righteousness with interests,” pursuing mutually beneficial outcomes rather than zero-sum games, embodying the Chinese civilization value of “harmony while preserving differences.”

While Western Developmental Geopolitics theory views development cooperation as a strategic tool for achieving geopolitical objectives. It emphasizes the strategic instrumentality of development assistance and economic cooperation, extending political influence through economic means. Western initiatives such as the “Global Gateway” initiative and the Global Infrastructure Plan both embody the theoretical logic of treating development as a geopolitical tool.

And, Competitive Regionalism theory emphasizes institutional competition and rule orientation among different regionalism mechanisms, characterized by exclusivity. High-standard rule systems objectively exclude certain countries from participation. From the perspective of competitive regionalism theory, regionalism can serve as either a “building block” or a “stumbling block” for multilateralism, depending on its degree of openness.

There are also Differences in Value Orientation, Implementation Pathways, and Governance Concepts Among Three Theories

Fundamental Divergence in Value Orientation

Development-oriented regionalism theory takes “development” as its core value, emphasizing the concept of “community of shared destiny for mankind,” embodying the Chinese civilization’s value pursuit of “universal harmony.” Developmental Geopolitics theory is power-oriented, embodying the core logic of Western realist international relations theory. Competitive Regionalism theory centers on “rules,” emphasizing the importance of institutional arrangements, reflecting the Western liberal institutionalist theoretical tradition.

Strategic Differences in Implementation Pathways

Regarding implementation pathways, development-oriented regionalism theory adopts a gradual model of “cooperation first, rules later,” emphasizing the progressive perfection of rule systems through cooperative practice, consonant with the practical conditions of developing countries. Western Developmental Geopolitics theory selects cooperation partners based on alliance relationships and geopolitical considerations. Competitive Regionalism theory, conversely, adheres to the institutional pathway of “rules first, cooperation later,” ensuring the “qualification” of participating countries through high thresholds.

Institutional Design: Inclusivity versus Exclusivity

Development-oriented regionalism theory demonstrates high inclusivity, particularly opening participation opportunities to least developed countries and developing countries, contrasting sharply with the exclusivity of Competitive Regionalism theory and the selective inclusivity of Developmental Geopolitics theory.

Although Development-oriented regionalism theory is more suitable for the needs of developing countries, including South Asia,we must acknowledge that Western regionalism theory has long occupied the dominant position in international academic discourse since the end of the Cold War. However, existing Western theories have obvious limitations in explaining regional cooperation practices among developing countries. Traditional rule-oriented regionalism theory cannot adequately adapt to the actual needs of developing countries; its high thresholds and complex rule systems objectively exclude many developing countries from participation opportunities. Developing countries need regional cooperation mechanisms that can promote economic development and narrow development gaps. The achievements of the “Belt and Road” initiative demonstrate that this initiative has significantly promoted economic scale expansion and total factor productivity improvement in countries along the BRI. I think that scholars from China and South Asian countries should work together to surpass Western centrism and construct a regionalism theory that is truly suitable for the global South.

In recent years, China has actively constructed multi-level, multi-sectoral cooperation mechanisms with South Asian and Indian Ocean countries to promote regional economic integration, poverty reduction, and sustainable development, shaping a new regionalism paradigm consistent with the interests of developing countries. These mechanisms include: the China-South Asia Cooperation Forum (CSACF), the China-South Asia Forum on Poverty Reduction and Development Cooperation, the China-Indian Ocean Region Forum on Blue Economy Development Cooperation. These mechanisms form an organic link with the “Belt and Road Initiative,” serving both as concrete practice of the BRI in South Asia and the Indian Ocean region and as important support for BRI.

The evolution and governance systems of these cooperation mechanisms embody the core concepts of “Development-Oriented Regionalism” theory. In the future, this series of cooperation mechanisms are expected, on the basis of deepening “cooperation first, rules later” and enhancing inclusive governance, to promote the South Asia-Indian Ocean region in forming an open regionalism framework, providing replicable institutional experience for the common prosperity of developing countries.

Beyond multilateral cooperation mechanisms, China and South Asian countries have also established the China-Pakistan-Afghanistan trilateral foreign ministers’ mechanism. This year, the China-Bangladesh-Pakistan trilateral cooperation mechanism has also taken preliminary shape. This institutional innovation breaks through South Asia’s traditional limitations of bilateral and multilateral cooperation, providing strategic support for the three countries to jointly address modernization challenges through non-confrontational cooperation agenda design, and trying to establish a new paradigm for South Asian regional cooperation. China and South Asia are connected by mountains and rivers, and China considers itself a part of South Asia. China hopes to work together with South Asian countries to reshape the South Asia-Indian Ocean regional cooperation landscape through institutional provision.