Dr. Manoj Kewalramani, Chairperson of the Indo-Pacific Studies Programme at the Takshashila Institution, Bengaluru, delivered a talk on the “Changing Nature of China’s Peripheral Diplomacy”, during the Monday Morning Meeting on 13 October 2025. The talk was moderated by Dr. Prashant Kumar Singh, Research Fellow and Centre Coordinator, East Asia Centre MP-IDSA. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA and the Institute’s scholars participated in the discussion.

Detailed Report

Dr. Prashant Kumar Singh, in his introductory remarks noted the context of the topic. He observed that in October 2013, Beijing had organised a work conference on Peripheral Diplomacy. More than a decade later, in April 2025, the Central Conference on Work Related to Neighboring Countries was held in Beijing. This transformation from an adhoc to calendar event reflects the increasing importance of the neighbourhood in China’s larger diplomatic strategy. Further, it also indicates towards the growing interlinkage between China’s neighbourhood diplomacy and major-power diplomacy.

Following Dr. Singh’s remarks, Dr. Kewalramani made his presentation. He noted that the April 2025 Central Conference on Work Related to Neighboring Countries had created considerable speculation regarding Beijing’s approach towards its periphery and its diplomatic strategy. Deliberating on China’s perception of its periphery, Dr. Kewalramani noted that China sees the periphery as important for achieving development and prosperity. While previously, the Chinese leadership saw the periphery as an important, but not necessarily the central factor in their diplomacy. In recent years, the periphery has come to rank higher than major powers and Beijing now sees the neighbourhood as key not only for safeguarding national security but also for managing major power relations. The Speaker emphasised that within Chinese foreign policy discourse, the logic of managing periphery for better management of major power relations has become the predominant thinking. He noted that the changed perception of the neighbourhood reflects China’s increasing stake in its immediate neighbourhood and also its expanding periphery. Thereby, we are likely to witness a surge in active diplomacy from China in the region.

Dr. Kewalramani observed that the rhetoric of building a community of common destiny is part of the diplomatic outreach to the neighbourhood. Besides, the various initiatives like the Global Civilisation Initiative (GCI), Global Development Initiative (GDI), Global Security Initiative (GSI) and Global Governance Initiative (GGI) are well thought out programmes to not only engage the international community but also the region. He noted that the primary objective is to bind the neighbouring countries to China not only through economic diplomacy but also through people to people exchanges. The Chinese leadership perceives that while China has been successful in engaging the elites across the world, it needs to engage the public to gain a favourable public perception. This logic also applies to the neighbourhood where we see significant public engagement efforts through Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and other platforms. Dr. Kewalramani observed that while the structure of the BRI has shifted from infrastructure to energy, it continues to be an important platform. He also briefly discussed Chinese strategy to build an Asian Security model which extends beyond traditional defence issues to encompass macroeconomic security, network and cyber security and monetary fraud among others.

Shifting to China’s perception of the periphery Dr. Kewalramani noted that Beijing has adopted an expansive view of the neighbourhood whereby Ukraine is also considered part of the periphery. Further, the leadership considers that in an era when global challenges are likely to impact the region more than it did in the past, China would have to formulate a more focused policy towards the region.  The United States’ increasing presence in the Chinese neighbourhood is also a major concern which in Beijing’s view has to be countered with an integrated policy of engagement with the region. With regard to Chinese foreign policy towards the neighbouring countries, he contended that while China aims to bring the neighbouring countries within the ambit of overwhelming domination, it also intends to cultivate deference and at worst neutrality. Towards the end of his presentation, the Speaker concluded that as China is endeavouring to integrate the neighbouring countries more closely to its economic and diplomatic system, it is looking into regional dynamics and inventing new platforms to enhance cooperation.

The Director General’s Remarks

Following Dr. Kewalramani’s presentation, DG, MP-IDSA, Amb. Sujan R. Chinoy, observed that China has always been concerned with its periphery and neighbourhood and this highlights China’s own anxiety over encirclement on the one hand and its own policy of containment against its neighbours. There is a very distinct past in China’s history when they wanted to keep away the barbarians from Central Asia and the Steppes and that is why the Great Wall of China was built. This has shaped China’s diplomacy and world view of its neighbourhood since then including the Wei Qi principle, the containment and encirclement concepts. China has been at the receiving end and has also exercised its choices in this regard, including in South Asia today.

After 1949, the neighbourhood in that same vein assumed extremely high priority in China’s security policies. Besides, China’s colonial experience also shaped Chinese perception of its periphery. He observed that when one looks at the 1960s, Mao was very enthusiastic in supporting the so-called communist revolutions, primarily in the periphery – the Indonesians, the Malaysians, the Thai – everybody was at the receiving end. This also went as far as Africa in terms of supporting the revolution there. In the next decade, China went in for its modernisation in 1979, the Open Door Policy began with its periphery. One must keep in mind that the earliest investments that came into China, whether from states like Japan or Korea or Singapore or Hong Kong were all on China’s periphery. The overseas Chinese population was located in China’s periphery. They were crucial in terms of fuelling China’s modernisation programme and Open Door policy. Today, one can see that China is broadly trying to make the region a part of its own concept – the flying geese formation – with China in the lead and rest of the region  flocking  behind in a manner which is conducive to the region’s own economic development.

No great power has emerged without there being some kind of regional consensus on its emergence. China is particularly keen to implement this concept. This is being manifested in many ways in the Belt and the Road Initiative (BRI). Amb. Chinoy contended that without the BRI succeeding in China’s neighbourhood, there was no question of expanding to the greater extended neighbourhood, be it Eurasia or the heart of Europe. In China’s case, the concept of neighbourhood is expanding very rapidly. This redefinition takes it across to South China Sea, East China Sea or as far away as Palau in the Pacific, French Polynesia and Micronesia – where China is rubbing shoulders with the French but also in South Asia where it rubs up against India’s definition of neighbourhood and the extended neighbourhood China’s expanding sphere of influence must be studied more in detail.

Amb. Chinoy contended that one should draw similarities with the Mandala principle of Chanakya because Chanakya had said that one cannot be Chakravartin unless one subdues or dominates its neighbours. There is a very big parallel between Chanakya’s teaching and Xi Jinping’s own definition of China as a Middle Kingdom. Notably, “peripheral work” instead of “peripheral diplomacy” indicates a whole of government approach. This is something which needs to be studied very carefully. However, we must keep in mind that it is not all success for China in its periphery. When Trump claims to have brokered peace between Thailand and Cambodia, it is a setback to China’s regional diplomacy because of the acute interdependencies China has created in the region. He concluded, stating that it remains to be seen how China will respond to Trump’s claims of mediation between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Q&A Session

During the Q&A session, the scholars posed various questions to the Speaker. It was asked whether due to Beijing’s expansive view of the neighbourhood, China will treat the territories between the US and China as part of the wider neighbourhood that need to be brought under Chinese control. The Speaker was also probed about Chinese perception of priorities and success in its neighbourhood work and the alignment between Chinese private enterprises and Beijing’s geostrategic and economic interests. Further, questions were raised with regard to the challenges posed by the Chinese conception of the core and periphery to the Heartland theory by Halford Mackinder.

The Speaker responded by stating that the approach differs according to the region. He reiterated that with regard to immediate periphery, China intends to connect these countries closely to its own regime stability, while with Europe and further regions the objective is to ensure neutrality in an event of China-US conflict. He also noted that China no longer intends to capture territories but subdue them to Chinese interests. Also, in terms of periphery work China imagines its neighbourhood in concentric circles reflecting different challenges to China’s security.

Report prepared by Ms. Mayuri Banerjee, Research Analyst, East Asia Centre, MP-IDSA, New Delhi.