Geoeconomic rivalry in Central Asia: China’s belt and road initiative, the 2025 United States National Security Strategy, and Kazakhstan’s hedging

D.M. Turtugulova, Guldana Baktiyarova, Dina Aikenova, K.U. Maigeldinov

2026

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.3389/fpos.2026.1839540
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Introduction Central Asia has once again become strategically important for an increasingly fragmented international system in which external entities are no longer militarily dominant. Instead, external influences are projected via economy, infrastructure, and other indirect means. This study aims to examine how China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the United States’ strategic response, as articulated in the U.S. National Security Strategy 2025, are reshaping geopolitical and economic dynamics in Central Asia and influencing the regional balance of power. Methods To achieve this objective, the study employs a mixed-methods research design combining qualitative analysis of policy documents with descriptive statistical analysis of trade and foreign direct investment data obtained from UN Comtrade, UNCTADstat, and country-specific sources. The findings suggest that, via the BRI, Central Asian economies are becoming structurally embedded into Chinese-centered logistics, energy, and trade networks, thereby generating asymmetric interdependence and long-term structural influence across the region. Results The analysis further demonstrates that the U.S. approach, which primarily emphasizes commercial partnerships, governance standards, and adherence to international norms, provides only a partial counterbalance to China’s infrastructure-intensive and connectivity-driven strategy. In contrast to the U.S. model, China’s investment approach creates large-scale physical and economic lock-in effects across Eurasia. Kazakhstan emerges as a particularly illustrative case of strategic hedging, simultaneously deepening economic cooperation with China while expanding trade relations with multiple international partners in order to preserve strategic autonomy and maintain a multi-vector foreign policy. Discussion The study concludes that Central Asia should be understood not as a space of bipolar domination, but rather as a region of competitive cohabitation among major powers. Future regional outcomes will depend on the ability of Central Asian governments to diversify external partnerships, manage asymmetric dependencies, and leverage their strategic position as transit states and suppliers of critical resources within an evolving contested Eurasian trade network.