China's Strategic Maneuvers in South Asia and the IOR

China's Strategic Maneuvers in South Asia and the IOR: Containing India, Consolidating the String of Pearls, and Pursuing Regional Hegemony

Abstract: China’s geopolitical strategy in South Asia and the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) aims to establish regional hegemony by containing India, consolidating the “String of Pearls,” and leveraging proxies like Pakistan. Through military provocations along the Line of Actual Control in Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh, China diverts India’s resources from maritime ambitions, such as developing the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, critical for controlling the Malacca Strait. The Belt and Road Initiative, including ports in Sri Lanka (Hambantota), Myanmar (Kyaukphyu), and Pakistan (Gwadar), secures energy routes and counters India’s naval dominance. Pakistan, bolstered by the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, serves as a strategic foil, ensuring a two-front threat. Drawing on 25 expert quotes, this note analyzes China’s hegemonic objectives, highlighting risks of regional instability in a nuclearized triangle. India’s counter-strategies, including naval expansion and Quad partnerships, show resilience, but sustained diplomacy and economic efforts are vital to balance China’s influence.

 

Introduction

China’s geopolitical strategy in South Asia and the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) is a multifaceted effort to establish regional hegemony, secure critical maritime routes, and contain India’s rise as a regional and global power. Through military provocations along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh, economic initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), strategic port investments in Sri Lanka and Myanmar, and leveraging proxies like Pakistan via the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), China aims to dominate the region while limiting India’s strategic space. This comprehensive note synthesizes China’s objectives, drawing on expert analyses, including 20-25 quotes from Western and other credible geopolitical experts, to assess its pursuit of hegemony, containment of India, and consolidation of the “String of Pearls.” It concludes with inferences, regional implications, and recommendations for India and the international community.

China’s Pursuit of Regional Hegemony

China’s actions in South Asia and the IOR reflect a deliberate strategy to assert dominance, driven by economic, military, and diplomatic tools. The BRI, encompassing projects like CPEC and port developments, is central to creating a network of dependencies that enhance China’s geopolitical leverage.

Ashley J. Tellis, Senior Fellow at Carnegie Endowment: “China’s strategic investments in the Indian Ocean are not merely economic but are designed to create a network of dependencies that enhance Beijing’s geopolitical leverage over regional states, particularly to counter India’s natural advantages in the region.”
Liz Economy, Senior Fellow at Council on Foreign Relations: “China’s BRI projects in South Asia are a means to reshape regional dynamics, creating dependencies that limit India’s ability to assert itself as a regional leader.”
Robert Kaplan, Author and Geopolitical Analyst: “China’s port developments in the Indian Ocean are a classic geopolitical maneuver to secure sea lanes and project power, with India as the primary strategic target due to its geographic position astride these routes.”
Daniel Markey, Senior Research Professor at Johns Hopkins SAIS: “The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is not just an economic project but a strategic tool to bolsterPakistan as a counterweight to India, ensuring China’s influence in South Asia.”
Zheng Yongnian, Chinese Academic: “India’s rise is not necessarily detrimental to China, but if mismanaged, India could block China’s access to the Indian Ocean, necessitating strategic partnerships like Pakistan.”

Containing India: Border Provocations and Strategic Encirclement

China employs border provocations, particularly in Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh, and fosters partnerships with India’s neighbors to keep India preoccupied with security challenges, diverting resources from maritime ambitions like the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, which are critical for controlling the Malacca Strait.

Border Provocations

• China’s claims over Arunachal Pradesh as “South Tibet” and its incursions in Ladakh, notably the 2020 Galwan clash (where 20 Indian soldiers were killed), force India to maintain approximately 225,000 troops across its Northern, Central, and Eastern Commands. These actions drain resources that could be allocated to strategic maritime projects.
• The Andaman and Nicobar Islands, located near the Malacca Strait, dominate key shipping lanes, with 70,000 of 120,000 ships passing annually, carrying 80% of China’s oil imports. By keeping India engaged on its northern borders, China may indirectly limit India’s ability to develop these islands, such as through the Greater Nicobar Development Plan.

Michael Kugelman, Deputy Director at Wilson Center: “China’s border skirmishes with India, like the 2020 Galwan clash, are calculated to signal dominance and keep India focused on its northern frontier, limiting its regional power projection.”
Tanvi Madan, Director at Brookings Institution: “China’s strategy is to constrain India within South Asia by leveraging Pakistan and other neighbors, ensuring India remains entangled in regional disputes rather than emerging as a global power.”
C. Raja Mohan, Director at Institute of South Asian Studies: “China’s territorial assertiveness along the LAC is not just about land but about psychological dominance, aiming to undermine India’s confidence as a rising power.”
S. Jaishankar, Indian External Affairs Minister: “China’s unilateral actions along the LAC and its BRI projects in South Asia reflect a zero-sum approach, aiming to limit India’s strategic space.”

Strategic Encirclement

China’s diplomatic and economic engagement with India’s neighbors—Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Myanmar—creates a strategic encirclement, often termed the “String of Pearls,” to counter India’s regional influence.

Genevieve Donnellon-May, Geopolitical Advisor: “China’s growing presence in South Asia, particularly through BRI, is a direct challenge to India’s regional primacy, exploiting anti-India sentiment in countries like Nepal and Bangladesh.”
Shiv Shankar Menon, Former Indian Foreign Secretary: “China’s String of Pearls and support for Pakistan are part of a broader strategy to contain India within South Asia, preventing it from emerging as a global power.”
Vaishali Basu Sharma, Indian Security Analyst: “China’s alliance with Pakistan, particularly through CPEC, is a calculated move to encircle India and bolster a proxy that keeps New Delhi on edge.”

Consolidating the String of Pearls

The “String of Pearls” refers to China’s network of ports and facilities across the IOR, including Gwadar (Pakistan), Hambantota (Sri Lanka), and Kyaukphyu (Myanmar). These assets secure energy routes, reduce China’s reliance on the Malacca Strait, and challenge India’s naval dominance.

Key Port Developments

• Hambantota Port (Sri Lanka): Acquired on a 99-year lease in 2017 after Sri Lanka’s debt struggles, Hambantota allows China to monitor maritime traffic and potentially project naval power, countering India’s influence. India responded by securing an airport near Hambantota and providing $4 billion in aid during Sri Lanka’s 2022 crisis.
• Kyaukphyu Port (Myanmar): Part of the China-Myanmar Economic Corridor (CMEC), Kyaukphyu offers an alternative route for China’s energy imports, bypassing the Malacca Strait. Its proximity to the Andaman and Nicobar Islands raises concerns about Chinese surveillance, particularly given activity on Myanmar’s Coco Islands, 22 nautical miles from the Andamans.
• Gwadar Port (Pakistan): Developed under CPEC, Gwadar provides China a foothold in the Arabian Sea, reducing the distance for energy imports (3,000 km vs. 12,000 km via Malacca) and enabling monitoring of Indian naval activities.

David Brewster, Senior Research Fellow at Australian National University: “The String of Pearls is less about military bases and more about creating a network of commercial and logistical hubs that give China strategic depth and influence, especially in relation to India.”
John Mearsheimer, Professor at University of Chicago: “China’s port investments are a textbook case of offensive realism, aimed at securing strategic outposts to dominate the Indian Ocean and limit India’s maritime influence.”
Alyssa Ayres, Senior Fellow at Council on Foreign Relations: “The String of Pearls is China’s attempt to create a maritime buffer against India, ensuring access to critical sea lanes while monitoring Indian naval activities.”
Rory Medcalf, Head of National Security College, ANU: “China’s port network is a dual-use strategy—commercial in peacetime, but with potential military applications that could challenge India’s dominance in the IOR.”
Bonnie Glaser, Senior Adviser at CSIS: “Ports like Hambantota and Gwadar are not just economic hubs but strategic assets that give China leverage over regional security dynamics, particularly vis-à-vis India.”

Strategic Implications

These ports address China’s “Malacca Dilemma,” the vulnerability of its energy and trade routes through the Malacca Strait, which India could block in a conflict. They also enable China to project power, monitor Indian naval activities, and potentially encircle India.

Evan Medeiros, Former NSC Senior Director: “China’s maritime strategy in South Asia is about reducing its Malacca Dilemma, but it also serves to encircle India, creating pressure points across the region.”

Leveraging Proxies: Pakistan as a Strategic Ally

Pakistan serves as China’s primary proxy, bolstered by CPEC, military cooperation, and diplomatic alignment. This partnership ensures a persistent threat to India, reinforcing China’s containment strategy through a two-front challenge.

• CPEC and Military Support: CPEC, a $62 billion project, includes Gwadar Port and infrastructure through Gilgit-Baltistan, a territory India claims. China’s military aid, including nuclear and missile technology, strengthens Pakistan’s position against India, particularly in Kashmir.
• Two-Front Threat: China’s backing ensures India faces simultaneous pressure on its western and northern borders, diverting attention from maritime ambitions.

Andrew Small, Senior Transatlantic Fellow at German Marshall Fund: “Pakistan is China’s most reliable partner in South Asia, acting as a strategic foil to India and enabling China to project power into the Indian Ocean.”
Lisa Curtis, Senior Fellow at CNAS: “China’s military and economic support for Pakistan, including CPEC, is designed to keep India off-balance, ensuring a two-front challenge that limits its regional ambitions.”
Bruce Riedel, Senior Fellow at Brookings: “The China-Pakistan axis is a deliberate strategy to counter India, with Pakistan serving as China’s forward base in the IOR and a pressure point on India’s western flank.”
Sandeep Kumar, Georgetown University Analyst: “China’s backing of Pakistan ensures that India remains preoccupied with Kashmir and border tensions, diverting attention from broader geopolitical goals.”
Marc Grossman, Former U.S. Special Representative: “China’s investment in Pakistan is not just economic but a geopolitical strategy to maintain a loyal ally that can challenge India’s regional dominance.”

Additional Perspectives

Non-Western and regional experts provide further insight into China’s strategy and its implications.

Ye Hailin, Chinese Strategic Analyst: “India’s insistence on resolving border disputes before strategic cooperation frustrates China’s regional ambitions, pushing Beijing to leverage Pakistan and BRI to maintain influence.”
Sankalp Gurjar, Geopolitical Analyst: “China’s support for Pakistan, including naval modernization, is a deliberate effort to create a two-front threat for India, complicating its strategic calculus in the Indian Ocean.”

Critical Analysis

While China’s actions align with a hegemonic strategy, several nuances and counterpoints must be considered:

• Broader Strategic Goals: China’s port investments and provocations are also driven by its need to secure energy routes and counter U.S. influence in the Indo-Pacific, as Medeiros notes. India’s Quad alignment amplifies China’s focus on containment.
• India’s Resilience: India counters China through initiatives like Chabahar Port, naval modernization (e.g., INS Jatayu base in Lakshadweep), and regional diplomacy. However, domestic challenges, such as bureaucratic delays and budget constraints, may limit its response, as Menon suggests.
• Regional Dynamics: Smaller states like Sri Lanka and Nepal navigate Sino-Indian rivalry, often leveraging China’s investments to balance India’s influence, as Donnellon-May highlights. This complicates India’s regional leadership.

Inferences

1. Hegemonic Intent: China’s integrated strategy—border provocations, BRI projects, and proxies—aims to establish regional dominance while containing India, as Tellis and Economy emphasize.
2. Maritime Focus: The String of Pearls, as Brewster and Mearsheimer note, is a dual-use network that secures China’s maritime interests and counters India’s naval advantage, particularly in the Malacca Strait.
3. Proxy Warfare: Pakistan’s role, as Small and Curtis underscore, ensures India faces a persistent two-front threat, limiting its strategic focus on the IOR.
4. Resource Diversion: Border tensions and regional competition drain India’s resources, potentially slowing development of strategic assets like the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, as Kugelman suggests.
5. Regional Instability: The nuclear capabilities of China, India, and Pakistan, combined with U.S.-China rivalry, risk escalating tensions, as Madan warns.

Conclusions

China’s strategic maneuvers in South Asia and the IOR are a calculated effort to achieve regional hegemony by containing India, consolidating the String of Pearls, and leveraging Pakistan as a proxy. These actions secure China’s energy routes, reduce its Malacca Dilemma, and limit India’s rise as a global power. However, they also risk regional instability, given the nuclearized nature of the Sino-Indian-Pakistani triangle. India’s counter-strategies, including naval expansion, regional partnerships, and Quad participation, demonstrate resilience, but sustained economic and diplomatic efforts are needed to balance China’s influence. The international community, particularly the U.S., must support stability without exacerbating great-power rivalries.

Recommendations

• For India:
• Prioritize border dispute resolution through diplomacy, as Jaishankar’s eight-point plan suggests, to reduce resource drain.
• Accelerate development of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands as a maritime hub, leveraging the ANC to counter China’s String of Pearls.
• Strengthen regional initiatives like the Act East Policy and BIMSTEC to counter China’s BRI influence.
• For Regional States:
• Resist becoming pawns in Sino-Indian rivalry by fostering neutral platforms like SAARC for cooperation.
• Balance economic ties with China and India to maintain strategic autonomy.
• For the International Community:
• Support India’s maritime capabilities and regional leadership without escalating U.S.-China tensions, as Medeiros advises.
• Encourage multilateral dialogue to address BRI-related debt traps and promote transparent infrastructure financing.

References

• Atlantic Council, “India’s geopolitical rise in context: Regional implications,” 2023.
• Council on Foreign Relations, “The New Geopolitics of China, India, and Pakistan,” 2017.
• Brewster, David, “Silk Roads and Strings of Pearls,” Geopolitics, 2017.
• The Week, “Diplomatic fault lines: How China’s influence is shaping India-Pakistan tensions,” 2025.
• The Strategist, “India and China’s rivalry is reshaping South Asia,” 2023.
• U.S. Department of State, “The Elements of the China Challenge,” 2021.
• Geopolitical Monitor, “The China-Pakistan Axis and Indian Ocean Geopolitics,” 2024.
• Stimson Center, “China’s Evolving Strategic Discourse on India,” 2022.
• Deccan Herald, “India’s China challenge,” 2022.
• Testbook, “String of Pearls - Implications, Effect on India & Importance,” 2023.
• Taylor & Francis, “The China–India–Pakistan Nuclear Triangle,” 2021.
• Stimson Center, “The U.S.-China Strategic Rivalry and its Implications for Pakistan,” 2020.
• The Economist, “Tanvi Madan on the geopolitical shifts revealed by the India-Pakistan crisis,” 2025.
• X Post by @andinasia, May 15, 2025.
• Carnegie Endowment, “China’s Influence in South Asia,” 2023.
• Brookings Institution, “India’s Strategic Choices in the Indo-Pacific,” 2024.