Eastern Philosophy Meets Western Geopolitics

Two Ways of Understanding Power

International politics has traditionally been studied through concepts developed largely in the Western intellectual tradition: power, sovereignty, national interest, balance of power and military competition. In particular, realist theories of international relations portray the international system as an environment in which states must protect their security and pursue their interests without a central authority above them.

Yet this perspective becomes increasingly limited when applied to a world in which Asian powers, particularly China and India, play a central role. Eastern political thought offers different ways of understanding relations between states, often placing greater emphasis on harmony, hierarchy, relationships, morality and long-term stability.

This does not mean that Eastern philosophy is inherently peaceful or that Western geopolitics is inherently aggressive. Rather, the encounter between the two reveals that power can be understood in different cultural and intellectual ways. The meeting between Eastern philosophy and Western geopolitics is therefore not simply a confrontation between two civilizations, but an opportunity to reconsider how international politics itself should be understood.

Western Geopolitics: Power, Competition and Security

Modern Western international relations has been strongly influenced by realism, a political philosophy focused on the importance of power and survival. States operate in an international system without a world government capable of guaranteeing their security, which encourages them to develop military and economic capabilities and to balance against potential rivals.[1]

This approach remains extremely influential because it provides a useful explanation for phenomena such as military alliances, arms races and competition between great powers. From this perspective, cooperation between states is possible, but it is often understood as a consequence of shared interests rather than simply moral commitments.

The geopolitical competition between the United States and China illustrates this logic particularly well. Washington and Beijing increasingly compete over technology, trade, military influence and strategic partnerships. A realist interpretation sees this competition as a consequence of the changing distribution of global power: as China becomes more powerful, the United States has stronger incentives to preserve its strategic position.

However, a purely realist interpretation can overlook something important: states do not make decisions based exclusively on material interests. Historical memory, cultural identity and political traditions also influence how leaders perceive threats and opportunities. This is where Eastern intellectual traditions become particularly relevant.

Confucianism: Harmony, Hierarchy and Relationships

Among the Eastern traditions influencing contemporary geopolitics, Confucianism is particularly important for understanding China. Confucian thought traditionally places considerable importance on social harmony, ethical behaviour, hierarchy and relationships between individuals and political communities.[2] These ideas can also influence how political order is imagined internationally. Rather than seeing international politics exclusively as a competition between formally equal and autonomous states, a Confucian perspective can place greater emphasis on relationships and the responsibilities associated with different positions within a hierarchy.

Historical Chinese foreign-policy traditions influenced by Confucianism are far more complex than what the popular idea of Confucian pacifism suggests. Chinese rulers did not necessarily reject the use of force; instead, historical traditions included both more inclusive and more exclusive approaches to foreign relations.[3] This distinction is important because it prevents us from reducing Confucianism to the idea that China is simply a “peaceful” power. Confucian ideas can encourage stability and harmony while still being compatible with the pursuit of national interests and strategic power.

Contemporary research similarly suggests that Confucian values can function as part of China's strategic culture, shaping perceptions of order, legitimacy and international relationships rather than mechanically determining foreign-policy decisions.[4]

Kautilya: An Eastern Tradition of Realism

India provides another fascinating example. If Confucianism demonstrates how philosophy can emphasize harmony and relationships, the ancient Indian thinker Kautilya demonstrates that Eastern political thought can also be highly pragmatic and strategic.

Kautilya, traditionally associated with the Arthashastra, developed a sophisticated analysis of statecraft, diplomacy, alliances and warfare. His famous “Mandala” theory describes international relations through a network of neighbouring states whose interests can lead to rivalry, cooperation and shifting alliances.[5]

This has obvious similarities with Western realism. Modern scholarship has therefore examined Kautilya as an important non-Western source for understanding international politics. One recent study argues that Mandala theory contains concepts comparable to realist ideas such as self-help, shifting alliances and security competition.[6] Kautilya therefore challenges the assumption that realism is exclusively Western. Long before modern European theorists formalised international relations, Indian political thought had already developed a sophisticated understanding of strategic competition.

At the same time, Kautilya's approach was not identical to modern Western realism. His political thought also incorporated ethical and normative considerations concerning the responsibilities of rulers. This combination of pragmatism, morality and statecraft demonstrates why Eastern traditions should not simply be categorised as either “idealistic” or “realistic.”

China and the Modern Geopolitical Order

The contemporary rise of China represents perhaps the clearest meeting point between Eastern philosophy and Western geopolitical thinking.

China operates within a modern international system based largely on concepts such as sovereignty, territorial integrity and national interest. At the same time, Chinese political discourse frequently draws upon concepts associated with traditional Chinese thought, including harmony, mutual benefit and peaceful coexistence. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a useful example. Official Chinese documents describe the initiative in terms of cooperation, mutual benefit, peaceful coexistence and respect for sovereignty. The initiative explicitly presents itself as an alternative to confrontation and emphasises dialogue and economic cooperation.[7]

From a Western geopolitical perspective, however, the BRI can also be interpreted as an instrument of strategic influence. Investments in infrastructure, ports, railways and energy networks can generate economic interdependence while simultaneously increasing China's political and strategic presence.

These two interpretations do not necessarily have to contradict each other. A project can be presented through the language of cooperation while also producing geopolitical advantages. The important point is that Western geopolitical analysis may focus primarily on the strategic consequences, whereas Chinese discourse may emphasise concepts such as mutual benefit and harmonious development. Understanding both perspectives can therefore provide a more complete interpretation of China's international behaviour.

Beyond the East-West Divide

The interaction between Eastern philosophy and Western geopolitics should not be understood as a simple clash between two completely separate systems. In reality, contemporary Asian states operate within a global system that has been profoundly shaped by Western institutions and concepts. China, India, Japan and other Asian powers participate in international organisations, global markets, military alliances and diplomatic institutions. At the same time, their political cultures can influence how these institutions and relationships are interpreted.

ASEAN provides an interesting example. Its Treaty of Amity and Cooperation emphasises sovereignty, non-interference, peaceful settlement of disputes and renunciation of the use of force.[8] These principles demonstrate that Asian diplomacy can place considerable importance on coexistence and relationship management. Yet this does not eliminate geopolitical competition. ASEAN states continue to pursue their own national interests and respond to the strategic rivalry between larger powers. The result is therefore a hybrid form of geopolitics: states use traditional concepts of power while simultaneously relying on cultural ideas about relationships, respect and stability.

What Eastern Philosophy Can Teach Western Geopolitics

The growing importance of Eastern perspectives can broaden the study of international relations in several ways.

First, it reminds us that power is not necessarily synonymous with military strength. Economic relationships, diplomacy, cultural influence and political legitimacy can also create power.

Second, Eastern traditions encourage greater attention to relationships. Instead of analysing states exclusively as independent actors competing for resources, international politics can also be understood as a network of long-term relationships in which trust, reputation and historical memory matter.

Third, Eastern philosophy highlights the importance of harmony and stability. Western realist theory often concentrates on avoiding domination or maintaining a balance of power. Eastern approaches can add another question: how can a stable relationship be maintained even when interests are different?

Finally, these perspectives challenge the idea that international relations has a single intellectual tradition. Kautilya, Confucian thinkers and other Asian traditions demonstrate that sophisticated theories of diplomacy and power developed outside Europe as well.

A More Pluralistic Geopolitics

The meeting between Eastern philosophy and Western geopolitics is ultimately a meeting between different ways of understanding power, order and international relationships.

Western realism provides valuable tools for explaining competition, insecurity and the struggle for influence. Eastern traditions such as Confucianism and Kautilyan statecraft, however, demonstrate that strategic behaviour can also be interpreted through concepts such as harmony, relationships, moral responsibility and long-term stability.

The future of international relations may therefore depend less on choosing between “Eastern” and “Western” approaches and more on combining their insights. In a multipolar world, understanding how different civilizations conceptualise power is becoming strategically important in itself.

The most useful approach is neither to romanticise Eastern philosophy as peaceful nor to reduce Asian politics to Western concepts of realpolitik. Instead, geopolitics should be studied as a dialogue between different intellectual traditions. Such an approach can make international relations more historically aware, culturally sensitive and capable of explaining a world in which power is increasingly distributed across different regions and civilizations.