Between autonomy and dependency: comparing hedging strategies of Central Asian states towards China

This study evaluates the effectiveness of hedging strategies by Central Asian states in managing relations with China, focusing on economic resilience, political autonomy and domestic stability. Using a comparative case-study approach, it distinguishes between symbolic and substantive hedging, revealing that economic diversification, robust institutions and alternative partnerships are critical to success. Through a comparative analysis, the findings reveal significant variation in hedging strategies and the elements affecting them: Kazakhstan achieves substantive hedging through its resource wealth, multi-vector diplomacy, diversified partnerships and low dependency on China; Uzbekistan adopts emerging substantive hedging influenced by its reform-driven approach (including economic liberalization and institutional strengthening) and non-Chinese collaborations (such as partnerships with the EU, the US and regional actors); Kyrgyzstan engages in symbolic hedging constrained by its economic limitations and political instability, resulting in gestures that lack strategic impact; Tajikistan and Turkmenistan, limited by their economic dependence and authoritarian governance, achieve minimal success, reflect symbolic hedging, resulting in predominant alignment with China. By distinguishing between symbolic and substantive hedging, it refines hedging theory and offers practical insights for small states navigating great-power competition, emphasizing the need for material capabilities and diplomatic alternatives to achieve genuine autonomy.