Goals of Russia-China Cooperation in Developing the Northern Sea Route: The Position of the Governments and Business

The developing cooperation between Russia and China in the development of the Northern Sea Route requires theoretical understanding as an independent phenomenon. Aim and tasks. The purpose of the article is to find the most acceptable approach that can describe the interaction of the two countries based on theories of international relations. The objectives were to study Russian-Chinese cooperation from the standpoint of realism, institutionalism and constructivism. Methods. The results are obtained based on statements by officials and business representatives made at the Roscongress economic forums in 2018–2025. Results. For the Russian side, the approach from the standpoint of realism implies influence on world markets, as well as priority for interaction with friendly countries. The Chinese side points to the strategic value of partnership relations. Both parties gain influence on geopolitics in the region. An assessment of the role of institutions showed their importance for achieving sustainable development goals, organizing shipping, and economic development of the Arctic zone. In 2025, interaction moved to the level of bilateral intergovernmental formats and synchronization of goa ls with individual countries. From the standpoint of the constructivist approach, we can talk about corporate identity (the development of the Arctic is the largest project in the history of Russia and ensures a turn to the East), typical identity (the Arctic is the national idea of Russia and the mission of China), role identity (Russia needs investments and technologies. Containerization, the presence of ice-class vessels and year-round navigation are important for both), as well as collective identity, through which the countries p osition themselves as a single whole, sharing a common economic future, confirming friendship and steadfast mutual support. The theory of complex interdependence (neorealism), which assumes forced cooperation, did not find clear confirmation in the considered case, although in most publications it is realism and neorealism that explain the Russian-Chinese rapprochement. Conclusions. When we want to explain the relations of two countries that shared communist ideology for decades, theories based on market considerations turn out to be half-hearted. Commitment to friendship gives stability to the relationship, which leads to long-term economic results.

1. Biedermann, R. Exploring Sino-Russian-Nordics triangular relations: complex balancing along the Polar Silk Road // Journal of Contemporary European Studies. 2021. P. 1–17. DOI: 10.1080/14782804.2021.1924640.

2. Feng, H. Partnering Up in the New Cold War? Explaining China-Russia Relations in the Post-Cold War Era. In: Yoder B. (Eds.) The United States and Contemporary China-Russia Relations. Theoretical Insights and Implications Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 2022. Р. 79–104. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-93982-3_4.

3. Gladkiy, Y. N., Sukhorukov, V. D., Kornekova, S. Y. [et al.] “Polar Silk Road”: project implementation and geo-economic interests of Russia and China. In: IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. IOP Publishing. 2020. 434 (1). P. 012009. DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/434/1/012009.

4. Haynes, K. Sino-Russian Logrolling and the Future of Great Power Competition. In: Yoder B. (Eds.) The United States and Contemporary China-Russia Relations. Theoretical Insights and Implications Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 2022. P. 231–252. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-93982-3_10.

5. Huang, L., Lasserre, F., Alexeeva, O. Is China’s interest for the Arctic driven by Arctic shipping potential? // Asian Geographer. 2015. No. 32 (1). P. 59–71. DOI: 10.1080/10225706.2014.928785.

6. Katzenstein, P. J. The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. New York : Columbia University Press. 1996. 560 p. ISBN: 9780231104692.

7. Kobzeva, M. New Arctic Seaways and the Role of China in Regime Formation. In Global Arctic. 2022. P. 315–330. Springer, Cham. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-81253-9_16.

8. Korolev, A. Measuring Strategic Cooperation in China-Russia Relations. In: Yoder B. (Eds.). The United States and Contemporary China-Russia Relations. Theoretical Insights and Implications Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 2022. P. 29–53. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-93982-3_2.

9. Larson, D. W. China’s and Russia’s New Status Relationship. In: Yoder B. (Eds.). The United States and Contemporary China-Russia Relations. Theoretical Insights and Implications Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 2022. P. 107–129. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-93982-3_5.

10. Laruelle, M. Russia’s Arctic Policy: A Power Strategy and Its Limits. 2020. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344221690_Russia%27s_Arctic_Policy_A_Power_Strategy_and_Its_Limits_RussieNEIVisions_ no_117.

11. MacDonald, A. P. China-Russian cooperation in the Arctic: A cause for concern for the Western Arctic States? // Canadian Foreign Policy Journal. 2021. No. 27 (2). P. 194–210. DOI: 10.1080/11926422.2021.1 936098.

12. Moore, G. J. China, Russia and the United States: Balance of Power or National Narcissism? In: Yoder B. (Eds.). The United States and Contemporary China-Russia Relations. Theoretical Insights and Implications Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 2022. P. 55–77. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-93982-3_3.

13. Owen, J. M. IV. China and Russia Contra Liberal Hegemony. In: Yoder B. (Eds.). The United States and Contemporary China-Russia Relations. Theoretical Insights and Implications Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 2022. P. 131–153. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-93982-3_6.

14. Pieper, M. Mapping Eurasia: Contrasting the public diplomacies of Russia’s ‘Greater Eurasia’ and China’s ‘belt and road’ initiative // Rising Powers Quarterly. 2018. Vol. 3, No. 3. P. 217–237. URL: https://rpquarterly.kureselcalismalar.com/quarterly/mapping-eurasia-contrasting-the-public-diplomacies-of-russias-greatereurasia-and-chinas-belt-and-road-initiative/.

15. Tillman, H., Yang, J., Nielsson, E. T. The Polar Silk Road: China’s New Frontier of International Cooperation // China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies. 2018. Vol. 4, No. 3. P. 345–362. DOI: 10.1142/ S2377740018500215.

16. Waltz, K. N. Theory of International Politics. Reading, MA : Addison-Wesley. 1979. 179 p.

17. Wendt, A. Social theory of international politics. 1999. 450 p. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511612183.

18. Wishnick, E. China’s Interests and Goals in the Arctic // Letort Papers. 2017. Carlisle Barracks, PA. 19. Wishnick, E. Sino-Russian Consolidation at a Time of Geopolitical Rivalry // China Leadership Monitor. 2020. URL: https://www.prcleader.org/elizabeth-wishnick.

19. Wishnick, E. The Paradox of Sino-Russian Partnership: Global Normative Alignment and Regional Ontological Insecurity. In: Yoder, B. (Eds.). The United States and Contemporary China-Russia Relations. Theoretical Insights and Implications Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 2022. Р. 155–180. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-93982-3_7.

20. Wu, Z. Classical geopolitics, realism and balance of power theory // Journal of Strategic Studies. 2018. No. 41 (6). P. 786–823. DOI: 10.1080/01402390.2017.1379398.

21. Yoder, B. International Relations Theory and the Puzzle of China-Russia Alignment. In: Yoder B. (Eds.). The United States and Contemporary China-Russia Relations. Theoretical Insights and Implications Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 2022. P. 1–26. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-93982-3_1.

22. Yoder, B. The US Factor in China’s Successful Reassurance of Russia. In: Yoder B. (Eds.). The United States and Contemporary China-Russia Relations. Theoretical Insights and Implications Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 2022. P. 183–206. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-93982-3_8.

23. Yu, Cao. Implications for Sino-Russian Cooperation on the Polar Silk Road // Arctic Yearbook. 2022. URL: https://arcticyearbook.com/images/yearbook/2022/Scholarly-Papers/16A_AY2022_Cao.pdf.