孙德刚、萨勒曼、王晓宇（通讯作者）： “Securitisation versus de-securitisation: China’s seaport
diplomacy along the Maritime Silk Road，” Maritime Economics & Logistics （SSCI 一区），
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-026-00373-4
Abstract
China’s seaport investments along the Maritime Silk Road have generated considerable controversy amid great power competition and cognitive-informational contestation. China-built or China-operated seaports are perceived by great powers as strategic pivots, often framed as China’s peer competitors. Meanwhile, seaport construction often faces local financing challenges. Many have been securitised (Outside the finance domain and in securitisation theory and international relations, securitisation is defined as the way non-threatening public issues are transformed into urgent security threats. See H. Stritzel (2014). Securitization Theory and the Copenhagen School. In H. Stritzel, ed., Security in Translation. New Security Challenges Series. London: Palgrave Macmillan.) in Western and Indian narratives, as the ‘digital trojan horse’, ‘string of pearls’, ‘state capitalism’, ‘debt-trap diplomacy’ and ‘neo-colonialism’. Three factors drive the securitisation of China’s seaport investments: geostrategic, geopolitical and geoeconomic. Yet, it remains an open question as to how China has applied multiple measures to transform projects from securitisation to de-securitisation. To address this puzzle, the paper introduces the concept of ‘seaport diplomacy’ and argues that China seeks to forge a nexus between the government’s strategic interests and the commercial interests of foreign seaport enterprises along the Maritime Silk Road. As a strategy, the Chinese government has taken significant measures to cultivate a new narrative by advancing a discourse that defends its seaport projects through concepts such as ‘Business Orientation’, ‘Land-Sea Linkage’, ‘People’s Livelihood First’, ‘Developmental Peace’ and ‘Win-Win Cooperation’, falling into three tactics of ‘commercialisation’, ‘localisation’ and ‘socialisation’. This China-style and government-driven counter-narrative has generated mixed outcomes: it has mitigated external criticism but has failed to strengthen local endorsement in host countries. China’s overseas seaport investments may face grave hurdles if local anti-China sentiments flare up.
Keywords
Securitisation · De-securitisation · Seaport diplomacy · Maritime silk road · Narrative strategy
