This research supports the evolution of border studies by advancing recently elaborated theoretical insights convincingly captured as borders in motion and the multiscalar nature of borders. Drawing on ongoing empirical research in Yunnan province, China, the combined perspectives tender a new approach of ‘relational motion’ to inform analyses interrogating the complex and dynamic nature of border-related phenomena occurring in, across and beyond Yunnan. We propose a new consideration of the ways border phenomena manifest, and detail outcomes by highlighting a range of interrelated processes. Our focus on processes, as opposed to borders or borderlands only, provides a critical insight to understand how border-related phenomena shape – and are shaped by – a diverse range of initiatives whose nature are connective and discrete, distinct and obscure, theoretical and empirical. Theoretical discussion is centred on four empirical sections: Kunming as a border and borderlands metropolis; Yunnan as an integrative energy centre; Yunnan as a focal point for transregional security; and transborder migration in Yunnan. Empirical insights contextualize how macroscale initiatives, such as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)– manifest at multiple scales through border-related phenomena. The research presents fresh empirical and theoretical insights into China’s south-west to understand this dynamic, nuanced region better.

With the advances of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the geo-economic interactions between China and countries along the 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road counties (MSRCs) continue to increase, and analyzing the geo-economic relations between China and the MSRCs is extremely important for a scientific understanding of bilateral geo-economic cooperation. Differently from the traditional logic of geo-economic competition and cooperation, we constructed a new framework based on the dominant factors of geo-economic relations and used an extreme random forest regression model to classify the geo-economic relation types between China and MSRCs from 2006 to 2017. The results show that the unbalanced development of investment and trade between China and MSRCs hindered the enhancement of the intensity of bilateral geo-economic linkage from 2006 to 2017. The “Matthew effect” of China’s geo-economic flow linkage with MSRCs is significant. There are obvious differences in the dominant factors affecting the types of geo-economic relations between China and MSRCs, and the distribution of the importance of the indices of the types of geo-economic relations in each country is disordered. Geopolitics, markets, and resources have played important roles in the geo-economic linkages between China and MSRCs. There are five types of geo-economic relations between China and the MSRCs: market-oriented type, resource-oriented type, market-resource-oriented type, market-geopolitics-oriented type, and resource-geopolitics-oriented type, of which the market-oriented type is the most important type of geo-economic relations. In the future, China should focus on regional powers along the Maritime Silk Road for bilateral geo-economic cooperation, actively promote the balanced development of bilateral geo-economic elements flows, strengthen geopolitical cooperation with MSRCs, and formulate cooperation plans according to the types of geo-economic relations.

The countries along the 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road (MSRCs) are important geo-economic spaces for China. The implementation of the Belt and Road initiative is drawing a new geo-economic network of the Maritime Silk Road. Based on trade and investment flows, this study uses social network analysis to examine the characteristics and structure of trade and investment networks between China and the MSRCs. The results show that the MSRCs’ trade network is approximately an irregular quadrilateral, the node weighted degree distribution follows the law of long-tail distribution, and the trade network has shifted from the tripartite confrontation of China, Japan, and South Korea to China’s single-core dominance. The MSRCs’ trade group has changed greatly, and the trade cohesion of China, Japan, and South Korea is strong. The MSRCs’ investment network is not fully developed and the network connections are sparse. China, Japan, and Singapore are its core nodes. The weight degree of the MSRCs’ investment inflow network first increased and then decreased, and the weight degree of the MSRCs’ investment outflow network increased. The MSRCs’ investment network followed the “core-peripheral” structure. The cohesive subgroup of the investment inflow network did not have significant regional characteristics, and the cohesion of the core subgroups in the MSRCs’ investment outflow network was strong. To promote the development of geo-economic relations between China and the MSRCs, China should focus on regional powers, upgrade the investment network of MSRCs, and implement differentiated geo-economic cooperation strategies.

English Formerly localized, restricted border interaction between China and Southeast Asia has shifted to extensive cross-border engagement along regulated borders with a hierarchy of crossings and expansive borderlands. This expanded security system reveals rescaled and repositioned border security infrastructure and practice into a point and corridor system with vanguard crossings at Hekou, Mohan and Ruili. Fundamental shifts are concurrent focus on primary crossings and spatially extensive borderlands that encompass diminished attention to lesser crossings, beyond the border implementation of security checkpoints, mobile security, and compromise, to enable effective management of expansive borderlands. These borderlands mediate space and enable spatial reapportionment of security to accommodate greatly enhanced cross-border flows of people, goods, and information, thus shaping extensive spaces of exclusion and integration and focused places of exception.Spanish La anteriormente restringida interacción fronteriza China–Sudeste Asiático, cambió a un extenso compromiso de fronteras reguladas con una jerarquía de cruces y zonas transfronterizas expansivas. Este sistema ampliado de seguridad, revela la infraestructura y prácticas transfronterizas reescaladas y reubicadas como puntos y sistemas de corredores con cruces de vanguardia en Hekou, Mohan y Ruili. Los cambios se enfocan en los cruces primarios y extensión de fronteras, disminuyendo la atención a los cruces menores —después de la implementación de puntos de control de seguridad—, la seguridad móvil y el compromiso a una gestión fronteriza eficaz. Estas zonas permiten la redistribución espacial de la seguridad acomodando los intensificados flujos transfronterizos de personas, bienes e información, conformando espacios de exclusión e integración, así como lugares de excepción focalizados. French L’interaction frontalière entre la Chine et l’Asie du Sud-Est, autrefois localisée et limitée, s’est transformée en un engagement transfrontalier réglementé avec une hiérarchie de passages et des zones frontalières étendues. Ce système de sécurité élargi révèle une infrastructure et une pratique de sécurité frontalière redimensionnées et repositionnées dans un système de points et de corridors avec des passages d’avant-garde à Hekou, Mohan et Ruili. Les changements fondamentaux se concentrent sur les principaux points de passage, les zones frontalières étendues, la mise en œuvre de points de contrôle de sécurité, la sécurité mobile et le compromis, pour permettre une gestion effi cace des zones frontalières étendues. Ces dernières permettre ent la médiation de l’espace et la réaffectation spatiale de la sécurité afin d’accueillir des fl ux transfrontaliers de personnes, de biens et d’informations considérablement accrus, façonnant ainsi de vastes espaces d’exclusion et d’intégration et des lieux d’exception ciblés.

Combining the theories of politics of scale from political geography, security theory from international relations, and energy security theory, and putting the scale conversion of energy contention, geographical relationship and geo-structure in geo-setting, and the three properties of safety in consideration, this paper rebuilds a geo-energy security evaluation model and uses the model to quantitatively evaluate China’s geo-oil energy security in the Russian Pacific oil pipeline construction from 1995 to 2010. Five results could be drawn as follows: (1) from the aspect of time, an up-surging Geo-oil Safety Index of China in the Russian Pacific oil pipeline construction indicated an increasingly disadvantage of China in the geo-oil contention by politics of scale. If the United States and South Korea are involved, the competition would be further intensified; (2) from the aspect of geopolitical relationship, a general decrease occurred in the Sino-Japan Energy Competition Index, but a specific increase appeared in the competition of energy imports from Russia, by China and Japan individually; (3) from the aspect of regional strategy of energy export, an obvious downward tendency in Energy Export Strategy Index showed that Russia has changed its export destination off of Europe; (4) from the aspect of geo-security, a relatively steady proportion of China’s oil consumption, and a friendly comprehensive strategic partnership of cooperation between China and Russia, reduced the worries of China’s geo-oil energy security to some extent; (5) from the aspect of geopolitical structure, the increasing comprehensive national power in China, driven by rapid economic growth, will intensify the geo-oil competition in Northeast Asia.

Struggling for supremacy between great powers and the rise or fall and regime change of great powers are all subject to the Geopolitical Law. Geographers should keep in step with the times, accurately grasp the national interests, and seize the opportunity to contribute to the great rejuvenation of our nation. However, due to lack of criticism on the history and philosophy of geopolitics, we can neither accurately understand the geopolitical theory, nor effectively put the geopolitical theory into practice. This paper introduces the development of critical geopolitics, summarizes the three characteristics of critical geopolitics, and interprets the four classical geopolitical theories accordingly. In order to simplify the interpretation process, this paper firstly presents an analytical framework for interpretation of four classical geopolitical theories; secondly, focuses on interpretation of “The Geographical Pivot of History” put forward by Mackinder according to the analytical framework; finally, critically summarizes the four classical geopolitical theories. Through the critical interpretation, this paper draws a conclusion that there are the scientific, hypothetical and conceptual classical geopolitical theories. The construction of classical geopolitical theories is based on the international geopolitical structure, spatial distribution of national interests and inter-state spatial conflict, in order to show the identity of theoretical constructor, so as to reflect the historicality, sociality, situationality and geographical knowledge–power structure of geopolitical theories.