China’s BRI and the EU’s global gateway in Southeast Asia: conditional engagement versus non-interference

This article explores the contrasting strategies of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the European Union’s (EU) Global Gateway in Southeast Asia, focusing on the principles of conditional engagement and non-interference. The BRI offers flexible financing with minimal political conditions, allowing recipient countries to maintain sovereignty over domestic affairs, but raising concerns over debt dependency and transparency. In contrast, the Global Gateway emphasises sustainable investments tied to governance reforms, human rights and environmental protections, which, while promoting long-term stability, can be perceived as interference by nations wary of external influence. Through a comparative analysis, this article examines the economic and political implications of both models, assessing their impact on infrastructure development, governance and sovereignty in Southeast Asia. By highlighting the advantages and drawbacks of each approach, the study addresses the broader question of how external powers can effectively engage in the region without undermining national autonomy. The findings suggest that while both initiatives offer significant benefits, their success depends on the specific needs and preferences of individual Southeast Asian nations.