The paper situates China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as geopolitics by other means: a long-horizon strategy to rewire global trade corridors and, through them, political influence. It argues that the Middle East should be understood less as a set of isolated conflicts and more as a corridor system linking Europe, Asia, and Africa, where control over maritime and overland routes increasingly shapes great-power competition.

Within this framework, Saudi Arabia and Turkey emerge as pivotal nodes. Saudi Arabia anchors the maritime “spine” of Eurasian trade through the Red Sea and Suez canal, combining energy centrality with port expansion and Red Sea security. Its foreign policy posture is described as structurally multi-aligned: Riyadh hedges between Washington and Beijing to maximize leverage, rather than tactically oscillating between them. Turkey, by contrast, has gained renewed importance as the Russia-centric Eurasian land route was disrupted by the war in Ukraine. The Trans-Caspian “Middle Corridor” has grown rapidly, positioning Turkey as a critical bridge between Asia and Europe, though capacity, financing, and coordination constraints mean it remains a strategic supplement rather than a full alternative.

Against this backdrop, Syria is not a centerpiece of the Belt-and-Road rivalry, but a revealing test case. China has signaled intent through diplomacy, yet investment has lagged, underscoring the gap between strategic signaling and execution under high risk. The United States’ post-Assad re-engagement is therefore framed less as a Syria-first policy and more as alliance management and great-power blocking—aimed at shoring up Saudi and Turkish alignment, constraining openings for China, Russia, and Iran, and preventing a renewed vacuum.

The analysis highlights Israel as the principal spoiler risk to this pathway, arguing that its opposition to rapid reintegration and intensified military posture could derail stabilization and complicate U.S.–Saudi–Turkish coordination. The paper concludes cautiously: a fragile convergence around Syria’s territorial integrity and managed reintegration is emerging, but outcomes remain contingent and reversible.