II.Theoretical Debates on China-CEEC Cooperation by Chinese and Foreign Scholars

A few Chinese and foreign scholars have put forward theoretical assumptions, [3] each of which has made qualitative arguments on the ontology of the Cooperation, and therefore proposed fundamental theoretical frameworks and logics dominated by ontology. Existing theoretical explorations are mainly based on the form and content of the Cooperation, and one of the representative views argues that China-CEEC Cooperation is a type of Group Cooperation Diplomacy （GCD）and contains the characteristics of Pragmatic Institutionalism.

（1）Group Cooperation Diplomacy

On the basis of summarizing China’s extensive cooperation with foreign regions, Chinese scholars put forward the concept of GCD, and argue that China-CEEC Cooperation reflects the characteristics of such diplomacy （Hu DaWei, 2018;Sun Degang, 2020）. The GCD is a complex diplomacy pattern that is based on China on one side, and the countries with diplomatic ties with China in a certain region and the regional organizations they are affiliated with on the other side, and two sides jointly carry out various forms of institutionalized cooperation, such as leaders’ summits, regular meetings at all levels, economic and trade cooperation, and people-to-people and cultural exchanges.

Hu Dawei argues that GCD emphasizes and attaches importance to political cooperation and political will, rather than the contract-style relations and the formation of international organizations. The scope of cooperation depends on geographical factors, but such cooperation is immune to geopolitics. The GCD is a complex exchange system formed by the agglomeration of various diplomatic functions, it is in parallel and complementary with bilateral diplomacy. The relationship between China and CEECs is featured with GCD, however, it is special in the fact that there is no regional multilateral cooperation mechanism between CEECs. This is different from the GCD between China and other regions, such as the African Union, and Association of Southeast Asian Nations （ASEAN）.

（2）Pragmatic Institutionalism

From the perspective of institutional construction, foreign scholars believe that China-CEEC Cooperation demonstrates a type of pragmatic institutionalism, that is, China-CEEC Cooperation is not bound by strict and binding rules and rigid institutional forms, instead, it is featured with pragmatic agenda, voluntary participation, flexibility, and openness, driven by sustainable economic and social development and benefits. It institutionalizes pragmatic cooperation in continuous and repeated international practices, cultivates proactive cooperation habits of institutional actors. The representative views come from a co-author work of scholars from Bosnia and Herzegovina and China （Natasa Maric and Wei Ling, 2018）. The China-CEEC Cooperation shows the characteristics of pragmatic agenda, voluntary participation, flexibility, and openness in practice. The Cooperation is oriented by the needs of multiple parties. If anyone has specific cooperation intentions and ideas, they will discuss together and reach consensus, which shows a strong pragmatic color. Among the many cooperation areas and projects, countries voluntarily choose the areas and approaches of participation, which could be bilateral, mini-lateral, or any other form. The participating countries independently determine the degree of participation, which is non-coercive and non-regulated. The entire process of cooperation is open to all stakeholders and third parties.

In addition to the above theoretical interpretations put forward by Chinese and foreign scholars, the theories in the following two dimensions at least provide theoretical support for the academic community to understand China-CEEC Cooperation in depth.

（3）Theory of Regional Public Goods

The rise of regional cooperation has been fully reflected in the development of international public goods theory, and the concept of regional public goods came into being. The international public goods that are only supplied and consumed in a specific region rather than the globe have increasingly attracted the attention of international academic community （Fan Yongming, 2010）. But it does not mean that regional public goods do not have global attributes. Actually, some regional public goods are bridges and bonds connecting domestic and international public goods, and their spillover effects can extend to the world.

Regional public goods generally have the following characteristics: first of all, following the principle of “beneficiaries pay”, they are jointly provided by related countries to meet common needs;secondly, the coverage scope is small, and the benefits and costs that countries take from them are relatively transparent, which can avoid the “free-rider” problem that is popular in global public goods;thirdly, regional public goods can more directly reflect the needs of different types of countries in the region, so that the mechanisms and institutions can serve the region’s stability and development better, and are more focused. [4]

As far as the Central and Eastern Europe （CEE）is concerned, there are various actors that provide regional public goods to the region. For example, the United States provides security regional public goods;the EU provides institutional and economic regional public goods;Russia provides energy regional public goods;China provides a kind of connectivity regional public goods. China-CEEC Cooperation focuses on connectivity, which undoubtedly will benefit both the region and the world. From the perspective of providers of regional public goods, most of them embody advantages or good foundations in a certain field, ensuring that they can provide high-quality public goods and bring benefits to the region. In supplying regional public goods, countries participate extensively, each gets what it needs, and all pay the cost to strive for effective cooperation.

In theory, China’s provision of regional public goods to CEECs meets their development demands to some extent. The public goods provided by China in infrastructure have certain comparative advantages, and have made some achievements and high visibility across CEECs. With the advancement of BRI construction in CEE, this region has become the place where the largest number of China’s connectivity projects have been implemented in Europe. The Hungary-Serbia Railway, the China-Europe Land-Sea Express Line, as well as various expressways and energy infrastructures have been implemented, which facilitates the exchanges between the region and the rest of the world.

（4）Inclusive Regionalism Theory

Inclusive regionalism theory is better demonstrated in the cooperation between China and ASEAN, with which China subtly dealt with its relations. After the formation of the “10+1” mechanism between China and ASEAN, similar mechanisms were organized between ASEAN, Japan, and South Korea, and finally the “10+3” mechanism between ASEAN and the three East Asian countries was formed. It is difficult for the three East Asian countries to form an independent cooperation mechanism due to some historical and practical problems. It is the ASEAN platform that facilitates the benign interaction between the three countries. This type of cooperation mechanism soon expanded to the relations between ASEAN and countries such as India, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. These major powers interact on one shared arena, accept common rules and are subject to the same institutional constraints. [5] The cooperation model promoted and created by China is of typical characteristics of Inclusive Regionalism.

The inclusive regionalism relationship with ASEAN has been extended to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation （APEC）. APEC adapts the regionalism thoughts that emerged in late 1980s into a unique model that is different from any current regional economic cooperation mechanism in international relations. It is reflected in three aspects: first, openness and inclusiveness, acknowledging the diversity of members, and believing that the policy framework should adhere to flexibility and gradualism;second, the principle of autonomy and voluntariness, following the fundamental principles of equality, mutual benefit, and consultation, and avoiding a high degree of institutionalization and coercion;third, combination of unilateral and collective actions （Sangtian, 2014）.

China’s experience in participating in ASEAN and APEC lays the foundation for the development of inclusive regionalism and creates a good premise for theoretically optimizing China-CEEC Cooperation. Openness is an important feature of the theory, which is mainly reflected in the plans, content, rules, time, and development trends of inclusive regionalism cooperation. They are all open and pragmatic, have no specific timetable and strong-rule framework. It prioritizes cooperation, takes win-win as the key and sharing as the root. At the same time, although inclusive regionalism has a certain regional orientation, it encourages third parties to join, adhering to the principle of openness, and encouraging the “regional cooperation+” model, which opens up a vast space for third-party cooperation and the participation of stakeholders （such as the observer-state model）.

An important issue that China-CEEC Cooperation faces is how to deal with the EU, which is an already highly integrated regional organization. Most of the CEECs are EU members, and their development models and regulations have been highly integrated into the European system. At the same time, these countries have the desire to develop cooperation with external countries. On the premise of respecting the interests and regulations of the European bloc, China has developed its relations with the CEECs inclusively, taking into account the interests and demands of all parties, meanwhile highlighting the needs of the CEECs, thus initiated a new model of practical cooperation between the two sides.

The China-CEEC Cooperation adheres to the principle of equality, consultation, mutual conplementarity, and cooperation for mutual benefit. The Cooperation is not limited by the form and content but maintains a certain regional stability and cooperation orientation. In annual summits, participants discuss cooperation projects and prospects in a fair and open manner, and seal pragmatic cooperation results. Therefore, it can be said that it is a flexible and inclusive regionalist cooperation approach. Although China-CEEC Cooperation has an explicit regional orientation, that is, EU member states or candidates in eastern and southeastern Europe, the Cooperation maintains the openness character. The EU, Austria, Switzerland, Belarus, Greece （later became a member state）, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and many other actors participated as observers. The Cooperation is loose but not scattered, flexible and orderly, focusing on specific areas while maintaining openness and coordination.