50 the silk road economic belt Regionally, the EU emphasizes integration among South Asian states, and it is an observer in the SAARC. The impact of CPEC on political and economic integration among the neighbouring states is debatable in the short term, particularly given the geopolitical tensions that have been raised vis-à-vis India. On issues of counterterrorism, the most recent EU–Pakistan Political Counter-Terrorism Dialogue stressed cooperation on a comprehensive approach to violent extremism, addressing root causes of radicalization. 241 CPEC implementation may, in theory, help to address some of the economic roots of extremism, but the relationship between economic growth and political violence is not necessarily linear. 3.2. Ways forward for the European Union Eurasia’s geopolitical and geoeconomic landscapes are in rapid transition. While actors such as China and Russia are initiating and stimulating their own regional integration efforts such as the Belt and the EEU, the EU is facing its own internal integration challenges and is also preoccupied with crises in its immediate neighbourhood. However, within a rapidly changing strategic environment, and in an increasingly interconnected world, the EU also needs to think about stability in the long term—not only of its neighbours, but also its neighbours’ neighbours. While this is underlined in the 2016 Global Strategy, a vision for Eurasia specifically is not delineated—a direct connection is made between the EU’s prosperity and security and Asian security. It is pivotal that the EU goes beyond the 2016 Global Strategy and more clearly delineates its vision for a more stable and secure Eurasia. This would need to incorporate its own strategic role in Eurasia, its views on Asian security architecture and its vision for governance vis-à-vis other important stakeholders, including not only the USA and China, but also India and Russia, middle powers, and local actors. 242 This vision could then act as the guideline for all its endeavours in, and assessment of, other Eurasian security and connectivity ideas, including the Belt. However, in the absence of such a vision, in many regards, the Belt fits into EU interests as they stand: it seeks to contribute to increased Eurasian economic, political and security cooperation and integration, and addresses a vast infrastructural and developmental deficit for which there are few other viable large-scale financial alternatives. Indeed, it has elicited a substantial amount of enthusiasm among target states, including within EU borders. The EU should coordinate its own aims and ambitions, and develop a common voice and response to the Belt, both internally and externally. Since the Belt itself remains open-ended and relatively flexible, the EU should also use the opportunity to proactively calibrate the initiative in a way that corresponds more with EU foreign and security interests. The following subsection lays out a few possible avenues. Potential avenues of security cooperation As the previous sections noted, China’s large-scale economic engagement in so many fragile, developing and even developed nations across Eurasia has important implications for global governance. Economic implications of the BRI are perhaps better understood, and the EU has already engaged with China through the EU–China Connectivity Platform on investment cooperation, which also provides the future possibility of joint investment in third countries. The Belt remains too nascent to draw 241 EEAS,‘EU and Pakistan hold political counter-terrorism dialogue’, 20 Apr. 2016.<https://eeas.europa.eu/ topics/nuclear-safety/5152/eu-and-pakistan-hold-political-counter-terrorism-dialogue_en>. 242 Reiterer, M.,‘Asia as part of the EU’s global security strategy: reflections on a more strategic approach’, LSE IDEAS, Dahrendorf Forum Special Report, Apr. 2016.