The report by the US-based research group C4ADS questions China's portrayal of the trillion-dollar programme, called the "Belt and Road Initiative," as strictly meant to promote economic development.
President Xi Jinping's signature foreign policy programme, is working to reinforce China's links to Southeast Asia, Europe and Africa through networks of roads, ports, railways, power plants and other infrastructure projects.
C4ADS, a nonprofit research institute that specializes in data analysis and security, examined official Chinese policy documents and unofficial reports by Chinese analysts to analyze the intentions of Beijing's ambitious economic development programme, which seeks to connect 65 per cent of the world's population in more than 60 countries.
Chinese officials say the initiative, also known as a modern "Silk Road" harkening back to maritime and land-based trade routes of centuries past, is driven by commercial considerations. They have rejected assertions that it is also meant to expand Beijing's global influence.
The report analyzed 15 Chinese-funded port projects in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Australia, Oman, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Djibouti and elsewhere in the Indo-Pacific region. It concluded that projects aren't driven by "win-win" economic development for the individual host countries, as Beijing claims.
"Rather, the investments appear to generate political influence, stealthily expand China's military presence and create an advantageous strategic environment in the region," it said.
China's foreign ministry rejected the findings, saying in a statement that Belt and Road is "essentially an economic cooperation initiative" promoting common development through infrastructure.
"China is not playing a geopolitical game," it said.
While there's no official policy document linking Belt and Road to China's national security interests, Chinese analysts have written that developing the programme and pursuing Chinese security are "intimately linked," the report said. The analysts don't represent official thinking but the authors believe what they say could influence decision-makers promoting the Belt and Road Initiative.