Abstract: The report of the 20th CPC National Congress emphasized the critical directives of “comprehensively advancing major country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics ” and “accelerating the leading sporting nation.” Grounded in the strategic convergence of these directives and the imperative to build China’s autonomous knowledge system in sports studies, the study methodically delineates the theoretical system for sports foreign engagement with Chinese characteristics. It is posited that the theoretical system defines its subject of study as “the exchanges and interactions of the Chinese government and people, adhering to the practical principles of the sinification of Marxism, with other countries and international organizations through sports.” Rooted in the methodological principles of dialectical materialism and historical materialism, the theoretical system should primarily rely on historiographical research methods, interdisciplinary approaches as its core, and quantitative methods for expansion. Based on the convergence of the logical foundations of sports science and diplomacy, the theoretical framework of China’s sports-driven foreign engagement with distinctive Chinese features is rooted in the following premise: “the Chinese government and people’s adherence to the practical principles of the sinification of Marxism adapted to the Chinese context, guided by the vision of a community with a shared future for mankind, through sports activities and cultural exchanges with other governments and peoples or international organizations.” The core categories of the theoretical system encompass five dimensions: Subject Theory, Ontology, Object Theory, Value Theory, and Operational Theory. Grounded in the holistic architecture of China’s diplomatic strategy, this study systematically identifies the evolutionary imperatives and theoretical coherence that unify the system’s developmental trajectory. The study culminates in articulating the system’s architectural configuration across five interlocking domains: political orientation, philosophical tenets, institutional design, axiological core, and operational praxis.