Reimagining Regional Connectivity: Why IMEC Falls Short

IMEC, at its inception, was positioned as a counterbalance to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a flagship initiative of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). However, its fundamental flaws quickly surfaced, undermining its feasibility and potential for success.

• The vision of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) promised a transformative approach to regional connectivity and economic integration.
• However, as scrutiny mounts, it’s becoming increasingly evident that IMEC falls short in comparison to alternative projects like the Iraq Development Road Project (IDRP) and the potential extension of the RCD Highway.
• From logistical challenges to geopolitical complexities, IMEC’s shortcomings highlight the need for a reevaluation of regional connectivity initiatives.

The grand vision of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) was conceived with lofty ambitions of fostering connectivity and economic integration across continents. However, as the dust settles on its proposal, it becomes increasingly evident that IMEC is fraught with challenges, rendering it a failed project in comparison to alternative ventures like the Iraq Development Road Project (IDRP) and the potential extension of the RCD Highway.

Understanding IMEC’s Flaws

IMEC, at its inception, was positioned as a counterbalance to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a flagship initiative of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). However, its fundamental flaws quickly surfaced, undermining its feasibility and potential for success.

One of the primary criticisms directed towards IMEC is its convoluted route, which necessitates traversing through the Arabian Sea, a region rife with geopolitical tensions among India, Pakistan, and China. This geographical complication not only increases the complexity of the corridor but also escalates costs, making it a less attractive option when compared to alternatives like the IDRP.

Moreover, IMEC’s exclusion of Turkey, a pivotal player in regional geopolitics, raised eyebrows and garnered significant backlash. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s swift condemnation of IMEC underscored Turkey’s alternative proposal, the IDRP, which offers a more direct route connecting the Persian Gulf with Europe via rail and highway networks. Turkey’s proactive approach in advocating for the IDRP highlights the project’s viability and strategic significance, particularly in bypassing volatile regions like Gaza and potentially securing the route through northern Iraq.

Overcoming Security Challenges: The IDRP Perspective

However, the success of the IDRP hinges on addressing security challenges posed by groups like the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in northern Iraq. Turkey’s intent to eliminate PKK elements underscores the necessity of a coordinated effort among regional actors to ensure the security and viability of the corridor. By leveraging collective expertise and resources, Turkey, Pakistan, and other like-minded nations can mitigate security risks and pave the way for seamless connectivity.

The Appeal of the RCD Highway Extension

In contrast to IMEC’s geopolitical constraints and security vulnerabilities, the extension of the RCD Highway presents a compelling alternative for regional connectivity. Linking Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, and potentially Azerbaijan, this project capitalizes on existing infrastructure and strategic partnerships to create a robust transit corridor. By tapping into the economic potential of Central Asia and the Caucasus region, the RCD extension promises to unlock new avenues for trade and cooperation.

Furthermore, Pakistan’s strategic vision emphasizes collaboration with Iran and Azerbaijan to leverage the Caspian Sea as a gateway to Eurasian markets. This multifaceted approach not only enhances Pakistan’s regional influence but also strengthens economic ties with key partners, positioning the country as a vital player in the evolving geopolitical landscape.

Reassessing Priorities and Embracing Sustainable Solutions

In the context of these alternative projects, IMEC pales in comparison, plagued by logistical hurdles, geopolitical rivalries, and strategic oversights. While India and its allies may have championed IMEC as a counterweight to CPEC, the reality paints a different picture—one of unfulfilled promises and unrealized potential.

As we navigate the complexities of regional connectivity, it is imperative to reassess our priorities and embrace projects that offer tangible benefits and sustainable solutions. By investing in initiatives like the IDRP and the extension of the RCD Highway, we can chart a course toward inclusive growth, stability, and prosperity for all stakeholders involved. The time for visionary leadership and collaborative action is now—to build bridges, both literal and figurative, that transcend borders and unite nations in pursuit of a brighter future.

Conclusion: Towards a Unified Approach

In conclusion, reimagining regional connectivity requires a unified approach that transcends political boundaries and geopolitical rivalries. By embracing inclusive and sustainable projects like the IDRP and the extension of the RCD Highway, we can overcome the challenges posed by projects like IMEC and pave the way for a more interconnected and prosperous future. The journey toward regional connectivity may be fraught with obstacles, but with visionary leadership and collective action, we can turn these challenges into opportunities for growth and collaboration.

by Anees Hafiz ~ The Writer is an engineering management professional and the author of Pakistan`s Defence & Nuclear Doctrine

This article was Published on 14th March 2024 in THE ISLAMABAD TELEGRAPH  https://theislamabadtelegraph.com/2024/03/reimagining-regional-connectivity-why-imec-falls-short/