75 Years of India’s Republic: Tracing the past and IMEC as a subject of inquiry amidst global developments

Introduction
Eric Garcetti, the departing US ambassador to India, has urged India, the US, and Gulf allies to show new vigour in promoting the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC). This view of the outgoing American ambassador should be seen in light of the ongoing conflict in the Middle East and the recent swearing in of Donald Trump as the 47th President of the United States of America. The Middle East is an extremely combustible region today witnessing several sites of conflict simultaneously. The new American administration might as well sleepwalk into a significant conflict in the region. To support this observation with an example, Washington had come perilously close to a direct war with Iran few years ago in 2020 after a protracted period of simmering tensions. Hence, the current conflict in Gaza, and the recent tit-for-tat missile exchanges between Israel and Iran, creates a highly volatile geopolitical environment, which could get considerably more complex following the overthrow of the Assad government in Syria. This is the sentiment that got reflected in Garcetti’s comments during his interaction with the Indian press where he admitted to the existence of both challenges and new-found opportunities in so far as the operationalisation of the IMEC is concerned. Extrapolating from historical trends leads to an understanding of past attributes and lessons that are shaping the geostrategic realities of today. A historical understanding of this flagship connectivity partnership is required before diving deeper into these geopolitical developments in the regions that sit astride or close to where the IMEC passes through.

Historical Backdrop of the IMEC
Although the IMEC’s history is rooted in the Silk Road, a historic trade route that served as a forum for interactions and exchanges between civilizations, it has seen renewed growth since the early 21st century. The Silk Road laid the foundation for the regions’ economic prosperity and cultural development by facilitating not just the trade of goods but also the spread of religion, culture, technology, and art. These historical ties were reinforced and solidified throughout time. The Middle East’s connections with India and Europe were further reinforced during the Middle Ages by the emergence of Arab empires and traders. Later on, through the establishment of colonies and trade networks, European nations strengthened ties between India, the Middle East, and Europe during the colonial era. However, the IMEC’s revival in the global scenario takes place in synergy with the growth of the Indian economy, the Middle East’s plentiful oil resources, and the need for markets in Europe, offering significant prospects for India.

Prospects for India
From India’s standpoint, a grouping based on geostrategic and geo-economic determinants like the IMEC does provide considerable opportunities to increase its diplomatic footprint, which has been bolstered by its G20 leadership in 2023 and its growing status as a representative voice of the Global South. The IMEC consists of multi-modal routes, that could realistically emerge as a viable alternative to the troubled North-South Corridor to Russia via the Chabahar port in Iran. It could potentially transport goods and other commodities from India to the south-eastern flanks of Europe, particularly in countries like Greece in less than two weeks, which is nearly 40 % faster than the traditional trading routes that pass through the Suez Canal. The multibillion dollar ‘India-Middle East Food Corridor’ and an integrated hydrocarbon value chain are two examples of India’s already-existing integrated value chains that serve as a conduit for collaboration amongst the major IMEC participants. It is interesting to note that India’s bilateral commerce with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates stand at nearly $60 billion and $90 billion respectively, and is poised to grow steadily in the next decade. In addition to its historical roots, this engagement with the Middle East is currently also being driven by China’s increasing influence in the region.
The shores of the Eastern Mediterranean flowing through the IMEC have direct ramifications on European security. India and Greece, both of which are descendants of ancient civilizations, have had to defend themselves against their neighbours, Pakistan and Turkey, respectively. In addition, the Houthis, an armed militia backed by the Iranian state, launched missiles, and armed drones in the Red Sea in response to Israel’s military operations at the Gaza strip, contextualizing the interconnectedness of maritime security in the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean. In this scenario, the withdrawal of American troops and a hitherto lenient approach by the European Union has, off late, spurred Turkey to exercise its hegemonic impulses in the region. Turkey, suffering from a kind of ‘empire’ syndrome is anomalous to the cross regional cooperation initiatives like the IMEC. Though many within the EU, particularly France and Greece are of the view that the US approach towards Turkey is unreasonably accommodating, the advent of India into this region by means of the IMEC might well oblige them towards recalibrating their policies.

Impact of Trump
The connectivity project aims to draw India closer to the US and the EU, while countering Chinese influence. While bridging the East and the West, IMEC would provide a boost to India’s strategy of escaping encirclement by Beijing and emerging as a leader among developing countries. The return of Donald Trump as the president of the US could have a profound impact on the trajectory and operationalization of the IMEC. Trump with his ‘America First’ approach and unpredictable policy-making leads the world to view his administrative measures cautiously. The US is all set to intensify its competition with Beijing amidst the already deepening US-China great power rivalry, as exemplified in Trump’s cabinet selection of anti-China hawks. This may work in the favour of IMEC as the project can be perceived as a strategic alternative to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, and an administration critical of China, would likely prioritise the implementation of projects that counter China’s influence in critical regions, particularly the Middle East and Europe. Trump is likely to increase US investment in this corridor, which seeks to establish an alternative trade and logistics network connecting India, the Gulf, and Europe, as it aligns well with the US agenda of diversifying global supply chains away from the Chinese dominance.

A second Trump administration may also lead to deeper India-US ties, ensuring greater cooperation in infrastructure, logistics, and connectivity projects like the IMEC. This would be underscored by the recognition of the pivotal role India plays in the Indo-Pacific region, owing to its unique geopolitical positioning and its ambitions to counterbalance China in the region. Trump’s established connection with the key leaders of the Middle East, including those of Saudi Arabia and the UAE, could further bolster regional support for the IMEC, particularly in light of his administration’s focus on forging strong bilateral relationships in the Gulf.

However, Trump’s polarising tendencies to global diplomacy and his incalculable approach towards Iran was evident in his first term when he junked the Iran nuclear deal, which was not only backed by the EU, but also the UK, France, and Germany. An extrapolation of similar trends coupled with the escalating conflict in Gaza, and the broader Israeli-Iranian rivalry risks destabilising the region. These factors could create challenges to the objectives this corridor seeks to achieve, by compromising the security and reliability of the proposed trade routes. Though the recent ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas is a positive development that augurs well for the plausibility of the corridor. In essence, the IMEC stands at the intersection of great power competition and regional cooperation, and its trajectory will likely reflect the complexities of geopolitics of the day with its share of challenges as well as opportunities.
Conclusion

As India celebrates 75 years of its republic, the IMEC emerges as a beacon of its growing global influence and connectivity ambitions amidst a rapidly evolving and volatile geopolitical landscape. Although the unpredictable geopolitical climate of the Middle East introduces challenges to the operationalization of this corridor undermining its viability, there are several opportunities to galvanise investments and cooperation essential for the IMEC’s success. For this success to see the light of the day, it becomes increasingly important for the participating countries to align on a path of actionable implementation and to confront the challenges in solidarity. Only by doing so can the IMEC realise its goal of driving global trade efficiency, with a focus on energy transition and digital connectivity. While the India navigates complex challenges and opportunities today, the IMEC, rooted in historical trade routes and cultural exchanges, reflects the convergence of the Middle East’s strategic importance, the European quest for strategic autonomy, and India’s aspirations as an emerging global power.

Dr. Manish Barma has completed his PhD from the School of International Studies, JNU and was an Assistant Professor of International Relations and Security Studies at Rashtriya Raksha University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India.
Shreya Sinha is a Research Associate (Europe Desk) at the Vivekananda International Foundation (VIF), New Delhi, India.