Turkey: Spolier to India’s Global Ambitions

On September 9^th, the White House, in a statement, announced the signing of an MoU by the leaders of the US, India, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, France, Germany, Italy and the EU, committing to work together to develop a new India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC). This proposal was also announced at the recently concluded G20 summit in New Delhi during an event of the "Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment."

Riled by IMEC bypassing Turkey in this groundbreaking deal, which could be a game changer if realised, President Turkey announced, "There's no corridor without Turkey." Mr Erdogan has criticised the project for leaving Turkey out in the cold and has vowed to create an alternate Iraq Development Road project to connect the Persian Gulf with Europe through Iraq and Turkey.

Background

This landmark corridor is expected to stimulate economic development through enhanced connectivity and economic integration across two continents, thus "unlocking sustainable and inclusive economic growth." On the ground, the IMEC will include a railway linked through ports connecting Europe, the Middle East and Asia with commercial hubs and clean energy, undersea cables, energy grids and telecommunication lines to expand reliable access to electricity.

Trade between Europe and Asia has been going on since ancient times and for centuries has taken place both through land and sea. Historically, the region occupied by the present-day country of Turkey normally played a big role in the land route. When the Ottoman Empire took control of this region, the land trade route between Europe and Asia was under its control.

Analysis

This announcement by the Turkish government should come as no surprise. The Turkish economy is in the doldrums. Years of economic mismanagement by the Erdogan administration have resulted in this. Political corruption and nepotism have added to the economic woes.

It is true that given its geographical position, Turkey should act as the natural confluence point of trade between the East and the West. Europe is certainly highly accessible from the Turkish mainland. Istanbul is situated strategically between the European and Asian continents. The Istanbul harbour is well connected.

Still, just having a strategic location is not good enough. Something more must be on the offer as well. This includes an economy that is on an upward trajectory. Despite being a NATO member, Turkey under President Erdogan has been following more or less an independent path, openly courting China and Russia at the cost of its relations with its other NATO members. Clearly, the Western powers do not wish to reward Ankara for these indiscretions.

Today, an economically weakened Turkey finds itself increasingly marginalised in global affairs, and with its currency falling, even its erstwhile Gulf state partners have not taken up cudgels on its behalf for its inclusion in the IMEC. Turkey must first set its own house in order before it can attract the attention of global partners for massive development projects like the IMEC.

Under President Erdogan, Indo-Turkish relations have been rather cool, if not openly hostile. Turkey has historically been Pakistan's military partner since the CENTO days when both were members. The Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), formerly known as the Middle East Treaty Organization (METO) and also known as the Baghdad Pact, was a military alliance of the Cold War. It was formed on 24th February, 1955 by Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. The alliance was dissolved on 16 March 1979.

Turkey has been extremely vocal in its support for Pakistan on the issue of Kashmir, and even in the latest UN General Assembly address, President Erdogan did not forget to include the 'outstanding issue of Kashmir" in his address to the UNGA. India has observed that the Turks normally oppose India’s growing global pre-eminence, and their recent response to the IMEC is no less than a spoiler.

Turkey knows that if fully realised, the proposed India-Middle East-Europe corridor will be a game-changer in more ways than one. It will connect the world's three most important economic regions today, dwarfing even the Chinese BRI, which has just one engine to drive it and hundreds of debtors/ dependent nations, unlike the IMEC where relatively rich countries would be investing their money for an enduring partnership.

The countries of Asia and the Middle East involved in the IMEC are -India, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel and the European nations. Each of these countries has specific reasons for supporting this inter-regional model of connectivity. During the G20 Summit, extensive discussions on this issue took place, and each of the participating countries’ unique concerns about this project were addressed. Only after a consensus was reached among the participating states was this initiative officially announced.

The alternative plan proposed by Turkey is tentatively called the Development Road Project. This plan has a number of loopholes. Iraq is supposed to play a big part, which is still in a state of shambles after years of civil war. Large parts of this country remain under the control of Shia and Sunni militias, where the central government has little authority. Border controls are non-existent, as the border was dissolved when the Islamic State was in power. Smuggling continues to be a serious problem along Iraq’s many borders. With such a dysfunctional polity, any country should be disqualified from being part of a regional trading arrangement. The Iraqi government has put forward some maps. According to these maps, a proposed route within Iraqi territory has been formulated. Products will be transported along this route whose value is expected to be in the range of $17 billion. The starting point will be the Grand Faw port in southern Iraq. Ten Iraqi provinces will fall in between. The destination will be Iraq’s northern border with Turkey. The Iraqi government still does not control a substantial part of these provinces through which this trade route will pass.

Another pillar in this Turkish plan is Qatar. This is a small Arab emirate that punches way above its weight in the global arena due to its economic might. Qatar and Turkey already have a close relationship. They support the same factions in Libya’s civil war. Both countries also have a close relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood organisation, which is banned in several Arab countries like Egypt. Hence, it was quite expected that Qatar would somehow become a part of this Turkish idea.

Despite its growing worldwide economic clout, Qatar is still a small country. Any East-West trade that will take place with Qatar as a conduit will be small in scale. The native population of Qatar is small. Most of the remainder are expatriates. At the end of 2022, Qatar hosted the football world cup. This put a huge strain on the Qatari economy. If Doha’s economy felt the brunt of holding a major sporting event, would it be able to deal with the pressure of acting as a hub of world trade without buckling under the strain?

The last piece of the puzzle in the Turkish endeavour is the UAE. Abu Dhabi has already committed to the corridor proposed at the G20 Summit. Emre Peker, Europe director at the Eurasia Group think tank, told the Financial Times, "Turkey lacks the financing to realise the full scope of the project and seems to be counting on the UAE and Qatari support to build the proposed infrastructure”. This clearly shows that the Turks are trying to make up for their lost economic leverage by relying totally on money from the Gulf Arabs.

This scheme is not going to work out in the long run. The Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan has recorded his opposition to the India-Middle East-Europe corridor by saying that "experts had doubts that the primary goal of this corridor was rationality and efficiency" and that "more geostrategic concerns were at stake”. Actually, these same accusations can be levelled at Turkey’s weak plan to counter this corridor.