ÇOK TARAFLI STRATEJİK REKABETLER: ÇİN’İN BRI’Sİ VE HİNDİSTAN’IN IMEC’İNİN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Yıl 2025, Sayı: 71, 87 - 99

Emrah Yıldırımçakar

https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1732300

Öz

Kuşak ve Yol Girişimi (BRI), Çin’in dünya siyasetindeki siyasi ve ekonomik etkisini önemli ölçüde genişletmiştir. BRI’nin ilanından bu yana Çin-Hindistan ve Çin-Amerika Birleşik Devletleri arasındaki rekabet giderek artmıştır. BRI’nin başlatılmasından yaklaşık on yıl sonra Hindistan, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri ve Avrupa Birliği tarafından desteklenen Hindistan-Ortadoğu-Avrupa Ekonomik Koridoru’nu (IMEC) ortaya koymuştur. Ancak Hindistan’ın IMEC’i ve beklenen diğer koridorlar, Çin’in koridorları kadar kapsamlı değildir. Çin’in BRI’si, demiryolları, deniz yolları ve karayollarını kapsayan altı koridordan oluşmaktadır. Aynı zamanda İpek Yolu Fonu ve Asya Altyapı Yatırım Bankası (AIIB) gibi güçlü ekonomik temellerin yanı sıra yaklaşık 150 ülkenin desteğiyle desteklenmektedir. IMEC ise BRI’nin aksine güçlü bir finansal temelden yoksundur ve esas olarak Batı’nın stratejik çıkarlarına hizmet ediyor gibi görünmektedir. Bu çalışma, BRI ve IMEC girişimlerini karşılaştırmalı olarak analiz ederek, bu girişimlerin gelecekteki yönelimlerini değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

BRI , IMEC , China , India , United States , Power Competition

MULTILATERAL STRATEGIC COMPETITIONS: ASSESSING CHINA'S BRI AND INDIA'S IMEC

Öz

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has significantly expanded China’s political and economic influence in world politics. The competition between China, India, and the United States has intensified since the announcement of the BRI. Nearly a decade after the BRI's launch, India introduced the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), backed by the United States and European Union (EU). However, India’s IMEC and other expected corridors are not as comprehensive as those of China. China’s BRI includes six corridors covering railways, seaways, and highways. It is also supported by substantial economic foundations such as the Silk Road Fund and Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), and nearly 150 backing countries. Unlike the BRI, IMEC lacks strong financial backing and appears to primarily serve Western strategic interests. This study analyses the BRI and the IMEC initiatives to assess their future trajectories.

Anahtar Kelimeler

BRI , IMEC , China , India , United States , Power Competition

Kaynakça

• Abumbe, G., Kingsley, N., & Lawrence, O. (2024). Hegemony Of The United States And Wars In The Middle East. Global Journal of Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.4314/gjss.v23i2.3.
• Baabood, A. (2024). The Geopolitics of Economic Development in the Middle East, February 15, Carnegie Middle East Center, https://carnegie-mec.org/2024/02/15/geopolitics-of-economic-development-in-middle-east-pub-91650.
• Canuto, O. (2024). Whither China’s Belt and Road Initiative? Policy Center, January 2. https://www.policycenter.ma/publications/whither-chinas-belt-and-road-initiative#:~:text=In%20total%20for%20the%20period,2023%3B%20Miller%2C%202023).
• Chaisse, J. & Kirkwood, J. (2020). Chinese Puzzle: Anatomy of the (Invisible) Belt and Road Investment Treaty, Journal of International Economic Law, 00, 1–25 doi: 10.1093/jiel/jgz047
• Chaziza, M. (2024). The US-China Rivalry in the Middle East: Confrontation or Competitive Coexistence. Contemporary Review of the Middle East, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/23477989241240899.
• China Daily. (2022). “Biden’s Vacuum-Filling Trip May come back to Bite Him at Home.” Editorial. July 17. www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202207/17/WS62d3f4faa310fd2b29e6cc7c.html (accessed August 10, 2023).
• Darshana M. Baruah (2020). Baruah, India in the Indo-Pacific: New Delhi’s Theater of Opportunity, Carnegie, Endowment for International Peace Publications Department, June 2020, Washington.
• Das, D. (2024). Revisiting the contours of the evolving Middle Eastern order through the India-Middle East-EU Corridor: mapping India’s scopes and limitations, Asian Journal of Political Science, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2024.2322498.
• Dunford, M. & Liu, W. (2019). Chinese perspectives on the Belt and Road Initiative, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society,12(1), 145-167,  https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsy032.
• Elmali, B. (2023). Unrest in the Middle East Is Bad for Both CPEC and IMEC, Retrieved from The Diplomat: https://thediplomat.com/2023/11/unrest-in-the- middle-east-is-bad-for-both-cpec-and-imec/
• European Commission. (2021). EU trade relations – India, Retrieved from European Commission, https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/eu-trade-relationships-country-and-region/countries-and-regions/india_en.
• Ferdinand, P. (2016). Westward ho-the China dream and ‘one belt, one road’: Chinese foreign policy under Xi Jinping. International Affairs, 92(4), 941–957, https://doi. org/10.1111/1468-2346.12660.
• Foreign Policy Research Institute (2011). China and India: Ancient Civilizations, Rising Powers, Giant Societies, and Contrasting Models of Development, March 19, https://www.fpri.org/conference/china-and-india-ancient-civilizations-rising-powers-giant-societies-and-contrasting-models-of-development/
• Gong, X. (2019). The Belt & Road Initiative and China’s influence in Southeast Asia, The Pacific Review, 32(4), 635-665, DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2018.1513950.
• Gupta, A. (2020). Global Strike vs. Globalization: The US-China Rivalry and the BRI. In F. J. B. S. Leandro & P. A. B. Duarte (Eds.), The Belt and Road Initiative: An Old Archetype of a New Development Model, Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Huang, Y. (2016). Understanding China’s Belt & Road Initiative: Motivation, framework and assessment, China Economic Review, 40, 314-321, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2016.07.007.
• Ikenberry,G.J. (2015). Between the Eagle and the Dragon: America, China, and Middle State Strategies in East Asia, Political Science Quarterly, XX(XX), 1-35.
• Johnston, Lauren A. (2018). The Belt and Road Initiative: What is in it for China? Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies,6 (1), 1-18, doi:10.1002/app5.265.
• Khan, K.H. (2023). China-India Rivalry and the Economic Corridors, Saudi Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 8(9): 252-258. DOI: 10.36348/sjhss.2023.v08i09.003.
• Khan, K.H., Bastanifar, I., Omidi, A. et al. (2024). Integrating gravity models and network analysis in logistical strategic planning: a case of the India Middle-East Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), Maritime Economics & Logistics, 26(2), https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-024-00289-x.
• Kashif, H. K., and Koch, H. (2024). ‘INSTC and Chabahar Port’: An Introduction, (eds.) Kashif Hasan Khan, India’s Economic Corridor Initiatives, Routledge, New York, pp. 3-19. DOI: 10.4324/9781003454540-2.
• Marcoux, J. M. & Fleury, J.S. (2022). China’s contestation of international norms on state-owned enterprises and governmentprocurement through the Belt and Road Initiative, Asia Pacific Law Review, (30)2, 325-347, DOI: 10.1080/10192557.2022.2085413
• Morgenthau, Hans J. (1967). Politics Among Nations, New York: Knopf.
• Murton, G.& Narins, T. (2024). Corridors, chokepoints and the contradictions of the Belt and Road Initiative, Area Development and Policy, DOI: 10.1080/23792949.2024.2311904
• Murad A. Usman, K. (2024). Sino-India competition in South Asia: Can India counter the growing role of China? Journal of Educational Research & Social Sciences Review (4(1), 13-19.
• Mearsheimer, J. J. (2021). The inevitable rivalry: America, China, and the tragedy of great-power politics, Foreign Affairs, 100(48). PDF available: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2021-10-19/inevitable-rivalry-cold-war.
• Mearsheimer, J. J. 2019. Bound to fail: the rise and fall of the liberal international order. International Secure,43, 7–50.
• Mearsheimer, J.J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. New York: W.W.
• Lake, D. A. (2017). Domination, Authority, and the Forms of Chinese Power, The Chinese Journal of International Politics, (10)4, 357–382.
• Leonova, O., & Khatri, J. (2023). Strategic Partnership between India and the United States: Examining Driving and Restraining Forces. MGIMO Review of International Relations. https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2023-3-90-180-198.
• Liang, H. and Zhang, Yao. (2019). The Theoretical System of Belt and Road Initiative, People’s Publishing House, Beijing, China.
• Lomia, E. (2020). Political Realism in International Relations: Classical Realism, Neo-realism, and Neo-Classical Realism. , 7, 591-600. https://doi.org/10.46291/ijospervol7iss3pp591-600.
• Ly, B. (2020). The nexus of BRI and internationalization of Renminbi (RMB). Cogent Business & Management, 7(1),1—21. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1808399.
• Pant, H. V. (2018). The future of India’s ties with ASEAN, The Diplomat, January, 26, Retrieved from, https://thediplomat.com/2018/01/the-future-of-indias-ties-with-asean/.
• Qian, X. (2022). Rethinking Investment Treaties for Sustainable Development: From the ‘New Delhi Declaration’ Principles to Modern Investment Law & Policy. Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy,17(2), pp.405-448, September 2022, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4416808
• Rizvi, O. (2023). From India to Europe: What Opportunities and Challenges will the New Corridor Bring?, December 12, https://www.euronews.com/business/2023/12/15/from-india-to-europe-economic-corridor-to-offer-new-trade-opportunities.
• Rolland, N. (2017). China’s “Belt and Road Initiative”: Underwhelming or Game-Changer? The Washington Quarterly, 40(1), 127-142, DOI: 10.1080/0163660X.2017.1302743.
• Rossi, E. (2023). How IMEC (and Italy) can reshape trade and ties. A conversation with Soliman, Decode 39, September 12, https://decode39.com/7712/imec-italy-reshape-trade-ties-soliman/.
• Shinde, V. (2023). History Repeats: A new (old) Economic Corridor Emerges, Lowy Institute, November 1,  https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/history-repeats-new-old-economic-corridor-emerges.
• Shorbagy, M. (2024). Triangular Dynamics: US Response to China’s Assertiveness in the Middle East, Arab Studies Quarterly, 46(2), 137-161. DOI:10.13169/arabstudquar.46.2.0137
• Siddiqa, A. (2023). Corridor Politics IMEC vs. BRI: Another Geopolitical Face-off in U.S.-China Rivalry, Journal of Pakistan-China Studies,4(1), 1-22.
• Sładkowski, A., Bošnjak, R., Kezić, D. and Krile, S. (2024). BRI Project: Are There Alternatives? Transactions on Maritime Science. Split, Croatia, 13(1). doi: 10.7225/toms.v13.n01.018.
• Tambi, R. (2023). India pushes back against China’s economic influence, September 9, https://eastasiaforum.org/2023/09/09/india-pushes-back-against-chinas-economic-influence/.
• Tamer, C. (2022). The ‘I2U2’ Alliance in West Asia: A New ‘QUAD’, July 25, ANKASAM, https://www.ankasam.org/the-i2u2-alliance-in-west-asia-a-new-quad/?lang=en.
• Thaliyakkattil, S. (2019). China’s Achilles’ Heel: The Belt and Road Initiative and Its Indian Discontents. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Tekdal, V. (2018). China’s Belt and Road Initiative: at the crossroads of challenges and ambitions, The Pacific Review, 31(3), 373-390, DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2017.1391864
• White House, ‘Remarks by President Biden on America’s Place in the World’ (4 February 2021) https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/02/04/remarks-by-president-biden-on-americas-place-in-the-world/
• The State Council of the PRC (2015). China’s Belt and Road plan open to all nations, April 18.http://english.www.gov.cn/news/top_news/2015/04/18/content_281475091262006.htm
• The White House. (October 12, 2022). The Biden-Harris Administration’s National Security Strategy, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/10/12/fact-sheet-the-biden-harris-administrations-national-security-strategy/.
• The White House. (February 4, 2021). ‘Remarks by President Biden on America’s Place in the World’ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/02/04/remarks-by-president-biden-on-americas-place-in-the-world/
• U.S. Defense Secretary. (2023). AUKUS: The Trilateral Security Partnership Between Australia, U.K. and U.S., September 12, https://www.defense.gov/Spotlights/AUKUS/.
• Wakim, J. (2023). The Indian–Middle Eastern–European Economic Corridor: Setting Israel as the Pole of a Middle East Order under US Hegemony. Contemporary Arab Affairs, 16(4), 383-396. https://doi.org/10.1163/17550920-01604001.
• Walt, S.M. (1987). The origins of alliances, Ithaca New York,
• Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of International Politics, New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Waltz, K. N. (2014). Anarchic orders and balance of power, in Colin Elman and Micheal A. Jensen (eds.) Realism Reader, Routledge, New York, pp. 104-123.
• Wang, J. (2005). China’s Search for Stability with America. Foreign Affairs, 84, 39. https://doi.org/10.2307/20031704.
• Yeung, H. and Huber, J. (2024). Has China’s Belt and Road Initiative positively impacted the economic complexity of host countries? Empirical evidence, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics,69, 246-258,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2023.12.012.
• Yildirimcakar, E. (2025). The Strategic Objectives of the India–Middle East–Europe Corridor (IMEC). Contemporary Arab Affairs, 18(2), 169-187. https://doi.org/10.1163/17550920-bja00071
• Yildirimcakar, E. (2023). The Dynamics of Iran-China “New” Strategic Cooperation. Alternatif Politika, 15(2), 344-367. https://doi.org/10.53376/ap.2023.13.
• Yildirimcakar, E. (2020). Turkey’s Role in China’s Soft Balancing Strategy, Turkish Policy Quarterly, 19(2)153–160. Yusha, Z. (2022). Biden’s Middle East Visit Empty-Handed Despite U-Turn in Stance. Global Times, July 17, www.globaltimes.cn/page/202207/1270737.shtml (accessed August 14, 2023).
• Zhao, M. (2024). The Belt & Road Initiative and U.S.-China competition over the global South, China Economic Journal, 17(2), 166-181, DOI: 10.1080/17538963.2024.2344270.
• Zhao, S. (2014). A New Model of Big Power Relations? China–US strategic rivalry and balance of power in the Asia–Pacific. Journal of Contemporary China, 24(93), 377–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2014.953808/
• Zou, L. Shen, J. H. Zhang, J. Lee, C.C. (2021). What is the rationale behind China’s infrastructure investment under the Belt and Road Initiative. Journal of Economic Surveys,36(3), 605-633, doi:10.1111/joes.12427.