Geopolitics and transport corridors

Throughout history, international logistics projects have played a significant role in determining the balance of power, alongside other dynamics in the global political economy. When the desire for access to different markets combines with concerns over transit security, efficiently functioning supply chains become an inseparable part of both economy and security. For this reason, the mention of transport corridors brings to mind both cooperation and competition, and naturally, this situation incorporates geopolitical power calculations.

Undoubtedly, the most talked-about among current international transport corridors is the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), brought to the agenda by the Chinese administration to make trade between Asia and Europe sustainable.

This infrastructure initiative, based on trillion-dollar funds, also holds a very important place on the geopolitical plane.

Through the BRI, it is aimed to integrate more closely more than seventy countries that make up more than half of the world's population and economy. Within the scope of the initiative, the construction of new high-speed train lines and highways, ports, energy pipelines, and modern telecommunications infrastructure is envisaged.

Under the BRI, there are sub-projects involving different countries. Markets in Europe are targeted via China-Mongolia/Kazakhstan-Russia, China-Central Asia-West Asia, and China-Kazakhstan-Transcaucasia transfers, as well as through Belarus and Turkey.

The China-Pakistan corridor holds a separate place. While it takes 40 days for Chinese goods to reach Europe by sea, it is possible to halve this time with train lines. Furthermore, railways reduce the cost of air transport fivefold.

The BRI is not just a physical connectivity initiative, but a digital one as well! The Digital Silk Road is built on China's vision of wireless power transmission, fiber optic infrastructure, 5G usage, data centers, mobile networks, and smart cities among regional countries.

Under the guidance of the Chinese state, the country's major technology companies are designing projects for regional countries. On the other hand, the US is playing a balancing card by introducing the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) initiative against the BRI. According to this, goods loaded from India will first be transported by sea to the Arabian Peninsula, from there by land to Israel, and then by sea again to Europe.

Although this project is not operational and has a low probability of realization, it is important in that it reflects the aim of highlighting India against China and easing strategic straits for Anglo-Saxon geopolitical interests. Another more concrete initiative that is India-focused and geographically located between Asia and Europe is the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) between Russia and India.

In addition, the 'Northern Sea Route' has a special importance thanks to the increasingly important Arctic region and the transportation that has become possible in certain months of the year due to the melting of glaciers there. The only disadvantage of this route, which is both a short and safe path between Europe and Asia, is that it cannot be used at all times of the year for now. This new route is expected to reduce the East Asia-Eastern Mediterranean sea route using the Suez Canal from 21 thousand kilometers to 12 thousand 800 kilometers and shorten the transit time by 10-15 days.

In the vast Eurasian geography, the Caspian basin is located at the meeting point of both 'East-West' and 'North-South' axis transport and trade corridors. For this reason, the Caspian is turning into a playing field that holds the potential to produce influence beyond the region within the framework of great power competition. Indeed, there are also routes passing through the Caspian via Central Asia in trade between Europe and China.

In the Caspian Sea, transportation carried out with increasing volumes in recent years between Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan is noteworthy. There are different names for this route, whose official name is the "Trans-Caspian International Transport Route". The most commonly used of these is the Middle Corridor. Although it is sometimes used for both Iranian and Caspian-crossing projects, the Middle Corridor concept officially declared by Turkey refers to the connection beyond the Caspian, primarily the Kars-Tbilisi-Baku railway, and the Turkey-Georgia-Azerbaijan link.

In addition, shipments starting from EU countries and passing through the Black Sea (bypassing Turkey) and then again through Georgia-Azerbaijan to the eastern shore of the Caspian are also evaluated within this scope. This route, which includes multi-modal transport vehicles such as sea, rail, and road, has been developing in recent years. The integration of the Turkic world is also accelerating in this way.

Since reducing the increasing importance of the Caspian in trade between Asia and Europe only to East-West axis projects would leave the picture incomplete, it is also necessary to take a look at the developments on the North-South axis and therefore the INSTC.

Official work for the aforementioned corridor, which extends from Russia to India via the Caspian crossing and Iranian transit, has been continuing uninterrupted for the last five years. The phenomenon of the war in Ukraine changing energy supply and trade routes also appears here.

The Russian Federation, whose trade with Europe has been disrupted due to war and sanctions, is forced to redefine its geopolitical orientation and is focusing on the development of the 7000-kilometer INSTC infrastructure in the geography extending from its own territory to the south of Asia.

Indeed, under current conditions, a ship departing from Russia's northern ports to reach Indian ports covers the distance in 30-45 days via the Atlantic coast, the Mediterranean, and the Suez Canal; there is a potential to cover this distance in 15-24 days via the "Unified Deep Water System of European Russia" including the Volga, the Caspian crossing to Iran, and from there to India via the Bandar Abbas or Chabahar ports in southern Iran. Of course, the most important problem here is the situation of Iran and the state of war.

It would not be correct to say that giant transport projects are planned solely for economic motives. There are also political goals behind the initiatives. For example, in the BRI, while regional countries are being tried to be integrated into the Chinese system, cooperation and coordination are sought against possible security threats. In this way, it is intended to prevent neighboring countries that attract investment by benefiting from China's increasing prosperity from becoming a source of any political instability. The US, on the other hand, is looking for every opportunity not to leave the region entirely to its main rival, and is building its geopolitical construct to weaken its rival.

In this entire general landscape, Turkey's vision should be to see East-West and North-South axis transport corridors not as alternatives but as complementary, and to benefit from this as much as possible for its own national interest. Gaining an effective position in the new international system woven with giant transport corridors is not possible with words, but only by developing concrete capacity in such matters. Unfortunately, as in many subjects, it is seen that we are far from this.

***

Note: I celebrate the 103rd anniversary of our Republic, the unique gift of Gazi Mustafa Kemal Atatürk to our nation and the greatest holiday for our country. Especially what has been experienced recently has once again revealed that the most suitable form of government for the Turkish people is the Republic.

However, it should not be forgotten that the Republic can only live if its citizens know its value and truly own it.

Long live the Republic!