My favorite former Indian diplomat, Bhadrakumar, is back with us after covering the G20, BRICS, and other such things, and is giving us his opinion of the proposed India - Middle East - Europe Economic Corridor. Needless to say, he's not terribly impressed by it.

First and foremost, why might the United States be interested in the idea at all? (I asked this question when it was discussed last megathread):

1. It allows the Biden admin to claim an achievement, as the mass killing and maiming of hundreds of thousands of people isn't going to be a bright policy spot when looked back on.
2. It gets Saudi Arabia and Israel to kiss and make friends, and in general seems to disrupt the ongoing vibe of reconcillation across the region by getting them to engage with Israel instead, and away from Egypt, Iran, and Turkey. This is especially pertinent with Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Iran joining BRICS+, and China and Russia's efforts to integrate the Middle East into Eurasia.
3. Reduce the dependence on the Suez Canal, as Yemen, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Sudan (all near or on the Red Sea) are becoming less and less West-friendly (or, at least, more involved with Russia and China).

Next - okay, let's take the concept and just run with it. Why, from a capitalist profit motive perspective, would anybody want to do this when the Suez Canal is right there? Transportation costs will inevitably rise and delays will form.

The answer, says Bhadrakumar, is partially because of the interests of the Adani Group. Israel's Port of Haifa, which is ran by Adani. The company also wants to get management contracts in Greece and Italy.

Two ports in the western state of Gujarat — Mundra and Kandla — have been identified as IMEC port heads. Mundra is a private port owned by Adani Group and is also a special economic zone.

Bhadrakumar does not believe this project will be any real hindrance or competition for Russia and China. In fact:

Russian President Vladimir Putin has expressed the hope that if the IMEC does materialise in the fulness of time despite the obstacles in the way, Russia’s exports from Black Sea to the Gulf region can be routed through it and vice versa.

It is entirely conceivable that China, which is the Gulf region’s number one trading partner, too will exploit the IMEC to maximum advantage. Chinese companies have a big presence in the Saudi railway sector for nearly two decades already.

Suffice to say, it is sheer baloney that China will lose sleep over the IMEC lest it spelt doom for the Belt and Road. In reality, the IMEC is peanuts compared to China’s proposed $57.7 billion plan to construct a 1,860-mile [3028 km] rail system connecting Pakistan’s port of Gwadar to the Chinese city of Kashgar in Xinjiang, which will be its most expensive Belt and Road Initiative to date and will also extend to additional train systems connecting China to Turkey and Iran, significantly opening up direct access to the regions.

Bhadrakumar is very skeptical that the US's plan to derail the Middle East's integration into Eurasia and instead force them to make friends with Israel will work.

Additionally, there is approximately 3000 kilometers of railway line to build, which is no small distance if you're explicitly leaving out Chinese companies from construction, and also alignment plans for the landing destinations in Greece and Italy which could cost up to $8 billion.

To quote India’s railway minister Ashwini Vaishnaw, “It is a very complex programme and will require everything to be brought to common standards. For instance, trains should run on the same gauge, similar technologies for engines should be used, dimensions of containers should be similar.”

Bhadrakumar concludes:

Suffice to say, the most feasible way to realise the IMEC dream may be to make this an inclusive project in regional connectivity — and invite China to join. That is, assuming that the raison d’être of the IMEC extends beyond its optics as a US foreign policy success story to embellish President Biden’s bid for re-election in the 2024 election.