THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE BELT AND ROAD INITIATIVE AND THE MIDDLE CORRIDOR INITIATIVE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF ECONOMIC RELATIONS BETWEEN TURKIYE AND THE ASIA PACIFIC COUNTRIES

Despite the fact that China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and Türkiye’s Middle Corridor Initiative (MCI) developed independently, there is no denying their strong synergy. Their synergistic relationship is essential to both programs’ overall success. Additionally, this synergy strengthens ties with the Asia-Pacific area. Both have an identical historical viewpoint. China’s contemporary BRI primarily stems from the historic Silk Road. Concurrently, Türkiye’s MCI aims to resurrect the same cause. Both encourage the growth of regional transportation tasks, particularly as a means of supplanting established marine and land lines and possibly cutting down on both travel time and expense. However, what sets these targeted routes apart is their connection. The MCI and the BRI’s China-Central Asia-West Asia corridor overlap.

However, neither must always be an integration of the other but rather an extension. By providing alternate routes to the Northern Corridor, BRI and MCI assist each other in establishing land and sea connections between Far East Asia and Europe across three continents. Both have similar objectives when it comes to investing in or attracting in trade and infrastructure through the use of constructed routes. As a result, both programs encourage economic growth and collaboration along the routes. Both have finished and are working on several projects linked to the two programs in modern times. There are many BRI projects spanning 173 nations worldwide and Türkiye’s side effort such as the The Baku–Tbilisi–Kars (BTK) Railway, the Yavuz Sultan Selim Bridge, and the Marmaray, all of which are located in Türkiye.

In essence, the two projects seek to provide a different route that shortens land and marine travel in order to connect space between east and west. It has benefited and will continue to assist neighboring countries in a variety of fields, as well as fostering cross-cultural exchanges. As a result, both of the initiatives further Foreign Economic Relations Board’s (DEİK) objective to seek out local and foreign investment opportunities and to improve bilateral trade between Türkiye and other possible partners. This is the factor that would develop and attract investment.

Relations between BRI and MCI impact the Asia-Pacific region significantly. As was previously noted, BRI and MCI connect east and west, hence extending each other’s reach. The Asia-Pacific narrative now makes perfect sense in numerous aspects. First of all, a significant portion of the Asia-Pacific region was shaped historically, culturally, linguistically, and through the traditions of the ancient Silk Road. Despite the fact that Türkiye and the Asia-Pacific region trade via the Suez Canal, the Malacca Strait, the Black Sea, etc., a quicker and more efficient method of trading is always appealing.

MCI is difficult to overlook because the majority of Asia-Pacific nations have economic ties with China and are benefiting from the BRI. Now that routes are more accessible, including subregions like Southeast Asia, Central Asia, South Asia, and the South Pacific, the connected routes undoubtedly attract more attention to the Asia Pacific region. As a matter of fact, BRI has been pouring a great deal of money into the region over the course of a decade, completing 195 projects and planning another 100, which include rail, road, and pipeline networks as well as port facilities. We can examine Southeast Asia as an example.

BRI was only getting started in 2013, but the initiative picked up steam very rapidly. According to Singapore Business Federation (SBF) and PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) (2020), there were 19 BRI projects in Southeast Asia that were prioritized in 2019 and had a combined valuation of USD 15 billion. Southeast Asia had almost doubled the number of BRI-related programs by 2024. Of the 34 infrastructure megaprojects in the region that each’s value is $1 billion or more,  24 are being undertaken by China. Additionally, Türkiye’s inflows of foreign direct investment into ASEAN rose from 25 million US dollars in 2019 to 273 million US dollars in 2023, which represents an increase of 11 times in 4 years. As a result, from the example of Southeast Asia, the Asia Pacific region and BRI with MCI have solid connections. Furthermore, Türkiye has declared its interest in and intention to collaborate with this region since 2019 through the Asia Anew Initiative. Although MCI appears to benefit much of Central Asia more than the rest of the region, it is still linking Asia-Pacific nations to Europe. No country, especially in the Asia Pacific region, can ever truly ignore the current state of affairs, particularly with regard to international transportation and the development of logistics infrastructure, which are also regarded as crucial components of the system of economic links in today’s world.

Countries in the Asia-Pacific region ought to participate in it in some capacity, or maybe design the brand-new, enlarging way. Should BRI and MCI build roads all the way to farther part of Asia Pacific region? Perhaps not right now, as there is a need to first improve the roads and collaboration in the existing routes. To harvest more of the two initiatives, there are still certain obstacles to overcome. Examples include the local conflicts and wars, the US and certain Western nations’ unfavorable policies, and the significance of taking the effectiveness of the participating countries’ national coordination committees into account. A capable group with a common goal will complete the task with ease. There is always hope and a method to go forward for a better future.