Acronyms are aplenty in economic parlance, in both global and regional perspectives, these days. In one way or other, these are now part of semantics, making sound or creating 'noise'. Do they make sense or carry substance, too? Perhaps, not all of them. But some of them do.
From this point of view, BCIM-EC, an acronym for Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar-Economic Corridor, holds out promising prospects for regional economic integration, being integral to the globalisation process.
Interactions with the Chinese officials, academicians and other relevant functionaries in both Beijing and Kunming on a week-long visitors' programme, provided a scope to get some insight into how China would like to look at the potential of the BCIM-EC.
China is quite serious about operationalising this economic corridor as an adjunct to its mega project, New Asian Silk Road. This will be, as it considers, a 'win-win' situation for all its partner-countries, unfolding new opportunities for reaping the dividends of connectivity, trade and investment promotion, technological upgradation and a lot more.
The potential benefits for the BCIM-EC member-countries are, on all counts, immense. This hardly needs elaboration. 'Geo-economics' dictates the need for walking the walk to make this regional grouping effective at the earliest. The countries concerned - Bangladesh, China, India and Myanmar - have been talking the talk about BCIM-EC for quite some time - beginning from 1999 under Tack-II process that involves the representatives of the Civil Society to its upgradation to inter-governmental level (Track-I) after the holding of the first meeting of the Joint Study Group (JSG) in Kunming, the capital of Yunnan province of China, in 2013. This would suggest that enough of spadework was done to help move the process forward.
Time is now ripe for positioning it as a conduit to harnessing its intended benefits in the collective interests of all its four-member countries to the optimal extent through a phase-by-phase action programme. The BCIM-EC will be the sixth economic corridor for the would-be New Silk Road. China has already earmarked $40 billion for this route that would revive the 2000-year-old Silk Road. 'One Belt and One Road', as the resource personnel of the Academy of Macroeconomic Research under China's most powerful body, National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), explained, is the moot theme of the New Silk Road, in conjunction with the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road.
There is no apparent reason to dub these two initiatives as 'geo-politics' to pursue 'strategic objectives' through economic initiatives. These are essentially about upgrading logistics and strengthening multi-modal connectivity-the factors that are all too important for economic prosperity and peoples' well-being in today's globalised economy.
Mr. Guo Yezhou, Vice Minister of International Department of the Communist Party of China (IDCPC), made it pointedly clear that China would like to play 'a responsible role' on the global stage, in tandem with its growing economic might. And China, as his words would suggest, is now projecting itself not only as a confident and assertive power but also as a constructive one. Because of its important stake in the global economy, it also appreciates how peace, security and development are now interwined in an evolving new international order that involves elements of both competition and cooperation.
Both the New Silk Road and New Maritime Silk Road, as being pivoted by China, are pro-active, not reactive, moves to extend its infrastructure-development programmes, backed by its plenty of money and enormous expertise. It has clearly demonstrated in recent years its most remarkable performance in infrastructure-related areas in history. The economic case for making huge investments in infrastructure in Asia is all too evident. There is not much to argue about it. That explains amply well why Beijing has taken the lead role in setting up Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).
That is also the case with Brics Bank. Brics is another acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. The Brics first came together for their first annual summit two years ago. The stated purpose of the Brics Bank is to lend to infrastructure. The Brics is mostly against, for instance, interference in affairs of other nations, particularly of the unilateral sort.
In this context, there is no denying that the new initiative - the New Silk Road in tandem with the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road - would, if it is operationalised in the way that it is conceived by Beijing, enhance China's role as one of the leading powers not only in Asia but also around the globe. This is an unpalatable development for those who have been trying to maintain the 'status quo' of the existing global power structure.
Looking at the BCIM-EC from the Bangladesh perspective, there is every reason, based on pragmatism, to consider it (the new regional grouping) a 'win-win' case. The 'economic corridor'-a modern version of the ancient Silk Road-will provide scope to exploit existing complementarities of all four countries in trade, in terms of both sectors and products, while offering opportunities to promoting investments that it badly needs, through trade facilitation measures and greater participation of its public and private sectors. The latter can lead to achieving greater efficiency and diversification of its economy to strengthen its competitiveness, enhance the quality of its human resources and raise overall competitiveness in new areas of activities.
The BCIM countries, on a broader level, account for 9.0 per cent of the global landmass and 40 per cent of the global population. Trade between Bangladesh, India, China and Myanmar was about 8.0 per cent in 2005. It has grown both within the region and with outside countries since then, being largely driven by China.
If the area of the BCIM-EC-running from Yunnan province of China with Kunming as the former's capital to Kolkata, the capital of the Indian state of Pashimbanga and covering India's northeastern provinces and linking Mandalaya in Myanmar and Dhaka and Chittagong in Bangladesh - is considered, the combined population of this regional grouping would be 440 million. And intra-regional trade among the countries of the BCIM-EC amounted to 5.0 per cent of total BCIM trade in 2012. This is strikingly low at a disportionate level, if compared to the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) where 35 per cent of total trade is intra-regional.
Viewed from the angle of regional cooperation, BCIM-EC might become the game changer that South Asia needs. To date, South Asia has not come close to enjoying the same economic success that East Asia has already reaped and the ASEAN region is in the process of reaping.
But such things are easier said than done. Pro-active engagement of all four member-countries of the BCIM-EC and open-mindedness, forsaking the elements of mistrust or distrust, on some real or perceived grounds, and leaving aside the irritants of political and 'security' nature as the hangovers of the past, will be sine quo non for making it (the regional forum) a real, effective body, working along its stated goals, purposes and objectives.
It is pertinent to note here, particularly from the perspectives of relatively smaller countries like Bangladesh in South Asia, that regional cooperation arrangements like that of SAARC-another acronym for South Asian Association for Regional Co-operation (SAARC) - have not been able to move things forward much. The SAARC is still practically a 'non-starter'. Last month's 18th SAARC Summit in Kathmandu, the capital of Nepal, has demonstrated how bilateral acrimony - a baggage of the past - between two of its large countries can mar the prospects for meaningful cooperation among this eight-nation group in a 'win-win' situation for all concerned. Serious doubts persist about the future of framework agreement - the lone one of significance to mention - on cooperation in energy sector that was agreed in Kathmandu. The deal on SAFTA - an acronym for South Asian Free Trade Agreement - that was made many years back, has not yet made any operational progress, in real terms.
Given the most unimpressive track record of SAARC about promoting regional cooperation in the poorest part of the world, in terms of the numbers of people below the poverty line, questions are raised, on valid grounds, about its (SAARC's) practical utility after nearly three decades of its 'operational' existence. One can only surmise that the mere 'survival' of this regional cooperative body for so many years is its 'sole achievement'.
Besides the SAARC, there are also other regional or sub-regional cooperation arrangements that are of relevance to Bangladesh. BIMSTEC, an acronym for Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC), has been in place for a considerable period of time. Its secretariat was opened in Dhaka this year but this body is yet to make any visible impact on the ground level as an economic cooperation mechanism.
And also this year, the proposal for a new regional grouping-BIG-B - an acronym for the Bay of Bengal Industrial Growth Belt - was made by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan during his visit to Bangladesh. It is still at the conceptual stage, though it has also made a 'noise', hinting at Japan's support for concretising the idea into actions.
Harmonising actions on such acronyms for different sorts of regional cooperative mechanism - new, evolving, or old ones - is part of the dynamics of the present-day economic diplomacy and also perhaps beyond it. All these have some overlapping features. Time dictates that there is effective coordination of works by those involved in matters concerning such bodies, by taking the felt-needs of the people into consideration. Otherwise, such acronyms will make only sound and hardly any substance. (More on Page-5)
Future beckons BCIM-EC
Moazzem Hossain, back from China | Published: December 07, 2014 00:00:00 | Updated: November 30, 2026 06:01:00
Share if you like