New Delhi: Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent state visit to Israel marked a strengthening of bilateral relations between the two countries as part of a “sophisticated geo-economic gambit,” according to an article in The Jerusalem Strategic Tribune.
The article highlights that PM Modi’s address to the Knesset outlined both his government’s broader strategic outlook and Israel’s place within it. In his remarks, PM Modi signalled a commitment to building a regional architecture designed to embed India more deeply into trade and connectivity to its west with an anchor role for Israel.
That effort is driven in large part by New Delhi’s search for strategic autonomy as it seeks to escape China’s growing shadow in the Indo-Pacific. No longer defined by its Cold War-era doctrine of non-alignment, India is now prioritising issue-based coalitions and partnerships with countries whose strategic trajectory is durable and predictable. This logic, in turn, favours states whose survival and prosperity are tied to the stability of the rules-based international order, the article states.
At the heart of India’s vision for the Eastern Mediterranean is the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC). IMEC is much more than simply a commercial route. It is designed to offer India’s international partners a “values-based” alternative to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), thereby reducing Beijing’s leverage over Eurasian trade and energy flows, the article points out.
Over the past decade, Beijing has leveraged large-scale investments in transportation, energy, and telecommunications to establish a strong presence across the Middle East, South Asia, and Europe. This has created a structural interdependence in which economic relationships are inextricably linked to Chinese strategic interests.
From a strategic perspective, IMEC represents an effort to break up this monopoly. It serves as a normative counterweight to China’s model of state-centric control and top-down financing. Instead, it envisions a smaller and more flexible framework in which the economic and political interests of partners, while not identical, overlap in their desire to mitigate Chinese unilateralism.
For India, a reliable corridor requires anchor states such as Israel and Greece which offer institutional stability and technological maturity. While other prospective routes may offer more convenient geography, they lack the normative reliability and security predictability that India requires for long-term strategic investment.
Nevertheless, China’s structural advantage remains formidable. The BRI rests on a foundation of already-commissioned projects and established logistical networks, such as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and the strategic Port of Gwadar. Furthermore, China’s influence is further reinforced by its deep diplomatic engagement with Iran and the Gulf states, as well as its control over critical infrastructure components such as subsea communication cables.
For this reason, the challenge for IMEC is not simply to propose a technical alternative, but to establish institutional credibility and long-term resilience.
For New Delhi and its partners, the corridor’s viability depends on its ability to create a de-risked ecosystem that prioritizes transparency and distributed governance over dependency and top-down control, the article states.
(IANS)
