Can BIMSTEC Set Sail for Real This Time?
As BIMSTEC leaders gathered in Bangkok for the 6th Summit, there was a palpable sense of optimism and hope despite the underlying anxiety plaguing the world right now. While the BIMSTEC Bangkok Vision 2030 unveiled an ambitious roadmap for connectivity, resilience, and prosperity, the question remains: Can BIMSTEC finally move from aspiration to action?
In his opening remarks, EAM S. Jaishankar observed, “The new order, whose outlines have only now started to become visible, is intrinsically more regional and agenda-specific. The era when a few powers underwrote the international system is now behind us. What we make of our prospects is very much dependent on ourselves. As developing nations who face a multitude of challenges, that is better done in concert with each other than individually.”
Founded in 1997 as the Bangladesh-India-Sri Lanka-Thailand Economic Cooperation (BIST-EC), the group transformed into BIMSTEC with the inclusion of Myanmar and, later, Nepal and Bhutan. Conceived as a bridge between South and Southeast Asia, its foundational objective was economic integration through technical and economic cooperation across six priority areas.
Yet, despite early enthusiasm, the grouping has held only six summits in 28 years, reflecting institutional inertia, overlapping regional architectures, and political upheavals in member states. From 2004 to 2022, despite expanding thematic areas (from 6 to 14), the group remained sluggish, marred by a low frequency of meetings and a lack of legally binding frameworks.
A decisive shift came after 2016, with the BIMSTEC Leaders’ Retreat in Goa, following the collapse of the SAARC process due to India-Pakistan tensions. BIMSTEC became India's platform of choice for pursuing sub-regionalism without the “Pakistan veto.” Reforms began with a charter adopted in 2022, sectoral rationalisation to seven core areas, and a push toward institutional capacity building.
India’s Role: Anchor and Aspirant
India views the grouping as a natural extension of its ‘Act East’ and ‘Neighbourhood First’ policies. It leads in five key sectors—security, counterterrorism, environment, energy, and agriculture—and has consistently funded capacity building and disaster resilience efforts. Being a China-free composition also enables India to promote regionalism on its own terms.
However, intra-BIMSTEC trade remains low, accounting for only 7% of total trade among member countries. India’s trade within BIMSTEC is disproportionately tilted towards Thailand and Bangladesh, while exchanges with Bhutan, Nepal, and Sri Lanka remain limited. Delhi also faces the dual challenge of balancing leadership without dominance and delivering on its promises while managing its many mini-lateral commitments.
It has taken India over two decades to realise that the initiative has been underfunded and underprioritised. There is also resistance to pushing trade liberalisation to protect its domestic manufacturing and agriculture sectors. Nonetheless, with recent proposals to integrate UPI systems, establish a Disaster Management Centre of Excellence, and initiate annual business summits, India is attempting to infuse the grouping with new energy.
India has proposed simplified rules of origin, mutual recognition of standards, and an integrated customs facilitation platform modelled on its ICEGATE portal. Delhi has also presented a Buddhist Heritage Trail, connecting shared cultural sites across India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, and Thailand. This complements India’s pitch for regional tourism integration, especially as it chairs the Tourism track in BIMSTEC for 2025–26.
The leaders signed the Maritime Transport Agreement that provides for national treatment and assistance to vessels, crew and cargo. This is expected to reduce regulatory friction at ports, shorten cargo clearance times and lower shipping costs. They also endorsed the Report of the Eminent Persons Group, which offers recommendations to enhance policy coherence and improve implementation capacity.
Building the Bay
Compared to other regional organisations, such as the ASEAN, BIMSTEC lacks institutional maturity and enforcement capability. While SAARC is politically paralysed, BIMSTEC’s architecture, if strengthened, offers a cleaner slate with more geostrategic value. Another maritime-based grouping, the Indian Ocean Rim Association, offers a parallel platform but is too vast and diluted for focused regionalism.
BIMSTEC enjoys certain natural advantages; it covers 22% of the global population, links two of the world’s fastest-growing regions, and occupies a crucial maritime space, the Bay of Bengal, through which one-fourth of global trade transits.
To realise its potential, BIMSTEC must adopt a three-pronged strategy. First, it must focus on a core agenda - be it connectivity, energy grid integration, disaster management, and trade facilitation, and pursue it through a phased integration process. Second, if finalising the long-pending FTA remains untenable, the recently signed coastal shipping agreement should be operationalised swiftly to catalyse regional commerce and improve supply chain efficiency.
Third, although it has taken steps in this direction, there is room to expand the secretariat’s budget and mandate with clear accountability metrics. The secretariat in Dhaka is now being strengthened with rules of procedure and financial frameworks, addressing long-standing capacity deficits.
The recently adopted Bangkok Vision 2030 aspires to build a "prosperous, resilient, and open" Bay of Bengal community. But vision alone is not enough. Unless BIMSTEC evolves into an institution with teeth, capable of enforcing agreements, resolving disputes, and mobilising resources, it risks being another ambitious acronym in the crowded alphabet soup of regionalism.
Authors
