Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) Secretary General Indra Mani Pandey, a former Indian career diplomat, has called on the regional grouping to move beyond slow progress and deliver tangible results.
Speaking to The Sunday Morning during a visit to Colombo last week to attend the sixth Bay of Bengal Maritime Dialogue, he said that 10 additional centres had been proposed to strengthen BIMSTEC’s institutional capacity, expressing optimism that ongoing reforms would enable the organisation to make greater strides in regional cooperation.
Following are excerpts:
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates that the Middle East accounts for around 50% of Sri Lanka’s petroleum imports and 40% of its remittances. The crisis also threatens tourism, tea exports, and foreign exchange earnings. What practical assistance or regional cooperation can BIMSTEC offer a country like Sri Lanka and other vulnerable member states when external geopolitical shocks threaten their economies?
Precisely because there are challenges emanating from outside, the countries of our region need to work together. That is the reason why an organisation such as BIMSTEC was created.
Sri Lanka was one of the countries that was part of the initiative to establish BIMSTEC. There is definitely a desire to work together to deal with the different challenges our countries face. Most of these countries try to deal with such challenges individually. However, through regional cooperation, they can address them more effectively.
Given that BIMSTEC member countries depend heavily on energy imports, maritime trade, Gulf employment, and regional supply chains, what is the organisation’s collective position on the crisis in the Gulf region? Has BIMSTEC discussed a joint response to protect shipping, ensure freedom of navigation, and minimise the economic consequences?
The crisis in the Middle East has impacted our member states in different ways. It has disrupted trade and supply chains and affected energy security and food security. There is no direct, specific response to the crisis. However, we have cooperation mechanisms in all those areas which can directly and indirectly help member states deal with some aspects of the crisis.
For example, we have a separate sector of cooperation called Agriculture and Food Security, along with related sectors covering livestock and fisheries. Cooperation in these sectors can help address the overall issue of food security.
Similarly, we have cooperation in the energy sector, which is mainly focused on interconnecting the power grids of our member states. Some member states have surplus power, while others are power-deficient. Some have significant potential for green energy, while others have limited potential. Therefore, if they can trade electricity with one another, it can benefit all countries.
A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has been signed among our member states for the interconnection of power grids and technical discussions are ongoing. Connecting power grids with different sources of power is a highly technical matter. Member states also need to agree on mechanisms such as pricing. These discussions are continuing, and once the protocols are agreed upon, we can move ahead with the project.
The power grids of four of our member states – Bangladesh, India, Bhutan, and Nepal – are already interconnected. We could therefore connect with Myanmar and then Thailand through Bangladesh or India.
How is this cooperation being coordinated among BIMSTEC member countries?
There is an expert group which meets regularly. We also have a BIMSTEC Energy Centre, which will act as the secretariat for the interconnected power grids.
Is the BIMSTEC Energy Centre already operational?
Yes. It is presently engaged in building the technical capacity of our member states to deal with interconnected power grids. In the future, it will handle all aspects related to grid interconnection.
The BIMSTEC Energy Centre in Bengaluru, India is also working to promote energy efficiency, renewable energy sources among BIMSTEC countries, and capacity-building initiatives.
For food security, we have cooperation in agriculture, fisheries, and livestock. For energy security, we are looking at the interconnection of power grids, as well as promoting the use of renewable energy sources and enhancing what is called power efficiency.
Is that cooperation actually happening?
It is happening. As I mentioned, we have a comprehensive agenda and our member states have agreed on a plan of action for cooperation. That plan of action is being implemented in many areas, although progress has not been as much as expected. Regional cooperation requires building consensus and convergence. The agreement of all seven countries is required to take any initiative.
However, our member states are very much committed to continuing their cooperation and identifying new areas of cooperation whenever they feel it is essential. That is how the agenda evolves.
When you say BIMSTEC brings these countries together through technical cooperation, how far have they achieved their individual goals through their membership? Does BIMSTEC have an assessment, perhaps with statistics, on how each country has progressed through the organisation?
No, we do not have that kind of data because cooperation in each sector is led by the member states. Member states invite other member states to become part of the initiatives they wish to undertake for the region. That is why it is difficult to measure the actual benefits arising from regional cooperation.
For example, Sri Lanka has been leading the effort under BIMSTEC to secure a World Bank project in the health sector to address pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. That project is now being implemented.
Later this month, Sri Lanka will also host the first meeting of BIMSTEC health ministers. For the first time, the health ministers of all BIMSTEC member countries will meet. Once the ministers meet, they will look at the entire range of cooperation in the health sector, including traditional medicine. They will identify how the seven countries can work together for the benefit of people across all our countries. That is how cooperation progresses in different areas. It is the member states that decide what they want to do, how they want to do it, and how quickly they are able to implement it.
How can BIMSTEC ensure that the interests of smaller countries such as Sri Lanka, Bhutan, and Nepal receive equal consideration? What safeguards are in place to ensure equal opportunities and that decisions are based on collective regional interests?
Under BIMSTEC, all decisions are made through consensus. Any action plan is first formulated in consultation with member states at expert level, followed by approval at senior officials’ and ministerial levels before implementation.
All member states have equal opportunities to participate in decision-making. Any country can oppose a proposal that goes against its interests or introduce initiatives of its own.
At the March 2022 BIMSTEC Summit in Colombo, member states agreed to designate each country as the lead for specific sectors. Sri Lanka leads on science, technology and innovation, health, and human resource development. While Sri Lanka takes primary responsibility in these areas, all member states contribute equally to implementing initiatives.
For instance, Sri Lanka will host the first BIMSTEC Health Ministers’ Meeting, helping shape its agenda and outcomes, with the possibility of adopting a Colombo declaration on health cooperation. In science and technology, the BIMSTEC Technology Transfer Facility has been established in Colombo, and its Board of Governors met a few months ago, giving Sri Lanka an opportunity to lead regional technology transfer initiatives.
Sri Lanka is also taking the lead in human resource development, while Bangladesh has offered to establish a BIMSTEC Centre of Excellence for skill development.
Similarly, although Myanmar leads the agriculture sector, India has proposed establishing a BIMSTEC Centre of Excellence for agricultural cooperation. This arrangement ensures that all member states can lead, contribute to, and benefit from regional cooperation according to their respective capacities.
The Strait of Hormuz crisis has demonstrated how quickly international shipping routes can become vulnerable to geopolitical conflict. Could BIMSTEC work with the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and other regional maritime organisations to establish a strong mechanism for maritime intelligence-sharing, protecting commercial vessels and seafarers, and responding to disruptions along critical shipping routes?
We have maritime cooperation under BIMSTEC and we are addressing it in a very comprehensive manner. One important aspect is maritime connectivity. Last year, we signed an agreement on maritime transport cooperation, which will enhance shipping links among our member states.
Another aspect is the blue economy. We have a separate expert group, which is in the process of developing a plan of action for blue economy cooperation. The third aspect is maritime security, which addresses transnational organised maritime crime and other developments that affect the security of our countries. We have an expert group on maritime security cooperation, which has already identified five pillars for maritime security cooperation. There are 27 action points identified.
We have agreed on guidelines for interaction at sea among the maritime law enforcement agencies of our member states. We have also agreed on guidelines for delivering humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, particularly the maritime component of such operations.
I am happy to share with you that the first BIMSTEC maritime security exercise is currently underway. Sri Lanka has participated by sending one of its Navy ships. The exercise is taking place in the waters of the Andaman Sea. The exercise aims to identify practical ways in which countries can work together to address the challenges you mentioned, including those relating to maritime connectivity, maritime transport, maritime trade, and the movement of people, as well as piracy and other organised crimes originating at sea.
The Bay of Bengal is becoming increasingly important geopolitically, particularly amid the competing interests of China and the US-led Western powers. How can BIMSTEC prevent itself from being drawn into these competing geopolitical agendas?
As I explained, BIMSTEC is a consensus-based organisation. Our member states decide on the areas in which they want to cooperate and the manner in which they want to cooperate. How they interact with countries outside the region is their own decision. BIMSTEC has been a non-political organisation. Our member states believe that working together regionally in areas covered by the BIMSTEC agenda will be beneficial to them.
Our effort is to continue strengthening regional cooperation so that our member states can address some of the challenges they face. The nature of their relationships with other countries is not something that BIMSTEC deals with.
BIMSTEC countries often share similar resources and production capacities. For example, India, Bangladesh, and Thailand have sizeable textile industries, while several countries produce tea. Could this overlap in resources and products become a challenge to regional trade? What valuable resources can BIMSTEC countries share with one another?
I think you have highlighted the basic principle of trade: countries import or export depending on their comparative advantage and their needs. That is why negotiations under a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) can be a lengthy process, sometimes taking years. If we look at examples from around the world, some regional FTAs have taken more than two to three decades to conclude. Every country wants to have as many opportunities as possible to export, while avoiding the import of products it can produce domestically. It is therefore a challenge for countries to find common ground.
Even bilateral FTAs take considerable time. Imagine the challenge of seven countries sitting in a room, each trying to maximise its opportunities before finding common ground where all can benefit. That is why negotiations under the BIMSTEC FTA framework agreement have also taken a long time. However, our member states are keen to conclude these negotiations and they will find common ground.
Are you, as Secretary General, pushing for the conclusion of these negotiations?
As Secretary General, I can only request member states to meet more often and try to find common ground. But, as you said, they also want to protect their respective interests. This again makes it clear that there is no pressure on any country to compromise, whether it is a small or a large country. If we could put pressure on countries, these negotiations would have been concluded long ago.
BIMSTEC was once considered a very powerful regional entity, but it subsequently seemed to lose its prominence. How powerful is BIMSTEC today, and what is its relevance in the current regional landscape?
You have to look at the genesis of BIMSTEC. In 1997, BIMSTEC was created by leaders of Sri Lanka, India, Bangladesh, and Thailand. The idea was to find and create a platform where countries from South Asia and Southeast Asia could work together. Myanmar joined within six months.
That is how BIMSTEC – Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Thailand Economic Cooperation – was created. It was not established as a political platform with political objectives, as the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) was. Also, remember that BIMSTEC was created at a time when SAARC was functional and delivering results. Therefore, it was not created as an alternative to SAARC, as some people suggest. If SAARC is not as functional today as it was in the past, there are different reasons for that.
BIMSTEC has made progress because our member states see it as a viable platform where they can engage in tangible cooperation that will not be affected by political developments. It is a non-political platform with no political objectives to be realised. It is essentially focused on tangible cooperation to promote development and enhance the security of our people.
All member states work together as a team, agree on decisions, and determine how to implement them. Does this also involve sharing resources among all member states? What about funding?
The funding of the BIMSTEC Secretariat is provided collectively by all member states. Each member state contributes a designated share of the secretariat’s budget. As far as sectoral plans of action are concerned, their implementation is undertaken directly by the member states.
However, to give an example, although the Agriculture and Food Security Sector is led by Myanmar, other member states also host capacity-building events, knowledge-sharing activities, and take other initiatives to strengthen cooperation in these two areas. I would say it is a very consensus-based and inclusive process of regional cooperation.
Organisations such as the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA), among other regional platforms, are increasingly active in the Indo-Pacific. Where does BIMSTEC fit into this landscape? Is there scope for structured cooperation with these organisations on maritime security, disaster response, climate change, and economic connectivity?
The Bay of Bengal is a very important part of the Indo-Pacific. For the countries around the Bay of Bengal, it is, in fact, a very important maritime space. BIMSTEC is the only regional organisation that specifically deals with the Bay of Bengal. Its name itself comes from the Bay of Bengal.
If you look at ASEAN’s membership, it includes Thailand and Myanmar, but all its other members are geographically away from the Bay of Bengal. If you look at SAARC, it has a different membership, comprising only South Asian countries. If you look at the IORA, it has a large number of countries, not only from the region but also from outside it.
Therefore, BIMSTEC is the only organisation with membership centred around the Bay of Bengal, focusing on economic development and security leading to prosperity for our member states. As an organisation, BIMSTEC is open to working with other organisations.
Does that include IORA and ASEAN?
Yes. We signed an MOU with IORA last year. When Sri Lanka was the Chair, it was particularly keen that BIMSTEC and IORA should work together. Under that MOU, an action plan has been developed, which is currently awaiting approval by IORA and BIMSTEC member states. Four of our BIMSTEC members are also members of IORA, so there is considerable commonality.
When it comes to ASEAN, we have two ASEAN member states within BIMSTEC. It is natural that BIMSTEC has much to learn from ASEAN, and that learning is a continuous process. Whenever Thailand and Myanmar participate in our meetings, they bring their ASEAN experience and share with other members how ASEAN is addressing particular issues.
I would again like to underline one important aspect of BIMSTEC: it is a platform created to bring South Asia and Southeast Asia together. It is a very unique platform and, once again, the only organisation that deals with the entirety of the Bay of Bengal.
The US is a major export market for several BIMSTEC countries, including Sri Lanka. Given the uncertainty surrounding US tariffs and global trade policies, does BIMSTEC have a coordinated strategy to protect regional exports? Could regional supply chains help member countries reduce their dependence on a few major markets?
BIMSTEC has looked at trade and investment as major enablers of development. That is why a framework agreement was signed among member states to create a BIMSTEC Free Trade Area. Six working groups are working separately to negotiate the constituent agreements under that framework.
There is already a mature proposal to establish a BIMSTEC Chamber of Commerce and Industries. We are also looking at the possibility of creating a platform for the investment promotion agencies of BIMSTEC countries. In addition, we have been organising BIMSTEC business summits and business conclaves to bring together business communities.
Therefore, BIMSTEC has focused on enhancing intra-BIMSTEC trade and investment rather than responding to a particular topical development. Member states can individually decide how best to deal with such developments.
Can you identify one specific trade or connectivity initiative that has been delayed because of bureaucratic obstacles among member states, and tell us who needs to act to move it forward?
I would not like to identify any specific member state or particular initiative because, as I have underlined, our endeavour is to ensure that all member states are comfortable with the decisions they take. If a member state is taking more time to make a decision, there must be reasons for doing so. We want all member states to feel that this is an organisation where they have equal opportunities, equal benefits, and equal roles.
Yes, I agree that we could have made much more progress, and we can make further progress in the future if our member states devote more resources to BIMSTEC and take decisions faster than they have in the past. But it is a process, and it is ongoing.
The secretariat works very closely with member states, reminding them of the areas where action is pending. This enables member states to take stock of what is outstanding and take the necessary action. As Secretary General, I regularly write to member states, reminding them of the sectors and areas where action is pending and what they need to do.
It is a process through which member states are encouraged to act faster. However, they will act in the manner they consider appropriate and when they feel comfortable taking the necessary steps. Other members respect those decisions.
Finally, can BIMSTEC survive geopolitical competition?
There is no geopolitical competition for BIMSTEC because we are countries sharing the same airspace and the waters of the Bay of Bengal. We face shared developmental and security challenges, and our member states are very keen to make BIMSTEC successful.
They are politically committed to ensuring that BIMSTEC continues to function. This was reflected at the sixth BIMSTEC Summit held in Bangkok, where all our member states were represented at the level of Prime Ministers. Bangladesh was represented by its Chief Adviser, who was at the equivalent level of a Prime Minister.
All member states therefore came together at the highest political level to ensure that they contributed to BIMSTEC’s success. If our member states are committed to making BIMSTEC successful, I do not see any competition for the organisation.