They say and it has been proven, many times over, that history ryhmes. The world works in cycles – time, climate, wars, even financial markets. Nomads know when to move from one area to another and farmers know when to plant seeds and when not to and traders know when some products are available and when they are not. Information has always been gathered by people to be able to determine what to expect in an upcoming period. Is this what is coming in the talk of so many corridors lately?
In the middle ages there was, what is known today as, the age of exploration and discovery and that was when Atlantic Europeans, the Portuguese, and Spain, who had most contact with North Africa and West Asia felt they needed to explore new avenues to have access to the east, and most especially Cathay (China) and India, two developed economies of the time that were producing goods that were badly needed in Europe or by the new taste of those Europeans – silk, cotton clothes, and spices.
The Venetians, the Ottoman Turks and the vast Mongol Empire of Central Asia, which was breaking down at the time, stood in the way. This pushed many a trader, a king and a learned person of Atlantic Europe to think of new routes to reach those old destinations, without going through what seemed to them major and costly stumbling blocks.
It is how the Portuguese first started the age of exploration sailing along the Western coast of Africa and finally arriving in the east and the Spanish moved westwards to stumble on the Americas, lands and peoples that were unknown to them at the time.
Fast forward to the contemporary age and world, and the story seems to being repeated. It appears to be about a six-hundred-year cycle and we are back again in exploring new commercial routes to the same eastern destinations by Europeans without going through West Asia.
This time, it is the seemingly endless turmoil and uncertainty surrounding the traditional sea route of the Suez Canal/Indian Ocean water way, which passes in front of the Horn of Africa States region and hence the reason for this article. One must, therefore, explore the impact such new routes would have on the region.
One glaring factor in the calculations, this time, is that there was no competition between the two major trading and manufacturing countries of those days, namely China and India. There was little contact between them anyway, with the towering Himalayas in between. Today, there seems to be a competition, probably pushed by others, although they both belong to the new grouping of BRICS Plus, which stands for Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, and others.
The new corridors are varied and cover vast distances and multiple, mostly landlocked, countries. The many proposed routes include the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) of China, The North Sea Route, mostly dominated by Russia, the International North–South Transport Corridor (INSTC) of Russia, India, and Iran, and India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor.
There is also the Middle Corridor, which itself is composed of a number of component parts including the Trans-Caspian East-West-Middle Corridor Initiative, the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route, and the Trans-Caucasus Trade and Transit Corridor. These are routes which would bypass both the northern route proposed by Russia, the traditional maritime route through the Indian Ocean/Suez Canal, and the Indian Middle East Corridor. They may include parts of the China proposed BRI.
The move away from the traditional Suez Canal/Indian Ocean waterway, would increase the cost infrastructure on products moving between Asia and Europe as the cost of infrastructure in terms of railways, roads and additional ports in many countries that would have to be built should be included in the calculations of those who want to create the new corridors.
In any case, the new corridors, if they take root, would certainly reduce the passage of ships through the Suez Canal/Indian Ocean waterway, which appears to be the shortest trading route between Asia and Europe, except for the Northern Sea Route, and hence the least costly.
The impact on the region of the Horn of Africa States would, however, be negligible as currently the region does not benefit much from the current corridor, anyway. It lacks stability and peace, which is critical for it and for the world. It is mostly Egypt which lives off the route that would be negatively impacted.
Many such corridors and infrastructure projects have been proposed for years but were abandoned for multiple reasons, but mostly through shifting politics, wars, and indeed, heavy costs and time involved. There is no reason to believe that they would ever materialize in the forms and infrastructures proposed. The Northern Russian Route across theBarents and the Kara Seas and the Bering Sea is reported to be around half the distance of the traditional shipping lane using the Suez Canal. But it has its own drawbacks including the political Russia/NATO rift and the inhospitable Arctic environment.
Perhaps, the new corridors would minimize the urge to build more ports or improve and develop existing ports in the region to service the route. They may also reduce West Asian countries’ competition for influence and physical presence in the region, as they turn away to participate in those proposed many new corridors and/or protect their only product the current energy source of hydrocarbons.
This would certainly reduce the conflicts that have mostly been financed through rival West Asian states, all seeking to benefit from a revival of the region after the decades long conflicts, which seem to be tapering off.
The region offers substantial natural resources in addition to its geostrategic location, which includes among others one of the largest uranium reserves in the world and substantial hydrocarbon reserves both offshore and onshore, which would compete for markets with the West Asian states.
West Asian interests in the region end here, as they do not have the knowledge, the wherewithal and/or the permission from the Western countries to touch and exploit these resources of the region on their own. These are families that have been imposed on the populations of those countries, who need protection of other countries, no matter what, to stay in power.
The resources of the region can only be developed with the connivance and investments of the Western countries or for that matter with Eastern and Northern countries. The region itself is not equipped to exploit these resources on its own for multiple reasons, but this is not the purpose of this article.
Continuing negative involvement of West Asian countries in the region would only contribute to undermining their long-term securities, as regional and western policymakers seek to limit the influences of these countries and develop the region’s bargaining powers.
There was a new trajectory for the better in the diplomacy of the region until recently, when suddenly through the interference of some West Asian countries, the relations between the two most important components of the region, namely Somalia for its long coast and Ethiopia for its large and diversified population suddenly found themselves at each other’s throats through the workings of one of the West Asian countries.
It is fortunate this has not led to an open warfare although things have turned out to be uglier than expected but wisdom has so far prevailed to stay away from overt military clashes. Negotiations are currently underway, through third parties, to put out the fires that was planned to burn the region, from beyond the region. This would certainly disappoint those tiny but influential West Asian countries.
Development diplomacy is now needed, more than ever, to be deployed not only to calm down old fires but also to create new initiatives that would be beneficial for the whole region and hence the world. A peaceful Horn of Africa States region and working together would certainly help protect shipping in the important Suez Canal/Indian Ocean waterway.
It is, therefore, important for development actors including multilateral institutions, to work with the region and assist it in achieving its potential of a peaceful, prosperous and economically developed economy to engage and feed its large and growing youthful population.
