| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
157515
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
090286
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article reflects on the experience of India's engagement with China in two multilateral forums: the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar (BCIM) Forum for Regional Economic Cooperation, formerly known as the 'Kunming Initiative', and the China-India-Russia Academic Trilateral Conference. Though both forums are so-called 'Track Two' ventures, the dynamics of the two exercises are rather different. As of now, the 'Trilateral' is rated relatively successful in so far as it has shown more substantial progress from 'Track Two' to 'Track One'. Tracing these brief histories, this article argues that academic cooperation should be seen to have value in and of itself, and not merely as the mechanism that propels a speculative, academic exercise into state-to-state policy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
143291
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article takes a critical look at the new Chinese ‘One Belt, One Road’ (OBOR) or ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ (BRI) for 21st century Eurasian connectivity and economic integration from the perspective of the proposed Bangladesh–China–India–Myanmar Economic Corridor (BCIM-EC). The BCIM-EC is a sub-regional cooperation project that aims to link the land-locked provinces of southwest China with eastern India and the Bay of Bengal through northern Myanmar, India’s northeast region, and Bangladesh. However, within months of being mooted in May 2013, the BCIM-EC was yoked to another connectivity initiative, the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), and the two encompassed within President Xi Jinping’s grand vision for a new overland and maritime Silk Road. As of now, India has (i) endorsed the BCIM-EC, (ii) rejected the CPEC and (iii) maintained studied silence on the OBOR initiative per se. Where does that conundrum leave the BCIM-EC? And to what extent, if at all, can India leverage OBOR to its own advantage?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|