Introduction

The context of an ASEAN-BIMSTEC partnership is shaped by the strategic significance of their overlapping geographies and shared challenges within the Indo-Pacific. ASEAN’s economic integration and leadership has cemented its position as a constructive grouping in Southeast Asia, notwithstanding the challenges of internal divergences. Meanwhile, BIMSTEC aspires to bridge South Asia and Southeast Asia and serve as a platform for addressing economic, maritime, and development challenges across the Bay of Bengal region.

Global and regional interactions have become deeply intertwined with the shifting geopolitical and geoeconomic landscape of the Indo-Pacific, which has emerged as a defining strategic theatre of the 21^st century encompassing the vast maritime expanse from the eastern coast of Africa to the western Pacific. The region’s economic dynamism, resource abundance, and strategic chokepoints make it crucial to global trade, security, and geopolitical competition. Accounting for over 60 percent of global GDP and with nearly half of global trade passing through its waters, this region has assumed multi-stakeholder prominence,^[1] influencing both cooperative and competitive dynamics over resource access, connectivity, and infrastructure development. At the core of these evolving interactions lies persistent ambiguity regarding China’s role and heft, along with widespread apprehensions about its strategic intentions in the region.

The Indo-Pacific is today characterised by growing security challenges, including the militarisation of the South China Sea, piracy, illegal and overfishing, and the vulnerability of critical infrastructure such as subsea cables. As the competition for regional primacy intensifies, the absence of a robust multilateral framework has become a glaring gap. Unlike Europe, which has institutions such as NATO and the EU, the Indo-Pacific lacks a multilateral framework that can comprehensively respond to its political, economic, and security challenges. While existing forums like the Quad, AUKUS, and the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) offer various levels of engagement, they remain loosely institutionalised, security-centric, issue-based, and geographically limited. ASEAN has been central to regional diplomacy, but its consensus-driven approach has often limited its effectiveness in addressing hard security issues, which are increasingly gaining primacy. Meanwhile, BIMSTEC remains largely underutilised,^[2] despite its strategic location bridging South Asia and Southeast Asia.

A stronger partnership between ASEAN and BIMSTEC could create a broader Indo-Pacific framework that connects continental and maritime Asia. ASEAN’s institutional experience, combined with BIMSTEC’s geostrategic position in the Bay of Bengal, could foster deeper economic integration, connectivity, and security cooperation. As great-power competition intensifies across the region, an ASEAN-BIMSTEC partnership offers a pathway to a more inclusive and stable Indo-Pacific, reducing reliance on external actors while strengthening resilience against economic and security challenges.

Both blocs serve as critical nodes in the evolving geopolitical architecture of the Indo-Pacific and stand to be shaped by the strategic interplay of regional and global actors. Central to this transformation is the competition between the United States and China, with their competing visions of economic and security frameworks. Alongside this, regional groupings like ASEAN, BIMSTEC and even minilaterals like the Quad, play an important role in fostering multilateral cooperation, addressing shared challenges, and promoting connectivity. Emerging alignments, such as the AUKUS, underscore the growing emphasis on maritime security and a rules-based order. Meanwhile, the region’s critical trade routes and resource-rich waters make it a focal point for economic, security, and strategic competition globally. In all of this, the Bay of Bengal’s role in responding to non-traditional security threats while serving as a trade and energy transit hub underscores the importance of the BIMSTEC, while ASEAN’s expertise in fostering connectivity and trade integration provides a model for BIMSTEC to emulate.^[3]

Collaboration between the ASEAN and BIMSTEC can address common priorities such as maritime security, sustainable development, and economic growth, which in turn stand to buttress regional stability. Both organisations emphasise the importance of maritime security, sustainable development, and disaster management, which are crucial for regional stability. For instance, the BIMSTEC Master Plan for Transport Connectivity, adopted in 2021, finds congruence with ASEAN’s Master Plan on ASEAN Connectivity 2025, highlighting shared goals in infrastructure development and regional integration. For landlocked countries like Bhutan and Nepal, BIMSTEC offers greater access to the Bay of Bengal and Southeast Asia, while Sri Lanka, already a maritime hub, stands to expand its maritime influence. Thailand and Myanmar gain enhanced connectivity to South Asia, which balances their ties with China.^[4]

The two groupings can also offer a counterbalance to China’s growing belligerence across the region, particularly in terms of geopolitical navigation, managing resources, and leveraging trade. Enhanced coordination between these two platforms could also amplify the collective voice of the Global South in preserving a rules-based regional order, fostering economic stability, and promoting sustainable development​.

This volume explores the themes of climate adaptation, the Blue Economy, trade integration, and sustainable development, highlighting the complexities of regional development efforts in the context of geopolitical compulsions.

Trade integration presents an essential dimension in the ASEAN-BIMSTEC narrative. ASEAN’s economic rise, supported by a well-integrated trade framework, contrasts with BIMSTEC’s considerably slower progress in fostering regional trade. Despite its strategic location bridging South Asia and Southeast Asia, trade relations among BIMSTEC countries remain underdeveloped, impeding its ability to tap into global supply chains effectively. Geopolitically, closer trade ties between ASEAN and BIMSTEC could act as a counterbalance to external economic dependencies, enhancing resilience in the face of global uncertainties.

The compendium opens with an article by Ganeshan Wignaraja that highlights the key impediments to ASEAN-BIMSTEC trade integration, including weak special economic zones, high trade barriers, infrastructure deficits, stalled FTA negotiations, and an under-resourced BIMSTEC Secretariat. Using economic modelling, the analysis demonstrates how deeper trade integration between ASEAN and BIMSTEC could boost GDP in both regions.

An article by Jayant Menon follows, which argues that despite historical trade ties, South Asia lags behind Southeast Asia in integrating into global value chains due to high trade costs and other barriers. To bridge this gap, the analysis proposes two strategies: strengthening regional institutions like BIMSTEC and SASEC for deeper cooperation; and adopting open regionalism by effectively implementing trade and investment reforms.

In the domain of climate adaptation, the two regions face heightened vulnerabilities. Rising sea levels, intensified cyclones, and erratic rainfall patterns threaten agricultural systems, livelihoods, and coastal settlements. With a combined population exceeding two billion, the stakes are massive.^[5] BIMSTEC, connecting South Asia and Southeast Asia, grapples with climate-induced risks, particularly in agriculture which accounts for a major share of GDP and employment. Simultaneously, ASEAN, with its robust institutional frameworks, can offer lessons in regional climate resilience. While ASEAN has institutionalised adaptation strategies through frameworks like the ASEAN Climate Change Initiative, the efforts of BIMSTEC remain fragmented, hindered by limited institutional capacity.^[6] The geopolitical imperative, therefore, lies in leveraging ASEAN’s relative strengths to enhance BIMSTEC’s climate adaptation capacity, ensuring a coordinated response to shared vulnerabilities.

Discussing some of these themes is an article by Anamitra Anurag Danda that explores the growing climate challenges in the Bay of Bengal region. With over 40 percent of BIMSTEC’s population engaged in agriculture, climate-related risks threaten food security and economic stability. The article posits that regional cooperation under BIMSTEC could focus on climate-smart agriculture, improved risk management, and governance reforms.

Efforts towards nurturing the Blue Economy in the Indian Ocean Region further underscore the strategic intersection of ASEAN and BIMSTEC. Both regions are important from a maritime perspective, being reliant on the ocean space for fisheries, renewable energy, tourism, and shipping. Moreover, this maritime expanse is not merely a hub of economic activity but also a focal point of geopolitical contestation, with global powers vying for influence over critical sea lanes. Initiatives such as the ASEAN Blue Economy Framework^[7] offer pathways to balance economic growth with sustainability, addressing overfishing, marine pollution, and habitat destruction. However, BIMSTEC’s engagement with the Blue Economy has been slow, hindered by inadequate policy coordination and constraints in funding. Strengthened ASEAN-BIMSTEC cooperation could unlock the potential of the Blue Economy as a strategic asset, enabling both regions to safeguard marine biodiversity while enhancing maritime security.

Donah Baracol Pinhão follows through on this subject in her article, emphasising the shared maritime geography and economic potential of BIMSTEC and ASEAN. The exposition argues that while ASEAN has made strides in formalising and advancing the Blue Economy, BIMSTEC first needs to develop a coherent regional strategy. The article suggests that BIMSTEC heed the lessons of ASEAN’s structured policy frameworks, stakeholder engagement, and institutional mechanisms to accelerate its Blue Economy initiatives.

Delving on the same themes, Malshini Senaratne directs her attention to the strategic importance of the Bay of Bengal in the Indo-Pacific maritime economy, where ASEAN and BIMSTEC play increasingly bigger roles. The article recommends that ASEAN and BIMSTEC collaborate through shared policies, infrastructure investment, and digitalisation efforts. Strengthening public-private partnerships and multilateral cooperation is crucial for advancing the Blue Economy in the Bay of Bengal.

Amidst all the challenges, there is significant scope for cooperation between ASEAN and BIMSTEC. However, certain challenges impede the potential, primary of which is the disparity in institutional capacity between the two groupings. ASEAN, with its well-established secretariat and operational mechanisms, has achieved substantial integration and policy coordination, while BIMSTEC struggles with limited resources, weak institutional frameworks, and slow implementation of agreements. This asymmetry makes it difficult to achieve parity in cooperation, often relegating BIMSTEC to a secondary role in the partnership.

Political instability in various member countries and divergent priorities among member states complicate efforts to deepen collaboration. BIMSTEC nations, including Myanmar and Bangladesh, face internal political crises and governance challenges that hinder cohesive regional policymaking. In ASEAN, competing interests among larger economies like Indonesia and smaller, more vulnerable nations, for instance, Myanmar, Laos, and Cambodia, create friction, particularly in areas like trade liberalisation and maritime governance. These internal challenges often create ripple effects on bilateral tensions, further delaying collaborative initiatives.

Geopolitical competition among external powers poses uncertainties for countries in the region, all of whom can be affected by ensuing tensions. The Bay of Bengal region and Southeast Asia are contested spaces where global powers, including China and the United States, are vying for influence. While such competition can occasionally spur investments and infrastructure development, it also risks exacerbating divergences within these groupings, as member states are often pulled in different directions by the compulsions of external alliances and dependencies. The growing naval presence of different powers, compounded by an increase in the securitisation of the region due to competing territorial claims and strategic rivalries, can also complicate the pursuit of a unified ASEAN-BIMSTEC agenda.

Finally, economic and infrastructural disparities between ASEAN and BIMSTEC members also pose pragmatic challenges. ASEAN countries, on average, are more integrated into global supply chains and record higher logistics and trade performance indices than BIMSTEC nations. Bridging this gap between the two blocs will require significant investments in infrastructure, technology, skilling, and human capital, as well as coordinated efforts to harmonise trade policies and reduce barriers. Enhancing connectivity is a shared strategic interest for ASEAN and BIMSTEC, encompassing the facilitation of trade, mobility, and regional integration. The BIMSTEC Master Plan for Transport Connectivity outlines numerous projects to improve transport linkages among member states. However, a number of these projects are still in the planning stages and require substantial financing.

The publication closes with an article by Nilanjan Ghosh and Soumya Bhowmick, where they aim their sights on the challenges and opportunities for sustainable development in the Indo-Pacific. They seek to emphasise the slow progress of the SDGs due to global crises like the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change, and geopolitical conflicts. Priorities for post-2030 should include bridging digital divides, augmenting climate action, and developing a resilient Blue Economy. The essay highlights the need to address the wicked disparities between the Global North and Global South, advocating for technology transfer, trade facilitation, and South-South cooperation. Policymakers must seek to balance economic growth with environmental sustainability, ensuring an adaptive development strategy for ASEAN-BIMSTEC in the post-2030 era.

Despite challenges, the potential for ASEAN-BIMSTEC cooperation remains compelling. The two groupings can unlock new opportunities for economic growth, environmental resilience, and geopolitical stability by leveraging their shared interests and addressing structural impediments. Their combined efforts could serve as a cornerstone for a more integrated and resilient Indo-Pacific, where regional partnerships take precedence over external dependencies and unilateral actions. While the future of cooperation between these blocs may remain challenging, there is promise of reshaping the regional order in ways that can benefit their populations and enhance collective standing in the global arena.

The ASEAN-BIMSTEC partnership offers considerable potential for addressing shared challenges and leveraging opportunities. Reaching these ambitions will require overcoming institutional gaps, enhancing policy coordination, and fostering mutual trust among member states. In doing so, the two regions can emerge as a collaborative force in shaping the wider Indo-Pacific’s political, economic and environmental future.

Endnotes

^[1] Pratnashree Basu, “Brass Tacks: Unpacking the Indo-Pacific Template,” Observer Research Foundation, 2021, https://www.orfonline.org/research/brass-tacks-unpacking-the-indo-pacific-template

^[2] Harsh V. Pant, “How Regional Cooperation Could be Achieved with the Help of BIMSTEC?,” IMPRI India Insights, March 26, 2022, https://www.impriindia.com/insights/regional-cooperation-bimstec/

^[3] Promit Mookherjee et al., “ASEAN-BIMSTEC Synergy: Bringing Together Global South Forces,” Observer Research Foundation, July 2024, https://www.orfonline.org/research/asean-bimstec-synergy-bringing-together-global-south-forces

^[4] Pratnashree Basu and Nilanjan Ghosh, “Breathing New Life into BIMSTEC: Challenges and Imperatives,” Observer Research Foundation, April 2020, https://www.orfonline.org/research/breathing-new-life-into-bimstec-challenges-and-imperatives

^[5] “Exploring Cooperation in Sustainable Agriculture and Value Addition in BIMSTEC Region,” RIS, 2024, https://www.ris.org.in/sites/default/files/Publication/FINAL_Report%20BIMSTEC%20Agriculture.pdf

^[6] Christopher Len and Roshni Kapur, “Regional Cooperation in the Bay of Bengal: The Role of Energy Security and Maritime Governance in Promoting Integration,” Energy Studies Institute and Institute of South Asian Studies, 2021.

^[7] Association of Southeast Asian Nations, “ASEAN Blue Economy Framework,” September 5, 2023, https://asean.org/asean-blue-economy-framework/

• International Affairs
• Neighbourhood
• The Pacific, East and Southeast Asia
• ASEAN-BIMSTEC partnership
• blue economy
• economic integration
• geopolitical competition
• geopolitical competition
• Indo-Pacific
• maritime security
• Sustainable Development
• trade connectivity

The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.

PREV NEXT