ALTHOUGH the Economic Cooperation Organisation (ECO) initiative initially presented as a viable endeavour, its implementation in a region characterised by economic fragility, political fragmentation, and strategic volatility has consistently been precarious. The disparate interests of member states, along with their differing strategic alignments, particularly among the founding members, Iran, Pakistan and Turkey, have hindered regional economic cooperation within the ECO framework. Beyond economic factors and internal discord among member states, the strategic dynamics of the region, especially the external orientation of the principal states, have significantly contributed to the stagnation of the ECO. Consequently, it can be argued that the absence of a dominant, proactive, non-controversial and widely accepted central state severely limits the potential for substantial progress within the ECO.
In recent years, Pakistan has redirected its strategic focus toward geoeconomics, capitalising on its advantageous geographical position. National media, politicians, economists, academics and intellectuals have centred on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which is heralded as a transformative opportunity for Pakistan’s regional collaboration and economic advancement, particularly in terms of its extensive scope and investment potential. In this context, other economic alliances have not secured a prominent position in national discourse like the Economic Cooperation Organisation (ECO) founded by Pakistan, Turkey and Iran.
The ECO championed effective multilateralism at the regional level, offering the prospect of regional economic integration at a time when economic, trade and connectivity initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and BRICS were unknown to the global community. It was conceived as a cooperative framework aimed at fostering economic growth, trade, and connectivity among its member states, which span Central Asia, West Asia, and South Asia. The underlying intention was to harness the shared historical ties of kinship and camaraderie among the three nations to create a transparent and cooperative international platform.
Since then the emergence of international and regional organizations has become a crucial element of the contemporary global system. Central to these initiatives is a shared ambition among member states to enhance mutual cooperation and interdependence, advancing collective economic interests, providing opportunities to boost trade, connectivity, and ultimately, regionalism.
The ECO territory is strategically important and contested, given its direct access to essential maritime routes including the Persian Gulf, Oman Sea, Indian Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, Black Sea, and Caspian Sea. However, the primary motivations behind the establishment of the ECO were not predominantly strategic; rather, they have been driven by commercial interests, with the promotion of intra-regional trade emerging as the principal agenda. The commercial potential inherent in the ECO region, coupled with the prospect of enhanced mutual trade exchanges among member states, has the capacity to elevate the economic influence of the organisation.
Pakistan, as a key player within the region, perceives ECO as an essential stage for enhancing trade, connectivity, and economic partnerships. However, several factors hinder the actualisation of these objectives. The current level of intra-regional trade within ECO remains significantly below its potential. Despite the presence of abundant resources and a substantial collective population of over 417 million, intra-regional trade constitutes only a small fraction of total external trade.
The success of regional organizations is closely intertwined with the influential role played by its members, specially a leading state or states. Successful examples of leading regional states include South Africa in the African Union, Malaysia and Indonesia in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), China and Russia in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), Russia within the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), Saudi Arabia in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Brazil and Argentina in the MERCOSUR (Southern Common Market), Germany and France in the European Union (EU), and India and Pakistan in the South Asian Association for Region.
Along with its predecessor RCD, ECO represents one of the more established intergovernmental entities but economic cooperation in the RCD-ECO context has been hindered by regional conflicts, an unfavourable global strategic environment, and a lack of commitment from key members. In the case of ECO we see that the core states of Iran, Turkey and Pakistan have not been able to provide the requisite leadership role for a variety of their own strategic, economic and internal political dynamics, leaving ECO to basically drift aimlessly in a complicated global and regional environment.
The ECO region is also confronted by a plethora of regional groupings and cooperation mechanisms, with several member states sponsoring competing sub-regional initiatives. Despite its potential efficacy, the ECO has encountered numerous rival cooperation organisations within the region, which have considerably undermined its initiatives. Other competitive frameworks in the ECO territory include the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Zone (which encompasses Armenia and Azerbaijan), the Eurasian Economic Union (comprising Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan) and the emerging GUUAM Group (consisting of Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, and Moldova).
Numerous influential factors contributing to conflict and dissonance have shaped the strategic dynamics of the ECO region. The Caspian-Caucasus area has sought to enhance its external engagements through platforms such as the ECO; however, Tehran and Ankara have pursued a strategy characterised by simultaneous cooperation and conflict, while Islamabad and Tehran have been embroiled in a strategic competition regarding post-Soviet Afghanistan. The rivalries and trust deficits among intra-ECO states have critically undermined the prospects for cooperative mechanisms, which are unlikely to thrive without a fervent and collective commitment from all members.
The objectives of the ECO have been described as ambitious and extensive, particularly when juxtaposed with the actual capabilities of the organisation. Conversely, the ECO member states possess limited global strategic influence relative to their geographical positioning and potential.
In the absence of a significant member capable of exerting a prominent role in the contemporary international order, the ECO appears to be a fragile alignment for pursuing an independent and self-sustaining agenda. Initially, the agreement regarding the Iranian nuclear programme raised expectations that Iran would fulfil its role as the core state of the ECO; however, this expectation has been supplanted by new strategic anxieties stemming from the ongoing US-Iran standoff.
In order to ensure the realization of the full potential of ECO, a renewed emphasis on trade facilitation, tariff reduction, and the elimination of non-tariff barriers among member states is imperative. Although ECO has endorsed critical agreements, such as the ECO-Trade Agreement (ECOTA), the full implementation of these agreements encounters various challenges. The ratification of these agreements by several member states does not guarantee effective execution, resulting in unrealised benefits. Concerted effort towards the effective implementation of existing agreements, while also considering revisions that are consistent with contemporary economic dynamics is urgently required.
Enhanced connectivity is a fundamental component of economic integration within ECO. The development of physical infrastructure, particularly in the realms of transport and energy, is crucial for fostering stronger economic ties. The necessity for collaborative projects aimed at improving road, rail, and energy networks throughout the region cannot be over emphasized. This expansion could be facilitated not only through the promotion of a corridor-based approach but also by integrating various economic corridors, such as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and ECO networks. These networks can be interconnected through proposed initiatives, including the Mainline-1 (ML-1) railway project. Under CPEC, ventures such as the Islamabad-Tehran-Istanbul Rail and Road Corridor are anticipated to yield significant regional benefits.
As for Pakistan, it is imperative to align ECO’s economic integration strategies with Pakistan’s national economic agenda and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). This alignment necessitates the harmonisation of regional objectives with domestic priorities to maximise mutual benefits. Such synergy could enhance industrial cooperation, facilitate technological exchange, and create investment opportunities. A revitalised ECO that could as a catalyst for economic growth and integration among its member states. Through dedicated efforts in trade facilitation, the implementation of agreements, infrastructure development, alignment with national agendas, and institutional strengthening, ECO has the potential to evolve into a formidable economic.
On its part Pakistan is deeply committed to the realisation of ECO’s objectives. The appointment of Ambassador Asad Majeed, the former Foreign Secretary, as the new secretary General of ECO is a testament to the importance we are now giving to ECO. In March 2017, Pakistan hosted the 13th ECO Summit in Islamabad, which was centred on the theme “Connectivity for Regional Prosperity.” This summit culminated in the adoption of two significant documents: the “Islamabad Declaration” and the “ECO Vision 2025.” These documents delineate the organisation’s strategic agenda up to 2025 and provide a framework for evaluating progress.
The ECO has contended with various politico-economic challenges, both internal and external, which have rendered it an ineffective forum. Consequently, the operational efficacy of the ECO has remained significantly below the anticipated threshold, leading to a state of near dormancy. Without a sincere and committed effort from all member states, particularly the founding countries, the ECO is unlikely to realise its envisaged potential.
The ECO was established with high expectations and ambitious objectives that necessitated the concurrence of its members on proposals encompassing a multitude of industries and substantial portions of each member’s economy. The fundamental reasons contributing to the minimal progress in regional economic integration among ECO members can be summarised as follows: ineffective management at all levels, an inability to coordinate the economic and political discourse among members, the diversity of member nations, the similarity of economic resources among members, external pressures and interference from certain developed countries, a lack of effective diplomacy, insufficient financial capital, aggressive objectives, and the predominance of non-democratic governments and limited free-market experience in most member nations.
—The writer is former Ambassador, based in Islamabad.
