Governance of Transport Corridors in OIC Member States:
Challenges, Cases and Policy Lessons
110
The major problem of ASEAN, however, is the reality that few Member States of ASEAN have
transposed the ASEAN Charter, the constitution of the ASEAN Economic Community, the ASEAN
Strategic Plans, and the ASEAN Master Plans into national legislation. National legislation in the
Member States of ASEAN is often still in contradiction with ASEAN rules and regulations; and if
national legislation is harmonized, enforcement of this legislation is often lacking as well. Therefore,
national practices in the ASEAN Member States are often in contradiction with the commonly agreed
ASEAN rules and regulations.
The positive aspect is that in ASEAN the legal and regulatory framework is conducive for regional
integration, improvement of connectivity and international governance and management of economic
and transport corridors, with an emphasis on improving maritime connectivity. This later is an
important pillar in the ASEAN community as it addresses not only regional economic development
issues, but also international, regional and national safety and security on the oceans, seas and rivers
in the ASEAN community.
Interesting is the example of Indonesia, Member State of ASEAN, which tries to coordinate its national
Sea Toll Road project with the ASEAN Master Plan on Connectivity, but also with the Chinese Maritime
Silk Route initiative. It is important to integrate national and regional interventions as complementary
activities, which may reinforce each other.
Good practices corridor governance
Based on the information provided above, the following good practices can be identified:
 The strong foundation for regional cooperation, provided by ASEAN, with a clear policy (ASEAN
Connectivity 2025) and legal basis;
 The alignment of national initiatives (Indonesian Sea Toll Road project) and regional interventions
(ASEAN Master Plan on Connectivity) as complementary and reinforcing activities. Both initiatives
are linked to the Maritime Silk Road, as part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative.
7.3 Case study corridor TRACECA
7.3.1 Introduction
With fourteen member states (13 full members and one observer), the International Transport
Corridor Europe-the Caucasus-Asia (TRACECA) is one of the largest corridors in the world, spanning
across the centre of the Eurasian continent and covering the lion’s share of transport routes between
China and Europe. Often dubbed the new Silk road (Gorshkov & Bagaturia, 2001; Yildirir, 2015), its
location and geographical scope makes the stakes involved with corridor development high. At the
same time, its sheer size proves to be a major challenge, as aligning different national priorities and
procedures between member states with highly different historical, cultural and political backgrounds
has been a challenging exercise.
TRACECA is one of world’s first modern transport corridors. In 1993 negotiations started under
initiative of the European Union between Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Romania, Turkey, Tajikistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan. The goals of TRACECA
were carried forward in 1998 upon the members signing the Basic Multilateral Agreement (MLA), with
Iran joining the MLA in 2009 (the final project was completed in 2016). Although the main donor of
TRACECA, the EU, has reduced and eventually suspended funding, the member states continued its