Dual corridors, divided governance: India’s INSTC–IMEC strategy and the geopolitics of Eurasian connectivity

Connectivity has become central to Asian geopolitics. This article examines India’s simultaneous engagement with the International North–South Transport Corridor (INSTC) and the India–Middle East–Europe Corridor (IMEC) within a Eurasian order shaped by competitive connectivity and multipolar rivalry. It argues that the strategic value of India’s dual-corridor approach depends as much on governance ‘software’ as on physical ‘hardware.’ The article posits three structural challenges: alignment across rival geopolitical blocs, duplication and economic inefficiency, and institutional fragmentation. First, pursuing both corridors links India to partly competing coalitions, generating trust deficits. Second, gaps in standards, customs, and transnational coordination dilute time–cost advantages. Third, overlapping routes may enhance strategic flexibility but can reinforce fragmented regional networks without deeper institutional alignment. Rather than treating India’s dual engagement as policy incoherence, the article shows that its effectiveness depends on interoperable rules, corridor-level governance, and credible dispute-resolution mechanisms. Drawing on neo-institutionalist theory – particularly institutional isomorphism – and organizational governance theory, it explains when corridors integrate and when they fragment. The article links India’s corridor choices to wider debates on infrastructural power, strategic autonomy, and competitive connectivity in Asia.