From India to Europe: Why IMEC Must Fix Rail Links and Border Delays to Unlock Global Trade

An OECD report warns that the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor faces major railway gaps, port bottlenecks and customs inefficiencies that could limit its trade and investment potential. Coordinated infrastructure development, digital customs reforms and stronger regional cooperation could reduce trade costs, attract private investment and strengthen supply chains across Asia, the Middle East and Europe.

The India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) could transform international trade by connecting Indian manufacturing centres with Gulf logistics hubs and European markets. However, its success will depend on fixing missing railway links, expanding ports and simplifying customs procedures rather than merely announcing new infrastructure projects. A 2026 report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), titled Measuring Connectivity across the India-Middle East-Europe Corridor, finds that existing transport networks provide a strong foundation for economic integration, but infrastructure gaps, inefficient border procedures and geopolitical risks threaten the corridor's potential. For governments, development partners and private investors, the findings offer a roadmap for improving trade competitiveness, attracting investment and building more reliable supply chains.

Missing Railway Links Could Slow a Major Trade Ambition

Launched during India's G20 presidency in 2023, IMEC aims to establish maritime connections between India and the Arabian Gulf, followed by railway and shipping links towards Europe. The initiative also envisages electricity networks, digital infrastructure and clean hydrogen supply chains.

The OECD identifies incomplete railway connectivity across the Middle East as one of the corridor's biggest challenges. India and European countries already possess extensive railway systems, but a continuous freight railway linking the Arabian Gulf with the Mediterranean remains missing.

Jordan represents a critical gap because its railway infrastructure is poorly connected with neighbouring countries. Differences in railway gauges and operating systems further complicate regional integration.

Planned projects include a 238-kilometre railway connecting Abu Dhabi with Sohar in Oman and a 360-kilometre railway linking Jordanian mining areas with Aqaba. However, these investments will deliver limited corridor-wide benefits unless countries coordinate railway standards, border operations and connections to ports.

Maritime infrastructure also requires attention. India's Mundra Port, the UAE's Khalifa Port and Greece's Piraeus Port are important international gateways, but rising cargo volumes could create congestion. India's planned Vadhavan Port could increase capacity, while additional Mediterranean and Red Sea gateways could provide alternative routes.

For policymakers, the priority should be completing missing connections rather than building isolated infrastructure.

Customs Delays Could Cost Traders More Than Infrastructure Gaps

The report highlights a major weakness in international trade administration: countries have modernised domestic customs systems, but cross-border cooperation remains uneven.

India scored 1.905 out of 2 for trade information availability and 1.909 for domestic border agency cooperation. However, its score for cooperation with foreign border agencies was only 1.182.

The difference is also visible in digital trade. India achieved 100% implementation of domestic paperless trade measures in 2025, compared with 66.67% for cross-border paperless trade.

These gaps matter because exporters and importers may still face repeated documentation, inspections and clearance delays even when domestic systems operate efficiently.

For small businesses, unpredictable border procedures increase working capital requirements and make international orders harder to manage. Consumers may also face higher prices when transport and administrative expenses are passed through supply chains.

The OECD recommends electronic document exchange, common data standards, coordinated inspections and mutual recognition of trusted traders.

For governments and development partners, these reforms offer an opportunity to improve trade efficiency before expensive infrastructure projects become operational.

New Trade Routes Could Unlock Investment and Industrial Growth

Better connectivity could strengthen manufacturing exports, logistics services, warehousing, industrial parks and international supply chains.

The report demonstrates that infrastructure coverage does not automatically guarantee transport efficiency. India's road density reached approximately 221 kilometres per 100 square kilometres in 2024, compared with 184.2 in Germany and 13.2 in Saudi Arabia.

However, the UAE recorded a road-quality score of 6.2 out of seven, compared with India's 4.3. These differences underline the importance of infrastructure quality alongside network size.

For private companies, IMEC could create investment opportunities in ports, freight terminals, railways, logistics technology and storage facilities.

Nevertheless, geopolitical tensions, uncertain cargo demand, financing costs and regulatory differences could discourage investment.

International development institutions could help by supporting feasibility studies, financing commercially viable projects and reducing risks through carefully designed public-private partnerships.

The corridor could also improve energy security through electricity interconnections and clean hydrogen infrastructure, while stronger digital networks could support cargo tracking, customs processing and international payments.

Governments Must Turn Connectivity Plans Into Measurable Results

The OECD argues that IMEC should operate as an integrated transport and trade network rather than a collection of national infrastructure projects.

Governments should prioritise railway interoperability, faster border crossings, expanded port capacity and reliable logistics services. They should also develop common indicators to measure freight costs, shipment delays, infrastructure utilisation and supply-chain resilience.

Potential participation by Oman, Greece, Cyprus, Egypt, Lebanon and Syria could diversify routes, although expansion requires careful assessment of commercial feasibility and regional conditions.

Development partners should support institutional cooperation, digital customs integration and sustainable financing. Private investors need transparent regulations, predictable operating conditions and credible demand forecasts.

Importantly, the report does not establish guaranteed reductions in shipping costs or quantified increases in trade. These benefits will depend on actual project delivery and operational performance.

The central message is that IMEC's economic value will be determined not by how much infrastructure countries build, but by how efficiently goods, energy and information move across borders.