The “Middle Corridor”: An Undervalued Eurasian Trade Shortcut

The “Middle Corridor”: An Undervalued Eurasian Trade Shortcut

The “Middle Corridor,” also known as the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route, traces its conceptual origins to Eurasian economic cooperation initiatives in the 1990s. Unlike traditional China-Europe Railway routes relying on the “Trans-Siberian Railway” (Northern Corridor) or maritime routes via the Persian Gulf and Suez Canal (Southern Corridor), the “Middle Corridor” centers on the core route of “China-Kazakhstan-Caspian Sea-Azerbaijan-Georgia-Turkey-Europe,” stretching approximately 6,000 kilometers. It stands as the shortest land route connecting East Asia to Southern Europe and the Middle East.

In the past, this route failed to realize its potential due to weak infrastructure and complex cross-border coordination. For instance, insufficient cargo-handling capacity at Caspian Sea ports and differing railway gauges between Kazakhstan (1,520mm broad gauge) and Azerbaijan (1,435mm standard gauge) necessitated multiple transshipments, often prolonging single trips beyond 30 days. Additionally, varying customs procedures, language barriers, and inconsistent logistics standards across 沿线 countries further hindered its practicality.

Post-2020, deepened cooperation between China and Central Asian, South Caucasus nations breathed new life into the “Middle Corridor.” Kazakhstan upgraded the Aktau Port container terminal with three new quay cranes, boosting annual throughput from 500,000 to 1.2 million TEUs. Azerbaijan invested $2 billion in doubling the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway, increasing train speeds from 80km/h to 120km/h. Turkey expanded Istanbul’s Marmaray Tunnel to accommodate double-stack container trains. These upgrades directly enhanced transport efficiency, laying the hardware foundation for the “15-day timeline.”

II. Behind the 15-Day Milestone: Technological Innovation and Institutional Breakthroughs

Halving travel time required more than just infrastructure upgrades; it relied heavily on technological empowerment and innovations in cross-border collaboration mechanisms.

Technologically, the “Middle Corridor” introduced a “Smart Logistics Tracking System,” leveraging Beidou positioning, IoT sensors, and blockchain to achieve full-process visibility of cargo. For example, containers departing Xi’an Port are tagged with electronic labels that real-time upload location, temperature, and vibration data. Shippers can track vessels via mobile apps while crossing the Caspian Sea; upon entering Turkey, customs systems automatically identify cargo information for “paperless clearance.” This system reduced cargo anomalies by 70%, minimizing delays from information lag.

Institutionally, China, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey signed the 2024 “Memorandum on Joint Operation of the Middle Corridor,” establishing a “single window” customs clearance mechanism. Previously, cargo required five sets of distinct declarations across borders, with a 40% repeat inspection rate. Now, enterprises declare once at the origin, with data synchronized to all 沿线 customs, reducing inspections to 1-2. The five nations also unified cargo insurance standards, launching cross-border insurance products with “one-time coverage for the entire journey” to resolve disputes from unclear liability.

Ali Özkan, a supply chain expert at Istanbul University, noted: “15 days is more than a timeframe—it represents a shift from ‘fragmented efforts’ to ‘collaborative progress’ among 沿线 nations. This transformation elevates the ‘Middle Corridor’ from an alternative route to a truly competitive main artery for Eurasian trade.”

III. Impact on Global Trade: Diverting Maritime Freight and Complementing Air Cargo

The improved efficiency of the “Middle Corridor” is reshaping Eurasian trade patterns. Historically, 70% of China-Europe cargo relied on maritime transport and 25% on air freight, with railways accounting for just 5%. While maritime transport is cost-effective, it takes 40-50 days and faces risks like Suez Canal congestion and Red Sea instability. Air freight, though fast (7-10 days), costs 5-8 times more than rail, limiting it to high-value goods.

The “Middle Corridor,” with its “15-day timeline and moderate costs,” fills the gap. For electronics, shipping from Chongqing, China, to Munich, Germany, takes 45 days by sea, 8 days by air, and just 18 days via the “Middle Corridor” (including transshipment to Munich), at 1/3 the air freight cost. This has driven a surge in rail transport for time and cost-sensitive goods like laptops and smartphones, with electronics shipments via the “Middle Corridor” rising 120% in H1 2025, accounting for 35% of its cargo volume.

For Turkey, the corridor transforms it from a “Eurasian periphery” to a “hub core.” Istanbul’s Habipler Logistics Park now serves as the European transshipment center for the “Middle Corridor,” with cargo reaching Duisburg (Germany), Lyon (France), and Milan (Italy) within 2 days by road or rail. Turkish trade data shows H1 2025 cross-border trade up 42%, with 70% attributed to the “Middle Corridor.”

IV. Challenges and the Road Ahead: Sustaining Advantages

Despite progress, long-term development faces hurdles. First, capacity constraints: the corridor currently handles ~1.5 million TEUs annually, just 1/5 of the “Northern Corridor” (Trans-Siberian Railway), primarily due to limited Caspian ferry capacity, leading to shortages during peak seasons. Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan plan a joint “Caspian Express Ferry Line” with three new 1,000-TEU ro-ro ships, aiming to double capacity upon 2026 launch.

Second, geopolitical risks: the South Caucasus region along the corridor faces complexities like Armenia-Azerbaijan border conflicts and Turkey-Syria tensions, threatening stability. Experts propose emulating the EU’s “Trans-European Transport Network” with a cross-border crisis response mechanism—e.g., stockpiling 3 days of emergency capacity at Georgia’s Batumi Port to reroute cargo during local conflicts.

Additionally, cost gaps with maritime transport remain a competitive disadvantage. The “Middle Corridor” currently costs ~twice as much as sea freight. To attract bulk commodities like auto parts and machinery, economies of scale are needed. China Railway plans to double train frequency from 15 to 30 weekly by 2025, targeting a 20% unit cost reduction through increased volume.

Looking ahead, the corridor’s potential extends beyond freight. As it matures, 沿线 nations are exploring “China-Europe Railway + Tourism” cross-border trains, allowing travelers to journey from Xi’an to Istanbul in 18 days, experiencing diverse cultures. This “logistics + cultural tourism” integration could inject new vitality into the corridor.

From 30 days to 15 days, the “Middle Corridor’s” transformation reflects more than efficiency gains—it symbolizes win-win cooperation among Eurasian nations. Amid global supply chain restructuring, this transcontinental steel artery is redefining international trade with greater openness and efficiency.