Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

As an Indian editor, at every meeting I attend on the One Belt and One Road initiative, the one question, whether voiced or not, which hangs heavily in the air is: Why is India staying apart from the initiative?

The Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) Media Dialogue on Connectivity held in Guangzhou recently was no different. This question was the elephant in the room at the conference on the theme of "Promoting Public Awareness and Partnership." At least a score of delegates asked me why India had chosen to stay from the B&R initiative and what were the advantages of doing so. I was hard put to give a good reason.

It is difficult to understand why India has set itself against being involved or associated with the B&R initiative save for the fact that it was mooted by China and is China-led. As a reason, that does not make sense especially in an increasingly globalized and multi-polar world.

In India itself, different sections seeking to influence policy have divergent views on China, Sino-Indian relations and how New Delhi should deal with Beijing. However, almost all the different schools are more or less unanimous that it is in India's interest to work with China on the B&R initiative. Those who advocate India joining hands with China and venturing forth on the Silk Road are from across the spectrum of strategic affairs and foreign policy experts. Some of them are staunch supporters of the US "pivot" against China and votaries of the Washington-Delhi-Tokyo alliance.

Yet these sections have argued that India should get on board with the B&R initiative for pragmatic reasons. Economic common sense, need for connectivity and access to the proposed Asia-Europe infrastructure of transport and industrial corridors and hubs for telecom, trade, travel and energy transfer dictate that India seize the promise held out by the B&R initiative.

In fact, from a geostrategic perspective, involvement in the initiative could help India more effectively implement its own Spice Route and Mausam projects. Far from being counter-proposals, these two can be integrated with the B&R initiative to optimize both economic and strategic gains. On several occasions, Beijing has expressed its readiness to work with New Delhi and South Asia. It has offered to reorient and adapt the initiative to make it more acceptable to New Delhi.

However, India remains unmoved. Since the B&R initiative is expected to take shape over 35 years, New Delhi cannot be said to have shut the door for all time. Therefore, neither China nor the other countries including Russia have given up on India being persuaded to join the initiative.

But although the Indian government keeps out of B&R-linked activities, Indians, especially from the media, are regular invitees to these stakeholders' meetings on connectivity. Every such event is a reminder of how much India would have been in the limelight had it opted to partner China on the initiative.

In the absence of India, the most influential element of the Anglo-American axis that tends to dominate such spaces is Pakistan. Needless to say, Islamabad, as the leading South Asian presence in such forums, makes the most of these opportunities to "manage" perceptions. Had the government of India participated, even at a Track 2 level, it could have held center-stage, shown the way and stolen the thunder in Guangzhou or any such ASEM session, instead of leaving it to Indian journalists.

These media representatives are, at best, informed participants with little authority or say in policy-making. That is known to the organizers and the audience. Yet their being invited to present their thoughts and suggestions underscores the importance attached to India, its role in Asia, its engagement with Europe and emerging global initiatives.

Such participation and impact in international forums is a testimony to India's soft power, in the interests of the people and the state (not government) by non-state actors. But by keeping out of an initiative like the B&R, New Delhi is losing out not only on the tangible benefits of connectivity, but also the intangible gains that may flow from expanding its spheres of influence.

The author is an Indian journalist and commentator on international affairs. He is senior consultant and editor of China-India Dialogue in China International Publishing Group. shastriji@hotmail.com