Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Analyzing CPEC

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47275
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby ramana » 13 Jun 2017 00:19

China loan interest rates will drive Pak, BD and Nepal to bankruptcy

https://twitter.com/kamnaAKrish/status/ ... 2909054976

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 404
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby ArjunPandit » 13 Jun 2017 09:09

even china would have thought everyone that it would unravel like this. If all these countries go bankrupt there is no way that chinese can take over all of these and not to forget pakistan. Sooner or later they will meet the same fate as US in pakistan: Cut your losses and save your own mush first.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1327
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby manjgu » 13 Jun 2017 11:14

thats the whole idea..drive countries to bankruptcy..and then setup military bases, go for minerals, gobble up agri land, change governments, .... a new east india company in the making !!

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 404
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby ArjunPandit » 13 Jun 2017 11:29

Truly East of India Company :). Did they factor in the terrorism risk in the project risk with pakis or were the thinking of sin-i-fication of pakis. Didnt they see the pics of mard-e-momins with images of 3 cricket teams +3 extras?

kapilrdave
BRFite
Posts: 1549
Joined: 17 Nov 2008 13:10

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby kapilrdave » 13 Jun 2017 12:44

If our neighbors are so hell bent on preferring a loan shark over a gentle and peace loving neighbor like us, we should drag our feet and watch them suffering. This will come as a lesson for them. There is no point in pampering these nincompoops for eternity.

I hope BD, Nepal and SL are colonized by china. Gives us a chance to liberate them :wink: .

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9437
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 13 Jun 2017 12:58

With Saudis heating up the game in Balochistan and Iran being pulled in to counter that, it will be interesting to watch CPEC.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1452
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chola » 13 Jun 2017 14:37

I fail to see how a Han-ified pork-eating Pakiland more worried about making a profit than reciting verses from some murderous desert religion is a bad thing.

Of course, having the chinis fail and losing their shirt in that shitpile of a nation is an even better alternative. But a win-win for us in either case.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9088
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby arun » 13 Jun 2017 18:11

Peregrine wrote:X Posted on the OBOR, Chinese Strategy and Implications & STFUP Threads

After OBOR gets ready, Pakistan will become China’s colony: S Akbar Zaidi

NEW DELHI: Pakistan will become a colony of China once the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) -- flagship project under the One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative is operationalised, contended top Pak political economist S Akbar Zaidi on the very day the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Summit praised Beijing’s mega connectivity plan.

In a lecture titled “Has China taken over Pakistan” organised in Kolkata by think tank ‘Calcutta Research Group’ on Friday night Zaidi noted that the CPEC initiative is the most discussed but the least transparent among all the foreign initiatives in Pakistan.

“It is indeed a game changer, but not in the way our ruling classes have projected it to be. It will enslave Pakistan and undermine its sovereignty,” alleged Zaidi author of pioneering books --‘Military Civil Society and democratisation in Pakistan’ and ‘Issues in Pakistan’s Economy’.

“CPEC is a part of China’s OBOR initiative to expand its influence in the world and Pakistan is just the geographical space used by Beijing to reach the warm waters of the Persian Gulf. But in the process, Beijing blueprint will ensure complete control over Pakistan,” Zaidi further alleged.

Incidentally Zaidi’s comments came on the very day when SCO praised China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). India, which went to the Summit as an observer and became a member, however, was not party to the final Summit document on this occasion. CPEC is the very project that has irked India as it passes through PoK besides the fact that OBOR or BRI initiative lacks transparency and is being implemented in a unilateral fashion.

Speaking at SCO Summit PM Narendra Modi took a dig at connectivity projects that infringes on sovereignty. Zaidi quoted Pak Senator Tahir Mashhadi, chairman of the standing committee on planning and development, who had described the CPEC corridor as the advent of “another East India Company is in the offing.” China has announced to invest whopping $ 62 bn in CPEC.

The most dangerous implication of the CPEC would be that Pakistan’s foreign relations, especially those with India, will be determined by the Chinese, the Pak scholar warned. “Pakistan’s obsession with China and CPEC will prevent any rapprochement between India and Pakistan unless the Chinese themselves initiate such a process and that they would do only if that fits into their grand design in the region. With China taking over Pakistan, providing it with undisclosed amount of investments, any any argument of increasing trade and economic cooperation between India and Pakistan lose out completely.” Zaidi blamed the Pakistani ruling elite for leading the country down the path of enslavement.

“Our ruling classes, especially the military, have first lived with the influence of US imperialism, then allowed unusual degree of Saudi intrusion in domestic, cultural and social affairs. Now they have prostrated themselves before Chinese imperial designs.”

Cheers Image


Article in the PRC Communist Party controlled Global Times takes exception to speech by citizen of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Akbar Zaidi, warning his country men of the neo-colonial danger of CPEC.

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan will do well to be cagey of Deeper than Indian Ocean, Higher than Himalaya’s, Closer than lips to teeth, Sweeter than Honey Iron Brother bearing dishes of Pork Haleem for the dish may turn turn out to be anything but Halal.

Concerns that CPEC will result in colonialism in Pakistan by China are not new and still wrong

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9088
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby arun » 14 Jun 2017 12:26

ramana wrote:China loan interest rates will drive Pak, BD and Nepal to bankruptcy

https://twitter.com/kamnaAKrish/status/ ... 2909054976



Peoples Republic of China trying to con Bangladesh by jacking up interest rate on financing of tied aid projects.

China has asked Bangladesh to convert part of the credit it promised during its president’s Dhaka visit to commercial loans.

Converting soft loans into commercial credit means Bangladesh will have to pay higher interest for the fund.

Bangladesh signed $25 billion deals with China for nearly two and a half dozen projects during President Xi Jinping’s visit to Dhaka in October last year.

Li Guangjun, economic and commercial counsellor at the Chinese Embassy in Dhaka, made the proposal during a recent meeting of the Joint Economic Council, according to a senior official at the Economic Relations Division or ERD.

However, the ERD official said in the face of resistance against such proposal, China showed the sign of softening its stance. ………………………


From Bangladesh News:

China seeks to convert part of soft loans into commercial credit for Bangladesh

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3652
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 17 Jun 2017 19:52

X Posted on the STFUP Thread

Putting all its eggs in CPEC basket will jeopardise Pakistan's economy, warns IMF

ISLAMABAD:The International Monetary Fund (IMF) said the outlook for Pakistan's economy was "favourable", citing Chinese infrastructure investments among reasons for growth, but warned of risks to recent progress.

Confidence in insurgency-hit Pakistan is growing, with the IMF saying last year that the country had emerged from crisis and stabilised its economy after completing a bailout programme.

However the IMF warned in a report on Friday that macroeconomic stability gains have started to erode and could pose risks to the economic outlook.

"Pakistan's outlook for economic growth is favourable, with real GDP estimated at 5.3 percent in ... 2016/17 and strengthening to 6 percent over the medium term on the back of stepped-up China Pakistan Economic Corridor investments, improved availability of energy, and growth-supporting structural reforms," the report said.

"However, macroeconomic stability gains .have begun to erode and could pose risks to the economic outlook," it added.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif vowed to boost the long-depressed economy after winning a third term in 2013.

Encouraged -- and undeterred by domestic debt of $182 billion -- Islamabad set an ambitious yearly growth target of 5.7 percent for 2016/2017. The World Bank predicted 5.4 percent growth by 2018.

Hopes are pinned on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a $46 billion initiative by Beijing that aims to link the Asian superpower's Xinjiang region with the Arabian Sea through Pakistan.

The plan encompasses a series of infrastructure, power and transport upgrades that Islamabad hopes will kickstart the economy.

But experts say the deal is opaque, and much more transparency is needed before they can assess any impact for Pakistan -- including, for example, whether the $46 billion is an investment or a loan.

According to Friday's IMF report, Pakistan's current account deficit has widened and is expected at 3 percent of GDP in 2016-17 or mor than $9 billion, driven by fast rising imports of capital goods and energy.

It said Pakistan's foreign exchange reserves have declined in the context of a stable rupee-dollar exchange rate, urging Islamabad to allow greater exchange rate flexibility.

Over the last two weeks, official foreign currency reserves decreased by more than $1.5 billion.

Cheers Image

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21336
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 20 Jun 2017 07:18

Balochistan: The Chinese Chequered - Tushar Ranjan Mohanty, South Asia Intelligence Review of the South Asia Terrorism Portal
The Islamic State (IS, also Daesh) on June 8, 2017, claimed the killing of two Chinese nationals who had been abducted from the Jinnah Town area of Quetta, the provincial capital of Balochistan, in the afternoon of May 24, 2017. Amaq, the IS propaganda agency, declared, “Islamic State fighters killed two Chinese people they had been holding in Baluchistan province, south-west Pakistan.” The Chinese couple, Lee Zing Yang (24) and Meng Li Si (26), were studying Urdu in Quetta, where they reportedly also ran a Mandarin language course. According to Deputy Inspector General Police Aitzaz Goraya, unknown abductors, wearing Police uniforms, had forced the two foreigners into a vehicle at gunpoint and driven away. They also tried to overpower another Chinese woman but she ran away. A man present at the site attempted to resist the kidnapping, but was shot at by one of the abductors. So far no local group has claimed responsibility for the incident (abduction and subsequent killing). Reports speculate that the actual perpetrators were linked to the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi al Alami (LeJ-A), the international wing of the LeJ, which believed to be affiliated to Daesh.

The claim came hours after Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) released details of a three-day operation (June 1-3) by the Pakistan Army against Daesh-affiliated terrorists in the Mastung area of Balochistan, in which Security Forces (SFs) had killed 12 suspected terrorists, including two suicide bombers. ISPR claimed, There were reports of 10-15 terrorists of a banned outfit Lashrake-Jhangivi Al-Almi (LeJA) hiding in caves near Isplingi ( Koh-i-Siah/Koh-i- Maran) 36 Kilometer South East of Mastung." And further, "The suicide bomber used against Deputy Chairman of Senate Maulana Abdul Ghafoor Haydri on May 12 was also sent by [the targeted group]." The ISPR statement asserted that SFs destroyed an explosives facility inside the cave where the terrorists were hiding, and recovered a cache of arms and ammunition, including 50 kilogrammes of explosives, three suicide jackets, 18 grenades, six rocket launchers, four light machine guns,18 small machine guns, four sniper rifles, 38 communication sets and ammunition of various types.

Pakistan initially denied the Chinese couple’s death, perhaps due to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s presence, alongside Chinese President Xi Jinping, at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Summit in Astana on June 9, 2017. The first reaction from Pakistani authorities came four days after the Daesh claim. On June 12, 2017, Federal Minister of the Interior Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan confirmed that two Chinese nationals who had been abducted from Quetta had been killed.

The killing of the Chinese couple has underscored questions about the security of Chinese workers in Pakistan, and the country’s centrality to China’s ambitious One Belt One Road (OBOR) Initiative. The centrepiece of the ‘new Silk Route’ plan, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), passes through insurgency-hit Balochistan. Earlier, on May 31, 2017, amid Beijing’s growing concerns about the safety of two of its abducted nationals, the National Security Committee, presided over by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, reviewed the security of CPEC and Chinese nationals based in Pakistan. The NSC meeting released a press statement which gave no details, but noted that “security for CPEC projects also came under discussion”.

On June 3, 2017, 11 Chinese nationals— three men and eight women — living in the Jinnah Town of the Quetta were shifted to Karachi, and then flown back to China. Abdul Razzaq Cheema, Quetta’s Regional Police Officer, stated that these Chinese nationals had been living in Quetta for almost a year, and that two South Korean families had also been living in Quetta’s Jinnah Town for four years. After the abduction of the two Chinese nationals, Police had increased security of Chinese and other foreign nationals working on different component projects of CPEC, as well as with NGOs and United Nations’ organisations in Quetta and other parts of Balochistan.

The complex, multilayered, seemingly never-ending security crisis in Balochistan appears more dangerous with the entry of Daesh onto the scene. Balochistan has been under attack by separatists, insurgents, and Islamist terrorists for over a decade, and the situation can only worsen with Daesh’s entry. The Government, however, continues to deny Daesh’s existence in the Province and, most recently, on June 13, 2017, Balochistan Home Minister Mir Sarfaraz Bugti insisted that the group had no presence in the Province.

While the abduction and killing of the Chinese nationals was clearly a security failure, Pakistan has given the crime a religious angle, diverting attention from issues relating to ongoing CPEC projects in insurgency-hit Balochistan. Thus, on June 12, 2017, Federal Minister of the Interior Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan claimed that the slain Chinese couple belonged to a group of Chinese people who had obtained a business visa for Pakistan but were engaged in ‘preaching.’ In a meeting held at the Interior Ministry to review issuance of visas to Chinese nationals and registration of international nongovernmental organisations (INGOs), Nisar was told the couple was part of a group of Chinese citizens who obtained business visas from the Pakistani Embassy in Beijing. However, instead of carrying out any business activity, they were engaged in evangelical activities in Quetta, under the garb of learning Urdu language at the ARK Info Tech Institute owned by a South Korean national, Juan Won Seo.

On June 14, 2017, however, South Korea rejected Pakistan’s contention that the slain Chinese nationals were preaching Christianity under the guise of studying Urdu at a school run by a South Korean. An unnamed South Korean official asserted that there was no evidence to show the couple was involved in proselytizing under Seo’s guidance.


Meanwhile, China’s official media Global Times has criticized South Korean Christian groups for converting young Chinese and sending them to proselytise in Muslim countries. The kidnapping was a rare crime against Chinese nationals in Pakistan, but has alarmed the growing Chinese community in the country. A Global Times editorial argued, “while the atrocity” by the Islamic State in killing the two Chinese is appalling, it cannot drive a wedge between China and Pakistan, nor will CPEC construction be disrupted.

Behind the whole episode of Daesh’s abduction and killing of Chinese nationals, there is a clear intention of hurting Chinese interests. This is just the latest instance of Daesh targeting China, which is home to more than 20 million Muslims, including Uyghurs, in the Xinjiang province. In 2014, Daesh leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi explicitly equated China with the US, Israel and India as an ‘oppressor of Muslims’. That this was not mere rhetoric was demonstrated by the group's subsequent execution of a Chinese citizen, Fan Jinghui, in Iraq on November 20, 2015. In February this year, ISIS released a slickly produced propaganda video detailing for the first time "scenes from the life of immigrants from East Turkistan [Xinjiang] in the land of the Caliphate" in which an Uyghur terrorist promised to "shed blood like rivers" to avenge Beijing's alleged oppression in Xinjiang.

Arif Rafiq, fellow at the Centre for Global Policy, a Washington think tank, observed, on January 9, 2017, that “Balochistan provides IS with an opportunity to not only strike at Pakistani interests, but also those of China and Iran… Anti-state jihadis in Pakistan have previously sought to target Chinese citizens in Pakistan, knowing that this would strain relations between Beijing and Islamabad. Jihadis in Balochistan who’ve made the switch from al-Qaeda to IS are on a similar mission.”

Apart from Daesh’s abduction and killing of the Chinese couple, there has always been a lingering threat to Chinese engineers and workers associated with CPEC projects, as these have been rejected by Baloch nationalists who considers CPEC a 'strategic design' by Pakistan and China to loot Balochistan's resources and eliminate the indigenous culture and identity. Dubbing China as a 'great threat' to the Baloch people, UNHRC Balochistan representative Mehran Marri argued, on August 13, 2016, that "China really-really is spreading its tentacles in Balochistan very rapidly, and therefore, we are appealing to the international community. The Gwadar project is for the Chinese military. This would be detrimental to international powers, to the people's interest, where 60 percent of world's oil flows. So, the world has to really take rapid action in curbing China's influence in Balochistan in particular and in Pakistan in general."

Pakistan currently hosts a sizable Chinese population and the numbers are slated to grow as the project progresses. Concern about the demographic transformation of Balochistan was reiterated in a report by the Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FPCCI) on December 28, 2016, which noted that, at the current rate of influx of Chinese nationals into Balochistan and after completion of the CPEC, the native population of the area would be outnumbered by 2048.

Pakistan earlier beefed up security around Chinese citizens streaming into the country on the back of Beijing’s OBOR infrastructure build-up across the nation. On February 20, 2017, the Government announced the creation of a special contingent of 15,000 personnel from the Maritime Security Force (MSF) and Special Security Division (SSD) to protect 34 CPEC related projects, including Gwadar and other coastal projects, and to ensure the safety of locals and foreigners working on CPEC projects. Senator Mushahid Hussain Sayeed, Chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on CPEC, after a committee meeting in Parliament House on February 20, 2017, disclosed, “The SSD is a force that will provide security to 34 CPEC related projects, while the MSF will safeguard the Gwadar port and other coastal areas of the country”.

Despite these security arrangements, militants succeeded in killing 10 labourers on May 13, 2017 and three labourers on May 18, 2017, at CPEC related projects in the Gwadar District of Balochistan. Since the start of CPEC projects in Balochistan in 2014, at least 57 workers (all Pakistani nationals) connected with these projects, have been killed. With global terrorist formations such as Daesh and al Qaeda entering the fray, and a range of domestic Islamist terrorist formations, prominently including LeJ-A and Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, as well as Baloch nationalist formations, all opposing the Pakistani state in general, and Chinese projects in the country in particular, this pattern of violence can only increase.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21336
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 22 Jun 2017 11:13

Pakistani President confirms that sooner than later Pakistan will become a province of China and that is INEVITABLE.

New strategic doctrine inevitable after CPEC execution: Mamnoon - Daily Times
President Mamnoon Hussain on Wednesday said China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), in view of its regional and global impact, would necessitate a new strategic doctrine.

Addressing the graduation ceremony of National Security and War Course 2017 here at the National Defence University (NDU), the president said the vision of ‘One Belt, One Road’ had laid the foundation of far-reaching changes at global scenario. “With the progress on these projects there will also be changes in the region’s strategic realities. Thus a new Strategic Doctrine will be inevitable.

TKiran
BRFite
Posts: 653
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 00:22

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby TKiran » 22 Jun 2017 12:05

What was interesting about CPEC was that it used to be a partnersheep between two crooks. But it seems Paki's have blinked first.

It has major strategic ramifications for India.

Chinese have won the first round. India has not been knocked out yet, but facing major challenge. Unless India starts land grab in PoK from today onwards, it would be too little too late to stop China. Tibet can still be won, but Pakistan with bhooka nangas waiting for ghazwa-e-hind, would be militarily a difficult task, once CPEC completes.

Once CPEC concludes, all bhooka nangas will be invading India making way for their Chinese masters to colonize Pakistan.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9437
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 22 Jun 2017 12:15

Strange .... bakis waiting for CPEC to start their ghazwa-e-hind.

Greater *direct* Chinese involvement in Bakistan will bring them in direct conflict with the bhooka nangas for resources. And with a fandoo population like the bakis, that too 200 million+, I wish China best of luck. This is no Tibet, Xinxiang or even Sri lanka and look what happened in Sri Lanka when the Chinese demanded IIRC 15K hectares as part of loan settlement.

CPEC does setup a challenge for India in that it provides them a land route to and a military base at Gwadar. That in itself is a big challenge for India but nothing beyond that. Baki hope of making CPEC a red-line for India will prove false. Chinese projects Inside Bakistan will not prevent a future Indian response for baki provocation nor drag Chinese into the *military* defense of bakiland as is their fond hope.

TKiran
BRFite
Posts: 653
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 00:22

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby TKiran » 22 Jun 2017 14:29

^^^ Pankaj sir, so you are betting on Paki's to fool Chinese, whereas I am betting on Chinese to take over Pakistan.

I have interacted with civilians from both China and Pakistan, pakis are only obsessed with India, and they are not as intelligent or shrewd as Chinese. Entire population of Chinese think like what CPC wants them to think, they are more cunning and strategic in their thinking. I am sure as time passes, the Chinese would manipulate to shift the focus of ordinary pakis towards India, while they are meticulously colonizing Pakistan. Pakis are much more amenable to manipulation than Tibetans or Uyghurs.

It's a matter of another 2 years, let's wait till then if what you think about pakis is correct or my prediction is correct.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9437
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 22 Jun 2017 15:15

On India their views converge and that is without question. I am waiting to see an interesting contest of wills between the Bakis and the Cheenis on the internal dynamics and for the resources of Bakistan.

As the Bakis like to remind themselves and others, "Pakistan ka matlab kya ...." Bakis are MOST amenable to the slogan "Islam khatre main hai". When that becomes the rallying cry all else including India will be forgotten. India is well placed, if it want's to fan that fire inside Bakistan. But for obvious reason, such a fire is uncontrollable once lit and should not be thought of lightly. I am not going to spell it out but there is an Indian link or two that has deep deep roots within the Baki society that can be used if push comes to shove.

BTW, I don't think India will need to pull out that rabbit to create a Vietnam for China in Bakistan. The contradictions and risks of getting bogged down will ensure that China will stay on the periphery of Baki society even while collaborating with them in their joint anti-India project. For the Chinese the ideal scenario is where Bak army does its bidding inside and outside Bakistan even while helping them extract Baki resources for some baksish.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21336
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 22 Jun 2017 16:00

TKiran wrote: . . . Entire population of Chinese think like what CPC wants them to think . . .

TK, I have a different take on that. I will post my thoughts some time soon but in the regular China thread.

Yes, it would be interesting to watch whether the Pakis milk the Chinese (like the way they did and continue to do with the Americans) or as you say, the strategic-thinking Chinese are able to gobble up Pakistan under the CPEC rubric. History shows that the small nation of Japan was able to defeat China and take it over. Not for a minute am I suggesting that Pakistan could do a 19th century-Japan on China. But, China can be undone. That is what I want to post upon, Insh'a Alla'h.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1452
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chola » 22 Jun 2017 21:16

SSridhar wrote:
TKiran wrote: . . . Entire population of Chinese think like what CPC wants them to think . . .

TK, I have a different take on that. I will post my thoughts some time soon but in the regular China thread.

Yes, it would be interesting to watch whether the Pakis milk the Chinese (like the way they did and continue to do with the Americans) or as you say, the strategic-thinking Chinese are able to gobble up Pakistan under the CPEC rubric. History shows that the small nation of Japan was able to defeat China and take it over. Not for a minute am I suggesting that Pakistan could do a 19th century-Japan on China. But, China can be undone. That is what I want to post upon, Insh'a Alla'h.


Cheen is an agricultural/shopkeeping civilization. It is closest to Bharat as a race of rice-eating farming non-warriors. SYRE to our SDRE. Japan are a warrior race (as Mongols and Manchus) so when they met the outcome was inevitable.

Pakistan is not a Japan (or Mongols or Manchus.) They only think they are a martial race but they are SDRE with delusions of grandeur. They will do what ever the chinis have planned for them.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3456
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Karthik S » 22 Jun 2017 21:21

chola wrote:
SSridhar wrote:TK, I have a different take on that. I will post my thoughts some time soon but in the regular China thread.

Yes, it would be interesting to watch whether the Pakis milk the Chinese (like the way they did and continue to do with the Americans) or as you say, the strategic-thinking Chinese are able to gobble up Pakistan under the CPEC rubric. History shows that the small nation of Japan was able to defeat China and take it over. Not for a minute am I suggesting that Pakistan could do a 19th century-Japan on China. But, China can be undone. That is what I want to post upon, Insh'a Alla'h.


Cheen is an agricultural/shopkeeping civilization. It is closest to Bharat as a race of rice-eating farming non-warriors. SYRE to our SDRE. Japan are a warrior race (as Mongols and Manchus) so when they met the outcome was inevitable.

Pakistan is not a Japan (or Mongols or Manchus.) They only think they are a martial race but they are SDRE with delusions of grandeur. They will do what ever the chinis have planned for them.


If that were the case, our forum would be of green color today. BTW ironic that you chose the name "chola" but made that statement.

LokeshC
BRFite
Posts: 687
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 04:36

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby LokeshC » 22 Jun 2017 21:24

There are no martial races. Everyone was fjked over by someone else at some point in history, just have to rewind the tape far enough back.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3456
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Karthik S » 22 Jun 2017 21:30

Let's not say that as well. True, many martial races lost to others because the victors had better strategies, weapons or numbers. But that doesn't take away the fact that there were no martial races at all. There were many such races that lived by warrior codes such as bushido, code of chivalry etc that valued honor, country more than their lives.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1452
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chola » 22 Jun 2017 21:50

Karthik S wrote:
chola wrote:
Cheen is an agricultural/shopkeeping civilization. It is closest to Bharat as a race of rice-eating farming non-warriors. SYRE to our SDRE. Japan are a warrior race (as Mongols and Manchus) so when they met the outcome was inevitable.

Pakistan is not a Japan (or Mongols or Manchus.) They only think they are a martial race but they are SDRE with delusions of grandeur. They will do what ever the chinis have planned for them.


If that were the case, our forum would be of green color today. BTW ironic that you chose the name "chola" but made that statement.


Nope. Three wars have already shown us that we can never become green no matter what. Look, Bakis have many strikes against them, a dysfunctional political system compounded by a religion unfit for the modern age. But most of all, they are the same SDREs they like to disparage.

The Cholas were holders of a great empire and spread the power of my people across all of SE Asia but at its core it was a cultural and trading empire.

I hold the term SDRE with pride, Sir. We are what we are. We create and build. We spread knowledge and trade not the sword and the torch.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3652
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 22 Jun 2017 22:40


anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5817
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby anupmisra » 23 Jun 2017 03:40

Has any right-thinking baki (I know I know) economist studied the long term effect of g'awaadar on k'rachi? If chini container ships are diverted to g'awaadar, wouldn't k'rachi lose out on potential revenue? If (and only if) g'awaadar succeeds economically, wont that be at the cost of k'rachi?

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3652
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 24 Jun 2017 15:11

X Posted on the STFUP Thread

A very long Article. Here is a short Introduction :

Has China taken over Pakistan? - S Akbar Zaidi

What we know and what we don’t about CPEC. A comprehensive account that tries to make sense of the Corridor

It would be no exaggeration to state, that there has been more written on the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) in the Pakistani press over the last two years when the project was initiated, than perhaps any other economic or financial relationship which has affected Pakistan. In this short span of time, more words have been written on what is being called a ‘game changer’, a ‘fate changer’, a project which will transform Pakistan permanently making it part of the developed world, than on the IMF (on which Pakistan has had a huge dependence for 30 years), the World Bank or foreign aid to Pakistan over many decades.
Moreover, the nature of the narrative and the discourse around CPEC, compares very differently with any other financial and economic relationship in the past. Although the US has been Pakistan’s largest donor over 70 years, there has been much criticism of the type of this financial, economic, and subsequently diplomatic relationship, where the US has been seen to be the dominating partner, always asking Pakistan to ‘do more’ for all the monies poured into the country.
Similarly, even though the IMF continues to save Pakistan at critical junctures by providing emergency loans and assistance, no structural adjustment package comes through without much debate and criticism from different sections of society. While there have been some questions raised on the Pakistan-China partnership, the tone and content of discussion has been very different, and even sceptics and those who question some of the terms of the new relationship, concede that much, if not all, is more good, than bad.
Cheers Image

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 580
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Deans » 24 Jun 2017 16:25

anupmisra wrote:Has any right-thinking baki (I know I know) economist studied the long term effect of g'awaadar on k'rachi? If chini container ships are diverted to g'awaadar, wouldn't k'rachi lose out on potential revenue? If (and only if) g'awaadar succeeds economically, wont that be at the cost of k'rachi?


Since 'right thinking baki' is an oxymoron. I have tried to figure this out.
Karachi operates at only 50% of its capacity and is inefficient for the cargo it does handle.
There is a new private terminal being built at Karachi, which straightaway becomes unviable, if any significant part of the incremental
sea borne trade of Pakistan goes to Gwadar.
CPEC may actually reduce the no of Chinese container ships calling at Pakistani ports, if the premise of CPEC is to encourage trade by land.

The only incremental trade flowing though Gwadar would be exports of finished cotton based textiles (using cotton from Xinjiang and processed in
a Chinese owned tax free export zone in Gwadar - which China will demand when Pak fails to repay loans) which will directly hit Pakistani
textile exports - over half of total Pak exports. So basically Pak pays for an unviable port project, in order for their biggest export to get screwed.

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5817
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby anupmisra » 24 Jun 2017 16:32

Deans wrote:Karachi operates at only 50% of its capacity and is inefficient for the cargo it does handle. CPEC may actually reduce the no of Chinese container ships calling at Pakistani ports, if the premise of CPEC is to encourage trade by land.


To take this thought process to the next level, in effect, g'wadaar is bad news for k'rachi. K'rachi accounts for half of the bakistan's economy (give or take a few bucks). Jobs and revenue from trade will be lost. The port could become obsolete / redundant. I wonder why no one (read mohajirs, and sindhis) is protesting?

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3652
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 24 Jun 2017 16:40

anupmisra wrote:Has any right-thinking baki (I know I know) economist studied the long term effect of g'awaadar on k'rachi? If chini container ships are diverted to g'awaadar, wouldn't k'rachi lose out on potential revenue? If (and only if) g'awaadar succeeds economically, wont that be at the cost of k'rachi?
anupmisra Ji :

In around Mid May 2003 there was an Article from Jang-The News international - the link does not work - stated :

FIRST THE DREAM: GWADAR IS THE link between Pakistan and the oil & gas reserves of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan; Gwadar will become a hub of shipping, commercial and industrial activities; it will bring an economic and social revolution in Balochistan; Gwadar is the link between Pakistan and the mineral-rich Central Asian Republics; it will add US$10 billion per year to our treasury; Gwadar is destined to become the region’s energy hub; it will be the link between Pakistan and landlocked Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Kyrgyzstan; Gwadar will be traders’ paradise; Gwadar is investors’ heaven.
Now some facts: Pakistan has two ports – Karachi Port Trust (KPT) and Port Muhammad Bin Qasim (PQA). KPT and PQA are both served by rail and are linked directly with the National Highways. KPT handles 60% of our international trade while PQA takes up the remaining 40%. Over the last 10 years, our port traffic has increased at an average of 6% a year. KPT has 28 general cargo berths and three oil jetties (two of which are capable of handling 75,000 dead weight ton ships while the third will be able to serve 75,000 DWT ships).
PQA has seven berths. Berths 1-4 can accommodate vessels of up to 25,000 DWT and Berths 5-7 of up to 35,000 DWT. There is a special berth for handling bulk iron ore and coal for Pakistan Steel. PQA also has an Oil Terminal for the handling of liquid bulk cargoes, including fuel oil and petroleum.
Here is a really important expert deduction: With an average growth rate of 6% a year, the port capacity at KPT and PQA is adequate till the year 2025. The berth capacity of our current two ports is also considered adequate for the next twenty years (approach channels, however, do need major improvements).
KPT is 1.5 times more expensive than Bombay, 4.5 times more expensive than Colombo and 19 times more expensive than Dubai. Shippers using either KPT or PQA end up paying Rs15 billion per year in extra payments to Pakistani port authorities. Between 1996 and 1999, the cash flow at the KPT, as a consequence, has dropped by 50%. The real problem with our existing ports is chronically low labour productivity and excessively high port charges.
Now on to Gwadar. The peninsula is nearly 310 square miles with 50,000 inhabitants. Gwadar is 290 miles west of Karachi and 160 miles southwest of Turbat, the capital of Makran. The plan for phase I is the construction of three berths with a depth of 12.5 meters and approach channels. By 2006, the three berths are to be used for loading and unloading of general cargo, hopefully coming in from West China, Europe and the American continents.
Once in Gwadar, it’s 290 miles east to Karachi. From Karachi to Hyderabad heading north and then northwest to Nawabshah. On to Sukkur, Bahawalpur, Multan, Lahore, Gujranwala, Islamabad, Peshawar and finally northwest into Kabul. From Kabul, north to Kunduz to enter Tajikistan. Or, northwest to Mazar-e-Sharif to reach the oil and gas reservoirs of either Uzbekistan or Turkmenistan.
Just who would want to use Gwadar to reach all the uncounted wealth of Central Asia? Imagine, sniffing through the entire length of Pakistan and the entire breadth of Afghanistan both arguably the world’s most volatile countries. Gwadar has no water and no infrastructure to anywhere.
IMO : The whole CPEC-OBOR is a swindle, deception, trick, racket, bit of sharp practice, fraud; informal scam, con trick, sting, gyp, kite, diddle, rip-off, fiddle, swizzle, swizz; informal bunco, boondoggle, hustle, grift by Nawaz Sharif and the various Clapistani Politicians to involve China in Clapistan's Defence against India. Yes they will all make money - mainly the Sharif Family and their successors and keep China defending their Turf against India. It is quite possible that Clapistan will eventually become Pakziang but they will have succeeded in creating problems for India by way of the Chinese "Occupation".

Cheers Image

Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5764
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Vikas » 24 Jun 2017 20:02

So what happens if a country takes loan from a benign neighbor and then refuses to pay back citing bad economic conditions.
Say for example, Sri Lanka tells Cheen that it has no money to pay back any loan right now so give me more otherwise I will go under.
What can Cheen do ? Forcefully occupy SL or threaten to lower its Rating...
I think Cheen has sunk in the money which they will never recover from Bakistan and have got no leverage over Bakis.
Baki govt dont have money even to buy napkins to wipe their behind, How will they return Cheeni money at exorbitant interest rates.

PS: And a sucker is born every day trying to control Bakis by paying Jaziya

yensoy
BRFite
Posts: 505
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby yensoy » 24 Jun 2017 20:47

Cheen can say that they will remove the technical hold on the Azhar issue. Pakistan's blind hatred against India will send them scurrying back to appease China, selling the family silver if they have to just to pay interest. That is their mindset, the Chinese know fully well they are good for the money and can be made to pay every last fen (a hundredth of a yuan) due.

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 580
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Deans » 24 Jun 2017 21:47

anupmisra wrote:
Deans wrote:Karachi operates at only 50% of its capacity and is inefficient for the cargo it does handle. CPEC may actually reduce the no of Chinese container ships calling at Pakistani ports, if the premise of CPEC is to encourage trade by land.


To take this thought process to the next level, in effect, g'wadaar is bad news for k'rachi. K'rachi accounts for half of the bakistan's economy (give or take a few bucks). Jobs and revenue from trade will be lost. The port could become obsolete / redundant. I wonder why no one (read mohajirs, and sindhis) is protesting?


Also, there are no jobs for the Baluchis in Gwadar - though expectations have been raised sky high. So one more dissaffected ethnic group.

Peregrine - The analysis that you posted suggests that Karachi is more inefficient than Mumbai. But Mumbai itself is an inefficient port by
Indian standards.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21336
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 24 Jun 2017 21:50

Vikas wrote:I think Cheen has sunk in the money which they will never recover from Bakistan and have got no leverage over Bakis.
Baki govt dont have money even to buy napkins to wipe their behind, How will they return Cheeni money at exorbitant interest rates.

True that China has sunk in the money which they will never recover. But, I do not agree that they have no leverage over the Pakistanis. Pakaistan has to have either the US or China (preferably both) on its side; otherwise, it is dead meat. It knows that and that is the leverage the Chinese will have. More than that, the Han Chinese will occupy Pakistan - the process has already started - unlike the Americans who were extremely benign with their outright grants, low-interest loans over very long periods, free military hardware and training, non-occupation of the land etc.

It is my understanding that the Chinese are traditionalists and CPC is no exception. They continue to behave like the Chinese Emperors of yore who demanded and got tribute from faraway lands. It is astonishing what the Chinese Emperors demanded from the tributes! Pakistan since 1963 has lived upto those demands! An Empire, unlike a nation-state has undefined and irregular borders and so CPC can lay claim to the whole of a tribute-paying, subservient and servile Pakistan too.

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 580
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Deans » 24 Jun 2017 22:02

Vikas wrote:So what happens if a country takes loan from a benign neighbor and then refuses to pay back citing bad economic conditions.
Say for example, Sri Lanka tells Cheen that it has no money to pay back any loan right now so give me more otherwise I will go under.
What can Cheen do ? Forcefully occupy SL or threaten to lower its Rating...
I think Cheen has sunk in the money which they will never recover from Bakistan and have got no leverage over Bakis.
Baki govt dont have money even to buy napkins to wipe their behind, How will they return Cheeni money at exorbitant interest rates.

PS: And a sucker is born every day trying to control Bakis by paying Jaziya


CPEC / OBOR is based on the premise that ALL the investee countries will pay up. China bases this premise on the assumption that they are the
only lender in town (because normal bankers will not lend for dubious projects) and they only need to bribe the General/ Dictator/ Junta running
the country to ensure repayment, OR lend to a country too small to resist pressure. Venezeula/Africa/Pakistan/Myanmar/Central Asia are in the first category and Sri Lanka/Nepal in the 2nd.

The problem arises when dictators are faced with a bankrupt economy as a result of loan repayments - Venezeula has to decide between paying China and letting their people starve. Or when democracy replaces a dictatorship, or a strongman loses an election (Africa/ Sri Lanka), or public pressure demands a relook at projects (since none of them will benefit the public). If one country defaults, it will have a domino effect.

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5817
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby anupmisra » 25 Jun 2017 03:30

Deans wrote:If one country defaults, it will have a domino effect.


My belief is that CPEC (and OBOR or whatever acronymns you want to use), this SeePack is a one big, back handed land grab scheme. I have been saying this all along. In the case of gawadaar and roads leading to it, the long term goal for the chinis is to have a warm water naval and air base that could threaten and watch Indian and US assets in the area. The strategy the chinis have adopted is to "partner" with the broke bakis who have become pariahs in this part of the world and non one wants to touch them. By offering $50+ billion in loans under the Honest Li Loan to Own Program, the chinis would love to see the pakis default. Instead of taking ownership control of the assets that the pakis have pledged as collateral (an act that would be scrutinized in detal by the UN), the chinis will be happy to enter into a 100 or 500 year lease agreement for the full lase hold control of gawadaar and its infrastructure, in lieu of the debt service payments which the pakis will never have the ability to repay.

It would not hurt Li's cause that a few clue less chinis are kidnapped or killed (it is just statistics for them anyway) which will allow the chinis to convince the pakis to let them station a few hundred troops, a few supply ships, a few air assets,and then, lo and behold, a regional monitoring system, leading to, post default, a full fledged air and naval base. Pakjabis would love it because this gives them the protective shield against India and US. Now no one will be able to touch the because they uncle Li's protection.

vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2877
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby vera_k » 25 Jun 2017 06:50

SSridhar wrote: History shows that the small nation of Japan was able to defeat China and take it over. Not for a minute am I suggesting that Pakistan could do a 19th century-Japan on China. But, China can be undone.


Pakistan has seen off USA and USSR, so China would be a piece of cake. If India sets up CNY or PKR printing press for the good guys, it would add wind to their sails.

Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5764
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Vikas » 25 Jun 2017 10:42

My original question was - What can cheen do If Bakis refuse to pay back the money after say 5 years from now. The new Jernail has been promised Greecn Card and loads of dollars by Al-Amreeki to ditch Cheen when the fire works start in SCS/ They can't send army via same OBOR to occupy Gwadar. Bakis in a hypothetical world can make short term peace with Bharat (Even if Taqiyya) and show middle finger to Cheen.
Don't underestimate the power of Baki greed and innovation.

Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5764
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Vikas » 25 Jun 2017 10:43

vera_k wrote:
SSridhar wrote: History shows that the small nation of Japan was able to defeat China and take it over. Not for a minute am I suggesting that Pakistan could do a 19th century-Japan on China. But, China can be undone.


Pakistan has seen off USA and USSR, so China would be a piece of cake. If India sets up CNY or PKR printing press for the good guys, it would add wind to their sails.

i am pretty sure Pakis are already working on helping Cheen print more CNY in some cave.

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 580
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Deans » 25 Jun 2017 17:17

anupmisra wrote:My belief is that CPEC (and OBOR or whatever acronymns you want to use), this SeePack is a one big, back handed land grab scheme.


I would tend to agree if it was only Chinese loans to Pakistan. However, most investment to date (Venezeula, Egypt) is in countries with little
strategic significance to China. I believe this is a high risk gamble to save the Chinese economy by exporting surplus assets to countries who are more creditworthy (since their rulers have been bribed) than Chinese state owned companies, who are already in default.

Even in Pak, If China wants a Naval/Air base in Gwadar, why would Pak not give it to them today ? I think we are reading too much into the `string of pearls' theory. A PLAN submarine, or a couple of ships based in Gwadar, with little by way of support, would present more of a opportunity for the IN, than a threat to India.

Falijee
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5583
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Falijee » 25 Jun 2017 20:44

How CPEC Security Will Test the 'All-Weather Friendship' of China and Pakistan

If Pakistan can’t ensure the safety of Chinese workers, it should expect a cold shoulder from Beijing.


IMO, the above is the real reason for the Chinese Foreign Minister to Pakistan, rather than the smokescreen reason given by the Paki Establishment ( Afghanistan and Pakistan should patch up their differences - with Chini help !) :twisted:

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3652
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 26 Jun 2017 23:32

India's expanding trade ties a strategy to counter-balance CPEC: Chinese daily

Chinese state-run daily Global Times on Sunday termed India's efforts towards establishing trade linkages in the region 'geopolitical stubbornness' and urged New Delhi to develop economic and trade relations with Islamabad instead of bypassing Pakistan entirely.

A column published by the GT discussed whether India will bypass Pakistan to develop trade with Afghanistan and other Central Asian countries by means of recently opened Afghanistan-India Air Corridor and the Chabahar port in Iran, and warned that these efforts may be a "strategy to counter-balance the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)".

The first cargo flight along the Afghanistan-India Air Corridor was dispatched earlier this month, carrying $5 million in plants with medicinal uses.

Additionally, India, Iran and Afghanistan signed a transit accord on the Chabahar port last year, with India saying it would invest up to $500m to develop the strategic port. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the occasion had said: "We want to link to the world, but connectivity among ourselves is also a priority."

The Global Times claimed that "All such connectivity efforts have not only signalled India's desire to more actively participate in regional economic development, but have also highlighted the country's stubborn geopolitical thinking."

Although the new route will boost trade ties between India and Afghanistan, the column questioned whether an air trade route is "commercially viable and sustainable for trade exchange", and cautioned India to not bypass Pakistan, which it said "offers the most efficient and cost-effective land route."

The Global Times claimed that "India has always been pushing back against the Belt and Road (B&R) initiative", adding that "its intention to create its own connectivity network appears to be a strategy to counterbalance the CPEC."

It added that the One-Belt, One-Road initiative has "created the opportunity and platform for cooperation between India and Pakistan".

The column posited that it is better for India to develop economic and trade ties with Pakistan as "regional connectivity cannot live without the cooperation between both India and Pakistan.

Cheers Image


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Chinmay, Gagan, sooraj, Sushant and 29 guests