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.
Deans
BRFite
Posts: 642
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Deans » 17 Jul 2017 23:34

Karthik S wrote:BTW are Chinese outsourcing engineering to the pakees?


When the Chinese were introduced to `Lt Gen 10%', their local partner handling highway construction, little did they know that he would
build 10% and pocket 90%

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6116
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby anupmisra » 18 Jul 2017 02:13

pankajs wrote:Now imagine what a chota-mota bomb will do to that slope.


Create more blue collar employment opportunities for the pakis.

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6116
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby anupmisra » 18 Jul 2017 02:15

Peregrine wrote:
Karthik S wrote:BTW are Chinese outsourcing engineering to the pakees?
Karthik S Ji :
Indeed, such as Nuts, Screws & Bolts.
Cheers


I see what you did there. The accepted definition of a paki rapist in a UK court : nut screws and bolts.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3996
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 21 Jul 2017 01:04

X Posted on the OBOR, Chinese Strategy & Implications And STFU Threads.

Advancing CPEC by stealth

This newspaper carried a report back in May revealing a document that could be called the CPEC master plan. That report drew a sharp response from the government, particularly the minister planning who is in charge of all CPEC coordination. He argued that the report was “factually incorrect” and that the real long-term plan was under negotiation and would be released to the public upon finalisation.

But a number of developments since then show that the plan as revealed, far from being “factually incorrect”, is in fact being implemented as we speak. The implementation is taking place below the headlines, and many of the initiatives outlined in the plan are being advanced by burying them under other policy initiatives to give them a different name and thereby deflect attention. This mode of implementation is contrary to how those CPEC projects that the government is keen to tout are being projected as massive signature achievements. An entire website has been created simply for the purpose of purveying information about specific CPEC projects, but there are many that find no mention on that site.

Let’s take an example. One of the elements of the plan published in this newspaper that took a lot of people by surprise was its emphasis on agriculture. A careful reading of that plan document shows agriculture is, in fact, one of the biggest priorities for the Chinese government when they look at CPEC — not transit trade, not power plants. There is no mention of agriculture on the CPEC website (accessed on July 19).

But the recently announced National Food Security Policy, which went almost completely unnoticed as was undoubtedly the intention, contains a couple of paragraphs which show that the government is, in fact, moving fast to create an enabling environment to facilitate the entry of Chinese enterprises into Pakistan’s agricultural sector. Of course, there is nothing wrong with this. The agri-sector is in dire need of investments. But the fact that this is being done with some care to ensure no attention is brought to bear upon it is curious.

The policy has an entire section that details the creation of what it calls “CPEC agricultural development zones”. It identifies areas for the “agricultural economic and technical cooperation between China and Pakistan”, and details that “the corridor is divided into nine sections, each of which possesses distinct opportunities for establishing diverse agro-based businesses” since the corridor traverses different agro-ecologies.

“The commodities that can be potentially exported to China include cereals, dairy, eggs, honey, live animals, tobacco, meat, seafood, fruit and nuts.” The idea advanced by the policy is “developing business clusters for more than 40 commodities identified across the corridor for promoting rural businesses through developing entrepreneurship, processing zones, skilled manpower and modern market infrastructure”.

The whole enterprise is then wrapped up in agrarian development objectives. “Overall, the establishment of agricultural economic zones along CPEC in collaboration with Chinese counterparts can help to achieve: a) food sovereignty; b) benefiting farmers and rural communities; c) smarter food production and yields; d) biodiversity conservation; e) sustainable soil health and cleaner water; f) ecological pest management; and g) resilient food systems.”

In another place, the policy says all this is being done to advance the Sustainable Development Goals, in particular the one that relates to hunger, to which it says the government has a “strong commitment”.

The policy measures advanced to catalyse the creation of the CPEC agri-development zones also sound like they came straight out of the plan document revealed in the Dawn report. They are designed to facilitate the entry of private enterprises into the agrarian markets (again, nobody should construe this to be a bad thing), with a focus on “market intelligence”, reducing “post harvest losses”, and so on.

This suggests that a policy framework is being built, under the guise of a ‘national food security policy’, that, in reality, is designed to lay the groundwork to advance the agriculture-related priorities of Chinese enterprises, as the master plan document revealed in the Dawn report clearly stated.

The same thing can be seen in many other areas too. In finance, for example, work is under way to facilitate a greater role for the yuan in Pakistan’s economy, for payment and settlement purposes. The attorney general has said that “disputes between commercial entities of the two countries are bound to crop up”, for which “a bilateral institution for arbitration” between China and Pakistan could be necessary, so recourse to other bodies like the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes and the International Chambers of Commerce is not necessary.

All this is happening beneath the radar of the headlines. There are no flashy announcements, and often the work being undertaken is not mentioned at all. Look at the CPEC website run by the government of Pakistan, and you will find no mention of any of this, only of roads and power plants. The descriptions contained in the National Food Security Policy are a rare example, but even they are vaguely expressed, couched in other development objectives, and with pains taken to draw little or no attention to them.

Yet, this is where the reality of CPEC is. The corridor is only minimally about transit trade. The power plants, too, are little more than the “early harvest projects”, on commercial terms, designed to jump-start the economy before the real game begins. The real game of CPEC is about granting access to Chinese enterprises to Pakistan’s domestic markets, raw materials and the agrarian economy.

But that side of the entire equation is being kept deliberately quiet while we are encouraged to think of the projects in terms of roads and power plants alone.

There is a growing and urgent need for our CPEC conversation to move beyond transit trade and balance of payments. The real game has not even begun, and few understand the form it will take.

Cheers Image

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9194
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby arun » 21 Jul 2017 09:20

X Posted from the CPEC thread.

Singapore based newspaper Straits Times’ Associate Editor Ravi Velloor on OBOR, CPEC and the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan:

Pakistan is where OBOR hits the road

Despite its fulsome promise, the US$62b plan by China to boost Pakistan's infrastructure may not be all good for the flailing South Asian economy.

Ravi Velloor Associate Editor

For much of the world, the jury's still out on China's Belt and Road initiative, better known as the One Belt, One Road (OBOR) programme. While some countries have embraced it enthusiastically, others, such as the United States and Japan, have tried to be polite about it, going along warily without fulsome endorsement.

A few, India particularly, are openly disdainful, if not hostile to the plan. That's because they see it not as the Chinese grand design for globalisation that it is projected to be, but a Beijing plan to entrap the world in its grasp even as China looks for ready export markets for its tottering state-owned enterprises.

In the more than 60 nations that span President Xi Jinping's OBOR vision, none looms larger than Pakistan, possibly the Asian state strategically closest to Beijing after North Korea. The latest projected outlay for Chinese investment in that country under a plan called CPEC, or China Pakistan Economic Corridor, exceeds US$62 billion (S$85 billion) in loans and tied aid.

The vision is to link Kashgar in Xinjiang province to the warm water port of Gwadar in Pakistan's largest and most thinly populated province, Balochistan. In the bargain, Pakistan will get its biggest infrastructure boost since independence in 1947. China's strategic interest is to give itself all-weather access to the Arabian Sea bypassing the Strait of Malacca, a potential choke point that has India at one end and Singapore at the other, with Indonesia's Sumatra and the Malay peninsula in between.

While a good part of CPEC is about building road connectivity, the major investments are going into a series of power plants to shore up Pakistan's crumbling and hugely inefficient power grid that's made brown-outs of 12 hours a day common. The CPEC, according to available public information, will be built with not only Chinese capital, but Chinese labour and steel too. Because the so-called corridor traverses some intensely restive spots marked by periodic violence and terror attacks, Pakistan has raised a whole new army division to protect Chinese workers, marking a substantial recurring investment since pay and pensions tend to make up almost two-thirds of most military budgets in South Asia.

So far, so good. Few can take issue with Pakistan for accepting Chinese munificence, if indeed it is that, to fix its crumbling infrastructure. The dismal power situation had shaved off as much as 2 percentage points of growth annually, leaving the economy floundering at an expansion rate of less than 5 per cent, below potential. Having missed the services revolution that transformed next-door India because the poor security situation within its borders had made it risky to house outsourcing operations for Western firms, the energies of Pakistan's talented white-collar workforce had been unexploited to a large degree. As a result, India's significantly larger economy consistently outpaced that of its smaller neighbour, accelerating existing disparities.

SOLACE IN THE ARMS OF CHINA

What's more, Islamabad feels abandoned by Washington, which only in 2002 had deemed it a "major non-Nato ally". In the Pakistani narrative, the US used Pakistan to fight the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, funnelling Saudi-funded arms to militant groups resisting the Soviets, then uncharitably abandoned it to favour India. In the wake of the 2008 terrorist attack on Mumbai, blamed on hitmen allegedly trained inside Pakistan, former US secretary of state Madeleine Albright referred to Pakistan as an "international migraine" with its combination of nuclear weapons, terrorism, extremism, corruption and poverty.

Little wonder then that Pakistan's Commerce Minister Khurram Dastgir Khan recently described China as "the only game in town".

Against that background it suited both Pakistan and China to tighten their decades-old strategic embrace. The Pakistanis, quite seriously, believe their relationship with China is, to use a phrase popularised by Beijing, "taller than the mountains, deeper than the valleys and sweeter than honey".

The problem is that too much of the CPEC plan is opaque, and not available publicly for a proper examination of its merits. This leads to apprehension that, especially in the light of South Asian neighbour Sri Lanka's experience with unviable Chinese investments that led it into a debt trap, Beijing's talk of a win-win means China wins twice.

The Chinese money for CPEC, it is increasingly clear, is largely on commercial terms. On the other hand, if power plants constitute a major chunk of the CPEC outlay, Islamabad may have a repayment problem when China eventually hands it a bill. Analysts point out that Pakistan has always sold power to its people at rates significantly below what it pays for the energy. Additionally, collection ratios are poor because of rampant power theft and defaults by companies owned by elite families. Unable to pay the producers in time, a problem of circular debt has ensued.

IN PAKISTAN'S INTEREST OR NO?

What's more, not everyone is convinced that the projects were conceived in Pakistan's interest. Some analysts say that four of the six thermal power plants being set up will run on imported coal, whereas Pakistan's plants have traditionally used furnace oil. There also is fear that at a time when oil prices seem set to tread the troughs for a substantial period, and solar energy is nudging grid parity with coal, Pakistan may be making the wrong choices.

It also has not gone unnoticed that China, despite the tight strategic relationship, has in past years generally not shown much appetite to invest in Pakistan. According to State Bank of Pakistan figures cited in the Pakistani press, total foreign direct investment (FDI) in the six months to December last year - the latest number available - was US$1.08 billion.

While that was a 10 per cent increase over the previous year, the jump was mostly on account of a single Dutch investment of US$460 million. Chinese FDI in the same period was US$48 million, about a tenth of what companies from the mainland put into India.

Still, it is not difficult to divine the Pakistani mindset. In the near term, Islamabad is clearly playing off its strategic sweet spot not just to power up its economy but also to allow China such a big say in it that it compels Beijing to also underwrite its security, if nothing else, to protect its investments.

The gap with India widened so much in the last two decades that it left Pakistan in pretty much the same situation that India finds itself in vis-a-vis China: a deepening sense of insecurity about the more powerful neighbour and fear of coming under its economic and political coercion. The sensible thing to do would seem to be to develop a closer economic relationship with India, not just on account of geography but also because Pakistani products are likely to be far more competitive against Indian goods rather than Chinese products. It is no secret though that the Pakistani deep state will not countenance this, even if Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif himself favours it.

For Pakistan, therefore, the CPEC plan - which apparently also envisages giving Chinese visa-free access and the Chinese language being promoted in a massive way across the country - marks a turning of the back on its broader South Asian heritage.

According to revelations made two months ago by Dawn, Pakistan's internationally respected broadsheet, the CPEC document talks of a national fibre-optic backbone meant to assist in the "dissemination of Chinese culture".

Yesterday, the newspaper said "the real game of CPEC is about granting access to Chinese enterprises to Pakistan's domestic markets, raw materials and the agrarian economy".

It is now up to China to make sure that the CPEC does not turn out to be one more lemon it sold to yet another vulnerable developing economy. Mr Ahsan Iqbal, the Wharton-educated Minister for Planning in Mr Sharif's Cabinet and a key architect of the CPEC programme, has called the earlier Dawn report "factually incorrect". More recently he told me on the sidelines of a conference that his department's assessments are that the projects under the plan meet the benchmarks for commercial viability.

If that is true, there ought to be no grounds to complain. But, if Beijing is seen to have stiffed its closest friends with unviable projects and burdensome repayment obligations, it will not go unnoticed around the world.

After all, OBOR is a 100-year project and public memory, while short, cannot be completely erased. In more ways than one, therefore, Pakistan is where OBOR hits the road.

A version of this article appeared in the print edition of The Straits Times on July 21, 2017, with the headline 'Pakistan is where OBOR hits the road'.


From the Straits Times:

Pakistan is where OBOR hits the road

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9194
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby arun » 21 Jul 2017 12:09

Excerpt from July 20, 2017 article in World Finance titled “Following China’s debt-paved Silk Road”:

……………….. the paving of the Silk Road with low-priced debt has got China into trouble in some regions, particularly following the collapse in the price of crude oil. In Latin America, for example, state-owned lenders have been forced to swap infrastructure-funding debt for the supply of oil as recipient countries run out of revenues with which to pay China back.

The policy has also backfired in other locations. As the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies pointed out in a definitive recent report, crisis-hit Venezuela provides a sobering example: in mid-February, China agreed no less than 22 new deals aimed at propping up the South American country’s fast-declining oil industry. Although the ever-hopeful President Nicolás Maduro characterised the deals as heralding “our country’s economic recovery”, it looks more as though China is taking control of its wells and refineries in an infrastructure-for-debt swap. …………………….

Following China’s debt-paved Silk Road


Taking on debt from the Peoples Republic of China on usurious terms and conditions for infrastructure projects whose primary purpose is to keep PRC project infrastructure enterprises, PRC Labour and PRC input suppliers humming along has brought even more baleful consequences for countries such as Venezuela whose citizens have been so impoverished that they now need to work as prostitutes in Colombia:

Venezuelans sell sex in Colombia to survive : Women fleeing poverty get the right to work as prostitutes

The Mohammadden Terrorist Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan should take note of events in Venezuela as the day will not be long when muslimah wimmens sistahs may be forced to head westward to service Arabs as the adverse consequences OF CPEC aka Conning Pakistani’s to Enrich China, become reality.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15840
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 21 Jul 2017 18:56

twitter

India's diplomacy power play pays off, #Seoul pulls plug on PoK projects http://m.indiatoday.in/story/india-seou ... 07273.html … @rajeev_mp @TarekFatah



India's diplomatic power play is paying off with countries rethinking and reviewing decisions to invest in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK).

South Korea's Daelim Industrial Company Limited, which is leading a consortium to develop the 500 MW Chakothi Hattian Hydropower Project on the Jhelum in Muzaffarabad, is reconsidering its investment in the venture.

This after financiers such as the Asian Development Bank, International Finance Corporation and Exim Bank of Korea expressed their inability to back a project in a disputed area. The information minister of PoK Mushtaq Ahmed Minhas has confirmed the development.

Further, other Korean-financed ventures in the region, such as the Kohala Hydropower project, may also be stalled.

Sources have told India Today TV that Pakistan has been aggressively trying to seek investment from international financial institutions and countries, including China and South Korea, in energy and other infrastructure projects in PoK and Gilgit-Baltistan. Both are parts of undivided Jammu and Kashmir, and claimed by India as its territory.

"I think it's a very favourable development for us," said Jayadeva Ranade, president of the Centre for China Analysis and Strategy, and a former additional secretary in the Cabinet Secretariat. "It's a development that we should follow up. In fact, I would say that we should encourage South Korea and its companies to come to India particularly in areas that we are weak like shipbuilding."

MONEY ISSUES
While investments were being considered earlier, lately there has been a general reluctance both by financial institutions and countries towards putting money in these areas. This disinclination is on account of an increased international understanding of the legal status of Gilgit-Baltistan and PoK.

"If it is as a result of diplomatic effort on the part of India, I would say that it is very good and encouraging news that countries are receptive to concerns that we have," said former foreign secretary Shyam Saran.

Following the announcement of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), and India's categorical objection to it on the grounds that Pakistan and China could not construct an economic corridor that passed through Indian territory currently under illegal occupation of Pakistan, the international community has woken up to the disputed nature of the region.

Hydropower has been a source of friction between the neighbouring nations, with the two sides over the years objecting to each other's major dam projects. New Delhi has in recent months fast-tracked hydropower projects worth about $15bn in Kashmir, ignoring warnings from Islamabad that power stations on rivers flowing into Pakistan will disrupt water supplies.

The CPEC has also brought to the fore the legal position of the two areas in Pakistan. Not only do the regions remain disputed territory, they are also not formally part of Pakistan under the country's constitution. Azad Kashmir (AJK),i.e., Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, and Gilgit-Baltistan, are not named in the constitution of Pakistan, thereby leaving a large number of questions unanswered, including the citizenship of people residing in these parts.

India's continuous efforts to highlight these facts over the last few years have yielded results where doubts have been raised among investors on the economic feasibility of projects in the disputed area. "I think this realisation will dawn on commercial entities which have major stakes in India," said Ashok Kantha, former ambassador to China. "They will have to take a call sometime on what is more important for them: to get involved in PoK or to look after their commercial interests in India."

CHINA'S ROLE
Apart from South Korea, sources say China has also been putting pressure on Pakistan to legalise the status of PoK and Gilgit-Baltistan through amendments to its constitution before it pours in huge investments in these areas as a part of the CPEC.

China is aware that not only is the region disputed, being claimed by India, but even Pakistani laws do not give it the status of Pakistan's sovereign territory. Chinese pressure has led to the recent move by the Nawaz Sharif government to change the status of Gilgit-Baltistan and declare it the fifth province of the country.

"There must be some technical reason for their pullout," said Sardar Atiq, former Prime Minister of AJK (PoK). "One needs to find out. But as far as foreign investment in 'Azad Kashmir' is concerned, this is not for the first time. We have 2-3 projects going on right now and are accommodating a lot of foreign investment."

Earlier, Asian Development Bank also refused to fund the $14 billion Diamer-Bhasha Dam on the Indus river. This project has been facing problems with financiers since its inception with several sponsors backing out in 2012. The following year, it appeared that the project would take off after the Aga Khan Foundation and ADB agreed to be its financiers. However, subsequently the ADB put its decision to bankroll the project on hold

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9194
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby arun » 22 Jul 2017 08:48

X Posted from the “Baluchistan: The Story of Another Pakistan Military Genocide” thread.

CPEC = Colonization of Pakistan for Enrichment of China.

ANI report on the proceedings of the conference titled "Wall of Silence: Human rights in Balochistan" jointly organized by the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO) and the World Baloch Organization (WBO) at the UK House of Lords in London:

CPEC represents colonization of Pakistan for enrichment of China, says expert

By: ANI || Updated: 22 Jul 2017 08:05 AM

London [UK], July 22 (ANI): A senior teaching fellow and a PhD candidate at the University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) has said that the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) represents the colonization of Pakistan for the enrichment of China.

Speaking at the conference "Wall of Silence: Human rights in Balochistan", Burzine Waghmar said Pakistan's statehood is based on a fragile framework with no national basis in which Pakistani military acts with no legitimacy and with violence against local populations.

The conference was jointly organized by the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO) and the World Baloch Organization (WBO) at the House of Lords in London.

The event which was hosted by Baroness Jenny Jones of Moulsecoomb (Green Party for England and Wales), discussed Pakistan's suppression of human rights in Balochistan, focusing on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and on the shutdown on journalists and international organistions.

Distinguished experts from various backgrounds presented their experiences and ways forward, in a fruitful exchange of ideas at the British Parliament.

Waghmar during the conference also highlighted with concern the fact that China is unlikely to take into the consideration the contexts of the various ethnic groups in the country while pursuing the implementation of the economic corridor.

He presented a historical overview that showed how China's regional ambitions have affected disadvantaged groups in Pakistan for decades and how the Pakistani government has collaborated with these ambitions even before the Indo-Pakistani deal in 1947.

Baroness Jenny Jones de Moulsecoomb opened the event with an overview of the situation in Balochistan, from extrajudicial killings to economic exploitation and the persecution of those who oppose the implementation of CPEC.

The Baroness talked about the importance of raising awareness about these issues and of gathering international support to bring peace to the Baloch people.

Noordin Mengal, human rights campaigner (WBO), who was also the moderator of the panel in the conference reminded the audience that CPEC is not the first project of exploitation of natural resources by outsiders in Balochistan: natural gas and copper are key resources that have been exploited by Punjabis and Chinese, while the government denies the local population their rights to partaking in the richness that results from the use of the resources of their own land.

Angela Stanzel, of the European Council on Foreign Relations, highlighted the centrality of Balochistan in Pakistan-China relations, considering the amount of investments dedicated to the region by the Chinese, mainly for the Port of Gwadar.

According to Stanzell, CPEC has been fueling conflict in Pakistan and particularly in Balochistan, as it became a target for political opposition and extremist groups.

She noted that the feeling of Baloch people of being neglected and left behind was not born with CPEC, having been consolidated throughout history while Balochistan was subjected to exploitation and while its inhabitants were denied their rights.

Stanzell also drew attention to the fact that CPEC seems to be a model for the projects that China intends to implement worldwide, which must be regarded with concern considering that no investment is directed to local communities, increasing tensions in regions that are already unstable and raising censorship and violence against those who dare to oppose the project.

Carlotta Gall, who spent ten years in Pakistan and Afghanistan as a foreign correspondent for the New York Times, talked about her experiences under the intimidation and the violence to which both foreign correspondents and local journalists are subjected by Pakistani intelligence officers and military in Balochistan.

According to Gall, journalists are followed by Pakistani intelligence officers from the moment they touch ground in the region and are intimidated not only with physical violence, but also with threats to the safety of their loved ones.

She affirmed that her experience proved to her that Pakistan is not interested in allowing the Baloch people to have a voice - their focus is solely allowing military plans and economic projects such as Gwadar to move forward.

Approaching the fact that journalists, students, political activists are often arrested, tortured and murdered, she concluded that people are given little choice to be active in helping their communities, which fuels the rising of groups that resource to violence in order to fight for survival and dignity.

Peter Tatchell, from the Peter Tatchell Foundation, focused on the possibilities for Baloch people to succeed in their struggle for peace and respect for their rights.

He reminded the audience that Pakistan is widely dependent on western support, which means that raising international pressure in the context of IOs and CSOs is likely to have a strong impact in reducing the military pressure on the Baloch people.

He highlighted the importance of a well-delineated plan that gathers different Baloch organizations and groups, based on principles of social justice, human rights and democracy.

According to Tatchell, by uniting around some central demands - such as the release of political prisoners, a UN-sponsored ceasefire and a referendum on independence, and free access to the region for human rights organizations and journalists - Baloch people will be able to mobilize a comprehensive international solidarity movement to support their struggle.

Fernando Burges, UNPO Programme Manager, noted that the situation of ethnic and religious minorities in Pakistan stand out as particularly dire and noted that events such as "The Wall of Silence" are of paramount importance to give a platform for these peoples' voices to be heard, while they are silenced in their own countries.

The conference came to an end with Mengal urging states such as the United States and the United Kingdom to revise their policies regarding Pakistan, taking in consideration the situation of disadvantaged communities that have been suffering with human rights violations for decades. (ANI)


From ANI via ABP Live:

CPEC represents colonization of Pakistan for enrichment of China, says expert

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15840
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 22 Jul 2017 19:31

Image

yensoy
BRFite
Posts: 561
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby yensoy » 22 Jul 2017 20:11

chetak wrote:twitter

India's diplomacy power play pays off, #Seoul pulls plug on PoK projects http://m.indiatoday.in/story/india-seou ... 07273.html … @rajeev_mp @TarekFatah


Quid pro quo for this http://www.financialexpress.com/economy/india-bars-trade-of-defence-other-goods-with-north-korea/597293/?

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6116
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby anupmisra » 23 Jul 2017 00:46

CPEC - Conquest of Pakistan for the Enrichment of China. I like that.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3996
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 23 Jul 2017 23:05

X Posted on the Managing China Threat & STFUP Threads

China's New Chick : China's Proposed Infrastructure Project Running Through PoK | Exclusive



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QDbLhOqrO8

Cheers Image

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21711
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 29 Jul 2017 21:01

Nawaz Sharif's disqualification will not affect CPEC: China - ToI
China has said that Nawaz Sharif's disqualification from Pakistan's premiership will not affect its $50 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor project, amid reports that some of Beijing's big ticket investments in the country may come under a widening corruption probe.

"We believe that the China-Pakistan strategic cooperative partnership will not be affected by the change of the situation inside Pakistan," China's Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang was quoted by Pakistan's state-run APP news agency as saying.

Terming the Supreme Court judgement against Sharif over the Panama Papers scandal as Pakistan's "internal affairs", he said, "the all-weather friendship between China and Pakistan has withstood the test of time".

He urged political parties in Pakistan to unite for its national interest.

"As a friendly neighbour, China hopes that all parties and sections in Pakistan can prioritise state and national interests, properly deal with their domestic affairs, maintain unity and stability, and keep focusing on the economic and social development," Lu said.

Meanwhile, a report in Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post said that China has been assured by Pakistan's powerful military and politicians that its investments in the CPEC would not be disrupted by Sharif's fall, "even though some of its investments could come under the widening corruption probe".

Despite the assurances it has received, the Supreme Court's ruling has put China in a "peculiar position", Arif Rafiq, non-resident fellow at the Middle East Institute, a US think tank, told the Post.

Sharif stepped down after the Supreme Court disqualified him for failing to declare "receivable" salary from a UAE- based company of his son in his 2013 nomination paper. The court termed the salary which was not paid to Sharif as an "asset".

"The Chinese are treading into new waters: this is the first civilian government in Islamabad Beijing has fully invested in. (But) while the Communist Party of China is deeply leveraged in the civilian government, military-to- military ties also continue to strengthen," Rafiq said.

"Nonetheless, some CPEC projects are bound to be investigated because of existing allegations of corruption linked to the Sharifs," he said.


"Some projects, such as the Port Qasim Coal Power Project, could come under greater scrutiny given the involvement of power brokers allegedly connected to Sharif family financial improprieties," Rafiq said.

CPEC passes through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). India has strongly protested CPEC. Its protests have taken a concrete shape after Sharif came to power in 2013, the year Chinese President Xi Jinping also took over office, promising implementation of his grand multi-billion Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) which included the CPEC.

The CPEC, which involves huge investments by China to gain access to the strategic Gwadar port in Balochistan through rail and road connectivity, has taken shape under the Sharif-Xi leadership with firm backing from the Pakistan military.

The CPEC is headed by the Sharif's close aide, Ahsan Iqbal, who was the Minister for Planning and Development in the Sharif government. Reports from Pakistan say Iqbal too may face investigations.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9194
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby arun » 30 Jul 2017 10:19

X Posted from the STFUP thread.

Falijee wrote:Paki Political Turmoil Analyzed

Ordering a turmoil
Ayesha Siddiqa - Indian Express

..........{Rest Snipped}..............

While many believe that Sharif put his eggs in the wrong basket by hoping that China would protect him since he made great achievement in pushing for the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), the fact is that Sharif was immaterial to developments vis-à-vis Beijing. Pakistan is now back to its traditional policy framework.



Interesting that Ayesha Siddiqa writing in the Indian Express has opined that the way over the top love fest with the China Pakistan Economic Corridor aka Colonizing Pakistan to Enrich China aka Conning Pakistani’s to Enrich China aka CPEC, was also an abortive insurance policy taken by out by Nawaz Sharif to prevent being ousted from power by the Punjabi Military Dominated Deep State of the Mohammadden Terrorism fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3996
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 02 Aug 2017 16:53

X Posted on the DTFUP and OBOR, Chinese Strategy and Implications Threads

Here is how China 'friendship' highway is shattering Pakistani businessmen's dreams

TASHKURGAN, CHINA: The China-Pakistan Friendship Highway runs over 1,300 kilometres (800 miles) from the far western Chinese city of Kashgar through the world's highest mountain pass and across the border.

For China, the two-lane thoroughfare symbolises a blossoming partnership, nourished with tens of billions of dollars of infrastructure investment.

But for many Pakistani businessmen living and working on the Chinese side of the border, the road is a one way street.

"China says our friendship is as high as the Himalayas and as deep as the sea, but it has no heart," said Pakistani businessman Murad Shah, as he tended his shop in Tashkurgan, 120 kilometres from the mountain pass where trucks line up to cross between China's vast Xinjiang region and Pakistan.

"There is no benefit for Pakistan. It's all about expanding China's growth," Shah said, as he straightened a display of precious stones.

The remote town of around 9,000 is at the geographic heart of Beijing's plans to build a major trade artery -- the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) -- connecting Kashgar to the Arabian Sea port of Gwadar.

The project is a crown jewel of China's One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative, a massive global infrastructure programme to revive the ancient Silk Road and connect Chinese companies to new markets around the world.

In 2013, Beijing and Islamabad signed agreements worth $46 billion to build transport and energy infrastructure along the corridor, and China has upgraded the treacherous mountain road better known as the Karakoram Highway.

While both countries say the project is mutually beneficial, data shows a different story.

Pakistan's exports to China fell by almost eight percent in the second half of 2016, while imports jumped by almost 29 percent.

In May, Pakistan accused China of flooding its market with cut rate steel and threatened to respond with high tariffs.

"There are all of these hopes and dreams about Pakistan exports," said Jonathan Hillman, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

"But if you're connecting with China, what are you going to be exporting?"

One answer is Nigerian "male enhancement" supplements: expired medications which Pakistani merchants in the oasis city of Hotan recently peddled to bearded Muslims walking home from Friday prayers.

The products were typical of the kinds of small consumer goods brought by Pakistani traders into Xinjiang: medicine, toiletries, semi-precious stones, rugs and handicrafts.

Pakistani businessmen in Xinjiang see few benefits from CPEC, complaining of intrusive security and capricious customs arrangements.

"If you bring anything from China, no problem," said Muhammad, a trader in the ancient Silk Road city of Kashgar, who declined to give his full name.

But he said tariffs on imported Pakistani goods are "not declared. Today it's five percent, tomorrow maybe 20. Sometimes, they just say this is not allowed".

Three years ago, Shah was charged between eight and 15 yuan per kilo to bring lapis lazuli, a blue stone. The duty has since soared to 50 yuan per kilo, he said.

Customs officials told AFP the "elements influencing prices were too many" for them to offer a "definite and detailed list" of costs.

While large-scale importers can absorb the tariffs, independent Pakistani traders have benefited little from CPEC, said Hasan Karrar, political economy professor at the Lahore University of Management Sciences.

Alessandro Ripa, an expert on Chinese infrastructure projects at Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, said the highway "is not very relevant to overall trade" because "the sea route is just cheaper and faster".

The project is better understood as a tool for China to promote its geopolitical interests and help struggling state-owned companies export excess production, he said.

Traders also face overbearing security in China.

Over the last year, Beijing has flooded Xinjiang, which has a large Muslim population, with tens of thousands of security personnel and imposed draconian rules to eliminate "extremism".

Businessmen complain they are not allowed to worship at local mosques, while shops can be closed for up to a year for importing merchandise with Arabic script.

In June, on the 300 kilometre trip between Kashgar and Tashkurgan, drivers were stopped at six police checkpoints, while their passengers had to walk through metal detectors and show identification cards. Signs warn that officials can check mobile phones for "illegal" religious content.

Police officers interrupted an interview in Tashkurgan to demand a shopkeeper hand over his smartphone and computer for inspection, an event he said occurs several times a week.

Shah said that when he first arrived in the town, the intrusive security made him nervous: "But now I'm used to it. I almost feel like I'm one of the police."

As he spoke, an alarm sounded. He grabbed a crude spear, body armour and a black helmet off his counter and rushed into the street, where police had assembled over a dozen people for impromptu counter-terrorism drills.

The exercises are held up to four times a day. Stores are closed for several days if they do not participate.

Back in Kashgar, Muhammad hopes that CPEC will make life better, but he believes the oppressive security will remain an obstacle.

He plans to give it another three years. But, he said, he cannot wait forever: "Many people have already gone back."

Cheers Image

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9790
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby A_Gupta » 02 Aug 2017 18:36

There is a lot of research on demographic transitions - a dramatic drop in the fertility rate - and high economic growth rates. There certainly is a correlation, the causal chain is debated - that is, does lowering the fertility rate cause less expenditure and more savings and capital formation thus driving a high economic growth rate; or does a high economic growth rate cause the fertility rate to drop; or is there a positive feedback cycle.

We need not worry about causality, the correlation will do for us. The evidence is that there is no demographic transition in Pakistan, and so all the investment of CPEC will likely not help them.

A demographic transition is needed to get out of the Malthusian trap (Wiki: The Malthusian trap is the putative lack of sustainability of improvements in a society's standard of living because of population growth.).

I'm reproducing a blogpost of mine:
http://observingliberalpakistan.blogspo ... tions.html

The preliminary count of population from all the land areas controlled by Pakistan as per the abandoned Pakistan census of 2011 was 197 million, per leaked preliminary figures.

In 2017, a census was conducted and the results were to be released July 31st or so. However, after Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had to resign over corruption charges, the release of the census figures is in doubt, it may be November. What we know of the census is
Census Coordinator Habibullah Khattak told BBC {Urdu} in an interview that the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (PBS) {had completed the census process and that} the country’s population can be between 210 to 220 million


The last completed census of Pakistan was in 1998, which showed a population of 130.9 million.

The chart below shows population projections from the United Nations from 2012, plus the Pakistan actual figures up to 1998, and the 2011 and 2017 census leaks. The 2017 range of 210-220 million is shown as two dots.

As is dismaying clear, Pakistan continues to range above the constant fertility population projection.


Image

ashish raval
BRFite
Posts: 1142
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 00:49
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby ashish raval » 03 Aug 2017 02:39

I am still scratching on the economics of CPEC and I think it will turn out to be white elephant project just like OBOR. I believe Chinese have to export tons of highly valuable goods to west in order for these roads to be economically viable proposition. They can't use it to transport commodities like crude because it will be massively expensive to transport crude at such a long distance in event of a war with India as bombing disruption in CPEC will render that route useless to transport anything.

OBOR likewise would need Chinese exporting fairly valuable goods to wherever they want to construct roads to and I don't think they are there yet.

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6116
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby anupmisra » 03 Aug 2017 02:53

China warmly congratulates Abbasi on becoming PM

China Wednesday said Pakistan's government would stay committed to maintaining national unity and stability and promoting economic and social development.
We believe that under his leadership, the Pakistani government will stay committed to maintaining national unity and stability and promoting economic and social development
China stands ready to work with Pakistan to maintain the momentum of the rapid growth of China-Pakistan relations, advance the development of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and move forward the China-Pakistan all-weather strategic cooperative partnership


The chinis know that Khaq Abba's is a unqualified temp, right? He is there to keep the chair warm for 90 days. Really, it's all about See-Pak.

https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/22080 ... ecoming-PM

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3996
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 04 Aug 2017 02:40

X Posted on the STFUP Thread

CPEC may be hit by political changes in Pakistan, says Chinese expert

BEIJING: A Chinese expert has admitted that the recent political developments in Pakistan would affect the $50 billion China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) because some "variable factors" would come into play. The expert also said that some political parties in Pakistan have cast doubt on some specific items in their economic cooperation with China.

Writing in the state-backed Global Times, Lan Jiang, a professor with the China West Normal University, said, the "disqualification of Nawaz Sharif would likely bring some uncertainties to the ongoing China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project. Pakistani political parties have some disagreements on the project, especially whether the east or west route of the project should be given priority."

He also expressed concern that some part of the $50 billion CPEC project might come under investigation and face uncertainties if the ruling party loses the next election in 2018. "The CPEC project would face some uncertainties if the next election in 2018 leads to a ruling party change," he said.

This view flies in the face of a recent assertion by the Chinese foreign ministry, which said that the unseating of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif would not affect the project. "We believe the China Pakistan cooperative partnership will not be affected by the change in the situation inside Pakistan," foreign ministry spokesperson Lu Kang said on July 29.

Doubts have now surfaced in Beijing even though the new interim prime minister of Pakistan Shahid Khaqan Abbasi has been handpicked by Sharif to keep the seat warm for a few weeks until his brother, Shahid Abbasi, completes the formalities to be elected as prime minister.

Jiang also expressed concern that some aspects of CPEC may be investigated if the next general elections in 2018 throw up an opposition party in power in Pakistan. In addition, as opposition parties are incredulous about PML-N's behind-the-scene manipulation in project negotiations, the possibility of reviewing some projects' negotiation processes and conditions cannot be ruled out if an opposition party takes power.

The article noted that Shahbaz Sharif, who is expected to be the next prime minister of Pakistan, has "built more friendly ties with the Pakistan military". This is a significant statement coming from a Chinese expert because the military is known to be watching over CPEC's implementation and suppressing any sign of opposition to it.

Nawaz Sharif supported the east route for the economic corridor covering the provinces of Punjab and Sind but opposition parties favor the west route that passes through less-developed provinces like Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan, he pointed out.

"But political differences on the CPEC route will not hinder bilateral relations as no political parties in Pakistan use anti-China sentiment as political stunt and all of them are working to advance the sustainable development of China-Pakistan ties," Jiang noted.

Cheers Image

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21711
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 07 Aug 2017 16:01

Can CPEC weather Pakistan's political storm? - DAWN
In a highly partisan political environment, China reiterated its neutrality towards the internal affairs of the country by stating its resolve to abide by ‘a strategic cooperative partnership with Pakistan’.

Despite this stance the momentum of the CPEC initiative seems to have been compromised over the last two months.

Senior officials in Islamabad, who coordinate with the Chinese side for the CPEC, informed Dawn that the political crisis did hamper the pace of progress, particularly on projects in the pipeline.

“Yes, the divide blurs the line between civil and military leaders as Generals vow to secure and support CPEC related project as much, if not more, than civil political leaders.

“This unity of opinion is not enough. For CPEC to stay on course a conducive investment environment is absolutely necessary”, commented a business leader who wished anonymity.


A statement on the subject mailed to Dawn by the Chinese Embassy reads, “It hopes that all parties and sections in Pakistan can prioritise state and national interests, properly deal with their domestic affairs, maintain unity and stability and keep focusing on economic and social development.

“The all-weather friendship between China and Pakistan has withstood the test of time. We believe that the China-Pakistan strategic cooperative partnership will not be affected by the change in the situation inside Pakistan.

“China stands ready to work with Pakistan to continue jointly building the Belt and the Road and build a community of a shared future, which serves the fundamental interests of the two countries and peoples and promotes peace and development in the region and beyond”.

Prime Minister Khaqan Abbasi, in his very first speech on the floor of the house after his election, mentioned his intent to fasten the pace of progress on CPEC related projects.

Dr Nadeem Javed, Chief Economist, Planning Commission, admitted the comparative slow down but insisted that the fortnightly coordination committee on the CPEC meets regularly.

The said body is attended by related departments and ministries. It tracks and monitors progress and provides a forum to unwind bureaucratic knots.

“How can anyone deny that happenings of the past two months distracted the government’s attention from the economy and compromised its effectiveness? Yes we could have covered more ground had we been able to handle the situation better.

“There were exchanges and two-way travelling by relevant ministers and officials over the past two months but the private sector, particularly in Pakistan, withdrew into its shell, citing uncertainty” he said.

He saw harmony and enthusiasm in state level interaction but was not happy with the level of interest in the private sector. “The reluctance of local investors is hard to digest. Their attitude might change as plans of nine special economic zones start materialising”, he said.

“The CPEC is a large package of Chinese investment projects with the potential to transform Pakistan’s economy by relieving supply-side constraints to growth through investment in power generation and transport infrastructure.

“If implemented as planned, the CPEC would lift Pakistan’s potential GDP growth significantly and catalyse higher private-sector investments and exports.

“However, security-related issues and Pakistan’s weak track record of public project implementation suggests that the pace of execution will be relatively slow.

“Moving forward, continued support for the CPEC project across all branches of government will be critical to its success and full implementation,” said Moody’s in a current report on the country.

Some business leaders contacted blamed the tilt in policies that suit Chinese investors better.

“The policy framework is unfair towards locals. In their enthusiasm policymakers go the extra mile and roll out the red carpets for foreign investors. However, if we ask for what is our due they play deaf”, a business leader retorted.

“PM Abbasi may claim what he wants but hollow words will not in-still confidence in the private sector.

“The government will need to move decisively towards confidence building measures to motivate local investors”,
he added.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21711
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 07 Aug 2017 16:07

CPEC Security Costs - Edit, DAWN
THE inevitable is now slowly coming to pass. Costs that were not originally part of the tariffs granted to CPEC power projects are being passed to consumers, starting with the added cost of security. {More such costs would follow is the implication here} When Nepra, the power regulator, first took suo motu notice of a summary approved by the Economic Coordination Committee, which approved the “issuance of a policy directive to Nepra to allow 1pc of the capital cost” of all CPEC projects to pay for security expenses, it appeared that the idea was to examine the legality of such a “policy directive”, as well as the merits of bundling security costs into the tariff. But in the decision released on Thursday, it turns out Nepra was only going through the motions with the intention of bowing to the demands of the ECC. Not only was notice of the matter taken under peculiar circumstances, but the reasoning employed in the determination also shows that something fundamental has changed in the relationship between the regulator and the government.

First of all, deciding such an important matter under a suo motu hearing without requiring the government to submit a proper petition calls for some explanation. Second, when it was suggested during the hearing that the provision of security was the government’s responsibility and should not be charged from the consumers, Nepra responded by saying such costs would be met from public funds in any case, so why not bundle them into the tariffs granted to the respective projects. This is truly extraordinary reasoning on the regulator’s part, and implies that the protection of consumer interest, which ought to be Nepra’s priority, has now been sacrificed at the altar of bureaucratic self-interest. Third, the determination argues that the measure does not entail special treatment for IPPs coming under the CPEC umbrella since the implementation agreements of the others also allow for security costs to be part of the tariff. This is disingenuous, because the determination twice makes reference to the CPEC security force, and the mechanism for the payment clearly shows the costs in question relate to it, and this force is not there for the protection of all IPPs. This determination has opened the door to new large-scale escalations in the cost of CPEC power projects in the years to come, something for which the public should now brace itself.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21711
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 08 Aug 2017 07:03

Baloch activists up the ante against China-Pakistan Economic Corridor - ANI
Exiled Baloch leaders and activists will gather in Berlin, Germany, on August 11 to voice their protest against the under construction multi-billion dollar China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).

The event titled "China's One Belt One Road Initiative - Its adverse impact on Balochistan & the region" would be organized by the European branch of Baloch National Movement (BNM), a Baloch nationalist political group.


Hammal Haider, the foreign secretary of the Baloch National Movement, said, "The purpose of the Berlin conference is to engage scholars from around the world to have a candid debate on China's One Belt Road One Road (OBOR) initiative. The Baloch National Movement believes OBOR and its related projects not only affect Balochistan but also other nations in the world.

"In this situation, I think, it's high time we work with other nations and countries who also oppose OBOR / CPEC", he said.

The BNM has invited experts, analysts, journalists, economists, civil society actors and policy makers to discuss the impact of economic corridor.

People in Balochistan, Pakistan's resource rich province, are opposing CPEC, which runs mostly through the region. Balochistan is in the throes of a popular movement for self-determination that is gathering intensity.

For the indigenous Baloch people, CPEC is seen as a threat. As CPEC gets implemented in Balochistan, there is a fear of a massive inflow of migrants from different areas of Pakistan which will change the demography of Balochistan and reduce the Baloch people to a permanent minority in their historic homeland.

Ghaffar Baloch, President of BNM Germany, told ANI, "CPEC is no way an economic project. Pakistan and China together are building a military infrastructure in Balochistan's coastal areas. The purpose is to strengthen their military supremacy in the region which we believe will undermine the stability of the region."

Nevertheless, Chinese footprints are on the increase in Pakistan and inroads into Balochistan is becoming increasingly visible.

In order to provide security to Chinese facilities, Pakistan is raising special security groups and intensifying army operations in Balochistan.

China came up with its One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative in 2013, and during the last four years, it has displayed its willingness to follow through on its plans.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby shiv » 09 Aug 2017 18:07

Why the CPEC will fail
https://youtu.be/GQ0YjUvG3-Q

Guddu
BRFite
Posts: 803
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 06:22

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Guddu » 10 Aug 2017 08:09

Something to consider is that the landslides (sturzstrom) typically occur mostly during the rainy season, during which period the road could become unusable and also during the winter months when it snows. There are ways to prevent landslides in susceptible areas, but its not possible to have zero landslides. Thus, the karakoram highway would be usable about 8 months of the year, and any ROI calculations would need to factor in 8 months of use vs the 12 month use usually used. Its quite obvious the transport of goods is a secondary function of CPEC, rather access to Gwadar port as a military base might be the main motivation.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3996
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 16 Aug 2017 16:49

Fully Posted on the OBOR, Chinese Strategy and Implications Thread

Decoding the Doklam puzzle: China may be fighting its border war on Pakistan front
Will India and China go to war over Doklam? India has refrained from showing any aggression so far. China has heightened the war rhetoric but without backing it with any solid action. It seems China does not want an actual war but a prolonged, war-like situation.
Cheers Image

Falijee
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6237
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Falijee » 18 Aug 2017 23:53

CROSS POSTED FROM PAKI THREAD !

All Is Not Well At The So-Called Game Changer CPEC, According To This Foreign Newspaper Report :mrgreen:

China’s plans to rule the seas hit trouble in Pakistan
By Saim Saeed

China’s strategic ambition to extend its maritime power across the Indian Ocean is hitting severe obstacles in the giant, volatile Pakistani province of Balochistan.Beijing’s priority is to develop the sleepy Baloch fishing port of Gwadar, 300 miles west of Karachi, to project its commercial and naval influence further west. But kidnappings, drive-by shootings and bomb attacks in the past few weeks and months offer a chilling warning that China will have to pay a high price for a deep-water harbor near the mouth of the Persian Gulf. The Baloch have been fighting for their rights and their dignity for the last 70 years !
For the Chinese, there are clear reasons to run the risks of investment in Balochistan, one of the world’s wildest frontier regions. Gwadar will be a critical addition to Beijing’s so-called string of pearls: a ring of ports around the Indian Ocean, including in Sri Lanka, Djibouti and the Seychelles, which are intended to outflank China’s nuclear-armed rival for supremacy in Asia: India.Balochistan is not for the faint-hearted. A mountainous, desert province bordering Iran and Afghanistan, it is not only wracked by terrorism and separatist rebellion, but is also a focal point for smuggling guns, fuel and drugs.
Violence over the past few months has left Beijing in no doubt of the risks. In June, Islamic State militants killed two Chinese language teachers, who were snatched from the streets of Balochistan’s capital, Quetta, by men disguised as police officers. That came only weeks after two gunmen on motorcycles shot dead 10 laborers building a road linked to the Chinese investments around Gwadar. More than 20 people have died in bomb attacks against military units in the past few days. And the atrocities against the locals continues in the remote areas as well !
.
It is little wonder, then, that Pakistan’s new prime minister is scrambling to convince the Chinese that their investments are safe. The murder of the teachers was the most direct attack on Chinese citizens since three engineers were murdered in Gwadar in the early days of Beijing’s interest in the region in 2006. On only his third day in office, on August 3, Shahid Khaqan Abbasi met the Chinese ambassador to reassure him that Beijing has no reason to worry about its $62 billion spending plans, earmarked for the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project. China has committed thousands of engineers to this pharaonic infrastructure plan and is halfway through the first $28 billion investment cycle, which includes the development of Gwadar and the roads linking it to the rest of country.Abbasi told Beijing’s envoy he would “personally supervise the speedy completion of all the projects under CPEC.” The no nonsense Chinis would not too pleased with these hollow assurances !
Pakistan has sought to cast the murder of the teachers as a one-off, saying they were targeted because they were missionaries, not because they were Chinese. Beijing has also doubled down on its commitment to Pakistan after their deaths. The foreign ministry has vowed to support Islamabad’s battle against terrorism and Chinese Ambassador Sun Weidong insisted the relationship with Pakistan has “attained new heights, which will be further strengthened in days to come.”.To underline the show of solidarity, Chinese Vice Premier Wang Yang travelled to Pakistan on Monday to join the celebrations for the country’s 70th independence day. The Chinese are well known for their hard nosed diplomacy, although in public, they are all smiles and positive words. :mrgreen:
Only slightly smaller than Germany, Balochistan forms 45 percent of Pakistan’s landmass, but has only 6 percent of the population: some 13 million people. That population is Pakistan’s least educated, least connected, and most deprived. Three-quarters of women are illiterate. Half the province does not have electricity. It is also plagued by political violence. Islamic State claimed responsibility for a bomb attack against an army vehicle in Quetta on Saturday that killed 15 people, including eight soldiers, and injured dozens. On Monday, eight more soldiers died in an attack in Harnai, 100 miles east of Quetta. Pakistan is also to change the demography of the region by settling Non -Baluchis specially Punjabis !
Andrew Small, an expert on China-Pakistan relations at the German Marshall Fund, said the scale of the Chinese investment was so vast that it was bound to bring benefits. Thousands of Chinese engineers, laborers and even chefs are working across the province. A road link between Gwadar and Quetta is imminent and more power plants, which receive the biggest share of the $62 billion pie, are coming online to address Pakistan’s electricity needs, conveniently in time for next year’s election.
Baloch separatists accuse the country’s military — and particularly a paramilitary force called the Frontier Corps — of conducting extrajudicial killings and “disappearing” opponents. It is difficult to independently verify estimates of casualties in the “dirty war” between the insurgents and the security forces, which has been going on for years. Official statistics indicate that more than 4,500 bodies of forcibly disappeared people were recovered between 2010 and 2015.
For China, a strengthened Pakistan helps muscle out India, which has long been Beijing’s main foe across the Himalayas. The two countries fought a war in 1962 and soldiers again clashed along the Himalayan border this week. According to Small from the German Marshall Fund, a strong Pakistan would “distract India on its western border and keep it tied down in South Asia.”.While there is no formal military dimension to the agreement over Gwadar, Small explained that the relationship is so close “they don’t need it.” He predicted that Chinese naval ships would use the port informally, docking there whenever they need to.
There is also a soft-diplomacy dimension to China’s investments. A television advertisement that went viral in Pakistan — and spawned parodies — shows a Chinese woman bonding with her Pakistani neighbors over a spicy platter of biryani. More Pakistanis are also learning Mandarin than ever before. Chinese performers sing patriotic Pakistani songs on Chinese TV, and China Radio International launched a new station on Pakistani airwaves called “Friendship Channel.” The Chinese Embassy in Islamabad did not respond to a question on how many Chinese residents there are now in Pakistan, but the number is easily in the high thousands. Still, amid the bonhomie, it’s impossible to discount the core strategic worries. There are vast cultural differences between the religious Pakis and the atheistic Chinese. The crackdown by the Chinese on their own Muslim citizens is surely a cause of concern to the powerful Islam Lobby Of Pakiland !
Kakar said the war in Afghanistan next door was partially responsible for instability in the wider region. “[Even] with the presence of U.S. troops … just round the corner, hundreds are being killed even there [in Afghanistan], so … five soldiers being killed on Balochistan’s soil is not acceptable but … not unusual.” The state is trying to meet the security challenge. In addition to its regular and paramilitary forces of some 650,000, Pakistan assembled a 15,000-strong force called the Special Security Division specifically instructed to protect the Chinese-backed projects and the people working on them. Small predicted that number could rise to 30,000 — the size of Belgium’s entire armed forces — as work on the projects intensifies. Kakar argued that kind of show of force should put fears to rest about investment in Balochistan by the middle of 2018.“Probably the next six months to a year would be the timeline where we could be more confident and within a comfort zone to tell the rest of the world that the situation is almost 100 percent in our control.” Chinese influence in Pakistan is growing day by day. Chinese companies are buying Paki companies ( eg Chini investment in Paki Stock Exchange ). Paki schools are introducing Chinese language and the Chinification of Pakistan is surely under way !

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9557
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 20 Aug 2017 02:08

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1AY0FN
China to curb "irrational" overseas Belt and Road investment: state planner
(Reuters) - China will strengthen rules to defuse risks for domestic companies investing abroad and curb "irrational" overseas investment in its Belt and Road initiative, the state planner said on Friday.

The National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) said in an online statement lauding the Belt and Road initiative that it would provide better guidance on risks to companies investing overseas in order to prevent "vicious" competition and corruption.

The initiative is aimed at building a modern-day "Silk Road", connecting China by land and sea to Southeast, South and Central Asia, and beyond to the Middle East, Europe and Africa.

The state planner cited unspecified security risks for Chinese companies investing abroad.

The NDRC did not give more details about how it planned to strengthen rules or why it was concerned about corruption and unhealthy competition between companies.

Also on Friday, the cabinet issued new guidelines to regulate overseas investment as the government looks to support capable firms investing overseas while restricting or banning deals in certain sectors.

"(We will) guide firms to fully consider national conditions and actual needs of target countries, pay attention to mutually beneficial cooperation with local governments and companies, and generate economic and social benefits," the State Council said in a statement.

Mergers and acquisitions by Chinese companies in countries linked to the Belt and Road initiative have been growing at a rapid rate, even as the government takes aim at China's acquisitive conglomerates to restrict capital outflows.

Unveiled in 2013, the Belt and Road initiative has also come with some security concerns for China. This year, militants in Pakistan, a key Belt and Road partner, killed 10 workers and two teachers from China.

The largest deal in a Belt and Road country this year was a Chinese consortium's $11.6 billion buyout of the Singapore-based Global Logistics Properties (GLPL.SI).

Chinese acquisitions in the 68 countries officially associated with President Xi Jinping's signature foreign policy totalled $33 billion as of Aug. 14, surpassing the $31 billion for all of 2016, according to Thomson Reuters data.

Lawyers and dealmakers had told Reuters that companies were enjoying a relatively smooth approval process for Belt and Road-related deals as regulators tended to classify them differently when reviewing outbound investments.

China has tightened outbound capital controls and cracked down on overseas deals it sees as risky, putting pressure on acquisitive conglomerates like Anbang Insurance Group [ANBANG.UL], HNA Group [HNAIRC.UL], Dalian Wanda Group and Fosun International Ltd (0656.HK).

In the statement Friday, the NDRC cited projects such as a high-speed railway in Indonesia and a crude oil pipeline between southwest China and Myanmar as examples of how the initiative was advancing.

Up to the end of 2016, Chinese companies had invested more than $18.5 billion to build economic and trade cooperation zones in 20 countries along the Belt and Route routes, it said.

The State Council said capable firms were encouraged to invest overseas in sectors including agriculture and high-tech manufacturing, while mining, oil, and gas developments based on "prudent assessments" are also encouraged.

It reiterated that investment in property, hotels, entertainment, sports club, and film industries would be restricted, as will investment projects that do not meet environmental protection or safety standards.

Investment in gambling and *****, and some core defence technologies, and those that use technology not permitted for export are forbidden, the State Council said.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1410
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby manjgu » 20 Aug 2017 13:32

only a small fraction of CPEC is on roads..majorly its on power plants. possible roles of CPEC are ..not in any order of priority a) development of muslim majority restive areas of china close to pakistan..exports from this area could be impacted by landslides etc b) setting up chinese industry in mainland pakistan and so the power plants to enable manufacture and quick export thru sea route which will not be affected by landslides, snow etc c) ofc..using gwadar as a military base ( the excuse would be pakistan cant repay the loans and so it gives 1000000 year lease to chinese !! d) interest income on so called CPEC project.

Pakis will end up collecting toll tax ! while its own industry, exports go down the tube. With diminishing remittances from Middle east, its perfect recepie of economic meltdown of napakistan. What can Pakistan export to china? aam ka aachar ??

Seriously doubt if road closing for 4 to 5 months has not been factored in by the chinese, because they also understand not much is going to pass thru these roads.

venug
BRFite
Posts: 114
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 21:39

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby venug » 23 Aug 2017 22:18

Deciphering the Numbers: Employment in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor

Employment

In a populous and poor country like Pakistan, the CPEC will certainly be judged in terms of the employment it can generate. Pakistan’s population stands at approximately 201 million but it has a low median age of 22.7 years meaning that half the population is under this age which in turn means a large working age population over the next few decades. The question, therefore, is about the nature of employment in CPEC and the actual numbers involved. And on this score, things have been far from clear.

Pakistan media report employment figures from specific projects every now and then. For instance, it was reported that the construction of the 392km highway from Multan in Punjab to Sukkur in Sindh is expected to create some 9,800 local jobs. Similarly, the Suki-Kinari hydropower project in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is expected to create more than 4,000 jobs In terms of jobs actually created, it is reported that the China Machinery Engineering Corporation’s Thar lignite mining and coal-fired power plant in Sind has created over 1,000 jobs so far, while the Sahiwal power plant, southwest of Lahore in Punjab province ‘hired 3,000 locals’.

A 40-strong group of Pakistani teachers were part of a 15-day Chinese language training programme in July-August 2015. The fact that these teachers are being trained to teach Chinese to Pakistanis suggests that many jobs offered will involve dealing with Chinese personnel in Pakistan. But the fact that language courses are offered also suggests that there will be sufficiently large numbers of Chinese personnel present in Pakistan under the CPEC.

Meanwhile, official statements from Pakistan or China, in fact, actually seldom give out exact numbers for employment generated or likely to be generated. Even summaries of apparently detailed reviews of the CPEC actually provide no details. This was the case, for instance, in a July 2017 news item on remarks by Chargé d’affaires Chinese Embassy Islamabad Lijian Zhao and Foreign Secretary Tehmina Janjua. And nor was there any detail about jobs or employment prospects for Pakistanis in the Chinese official’s speech as available on his embassy’s website either. This is highly unusual given the frequent political complaints and suspicions about who is actually benefitting from the CPEC.

There is little also by way of information on the kinds of jobs that will be created – the skillsets involved or the duration for which these jobs will be available. In September 2015, a Pakistani minister noted that Pakistan needed to grow at 7-8% annually in order to create one million jobs annually. In June 2016, the Chinese ambassador to Pakistan, Sun Weidong declared that ‘[a]s of March [2016], ongoing CPEC projects have employed more than 6,000 Pakistanis.’ In April 2017, Liu Jinsong, Deputy Chief of Mission in the Chinese Embassy across the border in New Delhi gave out a figure of 13,000 jobs having been created locally in Pakistan. However, the latest figure on CPEC employment put out by the Chinese Charge d’Affaires in Islamabad in May 2017 says, ‘According to incomplete statistics, CPEC has created at least 60,000 direct jobs for Pakistan people.’ Even if one were to take that the numbers are rising, they still are nowhere along the optimistic trend line suggested by Pakistani figures or expectations.

For instance, one Pakistani figure has projected 2.32 million jobs would be created over the next two years, indicating a reduction of Pakistan’s unemployment rate from its current 5.9% to 3.3%. The latter Pakistani figure obviously indicates a marked increase if contrasted against the figures provided by the Chinese diplomats themselves and if accurate would without doubt be a significant reduction in Pakistan’s unemployment. Also to be taken into account are the multiplier effects of employment in the manufacturing sector in terms of ancillary or supporting activities and industries and additional jobs created.

However, when such figures for total employment numbers – declared or projected – are available, it is not clear just what projects exactly are being counted. It is only the rare CPEC project that announces specific employment generated. Further, it is also not clear if these numbers also include jobs the Chinese are getting in Pakistan under CPEC. What is more for the US$60 billion or so that the CPEC involves at latest reckoning these job figures still seem to be rather low relative to Pakistan’s overall population.

It also needs to be remembered that Pakistani reports on the impact of the China-Pakistan FTA signed in 2007 highlight the stress that it has placed on Pakistan’s domestic industries. One news report cites a figure of 20,000 jobs in the shoe-manufacturing sector alone, having moved from Pakistan to China. Thus, not only will the CPEC have to generate fresh jobs, it will also have to replace jobs lost to China since 2007. There are similar fears about the CPEC that it might lead to a loss of jobs because of the influx of cheaper Chinese goods that would drive Pakistani products out of the market.

Skillsets

Allied with these employment numbers being talked about must be viewed the rising numbers of Pakistani students going to China for higher education – they certainly will be expecting to find jobs in CPEC projects. In fact, Pakistani students are now being sponsored for studies in China not just by the Chinese government but also by Chinese companies. In 2016, some 3,500 Pakistani students went to China on Chinese government scholarships bringing their total number in China to over 18,000.

As indicated above, there are also details available with respect to specific CPEC projects. For instance, in the case of the Sahiwal power plant, 190 Pakistani young engineers trained in China have been employed for plant operations while the Port Qasim power plants, southeast of Karachi in Sind province sent 104 engineers to China for a five-month training programme. This is a positive sign for Pakistan insofar as jobs in the skilled sector are concerned.

However, in the specific instance of the Gwadar port, which is one of the big-ticket investment items under CPEC, there are doubts about the employability of local labour. Dostain Khan Jamaldini, Chairman, Gwadar Port Authority answering a direct question about whether employment would be generated locally answered in the negative asking in turn whether locals had the requisite skills. What is more the fishing community in Gwadar also fears the loss of livelihood and being cut out with the creation of the new port. Indeed, instead of generating local employment Chinese security measures such as building fencing around the Gwadar project area in Balochistan province will likely limit local involvement and jobs. And yet, leader of the National Party in the Balochistan Assembly, Zamruk Khan Achakzai, has expressed the belief that the CPEC ‘will create thousands of jobs for people of the province.’

Meanwhile, given that there is no break-up of the figures provided for jobs generated by CPEC, questions can be raised if whether these jobs do not also include those being created in the business of providing security to CPEC projects. In fact, the most frequently cited figures for Pakistani employment, in fact, come in the security domain. These figures range from a force of 15,000 personnel to 18,000 personnel, all raised to protect Chinese investment and citizens. This then reinforces the notion that a large number of Chinese will simultaneously be employed and also that local employment on the projects themselves – at least in certain areas like Balochistan – are likely to be limited or constrained by factors such as security and/or lack of adequate skills.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21711
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 29 Aug 2017 16:48

Back to more regular programming after Doka La.

Pakistan, from American fire into the Chinese frying pan to be 'cooked to Chinese specifications'.

Business with China - Editorial, DAWN
Slowly but surely a crucial realisation is setting in amongst the business community here that dealing with their Chinese counterparts is not going to be easy.

The rhetoric coming from the Pakistani government had made the relationship sound like it was some sort of family affair. But those sections of the business community who have tried to build commercial ties with their counterparts in China are finding out that, over there, profits come first and sentiment second.


One thing the business community has noticed is that their Chinese counterparts prefer dealing with the government rather than building private-sector partnerships, according to a report published on Monday in this paper that presented the opinions of a range of Pakistani businesses that have, or are seeking to build, ties with Chinese enterprises. They have noticed that the Chinese do not negotiate very much. They lay down their terms, and expect them to be fully met.

This realisation is only the beginning of what the rest of the country needs to learn about the growing economic relationship with China. The Chinese government has provided some diplomatic support to Pakistan at crucial junctures, even now as relations with post 9/11 US take yet another nosedive. But business is business, and when it comes to economic cooperation and partnering, all countries look out first and foremost for their own interests.

The question that needs to be asked with increasing urgency is this: is our government doing the same when it engages with the growing number of Chinese delegations landing in the country to build the framework under which Chinese investment will come pouring into Pakistan?

Ever since the CPEC enterprise got under way, calls have been growing for more transparency in its execution. By now, there ought to be no further doubts that the CPEC enterprise goes far beyond roads and power plants, and is, in fact, about creating the right environment for Chinese investment to acquire large stakes in Pakistan’s economy.

This is a positive development undoubtedly {really? How foolish is that?} , but it is also important to ask how far the government is going to protect Pakistan’s economic interests.


There is a need to learn this important lesson from the Chinese government. Only greater transparency with more information being shared through the online portals created by the government for disseminating CPEC-related news can address this concern.

Answers to questions like what sort of dispute-resolution mechanism will govern the partnerships envisioned under CPEC, and what investments are being prepared for which areas, will help dispel the growing anxieties.

It would be a sad but necessary end to the euphoria that has greeted the arrival of CPEC if the government were to learn the same lesson that the business community is busy learning these days, that in matters of business, brotherly relations have no role to play. {Allahu Akbar}

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6116
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby anupmisra » 29 Aug 2017 17:56

(Yet) One more call.

Khawaja Asif accuses India of violating Indus Waters Treaty, urges World Bank to intervene

Foreign Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif on Tuesday alleged that India was not fulfilling its commitments regarding the Indus Waters Treaty and urged the World Bank (WB) to play its role in ensuring the implementation of the accord.
The matter of Indus Waters Treaty is an important issue between the two sovereign countries, [but] India is not cooperating in the implementation of the accord, the defence minister said.
Commenting on the local issues regarding water distribution, Asif said that the government is only able to recover 80 per cent of the money spent on distribution of water locally. “We [Pakistanis] use water in a manner as if we have unlimited resources,” he added. “If we continue to waste water like this, we will have to face some serious issues in the near future.”


Yes. Pakis waste water and that is India's fault (problem). :roll: Other option can be to ask the chinis to intervene. After all, they have had recent successes in dealing with India.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1354697/khawa ... -intervene

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9194
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby arun » 02 Sep 2017 10:30

Kaiser Begali realises that CPEC indeed stands for Conning Pakistan to Enrich China and attempts to wash away the illusion of his fellow citizens in the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan regards CPEC by saying “CPEC is not a game-c

Kaiser Bengali is a senior economist who has served as advisor to the chief minister Balochistan as well as consultant/national coordinator for Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP), Government of Pakistan. Besides, he has headed research institutions including Social Policy and Development Centre (SPDC), Karachi, and Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI), Islamabad. He has done his Masters in Economics from Boston University, USA, and has a PhD from Karachi University. He has vast experience in the fields of teaching, research, publications and finance.

Here he talks to The News on Sunday (TNS) about the country’s economic policies, the priorities of those managing the economy, the economic challenges faced at local and international levels, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and its relationship with Gwadar, development of the social sector, our falling exports and foreign reserves and other related topics. Excerpts of the interview follow: …………………………..

TNS: A lot of hopes are pinned on CPEC. Do you think it can really be the game-changer?

KB: I do not think Pakistan will gain a lot from the CPEC initiative which is still shrouded in mystery. There are no details available and the government is not ready to answer any questions. Instead of a game-changer; CPEC may signify a game over. I see the Corridor creating threats for local businesses and fear that it won’t be a win-win situation for both countries.

For example, since Chinese companies are tax-exempt they will bring everything from China and hence they will have no reliance on Pakistani businesses to fulfil their demands. This has shattered the dreams of many local companies that planned to expand their production facilities in anticipation of receiving orders from these Chinese companies. The association of cable operators in Pakistan is one such entity that was expecting a big boost in its sale volumes, but now they are struggling to sustain their existing sale figures.

The Chinese companies play smart and get excellent returns on their investments. It has proven difficult to extract much from them. China has a 10-year control of the Saindak Copper and Gold Project and gets gold as a by-product of the mining. Also, China does not share how much ore it is taking from Pakistan or how much copper it is extracting or what is the quality of gold obtained as a by-product. And nobody can ask them these questions.

They will definitely watch their interest this time also, so it becomes the duty of the government to secure the country’s interests. I raised this issue and presented 12 questions on CPEC to the government but it has not provided any answer except one “yes” to the question about whether any feasibility has been conducted on CPEC. However, they have no documents or figures to support this claim. Furthermore, there is no document on how the toll money, if at all, will be shared between the provinces through which the CPEC routes passes.

And one more thing; people believe all the money is coming from China. This is not so. Pakistan is spending a lot from of its own resources without calculating what it stands to gain or lose. All the CPEC roads are being built by Pakistan. Besides, the cost of providing security to the CPEC-related Chinese workforce and infrastructure falls on us. There are reports that NEPRA has allowed transferring this security cost to the citizens of Pakistan. This will be done by adding it to our electricity bills just like the PTV license fee that they have to pay.

Those celebrating it must know that the above USD 50 billion loans and Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) will ultimately impact the country when there will be an outflow of loan payments and profit remittances to Chinese companies. This will put immense pressure on foreign reserves which are already dwindling. Unfortunately, Pakistan has done no planning on how funds and revenues will be generated for these payments.

Another fear is that the trade imbalance with China will further widen. The Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between Pakistan and China has already resulted in trade imbalances with Pakistani exports being far less than its imports from China. This is about formal trade; the flooding of Pakistani markets with Chinese products is in addition to it. You will be surprised to know that many Pakistani manufacturers have stopped production at their units. Instead, they import products from China and supply them to the market in Pakistani packaging. Buyers think the product is manufactured in Pakistan which is not the case.

The environmental cost of CPEC will also be big. One reason is that no EIAs have been done to offset this. Several coal-powered projects based on imported raw material have been launched. This dependence on imported fuel will increase pressure on rupee. The effective rate of US dollar is already Rs120 but it has been kept between Rs104 and Rs106 artificially. Just imagine what will be the situation when Pakistan will have to honour the payback commitments.


On Gwadar the usual Pakiness surfaces and Urban Legend of the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan of sea sick Indiian Navy sailors rears its head :

TNS: How much does Pakistan stand to gain from the development of Gwadar?

KB: I have said it earlier and will say it again that Gwadar cannot become Dubai. It is a seaport built for the purpose of re-exporting Chinese products brought into Pakistan via a land route. I think it is not possible to establish industrial zones and a mega city in Gwadar because there is no water available to support this development.

If we recall, Gwadar came into the spotlight after the Kargil war because a need was felt to have a port for naval purposes. India tried to blockade the port at Karachi and sent ships but this plan failed. As the sea is rough in the summer, the crew got sea-sick and returned. The Karachi-Gwadar Road (Coastal Highway) was also constructed during that time, mainly for defence reasons. Till then it had been completely neglected and its economic potential had not come under discussion. I am not against building infrastructure for security reasons; my point is that we must acknowledge it was for defence reasons and not to exploit its economic potential.

Can one believe it is for the first time that Gwadar and Quetta have been connected via a direct road?

The issue is that one tanker of drinking water brought from as far as Mirani Dam (150 kilometres away from Gwadar) costs around Rs25,000. You will be amazed to hear that water theft from houses in Gwadar is quite common. What happens is that thieves enter houses and walk away with household containers carrying drinking water. They won’t steal motorcycles or other belongings, it’s water that they want.

The government does talk about the option of setting up a desalination plant but I do not think it is workable because of its huge fixed and operational costs. It is estimated that it will cost Rs750 million a year to run such a plant. China is apparently not ready to give funds, so Pakistan will have to cover the cost. I do not think Pakistan will be able to take this responsibility because its share of revenues from Gwadar Port is only 9 per cent while China has 91 per cent of the share.


The News On Sunday:

“CPEC is not a game-changer, it’s game over”

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3996
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 02 Sep 2017 16:10

arun wrote:Kaiser Begali realises that CPEC indeed stands for Conning Pakistan to Enrich China and attempts to wash away the illusion of his fellow citizens in the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan regards CPEC by saying “CPEC is not a game-c
The News On Sunday:

“CPEC is not a game-changer, it’s game over”[/quote]

arun Ji :

Here is an Article by Dr. Kaiser Bengali - Dated February 26, 2016

‘CPEC is the real game-changer’
Cheers Image

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6116
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby anupmisra » 02 Sep 2017 16:56

China tightening visa rules, say businessmen :((

A growing number of Chinese nationals are coming to Pakistan in the wake of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).
71,000 Chinese nationals visited Pakistan in 2016, and 27,596 visa extensions were granted in that year, up by 41 per cent from a year earlier.
But a rising number of people in the business community of Pakistan are now saying that visas for China are becoming increasingly difficult to get. Moreover, even when they are granted, the validity period is seldom more than three months, and they are for single entry only.
Secondly, cumbersome and complex procedures for obtaining a Chinese visa have to be simplified.
“But instead of getting friendlier, the rules are becoming more stringent than even those of the United States
New regulations now require business visitors to obtain an invitation from a Chinese company before applying for a visa. Business applicants from Pakistan are being told by their counterparts in China that their government has capped the number of invitations that any company can issue to foreign visitors at five per month. :((
An auto-part importer said that for the last two years the Chinese government has been asking for a police character certificate for the first-time visa applicants as well as those who have not visited for the last two years.


Here's a sampling of the "quality chini" conscri...er...workers in ilon bilather bājīsītani coal mines (note the prison-issued food bowls and soap):

Image

Whereas, honey bilathers in bājīsītan thought these below are the sample chinis that will will be part of their skilled work force:

Image

Indian posters are having a field day in the comments section.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1355471/china ... usinessmen

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21711
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 03 Sep 2017 08:28

The first case of corruption in CPEC has been reported . . . . AoA

Chinese envoy rejects corruption claims against Shehbaz - Daily Times
The Chinese government has rejected allegations of corruption levelled against Punjab Chief Minister Shehbaz Sharif, saying reports of him receiving kickbacks from the Multan Metro Bus project through a ‘fake’ Chinese firm are false.

Responding to a tweet, Acting Ambassador Zhao Lijian said that the Chinese company in the middle of the scandal, Jiangsu Yabaite Technology Co Ltd, was not operating in Pakistan and had presented “fake letters to cheat [the] government”. He added that the Chinese government had taken action against the firm.


“Thx for advice. This Chinese company Yabeite was not working in Pakistan. It made up some fake letters to cheat government and was punished,” he tweeted. In another tweet, the diplomat said CPEC projects were transparent and clean and there was zero tolerance for corruption.

The Punjab chief minister welcomed the ‘vindication’ of his stance on the issue in a tweet. “I bow my head before Him, for it isn’t my vindication alone, it is magnificent vindication of all my colleagues and govt of Punjab…thanks!,” he tweeted. {Who is 'Him'?, the Chinese ambassador?}


A Chinese regulatory authority had released a report stating that the Punjab chief minister had received more than Rs 10 million in kickbacks from the Multan Metro Bus project through Jiangsu Yabaite Technology Co Ltd, a Chinese company listed on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange.

According to the report, Jiangsu is being probed by Chinese authorities after unusual transactions of money were detected in the company’s accounts. Pakistan, however, came into focus only after the Chinese company informed authorities in Beijing that the money involved in its unusual transactions was actually the profits it had earned from the Multan Metro Bus project through its Pakistani partner company, Capital Engineering and Construction Company (Pvt) Ltd.

The channel claimed in its report that on further investigation, the Chinese board ‘discovered’ that the company in Pakistan belonged to Shehbaz Sharif.


According to the report, the China Securities Regulatory Commission approached the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) and asked for its assistance pursuant to International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCOs) and Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding (MMoU) about Jiangsu Yabaite and Capital Engineering and Construction Company.

The CSRC also inquired from the SECP whether these two companies had participated in the construction of Multan Metro Bus Project, as claimed by Yabaite. The SECP approached the State Bank of Pakistan as well as the Federal Board of Revenue to know if there was any bank account of the Capital Engineering Company in the country, or any record of tax returns. The SECP also wrote to Pakistan Engineering Council to inquire if any such engineering company was registered with the council but no such company was found in the council’s record.

Yabaite, in light of the investigations, submitted to the CSRC two appreciation letters: one allegedly from Shehbaz Sharif, another from Senator Kulsoom Parveen, who hails from Balochistan, and one blank paper signed by Senator Mushahid Hussain Sayed, which endorsed Senator Parveen’s letter in May 2017.

The Punjab chief minister, as well as the two senators, have categorically denied writing any such letter. Shahbaz had vehemently rejected the allegations in a press conference on Wednesday.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3996
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 04 Sep 2017 19:14

AFTER 2 YRS. INTELLIGENT ANALYST REALIZE , CPEC IS NOT GOOD FOR PAKISTAN !

Cheers Image

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21711
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 10 Sep 2017 12:51

X-posted from STFUP thread

CPEC — first or final nail in the coffin? - Brig (Retd) Sahukat Qadir, DT
I have frequently and at some length I must confess, expressed apprehension about our new relationship paradigm with China, which of course has CPEC at its core. I had been hoping that — if nothing else — my relentless persistence might have prompted the stirrings of some sort of concern among those who softly tread the corridors of power.

Allow me to be clear: I am absolutely in no doubt whatsoever that CPEC holds the key to our economic revival. However, my worry is that we run the risk of being exploited. For we have allowed China to embrace us in a vice-like grip that threatens to cripple, if not crush, our economy. And we only have ourselves to blame. What else can we hope for after outsourcing our sovereignty in this way? As for our future generations — we offer them not a legacy of economic self-determination. Quite the opposite, in fact. We have simply changed the faces of those before whom we bow down; American idols are swapped for Chinese.

Yet alas and alack. It seems that my endeavours have fallen on resoundingly deaf ears.

After Trump’s recent diatribe in which he blamed Pakistan for the US failure to bring peace to Afghanistan — many Pakistanis felt reassured by both China and Russia jumping in to remind the world of our sacrifices. Then came a devastating blow. BRICS, the economic forum comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, issued a statement unanimously expressing misgivings over our support for active militant groups on this side of the border. As if that were not enough, the grouping also indirectly pointed its collective finger at our conduct vis-a-vis Afghanistan. Yet had the Chinese not agreed to rebuking Pakistan — the Russians certainly would have stalled.

The plot then thickened.

The question whispered on everyone’s lips: what caused the Chinese to recant? No one dared to ask this except in hushed tones. Perhaps fearful of what they might hear. Yet before attempting to suggest a response of sorts, allow me to proffer a little perspective.

In the piece I penned last week, I sought to express my confidence in the fact that while our earlier Afghan policy may have been questionable — our hands were no longer dirty. Naturally, such assertions by a terribly ordinary and, perhaps relatively uninformed, individual like myself, are not realistically expected to have any bearing on foreign relations. Nevertheless, is there more here than meets the eye? I, for one, certainly think so.

Regardless of the CPEC point of origin on the Chinese side — it ends at the Khunjerab Pass. Yet the entire Corridor actually runs from Khunjerab to Gwadar. North of this lies China and only China, thereby lending the C to the anacronym. Thus it is the area to south of Khunjerab that gives us the PEC

Back in May of this year, the Chinese Ambassador to New Delhi not only invited India to join CPEC — he went as far as proposing a renaming of the Corridor. This was all on record. Yet the latter part was duly rescinded. However, Chinese ambassadors, generally speaking, aren’t loose cannons the way some of ours are. Thus Beijing’s man in Delhi could never have extended such an overture without explicit approval from the top.

The mission to expunge the ‘offending’ words was surely undertaken at our behest. Yet we would not have been so foolish as to have huffed and puffed over the offer itself, preferring to limit ourselves to language alone. Inevitably, our objections were not taken too seriously in Beijing. The Ambassador was neither sacked nor rebuked. No apology was forthcoming. This could mean that none was actually sought. Or it could mean the opposite and that it was simply brushed aside.

I must admit that I have previously taken to these very pages to explore the above. But, if I may be so bold, I shall revisit the matter.

Regardless of the CPEC point of origin on the Chinese side — it ends at the Khunjerab Pass. Yet the entire Corridor actually runs from Khunjerab to Gwadar. North of this lies China and only China, thereby lending the C to the anacronym. Thus it is the area to south of Khunjerab that gives us the PEC.

There can be no ifs or buts about it, therefore. No country has the right to extend the lucrative CPEC invitation without first securing our specific permission. And if it turns out that this have we given — then shame on us and more. {He has a point}

Seen retrospectively through the prism of the BRICS statement, it now seems that the offer to change the CPEC name was a move calculated to add insult to further injury.

Now we should perhaps advert to understanding the whys and where fores of China’s sudden withdrawing of diplomatic support and in so public a manner.

According to Chinese whispers, Beijing is keen to keep India on side, especially following the recent Doklam confrontation. In addition, it may also be a strategic ploy aimed at assuaging the US, that is, until the Chinese have fully established their presence in Afghanistan. Yet despite the plausibility of one or all the above, I remain unconvinced. For me, China is simply announcing its suzerainty over us. The Chinese Ambassador’s statement was, I believe, intended to test the waters in this regard. And when we took it on the chin without the merest hint of a whisper — Beijing decided to set sail full steam ahead.

We have President Trump to thank for seeing the only other door of economic opportunity shut firmly in our face. Pakistan will very soon have to go hat-in-hand to the IMF. And if we manage to secure assistance, of one thing we can all be sure: the conditions will be extremely stringent, which we will have no option but to accept. Of course, the elite will remain safe in their collective cocoon. Not so the middle- and lower-income groups, who will find their backs well and truly broken.

So willingly have we taken this path that has only brought us to the economic brink, with the Chinese quietly yet persistently nudging us closer inch by inch. Their monopoly over us has now become irreversible. And Beijing has chosen to fire an economic shot over our burning bows of gold, thereby declaring their imperial rule over us.

I have said it before and so I say it again. The overt friendliness of the Chinese ought not to be mistaken for altruism. This is not to say that Beijing doesn’t have an enormous stake in our security. Yet it is to remind that it would have little or no qualms about seeing the Balkanisation of Pakistan — so long as this threatened not its precious economic corridor.

Now, over to you, Dear Reader: does CPEC represent the first or final nail in Pakistan’s
economic coffin?


The writer is a retired brigadier. He is also former vice president and founder of the Islamabad Policy Research Institute (IPRI)

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3996
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 18 Sep 2017 15:14

X Posted on the OBOR, Chinese Strategy and Implications Thread

Japan misleading India against China: Chinese state media

State-run Chinese daily, Global Times, has slammed Japan for misleading India against China, saying that the timing of Japanese PM Shinzo Abe's visit to India, right on the heels of the Doklam standoff, was suspicious.

Abe had visited India last week to inaugurate the Ahmedabad-Mumbai bullet train project, a 508-km railway line that will run on the Japanese Shinkansen technology.

The article in the Global Times also downplayed the role of the Asia-Africa Growth Corridor that was spoken about by Modi and Abe, saying that its basic concept and the spirit was similar to China's Belt and Road initiative.

The piece written by Long Xingchun, director of the Center for Indian Studies at China West Normal University, said that Abe was in conjunction with the USA and they were misleading India. Xingchun said that this was exemplified by the fact that Japan and the US had representatives attending the Belt and Road Forum in May, amidst India's boycott of the event.

It said Japan was using India as a tool to confront China, as Japan doesn't really want to confront it directly.

It took a dig at India too, saying that despite India building expressways and bullet trains, the roads in large parts of India were akin to "dirt tracks".

The article also questioned the entire logic behind the talks between the two countries.

"The better India-Japan ties have mutual self-serving interests. Japan, as the second-largest economy for long, is competitive in export of commodities, technology and global investments. While India is a key emerging market seeking foreign direct investment and technological know-how. Huge potential exists in the cooperation between the two countries," he said before stating that in such circumstances, it was perplexing to see that China was the dominant agenda in the talks between the two sides.

The article called upon both India and Japan to boost regional co-operation, saying the three major Asian powers could foster pragmatic cooperation which could be a win-win situation for regional progress and development as well.

Cheers Image

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9194
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby arun » 22 Sep 2017 10:25

X Posted from the Oppression of Minorities in Pakistan thread.

Excerpt dealing with CPEC and the Oppression of Pathan aka Pushtun minority from the Q&A sessision with the Prime Minister of the Mohammadden Terrorism fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, at the US Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)

A Conversation With Shahid Khaqan Abbasi
Past Event — September 20, 2017 4:45pm EDT …………………..

Q: Herbert Levin, Council member.

In New York, we have a number of Waziri and other people from the tribal areas. And they complain that they are neglected by Islamabad, both in terms of representation in the government and also for budgets for schools and things. What do you think the future is of the integration of the tribal areas into real Pakistan? That’s one question. The other question is, I don’t know if you ever took the bus trip to China, but I really wonder what the future is for Pakistan’s economy over those mountains through China. They’re great railroad builders, but I really wonder how you view that.

ABBASI: Well, as far as our tribal areas are concerned, last week we moved the first-ever law in Pakistan to start the integration process for the tribal area into the rest of Pakistan, and to have the laws of Pakistan apply to the tribal areas. We started that process. It has general support within the political community and the people of FATA. The process is not easy. This is a system that has been there for over 100 years. But one of the elements to bring it into force is equalize the tribal area with the rest of Pakistan economically and as far as the infrastructure is concerned. So a tremendous amount of money has been committed for that. That process will start as soon as the parliament approves that bill. So Pakistan today is committing to integrating the FATA, the Federal Administered Tribal Areas, into Pakistan.

The CPEC is a major part of our economic development today. Over $60 million have been committed. And as I mentioned earlier, power plants are being built, highways are being built, other infrastructure is being built, industrial zones are being built. And it will evolve. Gwadar is a key part of—port of Gwadar is a key part of that, the CPEC process, and the trade into western China is also a key part of that process. And this is all a part of the One Belt, One Road initiative of the—in fact, today it’s the only visible part of that initiative that the Chinese have undertaken.

We have a long economic relationship with China. If you recall Dr. Kissinger, when he visited China for the first time in ’70, Pakistan supported that effort. And it’s part of the history which ties China, the U.S., and Pakistan.


From here:

A Conversation With Shahid Khaqan Abbasi

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17594
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Philip » 22 Sep 2017 17:55

Something for OPEC to chew upon.India too.
http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/u ... ce/ri20967
Unknown Oil & Gas Deal Just Changed The Global Energy Balance
Russia's Rosneft makes acquisitions in India, and China in Rosneft making for an interesting three-way partnership

Dave Forest Subscribe to 15197Tue, Sep 19, 2017

One of the biggest energy stories this year has been Russia’s Rosneft buying India’s Essar Oil — giving the Russian company a firm grip on one of the world’s biggest emerging oil and gas markets.
And this past week, that story got more complex. With Rosneft striking another big deal — drawing in another heavyweight energy nation.

China.
Rosneft announced Friday it is selling a significant chunk of its equity to Chinese investors. In this case, little-know exploration and production firm CEFC China Energy.

Although few investors know CEFC, the company is bringing significant capital to the deal. With the firm agreeing to pay $9 billion to acquire a 14.16 percent stake in Rosneft.
The deal is historic in being the first major buy-in by China into the Russian oil and gas sector (although Chinese firms have been involved in financing LNG export projects in the Russian Arctic). Showing the strength of the ever-growing ties between Russia and China in the energy space.

Rosneft and CEFC have been at the center of that burgeoning relationship. With the two companies having signed a deal this past September for long-term supply of Russian crude into China.

This week’s equity purchase further cements those business ties. And shows that China sees Russia as a critical ally in the energy game going forward.

But there are implications well beyond these two countries. With China now having backdoor access into markets like India — through Rosneft’s recently-acquired holdings in that country.

That’s a critical development for the world energy picture. Given that Chinese companies haven’t directly gained much access into India — despite the nation being one of the most important emerging players on the energy stage.

Ownership in Rosneft could help change that. And could open up opportunities in other parts of the world — with Rosneft currently having operations in places ranging from Egypt to Brazil to Venezuela.

An intriguing side note to the story: CEFC is buying the Rosneft stake from Glencore, and Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund. Who reportedly purchased the interest just nine months ago — for $12 billion.

That means these holders are taking a 25% loss on the sale, less than a year after buying in. But in the meantime, Glencore was able to strike a lucrative deal to trade Rosneft’s Russian crude — probably making up for the losses on the Rosneft equity, and then some.

All of which shows just how complex things are in this rapidly-changing corner of the energy world. Watch for more China-Russia energy deals — and emerging influence from these two energy superpowers in other key markets like India.

Here’s to teaming up.
Source: OilPrice.com


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests