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.
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9414
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby arun » 04 Dec 2017 08:07

X Posted from the “Afghanistan News & Discussion - April 2016” thread.

Good to see India’s efforts to provide Afghanistan with alternate sea port access that completely bypasses the Islamic Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan via Chabahar in Iran so as to mitigate the consequences of any future blockade by Pakistan that targets Afghanistan, steadily moving forward.

Looking forward to Afghanistan carrying out significantly more aggressive counter moves to stand up to any bellicose behaviour on the part of the Islamic Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan as the India induced ability of the Islamic Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan to blockade Afghanistan ebbs.

And from this threads perspective, any move that leaches traffic away from CPEC is welcome.

The Joint Statement of Afghanistan, India and Iran Trilateral Meeting on Implementation of Chabahar Agreement follows:

December 03, 2017

The 2nd Ministerial level trilateral meeting between Afghanistan, India and Iran to discuss the implementation of Trilateral Agreement on Establishment of International Transport and Transit Corridor was held at Chabahar, Iran on 3 December 2017. The Minister of Roads and Urban Development of the Islamic Republic of Iran H.E Dr. Abbas Ahmed Akhoundi, Minister of Commerce and Industries of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan H.E. Mr. HumayoonRasaw and the Minister of State for Shipping of the Republic of India H.E. Mr. P Radhakrishnan led the respective delegations.

The three Ministers welcomed the inauguration of Phase-1 of the Chabahar Port by the President of Iran earlier in the day.

The Ministers recalled the decisions taken at the last trilateral meeting that was held in New Delhi in September 2016, and expressed satisfaction on the completion of the ratification procedures of the Trilateral Agreement by Afghanistan and India. They welcomed the steps taken by Iranian Majles to complete the ratification process.

The Ministers discussed the next steps for full implementation of the Agreement and moving towards its operationalization. Towards this endeavor, it was decided to finalize protocols related to transport and transit, ports, customs procedures and consular affairs. It was also decided to convene an Expert level meeting of senior officials of the three countries at the earliest.

Reiterating the importance of Chabahar as a hub for regional economic connectivity and their commitment to work towards this objective, the Ministers commended the joint efforts of the three countries in the recent successful transit of wheat from India to Afghanistan through Chabahar. It was also reiterated to organize a connectivity event involving all stakeholders at Chabahar at the earliest so as to increase awareness about the new opportunities offered by Chabahar Port.

The Ministers agreed that an integrated development of connectivity infrastructure including Ports, Road and Rail networks would open up greater opportunities for regional market access and contribute towards the economic integration and benefit of the three countries and the region.


From the website of our Ministry of External Affairs:

Joint Statement of Afghanistan, India and Iran Trilateral Meeting on Implementation of Chabahar Agreement

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 22107
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 04 Dec 2017 17:48

China invites more countries to take part in CPEC project - PTI
China on Monday termed the $50-billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) “an open initiative” and invited more countries to join the controversial project on the “principle of equality and voluntarism.”

Commenting on the commissioning of a power plant built by China and Qatar in Karachi, Geng Shuang, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, told a media briefing here that Qatar’s participation showed that the CPEC is open for third country participation.

The first unit of the 1320-MW coal-fired power plant at Port Qasim in Pakistan, under the CPEC project, was inaugurated on November 29.

The Port Qasim plant has been developed jointly by the Power China Resources Limited and Qatar’s Al-Mirqab Capital with a total investment of $2.085 billion, according to reports from Pakistan. It is the second major energy project under the CPEC.

“This is the first project participated by the third country. It shows that the CPEC is an open initiative. We are willing to explore the participation of more countries with the principle of equality and voluntarism,” Geng said.

Positive role


“The Chinese side is happy with the operation of this plant. I think this will play a positive role in providing energy and bring benefits to people of Pakistan,” he said.

India has objected to the project on the ground that it traversed through the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.


Now the tariff is 8.12 US cents per unit. This works out to Rs. 13 per unit !

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20496
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Prem » 05 Dec 2017 02:05


anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6467
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby anupmisra » 05 Dec 2017 08:11

Uh-oh!

Three CPEC projects hit snags as China mulls new financing rules

China has temporarily stopped funding of some projects particularly those related to the road network under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) till further decision regarding ‘new guidelines’ to be issued from Beijing
The decision could affect over Rs1 trillion road projects of the National Highway Authority (NHA). It was not clear how wide the impact of the delay will be, but initial reports confirm that at least three road projects are going to experience a delay.
The projects to be affected include the 210-km Dera Ismail Khan-Zhob Road, at an estimated cost of Rs81 billion. Of this, Rs66bn will be spent on construction of road and Rs15bn on land acquisition. Also the Rs19.76bn 110-km Khuzdar-Basima Road has also been affected. The Rs8.5bn 136-km remaining portion of Karakarom Highway (KKH) from Raikot to Thakot is also impacted.
‘new guidelines’ will be issued from Beijing under which new modus operandi for release of the funds will be described
This suggests that the impact of the new procedures could be much wider than just the three roads mentioned by the official.
the Pakistani side was left “stunned”


Bait and switch. Han special.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1374532/three ... cing-rules

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 786
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby ArjunPandit » 05 Dec 2017 11:14

Is game changer ka to game hi change ho gaya..
yahood, hanood, aur ab chinood bhi yaalaah..yeh kya intolerance, how will lal topi bring Gazwa-e-hind?

Jits
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 14
Joined: 19 Jul 2017 15:47

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Jits » 05 Dec 2017 13:56

India's answer to CPEC

INSTC to be operationalised mid-Jan 2018; game changer for India's Eurasia policy

The International North South Transportation Corridor (INSTC) connecting Mumbai with St Petersburg and beyond – which has been 17 years in the making – is set to be operationalised from the middle of next month with the first consignment from India to Russia.

Although the formal operationalisation of INSTC is planned for mid-January, the corridor will start functioning fully in a few months thereafter, according to people aware of the matter. Hectic preparations are underway to firm up all elements of the corridor in all key stakeholder states, informed officials. A Russian railway operator is expected to play key role in INSTC.

India, Iran and Russia had in September 2000 signed the INSTC agreement to build a corridor to provide the shortest multi-model transportation route linking the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gulf to the Caspian Sea via Iran and St Petersburg. From St Petersburg, North Europe is within easy reach via the Russian Federation. The estimated capacity of the corridor is 20-30 million tonnes of goods per year.

Conceived well before China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), INSTC will not only help cut down on costs and time taken for transfer of goods from India to Russia and Europe via Iran but also provide an alternative connectivity initiative to countries in the Eurasian region. It will be India’s second corridor after the Chabahar Port to access resource rich Central Asia and its market.

External affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, in an indirect criticism of the BRI project while addressing a meeting of the heads of Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) member states on Friday last week, emphasised on the need to make connectivity corridors inclusive.

The operationalisation of Chabahar Port (whose Phase 1 was inaugurated on Sunday) coupled with INSTC will be a game changer for India’s strategic and economic goals in the Eurasian region, where China has benefited from its geographical contiguity, experts told ET. These connectivity routes promise to open up a sea of opportunity for India, they said, and the country may even consider working jointly with Russia on economic projects in the Eurasian region.

INSTC could get linked to the Chabahar Port besides Iran’s Bandar Abbas port, said an official, who did not wish to be identified. India also hopes that INSTC will be connected with various other connectivity projects that the five Central Asian and other Eurasian countries have undertaken among themselves, the official said.

“INSTC is now becoming a reality. Chabahar project launched in 2016 will complement INSTC. India is also exploring how Chabahar connectivity corridor can be extended to connect with Central Asia through INSTC, or the Iran-Turkmenistan-Kazakhstan rail line, Iran-Uzbekistan-Kazakhstan alignment and Trans-Afghan rail line (which possibly could be developed by Iran, India, Afghanistan and Uzbekistan),” said P Stobdan, India’s former envoy to Kyrgyzstan and noted expert on Central Asia.


India’s ratification of international customs convention TIR in June will help boost trade through INSTC and other corridors.

The absence of viable surface transport connectivity is a serious impediment to trade with the Eurasian region. Currently, transport of goods between India and Russia mostly takes place through the sea route via Rotterdam to St Petersburg. In the case of the Central Asian region, goods are routed through China, Europe or Iran. The routes through China and Europe are long, expensive and time-consuming. Therefore, a need was felt to have a logistics route that would be shorter, cheaper and faster, officials said. A few dry runs on INSTC have been carried out in the past few years.

The corridor could held Indian exports get a competitive advantage due to lower cost and less delivery time. Studies show that this route can reduce time and cost of container delivery by 30-40%. According to Iranian officials, tariffs for transportation of freight through INSTC may drop further after the completion of a railroad segment connecting two Iranian and Azerbaijani border cities. Finland, Estonia and Latvia may also join INSTC in the near future, according to Iranian officials.


INSTC has been expanded to include 11 new members – Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkey, Ukraine, Belarus, Oman, Syria and Bulgaria (as observer).

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 22107
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 05 Dec 2017 17:08

anupmisra wrote:Three CPEC projects hit snags as China mulls new financing rules

So, quite a strong headwind for CPEC. Strong opposition from India, Diamar-Basha dam & a power project had to be given up, corruption charges in projects . . .

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4372
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 05 Dec 2017 18:22

anupmisra wrote:Uh-oh!

Three CPEC projects hit snags as China mulls new financing rules

Bait and switch. Han special.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1374532/three ... cing-rules
anupmisra Ji :

CPEC NOW RENAMED AS SEE KAY TEE BEE i.e. China Kicking Terroristani Butt! :rotfl:

Cheers Image

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9971
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby A_Gupta » 05 Dec 2017 19:26

^^^
Chinese side was quite disturbed with increasing news reports being published in Pakistan regarding corruption in CPEC projects and that was the reason China has temporarily halted release of funds for the corridor.


So guess what - Pakistan will censor the news-reports and not address the corruption :)

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16074
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 06 Dec 2017 12:22

The chinese fangs are now slowly emerging publicly. They don't seem to be too bothered about who sees the fangs now.

The halt in the release of chinese funds for the three CPEC projects hit snags as China mulls new financing rules. This may well be connected to the chinese feeling snubbed and rebuffed in the funding of the Diamer-Bhasha Dam project. The hans may see it as being ungrateful. The velvet gloves seem to have come off and the steel hand begins to emerge.

The chinese funding proposal for Diamer-Bhasha Dam project was scuttled by the panicked pakis when they realized that the chinese wanted the completed Diamer-Bhasha Dam itself to be pledged as collateral along with another existing paki dam, in case of (the sureshot!!!) paki difficulties in repayment of the chinese loans.

The same old srilanka move with a minor variation.

TKiran
BRFite
Posts: 737
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 00:22

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby TKiran » 06 Dec 2017 12:35

It's just a temporary glitch, eventually the Han are going to come with much harsher conditions for financing those projects and also complete the projects faster.... They have staked too much on CPEC, they will not give up... Now ​they will unleash their intelligence services to purge those in PA and ISI who are not effectively bidding/cooperating with their projects, and istall their Stooges who are ruthlessly pro-CPEC. No need for celebration for "CPEC funding stalled".

These are temporary setbacks for Han.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16074
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 06 Dec 2017 13:04

TKiran wrote:It's just a temporary glitch, eventually the Han are going to come with much harsher conditions for financing those projects and also complete the projects faster.... They have staked too much on CPEC, they will not give up... Now they will unleash their intelligence services to purge those in PA and ISI who are not effectively bidding/cooperating with their projects, and istall their Stooges who are ruthlessly pro-CPEC. No need for celebration for "CPEC funding stalled".

These are temporary setbacks for Han.


not celebrating but just a bit surprised at the hans willing to show their hand so early in the game. The paki press and the mango paki reaction is awaited. 8)

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1920
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chola » 06 Dec 2017 13:07

If a paki can’t get loans directly from Cheen then try Japan:

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/05/japan-to-help-finance-chinas-belt-and-road-projects.html

The Japs and Amreekis will make their money from this too.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16074
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 06 Dec 2017 13:32

chola wrote:If a paki can’t get loans directly from Cheen then try Japan:

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/05/japan-to-help-finance-chinas-belt-and-road-projects.html

The Japs and Amreekis will make their money from this too.


except for the hans with their "innovative" funding plus the coercive ROI they seem to have extracted from the pakis plus given their geopolitical and military strategic interests of clawing their way into the gulf, the project is unviable.

no one else will touch the slippery pakis or the paki part of CPEC even with a barge pole.

but again, the newly reelected han premier is not one to give up so easily, especially when his own neck is squarely on the block, so to speak.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1920
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chola » 06 Dec 2017 13:50

chetak wrote:
chola wrote:If a paki can’t get loans directly from Cheen then try Japan:

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/05/japan-to-help-finance-chinas-belt-and-road-projects.html

The Japs and Amreekis will make their money from this too.


except for the hans with their "innovative" funding plus the coercive ROI they seem to have extracted from the pakis plus given their geopolitical and military strategic interests of clawing their way into the gulf, the project is unviable.

no one else will touch the slippery pakis or the paki part of CPEC even with a barge pole.

but again, the newly reelected han premier is not one to give up so easily, especially when his own neck is squarely on the block, so to speak.


Eh. If the Hans’ funding schemes are so “unviable” OBOR would never get off the ground and we would have nothing to worry about.

What makes you think the slime in Pakshitstan, Bangladesh and the rest of the muzzie ‘Stans smack in the middle of OBOR are so innocent, guileless and naive to be taken in by the lizard? We’ve dealt with them. They are no less scheming than the fire breathing reptile. So if OBOR continues then obviously there is mutual benefit of some sort.

If the Japanese are involved in financing OBOR even if only outside Pakiland then it still frees up chini resources for CPEC.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16074
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 06 Dec 2017 14:04

chola wrote:
chetak wrote:
except for the hans with their "innovative" funding plus the coercive ROI they seem to have extracted from the pakis plus given their geopolitical and military strategic interests of clawing their way into the gulf, the project is unviable.

no one else will touch the slippery pakis or the paki part of CPEC even with a barge pole.

but again, the newly reelected han premier is not one to give up so easily, especially when his own neck is squarely on the block, so to speak.


Eh. If the Hans’ funding schemes are so “unviable” OBOR would never get off the ground and we would have nothing to worry about.

What makes you think the slime in Pakshitstan, Sri Lanka and the rest of the muzzie ‘Stans smack in the middle of OBOR are so innocent, guileless and naive to be taken in by the lizard? We’ve dealt with them. They are no less scheming than the fire breathing reptile. So if OBOR continues then obviously there is mutual benefit of some sort.

If the Japanese are involved in financing OBOR even if only outside Pakiland then it still frees up chini resources for CPEC.


The han funding in tajikstan and lanka have benefitted only some elites who have lined their pockets and landed their countries in grief by signing over national assets to the hans on really long term lease. The tajiks have handed over more than 11,000 sq Kms of fertile land to the hans. The africans will also be doing something similar very soon.

The hans are also hunting for fertile land for agriculture, around the world, to feed their own populations.

the japs have their own fish to fry and their own agenda to appease the dragon breathing fire in their backyard and these flames are already beginning to badly singe the japs.

The japs cannot continue to rely on the amreki nuke umbrella forever. They may be pushed to militarize rather aggressively to counter the hans. Given their stagnant economy as well as their aging demographics, can they effectively do so?? Technology is not a concern in this case.

If the next ameki president is DT again or another inward looking guy somewhat like him with a pronounced amreki first policy, the goose of many amreki "allies" is well and truly cooked.

So cooperation with the hans is one cheap way to ease the pressure and also to throw India under the bus, so to speak.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1920
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chola » 06 Dec 2017 14:39

The Japs have been among the chief enablers of Cheen’s rise since the very beginning. In fact, every one of the lizard’s erstwhile enemies has been. In the end this happened because the MNCs of Japan, Unkil, Taiwan, SoKo, Germany, France, etc. also benefitted from the arrangement. That is the nature of the lizard’s strategy.

OBOR will be more of the same. There will always be enough benefits for the other side to make this thing achievable and therefore dangerous to our future standing. Otherwise, we wouldn’t have to worry. Trying to separate the elites benefitting in Tajikistan and Sri Lanka from the general population is a meaningless exercise since the nations are pulled in regardless.

And it won’t be just Japan throwing us “under the bus.” Everyone on the goddam Eurasian landmass is being pulled in. Even f—ing Israel wants in. Iran, the Stans, Greece and a good chunk of Eastern Europe is good as gone from our perspective.

We need a Chanakyan strategy to benefit from the reptile’s schemes if this thing moves forward. And right now the avalanche of chini money has a momentum of its own.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-china/china-pushing-billions-into-iranian-economy-as-western-firms-stall-idUSKBN1DU225

http://m.jpost.com/Opinion/Central-Asia-could-be-entryway-for-Israel-to-join-One-Belt-One-Road-initiative-513634

https://bbj.hu/business/budapest-set-to-become-chinese-cargo-hub_142334

http://m.dw.com/en/sierens-china-pro-beijing-bloc-in-eastern-europe-irks-eu/a-41625660
Last edited by chola on 06 Dec 2017 14:46, edited 1 time in total.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9376
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Aditya_V » 06 Dec 2017 14:43

I would argue the other, The Obama administration was very China friendly and gave China a free pass. The Dems are also giving NOKO a very free pass while there was a complete attack on Russia in Ukraine, Syria etc.

America First means putting American Interests ahead of Saudi/Chinese/European Interests which was happening while screwing India, Russia type countries which was happening earlier.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16074
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 06 Dec 2017 15:08

Whatever anyone has to say about the israelis, they have very deep and below the surface connections with the hans.

Can't really blame them because for them it is simply a matter of survival. They benefit from the hans deep connections with their enemies and the payment extracted by the hans is in terms of mil + tech sales to the hans.

With nut cases like eyran and their evil cohorts, the israelis need to keep their very sharp ears to the ground to catch and stop existential threats before they manifest in some attack. For them, survival is paramount.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1920
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chola » 06 Dec 2017 15:27

^^^ Without doubt. The J-10, the KJ-2000 AWACS and a variety of chini AAMs like Python-3 based PL-5 came from Israel. But Cheen invests billions in Iran (as do we in Chabahar) and sells weapons across the Middle East. It is the same game other US allies like Japan and Taiwan play with the PRC.

I tell you, the Lizard plays a game as a mercantile dictatorship with an open market and a printing press that is totally different from traditional great powers based on pure kinetic force like the USSR. We need a strategy that can use the enemy’s economy to enrich ourselves. This was how Cheen rose.

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6467
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby anupmisra » 06 Dec 2017 18:52

TKiran wrote:These are temporary setbacks for Han.


Kiran, these are not setbacks for the chinis. These expected bumps were part of their "long term strategy" to eventually grab native land. Case in point - "Siri" Lanka, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Angola, and Zambia.

vijaykarthik
BRFite
Posts: 1105
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby vijaykarthik » 06 Dec 2017 19:10

From GPF: Can China dethrone the US?

https://geopoliticalfutures.com/special ... n=China-US

vijaykarthik
BRFite
Posts: 1105
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby vijaykarthik » 06 Dec 2017 19:34

Highly recommend watching the video. A short one and wroth its while. Its available for free only for the next 16 hours.

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 661
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Deans » 06 Dec 2017 19:44

chetak wrote:not celebrating but just a bit surprised at the hans willing to show their hand so early in the game. The paki press and the mango paki reaction is awaited. 8)


It is surprising. I would have assumed that CPEC costing factored in the usual cut for the Generals with the Aam Abdul bearing the inflated project cost.
Standard operating procedure for China in their overseas projects is to bribe the dictator/ supreme leader/ general, to sell his country. They have a problem when dealing with a democracy/ public opinion/ civil society etc.
The best outcome for India is that CPEC go ahead, but with delays like this, which will increase overall cost and reduce trust between tarrel fliends.

vijaykarthik
BRFite
Posts: 1105
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby vijaykarthik » 08 Dec 2017 08:20

TKiran wrote:It's just a temporary glitch, eventually the Han are going to come with much harsher conditions for financing those projects and also complete the projects faster.... They have staked too much on CPEC, they will not give up... Now ​they will unleash their intelligence services to purge those in PA and ISI who are not effectively bidding/cooperating with their projects, and istall their Stooges who are ruthlessly pro-CPEC. No need for celebration for "CPEC funding stalled".

These are temporary setbacks for Han.


These are carried out in the name of Xi. Failure cant be swallowed so easily for a supremacy seeking power like China -else his position will be in danger. Thats the danger of tying an albatross to the neck - there is no guarantee for projects like this and the idiots perhaps didn't realize it.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4372
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 08 Dec 2017 14:51

Can CPEC cause Dutch disease?

First the etiology of the Dutch disease. In 1959, the Netherlands discovered huge deposits of natural gas in the North Sea. It resulted in a massive upsurge in oil exports. The new-found wealth led to the expansion of social security. By the 1970s, unemployment rose some five times and the welfare spending became unbearable. In 1977, this phenomenon of a fortune turning into misfortune was labelled by The Economist magazine as Dutch disease. Pakistan hasn’t discovered a big cache of natural resources. How can Pakistan catch the disease? The disease is not specific to natural resources. Any economy that experiences a sudden high inflow of foreign currency for any reason is likely to suffer from it. Including the early harvest phase of $46 billion, the total expected inflow under CPEC is stated to be $62 billion. This is close to the entire external public debt payable by Pakistan. The large size of the inflow in a short span of time makes it possible, though not probable. Here is how.

In the case of the Netherlands, the boon of oil exports turned out to be the bane of non-oil exports, which lost competiveness due to a rapid appreciation of the real exchange rate. Together with the non-traded sector, the oil export sector crowded out the traditional exports with adverse long-term effects. The increased oil exports raised incomes, money supply and demand for non-traded goods and services. In the case of CPEC, the inflows are being utilised largely on the import of power generating machinery and construction equipment. These imports do not directly affect the money supply in Pakistan. A small part of the inflows is spent on domestically supplied goods and services, notably construction and retail trade. It does add to money supply as foreign exchange is converted into local currency. Since the exchange rate in Pakistan has, in effect, been kept fixed, the increased money supply and domestic demand tend to increase prices. As the purchasing power of a unit of foreign currency is less than before, its real value appreciates. Even if the exchange rate regime were flexible, the increased supply of foreign exchange would drive up the nominal exchange rate and thus real exchange rate. In both cases, the traditional export sector suffers. The effect is made worse by the movement of capital and labour away from the export sector and towards domestic non-traded sector.

The CPEC inflows are recent. Pakistan has suffered an absolute decline in exports for three years in a row since 2014-15. Failure to break away from concentration on traditional products and destinations lies at the roots, besides the critical constraints of energy and law and order. There is a revival of exports coinciding with the CPEC inflows. This does not mean that the Dutch disease has died down; only that better energy and security situation and expectations about the Special Economic Zones have reinvigorated exports. The outlook for the global commodity prices has also improved. But the exports still have to contend with a rupee that is overvalued to the extent of 20 per cent. This could worsen with the acceleration of financial flows under CPEC.

Policymakers have to focus on some deeper questions raised in the context of the Dutch disease. If the assumption is that the CPEC inflows are going to be a recurrent feature for a long period, the economy has to adapt to the required structural changes. These changes will entail shifts that can hurt labour as well as businesses used to get by in the traditional mould.

Cheers Image

rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3086
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby rsingh » 08 Dec 2017 21:27

Lets assume that in 2025 Bakistan see the light and stop collaborating with China. what stops them from throwing Chinese out of country and use the infrastructure for made by Chinese. A humiliated US will be more then happy to help Bakis.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4372
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 08 Dec 2017 21:37

rsingh wrote:Lets assume that in 2025 Bakistan see the light and stop collaborating with China. what stops them from throwing Chinese out of country and use the infrastructure for made by Chinese. A humiliated US will be more then happy to help Bakis.
rsingh Ji : Wake up Sir Ji! China has got a vice-like grip on Terroristan and as such Terroristan has been rendered witless! It just might be that by 2025 Terroristan might have been renamed Pakziang.

Cheers Image

yensoy
BRFite
Posts: 605
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby yensoy » 08 Dec 2017 21:55

rsingh wrote:Lets assume that in 2025 Bakistan see the light and stop collaborating with China. what stops them from throwing Chinese out of country and use the infrastructure for made by Chinese. A humiliated US will be more then happy to help Bakis.


Couple of days back someone had posted a photo of some Paki bigwig (Khakan Abbasi maybe) doing a tour of a new power plant. Operators were all young men from China and the control display was in Chinese.

Chinese will ensure that controls will be with them. Language barrier is one tactic (and to be sure it can be overcome); in today's world software controls everything and the keys to the system will remain with the Chinese. Watch them take over the payment and credit card systems, communication and power networks, logistics and supply chain - all the prerequisites for a modern economy.

Turks have been given the contract to clear garbage. If the Turks were booted out tomorrow, the place will stink even more (if you can imagine that for a moment) till contracts are re-negotiated, and labour & equipment re-mobilized.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20496
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Prem » 09 Dec 2017 00:03

Peregrine wrote:
rsingh wrote:Lets assume that in 2025 Bakistan see the light and stop collaborating with China. what stops them from throwing Chinese out of country and use the infrastructure for made by Chinese. A humiliated US will be more then happy to help Bakis.
rsingh Ji : Wake up Sir Ji! China has got a vice-like grip on Terroristan and as such Terroristan has been rendered witless! It just might be that by 2025 Terroristan might have been renamed Pakziang.
Cheers Image


I believe Han and Poakan have agreed on word Poochina for this new upcoming inbred Qabila.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20496
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Prem » 09 Dec 2017 01:10


ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 786
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby ArjunPandit » 09 Dec 2017 01:16

rsingh wrote:Lets assume that in 2025 Bakistan see the light and stop collaborating with China. what stops them from throwing Chinese out of country and use the infrastructure for made by Chinese. A humiliated US will be more then happy to help Bakis.

They dont want to be killed by evil yindoo india, so they are killing themselves or letting kang do that job

ashish raval
BRFite
Posts: 1234
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 00:49
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby ashish raval » 09 Dec 2017 03:48

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: this lady is classic Header mein chole bechenge! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

I thought Ganja was idiot was pukes are this idiots is beyond imagination. They are bordering educated chimps and certainly not humans.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20496
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Prem » 09 Dec 2017 05:24

ashish raval wrote::rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: this lady is classic Header mein chole bechenge! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
I thought Ganja was idiot was pukes are this idiots is beyond imagination. They are bordering educated chimps and certainly not humans.


Pakjaban do not know ki Chole, Chola have special meaning in Punjabi Zuban. eventually Paki will sell both Chole and beautiful Cholas to Han Jawans.

ashish raval
BRFite
Posts: 1234
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 00:49
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby ashish raval » 09 Dec 2017 09:59

Prem wrote:
ashish raval wrote::rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: this lady is classic Header mein chole bechenge! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
I thought Ganja was idiot was pukes are this idiots is beyond imagination. They are bordering educated chimps and certainly not humans.


Pakjaban do not know ki Chole, Chola have special meaning in Punjabi Zuban. eventually Paki will sell both Chole and beautiful Cholas to Han Jawans.

Correct. It is indeed derogatory word reserved by esteemed neighbours.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4372
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 09 Dec 2017 17:21

X Posted on the Sri Lanka News & Discussion Thread

Sri Lanka formally hands over Hambantota port to China

COLOMBO: Sri Lanka on Saturday formally handed over the southern sea port of Hambantota to China on a 99-year lease.

Two Chinese firms, namely Hambantota International Port Group (HIPG) and Hambantota International Port Services (HIPS) managed by the China Merchants Port Holdings Company (CMPort) and the Sri Lanka Ports Authority will own the port and the investment zone around it, officials said.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe during a visit to China in April had agreed to swap equity in Chinese infrastructure projects launched by former president Mahinda Rajapaksa in his home district.

Former Sri Lankan Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayaka, last year had said that the island country owed China $8 billion.

"With this agreement we have started to pay back the loans. Hambantota will be converted to a major port in the Indian Ocean," Wickremesinghe said while addressing the handing over ceremony held in parliament.

"There will be an economic zone and industrialisation in the area which will lead to economic development and promote tourism," the prime minister said.

Sri Lanka received $300 million as the initial payment for the lease which the opposition had described as a sell out.

The government's grant of large tax concessions to Chinese firms have also been questioned by the opposition.

Cheers Image

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4372
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 09 Dec 2017 18:30

X Posted on the Terroristan Thread

CPEC funds halted: China wants Pakistan army to take over projects?

NEW DELHI: Beijing's "new guidelines" overseeing the release of funds to Pakistan as part of its ambitious China-Pakistan Economic Corridor may stipulate greater involvement of the Pakistan army in the multi-billion dollar project, a report by global think-tank European Foundation for South Asian Studies (EFSAS) suggests.

The funding of three major road projects in Pakistan was expected to be finalised during the Joint Working Group (JWG) meeting held on November 20, but Islamabad was informed that the existing procedure for release of funds had been abolished and "new guidelines" would be issued from Beijing under which new modus operandi for release of the funds would be described.

While the Chinese government had cited rampant graft as the reason behind halting funds to the three road projects, the EFSAS report argues that Beijing is "keen to give the Pakistani Army the lead role" in CPEC projects as it sees the armed forces as "the epicentre of power in Pakistan", whose involvement would guarantee the success of the flagship venture.

Further bolstering China's intent for a greater role for Pakistani military is the volatility of the country's civilian government, which witnessed the dismissal of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on graft charges in recent months. But corruption is not the Chinese government's only concern.

"Had corruption been the reason behind the Chinese step (to block funds), it would, or perhaps should, have happened in July, when in the context of the Panama Papers, the former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his relatives were charged with financial irregularities and corruption, which prompted the Pakistani Supreme Court to declare Nawaz Sharif 'unfit' for political office, resulting in his dismissal from the Office of the Prime Minister of the country," the report postulated.

The EFSAS analysis puts forth that Beijing has been alarmed by the opposition of Pakistani legislators, who have questioned the benefits of several projects under CPEC. Evidently, this has resulted in setbacks and delays which has not made Chinese investors happy.

"The Chinese are not used to such harsh disagreements which evidently would have made people in Beijing nervous over the future of its vital projects. Pakistan is a political volatile country where power is unevenly divided between the Government and the Military and a closer involvement of the Military on political issues would have desirable impacts for China...," the report said.

The involvement of the Pakistani Army would also mitigate some of China's security concerns, given that the nearly $50-billion flagship project passes through the region of Gilgit Baltistan, which links China's restive Xinjiang region with Pakistan's insurgency-torn Balochistan province, where in October, a Chinese workers' shelter at the Pakistani port of Gwadar was attacked.

So on one hand, the decision to halt funding may seem like a punitive measure by China to reassert control over the situation. At the same time, its favourable view of Pakistani military could play a significant role in deciding who will take ownership of the CPEC projects and by extension, the security situation - the civilian government or the army.

"The current deferral to release funds is temporary and China's way of conveying a diplomatic, yet strong, message to the Pakistanis; 'We will pay, but only on our terms'," the EFSAS report concludes.

Cheers Image

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9376
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Aditya_V » 09 Dec 2017 19:19

Peregrine wrote:X Posted on the Sri Lanka News & Discussion Thread

Sri Lanka formally hands over Hambantota port to China

COLOMBO: Sri Lanka on Saturday formally handed over the southern sea port of Hambantota to China on a 99-year lease.

Two Chinese firms, namely Hambantota International Port Group (HIPG) and Hambantota International Port Services (HIPS) managed by the China Merchants Port Holdings Company (CMPort) and the Sri Lanka Ports Authority will own the port and the investment zone around it, officials said.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe during a visit to China in April had agreed to swap equity in Chinese infrastructure projects launched by former president Mahinda Rajapaksa in his home district.

Former Sri Lankan Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayaka, last year had said that the island country owed China $8 billion.

"With this agreement we have started to pay back the loans. Hambantota will be converted to a major port in the Indian Ocean," Wickremesinghe said while addressing the handing over ceremony held in parliament.

"There will be an economic zone and industrialisation in the area which will lead to economic development and promote tourism," the prime minister said.

Sri Lanka received $300 million as the initial payment for the lease which the opposition had described as a sell out.

The government's grant of large tax concessions to Chinese firms have also been questioned by the opposition.

Cheers Image


We must legislation that any container stopping at the port is subject to 2 weeks checks this probably making it unavailable to any transshipments to India

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 22107
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 09 Dec 2017 20:20

CPEC funds halted: China wants Pakistan army to take over projects? - ToI
Beijing's "new guidelines" overseeing the release of funds to Pakistan as part of its ambitious China-Pakistan Economic Corridor may stipulate greater involvement of the Pakistan army in the multi-billion dollar project, a report by global think-tank European Foundation for South Asian Studies (EFSAS) suggests.

The funding of three major road projects in Pakistan was expected to be finalised during the Joint Working Group (JWG) meeting held on November 20, but Islamabad was informed that the existing procedure for release of funds had been abolished and "new guidelines" would be issued from Beijing under which new modus operandi for release of the funds would be described.

While the Chinese government had cited rampant graft+ as the reason behind halting funds to the three road projects, the EFSAS report argues that Beijing is "keen to give the Pakistani Army the lead role" in CPEC projects as it sees the armed forces as "the epicentre of power in Pakistan", whose involvement would guarantee the success of the flagship venture.

Further bolstering China's intent for a greater role for Pakistani military is the volatility of the country's civilian government, which witnessed the dismissal of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on graft charges in recent months. But corruption is not the Chinese government's only concern.

"Had corruption been the reason behind the Chinese step (to block funds), it would, or perhaps should, have happened in July, when in the context of the Panama Papers, the former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his relatives were charged with financial irregularities and corruption, which prompted the Pakistani Supreme Court to declare Nawaz Sharif 'unfit' for political office, resulting in his dismissal from the Office of the Prime Minister of the country," the report postulated.

The EFSAS analysis puts forth that Beijing has been alarmed by the opposition of Pakistani legislators, who have questioned the benefits of several projects under CPEC. Evidently, this has resulted in setbacks and delays which has not made Chinese investors happy.

"The Chinese are not used to such harsh disagreements which evidently would have made people in Beijing nervous over the future of its vital projects. Pakistan is a political volatile country where power is unevenly divided between the Government and the Military and a closer involvement of the Military on political issues would have desirable impacts for China...," the report said.

The involvement of the Pakistani Army would also mitigate some of China's security concerns, given that the nearly $50-billion flagship project passes through the region of Gilgit Baltistan, which links China's restive Xinjiang region with Pakistan's insurgency-torn Balochistan province, where in October, a Chinese workers' shelter at the Pakistani port of Gwadar was attacked.

So on one hand, the decision to halt funding may seem like a punitive measure by China to reassert control over the situation. At the same time, its favourable view of Pakistani military could play a significant role in deciding who will take ownership of the CPEC projects and by extension, the security situation - the civilian government or the army.

"The current deferral to release funds is temporary and China's way of conveying a diplomatic, yet strong, message to the Pakistanis; 'We will pay, but only on our terms'," the EFSAS report concludes.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4372
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 10 Dec 2017 01:07

X Posted on the OBOR, Chinese Strategy and Implications Thread

India eyes Asean pivot against OBOR

NEW DELHI: Amid fresh controversy over China's One Belt, One Road (OBOR) projects in south Asia, India will next week host the first ever Asean-India Connectivity Summit with help, not surprisingly, from Japan, which has emerged as the linchpin of India's Act East Policy.

The summit, which will be held on December 11-12, has secured participation from all 10 Asean nations, with Vietnam and Cambodia likely to be represented at the ministerial level. Japan will be the only country outside of Asean to participate in the summit, which aims to enhance economic and industrial relations between India and Asean or the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

Japan, which inaugurated an Act East Forum with India on December 5, will be represented by Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and Japan External Trade Organisation (JETRO). The forum is meant to expand cooperation with Japan in the northeast, which, according to Japanese ambassador Kenji Hiramatsu, is where Japan's Free And Open Indo-Pacific Strategy converges with India's Act East Policy.

The Asean-India Connectivity Summit, which will also seek private partnership, is important for India and Japan as they seek to counterbalance China's OBOR that has often been accused of following exploitative debt financing practices. As officials here say, India's development partnership is based purely on needs identified by partner countries and the MEA has tried to accommodate as many requests as possible from these countries as is "technically and financially possible" .

In the present geopolitical situation, Southeast Asia is the most important focal point of India's foreign policy. By focusing on connectivity, the government wants to make the point that it considers the region a part of its immediate, not extended, neighbourhood, given that it shares maritime boundaries with some countries and also land boundary in the case of Myanmar.

India had, in 2015, proposed a $1 billion line of credit to promote projects with Asean that support physical and digital connectivity. In addition, it has also set up a project development fund of $77 million for developing manufacturing hubs in CLMV (Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam) countries.

The summit will also focus on ensuring better digital connectivity as the government looks to align its initiative with Asean's Master Plan on Connectivity, 2025, which centres on five strategic areas: sustainable infrastructure, digital innovation, seamless logistics, regulatory excellence and people mobility. The summit will look at regulatory frameworks to support digital technologies, financing of digital infrastructure and use of technology by MSMEs.

India and Asean have just completed 25 years of dialogue partnership, 15 years of summit-level interaction and five years of strategic partnership. India has also invited the leaders of all 10 Asean nations for the 2018 R-Day.

Cheers Image


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 39 guests