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.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8928
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 26 Dec 2016 13:41

http://www.dawn.com/news/1206911
PM Nawaz inaugurates Pak-China Friendship Tunnels over Attabad Lake
<--->
The seven kilometre long five tunnels are part of the 24km long portion of the Karakorum Highway (KKH) which was damaged in 2010 due to land sliding at Attabad.

Two bridges and 78 small bridges have also been constructed on the rebuilt section of the highway, Radio Pakistan reported.
<---->

5 Tunnels
2 Big bridges
78 Small Bridges

That's 7 big and 78 small targets in the damaged 24 Km portion. The target density won't be so high is the rest of the path but 50+ big target is easy. Big targets are built over big chasms, not so easy to repair, can create big disruption and need big projects/time/budget to overcome.

In these regions there is just one way and no roundabouts, no alternate routes. Taking out one significant bridge would be enough to cut traffic for upwards of a year.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15096
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 26 Dec 2016 13:56

rohitvats wrote:I think we need to start looking at military options on India's part to (a) show clear and present danger to CPEC and keep the parties under check (b) If yellow matter hits the fan, go for jugular and severe CPEC at multiple places.

While I've not spent much time on this CPEC program, a cursory look at the alignment tells me that Sundarji's 'dash to RYK' seems to have reborn with new clothing. About time we strengthened mechanized forces on western border along with strong tactical missile based offensive capability. POK and Northern Areas are another area where the CPEC alignment will be extremely vulnerable to missile bases strikes.


re coal based power plants being re located from han country to pakiland, pumping crude from gwadar to hanland will need enormous amounts of captive electrical power, simply to keep the crude at a temperature at which it can be pumped.

the pumping of crude oil from Cairn India's prolific Rajasthan oil block, needs captive power plants to heat the oil at almost 1.5MW per 10 Km of pipeline. This crude melts at about 38-40 degrees celsius and is typically heated to 65 celsius to ease pumping. A technology called skin effect heating is used by cairn to heat their pipelines.

The gulf crude needs to be maintained at 30 celsius give or take, to pump and in the cold of balochistan and on wards to hanland it gets increasingly colder, needing more power to heat the oil and I suspect that's where the coal fired plants may come in of use and they are not meant to serve the unwashed, non bill paying paki "customers".

Looks like project planning is not anyone's strong suit in pakiland / hanland.

pralay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 438
Joined: 24 May 2009 23:07
Contact:

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pralay » 26 Dec 2016 20:06

pankajs wrote:http://www.dawn.com/news/1206911
PM Nawaz inaugurates Pak-China Friendship Tunnels over Attabad Lake
<--->
The seven kilometre long five tunnels are part of the 24km long portion of the Karakorum Highway (KKH) which was damaged in 2010 due to land sliding at Attabad.

Two bridges and 78 small bridges have also been constructed on the rebuilt section of the highway, Radio Pakistan reported.
<---->

5 Tunnels
2 Big bridges
78 Small Bridges

That's 7 big and 78 small targets in the damaged 24 Km portion. The target density won't be so high is the rest of the path but 50+ big target is easy. Big targets are built over big chasms, not so easy to repair, can create big disruption and need big projects/time/budget to overcome.

In these regions there is just one way and no roundabouts, no alternate routes. Taking out one significant bridge would be enough to cut traffic for upwards of a year.

The mountain slopes are not stable in attabad region, last time the mountain collapsed, it blocked karakoram highway completely and even blocked the hunza river creating the Attabad lake on Jan 2010, that inundated 24km patch of Karakoram highway blocking it for 5.5 years which finally opened on Sept.2015.
It will be very handy to find and use such vulnerable slopes, when the need arises :D

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 26 Dec 2016 21:34

X Posted on the STFUP Thread

CDWP clears three CPEC-related projects

ISLAMABAD: Just days before their official inclusion in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), the government on Friday cleared three infrastructure projects along the western and eastern routes at a cost of Rs109 billion, fulfilling the last formality for their inclusion into CPEC.

The Central Development Working Party (CDWP) cleared these schemes so that they could be placed before the Joint Cooperation Committee meeting (JCC) – the body mandated to add or delete any project in CPEC. The JCC meetings will take place in Beijing next week.

Overall, the JCC would approve the addition of four projects in the CPEC framework. The CDWP has already cleared the $8 billion ML-I Peshawar-Karachi main rail link.

The three significant projects are related to areas situated around the CPEC alignment, which will enhance mobility and ensure socio-economic development, according to a handout issued by the Planning Ministry after the CDWP meeting. It seems that the government decided to forward these projects for inclusion in the CPEC framework after June this year. It has not made any financial allocation for these projects in the current fiscal year’s Public Sector Development Programme (PSDP).

The CDWP also approved the construction of Intelligence Bureau (IB) office along with CPEC at a cost of Rs482 million aimed at improving surveillance along CPEC.

Overall, the CDWP on Friday approved 14 projects worth Rs139.5 billion, including five projects costing Rs131 billion, which were referred to the Executive Committee of the National Economic Council (Ecnec) for final approval. The CDWP has a mandate to approve up to Rs3 billion projects.

Out of 14 projects, seven schemes did not have any allocation in the current year’s development budget. Their approvals were given in violation of standing instructions. According to planning minister’s earlier decision, any project that does not have financial allocation in the PSDP cannot be presented before the CDWP for approval.

Interestingly, the planning minister himself violated these instructions since he chairs the CDWP meetings in his capacity as Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission.

Additional projects approved

The CDWP cleared the project for rehabilitation of Karakoram Highway (N-35) between Thakot-Raikot at a cost of Rs8.5 billion. The project envisages rehabilitation of 136.4 km remaining portion of existing KKH between Thahkot and Raikot, which was damaged due to monsoon rains and flash floods in 2010.

Under this project breast walls and retaining walls will be constructed along with construction of causeway as well as culverts. While giving his observation on the project, Ahsan Iqbal directed authorities to rationalise the cost and review the design of the project.

Another significant project as part of the western route of CPEC, which was referred to Ecnec, is dualisation and improvement of existing N-50 from Yarak-Sagu-Zhob including Zhob bypass. The cost of this project is Rs80.8 billion and it is among three schemes to be taken up by the JCC. The project envisages construction of 210 km four-lane highway starting from Yarik on N-55 to Zhob on N-50 via Sagu, Daraban, Mughal Kot and Manikhuwa.

The project will help the development of the backward areas of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) and Balochistan provinces.

The CDWP also recommended construction of a two-lane highway from Basima to Khuzdar at a cost of Rs19.7 billion to Ecnec for final approval. The project aims to enhance the mobility of the underdeveloped area of district Khuzdar, Balochistan province and will play a vital role in the development of deprived population of the province.

In transport and communication sector, CDWP approved development and construction of port allied structures in Mullah Band Area Gwadar at a cost of Rs2.7 billion. In energy sector, the CDWP cleared a project for enhancement in transformation capacity of NTDC system at a cost of Rs16.5 billion.

In physical planning and housing sector, the CDWP approved Wash projects in Southern districts of K-P under RAHA through Pakistan Italian Debt Swap Agreement (PIDSA) at a cost of Rs150 million.

The CDWP approved renovation and rehabilitation of physical infrastructure of 200 educational institutions under Prime Minister Education Sector Reforms Program in ICT, Islamabad at a cost of Rs2.9 billion.

In information technology sector, CDWP approved umbrella PC-1 for private cloud center FBR and strengthening FBR’s capacity in fiscal research and tax policy analysis at a cost of Rs512 million.

In science and technology sector, CDWP approved acquisition of land for establishment of King Hamad University of nursing and allied sciences in Islamabad by government of kingdom of Bahrain at a cost of Rs 313 million.
Cheers Image

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 28 Dec 2016 02:00

X Posted on the STFUP Thread

CPEC to usher in 'new era of development': COAS Bajwa
Army Chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa on Monday expressed the hope that timely completion of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) would usher in a new era of development in the region.
Cheers Image

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21038
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 28 Dec 2016 09:39

Behind Pakistan’s CPEC offer - Editoril, The Hindu

The Leftist spokesmedium, The Hindu, wants India to take up the Pakistani Army general's offer and join CPEC. Can The Hindu get any more pathetic than this? Absolutely horrendous.

While there can be little expectation of any room for India in CPEC at present, there is space for India to step back and see where China and Pakistan want to go with it. :evil: The offer to India was made along with offers to other “neighbouring countries”. Already, Iran wants Gwadar to be a “sister” port to Chabahar, and Turkmenistan and other Central Asian republics have shown interest in the warm-water port that will be a nodal point for goods through Pakistan to the Chinese city of Kashgar. Further north, despite its problems on terror from Pakistan, Afghanistan is becoming a nodal point for China’s connectivity projects to Iran. The meeting among Russian, Chinese and Pakistani officials on Afghanistan this week, and Russian engagement with the Taliban, indicate much more is changing in the region than just the alignment of highways and tunnels. While India has done well to shore up relations with others in the region, it cannot afford to be blindsided by their involvement with the OBOR project and Chinese plans. CPEC is no longer a project in Pakistan, but one that runs through it, a project that will link 64 countries.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8958
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby arun » 28 Dec 2016 14:30

Falijee wrote:The Express Tribune > Pakistan > Balochistan
Lt Gen Aamir invites India to join CPEC :roll:


QUETTA:
Amid escalating tension between the two nuclear-tipped states, Commander Southern Command Lt General Amir Riaz on Tuesday invited India to join the China Pakistan Economic Corridor and ‘share the fruits of future development by shelving the anti-Pakistan activities and subversion’.
Speaking at an awards distribution ceremony at Balochistan FC Headquarters, he said that India should shun enmity with Pakistan and join the CPEC along with Iran, Afghanistan and other Central Asian countries and enjoy its benefits. And the liabilities too ?

CPEC is going to solve all the "problems of the world " :D


MEA Spokesperson on the Mohammadden Terrorist Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s invitation for India to join CPEC.

Transcript of Weekly Media Briefing by Official Spokesperson (December 23, 2016)

December 24, 2016 ……………………….

Question: There have been political statements from Pakistan inviting India to join the CPEC. Would you like to comment on that?

Official Spokesperson, Shri Vikas Swarup: See, our position on the CPEC is very well known. One Belt One Road is a Chinese initiative and CPEC is an integral part of that and CPEC passes through sovereign Indian territory. So obviously our concerns in this regard have been conveyed clearly both to China as well as to Pakistan.

MEA Briefing

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8958
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby arun » 28 Dec 2016 14:39

SSridhar wrote:Behind Pakistan’s CPEC offer - Editoril, The Hindu

The Leftist spokesmedium, The Hindu, wants India to take up the Pakistani Army general's offer and join CPEC. Can The Hindu get any more pathetic than this? Absolutely horrendous.

While there can be little expectation of any room for India in CPEC at present, there is space for India to step back and see where China and Pakistan want to go with it. :evil: The offer to India was made along with offers to other “neighbouring countries”. Already, Iran wants Gwadar to be a “sister” port to Chabahar, and Turkmenistan and other Central Asian republics have shown interest in the warm-water port that will be a nodal point for goods through Pakistan to the Chinese city of Kashgar. Further north, despite its problems on terror from Pakistan, Afghanistan is becoming a nodal point for China’s connectivity projects to Iran. The meeting among Russian, Chinese and Pakistani officials on Afghanistan this week, and Russian engagement with the Taliban, indicate much more is changing in the region than just the alignment of highways and tunnels. While India has done well to shore up relations with others in the region, it cannot afford to be blindsided by their involvement with the OBOR project and Chinese plans. CPEC is no longer a project in Pakistan, but one that runs through it, a project that will link 64 countries.


Predictably the MSM of the Mohammadden Terrorist Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan is seeing the Hindu’s Editorial as vindication of that country’s delusions on CPEC:

Indian media advises its govt to join CPEC


Meanwhile an antidote to the Hindu’s Editorial, an Editorial in DNA with the uncompromising :D last line message of "Thanks, but no thanks." 8) :

DNA Edit: A consortium of thieves in the corridor

Falijee
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5082
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Falijee » 28 Dec 2016 17:17

China "Defends" CPEC

Don’t let rumors ruin China-backed projects

Is the promotion of the mutually beneficial cooperation over infrastructure construction in countries along the One Belt and One Road initiative bound to be applauded? The rising China-related rumors in a number of Beijing's neighboring countries mirror that this may be to some extent a wishful thinking from the Chinese side.Some Pakistani and Indian media recently claimed the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) was accused of being beset with corruption, favoritism and Chinese prisoners have been used as laborers to save costs.
Pakistan is not the only country that is buzzing with similar slanders. In Indonesia, the Internet is filled with false stories such as "China using chili peppers as biochemical weapons," "Indonesian President promotes wider use of yuan" and the latest one argues "there are 10 million Chinese workers in Indonesia and more will come to steal our jobs." The most recent hearsay was so hyped up that President Joko Widodo had to personally clarify it, claiming the number of Chinese workers in Indonesia is only 21,000 so far.
Stumbling blocks in the path of promoting the One Belt and One Road initiative are diversified in different countries.
Stumbling blocks in the path of promoting the One Belt and One Road initiative are diversified in different countries.


The author is a reporter with the Global Times. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn

Global Times is the official mouthpiece of the CCP

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 28 Dec 2016 21:07

X Posted on the STFUP Thread


China sending its old and inefficient Coal Power Plants to Pakistan in the name of CPEC
Cheers Image

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 30 Dec 2016 05:25

CPEC : from knowledge to connectivity

As in the world at large, knowledge as a factor of production was discussed, debated and inserted into policy — speak in Pakistan also at the right time. The period, however, delivered a long spell of low economic growth. Knowledge production was reduced to quantitative expansion of university education without developing critical linkages with industry and trade. There has also been a tendency to see the spread of IT per se as knowledge accumulation rather than a means to it. Expanding access to internet, laptop schemes and mobile density have broken barriers, including that of ignorance and low literacy, but the resulting connectivity has not contributed to economic growth in any significant measure. On the contrary, it has led to job losses. Normally, growth associated with such “creative destruction” would generate more new jobs than the loss of old jobs in dying occupations.

While the country missed the knowledge flight, a new opportunity has emerged in the form of CPEC. It provides connectivity in all its dimensions — road, rail and fibre optics. The question is: Is Pakistan ready to fully exploit this opportunity?

Are we doing what needs to be done to turn the game-changer rhetoric into reality? The well-known benefits of connectivity are significantly lower cost of transport and communications that leads to higher trade and growth. It certainly is true for China, even if it just neutralises the rising labour costs. Trade is the critical variable here. Pakistan is, however, already flooded with cheaper Chinese goods under the Free Trade Agreement. We have neither been able to compete in China nor in our own market. Our industrial health requires not just reduced transactions costs, but reduced production cost as well. The huge trade imbalance with China shows that. The benefit of cheaper goods for consumers has to be weighed against this imbalance eventually reflecting in fiscal imbalance. Cheaper import of goods at the cost of local industry and jobs in a slow growing economy has its own set of problems.

In our case, investment has a greater role than trade. The most important avenue will be the relocation in Pakistan of Chinese industries experiencing higher labour costs. Joint ventures and various forms of partnerships with local investors provide the next best avenue. New local investment may also be encouraged as the CPEC projects help relieve the energy constraint. Taking cues from the Chinese development, there are plans to set up special economic zones. To begin with, three industrial estates in Faisalabad, Sheikhupura and Haripur are being presented to the Joint Cooperation Committee of the CPEC meeting this week in Beijing. There are many more to follow. Fiscal concessions have been provided in the form of a ten-year tax holiday and duty-free import of machinery. In the past, many of these schemes turned out to be no more than new avenues for speculative real estate investment or tax evasion. It is hoped that the Chinese presence will keep these special zones oriented towards job-oriented investment. The interest shown by six Chinese companies in Faisalabad Industrial Estate would, therefore, be keenly watched.

As part of reaping the full benefits of CPEC, the development of Gwadar has to move beyond physical infrastructure to include its people. An honest manifestation of this neglect was witnessed recently in a meeting of students from Gwadar studying in Lahore with the Punjab Chief Minister. There is then the regional dimension to maximise benefits. As CPEC investments materially reduce the transport and communications costs, new connectivity will become a lot cheaper, especially with large, better educated, populations. When the Commander of the Southern Command invited India to join the CPEC and “shun enmity”, the offer was rooted in hard political economics.

Cheers Image

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 30 Dec 2016 23:03

X Posted on the STFUP Thread

CPEC soars to Rs5,700 bn

Bhasha Dam, Peshawar-Karachi railway line, Karachi Circular Railways approved; Keti Bandar, special economic zones, three energy projects in Sindh added to project; Orange Line trains for all provincial capitals

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan and China have formally approved to include ML-1 Peshawar-Karachi railway line project and some infrastructure projects in the framework of the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), jacking up its overall size from $46 billion to $54 billion (approx Rs5,700 billion) as well as establishing eight industrial estates located in all the four provinces and special areas, including Fata, AJK, Gilgit-Baltistan and Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT).

On the eve of Sixth Joint Coordination Committee (JCC) meeting held at Beijing, both the sides agreed in principle to expand the list of projects for inclusion in the CPEC framework after which the overall size of the CPEC projects might go close to $60 billion but it would take a few more months to meet all the procedural requirements.

Both the sides agreed to form a special group on water storage and consider the Bhasha Dam for which Chinese delegation would visit Pakistan by next month. Both the sides also agreed in principle to include the mass transit system of railways for each province for making it as part of CPEC and now feasibility studies would be made to go ahead with the approval of the Joint Working Group. Both the countries also agreed to include the Orange Line Project and Karachi Circular Railway for inclusion in the CPEC.

The JCC approved the inclusion of four new projects in the CPEC framework, including ML-I Peshawar-Karachi railway line project. The total cost of the project is over $8.8 billion out of which China is expected to give $5.5 billion loan while the remaining amount will be provided by the ADB.

The JCC also approved to include three projects of the National Highway Authority (NHA) in the CPEC framework. These include $200 million Khuzdar-Basima Road project, Dera Ismail Khan-Zohb project of western route worth $800 million and a missing section of Thakot-Havelian of the eastern route having length of 136 kilometres.

While addressing the Sixth JCC meeting, the minister pleaded the case for Gwadar and said that the master city plan and the related projects are likely to bring socio-economic stability in Gwadar. He added that an agreement on 300MW power project has been signed and the project would be started soon. He also highlighted the Gwadar water supply project, hospital and technical institute projects and stressed the timely completion of these projects to bring a positive message of hope and support to the local people in Gwadar. In addition, the minister appreciated the Chinese commitment to help and start the mass transit railway project in the provincial headquarters, which will provide great facility to millions of people in Pakistan.

The minister also appreciated the consideration and inclusion of projects proposed by the provinces in infrastructure and energy to harness different opportunities and development in various parts of Pakistan to distribute benefits of CPEC among all the provinces and regions. He further mentioned that one industrial zone in each province had been identified and selected on the basis of their market attraction and principles of business.

Ahsan Iqbal stated that three years ago when China and Pakistan started the journey of CPEC, there were many doubts about covering so much ground in a very little time. He said that with the support of political leadership, hard work of officials of both the countries, CPEC had become the biggest project of regional connectivity in the world. "CPEC is the flagship project of One Belt, One Road showing how one belt one road can transform the regional cooperation into reality and bring benefits to millions of people."

He said that one proof of success of CPEC is that today think tanks from all over the world, including America, Canada and Europe, are doing research to analyse the impact of CPEC in the region. The minister maintained that CPEC had added more value to the friendship of China and Pakistan. CPEC had become the north star of friendship between China and Pakistan, making the friendship even higher than skies.
Cheers Image

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 30 Dec 2016 23:43

X Posted on STFUP Thread

Pakistan’s water security made part of CPEC framework

Anticipate next news item : Pakistan made part of CPEC! :rotfl:
Cheers Image

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9588
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby A_Gupta » 31 Dec 2016 15:15

The Chinese state newspaper Global Times says:
China should tackle CPEC disputes by inviting more countries to join and invest
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1026461.shtml
There is an endless demand for investment in Pakistan, and although it is possible that Chinese investment in the economic corridor will increase, funding from just one country is unlikely to satisfy Pakistan's appetite for capital to advance its economy and social development. To broaden the scope of investment, China is expected to have an open mind about inviting third parties to join the CPEC. The project could also benefit countries such as Afghanistan, Iran and India as well as other major economies like Russia who may be ideal choices to take part in the CPEC.


If one is to take the above seriously, it suggests China doesn't want to risk too much of its own investment in CPEC.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21038
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 31 Dec 2016 15:32

A_Gupta, that is a correct assessment. Recent spate of news items about the Chinese Ambassador meeting Imran Khan, the nervous outburst by the Ambassador, the frequent exhortations by various Chinese leaders to Pakistanis, the closure of a few projects etc point to deep issues. The Chinese have 'met their match' perhaps in Pakistan. They still want Gwadar and therefore cleverly want to hedge their bets by riding on other horses.

shashankk
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 44
Joined: 16 Aug 2016 03:53

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby shashankk » 31 Dec 2016 23:49

A_Gupta wrote:The Chinese state newspaper Global Times says:
China should tackle CPEC disputes by inviting more countries to join and invest
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1026461.shtml
There is an endless demand for investment in Pakistan, and although it is possible that Chinese investment in the economic corridor will increase, funding from just one country is unlikely to satisfy Pakistan's appetite for capital to advance its economy and social development. To broaden the scope of investment, China is expected to have an open mind about inviting third parties to join the CPEC. The project could also benefit countries such as Afghanistan, Iran and India as well as other major economies like Russia who may be ideal choices to take part in the CPEC.


If one is to take the above seriously, it suggests China doesn't want to risk too much of its own investment in CPEC.

I feel more than than money its influence and presence of multiple player which may complicate options for India. If somehow they get Russians and Iranians into it India would find itself into a tricky situation.

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 513
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby sankum » 01 Jan 2017 06:53

The is the best thing to happen to Pakistan. Unless you teach or train your local population and shut down terror training school and go for modern honest government and economy all the investment will create debt burden to pull the country down.

With India increasing pressure on Indus water treaty, They will be building $14b dams in CPEC which will further pull them down in debt cycle.

It is the best thing to happen and India should build alternate route through Iran, Afghanistan into central Asia at minimal cost so that CPEC remain a national defence project burden on China also.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21038
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 01 Jan 2017 15:07

http://www.dawn.com/news/1305441/provincial-cpec-projectsProvincial CPEC projects -Edit, Dawn
NOW that Sindh Chief Minister Murad Ali Shah is returning from China with a bouquet of projects for his province, one of the most persistent arguments relating to CPEC should begin to subside. The provinces are finally being given a place at the CPEC table, and with more projects dedicated to serving provincial government priorities, the debate needs to swivel to where it should always have been: on the need for more transparency. The Sindh government has identified the Karachi Circular Railway, Keti Bandar power park and an industrial zone as its choice for CPEC-related projects. The question now needs to be raised how these projects were selected, and what terms they will entail. The federal government has had to be pushed towards greater transparency, and even though it has responded to a point by creating a dedicated website, much room for improvement still exists. As provincial governments, that apparently also include KP, step up to the CPEC table, the need for transparency and disclosure grows.

The need for transparency was brought to the fore recently when the Lahore High Court was told by a department of the Punjab government that the terms of financing for the Orange Line train could not be revealed due to a ‘secrecy clause’ in the agreement. Now we have news of three more large projects taken up by Sindh, and it must be asked whether or not similar secrecy clauses are present in the agreements. The Sindh government should also explain why the KCR project languished when the Japanese showed an interest in building it, but suddenly came to life when the Chinese agreed to become involved.{Obvious. Probably, the Japanese refused to pay commissions/bribes}

More specifically, questions need to be asked about the Keti Bandar proposal. Has the Sindh government done a proper study on the viability of Thar coal for exports? The B-grade lignite contained in the desert usually does not have much demand in export markets. And the viability of this particular quality of lignite for long journeys is limited due to its tendency to spontaneously combust within a couple of hours of being mined. So before the government takes on large loan liabilities to build infrastructure for Thar coal in Keti Bandar, it should explain how the coal’s viability has been assessed for the power park. The provincial assembly needs to do its job and ensure that the government has discharged its obligations properly before taking on the liabilities of the project on public expense. Reflexive critiques of CPEC projects need to be jettisoned. But on the flip side, gratuitous applause of all things Chinese also needs to be replaced with judicious studies of the viability of each of the projects coming under discussion. The growing relationship between Pakistan and China holds much promise for both countries, but only if it is focused on areas that are genuinely of public interest.

rohiths
BRFite
Posts: 385
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 21:51

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby rohiths » 01 Jan 2017 15:14

IMHO CPEC is a scam and Pakistan elites and Chinese are fleecing the aam Abdul. All these power projects are pure scams. The roadways are unnecessary given the vehicle sales to support them. Chinese are trying to offload some of the responsibilities to other countries by inviting them as they know Pakis will eventually default on their loans.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8928
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 01 Jan 2017 15:18

Question that folks need to ask themselves.

1. Why would Russia join CPEC?
2. Why would Afghanistan join CPEC?
3. Why would Iran join CPEC?
4. Why would India join CPEC?

Just saying it benefits them without spelling out the benefit in concrete terms is like accepting that there is NO economic value to joining CPEC. For that one must study the major import/export of the country and its main markets and the cost for various mode of transportation to its main markets.

GShankar
BRFite
Posts: 868
Joined: 16 Sep 2016 20:20

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby GShankar » 01 Jan 2017 20:07

India might be induced with cheap oil protected by chinese (and russians). Iran could be a supplier. Russia could be another. China and India are say consumers.

There might be monetary gains. But then India has to accept the current status quo. Too bad for national interest. We may have to forget pok,aksai chin, etc.

The quickest we get electric cars the better to reduce dependency on oil. And the quickest balochis and sindhis revolt in large scale will be better too.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8928
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 01 Jan 2017 20:31

Middle eastern oil is nearer than Russian oil and IIRC, Saudis *can* undercut any rate offered by Russians if they want to. If peak demand theory is correct then all suppliers will be chasing the demand and Saudis produce the cheapest oil, IIRC.

The other way to get *Russian* oil is to trade Russian oil destined for India with ME oil destined for Japan. So Russian oil destined for India is routed to Japan and ME Oil destined for Japan is routed to India. The difference in grade is adjusted in dollars. That way we can get *Russian* oil while saving on the transportation cost.

So why would India join CPEC based on oil? And the Russian incentive to back CPEC to secure oil route to India is no longer valid. Hows that?

Lets assume Iran's biggest incentive to join CPEC is to secure a route for its gas to India. Now if GOI sets up a fertilizer plant in Chabhar we can absorb our quota of Iranian gas right there and export the fertilizer back to India. Much cheaper to transport than Gas. Hows that?

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8928
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 01 Jan 2017 20:55

CPEC makes sense economically ONLY if access to the Indian market is assured to the Chinese or the Russians or the Iranians. Without that they can do all the supporting they want but no one is going to put their money into CPEC except the Chinese for strategic reasons.

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... i-2815121/
Iran, Gadkari said, has cheap natural gas and power that Indian firms are keen to tap to build a 0.5-million tonne aluminium smelter plant as well as urea manufacturing units.

“We spend Rs 45,000 crore annually on urea subsidy, and if we can manufacture it in the Chabahar free trade zone and move it through the port to Kandla and onward to hinterland, we can save that amount,” he said.

Gadkari said Nalco will set up the aluminium smelter while private and co-operative fertiliser firms are keen to build urea plants provided they get gas at less than USD 2 per MMBTU.

Stated another way we can import as much gas from Iran as we want in the form of urea. I don't know for sure but transportation of solid urea should be much cheaper than transporting LNG.

GShankar
BRFite
Posts: 868
Joined: 16 Sep 2016 20:20

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby GShankar » 02 Jan 2017 00:05

Price is just one factor. Russia and Iran need reliable partner(s) who can help them withstand the sanction regimes.

Both the suppliers will be amenable to provide cheap gas at a discount than have unreliable buyers. This reliability gives them strength to do other things in the geo-strategic and military realms IMO.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8928
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 02 Jan 2017 01:24

Sure! Go for the cheapest oil/gas if Iran/Russia are willing to take price cuts for India.

Import LNG as urea from Iran as per plan. Takes much less space and hence will be pretty cheap via ship. No specialized vessel or loading/unloading docks. No gas has to flow through Bakistan. So If India does not join CPEC what is the benefit of CPEC to Iran?

Russian oil can similarly be swapped with Japan for their import from ME. Transportation will probably be cheaper than via pipeline over China and Bakiland. If India is willing to get oil via sea or execute a swap with Japan that shouldn't bother Russia. Assuming oil trade is out of the picture what is the benefit of CPEC to Russia?

Even if we go for straight import of oil/gas imports from Iran/Russia, India does not need CPEC. So what else is in CPEC for Iran/Russia?

Guddu
BRFite
Posts: 721
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 06:22

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Guddu » 02 Jan 2017 04:01

Mods:
Am wondering if it is more useful to rename this thread: Analyzing and countering CPEC ? We have analyzed CPEC quite extensively, but very little discussed about India's options to counter it.

GShankar
BRFite
Posts: 868
Joined: 16 Sep 2016 20:20

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby GShankar » 02 Jan 2017 04:06

Benefits or not, India's criteria for entry to CPEC (if at all India needs to enter) should be free a Baluchistan and full acquisition of J&K.

It would be an interesting theoretical initiative to work with China and Russia gain these things as a price to India's full cooperation on CPEC (to be renamed as RICEC or some).

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14220
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby svinayak » 02 Jan 2017 11:47

A_Gupta wrote:The Chinese state newspaper Global Times says:
China should tackle CPEC disputes by inviting more countries to join and invest
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1026461.shtml
There is an endless demand for investment in Pakistan, and although it is possible that Chinese investment in the economic corridor will increase, funding from just one country is unlikely to satisfy Pakistan's appetite for capital to advance its economy and social development. To broaden the scope of investment, China is expected to have an open mind about inviting third parties to join the CPEC. The project could also benefit countries such as Afghanistan, Iran and India as well as other major economies like Russia who may be ideal choices to take part in the CPEC.


If one is to take the above seriously, it suggests China doesn't want to risk too much of its own investment in CPEC.


This is the ripe moment for India to start a border war with China. It will derail all the border investment and also delay China long term plans in the region


There was another american news report which talks about China has to negotiate peace with India if it wants sucess in CPEC.
This is the line India has to promote and spread in India and Make Indian aware of what India card India has.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14220
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby svinayak » 02 Jan 2017 11:48

GShankar wrote:Benefits or not, India's criteria for entry to CPEC (if at all India needs to enter) should be free a Baluchistan and full acquisition of J&K.

It would be an interesting theoretical initiative to work with China and Russia gain these things as a price to India's full cooperation on CPEC (to be renamed as RICEC or some).


Also Indian navy should have ability to operate in Karachi and Gwadar Port. This is a must.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14220
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby svinayak » 02 Jan 2017 12:01

Corridor Of Uncertainty

The only big thing going for an isolated Pakistan is the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Unable to tackle its internal security problems — for which it now wrongly blames India — it prefers focusing on the good times the world thinks the Chinese investment of $46 billion will bring. However, speaking at an awards ceremony at the Balochistan Frontier Constabulary Headquarters in Quetta on December 20, Commander Southern Command Lt General Amir Riaz thought he should send a clear message to arch-enemy India: “Join CPEC and share the fruits of future development by shelving your anti-Pakistan activities and subversion.”
There was a time, not long ago, when Patrade utopia of CPEC will remain incomplete if India is kept outkistan blamed America for acts of terrorism inside Pakistan. After its flawed “strategic depth” made shipwreck and America got together with India against China in the region, Pakistan took a close look at what India was doing in Afghanistan and joined the dots.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15096
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 02 Jan 2017 12:07

svinayak wrote:
GShankar wrote:Benefits or not, India's criteria for entry to CPEC (if at all India needs to enter) should be free a Baluchistan and full acquisition of J&K.

It would be an interesting theoretical initiative to work with China and Russia gain these things as a price to India's full cooperation on CPEC (to be renamed as RICEC or some).


Also Indian navy should have ability to operate in Karachi and Gwadar Port. This is a must.



@svinaya
@Corridor Of Uncertainty

The @Corridor Of Uncertainty article is authored by a paki and run in an Indian paper and is indicative of psyops and desperation.

If the Indian market is to be "served" through the CPEC, a belated realization, if ever there was one, indicative of extremely poor project risk analysis and strategic planning, it would be disastrous for us.

If some no name jerk off, fall guy puki general is used as a cat's paw to "extend" an invitation to India, followed by orchestrated cheer leading from the paki and han presstitute media, clamoring hysterically for India to unconditionally join the CPEC, then the CPEC is in really deep doo doo.

Unconditionally, we should stay well clear of such political madness and economic harakiri.
Last edited by chetak on 02 Jan 2017 12:17, edited 1 time in total.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14220
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby svinayak » 02 Jan 2017 12:17

chetak wrote:If some no name jerk off, fall guy puki general is used as a cat's paw to "extend" an invitation to India, followed by orchestrated cheer leading from the paki and han presstitute media, clamoring hysterically for India to unconditionally join the CPEC, then the CPEC is in really deep doo doo.

Unconditionally, we should stay well clear of such political madness and economic harakiri.


Such proposal have to come thru govt channels and not from the media.
The Pak media is using that for discussion just to pull all the countries in their debate.
It looks totally artificial discussion when Pak does not have any proper official policy for none of its neighbors.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15096
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 02 Jan 2017 12:22

svinayak wrote:
chetak wrote:If some no name jerk off, fall guy puki general is used as a cat's paw to "extend" an invitation to India, followed by orchestrated cheer leading from the paki and han presstitute media, clamoring hysterically for India to unconditionally join the CPEC, then the CPEC is in really deep doo doo.

Unconditionally, we should stay well clear of such political madness and economic harakiri.


Such proposal have to come thru govt channels and not from the media.
The Pak media is using that for discussion just to pull all the countries in their debate.
It looks totally artificial discussion when Pak does not have any proper official policy for none of its neighbors.


They were testing the waters onlee.

Such a proposal will not be made "officially" unless there is a clear indication prior that the proposal will be accepted. Too much loss of face, otherwise.

since that has not happened, they are now trying to mold public opinion in India using readily available mercenary and presstitute assets in the Indian media.

Expect runditv burkha and karan thappad to take this up in their programs using a rigged "panel of experts" all favoring the hallaling of Indian interests to enemy interests.

It does not benefit us but it certainly does benefit our implacable enemies.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8928
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 02 Jan 2017 12:38

Quite right about testing waters by floating an idea via the usual routes.

But it impact need not be overestimated. A few presstitutes in studios and/or op-eds will not change the GOI's views or create a public opinion in its favor. If these charlatans held so much power Modi would never have been elected or his popularity would have taken a serious dive given the past controversies stoked by the same media.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8928
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 02 Jan 2017 12:43

CPEC makes economic sense only if it allows access to Indian Market. Without India CPEC has no future except as an expensive strategic project.

OTOH, India joining CPEC will not only make it economically viable but also in effect legitimize Bakis claim on POK. It will be double positive for the Bakis.

Bakis and Chinese are not going to transfer control of POK to India and cut their only land route.
Last edited by pankajs on 02 Jan 2017 12:44, edited 1 time in total.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15096
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 02 Jan 2017 12:44

pankajs wrote:Quite right about testing waters by floating an idea via the usual routes.

But it impact need not be overestimated. A few presstitutes in studios and/or op-eds will not change the GOI's views or create a public opinion in its favor. If these charlatans held so much power Modi would never have been elected or his popularity would have taken a serious dive given the past controversies stoked by the same media.


all what you say is true.

why are you so keen to jump to conclusions when all the facts and more importantly, the han game plan itself is yet to unfold, saar??

sit back, enjoy and let the events blossom as they may. :)
Last edited by chetak on 02 Jan 2017 12:48, edited 1 time in total.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14220
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby svinayak » 02 Jan 2017 12:44

This is the article I was talking about
He is the most realistic author in the net regarding China India relations


China Should Either Make Peace With India Or Forget About CPEC
China Should Either Make Peace With India Or Forget About CPEC

Panos Mourdoukoutas , CONTRIBUTOR
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.

China desperately needs the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). It's part of that nation’s vision to write the rules of the next stage of globalization and help its export and investment engines grow for years to come—a good prospect for investors in Chinese equities, which have been lagging behind of those of neighboring India.

Ranking China India
Population (millions) 1374.62 1254.02
Per Capita GDP ($, Dec2015) 6416 1806
Human Development Index (2015) 90 130
Entrepreneurship Index (2016) 60 98
Economic Freedom Index (2016) 144 123
Index/Fund 12-month Performance 5-year Performance
IShares China (NYSE:FXI) -5.16% 7.5.0%
iShares S&P India 50 (NASDAQ:INDY) 1.0% 32.18%
Source: Finance.yahoo.com 11/16/16

Specifically, CPEC is the express link between Western China, the Middle East, and Africa--China's second continent. Ideologically that is, which can explain why Beijing has committed $46 billion to the project.

The trouble is that CPEC passes through Pakistani regions claimed by India. That makes it a bumpy road, to say the least -- Pakistan and India continue to fight for control of these regions.

That’s why China needs to make peace with India.

So far, China has done very little to appease India. In fact, it has done quite the opposite: repeatedly blocking India's efforts to join the Nuclear Supplier Group (NSG).

And it has sided openly with Pakistan in the India-Pakistan Kashmir standoff, as evidenced by statements by China’s senior officials on the sidelines of the ongoing 71st session of United Nations General Assembly in New York.

That can explain why India's has sided with the US in the South China Sea disputes, as previously discussed here.

And things could turn worse, if pro-Indian forces in Pakistan sabotage China’s CPEC route.

That raises the possibility of an open confrontation between China and Pakistan on the one side, and India and its allies on the other.

Is China ready for this scenario? Probably not. That's why Beijing should either appease New Delhi or forget about CPEC altogether.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15096
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 02 Jan 2017 13:01

^^^^^^^

It's not as cut and dried as the writer makes it out to be.

By over simplification and dumbing down the issue, he has merely trivialized a very complex problem that has far reaching dimensions and factors that encompass multiple countries, some very far removed in ideology, clashing national interests and strategic outlook.

the hans seek to dominate and devour, whereas none except the pakis are willing to capitulate, India least of all.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14220
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby svinayak » 02 Jan 2017 13:10

Check this expert from China who blames imperialist forces for the border problem when he omits that China by invading Tibet and occupying Tibet has just behaved the same way

it is a pak link
pk link
Professor Li Xiguang is the chief expert of the National Social Science Foundation project for reforming the Chinese Communist Party media system. Dean Li is supervisor of PhD and MA students in journalism and supervisor of MPH students in the School of Medicine of Tsinghua University, Beijing.

Professor Li is also the Director of Tsinghua University Institute of Health Communication;Dean of Tsinghua University International Center for Communication Studies; Director of Tsinghua University Center for Pakistan Culture and Communication Studies; Dean of the Chinese Academy of World Agendas; and Honourable Dean of the School of Global Journalism and Communication of the Southwestern University of Political Science and Law.

Dean Li Xiguang has received a number of significant national and international awards for his pioneering work in soft power research, health and journalism education, including the Quaid-e-Azam Award by Pakistan President, UNAIDS Awards for Outstanding Contribution to the Control of AIDS; China’s Best Health Educator; China’s Best Course of News Reporting and Writing, China’s Top 10 Educator”, etc. He used to write a regular column in the English newspaper, Global Times.

His recent books are China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (2016); A Cultural Trekking along CPEC(2016); Writing on Asian borderlands(2015); Who is blinding you — the basics of media literacy; (2014,second edition); Soft Power and Global Communication (2005); Soft Power and China Dream (2010, Korean edition 2013); Soft Power in Shaping Public Opinions (2013); and Basics for News Writing and Reporting (2013).

DNA sat down with Prof Li for an interview to discuss the new alliances emerging in the region



Q: Would you please comment on the dynamics of the China-Russian-Pakistan collaboration that seemed in the early days of development? Should recent developments be seen as signs of greater, and deeper, economic and security alignment?

Li Xiguang: I have a grand idea that as an academic from Asia and a lover of Asian culture and people, I want to work hard to bring the central Asian countries and south Asian countries like China, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Nepal and Sri Lanka together and into one family under one heaven.

China, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran have been victims of imperial conspiracies of divide and rule which have not disappeared till date. The heartland of Asia which includes India, Afghanistan, Kashmir, Central Asia and Chinese western provinces actually did not have any artificially national borders which are inhuman and uncivilised until the British colonialists invaded to set up all the barriers on the Highlands of Asia; China, Pakistan, Afghanistan, India and Iran. These countries should work together to become a closer regional and collective economic and security body through OBOR and CPEC.

Q: How much traction has your suggestion of ‘soft border’ found in Pakistan and India so far? Is there a growing realisation that President Xi’s idea – of sidestepping issues stemming from the era of colonialism for trade and commerce gains – being accepted as the definitive way forward?

LX: We can use the idea of soft borders to the settlement of the border disputes of Indian occupied lands of China’s South Tibet and Kashmir. But the Indian newspaper The Hindu recently published an interview which quoted me using the concept of “soft border” to solve the border issue of Kashmir omitted my key and major point of my interview.

I suggest that China should play a proactive role to end crises in countries like Iraq, Libya and Syria. I regret that local media while highlighting terrorism related incident in Pakistan and Afghanistan but often fail to report crucial developments that are equally important for economic development for the two countries
The Indians occupied China’s territory of southern Tibet, particularly Dawan, which is the holy birthplace of the 6th Dalai Lama. China and India can have a soft border for Chinese Tibetans, traders and Buddhists going to Dawan in southern Tibet which is now occupied by the Indian army under the illegal name of Arunachal Pradesh.

We need to see through this as alert and educated citizens. We need to be visionary to blueprint OBOR against ‘conspiracy theory’, the theory which some politicians in India are pursuing.

In the meantime, China and India should also make Karakorum Pass a soft border which is controlled by the heavy Indian troops based on nearby Siachen Glaciers. India’s military buildup of four billion US dollars a year has caused an arms’ race in this area.

This area needs an open border instead of military buildup. The Chinese, Indian, Kashmiris and particularly Tibetans living in Ladakh should travel freely and resume the old Silk Route through Karakorum Pass.

I suggest Karakorum Pass be a part of OBOR and make Srinagar, Ladakh as key nodes of OBOR. India is most welcome to be a part of OBOR. But I emphasise that I support a stance on Kashmir’s settlement based on the UNSC resolution of 1948 of a plebiscite in Kashmir. That India should commit to conducting a plebiscite.

Q: New financial and economic alliances are also being forged, especially in the wake of CPEC. How is the region likely to be impacted? And what timeframe do you envision?

LX: I think some Indian politicians, academics and journalists need to have rational and positive thinking about OBOR and CPEC. We should leave the border disputes among China, India and Pakistan to our grandsons or grand-grandsons as Deng Xiaoping, father of modern China suggested decades ago.

In fact, the Chinese and Indian governments would never give in about Dawan, just like Pakistani and Indian governments would never give in about Kashmir. But we should not let the territorial disputes which were created by the British imperialists hinder the economic development and social progress of the Dawan people and Kashmir people. We should let the people living in Kashmir and South Tibet (“Arunachal Pradesh”) benefit from OBOR. Can China and India make Arunachal a neutral land?

Can Pakistan and India make Free Kashmir a neutral land? Just like Jerusalem between Israel and Palestine?

If the Chinese and Indian governments can emancipate their mind from their territorial disputes and open all the borderland passes, allowing the Tibetan railway going south from Shigatse, through Kathmandu, bringing people and cargo from the Chinese heartland provinces like Tibet, Yunnan, Qinghai, Sichuan, Chongqing, Gansu, all the way to Mumbai, Madras and Kolkata ports. In the meantime, Indian products will come to Chinese huge market of inner provinces more easily.

There had been free highway for religious pilgrims, diplomats and traders in this area until the Western countries which had no common value systems and share no cultural heritage with us imposed a so-called “modern order” on our Asian land. With OBOR, our Asian countries will have a new world order with which our Asian countries and people can live in a shared OBOR cultural belt which will be characterised by Confucianism and Buddhism in East Asia, Islam in Central, South and West Asia, Buddhism and Hinduism in South and South East Asia.

Q: How do you see the developing relations between China and the Muslim states, from Pakistan to the Gulf? What is your analysis about the New World Order being projected amid rising Islamophobia across the Western states and how do you see China’s relationship in this context?

Prof Li: I am particularly keen to enhance ties between Chinese civilisation and Islamic civilisation through OBOR. I am now leading a cross culture study tracing history of similarities and cordialities enjoyed by Chinese and the Muslim civilisations in the bygone era, amidst the urgency to revive the spirit in a period that itself is in the cusp of massive change.

The research is focused on the role of think tanks pertaining to Muslim Countries and China in the revival of strong cultural and economic ties between the two holds extreme relevance in the backdrop of rapid geo-political developments currently witnessed on the global scene.

It enhances need for close contact and linkages between China and the Muslim world, which ought to come closer and pave the way for the “New World Order” based not on war but on the principles of peaceful coexistence.

I believe that significance of Islamic World in strengthening the way for a New World Order cannot be ignored and China with a key role in the emerging situation must not commit the mistake of ‘othering’ them, as done by the west.

I am concerned with the growing “Islamophobia” and fear of associated terrorism registered among many people in the world who tend to see things from the prism of a biased media. The issue needs to be addressed through close contacts between academics, scholars, researchers, artistes and media personnel representing the Muslim countries and China to initiate a dialogue on regular basis regarding misgivings or reservations about one another particularly linked to myths and misconceptions created about Islam and the wave of extremism and terrorism engulfing many of the Muslim countries, with their spillover effects in general.

There never had been any clash of interests between Muslim and Chinese civilisations nor they ever went to war, but on the contrary, had traditionally supported each other and benefited from each other.

Despite the fact that Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism were practiced in the dynastic era of China there was no conflict registered among Chinese and the Muslim empires practicing Islam and even in the present times also no conflict could be recorded between China or any of the Muslim country.

China has historically benefited from the rise of the Islamic world and the same spirit maintained through the Belt and Road initiative will help achieve the Islamic Dream and the Chinese Dream together — bringing these historical and great civilisations together as partners rather than adversaries.

Although the present day Chinese are largely atheist yet they can be noticed to cherish similar values and ethos as promoted by Islam, the religion of peace, hence it is important that these are turned into tools of partnership instead of any hostility.

These are the facts that must be highlighted and promoted to influence foreign policies of the concerned countries, particularly that of China. It should be well understood that rise of China as a global leader and its key role in the new world order must be based on Chinese characteristics and understanding about Muslim world by directly learning from Islamic culture, rather than looking at the Muslim world as an enemy through the Western lens.

Agreeing that cultural differences as well as the discrepancies in terms of “sectarianism” persist in the Islamic world, these too could be understood with due realisation that basic and core principles are the same among the Muslim Ummah (nation) and that “differences” must not be exploited.

For better understanding of Muslim culture, we need to read the Quran and as this is not possible to read in Arabic, we can access translations, which may also have their limitations hence leaving us currently to read translations and discuss through round table conferences between Chinese and Muslim scholars.

Equal responsibility lies upon the Muslim countries to make the Chinese understand that Islam, which denotes to the term peace, is for promotion of peace in the world and that Islamic “Shariah” (Law) is different from what is being imposed by extremists in the name of Islam and projected by the western media.

Muslim scholars must also highlight relevance of halal food and other similar concepts/practices that may be part of lifestyle are needed to be deciphered in their proper context by the non-Muslims.

Communication is a major barrier. I strongly recommended that Muslim students attending different academic institutions in China, along with professionals, businessmen, scholars and so-forth visiting China must take learning of Chinese language as a responsibility to bridge the gap, so very crucial for themselves, their countries and the unfolding new world order.

China is a strong proponent of developing countries, with vast majority of Islamic world including those located on OBOR route as a policy encouraged using their own path towards development. The policy is a reflection of the Chinese concept of multiculturalism and the diversity of culture which has been frequently appreciated as the future of humanity by many Muslims leaders in recent times.

In a nutshell, “harmony” comes from the acceptance of differences and to communicate with differences. The underlying principle of the Belt and Road initiative is to integrate and to be tolerant towards the other cultures and civilisations instead of coercing them. China and Muslim world need to engage themselves in formation of an environment of mutual respect with underlying principle being that harmony is unity and diversity, not uniformity.

We need to make concerted efforts to engage each other by finding grounds of mutual interest where we are on the same parameter to discuss with one another. In particular context of Islamic World and the OBOR or Silk Road, with the construction of ports in South Asia, China has become an Indian Ocean Power, likewise by increasing connectivity in Central Asia and in the Pacific. China has also manifested itself as a Central Asian country and a pacific region power.

It has therefore become all the more important that along with the economic belt a culture belt is also developed enhancing our shared religious values, cultural values and giving people their choice of development models.

Q: In the wake of China’s efforts, along with Pakistan and Russia, to bring peace and normalcy in troubled Afghanistan, do you think China is also ready to play its role for peace and harmony in Muslim countries like Iraq, Syria and Palestine?

XL: I suggest that China should play a proactive role to end crises in countries like Iraq, Libya and Syria. I regret that local media while highlighting terrorism related incident in Pakistan and Afghanistan but often fail to report crucial developments that are equally important for economic development for the two countries and also for China being a close and trusted friend of the two.

China needs to shift its focus towards the Islamic world where its future lies. Western propaganda about Chinese ambitions to seek hegemony must also be dispelled through historical facts as well as current policies of the Chinese government.

China is not a nation state – itis a civilisation and even though it expanded it never occupied nor did it colonise the way as Europeans did. The Chinese culture focuses on existence and coexistence coupled with mutual respect and harmony.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 02 Jan 2017 17:53

X Posted on the PESW & STFUP Threads

Chambers voice concern at China’s plan to ‘set up industry along CPEC route’
GUJRAT - Cwapistani : The three chambers of commerce and industry of what is termed as “golden industrial triangle” comprising Gujrat, Gujranwala and Sialkot cities, have expressed their grave concern over China’s reported plan of establishing industrial units and warehouses along the route of the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).
The leadership of these three chambers has also urged the federal government to take the business community of these industrial cities in confidence about the nature of China’s planned industrial units in the country, warning of its adverse effect on local industry and apprehending that such a scenario might turn Pakistan into a purely consumer market, further weakening its own manufacturing sector.
These concerns were voiced by the presidents of the three chambers of commerce and industry, who gathered at the local chamber (GTCCI) the other day.
The meeting decided that the chambers’ presidents would also hold an exclusive meeting with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to share their concerns over the Chinese industrial units along the CPEC route. It regretted the government had not taken the chambers in confidence over the issue.
Mr Bhutta said the local manufacturers’ concerns over the CPEC’s possible effects on the local industry should be addressed forthwith, apprehending that such a situation might hit exports from these cities.
Cheers Image


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ashok Sarraff, atamjeetsingh, DrRatnadip, Falijee, Jayan Menon and 43 guests