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.
A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11638
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby A_Gupta » 23 Sep 2017 17:15

China is racing to finish one of the biggest hydro-power projects in Pakistan ahead of schedule, yet its location in the long-contested region of Kashmir will draw ire from India.

Construction on the 720 megawatt Karot power station being built on Jhelum river began in December 2016 and looks set to finish nine months ahead of its December 2021 completion date, a first for a Pakistan hydro-project said Qin Guobin, chief executive officer of the state-owned China Three Gorges Corp. South Asia Investment Ltd. The company has put in place an aggressive strategy to cut the project’s financing costs.

“For us, Pakistan is a strategic market,” Qin said at the site. “If we managed to complete it earlier we can save financing costs and make it more competitive.”


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... d-by-india

Pakistan considers the hydro power site a national security priority. It’s dotted with army pickets and plain-cloth security officials. None of the Chinese staff can leave the camp office without registering his or her name at the main gate. Out of the total 2,070 workers, 750 are Chinese.


This from 2015:
http://www.hydroworld.com/articles/2015 ... river.html

This from March 2017:
http://www.hydroworld.com/articles/2017 ... oject.html

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23927
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 01 Oct 2017 21:01

Pak overhauling communications system with help from China: Report - PTI
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan is working on a massive project with China as part of the $55-billion CPEC project+ to develop a communications system which is not routed through India and the US, a media report said on Sunday.

The roadmap of the Long Term Plan (LTP) for the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)+ was developed from November 2013 to December 2015 by officials and experts from both countries, the Dawn reported.

The plan contains a detailed 21-page outline specific to communications and envisions to span up to 15 years, starting in 2016 and concluding in 2030.

After examination of the LTP document, the report said that the project aims at a revamped communications framework, which includes components such as a fibre optic cable connecting Pakistan and China, a new submarine landing station for internet traffic flow, e-governance and digital TV for all.

The most critical component is a new, upgraded fibre optic cable network which spans across Pakistan and crosses the border to connect directly with China. The cross-border fibre optic cable will address multiple challenges faced by China and Pakistan.

Firstly, it said it will handle the anticipated increase in communication between the two countries.

With "deepening comprehensive strategic cooperation" comes the need to establish fast, reliable connectivity - and perhaps most critically - communication that is not routed through Europe, the US and India, the daily said.

China also has in mind its increasing international telecommunications service demands which, if not addressed, may end up exposing "a huge gap" in China's international bandwidth.

If actualised according to the LTP, the new network will be beneficial to Pakistan by improving internet penetration and increasing speed, especially in Balochistan+ and Gilgit-Baltistan, regions where internet connectivity has ranged from poor to non-existent. It should also reduce the cost of internet connections.

Additionally, linking with the rest of the world through China will help reduce Pakistan's dependence on undersea cables that carry the country's internet traffic.

In cases where the undersea cables develop a fault - as has occurred in the past - the document says another route would be in place.

More broadly, the new network would provide landlocked central Asian states a new, shorter and more cost-effective route for connectivity.

The existing fibre optic network through which Pakistan connects to the world has been developed by a consortium that has Indian companies either as partners or shareholders.

This is viewed as a security concern
when it comes to surveillance of communication.

As recently as January this year, Director General Special Communications Organisation (SCO) Maj Gen Amir Azeem Bajwa informed the National Assembly Standing Committee on Information Technology that some incoming and outbound internet traffic landed in India before being routed to its destinations, posing a security risk for Pakistan.

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8282
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby anupmisra » 06 Oct 2017 19:35

SeePak zindabad! Pakis to be reduced to the role of toll collectors.

CPEC toll income to be thrice the budget of Pakistan

Only the toll income generated by the route of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), after the completion of the project by 2030, will be three times of the national budget of Pakistan, an official said on Wednesday.

Digging a deeper hole, the official blurted:
“The national investment agency is targeting to increase the foreign direct investment (FDI) to $250 billion for infrastructure development and other industrial activities by 2025, including joint industrial cooperation between Pakistan and China.”
“The FDI in FY15 was only U$900 million, which increased to $2.3 billion in FY16 and further rose to $2.4 billion in FY17” (thus magically growing 100 times in eight years)

Disclosing additional state secrets:
“The CPEC is as important for China as it is for Pakistan,” he said.
“That is the gateway to reach African markets for China that is heavily invested there”

Further perjuring himself, the official claimed:
Replying to a question, the BOI director dispelled the impression that the government was favouring Chinese investors by giving them special concessions. “For the BoI and the government of Pakistan, every foreign investor is equal. Besides, same level of returns on investment is available to the local ones,” he added.


At this point, based on this claim, the pakis are royally screwed!

https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/234547 ... kistan-BoI

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13871
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 06 Oct 2017 20:04

There isn't going to be much trade over this CEPC so where will the toll come from?

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 06 Oct 2017 20:15

pankajs wrote:There isn't going to be much trade over this CEPC so where will the toll come from?
pankajs Ji :

One can't say any thing about the quantum of Chinese Trade through CPEC & Gwadar but IMO the main commodity along this route will be Cotton and Cotton Goods from Xinjiang to possibly PG, RS & East Africa. I will not be surprised if these Cotton Goods will mainly be meant for Terroristan and possibly on to India.

Cheers Image

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13871
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 06 Oct 2017 20:17

Yes but will such a trade bankroll the CPEC cost?

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 06 Oct 2017 21:06

pankajs wrote:Yes but will such a trade bankroll the CPEC cost?
pankajs Ji :
I trust you have read the ~Articles wherein the Chinese have factored in Terroristan's inability to repay up to 80% of the Loans from China!

Cheers Image

yensoy
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby yensoy » 06 Oct 2017 21:25

pankajs wrote:Yes but will such a trade bankroll the CPEC cost?


30 odd billion $ is peanuts to secure big geopolitical goals for a country with 4 trillion $ in reserves. Guys, please don't be fixated on the finances. We all know it won't pencil out.

The big questions and issues to watch out for are (i) how does the Chinese government provide incentives to companies to invest in CPEC (or are the companies benamis of PLA), (ii) what kind of infrastructural work is being done under the guise of CPEC, (iii) what kind of contracts and default clauses are being put in place to keep Pak from collapsing, and (iv) what are the security implications of said infrastructural work, contracts and default clauses were the sh!t to hit the fan, i.e. worst case for us.

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 1269
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Deans » 07 Oct 2017 22:24

Its not a question of $30 Bln. Total Chinese bank exposure to dubious overseas projects will be almost a trillion $.

Even excluding overseas loans, Chinese banking is an increasingly fragile house of cards. Its debt is 300 % of GDP. That's not just very high but also
has the highest rate of growth (both criteria are excellent predictors of a crash - Ruchir Sharma's book `The rise and fall of nations' is very interesting.
Moreover a lot of debt is not counted, as it is part of China's shadow banking (of a few trillion $), which is even more opaque than its traditional banks.
Chinese banks know that a large part of their loans simply cannot be repaid, because they are going toward to more ghost cities, roads that will
never recover cost etc. It will take one default to bring the whole thing down. A defaulting overseas loan may just be the trigger for that.

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7037
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Amber G. » 07 Oct 2017 23:21

Sorry if already posted:
One of the first times a US official has publicly taken a position on #CPEC. Sounds a lot like India's position.
CPEC passes through disputed territory: US

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13871
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby pankajs » 07 Oct 2017 23:30

This along with a push for a greater Indian role in Afghanistan is part of pressure tactic to bring bakistan to heel. The question is if bakistan were to agree to some demand would the US still stick for the newly stated positions?

I have my doubts.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 08 Oct 2017 14:26

CPEC

Capital suggestion

Fact 1: Pakistan’s decision-makers who approve and sign contracts under CPEC have little or no business interests in Pakistan. In other words, Pakistan’s decision-makers who approve and sign contracts under CPEC have most of their business interests outside of Pakistan.

Fact 2: Chinese companies that are undertaking mega-projects in Pakistan maintain a heavy corporate presence in Pakistan. Plus, Chinese companies that are undertaking mega-projects in Pakistan bring in ship-loads of Chinese workers. Plus, Chinese companies that are undertaking mega-projects in Pakistan rarely form genuine partnerships with Pakistani companies. As a consequence, there is little or no transfer of skills. As a consequence, there is little or no transfer of technology.

Fact 3: Developmental loans play a vital role in the development of a country. Whether a ‘developmental loan’ is truly ‘developmental’ or not depends on two things: terms of the loan and the rate of interest.

Fact 4: In Pakistan, the terms of Chinese loans and the real rate of interest being charged on them somehow continues to be a ‘state secret’ (the disclosed return on equity in case of coal-fired power plants is between 27.2 percent to 34.49 percent per annum).

Fact 5: International competitive bidding is “the most appropriate method of competitive bidding in public procurement. The process entails the procurement entity to internationally advertise their requirement of goods and services; in an internationally acceptable language. The contract is then awarded to the bidder with the best bids and contract terms.”

Fact 6: International competitive bidding “promotes competition between suppliers, resulting in best ‘value for money’ for the purchaser.”

Fact 7: Projects under CPEC are awarded without international competitive bidding.

Fact 8: The Government of Pakistan is providing tax breaks and other incentives to Chinese companies undertaking projects in CPEC – with no comparable tax breaks or incentives to Pakistani companies.

Fact 9: The demand for ‘Made-in-Pakistan’ goods is going down like a pebble in a clear-water lake.

Fact 10: Pakistan’s textile sector has a 52 percent share in Pakistan’s total exports and employs 40 percent of the total manufacturing labour force.

Pakistan Textile City: In 2009, the Government of Pakistan established an industrial zone at Port Qasim specifically “dedicated to textile processing and related industry”. The federal government had a 40 percent share, Sindh government 16 percent, National Bank of Pakistan 8 percent, Export Processing Zone 4 percent, Saudi Pak Insurance Company, Pak Qatar Investment Company, Pak Kuwait Investment Company each 4 percent and PIDC 1 percent. On August 4, 2017, a parliamentary committee was told that the “government had decided to wind up the Pakistan Textile City”.

Xinjiang Textile Park: The Chinese government inaugurated the Xinjiang Textile Park in the neighbouring province of the China-Pakistan border. The Park now produces more than 10 million meters of cotton cloth and has close to a million spindles. The Chinese government doles out $33 billion in subsidies to cotton farmers of Xinjiang and under the 10-year Textile Development Plan the Xinjiang Textile Park will be the largest textile exporting hub in the region. Yes, Pakistan’s textile industry is scared to death. To be certain, CPEC is neither good nor bad; it is what we can extract out of it.

One last question: Are the CPEC projects really creating opportunities for Pakistanis?

Cheers Image

Falijee
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10948
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Falijee » 10 Oct 2017 05:23

CROSS POSTED FROM TERRORISTAN

See- Pee - E - See (CPEC) Sialkoti Statistics :roll:

CPEC toll income to be thrice the budget of Pakistan: BoI

LAHORE: Only the toll income generated by the route of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), after the completion of the project by 2030, will be three times of the national budget of Pakistan, an official said on Wednesday. “It is on top of the business, economic, and employment creating activities of special economic zones (SEZs), and other industries,” Zulfiqar Ali, director Board of Investment (BoI) said while briefing Lahore Economic Journalist Association (LEJA) a local venue. " Statistics" manufactured in Sialkot, "Logic" supplied by La-Whore" :mrgreen:
“The national investment agency is targeting to increase the foreign direct investment (FDI) to $250 billion for infrastructure development and other industrial activities by 2025, including joint industrial cooperation between Pakistan and China.” Ali said that Pakistan had already started development of seven SEZs with Chinese cooperation out of which three each were being established in Sindh and Punjab and one in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP). In nowadays Pakistan, it is all about CPEC,CPEC and only CPEC, the "magic elixir" to solving Paki problem ! :D
“Furthermore, nine more Priority SEZs have also ben approved for Rashakai KP, Dhabeji Thatta, Boston Economic Zones Balochistan, Allama Iqbal SEZ, Faisalabad, Maqpoondas Northern Are3as, Islamabad Capital Territory Model SEZ, Federal Government Industrial Park on Pakistan Steel land at Port Qasim, Mirpur Industrial Zone and Mohmand Marble City, Federally Administered Tribal Areas,” he said. :(( Sounds got on paper onlee !)
The BoI chief said CPEC is the second chance for the industrial and economic development of Pakistan after 1960s industrialisation drive. “The CPEC is as important for China as it is for Pakistan,” he saoid.
He told the journalists that as an outcome of government’s negotiation with the Chinese, early harvesting projects of energy sector ( that "buzz word" again ! Whatever TF it means :twisted: ) had already started adding into the national grid. “It is expected that there will be no power outages in 2018 and by 2020 maximum energy will be added into the national grid by 2020,” Ali said.
Replying to a question, the BOI director dispelled the impression that the government was favouring Chinese investors by giving them special concessions. “For the BoI and the government of Pakistan, every foreign investor is equal. Besides, same level of returns on investment is available to the local ones,” he added. While the BOI Director is acting here as a "poster boy" for CPEC , the Isloo traders are expressing their own serious concern- in a separate report - about the FTA with the "Chini fliend", which is likely to throw them out of business !

Mukesh.Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 1106
Joined: 06 Dec 2009 14:09

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby Mukesh.Kumar » 11 Oct 2017 13:57

X-Post from PRC Economy - New Reflections : April 20 2015

Mukesh.Kumar wrote:Growth of Chinese Foreign Aid.

We have been discussing, CPEC, OBOR and general growing Chinese financial prowess in using Foreign Aid for influencing countries in S. Asia and Africa. The BBC today carries a good and detailed article, on a report from AidData a public policy think-tank based at William & Mary Univ, US, summarizing how Chinese

Short read: BBC: Following the Money: Uncovering a Chinese state secret

Not very long ago, China was a foreign aid recipient. Now, it rivals the United States as one of the world's largest donors, through traditional development aid or through financial loans.
For the first time, a large group of researchers outside China have compiled a major database detailing virtually all of China's financial money flow to recipient countries. Citing more than 5,000 projects found across 140 countries, it reveals that China and the US rival each other in terms of how much they offer to other countries.
However, "they spend those budgets in radically different ways. And the different compositions of those portfolios have far-reaching consequences", explains Brad Parks, the project's chief researcher


Image

The vast majority (93%) of US financial aid fits under the traditional definition of aid that's agreed upon by all Western industrialised countries. That aid is given with the main goal of developing the economic development and welfare of recipient countries. At least a quarter of that money represents a direct grant, not a loan that needs to be repaid.

In contrast, only a small portion (21%) of the money that China gives to other countries can be considered as traditional aid. And the rest of that money? The "lion's share" of that money is given in commercial loans that have to be repaid to Beijing with interest.
"China wants to get attractive economic returns on its capital


University of British Columbia studied how Chinese aid has changed countries in Africa, arguing that democratic reforms have slowed as the developing countries concluded they could bypass the political demands of Western donors by turning to Chinese aid.
"Traditional donors have criticised China's approach to aid," she says, but "many African countries embrace the assistance from Beijing, or at least are glad to have more options".


For those interested in further details, recommend downloading and going through the original report below
Downloadable PDF report from AID Data

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22486
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 11 Oct 2017 18:29

Amber G. wrote:Sorry if already posted:
One of the first times a US official has publicly taken a position on #CPEC. Sounds a lot like India's position.
CPEC passes through disputed territory: US


need to be very careful of the US and it's positions on various issues.

They will change or recast their positions in a heartbeat if it suits them and they will do so quite brazenly.

they are trying to replace white skinned (in a manner of speaking!!) americanos with brown skinned Indians in afghanistan. Of course its not going to work but all the pro India CPEC talk is just spin while trying to con the Indians into taking over from them.

Our madras mami is not so naive as to be taken in by some glib talking amreki power brokers.

yensoy
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby yensoy » 11 Oct 2017 19:49

^^^^ US's objection to CPEC is to find fault with BRI/CPEC, i.e. with China's undue influence in Pak & rest of Asia, rather than to support India. That much we all know and understand. They use our objection to argue their case; we will use their objection to argue our case :-) Nothing more, nothing less.


Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 22 Oct 2017 13:36

X Posted on the Terroristan & PESW Threads

Unsound projects

Capital suggestion

‘Unsound economic projects’ are the new weapons of war. In the 70s, President Richard Nixon ordered the CIA to “make the [Chilean] economy scream (declassified documents relating to the military coup, September 11, 1973)”. Lo and behold, Pakistan’s economy is screaming today.

For the record, Pakistani leaders stand convinced of taking on additional layers of debt on top of existing layers of debt.

For the record, Pakistani leaders stand convinced of ‘adopting economic policies that are bound to impoverish’ Pakistan.

For all of us to see, ‘uneconomical, financially non-viable and fiscally unsound’ projects are being bankrolled. The 27-kilometer Orange Line, the light rail rapid transit system, is expected to cost Rs162 billion. The estimated breakeven is Rs175 per ticket. At Rs20 a ticket, the Orange Line will lose Rs40 million a day or Rs14 billion a year every year. Plus, an additional Rs4 billion for operation and maintenance. Assuming that the Chinese loan is concessional, the debt payment of interest and principal is estimated at around Rs10 billion a year. Red alert: The debt burden is in dollars and the project loses money.

Imagine, the Government of Pakistan has guaranteed an annual Return on Equity (ROE) of 34.49 percent for the Thar Coal Block-I Power Generation Company (Private) Limited. The project cost is estimated at $767 million of which $575 million is debt. The interest rate used as the reference is Inter Bank Offer Rate (LIBOR) of 0.45 percent plus 450 basis points (https://nepra.org.pk/Tariff/IPPs/003%20 ... 6-2016.PDF).

For the record, the annual Return on Equity guaranteed by the Government of Pakistan on the Sahiwal Coal Power Project stands at a tall 27.2 percent. The interest rate used as the reference is Inter Bank Offer Rate (KIBOR) of 11.91 percent plus 350 basis points. The project cost is estimated at $956 million of which $723 million is debt (https://nepra.org.pk/Tariff/IPPs/Huanen ... 0(Pakistan)%20Energy%20(Private)%20Limited/TRF-308%20HUANENG%20UPFRONT%20COAL%20DETERMINATION%2031-03-2015%204385-87.pdf).

Red alert: This is awfully expensive electricity. Our industry cannot produce exportable competitive products with this electricity. Resultantly, we will have a huge dollar-denominated debt servicing burden but no additional exports.

Nandipur has gone from $329 million to $847 million. Neelum-Jhelum has gone from Rs15 billion to Rs414 billion. The New Islamabad Airport has gone from Rs37 billion to over Rs100 billion. Imagine, the tariff for Nandipur is: Refined Furnace Oil Rs18.17/kWh; High Speed Diesel Rs27.91/kWh and Gas Rs8.44/kWh.

Pakistan is getting crowded with ‘unsound economic projects’. Debt is the new weapon of war – debt that leads to ‘emergency managers’ and ‘emergency managers’ then “turn over the reins of the economy” to their political masters. The combination of unsound economic projects, debt, enforced austerity (by the IMF) and under-investment in health and education are the new weapons of war. This is what the 4th Generation War is all about.

Missiles, as weapons of war, are out. Unsound economic projects, as weapons of war, are in. Tanks, as weapons of war, are out. Debt, as a weapon of war, is in. Cold start, as a weapon of war, is dead. An economic strategy based on unsound economic projects is in. Open warfare is out; covert economic operations are in. Military force is out; financial warfare is in.

Cheers Image

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 24 Oct 2017 15:01

X Posted on the OBOR, Chinese Strategy and Implications Thread

India lines up projects to strengthen links with South, Southeast Asia

NEW DELHI: India is considering a series of projects aimed at strengthening links with South Asia and between the region and Southeast Asia. This comes at a time when the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation is losing steam amid Pakistan's intransigence over connectivity pacts and China is seeking to increase its influence in the region.

The proposals under consideration include mega cross-border air and land connectivity projects, along with power and energy initiatives.

Some of these projects were part of the agenda when external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj met her Bangladeshi counterpart Mahmud Ali in Dhaka on Sunday, officials told ET.

These included proposals for Dhaka-Chennai-Colombo air connectivity, Chittagong-Kolkata-Colombo shipping connectivity, Bangladesh-North Bengal rail link, Bangladesh-Bhutan internet cables through India, trade route connecting Nakugaon Land Port in Bangladesh to Gayleyphung in Bhutan via India.

Image

Besides, efforts are on implement the BBIN (Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal) motor vehicles agreement (MVA) soon, while keeping a provision for Bhutan to join later. Bhutan had requested to join the initiative later since its upper house of parliament failed to ratify the pact.

Regional connectivity heads the agenda for the Narendra Modi government because China is expanding its footprint in South Asia and Southeast Asia through its One Belt One Road initiative.

The BBIN MVA will complement the proposed BIMSTEC MVA, which is expected to be the key outcome of the seven-nation summit to be held in Nepal early next year to celebrate 20 years of creation of the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation. The BIMSTEC MVA will have all multi-modal features connecting Sri Lanka, which has so far been connected to the six members of the grouping only through air or sea. The two agreements are a critical part of India's Act East policy, which is aimed at enabling strengthening of ties with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations or ASEAN in the periphery of China.

BIMSTEC is also mulling connectivity through cruise liners to promote tourism and coastal shipping between the member states. This will facilitate India's Bay of Bengal outreach, complementing its Indian Ocean Region strategy. Japan is India's key partner in this process.

Connectivity through trans-border rivers among BIMSTEC member states is also on the cards, officials indicated. A significant development has been the beginning of the direct sea movement of containerised cargo between India and Bangladesh, which has reduced shipping time from 30-40 days to not more than 10 days. The two states are linked by cross-border bus and train, besides movement of cargo through rivers. Additionally, old rail links are being revived and new routes added between India and Bangladesh.

The BBIN MVA seeks to allow movement of a pre-determined number of passenger vehicles (personal, regular and non-regular) and cargo vehicles along pre-identified routes running across the territories of the four countries. The trial run of a truck carrying cargo on the Dhaka-Kolkata-Delhi route under the BBIN MVA was carried out successfully in September last year.

A memorandum of understanding for trilateral hydropower cooperation among Bangladesh, India and Bhutan is expected to be signed soon. India had earlier agreed to facilitate import of electricity to Bangladesh from hydro projects in Nepal.

The MoU for Indo-Bhutan-Bangladesh energy partnership is proposed to be signed in presence of the prime ministers of the three countries, according to people aware of the matter. The MoU between NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Limited and Bangladesh Power Development Board for the supply of 500 mw hydropower from the 900 mw Upper Karnali Hydropower plant in Nepal was signed during the visit of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to India in April 2017. At present there are two interconnections through which 660 mw of power is transferred from India to Bangladesh. The state-run Indian firm plans to set up a 1,320 mw coal-fired thermal power plant at Rampal in Bangladesh and several private players are also setting up power stations in the neighbouring country.

India will construct a 135-km-long pipeline from Assam to supply oil to Bangladesh ollowing an agreement signed on Sunday after the Swaraj-Ali joint consultative committee meeting. ONGC Videsh Ltd has acquired two shallow water blocks in Bangladesh, SS-04 and SS-09, in a 50:50 consortium with Oil India Limited, and is carrying out exploration activities in these blocks.

Meanwhile, eyeing better integration among the seven member states, BIMSTEC is considering other regional efforts as well, including the Bay of Bengal Industrial Growth Belt, a joint effort of Japan and Bangladesh. Maritime connectivity is crucial for the BIMSTEC region owing to its geography as well as geo-strategic requirements.

Cheers Image

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 28 Oct 2017 19:51

X Posted on the Terroristani Thread

CPEC long-term plan - Editorial

After suffering from a series of delays, the long-term plan, or LTP, for the China Pakistan Economic Corridor is now ready for finalisation at the seventh meeting of the Joint Cooperation Committee to be held in Islamabad on Nov 21.

At the last JCC meeting held in December 2016, the plan was discussed and both sides agreed that the “LTP shall be finalised and approved by March 31, 2017, at the latest” according to the minutes of that discussion. But that date came and went, and we were told that the document was awaiting the signature of the then prime minister who was a bit caught up in his Panama Papers-related entanglements.

Then we were told that the LTP would be finalised during the One Belt, One Road summit held in Beijing in mid May. But the government delegation returned from the summit promising that the plan would be finalised in a couple of weeks.

Since the details of the plan had already been published by Dawn while they were away, we were also promised that immediately upon its finalisation, the full LTP would be made public to dispel some of the anxieties caused by the particulars. Then the trail went cold.

This is the first time we have heard of the plan since then, and Interior Minister Ahsan Iqbal has again repeated his commitment to make it public after finalisation. Whatever may have been the reasons for the delay, the fact that we now have a date for finalisation is progress, and the minister must be held to his promise of disclosure.

The LTP is the most detailed long-term plan that has ever been proposed for Pakistan, and its ramifications for the economy are deep and broad.

Contrary to the image of CPEC as an enterprise involving roads and power plants, the LTP shows that the real nature of the engagement with China that is about to begin goes far beyond infrastructure investments and enhanced connectivity.

The real game of CPEC appears to be to prepare the economy, society and culture of Pakistan for a massive influx of Chinese investments and personnel. This could indeed prove to be a positive development, and provide the economy with a boost given the scale of the investments being contemplated.

But the public has a right to know exactly what is being negotiated under this arrangement, and to assess and debate its merits. There can be no two opinions about this.

As soon as the plan is finalised at the next JCC meeting, the clock will start ticking for Mr Iqbal to deliver on his commitment and make a full disclosure of all the contents of the LTP.

A redacted or abbreviated version will not do. Full disclosure is what he promised, and that is what he must ensure.

Cheers Image

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby arun » 28 Oct 2017 20:25

X Posted.

Vips wrote:Pakistani author shatters delusions of paki dreams of earning toll income form CPEC which is three times pakistani budget size by 2030!!!

The author did some research regarding the freight market size, the tolls that can be levied etc. Not knowing that the whole effort is wasted as Chinese have a written agreement with Pakistani government and no toll can be charged on Chinese trucks/good movement. :rotfl:


Excerpt from the above:

Earlier this month, the Board of Investment claimed that the CPEC toll income would be three times the budget of Pakistan after completion by 2030. It is the first time an official figure on CPEC toll estimates has come out and needs some objective appraisal.

Pakistan’s budget this year stood at Rs4.75 trillion. Thrice this amount would mean Rs14+ trillion ($135+ billion).


Talk of CPEC generating toll income of USD 135 Billion is typical braggart claim from the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan that has no basis in reality.

Consider the Suez Canal revenue for the 10 months January to October 2017 amounted to USD 4.3 Billion for an annualised USD 5.16 Billion.

Suez Canal revenues up to USD 4.3 billion in 2017: SCZone Chairman

Al-Masry Al-Youm
October 19, 2017 3:29 pm

The chairman of Suez Canal Authority (SCA) and SCZone — the Suez Canal Economic Zone, Mohab Mamish, announced on Wednesday that the SCA’s revenues raised by 3.4 per cent within the period from January-October 2017, increasing to $US4.3 billion up from $US4.2 billion in 2016. ……………..

Suez Canal revenues up to USD 4.3 billion in 2017: SCZone Chairman


Then consider that the Panama Canal revenue for the 6 months January to June 2017 amounted to USD 1.1 Billion for an annualised USD 2,2 Billion revenue:

Panama Canal toll revenues up 19.7% in first half 2017

Panama Canal revenues totaled US $ 1,119.5 million in the first half of this year, up 19.7% from US $ 935.3 million in the same period of National Institute of Statistics and Census (INEC) released today.

08/08/2017 - 15:59 ·Panama, Aug 8 (EFE) .- Panama Canal revenues totaled $ 1,119.5 million in the first half of this year, 19.7% more than the 935.3 million in the same period of 2016 According to data from the National Institute of Statistics and Census (INEC) released today. ………………..

Panama Canal toll revenues up 19.7% in first half 2017

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 29 Oct 2017 22:06

X Posted on the Terroristan and OBOR Threads

India sends 1st wheat shipment to Afghanistan via Chabahar port

Badhaiyan Ji Badhaiyan, Cheen ko Badhaiyan, Terroristan Ko Badhaiyan, Gamechanger CPEC Ko Badhaiyan, OBOR Ko Badhaiyan aur antim mein Gwadar Ko Badhaiyan! :rotfl:

NEW DELHI: India on Sunday sent its first consignment of wheat to Afghanistan through the Chabahar port in Iran, seen as a "landmark" move to operationalise the new strategic transit route, bypassing Pakistan.

The shipment was flagged off from the Kandla port in Gujarat with External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj and her Afghan counterpart Salahuddin Rabbani joining the ceremony through video conferencing.

"The shipment of wheat is a landmark moment as it will pave the way for operationalisation of the Chabahar port as an alternate, reliable and robust connectivity for Afghanistan," the ministry of external affairs (MEA) said in a statement.

In June, India and Afghanistan had launched an air freight corridor between the two countries to boost trade as Pakistan has been refusing land transit access through its territory.

"I am extremely delighted that today we have joined on a momentous occasion for the people of our three countries and the region," Swaraj said, terming the move as an important step in realising the shared aspiration to carve out "new routes" of peace and prosperity.

The consignment will be transported to Afghanistan from Chabahar through land route.


Swaraj also reiterated India's continued commitment to support reconstruction, capacity building and socio-economic development of Afghanistan, including under the framework of the New Development Partnership announced last month.

"The wheat that is leaving the Indian shores today, is a gift from the people of India to our Afghan brethren. It is testament to the continued commitment of the government and the people of India to support our Afghan brethren in building a normal, peaceful, prosperous, secure and bright future for themselves," Swaraj said.

The external affairs minister also renewed commitment to work closely with regional and international partners to bring peace, security, stability and prosperity in Afghanistan.

The Chabahar port is expected to open up new opportunities for trade and transit from and to Afghanistan and enhance trade and commerce between the three countries and the wider region.

"The people of India, Afghanistan and Iran have been connected through centuries; shared commonalities of art and culture, ideas and knowledge; language and traditions. Today, we are rejuvenating these connects and commonalities. I believe that this is the starting point of our journey to realise the full spectrum of connectivity," Swaraj said.

Swaraj and Rabbani welcomed the fact that this is the first shipment that would be going to Afghanistan through the Chabahar port after trilateral agreement on Establishment of International Transport and Transit Corridor was signed during the visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Iran in May 2016, the MEA said.

It said six more wheat shipments will be sent to Afghanistan over the next few months.

India and Iran have already expressed commitment for early completion of the work on the Chabahar port project.

The Chabahar port, located in the Sistan-Balochistan province on the energy-rich Persian Gulf nations southern coast, lies outside the Persian Gulf and can be easily accessed from India's western coast, bypassing Pakistan.

The port is likely to ramp up trade between India, Afghanistan and Iran in the wake of Pakistan denying transit access to New Delhi for trade with the two countries.

India has been closely working with Afghanistan to create alternate and reliable access routes, bypassing Pakistan.

Cheers Image

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3948
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby kit » 30 Oct 2017 03:15

Peregrine wrote:X Posted on the Terroristan & PESW Threads

Unsound projects

Capital suggestion

‘Unsound economic projects’ are the new weapons of war. In the 70s, President Richard Nixon ordered the CIA to “make the [Chilean] economy scream (declassified documents relating to the military coup, September 11, 1973)”. Lo and behold, Pakistan’s economy is screaming today.

For the record, Pakistani leaders stand convinced of taking on additional layers of debt on top of existing layers of debt.

For the record, Pakistani leaders stand convinced of ‘adopting economic policies that are bound to impoverish’ Pakistan.

For all of us to see, ‘uneconomical, financially non-viable and fiscally unsound’ projects are being bankrolled. The 27-kilometer Orange Line, the light rail rapid transit system, is expected to cost Rs162 billion. The estimated breakeven is Rs175 per ticket. At Rs20 a ticket, the Orange Line will lose Rs40 million a day or Rs14 billion a year every year. Plus, an additional Rs4 billion for operation and maintenance. Assuming that the Chinese loan is concessional, the debt payment of interest and principal is estimated at around Rs10 billion a year. Red alert: The debt burden is in dollars and the project loses money.

Imagine, the Government of Pakistan has guaranteed an annual Return on Equity (ROE) of 34.49 percent for the Thar Coal Block-I Power Generation Company (Private) Limited. The project cost is estimated at $767 million of which $575 million is debt. The interest rate used as the reference is Inter Bank Offer Rate (LIBOR) of 0.45 percent plus 450 basis points (https://nepra.org.pk/Tariff/IPPs/003%20 ... 6-2016.PDF).

For the record, the annual Return on Equity guaranteed by the Government of Pakistan on the Sahiwal Coal Power Project stands at a tall 27.2 percent. The interest rate used as the reference is Inter Bank Offer Rate (KIBOR) of 11.91 percent plus 350 basis points. The project cost is estimated at $956 million of which $723 million is debt (https://nepra.org.pk/Tariff/IPPs/Huanen ... 0(Pakistan)%20Energy%20(Private)%20Limited/TRF-308%20HUANENG%20UPFRONT%20COAL%20DETERMINATION%2031-03-2015%204385-87.pdf).

Red alert: This is awfully expensive electricity. Our industry cannot produce exportable competitive products with this electricity. Resultantly, we will have a huge dollar-denominated debt servicing burden but no additional exports.

Nandipur has gone from $329 million to $847 million. Neelum-Jhelum has gone from Rs15 billion to Rs414 billion. The New Islamabad Airport has gone from Rs37 billion to over Rs100 billion. Imagine, the tariff for Nandipur is: Refined Furnace Oil Rs18.17/kWh; High Speed Diesel Rs27.91/kWh and Gas Rs8.44/kWh.

Pakistan is getting crowded with ‘unsound economic projects’. Debt is the new weapon of war – debt that leads to ‘emergency managers’ and ‘emergency managers’ then “turn over the reins of the economy” to their political masters. The combination of unsound economic projects, debt, enforced austerity (by the IMF) and under-investment in health and education are the new weapons of war. This is what the 4th Generation War is all about.

Missiles, as weapons of war, are out. Unsound economic projects, as weapons of war, are in. Tanks, as weapons of war, are out. Debt, as a weapon of war, is in. Cold start, as a weapon of war, is dead. An economic strategy based on unsound economic projects is in. Open warfare is out; covert economic operations are in. Military force is out; financial warfare is in.

Cheers Image


Well the best way to put all that is

" Buddy., the Generals are selling of Pakistan to China and moving off to ..where else ..USA :mrgreen: :mrgreen: "

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3948
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby kit » 30 Oct 2017 03:19


kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3948
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby kit » 30 Oct 2017 03:20

CPEC without India is as good as dead.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby arun » 30 Oct 2017 07:30

X Posted from the “Terroristan” aka Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan thread.

Peregrine wrote: India turns down Pak. offer of talks on transit trade to Afghanistan

India has rejected an offer from Pakistan for talks on transit trade to Afghanistan, diplomats and officials in New Delhi and Kabul have confirmed to The Hindu.

According to sources, the offer was made by the Pakistan Chief of Army Staff General Qamar Javed when he met President Ashraf Ghani on October 1 in Kabul. During discussions on the renewal of the Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement (APTTA), that lapsed in 2015, President Ghani repeated concerns that trade with India over the Wagah border had been blocked by Pakistan, despite being agreed to in the APTTA.

“At this, the Pakistani Army Chief offered to talk about the transit trade issues with Indian officials,” said a diplomat privy to the talks, adding that General Bajwa reportedly said, “Ask the Indian side to speak to us and we will try and sort it out.”

President Ghani is understood to have conveyed the conversation to New Delhi through the Indian Embassy in Kabul. However, days later, Indian officials at the SCO Afghanistan-Contact group meeting in Moscow, told the Afghan delegation that it would not take up the offer for talks.

“It wasn’t a real offer, as far as India sees it,” an MEA official, who asked not to be named, told The Hindu, confirming the government decision.

“The APTTA is a bilateral agreement. It is not working because of unilateral decisions by Pakistan not to honour it. So how can India-Pakistan talks fix that?” he said.

Pakistan has consistently refused to allow any Indian goods to travel over land Afghanistan, insisting that India use the sea-route via Karachi. Exasperated by Pakistan’s refusal to allow the truck trade, President Ghani has said repeatedly that he would cut off Pakistan’s access to Central Asia and issued a decree last week cancelling permission for Pakistani trucks to transit through Afghanistan.The Pakistani gambit on APTTA made little headway as a result, especially as

India and Afghanistan are now working on strengthening alternative routes, including the air cargo corridor launched in June this year, and the Chabahar sea route. While the development of Chabahar will take at least another year, India’s first major shipment of 1,30,000 tonnes of wheat via Chabahar will be dispatched on Sunday. Officials The Hindu spoke to said although General Bajwa’s offer was only made orally, and not followed up with a direct offer to India, it was considered significant for a number reasons. To begin with, the offer was made by the Pakistan Army Chief, considered to have a stronger mandate to implement such an offer than his civilian counterparts.

U.S. nudge

In addition, the conversation was held in the backdrop of the U.S.’s newly announced South Asia Policy for Afghanistan, where the Trump administration has committed to ensuring greater Indian involvement in development projects in Afghanistan, while also pushing to “ease tensions” along the India-Pakistan border. It also had come just as preparations had begun for U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to visit Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, a visit he concluded this week.

“Frankly, we hoped that the offer by General Bajwa would be taken up by the Indian side, or would open a small window for talks, but obviously, it was India’s decision to accept or not,” a U.S. official involved in the planning of the Tillerson visit said.

Speaking to journalists in Geneva on Thursday, Mr. Tillerson said he had told the Pakistani Prime Minister Abbasi and General Bajwa, that his trip was also to “talk about how can we lower the tensions on the border with India,” in an indication that the U.S. still hopes to nudge New Delhi and Islamabad to talks.

https://youtu.be/AYZB8v77cNM


EAM Sushma Swaraj flags off first consignment of wheat from Kandla to Chabahar Port

Cheers Image


Meanwhile text link reporting that the need for the use of the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s transit facilities along with their ability to threaten an economic blockade of Afghanistan by suspending Afghanistan’s use of Pakistani port and road facilities has been substantially reduced by India along with Iran, providing an alternative trade corridor through Iran’s Chabahar Port.

Good to see the clock on the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s ability to act as the toll collecting Thekedar of Afghanistan’s external trade winding down:

Delhi sends Kabul 1st wheat shipment through Chabahar

By Pajhwok,
On Oct 29, 2017 - 15:07

KABULinfo-(Pajhwok): Foreign ministers of Afghanistan, India and Iran on Sunday flagged off the maiden shipment of wheat from New Delhi to Kabul through the Chabahar port in Iran.

The Indian government has promised a supply 1.1 million tonnes of wheat for the people of Afghanistan on a grant basis, according to the Asian News International (ANI).

External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj, her Afghan counterpart Salahuddin Rabbani and Javad Zarif of Iran hailed the first shipment going to Afghanistan through the Chabahar port.

During the visit of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Iran in May 2016, a three-way deal on establishing the International Transport and Transit Corridor was inked.

Over the next few months, six more wheat shipments will be dispatched to Afghanistan. The ministers renewed their pledge to continue cooperation in the interest of the people of Afghanistan and the region as a whole.

India would continue supporting Afghanistan’s reconstruction , capacity-building and socio-economic development, including under the framework of the New Development Partnership, Swaraj said

She also renewed India’s commitment to working closely with regional and international partners to bring peace, security, stability and prosperity to Afghanistan.


From here:

Delhi sends Kabul 1st wheat shipment through Chabahar

TKiran
BRFite
Posts: 939
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 00:22

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby TKiran » 30 Oct 2017 12:46

CPEC is strategic project for China.

1. CPEC without India participation == colonization of Pakistan, undermining Indian sovereignty in Kashmir.

2. CPEC with India participation == all benefits of #1 + commercial use and profits.

In fact, China's calculation is, #2 means, India gave up on Kashmir.

For India, #2 is acceptable without #1.(that's what MEA statement means, of course, it's Indian diplomacy in showing pusillanimity, when you do not condemn #1 in no uncertain terms, China is very happy with MEA statement, as it shows that India one day will welcome CPEC and that's what they read from that statement. They can count on MEA statements, as those statements are very reassuring China that India is not serious in disrupting CPEC.)

MEA statements are often funny and "not serious". Either there's incompetence in India diplomacy, or they are chankian.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23927
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 01 Nov 2017 11:40

China and Pakistan are selling dreams and illusion in the name of CPEC: VC Niti Aayog - Economic Times
The vice chairman of Niti Aayog Dr Rajiv Kumar stated that China and Pakistan were selling dreams and illusion in the name of China Pakistan Economic Corridor and this activity would only benefit five percent elite Pakistanis and not the common man of that country.

Pakistan, Kumar said is successfully leveraging its relationship with China like they leveraged relationship with US in 1980’s to its best, with the sole aim to counter India and it continues to be so.


CPEC, as per the Niti Aayog VC, will have no impact on India, as it is not an Indian problem or issue, but a wonderful Chinese ambition of which Pakistan has decided to become a client state and transit route for Chinese goods.

Kumar was speaking on sidelines of a function in Srinagar ‘Role of Youth and Economy of J&K’ organized by Delhi based organization Bureau of Research on Industries and Economic Fundamentals.

“This whole hope, that there would be tremendous multiplier effect of (CPEC) and Chinese investors and traders are going to set up units there. I don’t think so that will happen,” Kumar told ET, adding, “This is a dream and sort of illusion that is being sold. This is part of Border Road Initiative {Did he really say 'Border' ?} and China had the centuries old ambition of getting access to warm waters of Arabian Sea and has succeeded in that.”

Kumar says that this is wonderful Chinese ambition as it has always aspired to be the middle kingdom to which whole world should come and pay obeisance. “Pakistanis have agreed to this. We are still, at best, thinking about it. I hope we don’t have to do it.” {What does he mean?}

“Pakistani rulers have tied themselves with china in such a way which is not going to be good for people of Pakistan. Pakistani people are not very close to and have no traditional or cultural relationship with China,” said Kumar adding, “This (CPEC) is therefore a decision by a small elite for their own benefit as has been the case always. The driving force is not their love for china, but a smart design to counter India and amplify geostrategic power.”

While referring to a conversation of Brijesh Mishra, who served as principal secretary of then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, with a Chinese delegation in his presence, Kumar quoted him as saying, “Look no country is big enough in the whole world to put India in its pocket, neither USA nor China. We have our identity and status.”

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1962
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby AdityaM » 02 Nov 2017 01:53


kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3948
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby kit » 02 Nov 2017 03:30

TKiran wrote:CPEC is strategic project for China.

1. CPEC without India participation == colonization of Pakistan, undermining Indian sovereignty in Kashmir.

2. CPEC with India participation == all benefits of #1 + commercial use and profits.

In fact, China's calculation is, #2 means, India gave up on Kashmir.

For India, #2 is acceptable without #1.(that's what MEA statement means, of course, it's Indian diplomacy in showing pusillanimity, when you do not condemn #1 in no uncertain terms, China is very happy with MEA statement, as it shows that India one day will welcome CPEC and that's what they read from that statement. They can count on MEA statements, as those statements are very reassuring China that India is not serious in disrupting CPEC.)

MEA statements are often funny and "not serious". Either there's incompetence in India diplomacy, or they are chankian.


more the case of talking nonsense in a sensible way while actions bely those very words .. witness the sale of brahmos to vietnam ..response of MEA was epic !! .

Credit needs to be given to the MEA , every country's MEA should be like those corporate lawyers , They just know how to scr''' well without the other party knowing!

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3492
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby ArjunPandit » 02 Nov 2017 04:11

^^Now i am assured CPEC is truly a game changer for Pakis, the game has been changed from them screwing khan to being screwed themselves

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23927
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 02 Nov 2017 09:04

CPEC Long Term Plan - DAWN
PLANNING MINISTER Mr Ahsan Iqbal has finally confirmed that the CPEC Long Term Plan (LTP) is about to be finalised on Nov 21 at the seventh Joint Cooperation Committee to be held in Islamabad. Some might recall that details from the LTP in question were published by Dawn in a long detailed report in May, and the same minister had reacted sharply at the time, saying that the details are “factually incorrect” and the real plan will be made public once it has been finalised.

It looks like that moment is at last arriving, if the minister lives up to his promise of releasing the full document. If they do what they did earlier in the year, and produce a shortened, sanitised and general summary of the main LTP, and release that claiming that it is the original document, we will know that an effort is being made to conceal the real details of CPEC from the public.

To recap the conversations that took place around the time when the Dawn story revealed the details of the plan, there were four main areas of focus identified by the Chinese side and a few from the Pakistanis. The Chinese appeared primarily interested in agriculture, industrial zones and tourism, along with a digital strategy to expand fibre optic connectivity and build a submarine cable landing station in Gwadar to carry some of their digital traffic from the western provinces out via Pakistan rather than routing it through servers in Europe.

In addition, there was a detailed financial strategy, which called upon the government of Pakistan to expand the role of the yuan in its economy, turn more to raising debt from the markets in Hong Kong, and dedicate increasing resources from its own budget, as well as provincial and local bodies’ budgets, towards CPEC-related priorities.

Since then, we have seen something odd happening. Many of the priorities identified in the LTP have indeed been pursued since, but without any of the fanfare associated with the inauguration of roads and power plants. For example, the national food security policy announced in July contained an entire section dedicated to the creation of CPEC-related agriculture development zones as one solution to the country’s future food security issues. Many of the details in that policy document sound almost identical to the priorities highlighted by the Chinese in their LTP document, produced by the China Development Bank under the auspices of the National Development Reform Commission.

In other examples, a recent news item highlighted the fact that a Chinese company has entered into an MoU with the city of Karachi to build an elevated road, almost four kilometres long, from Clifton Beach to Hawkesbay. A closer read of the actual MoU shows that the road is in fact being built to carry traffic to a Chinese resort to be built in Hawkesbay beach, possibly one of the first of the many tourist resorts to be built along the coastal strip from Badin to Gwadar identified in the Dawn report.

There are innumerable examples now. Land acquisition is under way in various areas around KP to build housing for Chinese personnel who will reside in the province in the years when CPEC-related investment begins pouring into the country.

The basic point here is simple: we have all been led to believe that CPEC is about connectivity, roads and power plants. In reality, it is about much more than that. It is about preparing the country to receive massive amounts of Chinese investments, personnel and culture.
None of this implies that CPEC is a bad thing, as some people are ready to conclude without reflection. It is only to imply that the real details of what is being negotiated under the CPEC umbrella need to be publicly known, and efforts to hide these details from the public in a democratic country like Pakistan, where transparency and debate around issues of national importance are the norm, are bound to fuel adverse commentary and conspiracy theorising.

When the minister issued his sharp response to the Dawn story about the LTP, he was given a clear stage upon which to air his grievances with the story. When has asked for more time to be allowed to make the details of the LTP, he was given the time he said he required. But now that he has confirmed that the LTP is about to be finalised, it must be insisted that the time to deliver on his commitment has also arrived.

It is worth bearing in mind a couple of tricks that the government could resort to in order to try and wiggle out of this commitment without appearing to do so. Early in the year, when it needed provincial government assent for the plan, it generated a shorter, edited draft of the original LTP and circulated that to the provincial governments. Later, the government tried to argue that the edited version is the real one, and the longer, detailed draft was only a “working document”. A few people fell for this gimmick, thinking that somehow there are multiple drafts of the plan in play. In reality there was only one, and the shorter one was only a summary meant for public consumption with all vital details removed. Such gimmickry must not be resorted to this time.

The LTP is one of the most important documents in the arena these days, far more than the LNG contract that members of the opposition parties are clamouring for access to. It is bewildering to see the same members of the opposition parties holding their silence regarding the disclosure of the LTP. How has the silence of the opposition parties been obtained? Have they seen the LTP to be satisfied that no further discussion is required? The demands for CPEC transparency are more consequential for Pakistan’s long-term prospects, especially for its economy, and silence does not serve that interest well. {The silence is because of three reasons, in no particular order: they have been 'bought' by China; they see ample opportunities to make huge money through CPEC deals; and, they feel that the game-changer CPEC would enable them to achieve parity with 'mortal-enemy' India and destroy it eventually}

The writer is a member of staff.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23927
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby SSridhar » 02 Nov 2017 09:36

As the above report says, it would be interesting to see how on November 21, Terroristan fudges, hides, and indulges in word-play to implement the Chinese Long Term Plan.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 03 Nov 2017 21:35

CPEC: Are we shooting ourselves in the foot?

Security and stability are key to handling this investment

A short six months ago, a palpable sense of optimism prevailed in Pakistan. The news flow was generally positive—after all things were looking up, and even the foreign press, Financial Times, the Wall Street Journal, Economist begrudgingly acknowledged as much. Thanks to the army’s role and great sacrifice, security had improved. In tandem, the economy was getting fired up, the end of load shedding was in sight, inflation benign and with it interest rates at historic lows with stocks rising in anticipation of foreign direct investment and portfolio investment flows.

This encouraged commentators to think that a long-awaited turnaround in our fortunes was shaping up nicely as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor roll-out picked up pace and substance on the ground and local investors unveiled long-stalled investment plans of their own. There appeared to be consensus that economic prospects founded on CPEC represented the most potent opportunity for the country.

Back then, the geo-political elephant in the room had not reared its ugly head nor had the Supreme Court pronounced its verdict. As the American global policy remained in flux and failed to enunciate meaningfully on the Afghan imbroglio, Pakistan, it appeared, was craving inattention. Up until recently, no meaningful contact had been made with the new administration. On the other hand, the assemblage of generals under pressure to redeem America’s failing position in Afghanistan as heads of National Security, the Department of Defense and ultimately the White House chief of staff and of Lisa Curtis from the Heritage Foundation as South Asia policy head was as ominous as the lull before the storm.

Narendra Modi’s visit to the US in June was the final trigger to what is now a fast-evolving situation which threatens to subsume regional strategic constructs. Pakistan’s response thus far has been flat-footed and transactional, notwithstanding COAS General Bajwa’s recent initiative to attempt a reset with Afghanistan. Significantly, it underlined the central role of the armed forces in regional policy to the near exclusion of civilian input and was a signal that there was little likelihood of any substantive change from the precept of a security state that has traditionally guided the establishment in our country.

Predictably, a hunker down mood has set in after Mr Trump’s strongly worded statement, accusing Pakistan of providing a safe haven for terrorists in Afghanistan in August. Mr Trump’s public posture is not given to nuanced ways and therefore one expects that the administration will try to keep Pakistan off balance without wanting to lose its influence entirely.

Based on whatever has been publicly shared, it appears that there was also no breakthrough during Rex Tillerson’s just concluded visit to Islamabad, albeit some moves to bolster trust preceded it. It was nevertheless, refreshing to see that the government presented a more united and resolute front. The US understands that the situation in Afghanistan is unremittingly messy. Neither it, nor Ashraf Ghani’s government nor Pakistan are in a position to control the outcome in any meaningful way in the very short term but having lost much treasure and some blood, it cannot afford to give up. America’s deep state agenda cannot be about winning the Afghan war given the limited resource commitment and the aim therefore is to disrupt and destabilize and block the emergence any significant rival (Russia, Iran, China and its proxy Pakistan) and thereby maintain the regional balance at minimal cost.

How the scenario unfolds for Pakistan will depend on the intensity of this rivalry, and as a corollary, the degree to which Pakistan is able to fulfill more coercive American expectations. The US has signaled that it could act as a spoiler by suggesting that the CPEC route passes through ‘disputed territory’ as a pressure tactic. The ultimate prize (which would explain America’s abiding interest) appears to be Afghanistan’s as-yet undeveloped mineral wealth, including massive deposits of lithium, a rare mineral required for lithium ion batteries (see ‘Trump finds reason to remain in Afghanistan: Minerals’ published in the New York Times July 25). India, hitherto a proponent of an independent foreign policy with no overt alliances, will break with its past and line up squarely behind the US as an outsourced nation builder and proxy. This will suit it to a tee as it will relish the prospect of punishing Pakistan by meddling in Fata and Balochistan and keep 200,000 troops tied down on our western border.

Ironically, if our attempts to establish a pliable end state in Afghanistan were an unspoken strategic goal, then the outcome is exactly the opposite and presages the futility of analyzing problems from a geo-strategic lens only. While a secure and peaceful western border is a legitimate demand by Pakistan, new approaches need examination which should include sincere attempts to normalize relations with Afghanistan, facilitate peace and stability and include her in CPEC.

CPEC is a high-stakes gamble that will test Pakistan’s diplomacy skills. Of course the Great Terroristan Leadership and People are Devoid and Innocent of such Skills Pakistan’s geo-strategic importance is both a curse or an opportunity, depending on whether vested players engage in rivalry or collaborate with it for common benefit. Unending instability in Afghanistan has encouraged many other nations to fish in troubled waters. In the background are tectonic shifts in global geostrategy with the emergence of China as the world’s second largest economy and its OBOR initiative seen as a threat to America’s future status as the pre-eminent world power.

The regional situation is also testing our patience and cohesiveness, internally. External tensions have spilled over into our national politics, including the delicate power-sharing balance between the military and the civilian government. For the military, security is paramount as evident from recent comments by COAS General Bajwa that the country’s economic management needs attention since it is intimately connected to our ability to manage our security environment. It suggests that the military is unhappy at what it sees as wasteful financial expenditure on populist civilian projects which undercut military priorities. Other sources have indicated that it also feels that the 18th Amendment has given far too much latitude to the provinces to go their own way and undermines central authority. In an election year, the elected central government (as all elected governments) would be unwilling to concede the one tool that provides it a significant incumbency advantage especially as it perceives that it can leverage its electoral position on its record. Six months on, a prime minister has been disqualified and democratic continuity is apparently uncertain. The euphoria has subsided, and dire forebodings of a “Chinese East India Company” and “sky high debt” are being aired. A dormant finance ministry has done little to arrest the downward spiral of economic sentiment.

Dispassionate economic analysis will show that the skies have not fallen in the last six months. Pakistan is making an unprecedentedly large and visionary investment What Investments? All Terroristan is doing IS TO TAKE ON MORE & MORE DEBTS! and it needs to ensure that it addresses the issues which are in its control while working to mitigate any risks that are not, with an eye to the long term. Dousing the flames of the political firestorm and corrective measures to the economy are in the first category. Instability serves no one’s interest, least of all requirements for a strong economy to serve our security needs. We should be focusing instead on increasing the size of the pie rather than fighting over a shrinking one as noted by Dr. Asad Zaman in the Business Recorder on October 17.

CPEC’s ultimate success depends on the follow-on foreign and domestic investments that will accelerate growth and job creation for our future generation, the requirements for which are respectively 7% and 2 million jobs per annum according to the ADB. Her working age population is expected to increase by 27.5m to 147m in ten years—the third largest in the world. Hence pedestrian sub 5% growth rates are a non-option. It has a lowest savings and investment rate (15.8%) in South Asia. Do the math; at an estimated capital output ratio of 4, it requires an investment of up to 28% of GDP per year to get to 7% growth. With a perennially low savings rate, Pakistan has no choice but to attract foreign capital and borrow to grow. Pakistan’s public debt is elevated but not out of control at around 63% of GDP of which about 23% is foreign debt as informed by Dr Ishrat Husain in his recent interview to Kamran Khan on TV. Credible and timely policy measures to address the trade deficit and BOP position are needed but in the end stability, security and productivity must underpin the risks we take. If we fail to realise that, then I have a dire warning of my own – we are looking to a dystopian future and a complete breakdown of our national fabric. The time is now to repair the self-inflicted damage.

Cheers Image

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 03 Nov 2017 21:40

SSridhar wrote:As the above report says, it would be interesting to see how on November 21, Terroristan fudges, hides, and indulges in word-play to implement the Chinese Long Term Plan.
SSridhar jI :

I am sure that, knowing Terroristan as you do, in addition to do all you state they also have the FOOT IN THE MOUTH DISEASE!

Cheers Image

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22486
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby chetak » 03 Nov 2017 22:36

ArjunPandit wrote:^^Now i am assured CPEC is truly a game changer for Pakis, the game has been changed from them screwing khan to being screwed themselves


In the meanwhile, back at the ranch............. chabahar port is causing the pakis some heavy distress at being bypassed by India as the alternate route to afghanistan and the paki's "unique geographical position" touted as the USP of paki influence in world affairs being vastly eroded by bania SDREs. Poor pakis, where will it all end for them??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNTXwsVHfNU

Chabahar Port India s masterstroke.


ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3492
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby ArjunPandit » 03 Nov 2017 23:19

Peregrine wrote:CPEC: Are we shooting ourselves in the foot?

Her working age population is expected to increase by 27.5m to 147m in ten years

Cheers Image

This is what we need to worry, these many jihadis/jihadi breeding vessels for coming generations

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 03 Nov 2017 23:34

X Posted on the India's Shipping Sector and Terroristan Threads

Indian Wheat for Afghanistan Arrives at Chabahar Port

India’s first consignment of wheat to be sent to Afghanistan arrived at Iran’s southeastern port of Chabahar on Wednesday morning.

after the Trilateral Agreement on Establishment of International Transport and Transit Corridor was signed by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and Afghanistan President Ashraf Ghani in Tehran in May 2016.

Officials from the three countries, including ambassadors of India and Afghanistan in Tehran, Saurabh Kumar and Nasir Ahmad Nour, respectively attended the welcoming ceremony for the arrival of the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines’ vessel BEHSHAD from India’s western port of Kandla, IRNA reported.

India’s External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj was joined by her Afghan and Iranian counterparts Salahuddin Rabbani and Mohammed Javad Zarif through a joint videoconference, to ceremonially flag off the shipment from India on Sunday.

“The shipment is part of a commitment made by the government of India to supply 1.1 million tons of wheat for the people of Afghanistan on a grant basis,” India’s Ministry of External Affairs stated.

According to officials with Ports and Maritime Organization of Iran, the direct transportation of goods from the port of Kandla to Chabahar would result in saving $750 per 40-foot container and a one-day reduction in the time of transportation and the costs of transport from Chabahar to Kandla would also be cut by $500 for each 40-foot container.

The Indian premier wrote on Twitter that the launch of the trade route “marks a new chapter in regional cooperation and connectivity”.

The Chabahar transit route is intended to improve landlocked Afghanistan’s trade connectivity with India and other countries in South and Southeast Asia. It will also help India to access the markets of Central Asia and Europe through Afghanistan, bypassing Pakistan.

Islamabad at present allows trucks from Afghanistan to carry goods through Pakistan only up to Wagah (a checkpoint on the Pakistani side on the border) and not up to Attari (a checkpoint on the Indian side of the border).

The goods have to be unloaded from trucks coming from Afghanistan in Wagah and loaded again on other vehicles to be brought to Attari and finally into India.

The Afghan trucks then return empty to Afghanistan, as they are not allowed to carry goods from India.

Islamabad has repeatedly rejected calls by New Delhi and Kabul to allow hassle-free two-way trade between Afghanistan and India through Pakistan.

During his visit to New Delhi last Tuesday, Afghan President Ashraf Ghani warned that if Islamabad continued to deny entrepreneurs from his country access to India and rest of South Asia, his government, too, would retaliate and close transit for the traders of Pakistan through Afghanistan to Central Asia.

In June, India and Afghanistan launched a dedicated air freight corridor to boost bilateral commerce averting bottlenecks created by Pakistan on land connectivity between Central and South Asia.

Chabahar Port, located in Sistan-Baluchestan Province on the southeastern coast of Iran, is a port of great strategic utility for India. It lies outside the Persian Gulf and can be accessed from India’s western coast. It is Iran’s only oceanic port.

As per the trilateral transport and transit deal, Indian exporters will be allowed to utilize Chabahar Port and access markets in Afghanistan through Zahedan.

New Delhi last year agreed to provide provision and operationalization of credit of $150 million from EXIM Bank for the development of Chabahar Port.

India will equip and operate two berths in Chabahar Port in Phase I with a capital investment of $85.21 million and annual revenue expenditure of $22.95 million on a 10-year lease.

Cheers Image

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Analyzing CPEC

Postby Peregrine » 03 Nov 2017 23:50

Peregrine wrote:CPEC: Are we shooting ourselves in the foot?

Her working age population is expected to increase by 27.5m to 147m in ten years

Cheers Image
ArjunPandit wrote:This is what we need to worry, these many jihadis/jihadi breeding vessels for coming generations
ArjunPandit :

The Author of the Article has based his Population Figure of 207 Millions as per the Terroristani 2017 Census. However as per the following Article the 2017 Population Figure is 300 Million :

Pakistan unable to control population growth despite huge spending - Muzammil Ferozi Daily Times 11-07-17
Pakistan's population figures are according to estimates is around 200 million according to United Nations report . In 1972, Pakistan's population was 7million less than Bangladesh's, in 2015 it surpassed Bangladesh's population by about 30 million. As per sources the recent census in Pakistan the population has crossed 300 million while Karachi's population is 30 million. The population of Pakistan and the rate at which it is increasing has reached levels that are considered 'high risk'


Thus the Figure of working age population is expected to increase to about 220 to 225 Million.

The only way to keep this these Bhookha-Nangas in Terroristan and not cross-over into India is to build a "DEEP-THICK AND HIGH WALL"!

Cheers Image

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3492
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Analyzing CPEC

Postby ArjunPandit » 03 Nov 2017 23:56

Sialkoti stats of course. Although, i differ on the way to keep these bhookha nanga jihadis out of india is extermination or subjugation


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ssaravanan and 20 guests