Analyzing CPEC

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 20 Sep 2016 21:41

I managed to skim through the rest. He has quite a few of his facts wrong.

1. India has long offered (IG after '71 war) to convert the LOC into IB it is Bakis who have rejected that all along!! That would have solved all CPEC (karakoram part) related concerns of both China and Bakis! I don't think such a proposal is on the current GOI's agenda but what about till like 2013?

2. It is silly to suggest that the Chinese will fight for the Bakis and get directly involved between the two. CPEC does not change that. Infact even Baki commentators say that China has many times urged them to resolve all disputed with India or put them on the backburner and focus on economy.

3. Baki economy has been bankrolled by the Americans via the IMF, preferential tariff arrangements and massive amount of direct bilateral funding and NOT the Chinese. CPEC will be their first major financial commitment to Bakistan.

The analysis is wrong on above 5 points at least.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 20 Sep 2016 21:47

^^^ SSji, my article (linked in the Balochistan thread) was on the essentially the same thing. Though I see facts differently and use different templates of history.

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 20 Sep 2016 22:13

CPEC doesnt make any economic sense at all due to the cost of transportation by road. In addition , vagaries of nature looting by mullas, distance of manufacturing hubs etc makes it very risky. I feel it doesnt make sense even militarily..airlifting or by sea would be far better option. I think pakis are leading the chinese the same garden path that they took the yankees through...by the time chinese realise it, pakis will have to look for another murga/goat.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 20 Sep 2016 22:18

geeth wrote:CPEC doesnt make any economic sense at all due to the cost of transportation by road. In addition , vagaries of nature looting by mullas, distance of manufacturing hubs etc makes it very risky. I feel it doesnt make sense even militarily..airlifting or by sea would be far better option. I think pakis are leading the chinese the same garden path that they took the yankees through...by the time chinese realise it, pakis will have to look for another murga/goat.

Chinese may not be in CPEC for economy or Pakistan at all. Infact, IMHO, Pakistan and Economic are deliberate smoke screens in CPEC. It is a strategic route to Gwadar for a permanent PLAN base. All nuke supplies etc. will need some connectivity. The rest Chinese are investing to own Pakistan. 28% ROI on power plants and circular debt - 02 things Pakis can't handle. What's more they have provided China with Sovereign guarantees. Pakistan is now a Chinese munna, tomorrow it will be a colony.

kapilrdave · Post by **kapilrdave** » 21 Sep 2016 16:47

^^ I think we can safely conclude that CPEC is not at all about economy at least for chinese. It is only about getting a naval base (and probably an airbase in future) near the gulf. This will help them blackmailing Iran and Saudis in future with the help of pakis. As a bonus, they will get to exploit the riches of Balochistan. This sort of explains Saudi's support to India recently.

If above is the prime objective of chin then even if POK is recaptured by India, it cannot stop chinnis from creating a naval base in Gwadar as the so called "highway route" via POK is just a red-herring tactic. They will go forward with Gwadar regardless of India's assertion on POK. The only way we (or the world) can stop chinnis from creating a base in gwadar is by liberating Balochistan. That's precisely what we and lot of others are doing! This also explains our over emphasis on Balochistan than the POK. And this also explains pak's desperation to shift the attention from Balochistan to Kashmir.

More than bakis themselves, I think chinnis forced bakis to carry out Uri attack.

kapilrdave · Post by **kapilrdave** » 21 Sep 2016 17:29

We should start linking pak terror with china on international forum. I'm sure dragon doesn't like to be called terror supporters. This will eventually create pressure on china to force stop terror attacks on India.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 21 Sep 2016 20:39

IMO, CPEC is about the following Chinese objectives with no particular order:

Get access to a base in the Arabian Sea and that too close to Hormuz from a reliable, in fact a subservient, ally. We know it for a fact now that of the 18 naval bases that China plans to have stretchig from its shores west up to Africa, Gwadar is the only one among the 18 to have the entire gamut of facilities, namely, Logistics Supply, Rest & Recreation and Weaponry Repairing. As soon as China & Pakistan agreed to the contours of CPEC, Port Authority of Singapore which had a 40-year contract (PSA was barely into into 7th year of the contract) to manage Gwadar was unceremoniously booted out. During the May, 2011 visit by Pakistani PM Yousuf Raza Gilani ( two weeks after the elimination by the US of Osama bin Laden at Abbottabad), reports appeared of the Chinese interest in taking over the Gwadar port and building a naval base there. The Chinese later contradicted these claims, but within two years the reports proved correct. In January 2013, the Pakistan Cabinet led by the PPP Prime Minister Raja Parvez Ashraf decided to hand over the Gwadar Port from Singapore’s PSA to China’s China Overseas Port Holding Authority. To have access all the way from China to the single most important PLAN foreign base, Gwadar, without going through enemy territory is a big asset.
China truly feels that its problems in the hinterland where a thousand mutinies take place everyday without the world ever getting to know about these, can be solved by industrializing these places also, just like the peripheral areas along the coastline. For the western provinces of China, Burma is the sea outlet and a port (Kyaukpyu), oil & gas pipelines, and railroad are being built from there to Yunnan et al. For the more restive north, Xinjiang, Gwadar is expected to fill that role through Pakistan and across the Karakoram, Kun Lun & Taklamakan to Kashgar. After all, Xinjiang is the largest Chinese province and 10 million Uyghurs & 8 million Hans (still counting) populate this province. It is very strategic as well since it shares borders with eight countries and was not incorporated into it long ago. China is not so worried about the cost of transportation (which will be high in any case because Xinjiang is so far away from any nearby port), but it wants to see economic improvement which it feels would turn the Uyghur tide.
The Malacca Dilemma of Hu Jintao will exist and cannot be resolved by either by Gwadar or Kyaukpyu pipelines or the ones from Russia or Uzbekistan. they will provide a lot of strategic value, along with the SPR that China has built, in case of a Malacca lockout.
I have also always believed that CPEC is the template and experience that China seeks in implementing the OBOR elsewhere. It will not only gain experience but also flaunt the success to other countries. It is confident that with a begging-bowl Pakistan whose very survival is in its hands and with a very pliant Pakistani military, it can make CPEC a success story.
Completely consolidate Pakistan as a Chinese province in completing the encircling of India.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Sep 2016 16:00

China caught in a corridor of uncertainty - Kallol Bhattacharjee, The Hindu

China’s comments after the Uri attack amount to Beijing’s admission of deep strategic interest in the Kashmir region, experts and diplomats told The Hindu. Describing the attack as “shocking”, China’s Foreign Ministry expressed “sympathy” for the victims and asked for “relevant parties” to create a favourable environment which will secure CPEC (China Pakistan Economic Corridor) which passes through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK).

“China is unable to appreciate India’s concerns about constructing important projects in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir that is historically part of India. Beijing is following a contradictory policy by declaring that the CPEC should be safe while not doing more to stop terror strikes that originate from Pakistan to attack Afghanistan and India,” said Shashank, former Foreign Secretary. China’s statement regarding the Uri attack reveals the fact that Beijing is willing to stake its diplomacy for the major projects in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, he said.

China on Monday had said, that CPEC which passes through PoK is aimed at bringing development to the entire South Asia region.

“The goal of the CPEC is to serve the region by facilitating better development of regional countries. Naturally, relevant parties are required to make concerted efforts to ensure a safe, sound and favourable environment for the CPEC. As I said earlier we have been following the tension in this region, including in Kashmir recently. The Chinese government holds the position that all relevant parties can join hands to resolve these issues through friendly consultation and uphold regional peace and security, as this is in the fundamental and common interests of all regional countries, China, Pakistan and India included,” said Lu Kang, Foreign Ministry spokesperson.

By tying up the Uri attack with concern for CPEC, Beijing has shown that its views on terror are shaped by its evolving interests in the South Asian region, Mr. Shashank said. “China wants to build its One Belt One Road (OBOR) but other countries especially India will not sacrifice their core interests for Beijing projects,” Mr. Shashank said.

However, experts also cautioned that China too has reasons to be worried by terrorism from Pakistan which has spread to the Xinxiang province of China. “China too has its concerns regarding Pakistan’s ‘deep state’ which supports terrorism. However China plans to engage them with a regional strategic perspective as it does not consider the threat to be its biggest challenge,” said Dr. P. Stobdan of the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses.

India’s efforts to blacklist terror plotter Masood Azhar at the U.N. for the Pathankot attack of January 2 could not succeed due to the “technical hold” that China placed on India’s move at the UN. Diplomats say that India’s plans to eliminate cross-border terror is unlikely to succeed without China’s support at the UN.

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 22 Sep 2016 17:40

SSridhar wrote:
[*]The Malacca Dilemma of Hu Jintao will exist and cannot be resolved by either by Gwadar or Kyaukpyu pipelines or the ones from Russia or Uzbekistan. they will provide a lot of strategic value, along with the SPR that China has built, in case of a Malacca lockout.

Isn't building islands on the reefs in Indo-China sea along with ADIZ, a Chinese answer to the Malacca Dilemma?

abhijitm · Post by **abhijitm** » 22 Sep 2016 17:51

CPEC is only china's plan B if US and India block access through strait of malacca.

schinnas · Post by **schinnas** » 22 Sep 2016 17:52

Our position on CPEC is that it is unacceptable, period, for the primary reason that it goes through our territory without requesting for and receiving formal approval from us.

Whether Cheen helps rein in Pakistan from acting out terror acts in the region or whether CPEC serves only economic functions (which it surely isn't) are not _our_ concerns.

We reserve the right to do whatever it takes to remove illegal encroachments on our land. PoK and GB are our lands.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Sep 2016 18:00

panduranghari wrote:
SSridhar wrote:
[*]The Malacca Dilemma of Hu Jintao will exist and cannot be resolved by either by Gwadar or Kyaukpyu pipelines or the ones from Russia or Uzbekistan. they will provide a lot of strategic value, along with the SPR that China has built, in case of a Malacca lockout.
Isn't building islands on the reefs in Indo-China sea along with ADIZ, a Chinese answer to the Malacca Dilemma?

China is trying to avoid the Malacca straits by building the Kra Isthmus, a-la-Panama in Thailand. But, that takes the China-bound shipping even closer to the Tri-Services ANC ! The Malacca Straits at both ends can be closed by the Indian Navy and the US Navy based in Singapore. The reefs-converted-to-islands in Indo-China Sea are too far away in the east from the Singapore-end of the Malacca. If the situation comes to a stage where Malacca is closed, that would mean that the navies of India, US, Vietnam, Japan & Australia have come together and that would be formidable anywhere but more so in these waters.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Sep 2016 18:10

In fact, China faces three chokepoints, the Malacca Straits (to Indo China Sea), Strait of Hormuz (Persian Gulf) and Bab-el-Mandeb (to Red Sea and the Suez Canal). China proposes to have a naval base in Djibouti that faces the Bab-el-Mandeb, and Gwadar for Hormuz. It does not have any solution for Malacca.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 22 Sep 2016 19:12

schinnas wrote:Our position on CPEC is that it is unacceptable, period, for the primary reason that it goes through our territory without requesting for and receiving formal approval from us.

Whether Cheen helps rein in Pakistan from acting out terror acts in the region or whether CPEC serves only economic functions (which it surely isn't) are not _our_ concerns.

We reserve the right to do whatever it takes to remove illegal encroachments on our land. PoK and GB are our lands.

That is the "diplomatic" reason. The core reason is that the project impinges directly on India's security because the han will then deploy weapons systems at gawadar and en route "to protect" it's assets and that close a proximity of han weapons is too much of a danger to India. It will also cover the pakis with something like a "nuke umbrella" and ensure that many options that are now open to India regarding the pakis will be off the table. The building of a large dual purpose air port at gawadar is also not ruled out and the han may eventually base military aircraft there too.

Han troops present in pakiland may deter India from air/missile strikes in some critical areas for fear of broadening the conflict by drawing in the hans.

saurav_jha · Post by **saurav_jha** » 22 Sep 2016 21:08

Chinese govt may be investing in Road network. But why are Private Companies investing so much in power plants ? Only reason they will invest is, if they have surety of ROI. How are Pakis going to ensure 27% ROI ? what will they do with ultra costly electricity ? Circular Power debt of theirs has already crossed $ 6 Billion. This will only increase when Chinese power plants start production.

PeeliH · Post by **PeeliH** » 23 Sep 2016 13:53

From the article: Rouhani said Iran can install a power plant on border with Pakistan to supply electricity. "We consider Pakistan's economic development as our development," the President was quoted as saying.

http://www.firstpost.com/world/iranian- ... 15704.html

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 23 Sep 2016 17:06

PeeliH, welcome to the forum.

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 23 Sep 2016 19:53

CPAC works in Indias favour in the long run by making bakis get really embraced with the dragons interest trap.

But we get nothing on the China front if we let it happen without doing anything about it.

We must eventually push the bakis into this economic quicksand but only after frustrating the Chinese for about a decade or so by creating all sorts of overt,cover,diplomatic,track 2 hurdles.

Some long distance rocket artillery strikes whacking out some chinese in pok and protracted piss talks with the chinese for a decade or two to remind them of whos the big dog in "South asia"..

I doubt if china would want to go to war with India over such minor rocket artillery provocation..

While at it, India must also raise the issue of China paying toll to India as it will be using Indias territory. The bakis are dumfcuks to not go that route. Must call for negotiating and set up pricing committees on how China should compensate India for using our territory.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 26 Sep 2016 00:55

I was watcing one old video from Al Zajeera - discussion on CPEC, from the time when Xi visied Pak and declared 46B investment. One of the panelists made an interesting comment - CPEC might link up Islamic Extremism from Pakistan to that of Xinjiang which could be pain is ass for China..

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 26 Sep 2016 20:10

China sees Kashmir dispute as an obstacle to Silk Road - Atul Aneja, The Hindu

Growing tensions between India and Pakistan is persuading the Chinese establishment to look at the Kashmir issue as an impediment to Beijing’s One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative, with the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) at its core.

The Uri incident and Islamabad’s re-energised drive to internationalise Kashmir have fuelled considerable anxiety in Beijing. The Chinese foreign ministry has on two occasions since the Uri incident, called upon India and Pakistan to exercise restraint and resume their stalled dialogue.

The CPEC links the Pakistani port of Gwadar with Kashgar in Xinjiang. It is part of China’s high-stake OBOR connectivity initiative in Eurasia, which would allow China to gate-crash as an indispensable rule-maker of international trade and commerce. Coupled with its aspiration to develop a string of ports and coastal economic hubs along its maritime trading routes, China’s Maritime Silk Road (MSR) would also be central to Beijing’s rise as a mature global power.

Li-Sharif talks at UN

China hopes to replicate its dramatic success in developing coastal hubs such as Shanghai and Shenzhen along the Indian Ocean coastline.

Unsurprisingly, CPEC, which passes through a section of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), was the primary focus of talks between Chinese Prime Minister Li Keqiang and his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif at their meeting on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly (UNGA). A note on the September 21 talks on the Chinese foreign ministry website underscored that Mr. Li had “pointed out that at present, bilateral practical cooperation, with China-Pakistan economic corridor as the priority, has achieved positive progress”. Yet, Mr. Li did not hide Beijing’s security concerns, when he stressed that, “It is hoped that Pakistan can reinforce prevention on the security risk of the projects and continue to provide safety protection to the programme construction and Chinese personnel in Pakistan.”

A large part of the CPEC passes through Balochistan. India has raised Pakistan’s alleged human rights violations in the Province at the international level — a policy shift that was underscored by New Delhi’s assertions on the Baloch issue earlier this month at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. These assertions have not gone unnoticed in China. In an interview with The Hindu , academic Hu Shisheng had highlighted that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s reference to Balochistan in his Independence Day address “could be disastrous for the whole region; for all the relations — especially between Pakistan and India, China and India, especially among the three countries. That is the real concern.” He had also pointed out the contrary to the perception that China was developing CPEC to lower its commercial dependence on the Malacca straits, the prime strategic motivation behind the project was to ensure Pakistan’s economic stability. In turn, it was assumed this would help dry up terror sanctuaries in Pakistan, and prevent the outflow of militants, in the region, including China and Central Asia — all part of the expanding OBOR network. {So, you want us to believe this?}

Bringing stability to Pak.

Chinese academics have also begun to debate the regional fall-out of the Kashmir issue, and the benefits to the CPEC, in case a modus vivendi is achieved to address this thorny dispute. “If India and Pakistan can resolve the Kashmir problem, CPEC would not be an obstacle among China, India and Pakistan,” Professor Long Xingchun, Director of Center of India Studies, at China West Normal University, told The Hindu . He added: “The CPEC can then be renamed as China-South Asia corridor benefiting all participants.” Nevertheless, Professor Long noted that though the CPEC is a link between the land corridor of the Silk Road and the MSR, “its emergence was more important to Pakistan than to China”.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 26 Sep 2016 21:57

^^If Messrs. Hu Shisheng and Long Xingchun are at all sincere regarding the benign intentions of the CPEC... to lift Pakistan into economic prosperity and thereby stop its export of terrorism... then they should press Beijing to lean on Islamabad hard to give up its claims on Kashmir, in exchange for this generous $46B investment. That would end the Kashmir problem and everything would be hunky-dory, no?

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 26 Sep 2016 22:23

Rudradev wrote:^^If Messrs. Hu Shisheng and Long Xingchun are at all sincere regarding the benign intentions of the CPEC... to lift Pakistan into economic prosperity and thereby stop its export of terrorism... then they should press Beijing to lean on Islamabad hard to give up its claims on Kashmir, in exchange for this generous $46B investment. That would end the Kashmir problem and everything would be hunky-dory, no?

No. They would have to give up their hold on PoK and then let the CPEC go through Kashmir, under Indian control for India to acquiesce.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 26 Sep 2016 23:06

^^Shaurya we aren't going to acquiesce no matter what

Was being facetious. Even if all territories under Paki occupation were given back to India on a silver platter, are we going to be OK with the PLAN having a huge presence at Gwadar?

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 26 Sep 2016 23:13

SSridhar wrote:IMO, CPEC is about the following Chinese objectives with no particular order:

The Malacca Dilemma of Hu Jintao will exist and cannot be resolved by either by Gwadar or Kyaukpyu pipelines or the ones from Russia or Uzbekistan. they will provide a lot of strategic value, along with the SPR that China has built, in case of a Malacca lockout.

SSridhar Ji :

Please note that the Malacca Straits were bypassed - at that time - by the World’s Biggest Class of Ultra Large Crude Carriers employed on the PG-Japan Trade and these ULCCs had to use the Lambok Strait in 1973 when the Tikku owned Globtic Tokyo and Globtic London of 477,000 MT size commenced working on the PG-Japan Trade. The following Article – Old in the Tooth – makes reference to the Globtic Tokyo and Globtic London bypassing the Malacca Straits :

IHI Kure Shipyard Starts Construction On World's Biggest Tanker

The construction of the world's largest ship, the 372,400-dwt Nisseki Maru for the Tokyo Tanker Co., Ltd., a member of the Nisseki Group, was started on November 18 at the 400,000-dwt building dock of the Kure shipyard of IHI (Ishikawa- jima-Harima Heavy Industries Co.,Ltd.), Japan.

Completion is scheduled for November 1971. After completion, the ship will be engaged in carrying crude oil from Ras Tanura in the Persian Gulf to the Nisseki Group's C.T.S. (a crude oil storage terminal) at Kiire in Kagoshima Bay, Japan.

When unloaded, the tanker will travel via the Malacca Straits, which is the shortest route between Japan and the Persian Gulf. However, when fully loaded with crude oil, it will run through the Lombok Straits since the Malacca Straits are too shallow for the ship to pass through.

A team of women crew members will be aboard the ship for the first time on a Japanese oceangoing vessel. The team will consist of four women—a nurse and three women to be engaged in other jobs. The team will work on a shift basis for comparatively short duty periods.

The world's largest ships now in service are the six 326,000-dwt tankers including the Universe Ireland, which were delivered to National Bulk Carriers Inc., of the United States by IHI's Yokohama shipyard and MHI's Nagasaki shipyard during the period from September 1968 to July 1969.

IHI also has a 477,000-dwt-tanker even larger than the Nisseki Maru on order by Globtik Tanker Limited, England. Its construction will begin at the Kure shipyard in February 1972 with completion scheduled for February 1973. The ship will be chartered by the Tokyo Tanker Co.

1. Thus the Largest Tankers do not use the Malacca in “Fully Loaded” condition. I see no reason why these vessels, if need be, use the Lambok Straits also for the “unloaded” trip back to the PG.

2. Kyaukpyu : I believe this port has already berthed a 300,000 MT VLCC Vessel and as such it obviates need of Gwadar from which Overland Transportation to the Eastern and Southern Chinese Seaboards, albeit via Pipe Line or by Rail Transportation. Please check the following Article :

With Oil And Gas Pipelines, China Takes A Shortcut Through Myanmar - Eric Meyer

Cheers

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 29 Sep 2016 20:41

Hidden costs of CPEC

From that piece -

the day after Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Pakistan, the military put out a press release announcing the creation of a ‘Special Security Division for Pak-China Economic Projects’, which would consist of nine army battalions and six wings of civil armed forces, to be commanded by a major general.

By December we had reports that the CPEC security force had already been deployed, with 9,000 army personnel and 6,000 civil armed forces.

Meanwhile, the Gwadar Security Task Force, another formation similar to the force just raised, commanded by a brigadier, also became operational at the same time, with its expenses to be borne by the government of Balochistan and the federal government.

Rs100bn extraordinary expenditure on security, which was included as a “one-off” item last year and was to be outside the fiscal deficit ceiling, would be renewed again this year. And it surely was.

But then,

All along this timeline, there are repeated clues that the Chinese are not happy with the security arrangements

Worth reading in full

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 30 Sep 2016 18:35

With a new Chinese loan, CPEC is now worth $51.5bn - DAWN

Despite Indian conspiracies, the size of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) has been increased to more than $51.5 billion after China and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) agreed to lend $8bn to upgrade the main railway line from Karachi to Peshawar, according to a federal minister.

Addressing a news briefing upon his return from a week-long visit to China, Minister for Planning, Development and Reforms Ahsan Iqbal said Beijing has agreed to provide Pakistan with a $5.5bn concessional loan to upgrade and modernise the Karachi-Lahore main railway line called ML-1.

In addition, ADB will extend financing of $2.5bn for the Lahore-Peshawar railway track, he said.

“Both loans will carry less than 2 per cent interest rate[ {ADB may be. I cannot believe that China offers such concessional loans especially these days when its economy is in a bad shape. This minister is Pakiing which means lying} /u]. Both are concessional loans,” he said. However, he declined to discuss specifics of the lending programme, saying the Economic Affairs Division is still busy finalising the terms and conditions.

He said the original $46bn CPEC included about $3.56bn financing for the railway network, which has now increased to $8bn. “This is ad add-on” to the original CPEC, he explained.

He said the Karachi-Peshawar railway line processed 75pc of the passenger and cargo traffic, but its efficiency has dropped to 60-80 kilometres per hour. That is because of a continuous deterioration during the long tenure of former president Pervez Musharraf, he said, adding that the track, signalling system and bridges were in bad shape.

The refurbishment and upgradation of the main line will cost $8bn and take five to six years to complete. This will revive its efficiency to 120-160 kilometres per hour. It will be upgraded in a manner that it will accommodate fast-moving trains, reduce the cost of production and increase the competitiveness of Pakistani products.

The main line will then be expanded in the next phase to link Gwadar with Peshawar and then Havelian, Abbottabad, with Khunjerab.

Mr Iqbal said the CPEC has three phases and four major areas, namely Gwadar Port’s development, energy projects, road networks and industrial cooperation. The short-term, medium-term and long-term projects will complete by 2020, 2025 and 2030, respectively.

At present, work is in progress in the first three areas of infrastructure development {So, no industrial collaboration for now}, which will enable the two nations to push for industrial cooperation, he said.

Mr Iqbal said both sides agreed to convene the 6th Joint Cooperation Council (JCC) of the two countries in the last week of November. Before the JCC, working groups on transport, Gwadar Port and industrial cooperation will meet next month to firm up the implementation plan.

He said the long-term industrial cooperation has been finalised in Pakistan in consultation with all provinces, Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan. He said the four chief ministers belonging to different political parties have supported the CPEC that will be funded through the public-sector development programme, Chinese financing and funding by multilateral agencies.

Responding to a question, Mr Iqbal said some people have created misconceptions about the CPEC, adding that the federal government has invited the leadership of the Awami National Party for a briefing next week to address their concerns.

India has launched a massive campaign in the media to mislead people about the CPEC, he said. He noted that CPEC projects of about $18bn are currently in the implementation phase while another $17bn worth of projects are in the active pipeline. This means $35bn worth of projects have already been energised in just two years. {Allah-o-Akbar}

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 02 Oct 2016 20:09

A Senate special committee on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) has prepared its third report on the project raising questions over the fate of the Gwadar port.

The Senate committee noted that there were many indications on ground which suggested that the agreed western route was not being given priority as per promise publicly made by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on Jan 15 this year, while work on the eastern route and Peshawar-Karachi Main Line 1 of railways was progressing on a fast pace and construction of a six-lane motorway on the eastern route was expected to be completed at a very early date.

Many data points in that piece, worth checking out.

RCase · Post by **RCase** » 02 Oct 2016 20:39

Talk by Christine Fair: CPEC - Colonizing Pakistan to Enrich China.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aN8VvKB9Aug

Besides CPEC, she also talks about TSP, its nukes etc. etc.

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 03 Oct 2016 12:31

One More

China’s Rising Pile of Infrastructure Debt

Second part of the article talks about CPEC. Many points therein discussed earlier on this board, but some data points worth keeping..

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 03 Oct 2016 18:47

RCase wrote:Talk by Christine Fair: CPEC - Colonizing Pakistan to Enrich China.

Extract from the video specific to CPEC. For those interested the position is captured in the screen capture.

Note what you see on the image where unfair is pointing and then read it with the title of the first image. And then let you imaginations runs with a MKI and a Brahmos. Such a perfect target in these unforgiving mountains.

I just reached these points and thought of sharing it with folks here.

venug · Post by **venug** » 03 Oct 2016 19:36

In the RHS image, is that water? wonder where this is?

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 03 Oct 2016 19:52

venug wrote:In the RHS image, is that water? wonder where this is?

Yes, it is water - Atabad lake . Watch the presentation, its nice.

venug · Post by **venug** » 03 Oct 2016 20:04

Thank you sir, will watch it.

anishn · Post by **anishn** » 04 Oct 2016 02:14

pankajs wrote:
RCase wrote:Talk by Christine Fair: CPEC - Colonizing Pakistan to Enrich China.
Extract from the video specific to CPEC. For those interested the position is captured in the screen capture.

Note what you see on the image where unfair is pointing and then read it with the title of the first image. And then let you imaginations runs with a MKI and a Brahmos. Such a perfect target in these unforgiving mountains.

I just reached these points and thought of sharing it with folks here.

is that Dr "peacenik' ( of TOIlet fame) in the front row? Guess Hawks and Doves have lot more in common, than meets the eye

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 04 Oct 2016 14:04

^^^^^^^

Isn't pissnik a better word? These guys are essentially pissing all over India.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Oct 2016 23:45

So Unfair is teaching military strategy to India?

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 05 Oct 2016 00:11

^^Uneven Cohen, Frank Wisner and many others once made a career out of telling Indians JUST ENOUGH of what they wanted to hear and that was not being said by the US establishment by and large. We were so eager for a few crumbs of vindication from massa representatives that these nobodies became big deals in Delhi.

Today what the US establishment by-and-large says, has become relatively more anti-Pakistan (because of their own experiences with Pakistan 2001-16). So the utterances of people like Cohen and Wisner don't stand out as being so exceptional. What Indian audience wants to hear is now more than that.

So Ms Unfair has become the next generation of the Wisner/Cohen types. She is telling the new generation of Indian audiences, JUST ENOUGH of what we want to hear that isn't being spoken by the US establishment in public today.

Unfair, like Uneven in his time, serves a purpose to the US deep state. She is a character in whom many Indians will repose a certain degree of faith and respect, even trust, just because she seems exceptional. This gives the US deep state a handle by which they can attempt to manage what we might do next.

I welcome Ms Unfair's thesis on the Pak Army's Way of War, and many other things. Much to be learned in those works. Much to be learned by looking at the background noise of US discourse refracted around the edges of those works too... how the US establishment itself has changed in how it views the Pak Army, can be inferred by looking at the things she is allowed to say in public (via her supposedly "maverick" conduit).

But let us never, ever, ever forget whose interests she ultimately represents at the end of the day.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 05 Oct 2016 03:50

tandav · Post by **tandav** » 05 Oct 2016 08:54

It appears that all road, rail and air infrastructure in China is designed primarily for Military logistics and moving Troops and equipment across theaters rapidly. Civilian use is a secondary outcome. CPEC is more of the same. We must keep this in mind.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 06 Oct 2016 20:07

http://www.samaa.tv/economy/2016/10/chinese-embassy-releases-province-wise-share-under-cpec-project/

ISLAMABAD: Deputy Chief of Mission Chinese Embassy Zhao Lijian Wednesday explained the share of four provinces in the $51.5 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project.

Zhao response came in response to criticism in the local press and on social media about the Western route of CPEC and alleged absence of CPEC benefits to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan. And that with P in CPEC for Punjab, this is more of a China-Punjab Economic Corridor.

There have been planned protests by Awami National Party (ANP) against ‘change of Western route of CPEC and deprivation of Pakhtoon and Baloch interests.’

Chinese Ambassador to Pakistan Sun Weidong said reports that he had told KPK Chief Minister Pervez Khattak the Western route was not included in CPEC were “untrue.”

Giving the break-up of CPEC project, Zhao wrote in a series of tweets pasted at Wali Zahid’s blog that the number of projects included: Balochistan 16, KPK 8, Sindh 13 and Punjab 12.

Zhao said at least 16 projects under CPEC are related to Balochistan. These include: Khuzdar-Basima Highway (N-30), D.I.Khan-Quetta Highway (N-50), Hubco Coal Power Plant, Gwadar Power Plant, Gwadar-Nawabshah LNG Terminal and Pipeline, Gwadar Eastbay Expressway, Gwadar New International Airport, Gwadar Smart Port City Master Plan, Expansion of Multi-purpose Terminal including Breakwater & Dredging Wastewater, Treatment Plants for Gwadar City, Gwadar Primary School, Gwadar Hospital Upgradation, Gwadar Technical & Vocational College,Gwadar Eastbay Expressway II, Fresh Water Supply and Gwadar Free Zone.

About Khyber Pakhtunkwa, he said at least eight projects under CPEC relate to KPK: Joint Feasibility Study for Upgradation of ML1, Establishment of Havelian Dry Port, KKH II (Havelian-Thakot) Upgradation of ML-1, KKH III (Raikot-Thakot), D.I.Khan-Quetta Highway (N-50), Suki Kinari Hydropower Project and Optical Fiber Cable from Rawalpindi to Khunjrab.

He said that 13 CPEC projects relate to Sindh: Matiari- Lahore Transmission Line, Matiari-Faisalabad Transmission Line, Port Qasim Power Plant Engro Thar Power Plant & Surface Mine in Block II of Thar Coal Field Dawood Wind Farm, Jhimpir Wind Farm, Sachal Wind Farm,China-Sunec Wind Farm,Upgradation of ML-1, Thar Coal Block I & Mine Mouth Power Plant,Gwadar-Nawabshah LNG Terminal & Pipeline,Karachi-Lahore Motorway (Sukkur-Multan), Joint Feasibility Study for Upgradation of ML1.

He said only 12 projects under CPEC relate to Punjab and these are: Optical Fiber Cable from Rawalpindi to Khunjrab, Haier &
Ruba Economic Zone II, Karachi-Lahore Motorway (Sukkur-Multan), Joint Feasibility Study for Upgradation of ML1, Upgradation of ML-1, Sahiwal Coal-Fired Power Plant, Rahimyar Khan Coal Power Plant, Karot Hydro-Power Plant, Lahore Orange Line Metro Train, Matiari-Lahore Transmission Line, Matiari-Faisalabad Transmission Line Quaid-e-Azam Solar Park in Bahawalpur.